One Million Years B.C.

As you know, I am fascinated with trying to figure out why some movies stand the test of time, while other movies - some of which were big hits in their day - seem to disappear from the public consciousness.  It's a question I wrestled with as I reviewed The Vikings, Bad Day at Black Rock and The Best Years of Our Lives.  On a related note, I also find it fun when a single image from a movie becomes iconic while the movie itself has been largely forgotten.  

Case in point, the iconic image of Raquel Welch in the fur bikini from One Million Years B.C. This picture has appeared in film collages for the last half century.  I've seen it on posters, movie theater murals and in commercials.  It is even one of the posters Andy Dufresne hangs up in his cell in The Shawshank Redemption.  I'm willing to bet most people recognize the picture from their childhood, but just aren't sure where it is from. 

Not to say that One Million Years B.C. has completely disappeared.  This was a Hammer Production, after all, and that crazy English movie studio has a lot of fans out there (me, included).  But I'm willing to bet most folks in the general population have not seen or heard of this movie.  And as each generation passes, it will become more and more forgotten.  

And you know what?  Maybe that's not a bad thing.  One Million Years B.C. is not a particularly good movie, and maybe it's better if we let the mystery of Raquel Welch in that fur bikini stay just that: a mystery.  Maybe it's more alluring that way. 

I know that is getting the review off on a bad note.  That's not necessarily fair because One Million Years B.C. is not all bad.  There is a lot to like here.  Like many Hammer Films, it's kitschy fun, and I certainly enjoyed it more than the first time this story was told, in 1940's One Million B.C. starring Victor Mature. This is the story of Tonak (John Richardson), the son of Akhoba, the chief of a tribe of primitive humans living in cave that is much too close to an active volcano.  Though he is the favored son, Tonak angers his father one evening by not giving up his food when the chief is craving a little extra snack.  To be honest, this might be the most unappetizing piece of meat I've ever seen, just a shred of meat and fat hanging limply from a bone, but Ahkoba is hungry, damnit, and Tonak doesn't want to share.  Enraged, Ahkoba beats his son, exiles him from the tribe, and oh, throws him off a cliff just to make sure the point is clear. 

Wounded, Tonak wanders the wilderness, coming across all sorts of cannibals, dinosaurs and monsters before he discovers a beach and the peaceful Shell people who dwell there, including Loana (Raquel Welch, The Three Musketeers).  Tonak could make a home with these people, but he knows his destiny lies back with his own tribe (I can't say I agree with him on this one, but I guess Tonak really wants to find out what happened to that meat he lost.)

Look, this movie is not that good.  It is supremely silly, but there is still a lot of fun stuff to be had here.  For One Million Years B.C., Hammer Films partnered with one of the pioneers of stop motion animation - Ray Harryhausen.  Harryhausen's techniques are in top form.  And even if some of the dinosaurs look like animated models, there is still more excitement when the T-Rex and triceratops fight than any other beatdown in the movie.  Harryhausen brings excitement and creativity to these sequences that are genuinely fun.  

But what is most impressive about the film is the script...because it is all of three or four words.  We're in Prehistoric times and proper language hasn't been invented yet, and the filmmakers thought they'd be realistic about that.  You can sense the beginnings of language, the characters and monsters all have names, for example, but for the most part, they try to tell the story through grunts, groans, and knowing glances.  That is a gutsy move, and an insane risk with the box office.  But Hammer has the cajones to do it, and I have to tip my hat to them.  And they manage to tell a coherent story.  Sure, we have to pay extra attention to every look and the slightest movement to sort of figure the plot and relationships out, but they pull it off.  

I was also intrigued by the dynamics of the tribes.  Tonak and his tribe are all id.  Everything they do is fueled by individual self-interest.  They are pure desire.  Ahkoba wants that meat, damn it, no matter how gross it looks.  And later in the movie, Tonak really wants a spear that the Shell People made, and he is willing to fight anyone for it, and he doesn't care if these people just saved his life from a giant turtle. 

The Shell People are a bit more complex.  They are more community-based, and willing to spread the wealth for the common good.  Though certainly more docile and clearly not as effective fighters, they are more organized, well-fed and healthy.  They have built the first structured human society, and it is interesting to watch Tonak's id mentality butt heads against that, especially when there is no dialogue to hold our hand through the scenes.  There's a lot of interesting stuff going on here, and I applaud the filmmakers. 

I know what you're thinking: that's saying an awful lot of nice things or a movie I previously said wasn't very good.  Well, I'm sticking to it.  This movie isn't particularly good.  It really is silly.  And while it's impressive that they can tell a story with no dialogue, that story itself is really kind of dumb, and the finale, a big fight by an exploding volcano, is just bonkers (and not in a good way).  I don't think I can recommend this movie, except to Hammer fans.  For young girl-crazy teenagers, that poster of Raquel Welch in the fur bikini promises an adventure that is exciting and sexy, and the film certainly does not live up to that promise.  But at the same time, I admire it.  I am so impressed with the way the film is trying to tell its story.  That needs to be applauded, and it is a risk I wish more filmmakers would make today. 

MVP:

Honestly, I don't know.  I know the reason the MVP should win, but I don't know who deserves the credit. The best thing about this movie is its bold choice to forgo any dialogue.  I was impressed that they were able to tell a coherent story and still effectively incorporate interesting nuances to each society and their community structures.  Do I credit Don Chaffey, the director, or perhaps Michael Carreras, the producer/writer?  Or do I credit the filmmakers of the original One Million BC, who made a similar bold decision (though with less success, I think).  Ultimately, I probably need to give the MVP to Don Chaffey because he is the one who successfully translated the idea successfully for the big screen.  Yeah, I feel good about that.  Don Chaffey, whose wide range of credits includes Pete's Dragon, Jason and the Argonauts, and multiple episodes of MacGuyver and Charlie's Angels, gets his first MVP!  

BEST QUOTE: 

It's a tough call.  It probably has to be either "Ugh, grunt, ugh, Tonak, grunt grunt" or "Grunt, ugh, ugh, argh, ugh."  Too close to decide between those two classic bits of dialogue. 

TRIVIA:

Though Raquel Welch was the big box office draw for this film, and a fine actress, the producers must not have liked her grunting for this movie.  All of her dialogue was dubbed by Nikki van Der Zy, who also dubbed a lot of the female characters in the early Bond films.  

Night Creatures

 

Though I am generally not a huge fan of horror movies, there is something about Hammer Films that I really dig.  The studio produced a huge slew of horror films in the 1950s and 1960s, many starring Peter Cushing and Christopher Lee.  Many of the films were not great, but they had a goofy gothic charm that I really enjoyed.  I've seen a lot of movies by the studio over the years.   And after watching The Curse of the Werewolf, I had to ask myself whether it would be wise to stop.  Was I now scraping the bottom of the barrel?  Had I already seen all the good movies and was now just torturing myself with the dreck?  

And then I came across Night Creatures, otherwise known as Captain Clegg, which is an odd little film.  It's really a movie that shouldn't work.  And truth be told, it kind of doesn't.  But also, truth be told, I kinda don't care.  Night Creatures is silly fun, and I enjoyed myself! 

In a small village along the coast of England, Captain Collier (Patrick Allen, Dial M for Murder) of the Royal Navy arrives to investigate reports of illegal smuggling and piracy.  He suspects that an infamous pirate named Captain Clegg is responsible.  But Clegg has been dead for years, and the local villagers are too worried about the haunted marshes to be thinking about bootlegging.  You see, there are these phantoms deep in the marshes, glowing skeletons that ride out of the darkness, literally frightening people to death with their sheer presence.  Captain Collier thinks this is all a ridiculous distraction, but it will only be a matter of time before his investigation crosses paths with...the Night Creatures!!  

In the town, we have an assortment of odd characters, including the gentle Reverend Blyss (Peter Cushing, Horror of Dracula), his ward Imogene (Yvonne Romain, The Curse of the Werewolf), coffin maker Jeremiah Mipps (Michael Ripper, The Reptile), innkeeper Mister Rash (Martin Benson, Goldfinger) and Harry Cobtree (Oliver Reed, Gladiator), the son of the local government official.  These characters all take turns "helping" Captain Collier when actually frustrating his efforts.  

