Dr. Phibes Rises Again

...as the original. Yes, the design is impressive. Yes, Phibes is nearly as good. The Biederbeck sub-plot (Robert Quarry's best performance by far: check his IMDB credits list to see how many turkeys he's been in) is interesting, and makes him a suitable rival for Phibes. Sort of.

And that's kind of where I'm stuck at. Everything in this movie is "sort of." Biederbeck is "sort of" Phibes' rival, but the two never meet until the end. The movie "sort of" carries on the theme of the original. But without a driving force or motivation of vengeance, or a theme like the Plagues, here it's just a matter of seeing how many nifty ways Phibes can (rather implausibly) knock someone off. And some of those (a raven?) aren't even that interesting.

The humor here is also a lot broader, which wasn't really to my taste, either. Watching Phibes chow down on grapes through his neck hole and almost choking struck me as parodying the character itself, which tends to rob Phibes of much of his menace.

Overall, this sequel is enjoyable, but to me, it ultimately fails to rise to level of its predecessor.

Dr Phibes Rises Again is the sequel to the magnificent 'The Abominable Dr Phibes'. The original film achieved cult classic status through a magnificent performance from Vincent Price as the vengeful doctor of the title, and an over the top, absurd, camp styling that set it apart from most other films in it's field. Both of these ingredients are present for the sequel, but it doesn't succeed like the first one did because there's just something missing. The sequel sees Dr Phibes 'rise again' upon the moon aligning itself in a certain way (or something) and travelling to Egypt to find a river that will grant him and his neither living, nor completely dead beloved, immortality. However, things aren't so simple because the scrolls that lead the way to the river have been stolen and Phibes has a contender; someone that needs to find the river just as much as he does out there in Egypt with him.

What's basically missing from this film is assurance. The first film obviously knew what it wanted to do and so was able to do it and not let anything get in the way; this one is very muddled, and it never completely gives the impression that it knows where it wants to go. Just like the first film, this one delivers some very imaginative and very grisly methods of dispatch for it's lesser characters. However, these death scenes almost appear superfluous to the plot, and appear to only be there to continue what the original started, as Phibes probably could have gotten where he wanted to go without them…but I'm not one to complain about a film that sees a man trapped in a giant gold scorpion while being eaten to death by live ones, and another man killed via a sharp spike shooting out of the telephone, so whether they're needed or not; they're nice. The film also features, like the original did, a lovely camp feeling; but it's never on the same level as it was in 'The Abominable'. Perhaps it's the move to Egypt and the low quality of the set's (as opposed to the grand and lavish ones of the original) what's done it.

As mentioned, Vincent Price returns to take up one of the roles that have helped cement him in the minds of his fans - Dr Phibes himself. This role, frankly, was made for Vincent Price; and he excels at playing it. It can be said that he doesn't do quite as good a job here, but then again; he didn't have as much good stuff to work with. Also making an appearance is fellow horror legend - Peter Cushing. Cushing only actually appears for all of about two minutes, but it's nice to see him nonetheless. Robert Fuest returns to the director's chair, as you'd probably expect; but the most notable performance in the film (other than Price) comes from Peter Jeffrey, in the role of the inept Scotland Yard inspector - Inspector Trout. Jeffrey delivers his lines with impeccable comic timing and steals every scene he's in. I'd even go as far as to say that Jeffrey is just as important a part of these two movies as Vincent Price is.

Overall, this film isn't nearly as good as 'The Abominable Dr Phibes', but fans of the original will find lots to like and despite the fact that it's a lesser film and has many flaws; I love this kind of stuff so it gets a big thumbs up from me.

Years after going into hibernation, Dr. Phibes comes back to life and so has his fashionable female assistant Vulnavia (too bad she has only one other acting credit, "The Great Muppet Caper").

How Vulnavia survived the acid attack from the first film, I have no idea. Anyway, together they travel to Egypt to find the river of life that flows once every 2000 years in order to resurrect Phibes' wife Victoria. Biederbeck, running out of water from the last two thousand years, is racing to get there first. Who will win? Depending on how you look at this, the movie is either awesome or campy or both. I think both. Vincent Price (Dr. Phibes) never fails as a mad scientist and Phibes is a good character to demonstrate this. The supporting cast is also well-picked (with even a cameo from Peter Cushing). And the deaths are particularly cruel -- scorpions, snakes and one of the most painful ways to die you have seen (which involves crushing but you will have to check it out for yourself). Price, good deaths and a smoking hot woman. What more do you want? Well, there's the camp aspect. So many questions are raised here, besides how Vulnavia survived and where she was hiding. How does Phibes survive undetected if his house is torn down? How does he build so many elaborate traps in Egypt? How does he hide the bodies so quickly? And then there's the Clockwork Wizards (his robot friends who play instruments with him as he plays his organ). They are great (and call to mind Argento's "Deep Red") but it seems unlikely they would be able to be transported with such ease.

