Dracula AD 1972 - A Review

 

It's nearly Halloween folks 'n' fiends, and what better time to revive this unholy corpse of a blog, than with a review of a campy underrated classic that has a reputation it simply doesn't deserve. It's a film very close to my blackened heart, simply because it's so much fun. Cancel the fish and chips: We're having stake tonight.

 

 

 

'AD 1972' is brilliant from the off, with a fantastic final battle between Laurence Van Helsing and Count Dracula back in the 1800's, which results in both of their deaths. It's a swift, action-packed, and VERY familiar scene that recalls the grand finales of pretty much every Hammer vampire flick before this one.

       However, director Alan Gibson then neatly pulls the rug from under the feet of the audience, with a shot of a loud aeroplane zooming through the sky, to the accompaniment of some 'modern' 70s disco music. It's so unusual to see buses and shopping centres in a Hammer vampire film, and Gibson delights in emphasising this change of scenery. Brilliant!

 

 

As director, Gibson makes the most of every scene. Dracula's return from the grave (all smoke and rising mud) is excellently executed, and the moment in the church where the teenagers are under the spell of 'Alucard' is strangely erotic. Particularly the part when Caroline Munro has a goblet of blood poured over her chest...

       In short, the swift and tight direction helps to sell this Hammer film (made at a time when the company was struggling) as something fresh and vibrant. And it works.

 

 

Plotwise, the script is barmy and OTT, just like a Hammer film should be. It involves Dracula (Christopher Lee) being revived by one Johnny 'Alucard' (get it), to wreak havoc and revenge on Laurence Van Helsing, namely his son Lorrimer (Peter Cushing) and his glamorous daughter Jessica (Stephanie Beacham). In between all this, Cushing manages to persuade a pair of policemen that vampires are real, and it's his duty as a descendent of Van Helsing to rid the world of their evil. Let's face it, the film involves vampires, blood, heaving cleavage and lavish scenery. The plot is just a bonus!

 

Gibson's direction aside, the 'AD 1972's big selling point is the cast. Peter Cushing, as Lorrimer (the first time he has played a Van Helsing since 1960's Brides of Dracula') is sublime. He has charisma, a gentle charm, and yet a ferocity when fighting Alucard and Dracula. It's such a melancholy, dignified performance, and is one of the big selling points of the film.

       Christopher Lee, too, is brilliant. It's no secret he became increasingly fed-up with the later Hammer Dracula movies, but here, he is commanding and sinister, a genuine threat with decent (if infrequent) dialogue to deliver. It's the first film since the original 1958 edition that Lee & Cushing played Dracula and Van Helsing in the same picture, and the chemistry between the two is electric.

       The rest of the cast are great too. Stephanie Beacham is splendid as Jessica, a typical upper-class young lady with that harmless rebellious streak a lot of the more sensible teens have. She gives a witty and fairly amusing performance, in a role that could have been rather wet.

        As Johnny Alucard, Christopher Neame simply eats the scenery. He's a perverse, twisted creation - almost pathetic really. A power-mad psychopath with hopes of grandeur. Dracula only puts up with him because he's useful. Another strong perfomance.

       Then there's Caroline Munro, Hammer semi-regular. She's killed-off pretty quickly but she gives an energetic performance and shows the required amount of cleavage throughout her brief stint.

 

The movie heads to a gripping climax, accompanied by the jazzy soundtrack courtesy of Manfred Mann, albeit with an admittedly old-school setting. Even in 1972, Hammer can't seem to shake off the deserted churches and desolate graveyards. But let's be honest, we love them for it, don't we?

All in all, 'Dracula AD 1972' is a campy classic. It's scary, fun, and very silly, with big performances, bigger setpieces, and a funky soundtrack, brought together by some very tight direction from Gibson. Turn your nose up at it if you must, but we all need a bit of fun in our horror films sometimes, don't we?

RECOMMENDED!

 

 

House of Dracula (1945) - A Review

The ‘House of Dracula’ is yet another of the Universal sequels, with familiar monsters, convoluted mad Doctor plotlines and clichés galore. But it’s also rather good…

Dracula (John Carradine, in a chilling, dignified performance), has decided he wants to be cured of his vampirism and evil-ness, seeking out kindly Doctor Franz Edelmann (Onslow Stevens) to aid him. Of course, Dracula is lying (the fiend!), using the ploy to get close to the Doctor’s daughter, the sumptuous Milizia (Martha O’Driscoll). In a series of insane events, however, the plot spirals out of control, as Lawrence Talbot turns up wanting to be cured of his lycanthropy (and Lon Chaney, Jr. gives yet another fantastic performance as the haunted Wolfman), Frankenstein’s monster is found buried in the sand, and Dracula possesses Dr. Franz via his bloodstream!

