Hammer Horror

[EvilTwin]

I've been interrupted in the middle of FRANKENSTEIN MUST BE DESTROYED. But, let me say this, the Baron outdoes himself as a complete and utter bastard in this one. He earns the title of the movie before the halfway point.

[EvilTwin]

FRANKENSTEIN MUST BE DESTROYED (1969)

There's an odd realization that, for the first time, Frankenstein utterly succeeds in his experiments. The operations go off without a hitch. He fixes the brain. He outwits the authorities. And he still is unprepared for the full consequences of his actions as he gets carried into a literal hell at the end of the movie. His success is his destruction.

And a deserved destruction it is. The Baron murders, blackmails, steals, harasses, rapes, lies, commits various blasphemies, and is generally contemptuous of everyone and everything around him. A lot had changed in the decade since CURSE OF FRANKENSTEIN was released and this is the first in the series that really feels up to taking the Hammer legacy and responding to the raised game of others such as Polanski and Romero. It's quite the shock after the relatively tame FRANKENSTEIN CREATED WOMAN. I suspect that FRANKENSTEIN MUST BE DESTROYED was conceived first, the burned hands in CREATED WOMAN could come from the inferno in this one, but Hammer wasn't prepared to go that far first. This one makes up for it.

Cushing is particularly lively in this one. He was on the sidelines for CREATED WOMAN and wasn't particularly evil in EVIL OF FRANKENSTEIN, but here he gets to burst out and he appears to be savoring every cruel moment of it.

Veronica Carlson and Simon Ward are the doomed couple that get blackmailed by Frankenstein into being his assistants. One sometimes wonders why they put up with as much as they do, and Ward's arc gets cut short before the end as a better ending presents itself, but they're effective enough. Veronica Carlson certainly is more involved in the plot than many of Hammer's buxom babes.

Thorley Walters gets a new role after his turn in FRANKENSTEIN CREATED WOMAN as a police inspector on the trail of Frankenstein. The role starts out promising, he appears competent and not liable to making assumptions, but ultimately turns out to be without much purpose as he never confronts Frankenstein, his assistants, or his creation.

Freddie Jones has a nice turn as the subject of Frankenstein's experiment. The irony that he shared the same dream as Frankenstein isn't lost on him. And the performance brings a much needed humanity and contrast to Frankenstein. One of the better "creature" performances, IMO, and a very satisfying one from a thematic standpoint.

Terence Fisher's direction is still efficient. Most of the shock effects work. There's blood. And some squirm inducing sounds as Frankenstein practices his medicine. There's also a very noticable use of the color red as a recurring motif throughout the film.

One of the most depraved and best of the Hammer films. One of Cushing's best performances as he's appropriately satanic. It would have been a fitting capstone to the franchise.

[EvilTwin]

I'm about an hour into FRANKENSTEIN AND THE MONSTER FROM HELL. Is something interesting going to happen in the last half hour? Cushing's basically a supporting character in this one and the bad wig he's wearing doesn't help.

[EvilTwin]

FRANKENSTEIN AND THE MONSTER FROM HELL (1974)

I'm old enough to vaguely remember the evocative poster for this one, although I didn't see this until now. The movie doesn't live up to the poster. Even at just over 90 minutes, this one's a slog. Not flat out terrible, but everything has been done better in earlier entries. The only thing really new is the level of gore, which isn't even that great by 70s standards.

Clearly Hammer is second guessing themselves at this stage. Cushing's still Frankenstein, but he's pretty much a supporting character to Shane Briant as Dr. Simon Helder. Madeline Smith as the mute Sarah also features prominently. Clearly Hammer thinks that youthful casting, along with gore, would help the box office, but there's barely a story here. Helder clearly wants to be the next Frankenstein at the beginning of the film, but he has a conscience. Unfortunately, the end result is that he's wishy washy and never completely breaks away from the Baron.

The film is that way too, not even bothering to have a proper fate for the Baron, he's literally just sweeping up the pieces at the end ready for the next entry in the franchise, an entry that never came after this underwhelming effort.

Part of the problem is that the script is never in a hurry to get anywhere. We have about 10 to 15 minutes of Helder leading up to him being sentenced to the asylum. The movie then spends about 10 to 15 minutes of the Baron doing his rounds going over the case histories of inmates of the asylum, with none of that paying off at any point. By the time we go through the perfunctory plot points and medical procedures, we're basically an hour into the movie. The monster basically is relegated to the last 15 minutes of the movie with a very abbreviated climax.

