Hammer Horror!

[Ralph]

As I'm progressing my way through 5 Frankenstein films from the Hammer back catalogue at the moment I'd just thought I'd post some thoughts on the horric deeds of the infamous Baron.

Back in the 70s when these were shown late at night usually at the weekends I found them pretty frightening. After watching Hitchcock's "The Birds" when I was 10 I had to check under the bed for the next week! Certainly until the mid 70s I didn't watch the Hammer Horrors at all to avoid the nightmares!

As a teenager towards the end of the 70s I started to take a look at them and while I was compelled to watch them I still found it a bit unsettling - the whole gothic atmosphere itself and then hacking up bits of bodies and stitching them together just seemed to leave me a tad uncomfy on the sofa. Possibly also due in large part to the chilling music that goes along with the scenes.

So I was interested now to find out how I would take these movies with the passage of time...

First up last night was the 1957 "The Curse of Frankenstein" . The music as always on these movies set the scene and always gives the feel of impending doom!
The beginning of the movies always give you a nice breather before the sinister goings on get underway. Always polite society to start off with and then as the movie progresses more unsavoury characters and settings appear.

The laboratory has all the classic test tubes bubbling and frothing away with a colourful array of mixtures. The sound of electricity crackles around the lab too. For good measure there's always a few jars with things in them around the lab...

Baron Frankenstein in this movie seems to start off basically as good as his experiment brings a small dog back to life and then I felt rather suddenly turns a darker character as he decides to progress onto a human body and getting bits of bodies from dubious sources. He just gets progressively more evil with every scene... I couldn't help thinking could he not just give it a rest! but no there he is having to hack up corpses, chopping off hands, removing brains, getting eyeballs from the morgue... naturally enough Chris Lee as the monster ends up looking pretty horrific. I think the make up is amazing even now..possibly it's the eyes themselves that just look the worst! The monster's skin looks the colour of rotting flesh...

As for Chris I don't think he even gets a line in the movie! He's just left to look like the walking dead and is pretty convincing in the part too! Does anyone know if this was the first appearance of a Frankenstein Monster in the movies after the 1930s Boris Karloff version? I didn't really miss the square head of the Boris version...come to think of it why would the skull be square shaped anyway? No bolt either but I think Chris' version is still just as repulsive!

So no nightmares this time around but I still think these movies have a thick atmosphere which still leaves you compelled to watch the progress of the monster.

I don't want to say too much about the plot to spoil it for anyone but naturally enough the door is left open at the end for the Baron to make an escape from his impending capital punishment...hence more movies

Ok so this movie is 50 years old but I still think packs a punch with some unsettling scenes but then I'm not really one for watching modern horror so perhaps thats why. The likes of "The Thing" and "Alien" two of my favourite horror films from the 1980s have a totally different style - while I find these movies thrilling, the combination of music and gothic atmosphere In these Hammer movies somehow has an eery old world quality I can't quite put my finger on - maybe it's just Peter Cushing's earnest and compelling performances that just bring the whole thing alive.

Next up "Revenge of Frankenstein" made in the same year as Chris Lee's debut as "Dracula".

Anyone else want to share their thoughts on the first Hammer Frankenstein outing?

[Wayne]

I enjoyed reading that!

naturally enough Chris Lee as the monster ends up looking pretty horrific. I think the make up is amazing even now..possibly it's the eyes themselves that just look the worst! The monster's skin looks the colour of rotting flesh...

As for Chris I don't think he even gets a line in the movie! He's just left to look like the walking dead and is pretty convincing in the part too! Does anyone know if this was the first appearance of a Frankenstein Monster in the movies after the 1930s Boris Karloff version? I didn't really miss the square head of the Boris version...come to think of it why would the skull be square shaped anyway? No bolt either but I think Chris' version is still just as repulsive!

maybe it's just Peter Cushing's earnest and compelling performances that just bring the whole thing alive.

I agree about the make up, & no Chris never gets to utter a word, as he frequently didn't in the later Dracula sequels either.
This was indeed the first 'Frankenstein' movie since the old Universal films, there were solicitors on the case to make sure that Hammer didn't copy Karloff's trademark look too closely. But i agree Chris's monster is equally effective in a different way. I think it's the way Chris makes the monster 'walk/stagger!' so clumsily that adds to it as well.
Cushing is one of those actors who never fails to engage me, & lift up any film that he appears in. He was a great & somewhat underated actor, IMO.

I look forward to the rest of your thoughts.

