The F*ckin Black Sheep: Blacula (1972)

Last Updated on August 2, 2021

THE BLACK SHEEP is an ongoing column featuring different takes on films that either the writer HATED, but that the majority of film fans LOVED, or that the writer LOVED, but that most others LOATH. We’re hoping this column will promote constructive and geek fueled discussion. Dig in!

Blacula (1972)
Directed by William Crain

"Some real heart in here thanks mostly to William Marshall, who brings a genuine, dignified performance."

This will sound random, but I've seen a lot of Star Trek. As a result, I want to punish the masses as I force my students ever semester to watch "The Ultimate Computer", an episode from 1968 in which a dude named Dr. Daystrom unleashes…the ultimate computer on the Enterprise. To make a long boring story short, one of my students called out, "Hey, that's Blacula!" And I'll be damned. I never made the connection. So…that brings me to why the Sheep decided to examine one of the more famous Blaxploitation films ever produced: Blacula.

Honestly, I’m not sure how to judge a movie like this. By production, its (as I just mentioned) Blaxploitation, which usually falls somewhere between camp and drama with a whole lot of dated style. By genre, its a horror flick with a decent amount of horror and gore…but there’s plenty of camp, too. Example: Blacula shows up to the hippest clubs in town despite wearing his cape and even sits down for a few pictures. Or why the hell did character actor Elisha Cook Jr sport a hook for a hand as the medical examiner? It seems like that would get in the way. Or why the hell did Dr. Gordon Thomas (Thalmus Rasulala) decide so quickly that vampires were running loose when this was clearly the first case?  Or that his name is Blacula (Dracula actually names in a scene). 

Yeah, I know with a title like Blacula that it’s a flick that no one should take seriously. Hell, I know 99% of the population would define it as a horror/comedy, and I can't blame them. But I don’t. Why? Well, the movie has some real heart in here thanks mostly to William Marshall (Blacula and Dr. Daystrom of course) who brings a genuine, dignified performance to a role that could have been anything but. He’s not playing for a goof. He’s not cashing a paycheck (though I’m sure he did). He seems like a proud man, pumping a heart into that bloodless character as he roams the streets to recapture lost love.

For as funky as Blacula is, a good story lurks beneath, hidden beneath the goof. The good comes from the movie's basic plot: Marshall is Mamawalde, an African Prince who back in the 1700s was bitten by the man, Dracula, who was a real asshole for his stance on race relations. It's hard not to dig the first 15 minutes where Mamawalde is killed and then we fast forward 200 years. With Dracula is gone and his wacky exploits finished, someone puts his house on the market where two hip antique hunters decide to buy Dracula’s home in Transylvania. Why? Its filled with lots of kooky stuff to ship back to the US for profit, including a coffin that they (they're a couple) want to put in their bedroom for the goof. It’s such a simple concept, but damn if it doesn't work…until it just doesn’t.

I nearly wish the writer and the director would have spent just a little more time on this. Like why not play with the fish out of water a little more. Blacula wanders around town as if he just didn’t wake up from a 200-year long nap. Give us one scene that he at least looks baffled by cars or TVs. One moment of adjusting. Give us one scene of loniness for being away for so long. Why? Because the movie is so close to being more than camp with good acting, decent sets, and an interesting story. With a little more effort, this could have been a hellva horror movie instead of what it's become. 

GET BLACULA HERE