There's a couple of relatively new ideas. This time, unlike REVENGE OF FRANKENSTEIN, the body overwhelms the brain. However, considering how unbelievable the body is and how little is spent on developing the creature, it's hard to develop any sympathy for the creature or appreciate the predicament. It's basically a plot point. Then they throw in the plot point of Frankenstein trying to mate the creature with Madeline Smith, which is never developed into much of anything, before descending into a by the book monster rampage.

The script seems to want to evoke Biblical imagery with a patient that believes he's god, Frankenstein is credited with creation of a new "man", "The Angel", and the Monster From Hell, but the imagery is ultimately empty and says nothing.

Cushing, of course, gets to chew the scenery with his usual style, although hampered by a really bad curly wig. Nothing new here, but still enjoyable. Frankenstein's backstory seems to change with every movie, although this one seems most compatible with FRANKENSTEIN CREATED WOMAN with his burned hands and being sentenced to an asylum for practicing sorcery.

David Prowse gets to portray the monster. In a totally unconvincing body suit. They're clearly trying too hard here as the creature is supposed to be of a man, but the visage is more of an ape, even overshooting caveman. Other than size, it's hard to spot the future Darth Vader under the pounds and pounds of costume and makeup.

The asylum itself is nicely put together. Nice to see some of the old equipment make a return to the laboratory too. Nothing too memorable though and the model work of the outside is laughably bad.

An underwhelming end to the series. They clearly had nowhere else to go and the whole thing comes across as filler. A poorly designed creature attached to a perfunctory plot and misjudged attempts to be in tune with current trends. It probably makes more sense than EVIL OF FRANKENSTEIN, but at least EVIL had energy. Either way, it's one of the two worst of the series.

[EvilTwin]

So, to sum up the Cushing Frankensteins.

Highly Recommended (the essentials)
The Curse of Frankenstein
The Revenge of Frankenstein
Frankenstein Must Be Destroyed

Modest Recommendation (tepid but some interesting ideas)
Frankenstein Created Woman

For the hardcore fan only
The Evil of Frankenstein
Frankenstein and the Monster From Hell

[EvilTwin]

Had a Halloween horror film party last night. Hammer was the theme this year and HORROR OF DRACULA and THE DEVIL RIDES OUT were on the menu. (Put me in the camp that has THE DEVIL RIDES OUT as silly fun.) And, non-Hammer, HORROR EXPRESS which is a little, whacked out, gem.

[BusterG]

I found this in the supermarket. It was only 6 bucks, but I still feel kinda gypped. I'd gotten a general sense of it's being legendary somehow.

It started off okay, with Kronos driving pell mell through beautiful English countryside, but that got a little stale after a while, as they drove and drove and drove.

The woods that most of the movie took place in were beautiful. But God, nothing happened for long, long stretches.

What a borefest. Caroline Munro was in it, and I guess that's the main thing that made everyone remember this fondly ... the wanton sex between Kronos and the Munro character (though all implied ... no real nudity in it at all).

Been waiting to see this since I was 12. Guess if I'd been 12 the implied wanton sex would have been enough.

[DanielRoffle]

I think it's thought of fondly because it introduced a new take (let's focus on the vampire HUNTER) after way too many Dracula and Frankenstein movies. There's something appealingly comic book like about the concept; bummed that it doesn't live up to that.

[EvilTwin]

HORROR OF DRACULA (1958)

It's been awhile since I last watched HORROR OF DRACULA. Still a considerable step above it's more exploitation minded sequels. There's at least a pretense of literary mindedness to the proceedings. It's a very loose adaptation though, the least of which is that it apparently all takes place within a nights carriage ride of the Count's castle instead of in England.

The opening at Dracula's castle is still well done. Even on a Hammer budget it's a nice castle. And a nice interior design. Well suited to Lee as well who just glides up and down them. Lee really isn't asked to do all that much acting wise, but he does everything that's asked of him fine and certainly cuts an imposing presence.

The big early twist is that Jonathan Harker isn't an unsuspecting visitor but a vampire hunter. Seems a pretty bad one though. He seems to have little suspicion of the vampire woman, a great heaving bosom there btw. And, as a friend pointed out, if he hadn't spent so much time writing in his journal he wouldn't have fallen prey to Dracula. Of course then there wouldn't be a movie.

