Halloween Diary 2018
There were no plans to watch Dracula's Daughter (1936) in October this year, and I think this was one of the films I watched earlier in the hopes of a year long project leading up to Halloween Month. Alas, it remains a yearly October entry. It just always felt like a right way to get the month started. It is over and done with until the next year, sort of setting the tone. I kind of did that earlier during the last week of September, but officially in October, this is where the magic truly starts.
I think the first half of the film is definitely my personal
highlight. It has the dialogue I certainly find quite quotable and interesting.
Admittedly once it gets bogged down into the flirting of psychiatrist, Jeffrey
Garth, and secretary, Janet, I sort of find myself less enthusiastic.
Definitely Countess Zaleska and Sandor’s scenes together are my favorite. Her
burning the body of her “father” (although the first film doesn’t even remotely
hint as his parentage, and her connection to him is loosely explored) while
dedicating the passage of “Be thou exorcised oh Dracula, and thy body long
undead find destruction throughout eternity in the name of thy dark unholy
Master” I always look forward to, while Zaleska’s obvious attraction to an
unfortunate poverty-stricken, down-on-her-luck model remains another staple of
the film’s allure. Dracula’s Daughter remains a Halloween kickstarter, sort of
functioning as a tradition now after many years. Edward Van Sloan, as chatty,
unwavering Van Helsing, appeared far more significant at the onset until Garth
and his ongoing bickering with Janet takes hold of the film…but even still, Van
Helsing is given the basics already used in the ’31 film to reapply once again.
The neck wounds, victims with loss of blood, his stance about vampires and
their characteristics, and how others around him have such a hard time
believing him. Churchill, to her credit, looks fabulous in the elegance
costumed her, and she playfully gets under Kruger’s skin, but I’m all about
Holden and her fascinating performance. Just the way Holden captivates with her
expressiveness, the undercurrent of torment that leaves her desperate for help
but unable to resist the urges for blood, her inability to coax Sandor from
constantly reminding her of who she is, and her eventually surrender to the “dark
impulses”…she is the real reason I can watch this annually without fail.---------------------------------------
I had plans to watch a few similar titles to Witchcraft (1964), such as the gem starring Christopher Lee, from 1960, City of the Dead. And in a few, Bava's Black Sunday (1960) will return to the October line-up as well. Witchcraft drew my attention based almost exclusively on Chaney's presence, and being set in England also encouraged some real enthusiasm. Similarly to the aforementioned films dealing with practitioners of the dark arts, there is a witch who was punished for her "sins", in this case Vanessa Whitlock (Yvette Rees), buried alive. Developers are the target of the descendants of Vanessa, such as Chaney's Morgan, rightfully disgruntled and enraged when long-time family adversaries, the Laniers, are associated with a businessman named Myles Forrester (Barry Linehan). Myles okayed the bulldozing of a cemetery containing the bodies of the Whitlocks as encroaching populace demanded their removal and move elsewhere. The past had the Laniers responsible for the Whitlocks losing real estate and property to them, including the eventual arrest and burial of Vanessa. So the cemetery destruction and tombstones drove through by Myles' men, against the wishes of the Laniers, particularly Bill (Jack Hedley), just further reinforces the Whitlock's desire for vengeance. Even worse for the Laniers (and ultimately Myles!) is that during the bulldozing, Vanessa is released from her tomb to further seek revenge against the current lineage!
Very familiar this plot will be for those who have seen their share of vengeance-seeking witch movies. Witches want to use their powers to get even although their dangerous magic is often enforced on those that had nothing to do with their past suffering. Just being ancestors of those long gone is enough to incur the wrath of the witch harmed by those who came before them. In this case, the Laniers are unfortunately tied to the cemetery obliteration so Morgan is really out of sorts and looking to conjure plenty of bad towards them. Vanessa feels quite aesthetically similar to Barbara Steele, in her cloak, very much a figure of doom towards particular folks representative of those that put her away. She emerges in the car of certain Laniers, killing Bill's aunt by having her believe she's driving down a road when in fact the car goes over a cliff! Bill is almost the victim of the same wreck but he had cousin, Todd (David Weston), in the backseat to snap him out of it. And Bill's wife is tied to a table deep in a mausoleum, rescued in the nick of time. And true to the period, the crypt and eventually the Laniers' (and once the Whitlocks, so there is irony) manor go up in flames. I could have done without the Romeo and Juliet tie-in with Todd and Morgan's niece, Amy (Diane Clare; the bitch sister of Harris in The Haunting (1963) and Sylvia in Hammer's Plague of the Zombies) forbidden to be an item. Amy factors into the fiery finale. I loved this the first time I watched it, but tonight's viewing was rather a slog. Don't know what it was but I usually really dig a slow burn. Vanessa favors Steele from Black Sunday just so much to me, but I loved the cemetery scenes at the beginning and the witch sliding on her cloak before pursuing the Laniers is easy to win me over. Her emerging in the bedroom at night before later placing the spell on the aunt, with the resulting car cliff demise not long after also checks the boxes. And to emphasize just how driven Vanessa is, she "pushes" emotionally crippled Grandma Lanier down the stairs. And you have Chaney among other Devil Worshipers gathered together as one, like something right out of The Black Cat...