I guess this is a SPOILER, but not really since the movie reveals certain facts very early on.  The entire town is in on this bootlegging operation, which is led by the Reverend Blyss.  Their challenge is to somehow try and keep to their schedule while Captain Collier is sniffing around.  

Of course, it would make more sense if the criminals would just stop their activities for a day or two until Collier leaves.  And once you think about that, you start realizing that the most of the plot just breaks down under even a little bit of scrutiny. "Well, how did that happen?" "Why did he do that?" "How is that possible?"   Even the secret of the Night Creatures is a huge disappointment and a fun idea that never lives up to its potential.  On paper, this is probably not a particularly good movie.  

So why did I like it?  I enjoyed the Gothic Hammer atmosphere which is well utilized here.  I thought the concept of an entire town of bootleggers was interesting, and there are some genuinely fun and creative flourishes in their plotting.  But most of all, Night Creatures brings in Hammer's most reliable weapon: the always watchable Peter Cushing, who just elevates everything he is in.  Whether he is in kindly reverend mode or ruthless pirate leader mode, Cushing is just on a different level than the rest of the cast.  

So do I recommend Night Creatures?   Yes, I would.  But take that recommendation with a grain of salt.  It's definitely one of the lesser Hammer Films.  If Hammer isn't your thing, then I would avoid it.  This isn't the movie that will change your mind!  But personally, I really enjoyed it.  

MVP:

My love for Peter Cushing is no secret.  I've liked him since I was a little kid and I realized he was the one guy in the original Star Wars who could boss Darth Vader around.  He elevates Night Creatures, especially when he is allowed to dump his gentle reverend cover and go into ruthless pirate captain mode.  The film is constantly in danger of being overwhelmed by its plot contrivances, and then Peter Cushing shows up and all is forgotten and forgiven.  If that is not an MVP performance, I don't know what is.  

BEST LINE:

Captain Collier: Did you sleep last night? 

Reverend Blyss: Why, exceptionally well.  And you?  Oh no, you were out looking for the phantoms, weren't you?  Of course!  Don't tell me you've only just returned.

Captain Collier: Yes.

Reverend Blyss: Dear me, you must have walked a long way.  Did you have any luck?

Captain Collier: Yes and no.

Reverend Blyss: That's comprehensive, anyway.  

TRIVIA: 

I have two fun bits of trivia here.  As I mentioned, the original title of this movie was Captain Clegg, and in most of the world, that is what most people call the film.  However, in the United States, the film was called Night Creatures.  What happened behind the scenes was this: Hammer had planned on producing an adaptation of the classic horror story I Am Legend.  They were going to call the film Night Creatures.  But the British censors warned the studio that they would never allow the film to be made, so those plans had to be abandoned.  The problem is that Hammer already promised a film called Night Creatures to the U.S. distributors.   So they hastily changed the title of this film and the rest is history. 

I have to be honest.  That bit of trivia also makes me a bit sad.  Can you imagine a Hammer version of I Am Legend with Peter Cushing or Christopher Lee in the lead?  That would have been amazing.  

The second bit of trivia is about the small town where the film was made, Denham.  The red brick house where Reverend Blyss lives was actually the home of legendary producer Alexander Korda (The Third Man) and his wife Merle Oberon (Wuthering Heights).  The house was later owned by Sir John Mills (the father in Swiss Family Robinson).  Years later, Mills' daughter, Hayley Mills from The Parent Trap restored the local windmill, which can also be seen in the film.  

The Curse of the Werewolf

 

When I finished watching The Curse of the Werewolf, my first thoughts were, "Woof!  What a bad movie."  That line just kept popping into my head - and honestly, I didn't even think about it being a pun until a few minutes later.  I promptly rolled my eyes and thought, well, I can't start a review that way.  People will hate me.  And yet, here I am.  

The Curse of the Werewolf?  Woof!  What a bad movie!  

I know there is a lot of love out there for this movie, but I just felt it was a bore and tedious to get through.  I understand that Hammer Films are not striving for Oscars, but there is a Gothic charm to a lot of them, and a lot of creative and exciting reimagining of iconic horror creatures like vampires, mummies and even Frankenstein's monster.  So I'll give The Curse of the Werewolf some props for taking some chances, but the film is full of creative misstep after creative misstep.  It's just bad.  

One fateful day, a poor beggar (Richard Wordworth, Revenge of Frankenstein) visits a local lord's house during his wedding day.  After the local lord (Anthony Dawsen, Dr. No) abuses him for quite some time to entertain the wedding guests, the beggar is imprisoned in the castle dungeons.  There, he is forgotten by almost everyone.  Years pass.  And only the poor, mute servant girl who serves him his food shows him any kindness.  More years pass.  The servant girl grows up into a beautiful young woman played by Yvonne Romain (Night Creatures), and the villainous lord takes notice.  When she refuses his advances, she is also thrown into the dungeon.  The beggar, now mad and feral, inexplicably rapes her and then promptly - and without explanation - dies.  The servant girl escapes the castle and soon gives birth to little Leon - a poor baby whose circumstances of conception were so horrible that he is forever tainted by the... CURSE OF THE WEREWOLF.  

I know that local censors of the day would rant and rave about the shocking sadism in the Hammer Films.  These movies, with their emphasis on blood and eroticism, were shocking for the late 1950s and early 1960s, but I really think these complaints were the silly and overblown grumblings of stodgy old critics.  But with The Curse of the Werewolf, they probably had a point.  The first half of the movie is really full of distasteful and, yes, sadistic material.  They just pushed it a bit too far.  

If this sadism had a point, if it led to anything interesting in the second half, I suppose the film could be forgiven.  But it never does.  Leon (played as an adult by Oliver Reed from Gladiator) struggles with his curse as his adoptive father Alfredo (Clifford Evans, Kiss of the Vampire) tries to help him. And the movie just bounces from one stupid plot point after plot.

Here's one example.  When he is a boy, Leon turns into a werewolf and attacks some local goat herds.  The night watchman shoots at what he thinks is a wolf, and though we don't see Leon get hit, there is some blood on the ground.  Cut to the next scene with Alfredo removing the bullet, not knowing Leon had snuck out (or transformed into a werewolf), and asking in a way that I think is way too casual, hey, do you happen to know how you got shot while you were sleeping last night?  Leon doesn't remember...and that's the end of that.  

Woof!  This movie stinks.  

In fairness, it's not a complete disaster.  The werewolf make-up is pretty good.  I know in some production stills you can find online, it looks a bit dodgy, but in action the makeup is definitely effective, especially when matched by Oliver Reed's committed, snarly performance.  And in general, Oliver Reed and Clifford Evans are both great actors and are always engaging, even when the film is not.  They do the best they can with the material.   I'm just shocked by how bad this material is.  This was made by Hammer's best director, Terence Fisher, who had successfully rebooted the other iconic horror characters for the studio.  So I'm not sure what happened here.  You have a disturbing and sadistic first half and a pretty routine and boring second half.  Save yourself from the curse, and skip this movie!  

MVP: 

I will probably have to go with Clifford Evans.  Oliver Reed is good in the role, but I do feel like they missed an opportunity with his character.  A good boy, stoically trying to suppress his urges, does not play to Reed's strengths.  Though he gives a good performance, Reed is best when you let him dial it up all the way to eleven (which he does get to do in wolf form).  Whereas Evans does a very good job of reigning everything in.  He's a calm and collected doctor who adopts Leon after his mother dies, and once he learns about the curse, he does a great job of telegraphing the horror without going over the top.  He brings more of a weary resolve to the role and is focused on what he should do to save his son, as opposed to overplaying the terror of it all.  Now that I am writing this, I guess that makes Leon's character work.   It makes sense that this man was raised by Alfredo.  They are both kind people not given to huge displays of emotion.   So I suppose from a script and direction standpoint, that works. But it still doesn't play to Reed's strengths, while Evans fits the role perfectly.  Anyways, that's a ramble.  Clifford Evans gets my MVP!    

