Torgo
Moderator Emeritus
-segment with Crow?
Posts: 15,420
|
Post by Torgo on Oct 2, 2021 19:03:41 GMT -5
I probably won't be able to do a full 31 Days this year, but my days off coincided with the first few days of October and I figured I might as well watch something. Throughout the year I've been stockpiling Hammer movies, because I've been owing Hammer a deep dive for a while. I've seen maybe ten or so, mostly Dracula, Frankenstein, and Mummy flicks. I don't think I was picking these up for a 31 Days of Halloween marathon or anything, it was just something on my Bucket List. But I figured I had them, and it's October...so flapjacks it. It's Hammer time. The Quatermass XperimentAn astronaut comes back from space with his fellow crew missing and a strange goo on board. He is taken in for treatment and escapes, turning into a creature that can kill people with his touch. The first thing I notice about this movie is that it's the plot of The Incredible Melting Man. I'm sure that had to be in the back of Melting Man's screenwriters head because there are too many parallels between the two movies. Melting Man is just gooier. Though this movie has some goo too. The movie is based on a British television serial, and it sure feels it at times. The film is a bit too leisurely, as if its structure isn't necessarily a film structure. The movie needs time to warm up, but it gets pretty solid once the ball gets rolling. Make-up effects are great, and the film has pretty good camera work that helps prop up some rubber creature effects. There's a scene with a rubber goo monster crawling on the floor, and while the prop isn't impressive, the cinematography sells it by keeping the body in the background while only a tendril is in focus reaching for the camera. I also liked a sequence where the scientist protagonists are watching a film reel of the astronauts, which is like a mini-silent horror film. It reminded me of some of the better aspects of Cannibal Holocaust. X...the UnknownA random burst of radiation from the ground kills several soldiers and civilians. It turns out it's a molten prehistoric creature that feeds on radiation. First of all, I love this... This movie is littered with static close-ups of people screaming like this. And it's funny every god damn time. I assume it's used to hide the monster for suspense/they can't afford to show it. Once they do show the monster, it's a giant blob, and it looks pretty rad. Bear in mind this movie predates The Blob by a few years, but I think the special effects in this movie hold up better than the Steve McQueen classic. While this movie was made to bandwagon off of The Quatermass Xperiment, I think I liked it more. I think its pacing is more even and the monster is cooler. I even think the acting is a bit sturdier. Fun 50's monster flick and a big old "dug it" from me.
|
|
Torgo
Moderator Emeritus
-segment with Crow?
Posts: 15,420
|
Post by Torgo on Oct 3, 2021 4:58:50 GMT -5
The Curse of Frankenstein
Victor Frankenstein awaits his fate at the guillotine after having been convicted of murder. He relates what he claims to be the true story to a visiting minister, which is the tale of him bringing a man back from the dead which spirals out of control.
Curse of Frankenstein was the first Hammer film I ever saw. I imagine it was the first Hammer film for most, likely either this one or Horror of Dracula. It's a solid place to start, as it's a striking halfway point between the gothic horror films of the 30's and the gorey horror films of the 80's. It introduces a striking image of that old Frankenstein tale most would associate with black and white and Boris Karloff, film it in Technicolor, and with bloody violence, scandalous sex affairs, and a few low cut tops to boot. It took a classic and made it sexy again. At least by 1957 standards. Hell, by 1957 standards this was considered grotesque and in bad taste. Curse of Frankenstein has aged out of that as what's considered grotesque today is far past the line this film dared cross back then.
Peter Cushing is great as Frankenstein, starting out as a curious scientist that grows more unlikeable as the film goes on. This film also teams him up with his fellow Hammer contemporary, Christopher Lee, who plays the monster. Lee's look isn't as iconic as Karloff's and it lacks the personality and pathos of the iconic portrayal its following up, which is unfortunate for him. Lee is mostly a lumbering, confused brute. It's not bad, just simple.
I like the ending, which is a little ambiguous as to whether or not this is just a desperate tale from Victor to save his neck, the ravings of a madman, or the story that is too fantastical to be make believe, though the many sequels to this film make it obvious which one it is, but this story works even better by itself. Curse of Frankenstein is a must-see in Hammer's catalog.
|
|
|
Post by Mighty Jack on Oct 3, 2021 10:26:17 GMT -5
I love me some Hammer - I know some find them slow starters, but I like the character and plot build up, the way they set the table, as they do with the Quatermass Xperiment, which is my 6th favorite Hammer film. I enjoyed the unraveling mystery of it all. And that ending, Quatermass unshaken, we go again.