Witchcraft * * * / * * * * *
------------------------------------------
10/3
------------------------------------------
10/3
“There’s always time for the important things”
This was something “Dr. Stein” (Cushing’s Frankenstein renames himself in a new village of Carlsbruck) tells the mother of a patient (her daughter, the mother trying to influence Victor Frankenstein into considering her as a mate through persuasive methods, including dangling the carrot of an inheritance). Nothing is as important as his experiments, his work. When Baron Frankenstein forewarns Dr. Krempe in The Curse of Frankenstein that he’ll find another brain, and another, and another…he’s not kidding. And in The Revenge of Frankenstein when he sits listening to that mother go on about how his time is taken up by the “practice”, mentioning he should find time for other things, there is nothing more vital to him than his pursuit of further knowledge and success in the creation of life, deriving from his own experiments and ongoing studies in how the human body works.
Evident of that when he shows willing pupil, Dr. Kleve, a set of tanks with eyes and an armed hand, using fire to prove that with devices made by his genius, he could “mimic” a brain. Curse and Revenge aren’t unencumbered by continuity problems, so they are the really true companions within the Hammer Frankenstein series. The others that come after these two have Frankenstein going through personality changes and presented in ways that run the gamut from complete evil bastard to a misunderstood scientist just wanting to be left alone so he could finish his work unabated.
While Krempe felt Victor was going too far (and he was, misguidedly murdering an aging, brilliant professor for his brain, allowing a maid wanting to blackmail him to die, openly warning he might allow his cousin/fiancé to be harmed if his work was threatened) and should stop dabbling in his mad science, Kleve believes in his work, willingly assisting in a delicate surgery where the brain of a crippled colleague who helped him escape the gallows would be placed in the statuesque body of a very tall, very healthy man (much more impressive than the grotesque and wearied body of Lee’s).
But typical of these movies, the experiment sees a degree (much smaller in Lee’s case but successful for a bit with Gwinn’s) of success before matters deteriorate (Krempe tries to stop Victor from using the professor’s brain, with the damaged material unfit for Lee’s body while Woodsworth’s snooping and instigating results in the poor vagrants turning on Frankenstein). And as typical with Frankenstein’s experiments, there are “complications” (Gwinn’s condition results in intrusive cannibalism and abuse with a foul local with too much relish for beating on someone alters his health, as the problems with Karl before his brain was removed emerge again; Lee’s monster, no matter the attempted surgeries by Victor to correct his behavior, always result in his violently attacking innocents).
I was in the mood for the first two Hammer Frankenstein films early this year, certainly as I’m approaching the weekend, with a vacation day on Friday where I hope to go on a big Vincent Price marathon. I wanted by early Cushing fix today, however. That determination in Victor’s eyes, unwilling to be thwarted, driven and undaunted, is quite the initial characteristics Cushing applies to Baron Frankenstein before other sequels mar and muddy him, often painting him in different strokes. Willing to allow a priest to be beheaded so he could live on, taking an arm from a pickpocket, sending a maid to her death without guilt (mocking her about their unborn child, disregarding her after their affair), among other misdeeds that continue to implicate Baron Frankenstein, when he fails at the end of his movies it as if karmic justice won’t allow him to enjoy his success very long.
