Dr Jekyll & Sister Hyde is one of my favourite Hammer horrors, and I am now kicking myself that it took me THIS long to finally see it. For some reason, I just kept putting it off and putting it off, despite the fact that I'm a fan of the two leads.
Anyway, now that I have seen it I can try to nudge other people towards giving it a watch. I think that most Hammer fans will get a kick out of it, even if you don't share my exact tastes and it doesn't become an immediate favourite (but, y'know, it really should).
The story, as if you can't guess from the title, concerns Dr. Jekyll (Ralph Bates) and a variation on the classic tale of his identity crisis, with a mixture that he creates turning him into his sister, Hyde (Martine Beswick). There's a lovely young woman named Susan (Susan Brodrick) who takes a shine to the doctor, while her brother (Howard, played by Lewis Fiander) ends up quite taken with the dangerous Hyde. As Dr. Jekyll finds that he needs more of the fresh, special ingredient for his elixir it's not long until more and more people start turning up dead.
Written by Brian Clemens, this takes the original tale by Robert Louis Stevenson and mixes in a number of other historical facts and fictions (Burke & Hare, Jack The Ripper) to create a thoroughly entertaining slice of Hammer horror, with an extra serving of delicious perversity at its core.
The direction by Roy Ward Baker is solid, but it's hard to think of anyone going too far wrong with the fun premise and the wonderful leads. I've always liked Bates, and thought him the best of the younger stars that Hammer used in a number of their horror movies, and he does his usual great work here, being effortlessly charming and easy to root for, even as the situation worsens. Beswick is one of the more memorable beautiful ladies that the studio made, deservedly, into star material, and fans will be grinning when they see her unabashed turn here. And the fact that you CAN believe that the two could spring from the same genes helps immensely.
Brodrick and Fiander aren't quite as good, but that's why they're in supporting roles, I guess. Gerald Sim is just fine as Professor Robertson, a friend of Dr. Jekyll, and Ivor Dean and Tony Calvin are suitably repellent as the opportunistic body stealers Burke and Hare.
With some wonderful set-pieces, production values in line with the top end of the Hammer range, a witty and pretty clever script, and just a whole lot of fun fun fun, this is one that I highly recommend.
9/10
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Dr-Jekyll-Sister-Hyde-DVD/dp/B0039LAPSE/ref=sr_1_1?s=dvd&ie=UTF8&qid=1391775908&sr=1-1&keywords=dr+jekyll+and+sister+hyde
Showing posts with label ralph bates. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ralph bates. Show all posts
Tuesday, 11 February 2014
Monday, 5 August 2013
Fear In The Night (1972)
A psychological thriller by Jimmy Sangster, Fear In The Night is yet another in the long line of Hammer movies often overlooked by fans of their horror movies featuring the archetypes of the genre. I was looking forward to seeing this one, not
expecting anything great as I had heard nothing about it beforehand, but
I was definitely intrigued.
The plot sees young Peggy (Judy Geeson), recently recovered from a nervous breakdown, joining her husband (Ralph Bates) on the grounds of the school where he works. The school is presided over by Michael Carmichael (the ever-watchable Peter Cushing), who stays there with his wife (Joan Collins). As fragile as she is, Peggy is made even worse when attacked by a mystery assailant. And the worst thing is that nobody will believe her, simply putting it down to recovering, shaky nerves.
While it's not a very remarkable entry into the psychological thriller subgenre, this movie does a number of things quite well. Geeson gives a decent performance as the young, nervous, often child-like, wife. Bates is solid and Collins is pretty good. Cushing is, it goes without saying, great. Before the twists and turns start to occur the pacing of the film also works just fine, drawing you into a mysterious atmosphere of unease and doubt while flagging up some, admittedly easy to spot, future plot developments.
It's also surprisingly bleak in places, rather nihilistic and hopeless for a Hammer movie - another point worth noting and another aspect that impresses when weighed against many other films released by the studio.
Sangster is a better writer (he co-wrote this screenplay with Michael Syson) than he is director, from what I have seen of his work, but he's capable enough and frames his material adequately, if nothing else. Fear In The Night ends up as a movie worth seeing, though perhaps not worth seeking out ahead of many other psychological thrillers you could give your time to.