X The Unknown ranks in the 40s... it originally was going to be a sequel to The Quatermass Xperiment, but creator/writer Nigel Kneale wouldn't allow them to use the character for the film. My issue with it? All those looks of abject horror, all that build-up - and then the monster is revealed... and it's a rolling pile of mud? While not as dumb as the carpet monster in The Creeping Terror, it was nevertheless, a let-down.
Curse of Frankenstein is my #1 Hammer film. Christopher Lee's Frankenstein, while a misshapen, scarred rag doll; an idiot man-child; and creepy as sin, there's also pain, confusion, and struggle etched on Lee's face. There's more to that performance than first meets the eye. And of course, Peter Cushing is incredible as an obsessed SOB.
Those are my thoughts.
Great project, have fun!
|
|
Torgo
Moderator Emeritus
-segment with Crow?
Posts: 15,420
|
Post by Torgo on Oct 4, 2021 7:38:43 GMT -5
Quatermass 2
Professor Quatermass is back and he is pissed! This time he is stuck in an Invasion of the Body Snatchers scenario as meteors fall to Earth and release a gas that gives people skin bubbles and puts them under alien control. Is an invasion afoot?
Goddamn Brits. Watching a movie so obviously patterned after a TV serial is putting me in the mood to watch Doctor Who, and I worked really hard to stop watching Doctor Who because John Barrowman sucks. He sucks on Arrow, he sucks on Doctor Who, he probably sucks on Torchwood, I don't know I haven't watched it but it seems like a reasonable conclusion.
Anyway, what was I saying? Oh yeah, this movie is dull. I kind of got bored and started thinking of Doctor Who, which is less boring. Then I thought about John Barrowman and got pissed off. I snapped back to attention at the end when three Hedorah style Kaiju monsters started wrecking stuff. That was pretty cool.
I liked the first Quatermass movie. This one just seemed to just drone. Couldn't get into it.
|
|
Torgo
Moderator Emeritus
-segment with Crow?
Posts: 15,420
|
Post by Torgo on Oct 5, 2021 7:50:34 GMT -5
The Abominable Snowman
Curse of Frankenstein's Peter Cushing and The Crawling Eye's Forrest Tucker journey deep into the Himalayas to search for the legendary Yeti. They discover that there might be truth to the myths, but who is more dangerous...the monster or the men who seek it?
I have seen maybe half of this movie before and I was eager to watch it more properly. Luckily Shout Factory offered it up on Blu-ray, though it was something of a butchered HD print that had to be patched up with SD materials. There are some really cool shots in this movie though, with some interesting use of shadow against the snowy backdrop.
Ultimately I think the movie is a bit uneven, as it tends to run a bit long in the front portion as it only kept my interest off and on. Most of the film's virtues play out in the last 40 minutes as the group finally stumbles on a tribe of Yeti. The movie keeps them mostly hidden, but what we do see is very well executed, such as a tense scene with a claw reaching into a tent and the like. We get shadowy full body shots toward the end, and we see just enough of the faces to know whatever we're imagining these creatures to look like is probably better than the design, so the movie wisely keeps out imagination in play.
What really keeps the film pumping though are the scenes between the characters, as they each meet their fate one by one...but not by the Yeti. Each character is done in by their own fear and lack of understanding of the situation or the Yeti themselves. There is some pretty damn solid writing, and both Cushing and Tucker do some great work playing off of each other.
Of course, I find myself comparing to another Yeti movie of the 50's, Ishiro Honda'a Half Human. Half Human is not a perfect movie, but I felt its wheels turning a bit more consistently than Abominable Snowman does. But this flick is worth the watch as once it gets where it's going, it's worth the trip.
|
|
Torgo
Moderator Emeritus
-segment with Crow?
Posts: 15,420
|
Post by Torgo on Oct 6, 2021 7:50:26 GMT -5
Horror of Dracula
Jonathan Harker arrives at the castle of Count Dracula to take a job looking after the count's library, but secretly Harker is working for Abraham Van Helsing and they seek to kill Dracula for he is secretly a vampire. Harker is discovered by Dracula and is killed, and Dracula travels to Karlstadt to feed on his fiance Lucy and her friend Mina so he can turn them into his new vampire brides.
