Dracula has Risen from the Grave

Dracula has Risen from the Grave
I know that by the late 60s and 70s, the Hammer films were on a decline. While Dracula has Risen from the Grave was produced before the fall, the cracks are beginning to show. Trying to keep the franchise vibrant, the producers throw a whole lot of absurdity at the screen. Just listen to the set up of the movie:

Dracula has been dead for a year, trapped underneath the massive ice moat that surrounds his castle. But in a nearby town, the townspeople are still terrified. They even refuse to go to church because the castle's shadow touches the church in the afternoon. So Monsignor Mueller (Rupert Davies) and the town priest (Ewan Hooper) climb up to the castle to purge the site of its evil and seal the entrance with a giant cross. Continuity be damned - the road that led to the castle in the last movie no longer exists and the only way to get there is by climbing up a treacherous mountainside.

And that massive moat I mentioned? It's gone, and has been replaced by a tiny frozen stream at the bottom of the cliff. During the exorcism, there is a great storm and the priest trips and falls on the ice. He cuts his head, and a tiny bit of blood goes through the ice and just happens to fall in the mouth of Dracula's drowned corpse. The vile count of course wakes up and puts the priest under his spell. When he learns that a cross is barring the way to his home, does he ask the priest to just take it down? No! Instead, he concocts some sort of bizarre revenge scheme against the Monsignor.

At this point, I was really worried. I got even more worried when I met our young hero, Paul (Barry Andrews), an atheist graduate student who works part time and shirtless in a bakery. Yes, he likes to bake shirtless. Our hero is in love with the Monsignor's neice, Maria (Veronica Carlson). The stage is set. Dracula and the now-evil priest vs. the atheist Paul and the Monsignor. The movie is gonna stink. 

But then something happens - it doesn't stink. With all the pieces clumsily put into place, the movie suddenly gels together and becomes really entertaining. The acting is all quite good. I knew Christopher Lee and Rupert Davies would be good, but I assumed that the young couple would be a pair of wooden pretty faces. On the contrary, Andrews' Paul is nowhere near as annoying as his shirtless baking introduction hinted at. And Veronica Carlson is quite good as the Count's ultimate target. She is certainly one of the most beautiful Hammer starlets, but she's also one of the better actresses I've seen so far in these films. And Hooper is also quite good as the priest, a good but weak man trapped in the thrall of evil. Dracula has Risen from the Grave also ramps up the sex and gore factor. It is never over-the-top, and is very effective. If anyone had any doubts that Hammer was responsible for the sexual subtext of vampires, they should see this movie. As one virginal victim is "seduced" by Dracula, we got a shot of her hand pushing a teddy bear off the bed. If there was ever a visual metaphor for deflowering/the end of youthful innocence, there you go. It's so bad, it's good! And the violence? The attempted staking in this film is not just the highlight of the movie, but one of the more entertaining moments in the franchise.

 The movie was directed by Freddie Francis, who is better known as a superb cinematographer (he won the Oscar for Glory). He experiments with filters and colors, and really gives the film a unique look over the previous Dracula movies. Sometimes he pushes the experimentation too far, adding a burnt hue to the scenes by the castle which are really just distracting. But for the most part, the film looks superb. I have to be honest, I can see why this film was one of Hammer's biggest hits. Once the adventure starts, it doesn't let up. And the climactic battle is actually one of the more exciting of the series so far. As long as you can get past the silly set-up, Dracula has Risen from the Grave is actually very good - maybe not as good as the first two, but a definite step up from Dracula: Prince of Darkness But even in its fun, you can see the cracks forming. And even if Dracula has Risen from the Grave ends up working, you can see that this is the beginning of the end.

MVP: Back to Christopher Lee, who actually puts in his best performance as the famous Count. The ten years since Horror of Dracula have been good for the character. The extra wrinkles and the gray streaks in his hair all add to his imposing stature. Though his dialogue is hokey (lots of lines like "At last my revenge is complete"), Lee sells every line with menace and rage. He was good in the other films, but he knocks it out of the park here.

TRIVIA: The very first film to ever be rated by the newly formed MPAA.

BEST LINE: A drunk Paul, after drinking some water, "That's better. Ah, that's delicious!" It's more the performance than the line itself. It made me laugh.

Dracula: Prince of Darkness

Dracula: Prince of Darkness

The third movie in Hammer's Dracula franchise, Dracula: Prince of Darkness differed from the previous film in one major way - it actually had Dracula in it!   After Dracula's death in Horror of Dracula, the studio followed vampire hunter Van Helsing's further adventures in the sequel, Brides of Dracula.  But in 1966, they managed to convince Christopher Lee to reprise his role as the evil count and the result was one of the more popular installments in the franchise.