BEST LINE:

Shepherd 1: I lost three goats last night!

Shepherd 2: I lost two.

Night Watchman: I can't help it if things won't die when I shoot them. 

TRIVIA: 

I have two bits of trivia for you.  First of all, in the original script, the beggar was actually a werewolf, which is even more awful but at least explains why Leon is also a werewolf.  But that was too much for the censors.  They drew the line and the scene had to be rewritten.  

On a more fun note, Oliver Reed liked to drive home in full makeup, just to freak out other commuters on the road!  

Five Million Years to Earth (or Quatermass and the Pit)

Five Million Years to Earth
And it finally ends...long, long ago, TCM had a marathon to celebrate Hammer Films, the studio that dominated the horror genre in the late 1950s and 1960s.  I used my DVR to pretty much record every single film in the marathon and planned on reviewing all of them.  Embarrassingly, it took two years to get through them all (in my defense, I had lots of movies I wanted to review in between!!).  And now I am finished, at last!  I am not saying I won't review more Hammer movies.  I would love to!  But Five Million Years to Earth is the final film in that initial marathon.  And I am happy to say that I saved a winner for the end! 

While doing construction in London's Hobb' End Tube Station, workers find something metallic and huge.  They think it is a Nazi bomb leftover from World War II and immediately call in the military.  But something is a bit weird about this metallic structure and the army brings in brilliant scientist Bernard Quatermass (Bernard Lee, Dracula: Prince of Darkness) to investigate.  Alongside fellow researchers Dr. Roney (James Donald, The Great Escape) and Barbara Judd (Barbara Shelley, also from Dracula: Prince of Darkness), Quatermass tries to get to the bottom of the mystery.  Pretty quickly they learn that the structure is a space ship...and that is seems to carry some sort of demonic power that could endanger the entire country.  Oh, crap! 

Let's just get the bad out of the way first.  Five Million Years to Earth is pretty good, but there are a few problems.  I know I shouldn't dock points for special effects in a film made in 1967, but the aliens just look too silly.  Look at the picture above.  The aliens look like plastic!  I just couldn't get past that!  I also had a problem with the way the military was handled in the film, as represented by the stubborn Colonel Breen (Julian Glover, For Your Eyes Only).  Despite mounting evidence to the contrary, Breen keeps insisting that the ship is a German bomb.  After the 43rd time he tells Quatermass to shut his trap and go away, you just start to get annoyed. 

Okay, that's the bad.  What about the good?  Well, that is actually the rest of the film.  This is smart science fiction, with some good ideas and with something to say.  In fact, some of the messages seem to be remarkably similar to Prometheus except they seem to be better thought out and...well, make sense.  Much of the film is spent following Quatermass and Barbara as they investigate the strange happenings around Hobb's End, and some of it is pretty creepy.  Some people might find all this talking and thinking to be dull, but I found it all very interesting.  I really wasn't sure where this movie was going to go.  And eventually there is a big, exciting climax.  You just have to be patient and wait for it!

The acting is also quite good.  James Donald, Andrew Keir and Barbara Shelley have a sophisticated, adult chemistry, and genuinely seem to enjoy each other's company.  Julian Glover is quite good, even if I didn't like his character.  And I have to say that Glover looks almost exactly the same here, in 1967, as he did in 2004's Troy, which is pretty damn impressive. 

Anyways, Five Millions Years to Earth isn't perfect, but it is smart and clever science fiction, and probably the best of Hammer's non-horror films.  I would definitely recommend it!

MVP:
I'm going to have to go with Barbara Shelley, who also won my MVP for Dracula: Prince of Darkness.  Known as the First Lady of British Horror, she really was more than just your average scream queen.  No matter what is happening on screen, she is just completely believable.  And she really telegraphs fear incredibly well, better than most actors, I think.  Her fear just seems real.  I think it is because she doesn't overdo it, and does most of the acting with her eyes.  But to be honest, the real reason she wins the MVP is because she makes such an impact despite that fact that her hair is the most dated thing in the film and does its best to distract the audience!


BEST LINE:
Sladden is a worker with a super powerful drill.  Along with Breen, he prepares to drill into the interior of the ship. 

Sladden: I reckon this little beauty will cut through anything.  Cut steel armor plate six inches thick, just like that.  Oh, it was legal!  Some bloke got stuck in a storeroom.  But I got him out.  It was a secret job, like this one.

Colonel Breen: Then I'm glad you don't talk about it.

TRIVIA:

At the Hobb's End Underground Station, there are numerous posters of other Hammer Films on the walls, including Dracula: Prince of Darkness and The Reptile.

Stranglers of Bombay

Strangers of Bombay

As everyone knows, I am a fan of Hammer Films, the British studio that specialized in horror films in the late 1950s and 1960s.  The studio was smart enough to know it couldn't depend on terrorizing audiences and tried to expand their filmography with science fiction, pirate movies, and other types of adventures.  Stranglers of Bombay certainly falls into this category, despite a promotional campaign that really plays up the more horrific aspects of the story.  What Stranglers of Bombay really wants to be is the next Gunga Din.

Gunga Din it is not.  I suppose it isn't fair to compare the film to that 1939 classic, but even taken on its own merits, Stranglers of Bombay just falls short.  There are just too many ridiculous things. There are elements of a neat film here, though, and these moments prevent the film from being a complete wash.  Even its basic storyline is pretty interesting.  Loosely based on true events when India was part of the British Empire, Stranglers of Bombay recounts the rise of the brutal Thuggee cult, vicious followers of Kali who preferred to strangle their victims.  If this all sounds vaguely familiar, it is because the Thuggees are also the villains in Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom.

After an alarming number of missing and/or murdered person cases crop up, dashing British Captain Harry Lewis starts to investigate.  He knows something dark is happening, something that could threaten not only his life, but the lives of the whole British garrison and the innocent Indian population.  He has to get to the bottom of the mystery, despite the obstinate objections of his superior officers.  And that plot point is one of the first major problems with the film.  Despite a vast amount of evidence to the contrary, the British generals just refuse to listen to Lewis.  I know there is supposed to be suspension of disbelief with movies, but they push it a bit too far.  I was also bothered by the way Indians were treated in the film.  I guess the film was made in the 1950s and I shouldn't judge the film by today's standards, but all the Indians are either craven villains or defenseless and helpless innocents who need the British to save them.  It was hard to get past that, too.

And this is also the type of film that features characters doing stupid things after stupid things. Here's an example (with a SPOILER ALERT!).  At one point, Lewis sneaks into the jungle and finds the Thuggee camp.  Instead of going back for reinforcements, he sneaks even closer and of course he gets caught because a small shrubbery is not a very good hiding place.  He is dragged into the temple and chained to the floor before the altar, a sacrificial victim of the Thuggee's poisonous pet snake.  Lucky for Lewis, he has his servant's pet mongoose with him and the mongoose kills the snake.  A superstitious lot, the Thuggees let him go home.  First of all, this is kind of silly.  Lewis found their secret headquarters and they are just going to let him go???  And when Lewis gets home, does he go to his superiors and report that he found the Thuggees so they can go back and deliver justice?  Nope. Instead, guess what he does!  He sneaks back to the Thugee camp again - alone!  And hides behind another small shrubbery and of course gets caught again!!! Really, the characters just make some jaw droppingly dumb decisions.

And it's a shame because there is some cool stuff going on in here.  Guy Rolfe is an entertaining lead, and I wish they gave him better stuff to do.   And the villains are actually pretty neat, each with an interesting backstory and character motivation.  There is a neat scene where the Thuggee leader excuses himself after ordering someone's execution.  In the background, we hear the struggle and the strangulation, but we don't see it.  Instead we are watching the leader's sweaty and anxious face, growing increasingly agitated as the sounds of the struggle grow louder.  It's an interesting decision.  Is he squeamish about death?  Or is he growing horrified about what he is becoming?  It's an intriguing question, and I wish there had been more moments like that in the film.

Anyway, that's Stranglers of Bombay.  If these were the types of non-horror films Hammer was making, then I can see why they doubled down and focused on their horror output as the 1960s wore on.  Skip it!