Keeping a good thing going, Hammer followed up the success of Curse of Frankenstein with their own take on Dracula, also starring Peter Cushing and Christopher Lee who were becoming the Boris Karloff and Bela Lugosi of the Hammer stable. Also coming back is the director of Curse of Frankenstein Terrence Fisher, who became a reliable go-to brand name director for Hammer, which is something Universal never really had. The closest might be James Whale, but Whale always seemed like the eccentric that would only do a movie if he was free to do whatever the flapjacks he wanted. Fisher was more of a stylish in-house director that would get assigned stuff, so I'd consider him closer to what Ishiro Honda was to Toho. "Get that guy who made that monster movie that made money!"
I don't find Horror of Dracula as devilishly macabre as Curse of Frankenstein though it is a fun little reinvention of the Dracula novel. It has some cute ways to twist the story around while keeping an aura of familiarity with its source but being fairly unpredictable in its own right. Because of this I think the pacing of this film works a bit better than Curse of Frankenstein, though Frankenstein may have the better paced climax, as this film gets to a point where it seems like it's in a rush to conclude.
That Dracula death scene is hardcore though.
Christopher Lee is pretty great as Dracula, though one does wish the movie gave him more of a chance to be verbal. He doesn't really say anything after the first ten minutes or so, after which he is mostly reduced to hissing with fangs or glaring intensely. Both of which he does well. Lee often seems to be cast in these movies because he is an imposing figure, and can you blame them? But Lee was also a great actor too, so one would hope he'd have the opportunity to be as chatty as Lugosi, Frank Langella, or Gary Oldman in the role. That was never really Hammer's thing for him though. But god damn does he look good as Dracula.
I may like this movie more than Curse of Frankenstein. That's a toughie though. I think I have a more even experience with it, though Frankenstein's high points are higher than Dracula's. But Dracula does have Michael Gough in it, so there are bonus points just for that. Hard to pick, so I'll just leave that up in the air. They're both good and that's my final word.
Coming Attractions:
|
|
Torgo
Moderator Emeritus
-segment with Crow?
Posts: 15,420
|
Post by Torgo on Oct 7, 2021 7:52:45 GMT -5
The Revenge of Frankenstein
Things weren't looking good for ol' Frankenstein at the end of the last movie, as he did the slow walk to the guillotine. His fate seemed pretty final.
Yeah...about that...
Frankenstein had his neck saved by the malformed Karl, and Frankenstein repays his debt to him by promising to construct him a new body and transplant his brain into it. Three years pass as Frankenstein goes into hiding under the alias of "Doctor Stein" and continues his experiments. Frankenstein is eventually found out by a fellow surgeon Hans Kleve, who promises to keep Frankenstein's secret as long as he can work by his side. Together Frankenstein and Hans successfully transplant Karl's brain into a new body, but when Karl discovers he is to be studied by scientists globally, he escapes yearning for a normal life. But complications from the transplant soon come to pass and Frankenstein isn't present to solve them.
The Universal Frankenstein series followed the money and knew that people were paying to see breakout star Boris Karloff as the monster over and over again, which is probably the reason why the monster is often mistakenly dubbed "Frankenstein" even though that character was played by Colin Clive. Hammer was a bit more fortuitous in that a lot of what made Curse of Frankenstein work was Frankenstein himself, which means we get a Frankenstein series that is actually based around Frankenstein. Peter Cushing is such a devilish delight in the role that I'd pay to see him play it as many times as he wants to (which wound up being a total of six by 1974). The movie has some retconning logic hoops to jump through to justify why Victor still has his head, but play along. Revenge of Frankenstein is worth the ride.
(Incidentally, Revenge also retcons the reason Frankenstein was sentenced to death in the previous film, stating that it was because of the creature he created. In Curse the actual reason was he took the blame for the murder of his maid Justine while nobody actually believed the creature existed.)