[Ralph]

I
This was indeed the first 'Frankenstein' movie since the old Universal films, there were solicitors on the case to make sure that Hammer didn't copy Karloff's trademark look too closely.

I'm amazed there was what a 20 odd year gap when there was no further Frankenstein movies - it must have been a big cinema moment when this new version came out.

[Dave Tudor]

Whereas the original Universal version of 'Frankenstein' is pretty much about the monster (and Karloff's performance is indeed fantastic), 'The Curse Of Frankenstein' is (correctly) about the Baron himself, and Peter Cushing is just brilliant, as he was in just about everything he was in. I think he was one of the most underrated actors in British movie history.

I liked the continuing story that Hammer seemed to introduce to their Frankenstein films ('The Horror Of Frankenstein' aside) and possibly for that reason, I prefer these films to the studio's Dracula movies, although, admittedly, I haven't seen all of the Count's outings.

Good thread, Ralph. I don't think I contributed to the old Hammer thread, but I shall endeavour to keep an eye on this one.

[Pip Madeley]

Whereas the original Universal version of 'Frankenstein' is pretty much about the monster (and Karloff's performance is indeed fantastic), 'The Curse Of Frankenstein' is (correctly) about the Baron

THE BARON!

Sorry, but I can't help myself.

[Dave Tudor]

I AM EVIL!!!

Sorry. As you were.

[Larry]

actually watched Revenge of Frankenstine the other night on Sky and really enjoyed it Unlike the Universal films the Hammer films certainly in terms of feel and atmosphere seem to be more in keeping with the period the original book was set in .

[Ralph]

Well I got half way through my review when my pc went completely blank on me so 10 minutes work was wiped out! I lose the will to live when these things happen...

OK so onto 1958’s Revenge of Frankenstein….

I was surprised to find there was continuity from outset with the previous film…anyway not a good time to be a man of the cloth as the evil Baron makes good his escape…

I was relieved to see comic actor Lionel Jefferies putting in an appearance as a lazy Swiss bodysnatcher with a home counties accent…anyway just as they attempt to swipe the Count’s body no doubt for the good of mankind up pops the Count in the misty graveyard declaring his name and title in that reassuringly chilling Cushing way….

So enters Dr Stein who remarkably quickly makes his mark as the surgeon of the ladies of polite Swiss society… while showing his caring benevolent side with his pauper hospital….and upsetting the good folk of the local medical council…

Everything seems to be going just nicely when up pops Francis Matthews a budding young surgeon who identifies the infamous Baron. Fortunately he seems agreeable that making people is a worthy cause and so the laboratory work gets underway…

First up in the lab a set of eyeballs and pair of arms in liquid respond to a Bunsen burner experiment...I didn't try that one at school...the suspended eyeballs follow the light and the arms reach out to touch the flame…nice special effects for the era even if somewhat comical …and next up in true blue peter style a body has been prepared earlier …actually it looks much better than Chris’s version …there looks like some hope for this one…he looks strangely familiar a bit like a posh rogue guest at a Torquay hotel…but then that’s another story…

A brain is required for the new bod so we get a chance to see a squidgy brain put in a jar as it gets transplanted from old body to new. This movie’s brain donor is a man with a hunch who needs a shiny new body.

Everything’s going famously with the special patient and he even gets a private room up in the attic …as usual a damsel interferes and the new monster makes a break for freedom…he starts out looking OK but for reasons known best to surgeon types he appears to adopt the body of the brain’s previous body if that makes sense and so gets the hunch back and also takes on cannibalistic tendencies drooling at the mouth though I’m not quite sure if he has a nibble or not …

Anyway some poor girl hoping for a shag in the woods from her hapless boyfriend instead becomes victim to the new monster…damn shame! Meantime The Baron is on the trail of the monster when he turns up at a posh do and identifies the Baron in front of the dignitaries.

That’s seems to be the end of Monster 1 – presumably he just collapses and dies?

Dr Stein protests his innocence but alas he is revealed as the Count and his pauper patients don’t take too kindly to this revelation – The Baron’s battered body is rescued by his budding student, fortunately another body is in the pipeline so the Baron’s brain can be rescued…saving the Hammer franchise from an untimely end…some time later the Baron turns up as kindly Dr Franc in Harley Street in old London town… his physique remarkably like Peter Cushing…this seems to have been the first successful body resurrection… just as well I thought otherwise Peter would have to spend the next few movies in the role of his hideous creation. (Just another passing thought will the next alias be Dr En?)