MVP: 
I know I am about to sound like a hypocrite, but I am going to give the MVP to Guy Rolfe.  Despite the fact that the character does so many stupid things, Rolfe valiantly strives to save the character.  That Lewis is likeable at all has more to do with Rolfe than anything the character does.  It's not an easy MVP win, but I think he earned it.

TRIVIA:
The word "thug" comes from "Thuggee."  The meaning of the word has of course changed over the last century, but it is still a cool bit of trivia!

BEST LINE:

This exchange wins more because of a terrific site gag...now whether it was intentional or not, who knows?!

Lewis: This is a hanging, isn't it?

Guard: I beg your pardon?

Lewis: You ever see such happy people?

Guard: I think we all enjoy it a bit, sir.  That's why we're here.

Lewis: What about the prisoner?  Does he normally enjoy it a bit, too?  Look at him!

Cut to the prisoner, with the biggest, goofiest grin on his face.  I'm sorry, but it made me laugh!

The Hound of the Baskervilles (1959)

Hound of the Baskervilles

By 1959, Hammer Films was on a high.  Their Frankenstein and Dracula franchises were smash hits and it looked like the little British company could do no wrong.  But the studio was trying to be smart; and think ahead. They knew they wouldn't be able to rely on horror forever, and they began to look into other genres.  They found an obvious answer in the world's greatest detective, Sherlock Holmes.

This seemed like a no brainer.  The material was a perfect fit for director Terence Young and stars Christopher Lee, Peter Cushing, and Andre Morell, and Holmes' greatest adventure, The Hound of the Baskervilles, even had a heavy horror element to it, so it wouldn't be much of a stretch for Hammer to start their foray into detective films with this storyline.

The plot is fairly simple.  Sir Hugo Baskerville has just been killed mysteriously out on the moors near his manor, and the primary suspect is the ghost of a demon hound that has cursed the family for generations.  Sir Hugo's son, Henry (Lee) returns to Baskerville Hall to claim his inheritance, but he doesn't come alone.  The mystery of Sir Hugo's death and the demon hound has piqued the interest of Sherlock Holmes (Cushing) and his partner, Dr. Watson (Morell), and the two arrive in the moors to prevent the same gruesome fate from happening to Sir Henry.

Is The Hound of the Baskervilles as good as Horror of Dracula or other Hammer classics?  No, not really, but it is still a solid film and a good take on the character.  As Hammer rightly believed, this material is perfect for their inhouse cast and crew.  Cushing is a great Holmes, playing up the eccentricity without going overboard, and Morell is a terrific Watson.  Watson has a lot to do in this film as there are great stretches of time where Holmes is nowhere to be found, leaving Watson with the difficult task of protecting Henry himself.  Morell puts in great work, trying to keep one eye on Henry while keeping the other eye open for clues for Holmes.  He's quite the detective himself, even if he isn't as quick as Holmes.  Meanwhile, Lee brings just the right amount of aristocratic authority to his Henry, though I have to admit it is a bit strange seeing him as a good guy.  And Terence Fisher is a great choice of director, creating an eerie sense of atmosphere with beautiful mists and saturated colors.  All in all, this is a solid and entertaining film.

So it is strange to me that The Hound of the Baskervilles was a disappointment at the box office!  While not as good as Hammer's classics, it is still a lot better than a good chunk of the company's catalog, including The Mummy, which came out the same year and was an unqualified success.  I'm just not sure why this movie didn't do well.  The studio thought it was because audiences only wanted monsters, not detectives.  I've also read that audiences still closely connected the role of Holmes with Basil Rathbone, so maybe they were unwilling to accept a new actor in the role, no matter how good he was.  Either way, it is very strange to me.

I think it is time for The Hound of Baskervilles to get a second lease on life!  I want everyone who likes Sherlock Holmes or Hammer Films to go out and rent this movie!  I think you will enjoy it.  It is not a classic by any means, it is still an entertaining film and deserves more attention than it received in 1959.

MVP:
I have to go back to Peter Cushing. I love this guy!  If you want to see how versatile an actor he is, look no further than 1958 and 1959, when he played the Van Helsing, Victor Frankenstein, Sherlock Holmes, and even the romantic lead in The Mummy.  He is not a flashy actor who calls attention to himself, but each of these performances are remarkably different.  He was a great actor, and I very much enjoyed his take on the iconic detective.  He may not be the best Holmes - he doesn't quite reach the level of Jeremy Brett, Benedict Cumberbatch or Robert Downey, Jr. (I don't care what Holmes purists say, I really like Downey in the role!), but Cushing is still a grand Holmes and certainly the best thing about this movie. An easy MVP, I say!

TRIVIA: 
Hammer was so confident that The Hound of the Baskervilles would be a hit that plans were already being laid to continue the franchise.  Cushing, who loved the role, was especially excited. Alas, when the film underperformed, the franchise was canceled.

BEST LINE:

Holmes: "Now would you mind sorting out a large scale map of Dartmoor, my dear fellow, while I go and find some more tobacco.  This, I think, is a two pipe problem."

Frankenstein Must Be Destroyed!

Frankenstein Must Be Destroyed

So after the disaster that was Frankenstein Created Woman, I went into Frankenstein Must Be Destroyed with very small expectations.  But I have to say that I was pleasantly surprised.  The movie has some serious problems, but it is ten times better than the previous entry.

Well, it seems Baron Frankenstein is up to his old tricks again.  He finds out that a former colleague, Dr. Richter, is in a nearby insane asylum.  Frankenstein blackmails one of the asylum doctors, Karl (Simon Ward, Three Musketeers) and his fiance, Anna (Veronica Carlson, Dracula Has Risen From the Grave) into helping him release and cure the doctor so they can collaborate on their life creating experiments.  Of course, things never work out as they should...

First, let's talk about what the film does right!  I have to say it looks gorgeous, casting off the cheap and dull look that Frankenstein Created Woman suffered from.  Terence Fisher, the franchise's go-to director (who must have been sleepwalking through the previous entry) is back in fine form, moving the film along at a good clip and playing around with some terrific camera angles.  Fisher's introduction of Baron Frankenstein is easily the character's best entrance in the entire franchise.  I also like how the series finally clarifies its approach to the Frankenstein character.  There is some debate about whether the mad doctor is truly evil or not.  After all, he is just obsessed with furthering medical science!  He's not trying to hurt anyone.  But to me, it all goes back to the question of whether the ends justify the means...and this is why the good Baron will always be a villain to me...and Frankenstein Must Be Destroyed gets that.  Starting from the very first scene, this Baron is a ruthless, vicious man, and Cushing plays him to hilt, bringing all his malicious arrogance to the forefront.  And this is a lot of fun to watch at first, until they push the cruelty too far in the second half of the movie.

What doesn't work is everything related to Karl and Anna.  This is in no way the fault of Ward and Carlson, both of whom are fine performers.  I just felt their characters were extraneous.  I think they just added the young lovers' storyline to attract a wider (and female) audience.  But the gambit fails.  Anything they contributed to the plot could have been done in a different, more economical way.  And once they have outlived their usefulness to the story, they just stick around, weighing the movie down.  With nothing real for the characters to do, the producers just stick them in situations to be abused by Frankenstein and this gets annoying really fast.  This includes a random and uncomfortable rape scene, filmed against the objections of Cushing, Fisher, and Carlson.  The scene makes no sense, is out of character for Frankenstein, and is never mentioned again for the rest of the movie.

Really, this scene is just a good example of what happens in the second half of the film.  The whole enterprise just starts to fall apart.  All the characters start acting in ways contrary to what we have been watching in the first hour, and you just find yourself asking, "well, now why are they doing that?!" every five minutes.  If not for the moving performance of Freddie Jones (Dune) as Dr. Richter during the film's climax, the whole second half of the film would have been a complete disaster.

I was also profoundly disturbed by the unnecessary, undeserved and sadistic treatment of Anna.  It really bothered me.  And it is a shame because there is so much to like in Frankenstein Must Be Destroyed - the general look and feel of the film, the performances, the general concept.  I have very mixed feelings about this movie.  I suppose it is worth watching at some point, but don't rush out to see it!