The Curse of Frankenstein (1957) * * * * / * * * * *
The Revenge of Frankenstein (1958) * * * * / * * * * *
------------------------------------
10/5
There isn't an October where I can leave out House of Usher (1960) or Pit and the Pendulum (1961). No way. Yes, you sort of get the same kind of formula from casting (Damon and Kerr, Carbone and Westwood all look the same) in both of these films and the manservant for Price tells the assertive, stone-faced male leads (they weren't about to outshine Price in his films, that's for sure) who arrive as outsiders/intruders that the master isn't receiving...not stopping them from entering the eroding, ancient manors with a mission. Whether it is to return home with his fiance who is essentially being held prisoner by her brother or looking to gain answers regarding his sister's peculiar demise, the likes of Damon (Usher) and Kerr (Pendulum) encounter a lot more than they bargained for. While happy for Luana Anders to get a big film when she's often in smaller scale Corman fare among other lower budget, less extravagant B movies of the time, her role isn't particularly colorful, while Carbone's doctor (later revealed to be Steele's lover) and Westwood's servant add extra characters to the mix. Kerr sternly and aggressively demands for more details about his sister, while Steele's role in all of this remains almost exclusively to the end and a flashback at the beginning when Price describes her behavior before her death when intrigued by the torture chamber/dungeon further down into the bowels of the manor.
Being buried alive is certainly a theme Corman returns to for both of these films. Myrna Fahey a victim of catalepsy and her brother's (Price blonde and irritatingly intrusive anytime Damon tries to have time with her) need for her to die as expected, is chained in a casket, bloody fingers clawing to get out...which she ultimately does. The before and after the premature burial is quite staggering as Fahey's Maddy goes from demure and soft to mad and unhinged, targeting her brother, ready to choke the life out of him (and when Damon tries to intervene, he gets some of those bloody claws). Steele, on the other hand, rises from her coffin during an elaborate ruse as Price's Nicholas Medina was gradually driven into mental collapse, purposely victimized through the use of a past incident where he saw his mother buried behind a wall (another Poe callback). While in House of Usher, Price cannot accept that he and his sister deserve to live without fear of a family curse, as Damon tries and fails to get his fiance out of the house (in a state of inevitable crumbling), in Pit and the Pendulum, Price is a victim, driven into a character shift where the personality of his evil father takes over. So Nicholas' change in behavior allows Price to slowly transition from a nervous, anxious, horrified, tormented soul into an accusatory sadist just itching to use his torture devices. Kerr just happens to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, nearly split in half by the pendulum blade while Steele's vindictive, mocking wife (who poked fun at the lost husband, Nicholas, rubbing her adultery and his past family's adultery in real unpleasantly) and Carbone's concerned lover aren't lucky to get away after their handiwork created a monster. Whether you want to see the house burning into ash or victims falling off ledges of a torture room to their doom from a great height, the endings of both films do give viewers more than enough dramatic tragedies...with Price unable to escape.
To know Price made quite a go of it from the late fifties into the early seventies before his schedule started winding down, we have plenty of content featuring this celebrated icon and I always enjoy putting together my October must-sees featuring him. These two are just a start, with plenty more upcoming.
House of Usher (1960) * * * * *
Pit and the Pendulum (1961) * * * * *
---------------------
I’ve more than written enough about Horror of Dracula (1958), and as my day winds down, I did want to mention John van Eyssen, as Jonathan Harker, as I don’t think he is given much credit despite having a very sympathetic, heroic character at the beginning of the film. Cushing’s Professor Van Helsing benefits from Harker’s bravery and infiltration of Dracula’s castle (using the guise of a distinguished scholar hired to index his library), particularly learning much from his written diary before being bitten (by Valerie Gaunt, capitalizing on his down defenses) and right before vampirism is to take hold. Getting plenty of bright red blood, I never fail to enjoy the Dracula stone sprinkled right before Harker descends on the castle and Cushing’s use of the stake to the heart (of Lucy, as her brother, played by Gough, who takes Cushing to task for requesting to keep her in vampire form until he can be led to Dracula) with screams (Harker takes care of Dracula’s bride, which results in the Count awakening) quite curdling. All the hits are here, certainly enough I think to satisfy fans of the films that came before Horror of Dracula. Cushing with the crucifix, as his Van Helsing emerges to stop Lucy from attacking her brother (Gough shocked that his sister would go after a little girl and also target him), is just iconic to me. I have that image on the blog, of course. And Lee in that black cape, such an intimidating figure…just hits the right visual punch when Harker conveys, “Oh, shit” as the Count stands in the way of his only exit, while earlier manhandling Jonathan with a chokehold. And when Lee first appears and Valerie Gaunt scurries away, just as if he were ten feet tall, it is just so impressive. With Lee’s bloody lips and teeth and primal expression as he threatens his bride after she goes for Harker’s throat, you see the animal side of him. Lee is lensed by Fisher as sophisticated and regal, imposing and terrifying, alluring and handsome…quite a star is born moment for him. Cushing, though, as his vampire hunter prepares for the ending showdown, has the wits even as he’s not able to ever truly match Lee in terms of physicality. It is the very definition of using your brains when brawn isn’t an option. And the vampire’s weaknesses used against him offers kryptonite for a hunter to utilize when otherwise would result in easy defeat. I always liked how Harker understood how to defeat Dracula, but chose to free his bride from her long-term imprisonment instead of immediately executing the Count when availability was there…Cushing’s Van Helsing does the same. They see that freeing tormented souls comes first while finding Dracula and removing him from the equation is necessary and important…but Lucy rescued from trying to bite little girls and her brother was of importance while Dracula would eventually make a mistake that could be exploited.
