Movie review - "Top Secret!" (1984) **** (re-watching)

 Bewildering this wasn't a hit as the jokes are great. Maybe it doesn't have the same heart.  Maybe it lacked cameos. Maybe the central romance isn't as strong. Who knows?

A lot of big props gags.

Movie review - "The Gorgon" (1964) *** (re-watching)

 Solid Hammer entry - Chris Lee in a silly moustache, Peter Cushing looking intent, a lot of screen time to Richard Pasco (one of those actors whose face you'll know without recalling their name, at least that's how it was for me), a flashy part for Barbara Shelley. Satisfying ending with people dying, the use of Greek mythology is fresh for Hammer and makes one wonder why they didn't do it more.

Movie review - "Biggles: Adventures in Time" (1986) *1/2

 So frustrating! The classic movie where the producers lost their nerve along the way and leaned away from its source material when its source material is the best thing about it. There's a genuinely exciting airplane dogfight scene early on and the actor who plays Biggles is ideal.

And you know something? There's no reason why a time travel update couldn't have worked. But they don't lean into that either. Alex Hyde White isn't particularly 1986. They should have committed to that concept - have him as a full on yuppie who is very dependent on technology or something. But there's hardly any time culture clash. I kept forgetting Hyde White was from the future.

And to be frank Hyde White isn't very good. He never seems that involved in what's going on, there seems to be a delay in his reactions to things. In fairness that may be the editing/direction.

Really the Hyde White character should have been female. Then you would have inherent conflict because of the differing attitude towards women from 1917 to 1986 and you could have a romance, and a love triangle with that spy.

In one scene we meet this girl who Biggles had a fling with and a support character goes "oh that's a spy who Biggles fell in love with then she betrayed him and he got upset but now she says she wants to help." I want to see that movie!

It's confusing. The jumping between time feels random. A simple story is needlessly made confusing. I'd love to know what the proposed pre-Terminator script was like.

Movie review - "Blood from the Mummy's Tomb" (1971) **1/2 (re-watching)

I've seen this a few times and it never makes sense even though surely the basic story is simple. Christopher Wicking never did like writing uncomplicated screenplays and Seth Holt's death during filming wouldn't have helped. Some of it is silly such as the convincing flashbacks to ye olde Egypt and there's little chemistry between Andrew Keir and Valerie Leon - Cushing (the original choice) would've been far better.

And yet... the film has as certain magic about it. The circumstances of its production of course, but also the bewitching Valerie Leon, all curves and flashing eyelashes - Hammer should have given her another lead, like Ingrid Pitt she was a star. Keir is professional and actors like James Villiers and George Colouris are excellent. It's fun seeing an Aussie bearded Mark Evans as Leon's love interest, called "Tod Browning". There's neat severed hands and fun costumes. It's very patchy but is its own thing.

Movie review - "Horror Express" (1972) ***1/2 (re-watching)

Put this on for fun. Spanish actors pretending to be in Russia. Lee and Cushing. A script that gleefully raids The Thing. Telly Savalas stealing the show in the last 20 minutes. Some attractive women. Dodgy effects. The romance of a train. Rasputin like figure.

Great fun. Love it.

Movie review - "Arabian Adventure" (1979) **1/2

I had vague memories of watching this has a child at the drive in - a film with flying carpets, genies, little kids and so on... for a time I wasn't sure it existed, but figured out this was it.

Its curiously not well know while other Kevin Connor-John Dark collaborations are... It was also a long time out of circulation. Which is weird because the piece obviously has value as a family perennial.

Handsome production values. The guy who plays the kid is good. Chris Lee has a fine old time as an evil vazir.. Mickey Rooney pops up in a wordless cameo which is fun; Peter Cushing also has a small role. There's also two familiar American-actors-in-English-films-of-the-70s, John Ratzenberger and Shane Rimmer.

The romantic leads are Olivier Tobias and Emma Samms who are individually fine but there's too much of an age gap between them. They needed to age him down or age her up.