There is a TV miniseries from the 70's called Frankenstein: The True Story (which is actually not bad, mind you) that I am reminded of while watching Revenge of Frankenstein, because both present the scenario where Frankenstein's experiment initially seem to be a success by creating a normal looking man, only to have it unravel as it eventually becomes more deformed as it goes on. That's a story I find interesting personally, as Revenge takes what Frankenstein tried to previously as he makes strides to perfect it and do it better. After all, reanimating life is quite an impressive scientific achievement, but what actual use is it if all your creations are shuffling, rotting corpse men?
The movie isn't as raw and entertaining as Curse, but I find its plotline more engaging. So I'd probably put Revenge of Frankenstein on my list of sequels I like more than the original. Mill Creek's blu-ray on the other hand is complete ass. It's washed out and full of scratches, which is jarring after some beautiful Warner Archive discs of Curse of Frankenstein and Horror of Dracula. Revenge of Frankenstein needs a remastering, and I think its a movie that has deserved one for quite some time.
Coming Attractions:
|
|
Torgo
Moderator Emeritus
-segment with Crow?
Posts: 15,420
|
Post by Torgo on Oct 8, 2021 20:28:14 GMT -5
There are two more Hammer films made in 1959 that are on the official "Hammer Horror" both of which starred Christopher Lee and directed by Terrence Fisher. One was the Sherlock Holmes novel adaptation The Hound of the Baskervilles (which also starred Peter Cushing) and another called The Man Who Could Cheat Death. Unfortunately I don't have copies of these movies so I'll be skipping over them. Twilight Time's blu-ray of Hound was discontinued quite some time ago (before they went defunct even) and Man Who Can Cheat Death is on blu-ray, I just haven't picked it up. I'm not too broken up about Hound. I hear it's great, but I don't know how "Horror" a Sherlock Holmes movie can be. I mean, Rondo Hatton's Creeper character debuted in a Sherlock Holmes movie but I didn't exactly feel it was a horror movie. Maybe I'm wrong. Man Who Could Cheat Death has good word of mouth too, but oh well. I'll probably get to them later. But for now... The MummyPeter Cushing plays John Banning, an archeologist searching for the tomb of the Egyptian Princess Ananka with his father and uncle, despite the protests of native Egyptian Mehemet Bay. As Banning's father unearths Ananka, he suddenly has a psychotic breakdown. Unknown to Banning and his uncle, Banning's father had also uncovered the lover of Ananka, Kharis, who had been cursed and buried alive now awakened by Banning's father. Three years later, Banning's father has been murdered while under psychiatric care. Bay has come to England with Kharis and together they plan to kill all who desecrated Ananka's tomb. Hammer's relationship with Universal is an interesting little curiosity. They had gotten away with Curse of Frankenstein I believe because the Frankenstein novel had lapsed into public domain and all they had to was make sure it didn't resemble Universal's productions too closely. Horror of Dracula was a bit more complicated, as the book was more recent and it took negotiations with Universal to be able to make the movie. But things worked out, and Universal even offered them a look into their library to see if there was anything they were interested in. Hammer decided to take advantage of this and picked titles like Phantom of the Opera and The Old Dark House. They also optioned a take on The Invisible Man but they never filmed it (oh how I would have loved to have seen this movie). The best known film to come of this was The Mummy. But it's technically not a remake if the Boris Karloff film, rather a compressed retelling of the Kharis Mummy films that followed it, specifically The Mummy's Hand, The Mummy's Tomb, and The Mummy's Ghost (The Mummy's Curse can suck it). Most Hammer fans call this one of the best Hammer films ever made and the best of all the killer mummy films. Me: I've never really liked this movie that much. I think it's well shot and the sets are gorgeous, but it suffers from uneven pacing and while I love Christopher Lee, his body acting in this movie is too robotic for my liking. Lee has a lot of physical prowess (for flapjacks's sake, the movie has two flashbacks in a row halfway through) and his height is used to great advantage in this movie, but he spends the entire movie looking like he has to take a dump but the costume takes four hours to remove so he's keeping his cheeks super clenched. Not all is lost on Lee though, because when you get close-ups on his face you can see him doing some great work with only his eyes. It's a shame that the full body mummy is such a failure. I guess I can accept the argument that it's better than Hammer's other Mummy movies, which for the most part aren't very good, though in Hammer's catalog that's I've covered so far I'd only say it was better than Quatermass 2. As far as other Mummy films...it's better than Mummy's Curse, Tomb of the Dragon Emperor, and Dark Universe, I'll give you that. I'd prefer Boris Karloff or Brendan Fraser any day. Coming Attractions:
|
|
Torgo
Moderator Emeritus
-segment with Crow?