MVP:
Freddie Jones gets my MVP.  Cushing almost wins, especially for his awesome entrance, but they put him through too many uncharacteristic antics in the second half.  But with very small screen time, Freddie Jones makes quite an impact as Dr. Richter.  The scene to watch is when he goes to visit his wife and tries to explain what has happened to him.  It's a moving, heartfelt moment, and probably the best scene in the film.


BEST LINE: 
Upon overhearing an ignorant conversation from gentlemen at the inn's common room:

Frankenstein: I didn't know you were doctors.

Guest: We're not doctors.

Frankenstein: I beg your pardon.  I thought you knew what you were talking about.

Guest: That's damn rude, sir.

Frankenstein: I'm afraid stupidity always brings out the worst in me.

TRIVIA:
So the rape scene was filmed after most of the film was complete because producer Michael Carreras thought audiences would want more violence and sadism.  Terence Fisher, Peter Cushing and Veronica Carlson were all adamantly against the scene, and you can see their discomfort up on the screen.  Because it was filmed and included after the fact, that is why they act like it never happened in the rest of the movie.

Frankenstein Created Woman

Frankenstein Created Woman

Frankenstein Created Woman is a bit of an odd duck, and a divisive one at that.  There are those who champion the film, calling it one of the more inventive and creative films of the Hammer Horror canon.  Martin Scorsese is one of these - while admitting it is not one of the best Hammer movies, he says the film's "implied metaphysic is close to something sublime."  Then there are others who think it is absolute rubbish, and a clear indication that Hammer was on the downward spiral.

I am firmly in the second camp.  Frankenstein Created Woman is just absolutely horrible.  And it is a shame considering the presence of Hammer's "A" Team of director Terence Fisher and actor Peter Cushing.  The plot is also somewhat interesting on paper.  Baron Frankenstein has now mastered the art of creating life.  But something is missing.  His creations keep going crazy and killing people.  He realizes what has been missing is the soul.  He can transfer a creature's brain, but without the soul, what good is it?  That is the metaphysical concept that I think fascinates Scorsese, and it is a good idea.  But the execution is horrible.  And this genuinely intriguing notion becomes such a small part of a film that pretty much plays like a Tales from the Crypt or Twilight Zone episode.

Here is what the film is really about.  This is heavy SPOILER here, so skip the paragraph if you don't want to know.  Hans (Robert Morris, Five Million Years to Earth) is the assistant of Baron Frankenstein and Dr. Hertz (Robert Morley, Frankenstein Must Be Destroyed).  Hans is in love with the deformed and disabled innkeeper's daughter, Christina (Playboy playmate Susan Denberg).  But some village meanies are always making fun of her.  And then they kill the innkeeper and Hans is implicated and executed.  Distraught, Christina drowns herself.  Although Dr. Hertz is upset about the whole situation, the always practical Frankenstein senses an opportunity to prove his theory.  He revives Christina (and magically transforms her from ugly duckling to the Playboy playmate teenagers were paying tickets to ogle) and implants Hans' soul into her body.  So will his experiment work?  Or will this monster also go on a murderous, vengeful rampage?   SPOILER over.

But did you notice how I barely mention Frankenstein in this synopsis?  The mad doctor is wasted, vanishing from the film for vast stretches of time while we watch the young lovers frolic.  Even worse, the night of the murder, we are subjected to watching the village meanies act like jerks in the inn's bar for what seems like an eternity before they even get around to killing him.  Literally, this murderous, ponderous evening takes up a good half hour of the short film's runtime.  If they intended to do this in an attempt to ramp up the tension, then they failed miserably, because the villains lack any...I don't know, villainy?  They are just annoying, plain and simple.  And very boring, too.  

There is some good stuff in here. Cushing is reliable, as always, even in limited screen time.  The score by James Bernard is among his best.  And the "soul transfer" theme is genuinely interesting, and they really should have played that up more.  So whose soul is really in Christina's body?  What does that imply for the existence of an afterlife?  If it works, what would Frankenstein even do with this knowledge?  These are interesting questions that the film never thinks about.

All in all, I would steer clear of this movie.  There are those who love it, but I think it is easily one of Hammer's worst.

MVP:

James Bernard was one of the go-to composers for Hammer Films, composing thrilling music for the Dracula franchise, as well as several of their stand-alones.  He outdoes himself here, composing one of his best themes for the doomed lovers.  I can guarantee that if anyone in the audience felt an ounce of sympathy for Hans and Christina, it is because of what James Bernard brought to those scenes.  It's a superb score, and this movie doesn't deserve it!


BEST LINE: During Han's trial:

Inspector: What is your occupation?

Frankenstein: I am a doctor.

Inspector: Of Medicine?

Frankenstein: Medicine, Law and Physics.

Heckler in the crowd: And Witchcraft!

Frankenstein: To the best of my knowledge, doctorates are not given for Witchcraft, but in the event they are, I shall no doubt qualify for one.

TRIVIA:

This film was originally intended as a follow-up to Revenge of Frankenstein back in the late 50s, in order to take advantage of the huge Roger Vadim hit And God Created Woman.  Numerous delays kept pushing it back until 1967.  I'm assuming audiences still got the pun...

The Revenge of Frankenstein

The Revenge of Frankenstein

Now that is more like it!  I was sorely disappointed with The Curse of Frankenstein, the classic British film that ushered in the Golden Age of Hammer Films and revitalized the Gothic Horror film genre.  While I appreciated what the movie was trying to do, I just wasn't wowed by it.

Due to the success of The Curse of Frankenstein, Hammer rushed into production on this sequel, with much of the same cast and crew, including star Peter Cushing, director Terence Fisher, and writer Jimmy Sangster.  Usually rushing into a sequel can create problems, but in this case, it must have spurred a flush of creativity, featuring a storyline that I found much more engaging and innovative.

Once again, the focus of the film is on the evil Baron Frankenstein, played with relish by Cushing.  While The Curse of Frankenstein attempted a loose and only sort of successful adaptation of the original novel and also left Frankenstein's character and motivations somewhat confusing, Revenge just embraces the doctor's obsessions.  Posing as Dr. Stein, the Baron now has a thriving medical practice.  He also donates much of his time to a charity hospital, where he cares for the sick and poor.  And by caring for them, I mean he is harvesting their body parts so he can continue his experiments!  He is still obsessed with creating life, and having his abominations recognized by the scientific community, but doesn't understand why a little murder should be such a bad thing.  He is helped in his cause by another doctor, Hans Kleve (Francis Matthews, Dracula: Prince of Darkness) and a hunchback Karl (Michael Gwynn,  Cleopatra).  Also on hand, and perhaps in the way, is the wealthy and kind-hearted Margaret Conrad (Eunice Grayson, Dr. No), who volunteers at the clinic, but is not yet aware of Dr. Stein's hobby.

I really must stop calling Frankenstein "evil."  That isn't necessarily the right word.  Technically, he isn't necessarily evil.  He's just heartless, obsessive, and egotistical. To him, the ends always justify the means - and if that means amputating innocent people's limbs for the sake of what he thinks is science, then so be it!  Actually, I guess that is pretty damn evil!  And Cushing vanishes in the role, creating a memorable and focused take on the Baron.  The other actors are also solid, if not up to Cushing's level.  The script and music are both spot on, and the direction from Fisher is right on target, a clear example of why he was Hammer's most dependable director.

I'll be honest, part of me isn't sure why I enjoyed The Revenge of Frankenstein more than The Curse of Frankenstein.  I suppose part of it is that the writers are now removing iconic characters from their source material and seeing what kind of new adventures they can have.  This leaves a lot of room for stupidity, but if done well, it can be very exciting and full of surprises.  I really enjoyed The Revenge of Frankenstein.  I definitely think everyone should check it out!

BEST LINE:

Janitor: Now take the animals in the jungle.  They don't wash none and yet you never hear of none of them getting sick.  Cause why?  They be good and dirty!