The story is also wonky -they didn't play close enough attention to those 40s and 50s Easterns. Samms just hangs around instead of participating in the action and there's too many scenes of Lee watching the action on an old Arabian style version of a TV. It's a wonky story.

Still it looks good and kids should like it.

Movie review - "Horror Express"(1973) (re-viewing) ***

Watched this film again just for fun - and it is a lot of fun, despite the slightly jarring fact its set in Russia but was shot in Spain.Peter Cushing and Christopher Lee have a high old time as the heroes, get that great moment where they say "But we're British" when asked if one of them is the killer. (The piece might have had more emotional impact if one of them had been infected). I forgot how Lee's part was significantly bigger than Cushing's. 

Some actors you won't recognise, a lot with moustaches. Telly Savalas steals the film in the last 20 minutes. The storyline rips off The Thing but that works really well on a train.

Movie review - "She" (1965) ***1/2 (re-watching)

Some observations
- it was a mistake I feel to introduce Ayesha so early - having her turn up at an apartment near the town just feels silly... I know why they did it, to get her in sooner (otherwise she doesn't appear til the 45 minute mark) but they didn't do it right... maybe it could've worked as a dream?
- Peter Cushing is very good but wasted as Holly - he should've done more, fell for Ayesha himself
- I was surprised how much screen time John Richardson gets - it's really his film more than Ayesha's... he's okay... he's a funny looking guy with that blonde hair and sun tan and tormented look - not easy to cast, I imagine
- Bernard Cribbins is very good as Job - so too Andre Morrell.
- Ursula Andress is an outstanding Ayesha
- I forgot how many scenes consisted of Andress and Richardson just sitting around talking.

This remains an entertaining, full blooded adventure - location filming in Israel really helps as does the superior cast and score. There's decent action - the brawl at the beginning (I wonder if the shift to 1918 Palestine was inspired by Lawrence of Arabia), the final uprising - and some good set design. The Roman Empire uniforms on Ayesha's guards look silly - presumably Hammer got a deal on them from Cleopatra or something.

Some memorable moments such as Morell being presented with his daughter's ashes and Ursula Andress being transformed into a withered old thing.

Movie review - "Rogue One" (2016) ****

The first two thirds of this are a little wonky - the film never seems to get in a groove. I mean it's got a bright central idea - about the architect of the Death Star, and his daughter who is used by the rebellion. I liked all the various misfits who get together - the Japanese couple, the hardened rebel officer, etc.

But it never seems to get a fix on the characters - they don't seem to use Felicity Jones' rebelliousness. Also some things felt extraneous - she gets a video from dad and then goes and rescues dad?

But the final act is magnificent - it has integrity, gravitas, and I totally got wrapped up with it. War is serious.

Some random observations:
* didn't feel it was necessary for the rebellion to go "we're not going on the final mission" and then changing their mind;
* the recreation of Peter Cushing worked I felt - but Carrie Fisher felt wrong;
* David Prowse's physical presence was missed.

There's a brilliant "Honest Trailers" on this... "setting up the Stormtroopers' weakness against sticks".

Movie review - "Laddie" (1940) **

Tim Holt became known as a Western star for RKO but although this is set in the West it isn't really a Western. It's more a slice of life Americana, a genre popular at the time (The Magnificent Ambersons - which also starred Holt - was a darker example of the genre). It reminded me of something like Hound Dog Man or Pollyanna - lots of gentle observations about young people. The sort of thing that's always based on a "beloved" novel.

The central thrust of the plot revolves around farmer Holt being in love with Virginia Gilmore, whose English father (Miles Mander) doesn't approve. A lot of time is spent on Holt's younger sister Joan Carroll, who is very good. Gilmore isn't much - her character is a bit of a bitch. Miles Mander is fine as is Spring Byington. Peter Cushing - as in the horror star - pops up as Mander's estranged son, which gives the end of this a massive lift.

