1780: African prince Mamuwalde (William Marshall) and his wife Luva (Vonetta McGee) visit Count Dracula to enlist his help in the fight against slavery. When Dracula reveals that he is not only in favour of slavery, but wants to buy lovely Luva for himself, Mamuwalde and his wife try to leave but are restrained by the Count's men. Enraged, the vampire bites Mamuwalde, and locks him in a coffin, entombing Blacula (as Dracula names him) and Luva in a crypt.Present day: two hilariously camp antiques dealers buy the contents of Dracula's castle, including the coffin containing Blacula, and ship it to Los Angeles, where they break off the padlock securing the casket. Released from his prison, Blacula sates his thirst with the two antiques dealers, before heading for the streets of L.A. where he encounters Tina, the reincarnation of his beloved wife, who he proceeds to woo whenever he's not biting necks. Meanwhile, scientific investigator Gordon Thomas (Thalmus Rasulala) comes to believe that the spate of recent deaths are the work of a vampire and tries to convince the police of what is happening.The first example of Blaxploitation horror, Blacula succeeds in being both scary and silly, with a side order of camp. Marshall plays his role surprisingly straight, but the general atmosphere is one of lightheartedness, the film even taking time out for a couple of funky musical interludes courtesy of The Hues Corporation (who would later top the charts with their disco hit 'Rock The Boat'). Notable fun frights include the exhumation of a victim who leaps from his grave to attack Gordon, and the creepy return from the dead of a female vampire taxi driver. Also adding to the enjoyment are the stylish opening credits, some cool animated transitions to bat form, the sight of Blacula's hairy face in full on vamp mode, and a touching ending as Blacula ends his own life after losing his love once again.

In the opening to this film, William Marshall as Prince Mamuwalde visits Charles Macaulay's impressive Count Dracula about suppressing the slave trade. Dracula is more interested in Mamuwalde's wife Luva (Vonetta McGee), and when his advances are spurned, sentences Mamuwalde to vampirism and death to Luva. With a film entitled 'Blacula', and the mantle of 'blaxploitation' regularly directed at it, this kind of serious and violent opening was not what I expected. Only after the credits, and when things move from 1780 to the (then) present day, do we enter more familiar, somewhat expected territory.William Marshall is EXCELLENT as the noble vampire. Literally towering above everyone else, he exudes charm, melancholy and – despite some over-the-top vampire make-up – rage and terror. Yet he resists the temptation overplay anything, something other Draculas could not manage. His attraction to the character Tina Williams is played absolutely for real and the audience is completely on their side, despite the growing number of vampiric 'deaths'.As with Blacula himself, the make-up on the vampires is (probably deliberately) heavy-handed, making them appear as green-tinged zombie-types when they could have been terrifying. But is that the aim of the film? Probably not – this prefers to settle for being a compelling supernatural comedy/thriller (although very much 'of its time, the humour is held pretty firmly in check throughout) that aims to entertain, which it does.Having said that, a few deaths stray happily into 'shock' territory, not least Blacula's climactic demise. We aren't glad to see the back of the reign of a tyrant, or even the killer he is, but rather sad, admiring of his nobility. One of my favourite Dracula actors. This is a fine film lifted by Marshall's consistently brilliant performance. Luckily 'Scream Blacula Scream' was released a year later, presumably resurrecting Marshall's character.

I think it's pretty obvious that a blaxploitation horror movie that goes by the name "Blacula" is not to be taken completely seriously. Indeed, there are some humorous moments to be found here and there, though some gags (like the treatment of the gay antique dealers) come across as quite dated more than forty years later. There are other flaws to be found in the movie, like the fact that the title character actually becomes a secondary character for significant portions of the movie. As well, the screenplay has some plot flaws like why no one opened Blacula's coffin back in Transylvania, or why Blacula is not the least bit confused when he awakens and goes around 1972 Los Angeles.Despite flaws like these, I think the movie is worth a look. For starters, it's one of the first black-themed horror movies, and the movie is also kind of a time capsule for black culture of its era. The star feature of the movie, however, is William Marshall playing the title character. He gives a very commanding performance, giving this particular vampire character an intelligence and dignity that's rarely found in vampire movies, and his appearances make it worth your while to sit through the movie's occasional lulls.

There are some movies that we see as young children and they form a livelong love in us. No matter how many cracks we may notice as we rewatch the film in our later years, we still hold onto that childhood love. This movie pretty much has the opposite effect for me. I loved this movie as a kid. I was obsessed with the old film monsters and anything with a vampire was cool with me, especially one like William Marshall's Blacula who was such as classically Gothic vampire, yet modern and hip at the same time.As I'm now in my 30s and have re-watched the movie several times in recent years, I find that the cracks are far outweighing the positives and my opinion of this movie is lessening with each view.For those who haven't seen, it's essentially an update of the Dracula story. An old prince becomes a vampire, fast forward to the modern day and he finds the reincarnation of his lost love. Death and romance ensue, queue dramatic ending. The problems begin in the opening scenes with the least impressive Dracula you'll ever see sprouting some racism before cursing the African purse with a life of the undead and the name Blacula. This scene also features several vampire minions who can't hold a candle to Lugosi's brides. They are like bad DAWN OF THE DEAD rejects with blue face paint and overgrown fangs.I won't even get into the homosexual designer scene as it's been discussed enough. I don't think it's always fair to hold antiquated values against a movie and clearly this was long before our PC modern days, so you can't expect the same realistic portrayal of gays. Blacula makes his appearance and starts his killing spree, but the movie is really bereft of any atmosphere or tension. Lugosi and Lee's Dracula movies had the Gothic cobweb and shadows look. Modern films like THE LOST BOYS or NEAR DARK may be set in urban setting but use them for maximum effect. This is often like a bad 70s cop movie with a vampire as the villain. That extends greatly to the soundtrack, which is full of cheesy wah pedal guitars and brass horns which make me giggle at them much more than they establish any effective mood.I really enjoy a lot of AIP movies, particularly the Corman/ Poe films from a few years before this. At a time when horror was changing and becoming gorier and more modern, AIP was still able to retain that old-school vibe and present good Gothic chillers without resorting to bloody deaths. They attempt the same sort of thing here, but it just falls flat most of the time.What saves this movie is Marshall's portrayal of the vampire. He's still cool as hell, whether I'm 9 years old or 39. He's a perfect mixture of suave coolness in his "human guise" and animalistic evil in his vampire presence (though I never quite understood why he grows extra hair). He essentially saves this from being just another average low budget forgotten horror flick to being the memorable movie that is still watched today.