Noutions Good movie, but best of all time? Hardly . . .

Bereamic Awesome Movie

AnhartLinkin This story has more twists and turns than a second-rate soap opera.

Quiet Muffin This movie tries so hard to be funny, yet it falls flat every time. Just another example of recycled ideas repackaged with women in an attempt to appeal to a certain audience.

abdullah_zahid95 This Isn't as Bad As i thought it would be,But the fact that it's only a Pakistani version of Bram stoker's novel:Dracula,Rehan Pulls off an Amazing Performance,Though i thought it could've been better by editing out all the shocking stuff people refer to.I don't Really Know Why Everybody Says:It's A Rip-off,Give It a chance,This Might Be because It was banned ON it's very first Premier,The first time i saw it was back in Pakistan,which I even thought It Would be awful,Due to the way how people Reacted to it in 1967,Overall,The fighting Sequences Needed to be Improved A little bit Back then.....

wolfhell88 I have been through so many Trash movies that I'm really hardboiled but this one ... Argh! You know you have a problem when you see a few editing mistakes in the first minute of this "movie". The actor here who plays Dracula is probably the most ridiculous Dracula in movie history. The other "actors" are not better.But the real horror here are the very bad music and dancing scenes who make absolutely no sense and do not even fit into the other scenes. Like in later so-called "Bollywood-Films" there are a lot of these scenes to make the movie much longer.At the end you will have the most laughable and ridiculous fight scene ever shown in film history. (Well, a stunt coordinator wasn't in the budget, they spent to much on the senseless music and dance scenes.) You see that the actors never hit each other, fall on a table and cry "Argh" and "Ough" - like kids who play action scenes.There are a lot of bad Vampire movies out there but this is really the worst I have ever seen. Don't waste your time with this "movie"!

HumanoidOfFlesh Mad scientist Professor Tabani drinks a potion he has brewed up in his laboratory but is turned into a blood craving vampire instead.When Dr.Aqil pays a visit Tabani sees a picture of Aqil's wife Shabnam and,after turning Aqil into a vampire,heads for Shabnam to make her his bride.Aqil's brother discovers the grave of the vampire and his brother at Tabani's castle and kills his brother with a knife to free his soul.Tabani succeeds in putting the bite on Shabnam and once turned she tries to lure her young niece away.Aqil's brother races against time to put a stop to the vampire curse."Zinda Laash" almost put me to sleep.The plot is extremely slow but more or less follows Bram Stoker's famous novel.The suspense is completely absent as is the gore and nudity.The film is only recommended for curious horror fans that want to see the second horror film made in Pakistan(after "Madman" from 1964).

ajji-2 Here is an oddity if ever there was one: A 'Dracula' film from Pakistan, one of the few horror films ever attempted in the country, and certainly the first and most famous. In this variation on Stoker's novel, the count is actually a scientist (quasi-mad, perhaps) seeking the elixir of life, a potion that would defy death. But from here on, all similarities to The Fountain end, when the good doc (Professor Tabani to you, dear) not only succeeds in making the life-up soda, he proceeds to drink it himself (Hugh Jackman should have sought this guy's help)! No terminally ill wife to bother with, in fact no family or servants either, except for a full-figured lady assistant, who discovers the professor's inert body behind a sofa. For whatever improbable reason, the scientist had left a note saying that if he was to be found dead, his body should be put into the coffin down in the basement of his isolated mansion. And so it goes. Interestingly, the word Dracula is never used in the film, and people refer to the vampire as "khabees rooh", which literally translates as "evil spirit".This was not a big-budget affair, and it is therefore quite heartening to see how much they managed to pull off on meager resources. The film retains a lot of Stoker's original plot, despite a contemporary setting, and the inclusion of some silly musical interludes. Some of the direction is…er…wooden, as is some of the acting. But there are also eerie, suspenseful scenes, and good lighting and set design, evoking a Gothic and creepy atmosphere (in black and white). There are a couple of odd 'fade-outs' at the most inappropriate moments, but I suspect this was done at the behest of the censor board, who were initially aghast at the mere idea of a local horror film. They only passed the film after the producer-hero and director promised that they'd never ever make such a film again. And sure enough, they never did, despite the film becoming an unexpected hit. Even more surprising is that for an industry steeped in plagiarism, nobody else jumped on the bandwagon, either. Not really scary (but not suitable for young children, either), the film is nonetheless reasonably engrossing and one of the more unique takes on the familiar tale. Horror and cult fans should definitely check it out.