MVP:
Peter Cushing wins, without even the slightest competition.  He just owns the movie.  Aristocratic, cold, and brilliant, Baron Frankenstein is a dominating force of the film.  And Cushing knocks it out of the park.  Here is a minor spoiler moment from early in the film, but a good example of why I like Cushing here.  While attempting to unearth a coffin they need, Frankenstein and Karl come across some grave robbers.  One of them has a heart attack and dies, falling into the dug up grave.  Frankenstein checks to see he is breathing, and shrugs a nonchalant, "oh, well" and then just leaves him the grave without another thought.  This scene was hilarious, not just because the shrug was funny and a cute bit of funny timing, but also because we the audience are now being invited to laugh at, or with, Frankenstein's brand of villainy.  And Cushing just kills it.  He's great.  And he is the movie's clear MVP.

TRIVIA:
In 1958, the Daily Telegraph was so horrified by the film that they suggested the BBFC create a new category for the film, labeled "For Sadists Only."

Now, I have to say, the film's sadistic qualities are really not that bad, at least not by today's standards.  Lots of the gruesomeness is actually sort of cheesy, like the eyeballs that are floating in a fish tank in Frankenstein's lab.  Here's a picture.  Take a look at these suckers.  They are so cheesy, that I completely laughed that whole scene off!



 

The Curse of Frankenstein

The Curse of Frankenstein

A few years ago, I took it upon myself to watch and review a whole slew of Hammer Films, the iconic British studio that revived the classic monsters like Dracula and the Mummy in the late 1950s.  You can see my little writeup on the series here.  To be honest, it was one of the more fun experiments I have done since I started writing reviews.  But I was missing one of the most important pieces of the horror series: the Frankenstein franchise.

The Curse of Frankenstein is one of the most important films in Hammer history.  It was their first real foray into true classic horror and the film was a massive hit worldwide.  The film established the template for what made Hammer movies so appealing - lots of bright colors (especially red), gruesomeness, and sensuality (though very tame by today's standards). With the success of Frankenstein, Hammer launched Mummy and Dracula franchises, also to dizzying heights of box office gold.  The Curse of Frankenstein is now considered a classic.

And so it is very odd to me how underwhelmed I was with this film, especially considering the film featured Hammer's "A" Team (director Terence Fisher, writer Jimmy Sangster and actors Peter Cushing and Christopher Lee), who also collaborated on The Mummy, The Horror of Dracula, and The Gorgon.  The acting is fine, the atmosphere is gothic and chilling, and the dialogue is enjoyable (especially the winner of my best line award, below).  They also made an interesting decision to refocus the film, and the franchise, not on the monster like in earlier adaptations, but on Frankenstein himself, who instead of the misguided and obsessed hero he is in the original novel and in other movies, is actually downright evil.  The majority of the film involves his quest to create new life, no matter who stands in his way.  The monster only shows up briefly in a handful of scenes.  I actually think this is an interesting and bold choice to create a whole franchise based around an evil character, though I think it pays off more in the sequels.

Ultimately, I think getting the film to delve into this new direction is also what causes its biggest problem.  The Curse of Frankenstein wants to show us the descent of Frankenstein from an overly obsessed lover of medicine to a murderous and evil mad scientist.  But that descent makes no sense and comes out of nowhere.  If your film is going to focus on a bad guy as its main subject, you either make him sympathetic or you make him deliciously evil so we can enjoy the ride.  The Curse of Frankenstein sort of tries to do both, and that ends up hurting the movie because Frankenstein comes out as just a humorless and mean douchebag.  They should have just embraced his villainy like they do in The Revenge of Frankenstein. That would have been much more fun.

I also don't like the way women are handled in the film.  While I understand how they want to use Frankenstein's love affair with his maid (Valerie Gaunt) as a central skipping stone to his eventual embrace of evil, the whole subplot just seems out of character and random.  And his wife Elizabeth (Hazel Court) is kind wasted and here for no reason.

I don't want to say the film is all bad.  There is a lot to like.  The acting is good, especially from Robert Urquhart as Frankenstein's partner, Christopher Lee as a monster who seems more confused than murderous, and especially Cushing.  Even though I have problems with the character's presentation, Cushing is as always a pleasure to watch.  I also love the creature design.  The first appearance of the monster is truly staggering.  And I have to give a special shoutout to the super cool shot of Frankenstein working while the creature hangs on a meat hook behind him.  It is one of my favorite shots of any Hammer film ever.


Ah, well.  Maybe my expectations were too high.  The film was such a huge hit and is considered such a classic, that I just felt it should have been more on the ball.  Overall I think it is only okay.  Certainly worth watching, but definitely not the classic I expected.


BEST LINE:
Paul: I thought I'd find you here.

Frankenstein: That was very intelligent of you.  Well, now that you have found me, what do you want?

Paul: You killed the old man, didn't you.  And now you are mutilating his body.

Frankenstein: Mutilating?  I removed his brain.  Mutilating has nothing to do with it.

MVP:
Philip Leakey, the makeup artist who designed the creature makeup.  As soon as the production was announced, Universal immediately threatened to sue if Hammer used anything even closely resembling their now iconic creature design, so Leakey had to start from scratch.  After several failed attempts, Philip Leakey finally completed his terrific design literally the day before filming began.  I personally love what he came up with: patchwork person, with irregular features and a blind eye.  I wish the monster had been featured more, actually!











TRIVIA: 
Though Cushing and Lee had been in two films together already (Moulin Rouge and Hamlet), they never really talked or knew each other.  Inbetween takes on Frankenstein, the two passed the time and relieved the tension from all the gruesomeness around them by exchanging favorite Looney Tunes quotes back and forth.  And that was the beginning of a lifelong friendship. 

The Mummy

The Mummy

The foundation for Hammer Films was laid with three adaptations of classic movie monsters - Horror of Dracula, Curse of Frankenstein, and The Mummy - all directed by Terence Fisher, written by Jimmy Sangster and starring Peter Cushing as our hero and Christopher Lee as the monster.

The Mummy was the final of these three and while it is certainly the best of the Mummy films, it doesn't hold a candle to Horror of Dracula. The setup is simple and the same as most Mummy films. A team of archeologists led by Professor Banning (Felix Aylmer) and his son John (Peter Cushing) unearth the tomb of Ananka, the Egyptian priestess of Karnak. This of course pisses off the mummy that is guarding her tomb (Christopher Lee). The normal hijinks, curses, and murders ensue. What makes the film fun to watch is a committed cast of professionals (there really is not weak link in the acting department) and a Mummy that is genuinely cool looking. Unlike the silly looking bandages of the monsters in the later films, Christopher Lee's wrapping is actually pretty gross. He's muddy and moldy and dangerous.

The good parts of the movie also include the fights between the Mummy and John Banning. They are actually pretty rough for the 1950s and are some of the better fights of the franchise. I also really like the sinewy score by Franz Reizenstein. The main theme is terrific.

So its a pity that the movie just doesn't completely gel together. It really feels a bit sluggish in places, especially when it spends time on the little villagers, who I suppose are meant to be comic relief. Ultimately, they just drag the film down. And after a very effective buildup, the climax is a bit of a letdown. Overall, though, The Mummy is not bad. A bit slow in places, but still entertaining. I would recommend it. Just make sure you see the Dracula movies first!

MVP: Gotta give this one to Christopher Lee. I once foolishly thought that it didn't take talent to be a Mummy in a Mummy film. All you have to do is lumber around and kill people. But as I learned in this franchise's sequels, The Mummy's Shroud and Curse of the Mummy's Tomb, it really isn't so easy to be a Mummy. The monsters in those movies are not scary, at best - and at worst, they are laughable. Christopher Lee shows them how it should be done - he portrays the menace, but also the emotion. He is a conflicted mummy, after all. He cares more about Ananka (and John's wife, Isobel, who happens to look exactly like her) than he does about killing people. Lee makes all this clear with his body language and his eyes alone. It's pretty good stuff. Besides, he also deserves the MVP because of the Trivia below.

