THE CURSE OF THE WEREWOLF (1961)
Article #519 by Dave Sindelar
Viewing date: 8-16-2002
Posting date: 1-9-2003

A woman who was raped by a mad beggar gives birth to a boy who turns out to be a werewolf.

The first time I saw this Hammer take on lycanthropy I felt the movie spent far too much time on backstory; this time around, I changed my mind. The backstory is, in fact, the most interesting part of the movie; it’s quite fascinating to follow all the events that actually lead up to the more standard werewolfery in the second half of the movie. And since one of the problems I regularly have with Hammer films is that they usually have more running time than story, the time spent on backstory on this one actually fills out the time very well. The fact that the curse is passed on in a very novel way also makes the movie quite interesting, and I do think this is one of Hammer’s best horror movies, filled with memorable character parts (including Richard Wordsworth, the tormented astronaut of THE QUATERMASS XPERIMENT as the beggar) and good performances. I’m not particularly fond of Oliver Reed here, as I do feel he’s a little over the top on occasion, but there’s no doubt he brings the required intensity to the role.

THE CURSE OF FRANKENSTEIN (1957)
Article #518 by Dave Sindelar
Viewing date: 8-15-2002
Posting date: 1-8-2003

Frankenstein constructs a creature and brings it to life, but has trouble keeping it under control.

This was the movie that kicked off Hammer’s new style of horror, with more blood and sex and in color. It established the horror careers of all involved, including Terence Fisher, Peter Cushing, and Christopher Lee. Despite it’s reputation as a classic, I never quite feel satisfied with it; I always feel like I’ve been served what looks like a sumptuous feast but ends up leaving me hungry for something, and I’m never quite sure what is missing. I think it might be that I never emerge from having watched the movie with a sense that it had anything really interesting to say other than that they’ve added color, blood and sex to the mix. Maybe I’m expecting too much, but I would like to be able to quote at least one memorable bit of dialogue from the movie; as it is, the thing that I remember most, other than the great moment when Christopher Lee removes his bandages, is how annoyed I am with the Robert Urquhart character; he seems to only exist to make perpetual pronouncements on how evil Frankenstein’s work is, and a number of times he appears in a scene for no other reason than so he can make those pronouncements; he is a truly tiresome and repetitive character, and practically ruins the movie for me. It’s not so much a problem with his performance; he does the best that he can with it, as do Cushing and Lee in their roles, but I really wish more work had been put into the dialogue.

THE CREEPING TERROR (1964)
Article #517 by Dave Sindelar
Viewing date: 8-14-2002
Posting date: 1-7-2003

Strange creatures from outer space terrorize Lake Tahoe.

There are actually a couple of decent and novel ideas in this story, though they don’t appear until near the end; specifically, I like the nature of the creatures and what their mission is on this planet. I also kind of like the way it ends without a total victory on either side. Unfortunately, this is one of the most unwatchably incompetent movies around, with its poor acting (what you can make of it, anyway), awful direction, and its notorious soundtrack problems. For those of you not familiar with the latter, the vocal soundtrack for this movie was lost, and to compensate for this, endless narration was employed to compensate for this problem, and it is a very poor substitute. Not that the movie would improve immeasurably with its original soundtrack; it would still be a pretty bad movie, even though certain sequences would gain quite a bit, particular a sequence near the end which actually has the potential to be exciting. Mostly, it’s a series of monster attacks, and though the monster is interesting in concept, it is badly constructed and so slow-moving (“creeping” is the accurate word in the title) that these scenes are endless and unbelievable, as it requires people to sit there screaming in place for several moments in order for the monster to have any chance to catch them. It’s not my choice for the worst movie I’ve ever seen, but it’s definitely in the running.

THE CREATION OF THE HUMANOIDS (1962)
Article #516 by Dave Sindelar
Viewing date: 8-13-2002
Posting date: 1-6-2003

This is a portrayal of a post-apocalyptic society in which a decimated and no-longer-fruitful human population must contend with the rise of humanoid robots, derogatorily referred to as “clickers.”