Posts: 15,420
|
Post by Torgo on Oct 9, 2021 8:29:36 GMT -5
The Brides of DraculaSchoolteacher Marianne Danielle travels to a new position in Transylvania where she is invited to stay at the castle of a lonely wealthy Baroness. But the Baroness's son also lives there, but according to her he is deranged and must be locked up at all times. Upon meeting him, Marianne finds him completely normal, takes pity on him, and frees him. Unknown to her, the young Baron is really a vampire who is now unleashed to punish his mother and enslave village women as his vampire brides, and he has now taken a liking to Marianne. The only man who an stop the Baron is the man who killed the legendary Dracula, Abraham Van Helsing. Poor Dracula. It seems like movie studios always start a franchise using his brand name but rarely give him a callback for a sequel. Universal took the franchise and branched away from him with spawn characters in Dracula's Daughter and Son of Dracula, and Dracula himself didn't make a comeback for thirteen years with House of Frankenstein. Hammer decided to do the same thing with The Brides of Dracula and I'm not sure if there is a reason why but maybe I should give Shout Factory's blu-ray bonuses a go and see if the answer lies within. I've heard rumors that Christopher Lee was reluctant to return in the role, and considering that it took eight years to finally do so there might be truth to that. But for whatever reason Brides of Dracula exists as yet another sequel to a Terence Fisher directed horror film starring Lee and Peter Cushing that only Fisher and Cushing return for. Perhaps the idea was reformatting into an adventure of Cushing as vampire hunter Abraham Van Helsing. Could work. Hell, I'd rather have that franchise than a Hugh Jackman Van Helsing franchise. The first thing to be noticed is that there are no Brides of Dracula in this film. There are lady vampires, to be sure, but they bear no relation to the Count. And trust me, David Peel's Baron is no Christopher Lee's Dracula. The only relation to the previous film is Van Helsing himself. Taking all of that into account, the movie is pretty solid. It's not as entertaining as Horror of Dracula, but it tells a nice vampire yarn. It has a lot of energy and beautiful set design, while select moments are pretty effective (the rise of a vampire bride from the grave probably the most chilling imagery I've seen in a Hammer movie so far). There are a few logic holes in the story as presented, such as the Baroness risking taking a stranger into her home when she knew there was a danger of having her son freed. The reasons for this might be a bit up to interpretation though, as sometimes her desiring the company of a young woman might come off as a seduction. "It used to be be very gay around here!" Indeed. Cushing is reliable as always. Peel is okay as the antagonist, but too much of a generic pretty boy to look all that intimidating. He's a great vampire for the Twilight Saga, but by Hammer standards he's a little weak. Yvonne Monlour is a fairly lovely leading lady and succeeds in carrying the film until Cushing shows up. Brides of Dracula is no Horror of Dracula but its a satisfying sequel to it. Coming Attractions:
|
|
Torgo
Moderator Emeritus
-segment with Crow?
Posts: 15,420
|
Post by Torgo on Oct 10, 2021 7:43:15 GMT -5
The Two Faces of Dr. Jekyll
Trying to tap into the chemicals of human psychology, Dr. Henry Jekyll tests a chemical formula on himself. It turns him into a younger version of himself with less inhibitions. Dubbing himself the alias of "Edward Hyde" he hits the town but also discovers that he also lacks empathy and is prone to psychotic tendencies. He also learns that his wife Kitty is having an affair with his friend Paul and decides to use the Hyde persona to torment them.
Hammer has one leg up on Universal in that the latter company never produced a Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde full length feature. The closest they ever came was Abbott and Costello Meet Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, in which the title character was played by none other than the great Boris Karloff. The classic Jekyll and Hyde films that were released during Universal's horror period were actually made by MGM, including a saucy pre-code version in 1931 and a Spencer Tracy/Ingrid Bergman starring remake in 1941. Hammer, on the other hand, took three turns with the IP and The Two Faces of Dr. Jekyll isn't even the first. The year prior they produced a comedy based on the idea called The Ugly Duckling, which predated even the most well known Jekyll and Hyde comedy The Nutty Professor. They later produced the gender bending Dr. Jekyll and Sister Hyde, but maybe we'll get to that later. We're talking about Two Faces right now.
