School’s Out for this vampire finishing school.
If The Vampire Lovers was Hammer’s foray into sensual horror, Lust for a Vampire is like its slightly awkward cousin who’s trying too hard to be cool. Released just a year after its predecessor, it’s another bite at the Karnstein apple—but this time, the fangs are a little duller, and the plot feels like it’s mostly here to justify all the bodice-ripping that follows.
The story centres around Mircalla Karnstein (yep, she’s back—sort of), who’s been resurrected for another round of seductive shenanigans. Only this time, the action moves to a fancy finishing school, because nothing says “vampire horror” like a bunch of teenage girls studying etiquette and literature. Naturally, Mircalla, now posing as a student, quickly turns the school into her personal buffet, working her way through the local girl population while making doe eyes at every hapless dude in sight.
The plot, if we’re being generous, is mostly just a thin excuse for Mircalla to seduce and kill her way through the cast. The film tries to blend gothic horror with a touch of romance, but the result is more of a sexy soap opera than a vampire thriller. Sure, there are the usual vampire tropes—biting necks, dark rituals, spooky castles—but everything feels a bit… watered down.
Where The Vampire Lovers had a sense of menace and mystery, Lust for a Vampire seems more interested in showing off its leading ladies than in building real tension. Yutte Stensgaard, who takes over as Mircalla, is certainly easy on the eyes, but she doesn’t have the same dangerous allure that Ingrid Pitt brought to the role. As a result, Mircalla feels less like a predatory force of nature and more like a bored immortal killing time (and her fellow students) at finishing school.
And then there’s the love story. Oh yes, because nothing says “horror classic” like a clunky romantic subplot. Enter the English teacher (Ralph Bates), who falls head over heels for Mircalla, blissfully unaware that his new crush has a body count to go with that smokin’ hot body. Their “romance” is supposed to be tragic, but it’s mostly just awkward. At least Peter Cushing had the good sense to sit this one out—because even he couldn’t have saved this doomed love affair.
That’s not to say the film is all bad. The gothic visuals are still here in full force—dark castles, creepy crypts, misty graveyards—and Hammer’s trademark sense of atmosphere remains intact. If you’re in the mood for some campy fun with a side of blood and cleavage, Lust for a Vampire delivers. Just don’t expect the same level of bite that The Vampire Lovers had.
At the end of the day, Lust for a Vampire is a mixed bag. It’s got the classic Hammer ingredients—vampires, sex, and gothic horror—but it’s missing that spark that made its predecessor so engaging. If you’re working your way through the Karnstein Trilogy, it’s worth a watch. Just don’t expect it to live up to the promise of its name.