Two English couples are vacationing in the Carpathian Mountains.  Though they are warned by a burly, gun-toting priest named Father Sandor to avoid the creepy castle in the mountains, the couple eventually find themselves at that very spot.  To the characters' credit, they aren't like the stupid victims in other horror movies that impulsively go where we all know they shouldn't.  There are dark forces at work that push them towards the castle.  Their only crime is that they are a bit too trusting of the castle's butler, Klove, once they've arrived.

Before you know it, one of the men is dead, and his fresh blood is used to bring Dracula back to life - in a creative resurrection scene that sees the fearsome count literally rising from the ashes.  The man's wife then becomes the vampire's first victim.  Now the pressure is on the other couple.  Can they escape Castle Dracula?  Can they get to Father Sandor, who also happens to be an experienced vampire killer?

The movie is fun, though not much happens in the first half.  There is a slow build up in suspense.  The creepiness of the first half is enhanced greatly by actress Barbara Shelley, who plays Helen, one of the wives.  Helen wants to leave immediately, but because she's known as the complainer of the group, she's ignored.  But her fear is real and Shelley makes the terror believable.  You really believe that this woman is terrified.  

The second half is when events heat up and spiral to an exciting climax on the castle moat.  Dracula wakes up and begins a short reign of terror.  Christopher Lee owns the part.  He's actually better in this than in the first film, and he achieves this with no dialogue.   That is pretty impressive.  The rest of the cast is solid, except for Suzan Farmer's thankless role as the other wife.  She spends most of the movie saying, "I agree" to everyone.  They literally have nothing for her to do.  Andrew Keir as Father Sandor puts in a good, gruff, tough performance.  While I did miss Peter Cushing's Van Helsing, Father Sandor is an acceptable replacement.  

If there is a problem with the movie, its that the story is kind of slight.  Not much happens, and Dracula's antics get nipped in the bud before he gets a chance to really do anything (it's not ruining anything to say that the good guys win, is it?).  I definitely think its nowhere near as good as Horror nor as inventive as Brides.  But it is still a solid horror film, and a worthy entry to the franchise.

MVP: Christopher Lee, hands down.  He owns the movie.   While he has no dialogue, his imposing stature and attitude just intimidates everyone and dominates the movie.  He really is a terrific prince of darkness.

TRIVIA: So why did Lee have no dialogue?  This was not an artistic choice.  According to Lee, the script was so bad that he refused to speak the lines.  Better to have no dialogue than crappy dialogue.  

BEST LINE: Sandor: "Killed?  No, Dracula cannot be killed.  He's already dead.  Undead.  He can only be destroyed."  I'm not quite sure what that means, but it sure sounds cool.

Brides of Dracula

Brides of Dracula

The first sequel in Hammer Film's Dracula series, The Brides of Dracula is a bit of an odd duck. First of all, Dracula isn't even in the movie and is only referred to once. The film also has all sorts of scripting problems, brought on I suspect by last minute rewrites to beat the censors of the day. The result is a bit of a mess, with a rushed finale and subplots that never get resolved.

But I gotta tell you, it's a really entertaining mess! There are parts that are even more enjoyable than The Horror of Dracula. Now that the writers are no longer constrained by Bram Stoker's original book, they cut loose and go a bit wild. Marianne (the beautiful Yvonne Monlaur) is traveling to an all girls school where she has been hired as a new teacher. When the stagecoach abandons her in a foggy, little Carpathian village, she unwisely accepts an invitation by a local, creepy Baroness (Martita Hunt) to stay in her castle. While there, she is tricked into freeing an imprisoned Baron Meister (David Peel), a dashing vampire who begins to wreak havoc on the villagers. Good thing vampire hunter Dr. Van Helsing (Peter Cushing) just happens to be visiting town...

First, the good. Terence Fisher's direction is great. Despite not much happening in the first half of the film, he keeps the pace moving briskly, and I was never bored. The shot selection and moody lighting are much more effective here, as well. The acting along the board is fairly good - especially Martita Hunt as the Baroness, Freda Jackson as Baron Meinster's human servant, Greta, and of course, the super cool Peter Cushing returning as Van Helsing. Cushing was the best thing about The Horror of Dracula, and he is even better here. The writers have fun playing with the vampire mythos, changing the legend as they see fit and cobbling together some really fun and creative ideas, such as the creepy scene with crazy Greta, laying on a fresh grave, gently cooing to the earth, encouraging a new vampire to awaken and rise.