6/10
http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Ultimate-Hammer-Collection-Disc/dp/B000HN31KQ/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1375707468&sr=8-1&keywords=hammer+box+set
The plot sees young Peggy (Judy Geeson), recently recovered from a nervous breakdown, joining her husband (Ralph Bates) on the grounds of the school where he works. The school is presided over by Michael Carmichael (the ever-watchable Peter Cushing), who stays there with his wife (Joan Collins). As fragile as she is, Peggy is made even worse when attacked by a mystery assailant. And the worst thing is that nobody will believe her, simply putting it down to recovering, shaky nerves.
While it's not a very remarkable entry into the psychological thriller subgenre, this movie does a number of things quite well. Geeson gives a decent performance as the young, nervous, often child-like, wife. Bates is solid and Collins is pretty good. Cushing is, it goes without saying, great. Before the twists and turns start to occur the pacing of the film also works just fine, drawing you into a mysterious atmosphere of unease and doubt while flagging up some, admittedly easy to spot, future plot developments.
It's also surprisingly bleak in places, rather nihilistic and hopeless for a Hammer movie - another point worth noting and another aspect that impresses when weighed against many other films released by the studio.
Sangster is a better writer (he co-wrote this screenplay with Michael Syson) than he is director, from what I have seen of his work, but he's capable enough and frames his material adequately, if nothing else. Fear In The Night ends up as a movie worth seeing, though perhaps not worth seeking out ahead of many other psychological thrillers you could give your time to.
6/10
http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Ultimate-Hammer-Collection-Disc/dp/B000HN31KQ/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1375707468&sr=8-1&keywords=hammer+box+set
Labels:
fear in the night,
hammer,
jimmy sangster,
joan collins,
judy geeson,
michael syson,
peter cushing,
ralph bates,
thriller
Wednesday, 26 June 2013
Lust For A Vampire (1971)
Ahhhhhhhhh Yutte Stensgaard. Lovely, lovely Yutte Stensgaard.
A Hammer vampire movie directed by Jimmy Sangster, and written by Tudor Gates (is that name real? I'm not sure, but I'll assume that it is), let me get through this proper bit of the review as quickly as possible before getting to the main reason I love this movie and rate it so highly. Though you might have already guessed what, or who, that main reason is.
Lust For A Vampire is not the best Hammer movie, not by a long shot. The tale, all about an infernal clan who can avoid death and then feed off the blood of the living, is nothing unique. Young women wander around at the wrong time, and/or in the wrong place, and start to turn up dead and rather pale. The setting (an all-girl school) is enjoyable enough for male viewers and the cast, for its time, even throws in something to keep the ladies happy in the form of dapper Michael Johnson. Others appearing include Ralph Bates, Barbara Jefford, Helen Christie and the very pretty Suzanna Leigh.
But they are not the reason for me wanting to see this movie for years and years. Oh no, not at all. That dubious honour belongs to the one and only Yutte Stensgaard. A woman so beautiful that I pined for her long before my young mind knew quite what I was pining for (having only seen her in pictures - in The Dark Side Magazine, my only real source of all things horror when I was about 15 years old - and never managing to have caught her on screen). Her acting skills are quite bad, and she doesn't have much in the way of actual personality, but Yutte remains one of the loveliest women I have ever lusted after in movie form and is absolutely the right choice for a film with this title. Beauty may be in the eye of the beholder, but it's my eye and my decision to rate this particular Hammer horror a 7/10 based on little more than my enjoyment of the woman I have been smitten with for many, many years.
7/10
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Vampire-Lovers-Lust-For-DVD/dp/B001AOHQ0M/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1370433547&sr=8-1&keywords=lust+for+a+vampire
| Aaaahhhh Yutte. Yutte, Yutte, Yutte. |
A Hammer vampire movie directed by Jimmy Sangster, and written by Tudor Gates (is that name real? I'm not sure, but I'll assume that it is), let me get through this proper bit of the review as quickly as possible before getting to the main reason I love this movie and rate it so highly. Though you might have already guessed what, or who, that main reason is.