Yeah, this one sucks. I'm gonna put that card on the table right away. The script needs some polishing but is workable and Terence Fisher's direction is a little less striking than normal but still pretty good, but the thing that The Two Faces of Dr. Jekyll relies on heavily isn't up to the task of carrying it, and that's Dr. Jekyll himself. Paul Massie might be a capable actor in his own right, I wouldn't know because I haven't seen him in anything else, but his acting choices here just torpedo the entire project. The idea of having Jekyll be a tired old man and Hyde a sociopathic madman behind a gentleman's mask is a sound one, but Massie takes the concept in a direction that makes it feel like parody. His vocal choices alone are poor, as in his attempt to make Jekyll and Hyde feel like different characters he deepens Jekyll's voice and lightens Hyde's, but both voices sound like an unnatural pitch. Hyde himself is hard to take seriously when he sounds like he's both inhaling his dialogue and has been kicked in the gonads. Jekyll just belts out deep breathy monologues and it gets tiring.
There are promising ideas on display including a few heavy shocks in the final twenty minutes. Massie even has a moment where he argues with himself in a mirror that shows that there might be good performance potential in him. Christopher Lee is here too, not playing a monster for once in his god damn Hammer career. He's having an affair with a married woman and has a gambling problem, so he's still a dick, but it's good to see him actually act for once. That's about the extent of what I get out of Two Faces of Dr. Jekyll, which is hands down the worst film I've watched so far. For Jekyll and Hyde, stick with MGM.
Coming Attractions:
|
|
Torgo
Moderator Emeritus
-segment with Crow?
Posts: 15,420
|
Post by Torgo on Oct 11, 2021 7:41:18 GMT -5
The Curse of the WerewolfA horror movie directed by Terence Fisher that stars neither Peter Cushing nor Christopher Lee? Madness! Sheer madness! This movie instead stars Oliver Reed in his first leading role as a man who was cursed to become a beast by moonlight. A mute woman who was raped by a mad homeless man dies during childbirth, but her son survived and was adopted by a loving family. Being a child who was conceived by an unspeakable act and born on Christmas day, Leon becomes a werewolf every full moon cycle and the only thing that can keep the beast from coming out is love. Growing up to be a young man he finds love with a betrothed woman named Christina, but he also begins to discover his beastly nature. Curse of the Werewolf is nothing if not ambitious. It's not enough that it's a story about a man turning into a werewolf, but it spends a third of its 90 minute runtime on a prologue explaining exactly how this man was conceived. The lycanthropy was bad enough, but he's also the son of a mute servant girl who was raped by a mad prisoner and died in childbirth. Not only that, half of this prologue gives context to the man who raped her. It's not really relevant context as he dances for food and is thrown into a dungeon, but the movie is being thorough here. Oliver Platt doesn't even enter the movie until halfway through. I haven't seen this movie in a while, and I remember not caring for it when I first watched it. I don't know if I was just "not feeling it" or "not in the mood" or what but I was taken aback over just how much I liked this movie this time around. I mean really liked it. "I was glued to the screen" level liked it. If you were to ask me right now I'd say this were my favorite Hammer movie. It's that scope of its story that intrigued me this time around, as it has a more epic presentation than other Hammer films as it spans decades, while other Hammer films mostly take place within a few days/weeks or so. But as stated before, not all of it is necessary. I think one could lop off the first ten minutes of this movie and nobody would care. It might even be a move for the better, as it would make the mad prisoner who raped the mother more mysterious and make his lineage connection to his Lycanthrope affliction more implied rather than just waving it away with a superstition. Speaking of the mother in this movie, Mystery Science Theater fans may be delighted to recognize her as Yvonne Romain, who would go on to play the female lead and subject of the Great Vorelli's leery infatuation in the film Devil Doll. She also had a role in Circus of Horrors, which was used for MST Live a few years ago. Her character is mute here so she has no dialogue, but she has one of the more memorable roles in this film. For a couple of reasons, if anything... The film puts more of a diagnosis on young Leon as he starts to begin his werewolf transformations. Puberty allegory? Probably not. Ginger Snaps this movie is not. However let the record show that they do let it be known that the only thing that can keep the beast at bay is the love of a good woman, so make of that what you will. Though sometimes it takes more than the love of a good woman to keep my beast at bay, let me tell you... This feeds into the romantic subplot of the film, which I enjoyed quite a bit. Compare Leon and Christina's romance to the one featured in the golden standard of werewolf films, The Wolf Man, Larry and Gwen's story in that movie served little than to just give him someone to weep over his body at the end of the film. Christina is a bit different because her presence has an effect that could save Leon's soul. There is a very nice scene in which Leon tries to spurn Christina out of fear of hurting her only for her to stay and comfort him throughout the night, preventing him from getting all hairy and going on a murder spree. If there is one thing I would do differently it's probably give more time to see the romance blossom, because the extent of their falling in love in the film is the scene of her meeting him and then the two of them necking some time later. I'd take that ten minutes that I'd cut from the beginning and give it to them instead. The actual werewolf suit looks a bit too cuddly for my liking. However the scenes with the wolf are fairly effective, keeping it in the shadows through most of its scenes before letting it lose on a climax where it battles a hoard of angry villagers. It's a quality sequence and ends the movie with a bang. And as the story closes I find myself more than a little infatuated with the film that unfolded. Curse of the Werewolf is a little gem that's worth a look. Double Feature?