TRIVIA: Poor Christopher Lee. The Mummy is supposed to burst through a door during one attack. A grip on the set accidentally bolted the door shut right before filming. Luckily Christopher Lee was strong enough that he broke through the door anyway, but he dislocated his shoulder in the process. And then he threw his back out carrying Yvonne Furneaux through the forest. And then he bashed up his knees and shins on the swamp set because he couldn't see all the pipes and fittings underneath the murky water. And finally - those awesome little explosives that set off when Cushing shoots the Mummy with the shotgun (a super cool effect in the film) were extremely painful and left Lee with burn marks for weeks. All in all, a pretty painful gig...

BEST LINE: John Banning trying goad a potential bad guy into revealing himself:

John: "Karnak was not a very important diety. A third rate god."
Mehmet: "Not to those who believed in him."
John: "Perhaps not. But their standard of intelligence must have been remarkably low."

Blood from the Mummy's Tomb

Blood from the Mummy's Tomb

I am now convinced that the Mummy franchise was the weak link of the Hammer franchises. The original was alright, if a bit stuffy. Curse of the Mummy's Tomb was mediocre, and The Mummy's Shroud was terrible. I was dreading the thought of having to watch the fourth and final film of the franchise - imagine my surprise when I realized that Blood from the Mummy's Tomb is not half bad. It's actually one of the more creative mummy movies I've seen.

First of all, there isn't really a mummy. Archeologists led by Professor Fuchs (Andrew Keir) unearth the tomb of the evil Egyptian Queen Tera, but they don't find a decomposed and wrapped body. Instead they find a perfectly preserved (and barely dressed) body of the evil Queen Tera (played by Valerie Leon). That's strange. But even stranger is that her hand, which had been severed during her burial, still bleeds. At the exact moment the tomb is unearthed, thousands of miles away in England, Professors Fuch's wife dies in childbirth. But the child, Margaret, survives. What is weird is that as the older she gets, the more she begins to look like the young dead queen in the sarcophagus. That's odd. More years pass, and someone begins murdering members of the expedition one at a time. After her father is viciously attacked, Margaret (also Valerie Leon) begins to investigate the connection between the murders and Queen Tera's tomb.

It is a neat plot, based on a short story by Bram Stoker called Jewel of the Seven Stars. And this is actually an intriguing film. And I'm not sure why. There is a lot to not like here. First of all, the film can't make up its mind when it even takes place - sometimes it seems like 1970s swinging London, but certain characters are dressed as if it were half a century earlier. The acting is mostly unremarkable, and not even the usually dependable Andrew Keir is on his game.
And I think Valerie Leon was hired more for the way she wears the Egyptian neckpiece and not so much for her acting (see the picture over there). Oh, she's fine as the haughty and imperious Queen Tera, but as Margaret she isn't believable for a moment. Also, the ending of the film makes absolutely no sense. Just when we are going to get what I think is going to be an exciting climax, we get characters switching sides for no reason and then the movie just ends. Just ends. Without really even telling us what was happening.

And yet, there is a lot of good stuff in here. Maybe we can thank Stoker, but the story is actually interesting and creative. The movie leaves you guessing for most of its run time as to who the heroes and the villains are. Certain characters you are sure are going to live are killed off in surprising ways. The director Seth Holt (Scream of Fear) brings a lot of interesting tricks to the table with nice camera angles and atmospheric lighting that mask the film's small budget. And as usual, there is a flashback to ancient Egypt - scenes that invariably slowed down the previous Mummy movies, but here Holt incorporates the flashback into Margaret's nightmares, which gives them relevance.

I guess intriguing is the best word to use. Is Blood from the Mummy's Tomb any good? I don't know. Probably not. Too much of it doesn't work. But it is very intriguing and I found myself enjoying the journey it look me on. It's just a creative little oddity. If you're curious, check it out.

MVP: I'm tempted to say Queen Tera's neckpiece, but I think I might go with James Villiers as the scientist Corbeck. As one of the explorers on the expedition, he was present when the tomb was opened. He should be in danger like the rest of the group, but you would never guess so from his attitude. His snide and arrogant line readings are a hoot. He clearly thinks everyone in the world, with the possible exception of Tera, is beneath him and not worth his time. It's a fun performance.

Oh, who am I kidding? The MVP is supposed to be the best thing in the movie. And that is clearly Queen Tera's neckpiece. So there you go.


BEST LINE: Corbeck: "The meek shall not inherit the earth. They cannot be trusted with it."


TRIVIA: This movie seemed to be marked with tragedy from the beginning. Peter Cushing was due to star, but his wife passed away just before filming began. Andrew Keir stepped in to take his place. And then a week before the movie was due to be wrapped, director Seth Holt died and had to be replaced with producer Michael Carreras.

The Devil's Bride (or The Devil Rides Out)

The Devil's Bride (or The Devil Rides Out)

Reputation-wise, The Devil's Bride (or its original title, The Devil Rides Out) is considered one of the crown jewels of the Hammer Film series. At the recommendation of their top star Christopher Lee, they optioned the rights to the popular Dennis Wheatley novel. Their top director Terence Fisher (Horror of Dracula) was brought on board to helm the project, and acclaimed novelist Richard Matheson (I Am Legend) was hired to write the screenplay. The film is regarded as a classic of the genre. I guess you can call me the party pooper, but I think it is a great idea that unravels as it goes.

The film has an intriguing premise. The Duc de Richeleau (Christopher Lee) and Rex (Leon Greene) are old friends. A third friend had passed away many years before, and Richeleau and Rex had promised to watch over his son Simon (Patrick Mower). Unfortunately, Simon has fallen under the influence of a satanic cult leader named Mocata (Charles Gray). Luckily enough, Richeleau also just happens to be a master of the occult. The movie becomes a battle of wills between the villainous Mocata and Richeleau, with Simon's soul in the middle. Richeleau and Rex also try to save Tanith (Nike Arrighi), another potential young victim who is definitely due to be sacrificed to the devil.

The first half of the movie is pretty good, as Richeleau and Mocata keep interfering with each other's plans. There are actually some genuinely creepy moments, especially when Mocata begins to use his hypnotic influence over the weak-willed Simon and Tanith. The stakes raise, lives are threatened, we have car chases, evil genie demons, a dark and bloody ceremony in the woods, and the momentum builds to an awesome idea for a climax. Hiding out in a country estate with friends Marie (Sarah Lawson) and the skeptical Richard (Paul Eddington), Richeleau draws an magical protective circle on the floor. So long as they stay in the circle, they are safe. But Mocata's dark powers assault them at all sides, trying to either break through the barrier or convince the good guys to come out. This is a fascinating idea and an opportunity for some truly horrific magic coolness. Unfortunately, this set piece never lives up to its potential and as the film barrels to the climax, there are just so many "huh???" moments, that I was continually taken out of the movie.

For example - Spoiler Here - if you live in a house that is about to be attacked by a satanic cult, why would you put yourself in a protective magic circle, but tell your 8-year old daughter to just go upstairs to her room and go to sleep. Yeah, that sounds like a good idea. So later in the movie, when they find out that Mocata has kidnapped the girl, should they really have been surprised? I wasn't. The last act of the movie has a lot of moments like this that kind of ruin the rest of the movie for me. And don't even get me started on how the movie talks about the space-time continuum. Yes, The Devil's Bride talks about the space-time continuum.

But when it works, it really is enjoyable. Terence Fisher's direction is dependable as usual, and the acting is all quite good. Christopher Lee and Charles Gray are of course the highlights - two confidant and charismatic men who are great foils for each other. And like I said, there are some genuinely cool moments. I just wish the film didn't fall apart near the end.

Overall, I think this film is worth watching, but I don't understand why it is considered one of Hammer's best. 

MVP: Christopher Lee, for once playing a good guy, is the clear MVP. It's his show from the beginning. He even sells some implausible plot points - the fact that he is a master of the occult is literally just mentioned with a "oh, by the way" slight of hand. But I bought it, because I believed that Christopher Lee believed it. I think that's why Lee and Cushing are considered such icons of the genre. Because even in the most ridiculous circumstances, they seem like they believe it; they seem like they belong in this world. It makes the choice easy: Christopher Lee owns the movie.

TRIVIA: In England, the film was called The Devil Rides Out. But the U.S. distributor was worried that American audiences would think the film was a Western, so they retitled it as The Devil's Bride. It's a pity, because The Devil Rides Out is a way cooler title.