Horror of Dracula (1958) * * * * *
Evident of that when he shows willing pupil, Dr. Kleve, a set of tanks with eyes and an armed hand, using fire to prove that with devices made by his genius, he could “mimic” a brain. Curse and Revenge aren’t unencumbered by continuity problems, so they are the really true companions within the Hammer Frankenstein series. The others that come after these two have Frankenstein going through personality changes and presented in ways that run the gamut from complete evil bastard to a misunderstood scientist just wanting to be left alone so he could finish his work unabated.
While Krempe felt Victor was going too far (and he was, misguidedly murdering an aging, brilliant professor for his brain, allowing a maid wanting to blackmail him to die, openly warning he might allow his cousin/fiancé to be harmed if his work was threatened) and should stop dabbling in his mad science, Kleve believes in his work, willingly assisting in a delicate surgery where the brain of a crippled colleague who helped him escape the gallows would be placed in the statuesque body of a very tall, very healthy man (much more impressive than the grotesque and wearied body of Lee’s).
But typical of these movies, the experiment sees a degree (much smaller in Lee’s case but successful for a bit with Gwinn’s) of success before matters deteriorate (Krempe tries to stop Victor from using the professor’s brain, with the damaged material unfit for Lee’s body while Woodsworth’s snooping and instigating results in the poor vagrants turning on Frankenstein). And as typical with Frankenstein’s experiments, there are “complications” (Gwinn’s condition results in intrusive cannibalism and abuse with a foul local with too much relish for beating on someone alters his health, as the problems with Karl before his brain was removed emerge again; Lee’s monster, no matter the attempted surgeries by Victor to correct his behavior, always result in his violently attacking innocents).
I was in the mood for the first two Hammer Frankenstein films early this year, certainly as I’m approaching the weekend, with a vacation day on Friday where I hope to go on a big Vincent Price marathon. I wanted by early Cushing fix today, however. That determination in Victor’s eyes, unwilling to be thwarted, driven and undaunted, is quite the initial characteristics Cushing applies to Baron Frankenstein before other sequels mar and muddy him, often painting him in different strokes. Willing to allow a priest to be beheaded so he could live on, taking an arm from a pickpocket, sending a maid to her death without guilt (mocking her about their unborn child, disregarding her after their affair), among other misdeeds that continue to implicate Baron Frankenstein, when he fails at the end of his movies it as if karmic justice won’t allow him to enjoy his success very long.
The Curse of Frankenstein (1957) * * * * / * * * * *
The Revenge of Frankenstein (1958) * * * * / * * * * *
------------------------------------
10/5
At the start of Friday after a break on Thursday due to life’s exhausting respites, I decided to go ahead and check off the annual October viewing list, Son of Dracula and House of Dracula. One deals with a Dracula descendent looking to prey upon a fresh batch of Americans in Swampland USA (The Dark Oats plantation in moody Robert Siodmak direction) while the other is Dracula looking supposedly for a cure for his vampirism, instead injecting his own “corruptive” blood during the transfusion with a brilliant doctor trying to help him. Although the House of Dracula isn’t literal, you could offer the premise that Dracula does have a figurative house in the host body of Dr. Edelmann. Although never technically called “son” of Dracula, Chaney’s Count isn’t sophisticated as much as an asshole who intimidates from the get-go as those he makes demands towards (butler, marriage judge, among others) fall back worriedly. Carradine’s Count Dracula appears carefully suave and cautiously mannered, while plotting to “take” Edelmann’s assistant, Miliza, for his own vampire bride.