This was Andy Warhol’s favorite movie, and though I can’t pretend to know what was going through his mind, I think I see why it might have been. There aren’t very many familiar names in the credits, but I recognize make-up artist Jack Pierce, Don Megowan (who played the Gill Man in his last incarnation in THE CREATURE WALKS AMONG US) and Dudley Manlove, who played Eros in PLAN 9 FROM OUTER SPACE. There are a wealth of different ways to look at this movie; it is stiff, badly shot and acted, almost devoid of action, talky and endless, and many people consider it awful. However, the talk is fascinating and is cram-packed with ideas, something you’re much more likely to find on the literary end of science fiction rather than the cinematic end. I’ve heard that the plot may have been lifted from Karel Capek’s play “R.U.R.”, the work where the word “robot” was used for the first time, and I hope to be able to read the play sometime to find out if the movie lifts its ideas from this work as well. I find the movie fascinating when I’m in the right frame of mind, but it can also definitely be a hard, frustrating slog. it also has a final line that is either absolutely fascinating or pointlessly gimmicky, depending on your outlook; I love it, as it seems to imply that the whole movie was an educational historical reenactment being shown to students in a future school, many of which were badly acted and poorly shot to begin with, so it might give an explanation as to why the movie is the way it is.

P.S. I have had a chance to scan a script of “R.U.R.” since I wrote this review, and as far as I can tell, the story in that play is totally different from this movie.

THE COSMIC MONSTERS (1957)
(a.k.a. THE STRANGE WORLD OF PLANET X)
Article #514 by Dave Sindelar
Viewing date: 8-11-2002
Posting date: 1-4-2003

A scientist experimenting with metals and magnetic fields ends up creating environmental problems with his work.

A casual reader might look at the titles and think the movie is about monsters from outer space, and though outer space does play a role in the proceedings, he’d be wrong. This movie was, like it’s theatrical companion piece THE CRAWLING EYE, modeled after the Quatermass movies; though none of the movies that took this approach ever actually equalled their models, it did make the movies much more interesting than they could have been. In this case, the science is interesting enough to keep the story moving along until the monsters show up (it is at least partly a big bug movie), and even after that, it doesn’t throw out everything it set up in the first half for the sole purpose of concentrating on thrills. And even though the direction is very dull at times, the story and the fairly decent performances from all concerned do keep the viewer’s attention. Not a great movie, but a mildly diverting one for all that.

THE COMEDY OF TERRORS (1964)
Article #513 by Dave Sindelar
Viewing date: 8-10-2002
Posting date: 1-3-2003

An undertaker supplements his income by proactively creating his own clients.

This horror comedy borrows more than just its title from Shakespeare; in fact, the whole script is written in blank verse, a somewhat audacious conceit in the twentieth century, much less in the script for a horror comedy. Even if you aren’t very familiar with blank verse, you might be able to notice a lilt to the dialogue that is like nothing else you’ve heard before in this type of movie. Vincent Price and Basil Rathbone seem to be particularly at home with this, plus Rathbone gets to quote endlessly from “MacBeth” throughout the movie. Aside from that, this fun horror comedy reunites Price, Peter Lorre, and Boris Karloff from THE RAVEN; Price and Lorre have the major roles, while Karloff has been consigned to a smaller role, that of Joyce Jameson’s decrepit father; however, as small roles go, this one is choice, and Karloff steals practically every scene he’s in, particularly during his eulogy, which may be Karloff’s finest moment of comic acting. Richard Matheson deserves kudos for the script, and Jacque Tourneur’s fine direction is also an asset. The movie also features a cameo by former comedy star Joe E. Brown, who also has had a little experience with Shakespeare; he appeared in the 1935 movie version of “A Midsummer Night’s Dream”.