The last of the period Dracula films from Hammer finds Sir Christopher Lee in fine form. He's especially evil and sadistic as he goes about doing what he does best. The prologue sees him resurrected (in a rather novel way), and soon targeted by the nearby villagers, who attempt to burn down his castle. Some time later, an insatiable young rascal named Paul (Christopher Matthews) ends at Castle Dracula in an odd turn of events. When he disappears, his brother Simon (Dennis Waterman) and Simons' girlfriend Sarah (Jenny Hanley) come looking for him, and they must do battle with the nefarious Count.The screenplay by Anthony Hinds is contrived and doesn't always make sense, but director Roy Ward Baker delivers an agreeable shocker. It stands out from other Hammer Draculas by the nature of its violence and dark tone. The prologue ends in a horrible, fatal way for a number of characters. The studio once again is to be commended for their commitment to atmosphere, as there are some spooky shots here and there. Some tension is derived from the fact that the only way into the Counts' private room is a window. The special effects tend towards the unconvincing, at least in terms of the prop bats that pop up throughout. Typically grandiose James Bernard music is a heavy asset. There's a recurring element of comedy (such as the law officers), but not too much of it.Some of the supporting performances aren't all that hot, but the ladies (also including the very appealing Wendy Hamilton as the brave Julie, Delia Lindsay, and Anouska Hempel) are sexy and ravishing. Patrick Troughton is a joy as Draculas' somewhat loyal servant Klove, Michael Gwynn delivers gravitas as a helpful priest, and Michael Ripper (what a treat it is to see him in any Hammer film) has a field day as one of the most common stereotypes in Gothic horror: the hostile, decidedly unhelpful citizen who's always turning outsiders away.This is a good entry in this series that does manage a novel way of dispatching Dracula at the end.Seven out of 10.

One of the more ho-hum entries in the Hammer Dracula series, but still worth a look for fans. The special effects are hokey as all-get-out, the continuity with the prior film isn't there, and Christopher Lee seems bored most of the time. Patrick Troughton is good as the wild-eyed bushy-haired Klove, Dracula's servant. Also, this one uses a lot of elements from the Bram Stoker novel, which is interesting considering it took them six movies to do that. Overall, there are some ridiculous scenes but it's fun for what it is. I disagree with those who claim this is the worst of the series. Satanic Rites and the kung-fu one are much worse.

Although Hammer's horror films were becoming more prolific by 1970, there was a definite downturn in their fortunes: audiences were falling out of love for their modest-budgeted Gothic tales.Released shortly after 'Taste the Blood of Dracula', the drop in quality for this latest offering is noticeable, both in budget (there is a very studio-bound feel to Dracula's castle for example) and in interesting new ideas (Dracula's life-saving blood-spewing personal bat is particularly unsuccessful).Rather than an ongoing story, 'Scars' is more a series of set-pieces. The exploits of rakish Paul Carson are directed like an episode of the lame sex-comedy 'Confessions of…' film series. We then have the slaughter of a church full of villagers we never get to know, various sadistic acts by Dracula (as well as a partially successful scene of him crawling snake-like down the walls of his castle, lifted from the novel – presumably keeping Christopher Lee happy) and finally the least convincing climactic dispatch of the Count by lightning as Dennis Waterman and a badly dubbed Jenny Hanley watch on.Although it gives Lee more to do than most sequels in this series, it is nevertheless a palpably tired offering and wastes most of its cast. Hammer were surely aware of the paucity of ideas on display and decided to make a fairly big change with their next Dracula film.

After some villagers band together and burn down Count Dracula's castle, things are peacefully quiet, until Paul Carlson stumbles across the place. Dracula offers him a place to stay, little does Paul know what awaits him. Paul is inevitably murdered. Paul's brother Simon takes his companion Sarah to go look for him. Is it just me? or are these movies really becoming indistinguishable. I love Horror of Dracula, a couple of sequels are entertaining as well, but by this point, they were completely derivative and lacking imagination. The sets are typically lavish, cinematography is fantastic, and stylish atmosphere is present as well, but it's all for naught. This one suffers from pacing issues as well. At times, it is way too talky with characters that are very uninteresting. The gore is actually OK for this sort of thing. We get a couple of people being impaled, neck bites, and bloody bat attacks. I highly doubt it will whet a gore hound's appetite, but it is decent enough for a film like this. The acting is so-so. Christopher Lee continues to hum along very well with his typical menacing style. Dennis Waterman is extremely bland as Simon, Jenny Hanley is average as the love interest. Christopher Matthews is decent as Paul. What is up with all the characters named Paul in this series?! Dracula's demise in this one is very lame, lacking any excitement. This would be the final period film in this series, moving to more of a contemporary setting with Dracula A.D. It isn't the worst, but far from the best. Worth a look, but prepare for tedium5.3/10