This film offers nothing especially new to the Universal horror table, and many of the clichés and settings are much the same as in previous sequels ‘House of Frankenstein’ and ‘The Ghost of Frankenstein’. It is, however, wonderfully enjoyable, and gorgeously directed by Erle C. Kenton.

We get to see Dracula actually transform into a bat before our very eyes (a big thing for audiences at the time), and Dr. Franz go from a force for good, to Mr. Hyde-esque vulgarity. Yes, Frankenstein’s monster (played by Glenn Strange, who made the part his own in three movies) is tacked on and used at the end just to bring the house down (literally), but his inclusion adds to the fun. The shot of him buried in the sand is also suitably chilling.

Lon Chaney, Jr. is splendid as Talbot. Indeed, being the only actor to have played the Wolfman and his human counterpart in all the original Universal films, you get the sense that Chaney understood his character. Unlike the lumbering monster, or the cold evil of Dracula, Chaney gives Talbot real emotional depth, and the scenes in this film with Talbot in human form are far more interesting than when he becomes the Wolfman. It’s a joy at the end, to learn that he has finally been cured of his lycanthropy.

As a Bela Lugosi fan, it’s always a sorry point to look at how his career declined, and a sad fact that he never reprised Dracula on screen (in a horror film, at least). Carradine, however, is simply excellent. Rather than imitating Lugosi, he makes the role his own, taking explicit inspiration from the original Bram Stoker novel. He manages to be both suave and malicious, devious and sadistic. It’s all there. It is, however, a surprise that his character is killed off so soon, considering the film bares his name. It’s Dr. Franz who takes over as chief villain, possessed by Dracula and essentially becoming a Mr. Hyde subtitute.

One ‘monster’ in the film who is not evil at all, is the lovely Nina (Jane Adams). A beautiful, intelligent lady, Nina is also a hunchback, and the use of such an attractive lady to play the part of somebody with a disfigurement really adds character and depth to the film. It’s a masterstroke, and Jane Adams does the role justice.

‘House of Dracula’ is a great popcorn flick. Action, suspense, characters with depth, the usual lush settings of towers and caverns, and four super monsters duking it out…all packed into a mere 65 minutes. 

A must-see for any horror fan!

The Ghost of Frankenstein (1942) - A Review

 

 'The Ghost of Frankenstein' is the fourth in the long line of horror movies based upon Mary Shelley's creation, and is the first NOT to feature Boris Karloff as the monster. However, the film does assemble a stellar line-up of Universal favourites, including Lionel Atwill, Bela Lugosi, and Lon Chaney, Jr as the Monster.

The movie involves Frankenstein's monster once again being reawakened from his sulphurous tomb, and, led by Ygor (in a wonderfully perverse portrayal from Lugosi), sets off to find the son of his creator (the previous film was actually called 'Son of Frankenstein', and the Frankenstein in 'Ghost...' is the brother of the other son). Before long, this other Dr. Frankenstein (played by Sir Cedric Hardwicke) plans to replace the diseased brain of the Monster with the brain of a good person, curing the creature of its' evil. But Ygor, and the mislead Dr. Bohmer (Lionel Atwill) have other plans....

Unlike the previous three films, the plot here is decidely sillier and less important, and would set the scene for pretty much every sequel afterward. Mad scientists, incomprehensible science, and dead characters returning from the grave in ever more convoluted ways would become the standard. What  matters here is less what happens, and more, how it happens. 

Right from the off, the audience is drawn in to the so-called 'Curse of Frankenstein', with the ending of the previous movie explained away, and the return of the Monster from its' sulpher tomb dealt with just minutes after the opening credits. The angry mob, carrying their flaming torches and raiding a ruined castle to rid it of the evil within, has now become a staple of those old Universal films, and a cliche. It's a short-hand way of setting the scene and stirring up the action, and it is highly effective, if rather unoriginal. 

        Indeed, this film feels like a 'best of' of the Frankenstein films, with little in the way of totally fresh ideas. The Monster becoming friends with a little girl, for instance, is very similar to the 'flowers in the pond' sequence in the original, although there is no disturbing child death here. Saying that, the friendship between the Monster and the little girl (in a wonderful and honest performance by Janet Ann Gallow) is a beautiful sight to behold, and their initial meeting in the movie is one of the films' strongest moments.

Performance-wise, 'The Ghost of Frankenstein' is excellent. Bela Lugosi brings delightful menace to the character of Ygor, without going over the top. Seeing him play that peculiar horn in order to lure the Monster toward him is strangely fascinating, and his delivery of such poetic lines as, "Your father was Frankenstein, but your mother was the lightning!" is absolutely spot-on. 

        Indeed, despite the unoriginality of the plot, and the out-and-out lunacy of the brain-transplant idea (which comes to a head when Ygor has his brain put inside the Monster, so he can have a stronger body with which to rule the world!), Scott Darling and Eric Taylor conjured some gorgeous lines of dialogue in order to create a truly fantastical world, and it's something rarely seen in horror movies today.