BEST LINE: A rare moment of comedy. Sitting in the magic circle, Richard says: "I think we are behaving like a pack of idiots."
Richeleau: "It begins."
Richard: "What? What begins?"
Richeleau: "Mocata is working on you. Because you are the weakest link."
Richard: "What?"
Richeleau: "Uhhh, from his point of view!"

The Mummy's Shroud

The Mummy's Shroud
Despite the mediocre reviews, I was actually excited about this second sequel to the Hammer Mummy franchise. Filmed in 1967, The Mummy's Shroud was a reunion of sorts between director John Gilling and star Andre Morell, who the previous year had released the thoroughly enjoyable The Plague of the Zombies.

Maybe I jinxed it. In my review of "The Plague of the Zombies," I talked about how much I liked John Gilling's direction and how the mentor characters in Hammer Films are always awesome. Oh, this movie debunked both of those statements before the first reel had ended.

The movie starts off with a flashback of ancient Egypt - in all of its cardboard set glory. Our Egyptians are all clearly white dudes covered in uneven spray tan. The Pharoah is murdered, but before he dies he asks his slave Prem to rescue the prince Kay-to-Bey. Prem swears to protect the boy for all eternity. That's great and all, but this horribly filmed, horribly acted, horribly narrated prologue goes on for almost ten minutes! The film improves somewhat (but barely) when we skip to the early 20th Century, where archeologists have uncovered the tomb of Kay-to-Bey. Of course, it's time for the Mummified Prim to exact some payback!

Our potential victims this time are the unlikable Stanley Preston (John Phillips), a wealthy businessman who wants to hog all the glory and none of the danger; Preston's long-suffering press secretary Longbarrow (Hammer regular Michael Ripper); Preston's son, Paul (David Buck); the psychic archeologist Claire (Maggie Kimberly); photographer Harry (Tim Barrett); and esteemed archeologist Sir Basil (Andre Morell). I thought at least Morell would be good, but he is entirely wasted. He is barely in the movie, and his character doesn't have anything remotely interesting to do or say. After so many cool mentors in Hammer Films, this role was a complete disappointment.

There is so much stupid stuff in this movie. Our cartoon bad guy Hasmid (Roger Delgado) isn't scary, but overacts and spews out gibberish like a cartoon character. The best thing I can say about him is that his spray tan is at least even. The police are inept, insisting on keeping our heroes in exactly the places where they are most vulnerable. Our heroes themselves are either deadly dull or annoying, or both (with one exception).

Is the movie all bad? No, I suppose not. There are some nice, atmospheric moments throughout that reminded me a bit of Gilling's other work. The one actor I quite liked was Preston's put-upon press secretary Longbarrow. As played by Ripper, he is a nice man, a kind man, but weak. He just doesn't have the strength to resist his jerk of a boss. He is really the only character whose fate I cared about. Also, I thought some of the Mummy fights were pretty decent. I especially enjoyed the Harry vs. Mummy fight in his apartment dark room.

But this is all too little. If you love Mummy movies, check this out just so you can say you've seen it. But for everyone else - stay away from The Mummy's Shroud!!

MVP: Harry vs. The Mummy - I know usually I pick a person for the MVP, but I think I have to go with this one scene, where the expedition photographer Harry is assaulted in his dark room. It's a short struggle, but pretty brutal. And Harry puts up a good fight. It's easily the best scene of the movie.

TRIVIA: It is popularly believed that Peter Cushing was the narrator of the stupid opening flashback. There is no record of who the narrator was, but it is most assuredly not Cushing. It doesn't sound anything like him.

BEST LINE: Stanley Preston: "I plan to leave as soon as suitable passage is available." Police Chief: "In that case, I'm afraid you will become a guest of the police department. And in this instance, I should warn you that our prisons are not exactly what you would choose for a holiday."

Plague of the Zombies

The Plague of the Zombies

First off, I have to be clear about something. Zombies, as we know them, did not exist until 1968 when George Romero directed Night of the Living Dead. The flesh-eating, lumbering killers who stalk the streets moaning, "brainnnnssss" just weren't on the scene yet. Instead, zombies were undead, brainless slaves, usually brought to life by voodoo black magic. These are the zombies you see in Hammer's Plague of the Zombies. I just wanted to mention that upfront, so that you won't expect one type of zombie and end up with something entirely different.

But what you do get is one of the better Hammer horror flicks! All the standard Hammer elements are here - both good and bad - but it all comes together beautifully. Even the lead actress Diane Clare's wooden performance doesn't detract but actually enhances the fun (as does young Brook Williams' terrific over-acting). But don't think I am implying that Plague of the Zombies is so bad, it's good. That's not the case. This is a solid film, atmospheric and intriguing, and its flaws are endearing as opposed to annoying.

People are mysteriously dying in a small town in Cornwall. Dr. Peter Thompson (Brook Williams) doesn't know what to do, so he calls his old professor Sir James Forbes (Andre Morell) to help. Traveling with his daughter Sylvia (Diane Clare), Sir James comes to town and finds himself facing off against the voodoo-practicing Squire Clive Hamilton (John Carson), his gang of ruffians, and some zombie slaves.

Some people might complain about the pace of the film. If fast cuts, interwoven with slashing and screaming every five seconds is your type of horror film, then don't watch this movie. You will be bored to tears because most of the movie Sir James is investigating, wandering around the town, asking questions. The chills build slowly, gradually gathering steam until its time for the exciting climax. But there are moments that are genuinely creepy in this film. The first time you see a zombie is quite shocking. (SPOILER ALERT) Sylvia is exploring an old tin mill when she sees the creature standing on the roof, holding the bloody body of one of his victims. He screams and tosses the body at Sylvia like a ragdoll before disappearing. (SPOILER OVER).

The acting is mostly pretty good - with Andre Morell at the top of the heap as Sir James. Going about his investigations with a wry sense of humor, he is just a joy to watch. John Carson as the villainous squire and Hammer regular Michael Ripper as the police sergeant are also quite good. And as I mentioned above, even when the actors aren't good, it actually really is good!

Squire Hamilton is also an interesting villain. He's not all evil, and his motives aren't world domination or anything silly like that. His ultimate goal may seem cheesy to some, but I submit that the idea is sound - the budget just didn't permit the filmmakers to do it right!

Director John Gilling (The Reptile) pushes the filmmaking envelope in some ways, as well. His direction is assured, and he experiments with dream sequences and hand held camera work. The handheld work is especially surprising to see. The shots only half work - cameras were so cumbersome in the 1960s and the shots are really shaky. But the fact that Gilling was experimenting with this in a low budget British horror film is super cool and impressive.

All in all, Plague of the Zombies is a nice Halloween treat. I definitely think you should check it out!

MVP: One element that Hammer Films always handled extremely well was the "mentor" figure. Unlike American films, where the mentor is always killed off (so the young hero can get revenge), you are never quite sure what will happen to Hammer's mentors. Sometimes they die, sometimes they live, sometimes the young lead is killed and its up to the mentor to save the day. And sometimes they even take the lead in the film themselves - which is what Plague of the Zombies does. Continuing in the long line of awesome Hammer mentors, Andre Morell is easily the best thing about this movie. He is incredibly smart, but keeps a wry sense of humor about him the whole time. He isn't winking at the audience, but he is certainly winking at all the bad guys as if he's onto them from the beginning. The scene that seals his MVP award is when he visits Squire Hamilton's house. (MINOR SPOILER) He barges into the house, in an upper class fit, and places his coat, hat and cane on top of a giant stuffed bear; the way he does this without blinking an eye, while he is still ranting, is very funny stuff, but also smart because while he is distracting the Squire's men with his behavior, he himself is carefully observing everything around him. It's nice, subtle work. Morell's performance is a huge reason why Plague is so good. A weaker actor in the role and we would've had a big problem!

BEST LINE: Dr. Franklin, upon learning the identity of one of the victims, in all his overacting glory: "...no...no...NOOOOOO!!!!!"

TRIVIA: Filmed back to back with The Reptile, with all the same sets. And yes, this is very obvious!