I can't believe that no-one has picked up on this before, either here or on moviemistakes.com. At the beginning of the movie during the scene of Dracula's 'resurrection' - how can the priest see Dracula's reflection in the water, when Dracula himself does not (or should not) cast a reflection, either on a mirror or on water!
shareYou know, technically you're right, but I didn't think about it while I watched the film, because frankly it's too much of a fun "D'OH!" moment. It's one of those "UHHHHHHHHHHH......this is BAD, I think" moments.
Good movie this one is!
I noticed that also....it is the annoying bit in a great movie.
Lets explain it...erm...it wasn't his reflection...it was 'Vampire Magic' yeah.
Another moment like this is in 'Twins of Evil' in which Vampires do not cast reflections yet they did in the first film of that series (Which is OK as it is based on a vampire story that doesn't mention it) which is even more annoying for me as they make a big deal of it in that film.
"The face of evil is ugly to look upon. And as the pleasures increase, the face becomes uglier."
Yeah, that's a good theory. Lyndon W. Joslin notes this in his book "Count Dracula Goes to the Movies":
"Dracula, upon reviving, immediately brings the luckless preist under his power, appearing to him first by his reflection in the water! This part of the mythos, though featured in the Brides of Dracula, is never strongly enforced in the Hammer series"
To tell the truth, the dubiousness of Dracula casting a reflection hadn't even occured to me until I read Joslin's book last year. And I've been a regular watcher of this film since 1992!
the big error of all would be dracula walking around in broad daylight. and that happens a lot in this film.
shareWell, the scene where the woman is supposed to represent when dracula was still alive (a year before the next scene) The reason we know this, is after the woman is found, they show the seasons, warm, then snow, we are led to believe a year passes since the discovery of the body in which case Dracula has been destroyed and in ice.
shareRisen from the grave has many mistakes. I noticed the reflection one. Another is where he is in the woods where he bites Zena. You see him standing against a tree when she see's him, and the nexy shot of him, there is no tree behind him. Another scene is near the beginning when the preist was in the bar. He was given a red drink, red wine, later on, after the talk with Msgr. Ernst Mulle, you see his drink is white wine. This is just to name a few that i noticed, there are more hehee.
shareActually, many people have picked up on this. It was mentioned in "The Monster Times" decades ago, and I think Donald Glut's "The Dracula Book" has something to say about it as well.
In any case, it is not a mistake, as neither HORROR OF DRACULA nor DRACULA, PRINCE OF DARKNESS established that vampires cast no reflection. (There may be something about this in BRIDES OF DRACULA, but Baron Meinster is clearly a different species of vampire -- he also turns into a bat, which Lee's Dracula never does.)
Bottom Line: from the beginning Hammer established their own mythology for their monsters, regardless of what had come before.
READ MORE HERE; http://hollywoodgothique.com/draculahasrisenfromthegrave1968.html
what about the part where the preists blood falls on draculas mouth and then another shot of dracs mouth you can see it isnt even christoper lees mouth,my guess is they needed to see his mouth move and obviously chris was unavalible and they used another actors mouth.it looks a bit hoooo thou..
shareSTEVE-1559 wrote,
"In any case, it is not a mistake, as neither HORROR OF DRACULA nor DRACULA, PRINCE OF DARKNESS established that vampires cast no reflection. (There may be something about this in BRIDES OF DRACULA, but Baron Meinster is clearly a different species of vampire -- he also turns into a bat, which Lee's Dracula never does.)"
Actually in Satanic Ries of Dracula, Hammer does contradict previous movies. Dracula does not cast an image on photograph, and Peter Cushing explains that vampires do not cast relfections in general
[deleted]
Not only is SATANIC RITES OF DRACULA further along in the series than DRACULA HAS RISEN FROM THE GRAVE; SATANIC RITES also has nothing to do with RISEN FROM THE GRAVE in terms of continuity.
Hammer abandoned continuity after TASTE THE BLOOD OF DRACULA in 1970.
HORROR OF DRACULA, which launched the franchise, is set in the 1880s.
DRACULA AD 1972 tells us Dracula came to England in 1972 - and was destroyed by Van Helsing, then resurrected 100 years later.
SATANIC RITES is a direct sequel to AD 1972.
In other words, we're in a completely different time line, with different rules that have little if anything to do with what came before.
Yes. The contemporary Dracula films are a completely different series...as the last meeting between Van Helsing and Dracula takes place before the first film.
'Legend of The Seven Golden Vampires' seems to be in the same continuity as the original film however it cannot be (even if Van Helsing mentions the events depicted in '(Horror Of) Dracula'), the continuity is a bit off as it seems like he has been in China since the early 1800s...which he hasn't and besides it's set in 1904 and 'Has Risen...' is set after 1905, a year after 'Dracula: Prince of Darkness' (we should take what Sandor says about it being ten years after 'Dracula' as an off-hand remark) and thus cannot happen.
That film (if the same rules apply) reveals that Dracula can take other forms...actually to be fair 'Brides' possibly does as it may not be that Meister is another specie of Vampire but that Van Helshing was wrong in the first film.
"Nothings gonna change my world!"
Lee's Dracula does turn into a bat in "Scars of Dracula." As for Baron Meinster, narration in the beginning of the film clearly states "descendent" of Count Dracula.
All of the Hammer horror sequels, whether it be "Frankenstein" or "Dracula," suffer major continuity errors.
Actually Dracula does not turn into a bat, watch again, he has a bat as a servant.
Baron Meinster is disciple not a descendant!
"Nothings gonna change my world!"
[deleted]
They say vampires don't cast reflections in Brides of Dracula. It's a mistake. I can't figure out how no one picked up on it.
share[deleted]
''(There may be something about this in BRIDES OF DRACULA, but Baron Meinster is clearly a different species of vampire -- he also turns into a bat, which Lee's Dracula never does.)''
Actually it is heavily implied that Meinster was bitten by Dracula, thus making him the same species of vampire, technically. The reason Dracula doesn't change his form in canon is up to you...I guess he never feels the need. The reason is that they found the bat in 'Brides of Dracula' unconvincing. If the bat didn't look so fake you would have had Dracula turn into one at least in 'Dracula Prince of Darkness'. I do like to think that the owl in 'Dracula' was Dracula himself, as 'Brides...' proves van Helsing wrong about vampires not being able to change (and he wonderfully seems surprised in 'Brides...'!).
As for the reflection. It would be impossible for anyone to cast a reflection from that angle and distance from the water, let alone a vampire! It seems to be one of Dracula's powers rather than a true reflection.
If you love Jesus 100%... keep it to yourselves, perverts!
I know, it's pretty basic stuff really.Not to mention the fact that his body was well in shape even though he was under water for 12 months!
"We interrupt this programme to bring you loud static"
There's another that's just as good. The blood from the priest's wound revives Dracula by seeping in to his mouth. The priest leaves a trail of blood that trickes from his head, along the ground, to the ice - several inches away from Dracula's face....then travels upward along his neck and chin to his mouth. More "vampire magic" ?
share
Some versions let him cast a reflection, ignoring the 'mirror rule.'
This has been pointed out before and it is a hole in the plot. Perhaps it is possible that he can have a reflection in water (not a mirror) although the myth always was that he could cast no reflection, period.
Regradless, movies like this you're too enjoy and not get too tangled up in details. It is a great Hammer film...