And so we are left waiting for the next movie…

I see it was 6 years before the next one, a bit of a gap but perhaps Hammer were concentrating on the Dracula movies at this stage I’m not sure.

I think it’s a good follow up to the first movie, certainly not as horrific…the make up on the monster in this movie made him look more demented than grotesque. Time for Chris to make a return then perhaps?

So Evil of Frankenstein to come next….

[Ralph]

Lionel Jefferies adding some welcome light relief to the graveyard scenes...



Dr Stein shows the guys the prime cut he picked up at the supermarket

[Wayne]

I see it was 6 years before the next one, a bit of a gap but perhaps Hammer were concentrating on the Dracula movies at this stage I’m not sure.

I think it’s a good follow up to the first movie, certainly not as horrific…the make up on the monster in this movie made him look more demented than grotesque. Time for Chris to make a return then perhaps?

Nice review, Ralph!
I like the film, but like many sequels it doesn't quite have the impact of the original, although Cushing is as splendid as ever as the Baron. (Shut it, Pip!) And alas, Chris never returns as the monster. My favourite of the sequels is 'Frankenstein Must Be Destroyed', but more on that when you get there.

It may interest you to know that the first 'Dracula' sequel wasn't made until 2yrs after the 3rd 'Frankenstein' sequel. (1964 & 1966, respectively) But in the 6yr period between the films you mention, Hammer made no less than 31 films! Not all of them classics by any means, but some of the notable ones are:

The Mummy (1959) Cushing stars, with Lee as the 'Mummy'.
Brides of Dracula (1960) Cushing returns as Van Helsing, but Dracula (or Lee) himself isn't in it. Still a good film though!
Kiss of the Vampire (1964) Good, atmospheric vampire movie

Other ones worth a mention:

The Man Who Could Cheat Death (1959) Anton Diffring not playng a nazi for once.
The Stranglers of Bomabay (1960) - featuring a bare chested Roger Delgado! (Yes, Thascalos knows about it)
Curse of the Werewolf (1960)
The Two Faces of Dr.Jeckyll (1960)
The Phantom of the Opera (1962)
Paranoic (1963) Good pycho-thriller starring Oliver Reed.

[Ralph]

Yes from what you say they were clearly busy...of those I recognise "The Mummy" - I remember having fun doing the walk hands outstretched....as I recall the Mummy moves slowly but relentlessly

If think Ollie Reed was the werewolf in Curse? and a good performance too. Ollie always did do menacing with style!

I've clearly heard of Phantom but I don't remember any of the others and as for Roger well I guess he had to get his kit off sometime - I'll leave Thascy to get excited about that one!

[Wayne]

If I recall correctly Ollie Reed was the werewolf in Curse? I think a good performance too. Ollie always did do menacing with style!

Actually, although it's consdered one of Hammer's classics, i didn't rate it at all, & flogged the disc back on eBay. I thought it was painfully slow, with a somewhat stilted performance from Ollie Reed. But many disagree with me, so there you go......

My early Hammer favourites are obviously the Quatermass, Frankenstein, & Dracula films, & the top 3 on that list. (& also 'X - The Unknown') But most of my other favorites seem to fall from 1964 to 1970. But although there are some naff ones in the 70's, there are a few good ones as well.

[Paul Monk]

I agree with Wayne about Curse of the Werewolf. Not one of the best and the wolfman make-up always looked slightly comical. There's a Tyburn film called Legend of the Werewolf which has exactly the same story but is slightly better and has Peter Cushing in it.

[Ralph]

Probably my memory of Curse of the Werewolf is working in it's favour, it's a long time since I last saw it...probably back in the 70s in fact!

Watching This Island Earth last year definitelty confirmed the memory can play tricks.

[Pamela]

Actually, although it's consdered one of Hammer's classics, i didn't rate it at all, & flogged the disc back on eBay. I thought it was painfully slow, with a somewhat stilted performance from Ollie Reed. But many disagree with me, so there you go......

Much as I love the look of the Werewolf in that film, it is pretty dull. The lack of onscreen werewolfery, coupled with Warren Mitchell's dodgy acting, means I don't watch it very often.

[Wayne]

it is pretty dull. The lack of onscreen werewolfery, coupled with Warren Mitchell's dodgy acting

Yes, i forgot about Warren Mitchell!

[Pamela]

Yes, i forgot about Warren Mitchell!

ooooooh, it's that voice-he doesn't even try to disguise it.
And the bullet is "made of real silllvurrrrrrr".

[Ralph]

The Evil which is Evil of Frankenstein....