I've long been interested in the career of Tim Holt, who appeared in so many classics despite mostly making B Westerns. This isn't a classic - it's a nice enough thing, very light; it really needed a top flight director to add lots of touches and atmosphere to make it fly.

Holt is handsome and adequate; to be honest he's a little dull. He's not a star who leaps off the screen - he seems to be more of a leading man, the sort of guy to play opposite a vivacious female star, or to play someone's son. He doesn't have a personality that comes across - contrasted with, say, Carroll.

To be honest the film probably would've been better off had it totally focused on Joan Carroll - told everything from her point of view. (It does for a lot of it but then keeps popping away from her POV.) But he's fine - like the movie itself. I know I use that word a lot about this movie but I can't help it - it's "fine".

Documentary review - "The Flesh and the Fury: X-posing Twins of Evil" (2012) ***1/2

A very thorough look at the making of Twins of Evil - it's over feature length - but it doesn't feel padded because it explores the whole Karlstein trilogy, including the writing of Carmilla, the making of The Vampire Lovers and Lust for a Vampire before getting around to Twins (they don't spend much time on Lust, no one likes it).

Some fantastic talking heads, including leading Hammer enthusiasts/writers such as Wayne Kinsey as well as Joe Dante, plus interviews with John Hough (director) and Damien Thomas. The Collinson twins don't get interviewed, unfortunately.

Movie review - "Brides of Dracula" (1960) *** (another viewing)

I caught this at the New Beverly in Los Angeles - such comfortable seats! - because I wanted to see it on the big screen. It's probably the best looking of the Hammer horrors,with gorgeous photography, colour, costumes and sets. Yvonne Monlaur is one of the prettiest Hammer horror starlets and there are some good looking women in the support cast. There are lots of "in depth" shots i.e. looking down on balconies and from higher floors.

The script is irritatingly disjointed (three writers are credited on it). I kind of went with why the innkeeper was so keen to get Yvonne Monlaur out of town at night,and got that Monlaur fell in love with David Peel in one scene with only a few lines of dialogue... but not that she never asked Peel about his relationship with his mother (Marita Hunt) even though he's accused her of locking up; or that she never seems perturbed that Hunt dies after she lets Peel go; or the fact that Peel bites Peter Cushing but leaves him alive (despite the fact two of his brides are there) to go and fetch Monlaur; Monlaur promises Cushing to have nothing to do with Peel then goes and gets engaged to him.

There's a mysterious servant figure who pops up at the beginning but is never seen again; servant Greta seems all keen for keeping the Baron under lock and key in the first third, then becomes a full on ally for him; Monlaur is always getting intro trouble in ways that feel increasingly contrived.

Added to this the bat work is very shonky and the climax where Cushing/Van Helsing creates a cross from the shadows of a windmill feels like cheating. There's an uncomfortable level of misogyny with all these men fighting over defenseless silly woman (though the Baron's mother is an imposing character). And what's with the random comic bit in the third act involving Miles Malleson as a doctor who takes a lot of pills and wants to increase his bill all the time?

But there are lots of good things about it: Cushing is a superb Van Helsing; David Peel a worthy adversary (what ever happened to him?); the support cast is awesome; some of the dialogue was great; there's a few nice digs at the importance of social status among the characters. It has amazing atmosphere. I just can't share fans' enthusiasm for this one, though.

Movie review - "The Horror of Dracula" (1958) **** (re-viewing)

I've seen this film a few times now and it wouldn't be my favourite Hammer - I admit to being more frightened by Dracula - Prince of Darkness. But it works beautifully - Christopher Lee deservedly became a star with his count, all virility and action; he was a mediocre Frankenstein's monster, but a beautiful Dracula. And has there ever been a better Van Helsing than Peter Cushing - brilliant, whip smart, tough, imposing.

The music and art direction are first rate; Jimmy Sangster's script is a expert example in low budget adaptation. The limited budget helps - it adds to the feeling of isolation and spookiness. And there is a pleasing sexual frankness to it all: clearly the women can't wait to get a decent ravaging from Dracula, especially Melissa Stribling.