But there is the bad, as well. There is a character in the beginning of the film, set up as a major bad guy, who ensures that Marianne is stranded in the village. And then he disappears. Completely. He's not in the movie any more. No clue who he was or why he was there. Odd. We also have the super rushed ending, including two vampires (the brides of the title, even!) who just kind of stupidly watch everything unfold and then also just vanish from the scene. No idea what happened to them. And then there is the vampire bat that Baron Meinster can turn into. This bat looks like two flapping pieces of cardboard glued to a toupee. I've seen scarier hand puppets. Not even Peter Cushing can make the bat attack scenes work. They are just laughably bad. And of course, the bat transformation raises the big plot hole question - if Meinster could just turn into a bat and fly away, how was he a prisoner to begin with?

And how about Meinster, anyway? The imposing and forceful Christopher Lee is missed. David Peel does just fine when he is the arrogant aristocrat, but as soon as he goes vampiric, he hunches and snarls and overacts and just looks generally silly. I'd laugh in his face if he tried to bite me.

Overall, though, this is a fine film. It may not be as consistent as Horror of Dracula, but there are some parts that are big improvements. Check it out. You may enjoy it.

MVP: Is there any doubt? Heroic, athletic, confidant, but unerringly polite and quintessentially English, Peter Cushing's Van Helsing is the guy I would want at my side if I ever got in a vampire fight. SPOILER ALERT: The big example of his awesomeness this time involves a completely revisionist and absurd way of "curing" a vampire bite by branding himself with a hot rod and splashing the wound with holy water. This is highly questionable, but Cushing sells it and makes it the most memorable part of the movie - to me, this superb scene is the real climax of the film, not the goofy fight that follows it. Look around online and you'll see anyone who has seen this movie raves about the branding scene. SPOILER OVER. Cushing is the man!!!

TRIVIA: Dracula was actually supposed to make a cameo in this movie, appearing at the very end to kill Baron Meinster for being lame. I don't think they could convince Christopher Lee to come back, which is a shame. Because Meinster was kinda lame, and deserved to be punished...

Also, take a look at the windmill fight scene in this movie and then watch the end of Tim Burton's Sleepy Hollow again. You'll see a lot of the exact same shots and ideas. Sleepy Hollow was Burton's love letter to Hammer Films. I just thought that was kind of cool.

BEST LINE: "I'm not tenant of yours, you jackass!"

Horror of Dracula

Horror of Dracula

Interview with the Vampire, Twilight, True Blood, and all those other movies that rely on sexy, pouting vampires and plentiful violence owe their existence to this movie, Horror of Dracula, the first Dracula film put out by the famous English movie studio, Hammer Pictures.

Loosely based on Bram Stoker's novel, Horror of Dracula is not necessarily scary any more. I have to admit that it is pretty tame by today's standards. But this doesn't make the movie any less enjoyable.

The most important thing in a Dracula movie is to cast your vampire right. If you get Dracula right, then that will make up for goofiness elsewhere (Gary Oldman in Bram Stoker's Dracula), but if you cast Dracula wrong (looking at you, Frank Langella), then it doesn't matter how prestigious your cast and crew are, the film isn't going to work.

Christopher Lee (Saruman in Lord of the Rings) is a good Dracula, and I can see why he became so iconic in the part. At first, I had my doubts about him. He is a little too civil in the first act and I found myself distracted by his uni-brow (easily the scariest thing in the movie). But once he first makes his appearance as a vampire, his mouth covered in blood, snarling like a wolf, I was hooked. This was a shocking moment in cinema history, and the moment when vampires went from politely deadly to animalistic and primal.

The other important thing Horror of Dracula brings to the table is the sensuality. Dracula is not a frumpy Hungarian (no offense, Bela), but a handsome aristocrat. When he visits the young women in their bedrooms, they want to be bitten. The director Terence Fisher said he wanted to make the vampire's bite like a drug addiction; the victims know it will eventually kill them, but they still want it; they need it. And they will wait in their night gowns, excitedly staring at the door, waiting for Dracula to visit their bedroom. It's all very tame now, with the sensuality coming through nervous and excited glances, but make no mistake - these are the roots that changed vampire lore in cinema, and without Horror of Dracula, there would be no True Blood, The Hunger, or heck, even Bram Stoker's Dracula. This changed everything.