Well I was aware from the ratings on the imdb pages that this was not one of the best....the first return to Frankie after 6 years and was it worth the wait...where do I begin...

For starters I have to say I found the first genuinely creepy and unsettling, the second was a diluted version but still good...

But Evil..

The story reads like straight out a comic book and likewise the script... I didn't find this unsettling at all - it's pure ham! Perhaps it's only when you see how badly they can be that you then appreciate everything thats good in the original. While I could remember seeing the first two, years ago, I'm not sure I even saw this but I can understand why it probably would have been left on the sidelines.

There was no continuity with the previous films it seems to be a rewrite. No connection to the second film just loosely connected to the first and thats just the building.

The monster doesn't look scary at all, in fact I think Oddbod in Carry On Screaming looks more the part! The monster has a square head and clodhopper boots - a totally characature - I can't believe this could be scary even back in '64. I realised looking at this monster that it beared no relation to a person so the body horror was completely missing and that was key to the unsettling feeling in the original.

The Baron acts like a buffoon as well - gone is the cold calculating scientist, this version is almost unrecognisable other than Peter Cushing gives the crap storyline and script his best effort but there's nothing he can do with this.
Would the original Baron a man of great intellect and skill need the services of a hypnotist to bring his monster back from a coma - er I don't think so...he'd have whipped out that brain and given him a new one. This Baron seemed more bothered about his furniture than anything else too...that theiveing Burgmeister...the cad...as for Cushing tieing the sheet to the bedpost as he makes good his escape...pure "carry on"

And when the Baron is known to have returned to his home town where the police know he's a fugitive they don't bother to check out his old abode - I mean who thought up this whole story!

The Monster surving in a glacier too after it's first burst of life...as I said pure comic book.

This movie could have been made as a silent movie..it certainly runs with one...and totally cliched. It starts to drag and you want it to end!

I'm not sure I'd watch this one again - I think it's best forgotten as a silly entry - it does for Frankenstein what Casino Royale first time around does for Bond!

I've got my fingers crossed for the next one! Does it get better Wayne?

[Wayne]

Well I was aware from the ratings on the imdb pages that this was not one of the best

You do like to get a pre-conceived idea of how you should vote instead of going in with an open mind, don't you?

No, fair enough. It is definitely the weakest of the Hammer Frankies, but i still don't mind it. I don't think it's as bad as you're saying it is, but then the Hammer Horrors to me are like the James Bond franchise is to you: you can still enjoy the crapper ones. I can understand that.

[Paul Monk]

I don't remember thinking Evil was bad. Just that it wasn't one of the best. I guess I'm with Wayne in being able to enjoy all the Hammer films (except Demons of the Mind!)

[Ralph]

I think watching Evil after an excellent starter with a good follow up raised my expectations for more of the same.

Sometimes a second viewing later helps I guess.

That first one really is exceptional, when comparing to Evil it does feel like night and day in terms of emotional involvement. Even the music on Evil fails to set the mood.

I think I would enjoy Evil next time around knowing it's more of a Hammer filler rather than main feature. If anyone's doing a double bill Hammer evening then it's a good one to get you warmed up but not chilled.

[Ralph]

You do like to get a pre-conceived idea of how you should vote instead of going in with an open mind, don't you?

I like to get an indicator but I do judge it fairly thereafter

For example I read the Time Monster was crap so left it until just about last to buy the Video then when I watched it I really enjoyed it - so it's a barometer my dear chap...and if I'm correct the guage says "fine" for the next one.

[Ralph]

Frankenstein Created Woman...

A definite improvement. A fresh storyline but again well away from the body horror. I think it's nicely put together with a story of torment and revenge.
Seperating body and soul and marrying them together in another body gives the creation concept a fresh approach. I was pleased to see those three nasty chaps get their come uppence.

The Baron I've found quite a likeable character in these last two movies, just seems to be a bit of a misunderstood chap While in the first two he was quite detestable he shows more humanity in these. Is that good or bad? I think it's just different. Again it's a world away from the more gore oriented Curse - I don't mind as long as we get a reasonable story line.

I liked Peter's assistant in this one - much better than the two dimensional character of the last movie.

It has some moments where you feel for the tortured soul trapped within the girl and the end result.

So yes a fair entry.

[Jonno]

I think it's nicely put together

Very appropriate choice of words for a Frankenstein film!

[Wayne]

Very appropriate choice of words for a Frankenstein film!

@Jonno!

Glad you liked it more, Ralph!
Shame Denberg wasn't dressed (or undressed! ) like she was in the publicilty photos though.