In the support cast, Michael Gough and John Van Eyssen are particularly drippy as the supporting men - respectively a disbelieving idiot (and clearly a lousy lay) and not particularly effective assassin. The women aren't as attractive as you'd get later on, but the acting is pretty good. Spectacular finale.

Movie review - "Curse of Frankenstein" (1957) *** (another viewing)

This screened on TCM and I can never resist the chance to re-watch Hammer horror. The print wasn't the best - or maybe the colour photography for the first Hammer horror simply wasn't that great. The art direction remains impressive.

I was struck by how inherently inexpensive the film has been constructed - screenwriter Jimmy Sangster was a production manager and used to be able to budget his scripts himself down to the last cent (or pence, rather). Most of the action is two handers or three handers - Robert Urquhart and the young Frankenstein, Urquhart and Cushing, Cushing and Hazel Court, Cushing and Lee, etc. It also mostly takes place indoors

A lot of it is also like a play, or TV play - scenes of people sitting/standing around talking. There are some staircases and entrances and exits to keep it a bit lively and Terence Fisher does an okay job - but it only gets up and moving at certain times. (I think this is budget more than Fisher because in other films such as Dracula - Prince of Darkness things are very cinematic.)

Peter Cushing's performance looks better over the years - intense, glowering, dynamic. Christopher Lee's monster remains spectacularly unimpressive - a very mediocre turn (anyone could have played this, really - no sympathy). Hazel Court is wasted in a nothing part but Valerie Gaunt gets a flashy role as the maid seduced by Frankenstein (Gaunt is fine just not as charismatic or sexy as Court - I wish they'd swapped roles). Urquhart does his best in what is a terrible role really, as Frankenstein's friend, who has to help him, then get offended. (I always struggle with this part in Frankenstein movies - it's better if Frankenstein's assistant is fully committed.)

Movie review - "Top Secret!" (1984) ****

Loved this as a kid and it still holds up well with about ten times the genuine laughs as modern day spoofs - I must sound so old saying something like that but if you don't believe me check it out. It's bewildering to think this wasn't a hit - apparently it did okay but was a disappointment considering the budget and expectations.

I think maybe they spoofed a genre too far. There is a good basic premise here - rock star gets involved in the Cold War busting a scientist out of prison - with a strong basic dramatic arc (cocky kid grows up and finds love) but the film constantly veers between World War Two and the Cold War. I think it needed to pick one - probably the Cold War, and just set it in the sixties. That would have meant losing all the French resistance and Nazi stuff but it could be done. As it is, I think it was too much of a mixture.

Anyway, that's hindsight. To praise the good thinks: there's the song 'Skeet Surfing', so many classic lines ("truck load of dead rats in a tampon factory", "I just can't bring my wife to orgasm"), the names of the resistance (Montage, Mise-en-scene, Deja Vu, Latrine), the slapstick battles, the villain who only knows what he reads in the New York Post, the Blue Lagoon flashbacks.

This was a great way for Val Kilmer to start off his career, and Lucy Gutteridge does a great Ingrid Bergman impression. Some fun cameos by Peter Cushing and Omar Sharif - I wish there'd been more of them a la Flying High. But it's wonderful.

Script review - "The Horror of Dracula" by Jimmy Sangster (1958)

Publication of the beautiful script by Jimmy Sanger - elegant, simple and scary even to read. The character of Arthur remains a big dill, and that of Dracula genuinely terrifying. Sangster did have Stoker to draw on but he has changed a fair bit.