Of course, documented before by many, the cruelty of House of Dracula not giving Nina, well deserved of, a happy ending is tragic. Miliza referring to the moon differently than Talbot sees it, and his getting the chance to actually experience its rise again without the recurring werewolvery, is a nice couple of scenes that I don’t think I mention enough in past reviews. It is interesting seeing how Atwill’s star gradually diminished by the time of House of Dracula, though. What I hadn’t really thought much about in regards to Son of Dracula was the cast being so particular just for this one film. Besides Chaney, only Ankers was really a recognized Universal horror performer. The others aren’t so which perhaps gives Son of Dracula a uniqueness among the B-movies representing Universal’s 40s output. At least, in the case of Son of Dracula, there aren’t villagers with torches and pitchforks. And was goes up in flames has emotional significance: Dracula cannot stop the man who opposes him for the woman of their love triangle when she gives Frank the whereabouts of his casket in a drainage flume and Kay’s body and casket are destroyed by Frank when he realizes the monster that she has become (wanting to off her sister and Frank’s pal, Doc Brewster). I’ll continue to cringe at how far the Monster, once such a rich character of serious depth and fascination, had collapsed once poor Strange was credited the role. Miserable use of the Monster in House of Dracula can’t be re-stated enough.
Son of Dracula * * * *
House of Dracula * * 1/2
Of course, documented before by many, the cruelty of House of Dracula not giving Nina, well deserved of, a happy ending is tragic. Miliza referring to the moon differently than Talbot sees it, and his getting the chance to actually experience its rise again without the recurring werewolvery, is a nice couple of scenes that I don’t think I mention enough in past reviews. It is interesting seeing how Atwill’s star gradually diminished by the time of House of Dracula, though. What I hadn’t really thought much about in regards to Son of Dracula was the cast being so particular just for this one film. Besides Chaney, only Ankers was really a recognized Universal horror performer. The others aren’t so which perhaps gives Son of Dracula a uniqueness among the B-movies representing Universal’s 40s output. At least, in the case of Son of Dracula, there aren’t villagers with torches and pitchforks. And was goes up in flames has emotional significance: Dracula cannot stop the man who opposes him for the woman of their love triangle when she gives Frank the whereabouts of his casket in a drainage flume and Kay’s body and casket are destroyed by Frank when he realizes the monster that she has become (wanting to off her sister and Frank’s pal, Doc Brewster). I’ll continue to cringe at how far the Monster, once such a rich character of serious depth and fascination, had collapsed once poor Strange was credited the role. Miserable use of the Monster in House of Dracula can’t be re-stated enough.
Son of Dracula * * * *
House of Dracula * * 1/2
--------------------------------------
Black Sunday (1960) * * * *
--------------------------------------------
Sandwiched between the Universal B-films I started the day with and the Vincent Price Corman Poe double feature I almost capped the night with (only followed by Hammer’s Horror of Dracula (1958), a personal favorite of mine every October due to Cushing’s Van Helsing), I don’t nearly include Bava’s classic, Black Sunday (1960) in enough Octobers, which is to my own shame. But I wasn’t about to let this slip past me another year. I bounced around the idea of featuring it alongside Black Sabbath, but I decided to save the latter for later as I start to include more anthologies into the month’s viewing schedule (no Amicus features have made their way into the lineup yet). I had already planned in the morning to watch Pit and Pendulum as part of an evening companion with House of Usher before the nightcap of Horror of Dracula, so including Barbara Steele’s most famous role within my Friday marathon of classic horror just felt right. Steele’s double roles in the film gives her plenty of opportunity for being versatile, quite a nice chance indeed provided to her considering it was young in her career. This is indeed the film that brought her to the attention of us classic horror fans, further encouraging us to seek out every Euro-horror that might have capitalized on her star-making turn in Bava’s most highly regarded film, a success that propelled him into the spotlight and our gaze. Black Sunday (or Mask of Satan, as also titled) introduces Steele’s Asa, condemned by her brother for Satanism, hammered into her face/head with a spiked mask, uglied with tongue sticking out to iterate the foulness of her allegiance, to die as her beloved fellow worshipper, Igor Javuto (Arturo Dominici) did. As was custom for those who were sentenced to die for devil worship, Asa was to burn but a good, strong rain stopped that. So she is placed in a coffin with glass window so that a crucifix can remain on her face, later disturbed by travelers passing through, Dr. Thomas Kruvajan (Andrea Checci) and his protégé, Dr. Andre Gorobec (John Richardson), who are awaiting their coachman’s repair of a damaged stagecoach spoke, investigating a chapel ruins. In the ruins, her glass window is broken while the curious Kruvajan is swatting at a bat, his removal of her mask and blood from a cut stirring up a recovery process of her rotted, deteriorated corpse. Then as Asa resurrects, her ancestor, Katia, notices the passersby. The remainder of the film is Asa and her equally resurrected love, Igor, seeking revenge on their current familial line, Katia, Katie’s brother, and their father. Dr. Kruvajan is also lured to Asa by Igor in order to be seduced and preyed upon, subjected to further “nutrition” needed for her recuperation. Eventually Kruvajan is no longer needed once Katia and her brother’s father is found murdered, leaving Andre behind to hopefully stop Asa and Igor, understanding that their threat to innocent civilians must be taken seriously.