Overall, the movie is quite good, but not the masterpiece some would claim. The pacing is a bit slow in the first half, and there is one ill-timed and unfunny moment of slapstick comedy near the end that befuddles me. And while everyone gives Christopher Lee the credit for the film's success, I found he wasn't in it enough. The secret weapon of the movie is Peter Cushing as Professor van Helsing, doctor and vampire hunter. His Van Helsing is a terrific performance, clipped and efficient. He is a perfect English gentlemen, but doesn't waste time explaining or babbling. He knows what needs to be done, and does it. Van Helsings, from Edward van Sloan to Laurence Olivier to Anthony Hopkins, have either been dotty old men or crazy, dotty old men. Cushing is old enough to have the knowledge, but young enough that he can still chase Dracula down for a good ol' fashioned fist fight. He's pretty awesome.

I can definitely recommend this movie. While its not necessarily scary any more, it is worth seeing because of its place in cinematic history, for its entertaining story, and for the performances by two icons of the genre. 

MVP: SPOILERS-BE WARNED: So why do I like Peter Cushing's Van Helsing so much? Maybe it is because when they finally reveal where Dracula is hiding, he doesn't waste time thinking about it and just flings into action. Maybe it is because when he finds Dracula's coffin, he takes an extra second from the chase to toss a rosary inside (just in case the vampire wins their battle and then tries to return to his resting place). But I think the defining moment for me is when they rescue a little girl from one of the vampires. After chasing the monster away with a cross, Van Helsing doesn't follow immediately. He knows where the vampire is going; there is no rush. Instead he approaches the little girl and asks if she's cold. He wraps his fur coat over her shoulders, applauds her for her bravery and only then does he leave to go kick butt. The way Cushing plays the scene is brilliant, his tenderness in the middle of what should be such a terrifying moment is real and important. His resolve is always to protect first, and then kill second. If some other actor played the scene, I'd scream, "no, you idiot, kill the vampire first and then come back to see if the girl is okay!!!" But not only did I believe Cushing when he did this, he made it clear that this would be the right thing to do. Peter Cushing is the man and easily my favorite Van Helsing.

TRIVIA: While there are all sorts of snorts and snarls, Christopher Lee actually only has 13 lines in this movie, all spoken in the first act.

It's Hammer Time!!

HAMMER HORROR MONTH!

In celebration of Halloween, I am going to focus on the films of the famous Hammer Studios, a British film studio that revived the classic movie monsters to great success in the 1950s.

This is going to be fun for me because I've only seen a few of these films all the way through. I caught them in snippets and I certainly know them by their reputation (both good and bad). But I have always wanted to see them, and thanks to TCM, I will finally be able to! Throughout October, they will be playing several of them on Friday nights.

So what's the big deal about Hammer Films? In the 1950s, while Hollywood was busy attacking audiences with aliens, UFOs, and giant ants, the famous monsters of lore had been reduced to a joke. Frankenstein, Dracula, the Wolf Man only appeared in films if they were parodies. Their effectiveness had been played out, or so the conventional wisdom said. Of course, Hollywood was wrong (big surprise).

Starting with the Curse of Frankenstein, Hammer revived the fortunes of these old school baddies and created an incredibly successful series of films for the next two decades. One of the innovations was a no-brainer. Color! Hammer was known for their vivid color palattes - particularly the color red. Blood flows freely in these flicks - to actually see blood on the lips of a vampire after feeding was a HUGE shock in 1958. The Hammer Films also added an element of sexuality to horror - granted, beautiful women have been plagued by monsters since silent films. But to have these women be so overtly va-va-voomy was a Hammer innovation. The sex and the gore are very tame compared to today, even laughably tame, but for the 1950s it was quite risque and contributed to the huge business at the box office.

The other thing Hammer Films gave us were two new horror icons - enter Christopher Lee and Peter Cushing. We all know Christopher Lee as the evil wizard Saruman in Lord of the Rings, but he was a huge horror star in the 1950s and 60s, playing druids, warlocks, mummies, Frankenstein's monster and most famously, Count Dracula, a role he played 12 times! We all know Peter Cushing as Grand Moff Tarkin, the old commander of the Death Star and the only guy in Star Wars who can boss Darth Vader around. These two appeared in countless Hammer movies and are true icons of the genre.

On the negative side, these movies were pretty cheaply made and you can usually tell. The pacing can be slow and lots of the acting outside of Cushing and Lee can be...well, let's say there are times when they should have focused less on the va va voom and more on the talent. But I have a feeling these problems probably affected the latter flicks more than the earlier ones. I guess we'll find out!!

So this is month is going to be a fun one. I may sneak in a review of something else, particularly if it is a new movie (I am probably going to see The Social Network and will want to review that). But the theme of the month is Hammer. It's Hammer Time!!!!