Oh, and if Phibes needs his special tool to speak, why does he ever disconnect it? It is not like it gets in the way or something, except maybe while sleeping.

You like Vincent Price. You like 1970s horror films from American International Pictures. You will like this film. Some say it's not as solid as the first, other say it's on par. I would suggest seeing the first one first (that makes sense) but there's no reason to avoid this film. It deserved more sequels, but this was not to be.

Just saw the movie on DVD. I have never seen it before and I am glad I found it. Of course this is an almost unnecessary re-working of the first movie but it is great for those like myself who can't get enough of Vincent Price's Phibes.

The British cast is very stiff here and the almost chanting 'Harvard Univeristy drama teacher' voice of American actor Vincent Price (when he is thinking/transmitting to Vulnavia as opposed to the stark tone when he uses his electromechanical speaking apparatus) provides grandeur and menace. This is a very challenging role since the story is badly underwritten (everything just exists and appears, no explanations), the dialog is pompous and overwritten and Price must work with no facial expression (or better: with an absolute minimum). He did that with bravura in the first pic and he only slips during the opening close ups at the organ where his facial muscles move a little too much, but I still accept it.

I must admit that I had some difficulties watching such a low budget movie. First I didn's understand what happened. What? The house is in rubbles, torn apart by the villain who stole the papyrus? When? The house was there just a second ago. I thought it was meant to be some kind of theatrical language I didn't understand. To my embarrassment on second viewing I found out that Price says: 'Let's go upstairs' and the organ, like in the first movie acts as an elevator. I missed the visual explanation.

The shot which shows Phibes and the new Vulnavia (where the heck does the beautiful female servant come from? Is she a ghost? Sure not: the writers couldn't come up with any explanation.

Period) rising into the rubbles clearly is a camera moving downward and there is a pitch black background. I needed to re-learn to listen more to dialog. The visual overload of today is hazardous to these kind of films which of course have worked much better in their time.

I agree with most of the comments that state that the deaths are less imaginative than in the first movie but I like this fact that this sequel was made only two years after the original - the look and feel are similar even if some of the lushness is missing.

I like the two policemen acting as a semi working-class, people with a common sense and humor, counterbalance to the Gothic "Phantom of the Opera style" Phibes. I like the way they have given up trying to catch Phibes and these of course are the two we can identify with, yet there is too little material here and some of the scenes with the policemen look like a family gathering from the first movie and of course as in so many sequels: the acting becomes a little too self aware.

The villain, his hoping-to-be wife and his henchmen are all very dull characters so this is basically a Vincent Price/Peter Jeffrey movie with wasted but welcome guest appearances from Terry-Thomas and Peter Cushing. Both wonderful actors with careers mostly made of making the most of bad material.

The 1970s version of late 1920s British Art Deco (since the Paris-fair that introduced the Art Deco style was held in 1925, I'd say it should be rather early 1930s but the cars look more late 20s in both movies) plus the theatrical, magical, Gothic, deep menace of the price-less (pun not intended) Phibes as only Price could have played makes this very low budget film a little treasure, even if it's basically only for those, like me, who can't get enough of the magical world of the wonderfully abominable Dr. Phibes.

Not as good as the first Phibes movie (The Abominable Dr...) but jolly good fun, so long as you're not expecting a horror movie! This is a comedy! The double act of Peter Jeffrey and John Cater as the bumbling police officers Trout and Waverley are a joy. Vincent Price, himself, often portrayed his characters with tongue firmly in cheek, (witness the AIP Corman series of E A Poe titles) and this is no exception. What I would like to know is what is the obsession with dance band leaders and jazz cornet/trumpeters all about? OK, its set in the 20s, (allegedly!) and the mechanical band look like an old dance band of the time, or is it just another in-joke probably lost on most viewers? I'll explain: Beiderbeck (Bix Beiderbecke - legendary cornettist, who died of drink at 28); Hackett (Bobby Hackett - cornettist often compared to Bix for his lyrical style); Baker (Harold "Shorty" Baker - one-time trumpeter for Duke Ellington. Or even Kenny Baker, English trumpeter of considerable ability); Shavers (Charlie Shavers - highly accomplished trumpeter from the 'swing era'); Stewart (Rex Stewart - cornettist with Duke Ellington during 30s/40s). Get the picture? Then we have two band leaders: Ambrose (English dance band leader from the 30s) and Lombardo (Guy Lombardo, Canadian dance band leader from the 20s and 30s). Obsessive or what? Never mind, I just thought I'd point it out!!!! Its still an enjoyable load of old nonsense all the same. 10 out of 10 for cheekiness, but overall a 7.