Peter Cushing is always a welcome sight and he makes a solid presence straight off as Van Helsing. It's funny that a Transylvanian inn would have a bottle of Gordon's Gin displayed so prominently. Slightly disappointing is the lack of skin on the bar maid. It's not like Hammer to miss an opportunity.

Cushing's reaction to the discovery of Harker in the mausoleum is typical of the film. It's not a showcase for subtle method acting, that's for sure.

The early phonograph is an interesting way to get a bunch of exposition across. The "I was talking to myself" is only semi-successful as comic relief though. There's really no reason for Van Helsing to be coy about a piece of technology, other than being a dick.

Michael Gough as the skeptic Arthur is a welcome edition. Really amazing that the three principals would later take part in three of the biggest franchises of all time. His performance isn't any subtler than Cushing's. The mausoleum scene when Lucy gets staked being a prime example. Nobody underacts in this movie.

Lucy's illness is handled alright, although it's very perfunctory. Obviously they're aiming for sex appeal with the open door and Lucy's neatly braided hair becoming wilder. Lucy the vampire works a lot better. In fact, Lucy and Tania might be the best scene in the movie striking the right note of horror without trying too hard.

The girl actress portraying Tania doesn't annoy me either. More than I expect of kid actors from this era. Looks as cute as a button wrapped up in Van Helsing's coat too.

Lucy's staking is what really sets the movie apart from Universal's. It's very graphic for its time and still very effective. The fact that blood spurts forth and covers Van Helsing's hand is a really nice touch.

The comic relief officials don't do much for me. The fact that Dracula hides his coffin in a coffin shop is clever though. And that he later hides it in the Holmwood (not a very German name, is it?) basement is equally good. Dracula's second attack on Mina really plays well, almost as a rape / seduction. Certainly it's as graphic as anything that anyone had done up to that point.

The climax really works. Out of all the adaptations of Dracula, this is the one that really gets that Bram Stoker had an action packed exciting climax. Obviously the special effects have dated some, but it still really works. It occurs to me that Sam Raimi homaged the dissolution of Dracula in the original Evil Dead, albeit by turning up the gore factor some.

Other than the comic relief, the other thing that really didn't work for me was the score, which was just ponderous. The same little theme played over and over.

So, basically, this still works like gangbusters. Handsome, sexy, and exciting. Sure, it's over the top and blunt at points, but I'd say that Nosferatu is the only Dracula adaptation that's markedly superior.

[Malmordo]

Did you find it a little strange that none of the characters acknowledge the rape in MUST BE DESTROYED? That scene was added after production wrapped at the insistence of the studio head. Cushing in particular was not happy about its inclusion.

So you're skipping HORROR OF FRANKENSTEIN. It's the only one of the series I've never seen, a comic reboot with Ralph Bates as a younger Dr. F. Would like to read your thoughts on it.

[EvilTwin]

Yeah, the lack of the payoff from the rape in MUST BE DESTROYED is odd. That said, Frankenstein had run that couple through the ringer enough that I can deal with them being too shellshocked to deal with more. In the end, it probably doesn't fit into the plot, but it sure fits into the theme of the movie.

I've gotten ahold of HORROR OF FRANKENSTEIN, so I'll get around to it. I think I'll plow through the Dracula films though after going through 6 Frankensteins as a change of pace. I might do the Dracula's out of order since I've seen Brides of Dracula relatively recently, one of my favorites actually, and I think Prince of Darkness is a bore after they resurrect Dracula. Or not, if dealing with them chronologically is something people prefer.

[EvilTwin]

"Just because", I took a look at the first half hour of HORROR OF FRANKENSTEIN. "The CW Presents Frankenstein" was my basic reaction to it. It really seems like it wants to be a sex romp as much as a horror film. And a parody. Unfortunately, it's so deadeningly obvious in its setups / payoffs that there's no life or surprise to the thing.

And Ralph Bates is no Peter Cushing, that's for sure.

Not much positive to say. However, the women in the film are gorgeous and I have no idea how they manage to keep their breasts contained in some of the costumes. And the camera makes sure we get as good a view as possible. Goodness gracious!

Just to put it in perspective, YOUNG FRANKENSTEIN was less than half a decade out.