Book review - "The Revenge of Frankenstein" (1958) (warning: spoilers)

Another in Bear Manor Media's excellent series of re-printed novelisations, this is a reminder of what a first-rate sequel Jimmy Sangster penned. It picks up right on the end of the first Frankenstein, tracks the action logically and pays due attention to continuity (something definitely not apparent in later entries in the series), really fleshes out the character of Dr Frankenstein, has a strong supporting casting including a devoted supporting doctor Hans, a female lead with a bit of spunk (though it's a shame there's no romance between her and either Frankenstein or Hans) and most of all a completely sympathetic monster - Karl, the hunchback who just wants a normal life. This is what gives the story real heart and emotion.

There are lots of effective moments - Frankenstein's lab of bits and pieces, the inner monologues of Karl - and a very satisfying conclusion, with Hans performing some deft work on his old mentor to keep him going.

Book review - "The Brides of Dracula" by Dean Owen (1960)

Novelisation of the script to the Hammer classic - actually I should say earlier script, because a number of things were changed for the final movie that pop up in the book, notably:
- a greater role of Baron's servant, Latour, who here threatens Marianne, kills Van Helsing's servant Jacques, and tries to kill Van Helsing but is killed by him.
- Van Helsing falls in love with Marianne... after rescuing her from a night out with the Baron, where the Baron had stripped her clothes off and was about to have his way with her (this is a raunchy hot book), Van Helsing takes her back to an inn, and winds up having sex with Marianne. Marianne is tempted under the sway of the Baron but it's her love for Van Helsing that keeps her from going completely over to the dark side.
- The climax involves the Baron being destroyed by Van Helsing invoking an old curse - where the Barton is punished by the dark side

It was a real jolt to read about Van Helsing having sex with the nubile Marianne (whose beauty is frequently commented upon) - mostly I guess because I pictured Peter Cushing and Yvonne Monlaur going for it. I struggled with the logic of some of it i.e. why the Barton didn't kill Van Helsing when he had the chance, why he kept Marianne alive. But there's plenty of atmosphere, violence (gorged necks, the Baron being attacked by bats), sex (lots of descriptions of Marianne and Greta's naked form, which was pretty racy) and it was an entertaining read.

Movie review - "House of the Long Shadows" (1983) **

In the 50s, 60s or even 70s, a cast of Vincent Price, Christopher Lee, Peter Cushing and John Carradine would have been a dream. By 1983 though everyone was getting on except Lee - Cushing, Price and Carradine seem half dead. Still it's great to see them all together - and with Richard Todd thrown in for free.

The actual star of the movie is Desi Arnaz Jnr giving a very TV performance (there is such a thing - see this movie if you don't believe me) as the writer who accepts a bet for $20,000 that he can't write a novel overnight. He goes to Baldpate Inn - and by now film buffs will recognise this is a version of the much filmed Seven Keys to Baldpate.

It's not a terribly faithful version - it does start off that way but then becomes about four old codgers and Arnaz hanging around, wondering about a deep dark secret in the past. There's a crazy old kid locked in an attic, a squabbling married couple turns up at the end (mainly for the girl to get changed into her underwear at then get killed), a few gory murders to perk things up. Julie Peasgood is terrible as the main girl.

It begins strongly, wobbles about a third of the way in and never recovers. The ending feels hollow.

Movie review - "The Uncanny" (1977) **

I remember watching a trailer for this when I was a kid and it scared me - a cat screaming at the camera - but eventually catching the movie, it's not very spooky. Unless of course you're terrified of cats. They are the uniting feature of this horror anthology which was co produced by Milton Subotsky, who had a lot of success making such movies for Amicus.

This isn't an Amicus work but it shares many similarities: three stories plus a connecting one, all star cast, washed out 70s colour, a final story more comedic than others. Peter Cushing and Ray Milland are in the bridging segments, as a writer and publisher respectively.

The first story is the best, with Susan Penhalgion as a murderous maid being attacked by a bunch of cats. The second one has some bad acting Canadian kids squabble over a cat, with a seance thrown in for good measure. The third is set in old time Hollywood, with Donald Pleasance in a wig and Samantha Egger as actors. John Vernon is also in the cast.

This isn't very good - not that scary, or well made. It does have novelty factor as well as a strong cast.