Lust For A Vampire is not the best Hammer movie, not by a long shot. The tale, all about an infernal clan who can avoid death and then feed off the blood of the living, is nothing unique. Young women wander around at the wrong time, and/or in the wrong place, and start to turn up dead and rather pale. The setting (an all-girl school) is enjoyable enough for male viewers and the cast, for its time, even throws in something to keep the ladies happy in the form of dapper Michael Johnson. Others appearing include Ralph Bates, Barbara Jefford, Helen Christie and the very pretty Suzanna Leigh.
| There ARE other people in this movie, but they're not Yutte Stensgaard. |
But they are not the reason for me wanting to see this movie for years and years. Oh no, not at all. That dubious honour belongs to the one and only Yutte Stensgaard. A woman so beautiful that I pined for her long before my young mind knew quite what I was pining for (having only seen her in pictures - in The Dark Side Magazine, my only real source of all things horror when I was about 15 years old - and never managing to have caught her on screen). Her acting skills are quite bad, and she doesn't have much in the way of actual personality, but Yutte remains one of the loveliest women I have ever lusted after in movie form and is absolutely the right choice for a film with this title. Beauty may be in the eye of the beholder, but it's my eye and my decision to rate this particular Hammer horror a 7/10 based on little more than my enjoyment of the woman I have been smitten with for many, many years.
7/10
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Vampire-Lovers-Lust-For-DVD/dp/B001AOHQ0M/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1370433547&sr=8-1&keywords=lust+for+a+vampire
| Room for one more picture of Yutte? Of course there is. |
Thursday, 21 February 2013
The Horror Of Frankenstein (1970)
Frankenstein for a new generation. This movie doesn't have any of the
elderly Hammer stalwarts (and they're sorely missed) but it does have
an energy to it and a lot of positives thanks to a witty script and a
great central performance from Ralph Bates. He may be no Cushing but he
gives an enjoyable, youthful take on Victor Frankenstein and carries
the film through some of its lean patches.
Directed by Jimmy Sangster (who also co-wrote the film with Jeremy Burnham), this movie may upset the purists but it's hard to see how anyone can come to hate it. Yes, it's essentially a rehash of The Curse Of Frankenstein but that's not the worst cinematic crime in the world. Young Victor upsets a number of people, from his father to his lecturers, as he grows from a boy into a man obsessed with the idea of bringing the dead back to life.
The pacing is brisk, the acting is all enjoyable (highlights = Kate O'Mara playing a great, lusty housekeeper, Dennis Price as a professional graverobber and Veronica Carlson as the fragile beauty this time around) and everything still feels lovingly crafted and unrushed, even if it is aiming for a younger audience.
I felt, as many others surely did, that I would miss many of the more seasoned Hammer stars this time but I actually managed to put them aside and enjoy almost every moment of the movie, a testament to just how many things the movie gets right. The one, big, negative point is the monster itself when it finally appears. Dave Prowse just doesn't cut it as the creature and it's in the moments featuring his lacklustre performance that the movie falters.
I'm sure that I'm not going to change the minds of any die-hard fans here but I liked this film a fair bit and think it deserves a bit more praise than it gets. It maintains a balance between nastiness and dark comedy from the first scene right up to the wonderful punchline just before the end credits roll and, personally, I think it's a much better way to push the character to modern audiences than the approach that was attempted with Dracula A.D. 1972.
Of course, I may be completely wrong (it wouldn't be the first time). Give it a look and see what you think. If you enjoy it then I can put on my smug face for a day, if you hate it then I can go back to hiding behind the false beard and dark glasses.
7/10
Yet another movie available in this bargain boxset - http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Ultimate-Hammer-Collection-Disc/dp/B000HN31KQ/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1354487105&sr=8-1
Directed by Jimmy Sangster (who also co-wrote the film with Jeremy Burnham), this movie may upset the purists but it's hard to see how anyone can come to hate it. Yes, it's essentially a rehash of The Curse Of Frankenstein but that's not the worst cinematic crime in the world. Young Victor upsets a number of people, from his father to his lecturers, as he grows from a boy into a man obsessed with the idea of bringing the dead back to life.
The pacing is brisk, the acting is all enjoyable (highlights = Kate O'Mara playing a great, lusty housekeeper, Dennis Price as a professional graverobber and Veronica Carlson as the fragile beauty this time around) and everything still feels lovingly crafted and unrushed, even if it is aiming for a younger audience.
I felt, as many others surely did, that I would miss many of the more seasoned Hammer stars this time but I actually managed to put them aside and enjoy almost every moment of the movie, a testament to just how many things the movie gets right. The one, big, negative point is the monster itself when it finally appears. Dave Prowse just doesn't cut it as the creature and it's in the moments featuring his lacklustre performance that the movie falters.
I'm sure that I'm not going to change the minds of any die-hard fans here but I liked this film a fair bit and think it deserves a bit more praise than it gets. It maintains a balance between nastiness and dark comedy from the first scene right up to the wonderful punchline just before the end credits roll and, personally, I think it's a much better way to push the character to modern audiences than the approach that was attempted with Dracula A.D. 1972.