This is not necessarily as much a recognized classic for its dialogue or story as much as its visual style prior to Bava’s incredible foray into color photography, where his true talents could be seen in full bloom. But if you watch this or The Girl Who Knew Too Much then it is obvious Bava has more than enough creative energy and visually inventive IQ to acclimate the restrictions of B&W photography into an effective chiller, revealing that he was more than capable in crafting a very pleasing Gothic aesthetic that not only equaled whatever Universal or Lewton produced a decade prior but advanced the genre ahead as imitators and other filmmakers tried to duplicate and replicate Bava’s success. And Steele’s popularity certainly stems not only from her ability to work both a heroine and villain in the same film but as a beauty onscreen she captivates. I realized yet again today that I was overpowered by her presence every time she appears. Even with bulging face wounds from the spikes of her mask, her eyes and the call for Kruvajan to come to her, she’s got such an incredible allure. And while another “villagers with their pitchforks and torches descend upon the castle to do away with the predator tormenting them” sequence at the end did make me admittedly groan, seeing Steele up on the stake as the flames light her up, having just gained youth and health in her face (her body still skeletal) by siphoning it from Katia, is quite a sendoff. That emphasis on Asa’s eyes starting to reform while her body is still in the coffin and Igor’s rotted face might get the goosebumps up. The ruins of the chapel is a nice Gothic hook, and the castle of the Vajda family is an ideal setting for most of the film.
Black Sunday (1960) * * * *
 |
| Not exactly a pleasant image for those with a fear of premature burial |
 |
| Roderick pushed his sister too far! |
 |
| Some houses are "born bad" |
Being buried alive is certainly a theme Corman returns to for both of these films. Myrna Fahey a victim of catalepsy and her brother's (Price blonde and irritatingly intrusive anytime Damon tries to have time with her) need for her to die as expected, is chained in a casket, bloody fingers clawing to get out...which she ultimately does. The before and after the premature burial is quite staggering as Fahey's Maddy goes from demure and soft to mad and unhinged, targeting her brother, ready to choke the life out of him (and when Damon tries to intervene, he gets some of those bloody claws). Steele, on the other hand, rises from her coffin during an elaborate ruse as Price's Nicholas Medina was gradually driven into mental collapse, purposely victimized through the use of a past incident where he saw his mother buried behind a wall (another Poe callback). While in House of Usher, Price cannot accept that he and his sister deserve to live without fear of a family curse, as Damon tries and fails to get his fiance out of the house (in a state of inevitable crumbling), in Pit and the Pendulum, Price is a victim, driven into a character shift where the personality of his evil father takes over. So Nicholas' change in behavior allows Price to slowly transition from a nervous, anxious, horrified, tormented soul into an accusatory sadist just itching to use his torture devices. Kerr just happens to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, nearly split in half by the pendulum blade while Steele's vindictive, mocking wife (who poked fun at the lost husband, Nicholas, rubbing her adultery and his past family's adultery in real unpleasantly) and Carbone's concerned lover aren't lucky to get away after their handiwork created a monster. Whether you want to see the house burning into ash or victims falling off ledges of a torture room to their doom from a great height, the endings of both films do give viewers more than enough dramatic tragedies...with Price unable to escape.
To know Price made quite a go of it from the late fifties into the early seventies before his schedule started winding down, we have plenty of content featuring this celebrated icon and I always enjoy putting together my October must-sees featuring him. These two are just a start, with plenty more upcoming.