|
|
Torgo
Moderator Emeritus
-segment with Crow?
Posts: 15,420
|
Post by Torgo on Oct 12, 2021 8:02:48 GMT -5
The Shadow of the Cat
A wealthy old woman is killed by her husband, the butler, and the maid in order to inherit her fortune, though a visiting niece could complicate their plans. They also become uneasy knowing there is one witness to the crime: the victim's cat.
Shadow of the Cat released in a double feature with Curse of the Werewolf, and it's obviously the B-picture of the double feature. Curse of the Werewolf was lavish and engaging, Shadow of the Cat is more modestly budgeted and...not boring. I do love movies like Shadow of the Cat, though I feel being a teen paying for these movies in 1960 I might have felt I had gotten my money's worth and maybe would have considered leaving halfway through this film.
I actually watched this movie for the first time a few months ago when it was hosted by Svengoolie on MeTV. I'm not sure if I was paying attention (I think I had company that night and the TV was just on at the time). Whatever the reason, I only remembered bits and pieces of it. I was much more attentive this time, and it's mostly okay. What strikes me about this movie is that I feel it actually would have benefitted from maybe a slower unfolding of the plot. We know from the beginning who committed the murder and they're out to kill the cat almost instantly because they deem it a threat. The problem with this is...it's a cat. What exactly is it going to do? It can't verbally communicate and honestly the best way a cat has at trying to kill someone is when they do one of those drive-by leg rubs when you're walking and accidentally trip you. I would have liked to have seen a version of this movie where they dismissed the cat then as the movie unfolded they became more paranoid about it and its actions.
There's not a lot else to say about the movie. It's a "close, but not quite" experience. I think it's interesting that its blu-ray release is a part of Shout Factory's Universal Horror collection sets, where it sits on Volume Six with The Black Castle, Cult of the Cobra, and Mystery Science Theater favorite The Thing That Couldn't Die. It's not the only film in those box sets that isn't really a "Universal" film, as Volume Two featured Murders in the Zoo, which was a Paramount film that Universal just owns the rights too. But I imagine there aren't many people clamoring for a Shadow of the Cat individual release so Shout had to put it somewhere. Universal didn't even bother to group it into their eight film Hammer collection blu-ray set when they released that a few years back. How's that for neglect?
Coming Attractions:
|
|
Torgo
Moderator Emeritus
-segment with Crow?
Posts: 15,420
|
Post by Torgo on Oct 13, 2021 7:01:31 GMT -5
Scream of Fear
Shaken up by her friend's suicide, wheelchair-bound heiress Penny returns to her father's home only to be greeted by her stepmother, who says her father has been called away on business. Staying at her estranged home with a group of strangers, Penny begins seeing the corpse of her father on the grounds but nobody else can see it. Is Penny going insane or is something else going on?
It was bound to happen. Hammer has gone full Hitchcock knockoff. And of course it happened post-Psycho, as it should have been. Though Scream of Fear has little in common with Psycho itself, it tends to be more inspired by Hitchcock psychological thrillers before it as it presents scenarios of what is real, who is who, who is doing what, who knows, and who knows that they know that you know. It's the type of thriller that tries to stay seven steps ahead of the audience and keep the twists in constant play, even if a few of them seem kind of silly as you look back on it.