Of course, I may be completely wrong (it wouldn't be the first time). Give it a look and see what you think. If you enjoy it then I can put on my smug face for a day, if you hate it then I can go back to hiding behind the false beard and dark glasses.
7/10
Yet another movie available in this bargain boxset - http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Ultimate-Hammer-Collection-Disc/dp/B000HN31KQ/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1354487105&sr=8-1
Monday, 28 January 2013
Taste The Blood Of Dracula (1970)
Following on nicely from the end of Dracula Has Risen From The Grave, this film starts with a man named Weller (Roy Kinnear) stumbling across a scene in which Dracula is dying. Weller takes some souvenirs away from this grisly tableaux, as you would, and goes on his merry way. Some time later, three men (William Hargood, played by Geoffrey Keen, Samuel Paxton, played by Peter Sallis, and Jonathon Secker, played by John Carson) meet a younger man (Lord Courtley, played by Ralph Bates) who shares their particular interests. All of these men have a fondness for exploring the darker side of life and giving in to their base desires, so when Courtley brings up a plan to buy the items that belonged to Dracula and to use them in an unholy ceremony. Well, that sounds like a jolly good time so the men agree and go along, only to lose courage when it comes to actually finishing the ceremony. They attack Courtley and flee, unaware that Dracula has risen from the dead and now aims to destroy those who would treat his servant so badly.
Peter Sasdy is the director of this one, and Anthony Hinds is the writer, and both men are working a few levels below their best. In fact, it's only the presence of Lee in his most famous role that saves this from being a complete stinker. The rest of the cast aren't bad, they're just not all that memorable either. Roy Kinnear doesn't have a lot of screen-time, and neither does Ralph Bates, so viewers are stuck with Keen, Sallis and Carson as the main characters. Linda Hayden plays the daughter of Geoffrey Keen's character and is, of course, quite lovely, as is Isla Blair (playing Lucy Paxton), but the aforementioned actors, plus Anthony Higgins, all seem pretty interchangeable.
Sadly, even the death scenes aren't that entertaining, although I enjoyed them more this time around than I did during past viewings, and the grand finale is, in my opinion, the absolute worst of any Hammer Dracula film. There's a nice element of seediness running through the whole thing, with both the content that's front and centre and also a few things that are implied, but even that isn't enough to put this above average.
Of course, opinions vary with any movie and even more so with Hammer movies. I've quickly learned that every single instalment in the Dracula, Frankenstein and Mummy series of movies that the studio produced will have one person who rates it as their very best and this film is no exception. There will be one or two people reading this who will absolutely love this film and I will never understand why.
5/10
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Taste-Blood-Dracula-DVD-Christopher/dp/B0001XLY5G/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1353796634&sr=8-1
Peter Sasdy is the director of this one, and Anthony Hinds is the writer, and both men are working a few levels below their best. In fact, it's only the presence of Lee in his most famous role that saves this from being a complete stinker. The rest of the cast aren't bad, they're just not all that memorable either. Roy Kinnear doesn't have a lot of screen-time, and neither does Ralph Bates, so viewers are stuck with Keen, Sallis and Carson as the main characters. Linda Hayden plays the daughter of Geoffrey Keen's character and is, of course, quite lovely, as is Isla Blair (playing Lucy Paxton), but the aforementioned actors, plus Anthony Higgins, all seem pretty interchangeable.
Sadly, even the death scenes aren't that entertaining, although I enjoyed them more this time around than I did during past viewings, and the grand finale is, in my opinion, the absolute worst of any Hammer Dracula film. There's a nice element of seediness running through the whole thing, with both the content that's front and centre and also a few things that are implied, but even that isn't enough to put this above average.
Of course, opinions vary with any movie and even more so with Hammer movies. I've quickly learned that every single instalment in the Dracula, Frankenstein and Mummy series of movies that the studio produced will have one person who rates it as their very best and this film is no exception. There will be one or two people reading this who will absolutely love this film and I will never understand why.
5/10
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Taste-Blood-Dracula-DVD-Christopher/dp/B0001XLY5G/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1353796634&sr=8-1
Labels:
anthony higgins,
christopher lee,
geoffrey keen,
gwen watford,
hammer,
horror,
isla blair,
john carson,
linda hayden,
martin jarvis,
peter sallis,
ralph bates,
roy kinnear,
taste the blood of dracula
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)