House of Usher (1960) * * * * *
Pit and the Pendulum (1961) * * * * *
---------------------
I’ve more than written enough about Horror of Dracula (1958), and as my day winds down, I did want to mention John van Eyssen, as Jonathan Harker, as I don’t think he is given much credit despite having a very sympathetic, heroic character at the beginning of the film. Cushing’s Professor Van Helsing benefits from Harker’s bravery and infiltration of Dracula’s castle (using the guise of a distinguished scholar hired to index his library), particularly learning much from his written diary before being bitten (by Valerie Gaunt, capitalizing on his down defenses) and right before vampirism is to take hold. Getting plenty of bright red blood, I never fail to enjoy the Dracula stone sprinkled right before Harker descends on the castle and Cushing’s use of the stake to the heart (of Lucy, as her brother, played by Gough, who takes Cushing to task for requesting to keep her in vampire form until he can be led to Dracula) with screams (Harker takes care of Dracula’s bride, which results in the Count awakening) quite curdling. All the hits are here, certainly enough I think to satisfy fans of the films that came before Horror of Dracula. Cushing with the crucifix, as his Van Helsing emerges to stop Lucy from attacking her brother (Gough shocked that his sister would go after a little girl and also target him), is just iconic to me. I have that image on the blog, of course. And Lee in that black cape, such an intimidating figure…just hits the right visual punch when Harker conveys, “Oh, shit” as the Count stands in the way of his only exit, while earlier manhandling Jonathan with a chokehold. And when Lee first appears and Valerie Gaunt scurries away, just as if he were ten feet tall, it is just so impressive. With Lee’s bloody lips and teeth and primal expression as he threatens his bride after she goes for Harker’s throat, you see the animal side of him. Lee is lensed by Fisher as sophisticated and regal, imposing and terrifying, alluring and handsome…quite a star is born moment for him. Cushing, though, as his vampire hunter prepares for the ending showdown, has the wits even as he’s not able to ever truly match Lee in terms of physicality. It is the very definition of using your brains when brawn isn’t an option. And the vampire’s weaknesses used against him offers kryptonite for a hunter to utilize when otherwise would result in easy defeat. I always liked how Harker understood how to defeat Dracula, but chose to free his bride from her long-term imprisonment instead of immediately executing the Count when availability was there…Cushing’s Van Helsing does the same. They see that freeing tormented souls comes first while finding Dracula and removing him from the equation is necessary and important…but Lucy rescued from trying to bite little girls and her brother was of importance while Dracula would eventually make a mistake that could be exploited.
------------------------------
10/6
10/6
After a really active-watch Friday where I marathoned classic horror something fierce, I took a break until Saturday evening, fulfilling the necessary Frankenstein/Bride double feature. Strangely, you’d think Frankenstein (1931) and Bride of Frankenstein (1935) would be ideal for Halloween day but I seem to always get the itch (as was the case today) to watch them quite early in the month. The Dracula’s Daughter / Mummy’s Curse sequels admittedly drift into the ether after a couple, but I always chew on something from the Whale masterpieces (not without their flaws, of course, but with so much rich attention to extravagance and excess, the director wasn’t much for subtlety; still, I love his films all the more for it) after they are over days in advance. Having watched Cushing’s Frankenstein films earlier in the week, too, I feel the timing for Whale’s iconic Universal standard bearers was just as it should be. I was reading a bit about the tragic short life of Colin Clive, his descent into extreme alcoholism, and the eventual tuberculosis that took his life. The poor guy hadn’t even made it to the 1940s, and getting the chance to truly realize the success of the franchise and his legacy as the actor tied to the title (Karloff would continue to understand the success of the Monster, but perhaps Clive might have been jaded as Boris was considering he would come across some afraid of him for the different boogeymen he portrayed) never was meant to be. But you can look over the brief history available for these different stars of the Universal Golden Age, such as Dwight Frye who died so terribly young of a heart attack early in the 40s, and so many of them weren’t as fortunate as Peter Lorre or Karloff (who was actually in his 50s, a late bloomer to stardom, when Frankenstein’s Monster made him (in)famous) to live too long a life. I recall watching Ghost of Frankenstein in late September, feeling disappointed poor Clive was already dead by the time the film came out. Perhaps Clive was spared the embarrassment of being reduced to bit parts by the time of the B-movie sequels, but I like to romanticize and believe he’d have been gifted some sort of role that might have granted him any sort of satisfaction seemingly denied him before death. He certainly looks worse for wear in Bride where his Henry (Baron at this point because his father was essentially written out of the sequel due to Frederick Kerr’s death in ’33) hasn’t been able to recover from the “illness” that resided