[EvilTwin]

So, I decided to go in order. Perhaps more fun that way.

BRIDES OF DRACULA (1960)

The title is misleading. It's really about a disciple of Dracula, Baron Meinster (David Peel) rather than female vampires. There are two Dracula references in the whole movie. In the opening narration, which basically tells us Dracula is dead but his disciples remain, and Cushing refers to the bite mark on the neck as the "kiss of Dracula". I actually like that turn of phrase.

Although the title is misleading, the movie does provide several significant female parts. Yvonne Monlaur is in quite a lot of the movie as Marianne. I'm quite amused that she seems to think she's in a gothic romance where she has to rescue the handsome Baron from his confinement. That he's a vampire is an EC style twist. And, you know what, it works. Sure you know it's coming in a movie with Dracula in the title, but it's a nice unconventional first act of a vampire movie and it's not boring.

The Baroness Meinster (Martita Hunt) is actually an interesting character. Keeping her son "alive" but confined. And apparently luring young women to the castle to feed him. The fact that he puts the bite on his own mom is a nice bit of perversity as well. Perhaps more could have been made of her own sins, but it's a good role. Toss in Freda Jackson as a female Renfield type and you have more than your token allotment of women roles in a Hammer film.

Of course, things really get a move on once Peter Cushing shows up. It's really a shame that it's his last turn as Van Helsing until the 70s when he's too old to really engage in the physicality that he displays here. Even the simple act of getting out of a carriage is given a boost by Cushing gracefully getting out while it's still moving. There's some well staged action too. It's really an exciting film. In some alternate universe there's a whole franchise of Peter Cushing's Van Helsing fighting vampires and I'd like to see those. At least the girl ends up in his arms at the end of the film and I'd like to think that she stays there.

David Peel is o.k. as the Baron Meinster. He's too much of a pretty boy to really be menacing, but that helps sell the early twist. You can believe that Marianne didn't see the implicit menace. But, it doesn't help that when Cushing and Peel fight, it's tough to believe that Cushing doesn't kick his ass.

This is really a good looking movie with well designed sets. The Meinster Chateau and the wind mill ending in particular. The finish of the vampire is terrifically cinematic as well. Also there's a nice bit where it looks like they actually did film at night on location as you can see Cushing's breath after a chase.

There's a lot of upfront Christianity in this one. Christian symbols are very powerful and at the center of the fights. The Christian symbol doesn't just protect the wearer, it causes pain and repels the vampire. There's a really unique use of Holy Water too. And when Cushing splashes Holy Water on a vampire, the results look pretty terrible in a well done makeup effect.

Also, there's a new approach to vampirism to go along with this. In HORROR OF DRACULA, it was treated almost as a disease. In this one, Cushing describes it as a pagan cult. And, after dismissing that a vampire could turn into a bat in the first movie, in this movie vampires do just that and Cushing claims as much.

There are some little inconsistencies here and there and comic relief that falls flat. Looking at some of them, a servant(?) shows up menacingly at the beginning and then promptly vanishes from the remainder of the film after the first 10 minutes. A female is buried in a grave covered by just a couple of inches of dirt. Van Helsing apparently has no sense of punctuality showing up after dark when he should have plenty of time while there's still light out. The bat attacks, as noted uptopic, are dated (the ones in SCARS OF DRACULA are worse though). The fact that Marianne doesn't realize the Baron is evil for like 90% of the movie.

But, it's fast moving, good looking, and features Cushing at his best. Honestly, I prefer it to HORROR OF DRACULA although the latter is obviously the more important movie. This one is darn entertaining though.

[Luca S.]

Looking forward to more. I've seen about half of these.

[JacknifeJohnny]

Originally Posted by EvilTwin

But, it's fast moving, good looking, and features Cushing at his best. Honestly, I prefer it to HORROR OF DRACULA although the latter is obviously the more important movie. This one is darn entertaining though.

I prefer it to 'Horror' as well, especially since I've alway been put off by how oddly restrained and casual Lee's Dracula is in his first scene, his Dracula in that film doesn't come alive until he bares his fangs. You could say that for every one of Lee's turns as the Count, but at least he becomes more vicious and intimidating in his latter appearances, making up for the weak and/or non-existent dialogue.

Also, Cushing's Van Helsing is so scrappy and bad ass, I just love him, the definitive portrayal of the character in my view.