Scream of Fear is constantly amusing, but it may not hold up as you look back upon it. Looking upon the lenses of knowing how things turned out you can't help but ponder "Huh" as you try to piece together the domino effect that is this movie and how certain things panned out in curious ways. I'd be interested in watching it again knowing what the ending is to see if it holds water. I suspect it doesn't, but it's not without interest. And that ending is a doozy, even if a few twists leading up to it are easy to guess.
But I don't think the movie has any pretentions about itself. The movie is silly and it doesn't seem to care it's silly. That nonchalance is part of its charm. Not great, but a fun time killer.
Coming Attractions:
|
|
Torgo
Moderator Emeritus
-segment with Crow?
Posts: 15,420
|
Post by Torgo on Oct 14, 2021 6:52:02 GMT -5
Paranoiac
The eldest surviving orphan child of the Reed fortune, Simon, is set to inherit the entire estate in a few weeks time as he tries to have his sister Eleanor committed to an insane asylum to stay the sole heir. Eleanor then begins to see their older brother Tony, who committed suicide several years prior. Believing that she is truly going insane, Eleanor tries to kill herself as well but is rescued by the man she believes to be Tony. This brings Tony back into their lives and complicates the matter of their parents' fortune. But is Tony who he claims to be?
Full disclosure, I watched this by accident. I was trying to go by release date watching these movies but I accidentally noted this movie as having come out in 1962 instead of 1963 so here it is. Oh well. I don't care and you probably don't either.
The one drawback is that the movie does feel very similar to Scream of Fear and spacing them apart might have been better for this film. It's also a black and white psychological thriller that involves identity, deception, family issues, and owes a lot to Hitchcock. It's okay, though a bit underwritten. I don't think the big explanation as to what is going on is not all that satisfactory and the ending doesn't offer a ton of closure on really anything in the movie.
But still, the acting is solid. Oliver Reed is back for another round of Hammer fun after Curse if the Werewolf and I thought Janette Scott put forth some quality work with a role that is almost always her on the brink of hysterics. There's a scene where she starts freaking out because she's sexually attracted to her brother, though spoiler alert, he's not her real brother. They do act as if this revelation is the end of it, but honestly, it doesn't change the fact that she wanted to do her brother when she though he was her brother now does it?
It's pretty blah and a little boring. I wasn't heavily into it, but I did watch a movie that was damn near identical before it so maybe I was just tired of it. Dunno.
Coming Attractions:
|
|
Torgo
Moderator Emeritus
-segment with Crow?
Posts: 15,420
|
Post by Torgo on Oct 15, 2021 8:17:40 GMT -5
Night Creatures
Originally titled Captain Clegg in the UK, Night Creatures doesn't have a lot to do with night creatures. It does have a bit to do with pirates and people dressed as skeletons, using what I assume is that same material they used on the Lightsabers in that Star Wars movie and the Kryptonian outfits in Superman.
The movie takes place a time after the pirate Captain Clegg is hanged by the British Empire, a group of sailors investigate an alcohol smuggling ring near a village that is supposedly terrorized by a group of "Phantoms" who haunt the woods around the village. These Phantoms as well as a few townsfolk may also have a connection to the late Captain Clegg.
I'm not sure how much of a horror movie this is. Hammer made it and it stars Peter Cushing and those glowy skeletons are cool. It seems like that sort of backdoor way the movie Night Key became involved with Universal Horror just because it stars Boris Karloff, even though it's not really horror. It's kind of an odd story with slight macabre elements, and I kind of enjoyed this movie so I won't complain about watching it. Its mystery aspects were a tad predictable though.
In addition to Cushing, Curse of the Werewolf star Oliver Reed is here and he's screwing his mom. Yvonne Romain, who played his mother in that film, is his lover here. She's actually given dialogue this time, though her wardrobe isn't as low cut to the dismay of teenage boys everywhere. This appears to be her final Hammer film, so that's unfortunate. I liked seeing her pop up in these movies. And Night Creatures isn't a terrific example of Hammer for her to go out on, but it is an oddly fun movie to watch.
Coming Attractions
|
|