from being obsessively committed to creating a man and getting tossed by the monster off a windmill, when Dr. Pretorius arrives with demands to help him create a mate/bride for Karloff. Funny viewing story: my daughter was watching Bride with me (she watched the first half of Frankenstein before retreating to her room to listen to her pop music), making it all the way to the end, right as Pretorius and Henry reveal Lanchester from her wraps, exiting the room because she never has liked the shrieking towards Karloff, in rejection of him. Something about how Lanchester noises her rejection at Karloff, the reaction of hatred for the sight of him and his attempts to win her over; this has always bothered my daughter. I could not get her to come back to the room to finish the film, until Karloff pulls the conveniently optional explosive lever, bringing down the towering castle high on the hill, perched at such a sight it serves as a reminder of what was produced by it: the Monster that caused havoc to the name of Frankenstein and those in the village below left to pick up the pieces. Each accompanying sequel (starting with Son of Frankenstein) were developed specifically to frown upon the name of Frankenstein and the results of the experiments that left behind terror and historical recognition of the violence caused (whether accidental or incidental) by the scientist’s creation. I was curious if there was some detail on the murders of Frieda and the Neumanns, as I never felt the Monster had anything to do with them. It appears Karl (Frye, one of two threatened by Pretorius if they don’t help him dig up graves and collect body parts) was the one responsible. But it is indeed a loose thread never quite elaborated with any real detail. It always bugged and fascinated me. I still consider the first my favorite, although that changes all the time with each viewing of both films. Una O’Conner is often the reason for that. Her hysterics, although so over the top I can’t help but laugh at them, can be a bit too much. Whale loves her, too. She’s always the busybody, investigating matters and butting in where not wanted. The burgomaster sure has his hands full with her always criticizing or offering her opinions about any given situation involving the Monster. But, again, it can’t be stated enough, a lot of the problems that result from the Monster derive from Fritz and the torch (and not long after, the whip). Fritz (in Frankenstein, not his Karl in Bride) can’t help himself. He just can’t get enough of watching the Monster fear the burning torch, seeing him in terror of the flame. Fritz’s death is certainly a harrowing aftermath of his sadism, but Dr. Waldman’s (Van Sloan) strangling before he can take apart the Monster often doesn’t get as much notice. Both are overshadowed by the drowned girl, though. But Pretorius’s joy of a crypt—before Karloff discovers a young woman’s body he would love to befriend, as his two murderers/helpers move on (questioning if the gallows would be better for them)—gets the honors as the most memorable moment of tonight’s dual viewings. His sheer delight in the atmosphere, his drink and meal, the skull and crossbones, all the Gothic particulars and Pretorius’ relish in them, and the Monster keeping him company—Pretorius isn’t even concerned about his emergence—just did it for me this evening. Can’t not enjoy these two movies: and there is always something I take from one or the other that is residue during the month.
Frankenstein (1931) * * * * *
Bride of Frankenstein (1935) * * * * *
Frankenstein (1931) * * * * *
Bride of Frankenstein (1935) * * * * *
---------------------------------
10/7
Just a brief sort of addition to my thoughts in the past in regards to Sunday's early evening viewing of a Universal favorite of mine, The Mummy (1932), I can't help but just have a surge of adrenaline when Van Sloan's authority of Ancient Egypt (and dead serious in his respect to treating their religion with utmost regard), Dr. Muller, confronts Karloff's Imhotep (discovering his name isn't Ardeth Bey as told previously) and proclaims with great sincerity and conviction:
10/7
Just a brief sort of addition to my thoughts in the past in regards to Sunday's early evening viewing of a Universal favorite of mine, The Mummy (1932), I can't help but just have a surge of adrenaline when Van Sloan's authority of Ancient Egypt (and dead serious in his respect to treating their religion with utmost regard), Dr. Muller, confronts Karloff's Imhotep (discovering his name isn't Ardeth Bey as told previously) and proclaims with great sincerity and conviction:
If I could get my hands on you, I’d break your dried flesh to pieces. But your power is too strong.
I just absolutely dig how Van Sloan delivers this. Yes, it is like Van Helsing going face to face with Dracula, but just Van Sloan sharing opposition with not only Lugosi but also Karloff...how could this horror fan of the golden age of Universal not just jive to that???
Yes, Pierce gets credit for his Wolf Man and Frankenstein's Monster, but my heart swoons for the mummy wraps and crusty visage on Karloff. And Karloff's piercing eyes right at us...this film might be a bit on the dull side for certain fans--a critique I've read in the past--but Karloff's casting is essential (and Pierce's work, of course) to my enjoyment of it. The Egypt flashback with the set design and props, might suffer from scrutinizing eyes, but I find it all irresistible.
The Mummy (1932) * * * * *
Comments
Post a Comment