[EvilTwin]

DRACULA, PRINCE OF DARKNESS (1966)

Eight years after HORROR OF DRACULA, Hammer brought back Christopher Lee. Unfortunately, the movie really doesn't accomplish a whole lot beyond resurrecting the Count and doesn't give Christopher Lee anything interesting to do. Acts II and III are prefunctory as can be.

Act I is fairly interesting though. Four travelers get stranded near Castle Dracula and a driverless carriage shows up. And the horses have minds of their own and end up driving them up to the Castle where a mysterious servant, Klove, makes them welcome for the night. One of the things going here is that the movie is quiet here and sets a solid spooky mood. Almost like we're in for a ghost story.

And then Klove murders one of the travelers, suspends him over Dracula's ashes, and matter of factly slits his throat raining blood down on the ashes and reviving Dracula. That's a real visceral payoff for the drawn out setup.

Unfortunately, nothing really interesting happens after that. Dracula puts the bite on Barbara Shelley who goes from a prude to an erotic vampire with her hair let down. More could have been done with her trying to put the bite on her brother-in-law. Lee's Dracula really doesn't have anything more to do. He has no lines, perhaps by choice, and he ends up looking imposing while wearing bloodshot contacts and trying to put the bite on Suzan Farmer for the rest of the film. There's one good scene, Christopher Lee opens his chest to have Suzan Farmer drink his blood, echoing Stoker's novel, but there's too little to do.

And there's potential for more. After Dracula's revival, the two survivors flee to a monastery run by the gun toting, claret swilling, Father Sandor (Andrew Keir) who livens things up immensely. The four travelers are an altogether uninteresting lot. Too bad Keir is in so little of the film and a lot of that is to serve as exposition. There's a lot of potential for Dracula and a female vampire vs. a monastery of monks, looking for a way in, and tempting/picking off the guards. The monks even manage to capture Barbara Shelley at one point, a potentially exciting scene that's relegated to happening off screen. WTF is up with that? It's like everyone was looking at the running time and going, the setup took too long, we have no time for anything interesting to happen before Dracula grabs the girl and flees back to the castle.

Thorley Walters gets to portray a Renfield analog named Ludwig. Why he's not named Renfield is a distracting question. But, they establish some new vampire lore for the series as it's declared that a vampire can't cross a threshold without an invitation and that drowning via running water is one method of destroying a vampire. Hammer is also still running with the idea of vampirism as a pagan cult with Dracula as the fountainhead. And, of course, a cross is still a powerful weapon against a vampire.

The climax actually works though, even if it is a pretty blatant variation of the ending of HORROR OF DRACULA. Again there's a horse chase to the castle, although this time it looks a lot better with location filming and the chase is much more exciting. There's a fight on ice and an imaginative ending with the ice getting shot out from under Dracula leaving him to drown in running water under the end credits. It might not be original, but it's one of the few things after Dracula is revived that is truly interesting and exciting.

The movie does look good. Even as a horror programmer, it gets points for location filming and atmosphere. That's one dependable pleasure of Hammer's films and something I'm sorry too few horror films attempt today.

Overall, not terrible, but the second half of the film is really weak. Which is a shame because the first half promises better and the directing gets the most of what is there. If there's a central problem, it's with a script that can't figure out what to do with Dracula beyond revive him.

[Luca S.]

Yeah, it's truly a shame that Lee has no lines whatsoever in this one. Sandor was a funny Van Helsing replacement, however. Shame that the last times Cushing/Lee would team up as Van Helsing/Dracula would be in such shitty movies.

[EvilTwin]

Yeah, it's truly unfortunate that there wasn't another Lee/Cushing Dracula film with them both in their prime.

I'm actually looking forward to the rest of the Dracula series. I haven't seen DRACULA HAS RISEN FROM THE GRAVE in a long, long time (and I believe that's the first appearance of a truly well used plot complication to vampire lore) and I don't believe I've ever seen one of those past that in full. Yeah, their reputation isn't good, but I'd still rather watch one of these shitty later films than the shitty later films of several horror franchises of the 80s.

Also, I semi-apologized for picking BRIDES OF DRACULA in the Horror Draft as a Hammer fetish. I revoke that apology, BRIDES is a terrific film. Yeah, I'm guilty of the fetish, but rewatching it convinced me that it belonged.