        As Ludwig Frankenstein, Sir Cedric Hardwicke is believable, mislead, and not at all as villanous as one might expect. He brings a dignity to the role, and a fallibility that allows the audience to sympathise with him. Frankenstein's motives here are totally good, to rid the Monster of its' evil, and Hardwicke emphasizes this with his performance.

       Lionel Atwill, as the mislead Doctor Bohmer, is also believable, to a point. Once Ygor tells him that he has to put Ygor's brain into the Monsters body so he can rule all (without Frankenstein knowing, of course), you do have to wonder what Bohmer was thinking, going along with idea! But Atwill brings a nice edge to the character, and he also has a tremendous death scene as well, which is a nice plus.

         As the 'good guys' of the film, both Ralph Bellamy (as town prosector Erik), and Evelyn Ankers (as Frankenstein's Daughter, Elsa), have little depth or much in the way of memorable dialogue. The film favours the villains, and so Erik is the do-gooder who saves the day, and Elsa Frankenstein just has to act anxious a lot, scream when she has to, and look good doing it (and miss Ankers is utterly stunning - it's very hard to take your eyes off her!). They fulfill a specific role, and that's all that can be said, really.

        Lon Chaney, Jr, best known for playing the Wolfman, must have had the most difficult job. Boris Karloff had made the monster his own in three excellent movies, and yet, Chaney, Jr. takes on the role with gusto. Yes, he is perhaps the most miserable-looking of all the Monsters (which is no mean feat!), but he brings a touch of depth to the creature, particularly in the scenes with the little girl. He doesn't merely lumber around and roar, there's a subtle touch of substance that helps the audience relate to him. Lon Chaney, Jr. perhaps wasn't quite as good as Karloff in this particular role, but he does his best, and it's hard not to feel sorry for him when the angry civilians attack him (on more than one occasion!).

The climax of the film, all electric shocks and explosions, is very good, sharply directed by Erle C. Kenton, and not anywhere near as rushed as the endings of some later sequels. The production values in 'Ghost...' were not as great as the previous three installments', but Kenton, and producer George Waggner, ensured that they did the best with the resources they had at the time, and their ingenuity shines through.

All in all, 'The Ghost of Frankenstein' is the movie where things started to get silly. The depth and originality of the earlier films was discarded in place of audience-pleasing cliches and over-the-top mad scientist plots. But it is still a wonderful film. At times chilling, at times beautiful, poetic, funny, haunting, and lots and lots of fun, 'The Ghost of Frankenstein' is still a gem, with a top-rate cast and decent production values. If you fancy a slice of old-school horror, but want it with added popcorn-lunacy, this is the film for you. Indeed, it's a testament to the how good the film is, that horror-punkers The Misfits wrote a song about it last year. 'The Ghost of Frankenstein' lives on!

                                                  THE MISFITS: THE GHOST OF FRANKENSTEIN

'Living Dead Girl' (1982) - A Review

'The Living Dead Girl', or 'La Mort Vivante', is a French film by Jean Rollin, about a reanimated corpse who returns to her old house, and finds her living childhood friend, Hélène. Catherine Valmont is the corpse in question, and is played with a  sort of innocent menace by Marina Pierro. In fact, all of the performances in this film are strong, and uniformly subtle. The problem is, they're also rather subdued, and along with the beautiful but quaint direction, the film feels a bit lacksture.

Scipt-wise, too, the movie is a bit of an odd combination. Moments of extreme (if fake-looking) gore, and harsh violence, are counterbalanced by a sort of ghost-story quality that wouldn't seem out of place in a Sunday afternoon drama. It's also very slow. The first hour essentially involves Catherine wandering around, occassionally killing people, sometimes switching to a pair of holidaying Americans (for their scenes, the language is English with no subtitles), Barbara and Greg, who do inject some humour to the otherwise lazy pace of the movie. 

Despite these criticisms, though, 'The Living Dead Girl' is a fun curiosity. Marina Pierro is fantastic as Catherine, and looks bloody good naked and blood-spattered. There's also some lovely location work, and a few delightfully gory moments to chortle at. 'The Living Dead Girl' is not a perfect movie, but it's an entertaining if slow romp. Recommended for fans of cult, Foreign horror flicks, or zombie films with a difference.

	Directed by Jean Rollin Produced by Sam Selsky Written by Jacques Ralf Jean Rollin Starring Marina Pierro Françoise Blanchard Mike Marshall Carina Barone Fanny Magieri Patricia Besnard-Rousseau Veronique Pinson Sandrine Morel Delphine Laporte Jean Cherlian Jean-Pierre Bouyxou Music by Philippe D'Arm Editing by Janette Kronegger Distributed by Films A.B.C. Films Aleriaz Films du Yaka Release date(s) 1982 Running time 86 mins Country  France Language French English