Play review – “The Tenth Man” by Paddy Chayefsky

This has a great idea – a modern-day exorcism of a girl by some Jews in New York city – and memorable characters and lines, particularly the suicidal lawyer. But there’s not enough story – it needed a reversal or something (although I did like the ending where the lawyer turns out to be exorcised.) Would look good on stage with all the rituals being done.

Radio review – Lux - “Blood on the Sun” (1945) **

Jimmy Cagney repeating his film role as a brave journalist uncovering Japanese treachery before World War Two. Well, the Japanese government was treacherous - General Tojo is a character here. The macguffin - a document detailing Japan's plan for world domination - is based on a real one.

Movie review – “Still Waiting” (2008) *1/2

The original had heart and a sense of reality, both lacking here. It splits focus by concentrating on two restaurants – the original and a Hooters type bar. That would have been okay but the Hooters one (which potentially could have been really interesting - what do the staff talk about in such places) is mostly done without insight. (There's a nice moment towards the end about when to draw the line - but it's too little too late; far too much caricatures and boobs). Some of the cast from the original return but we don’t really get to know them in much more depth – the angry girl is still angry, the hot girl at the front is still hot. The exception is Justin Long, who returns with a terrific cameo. A misfire.

Movie review – “Horror of Frankenstein” (1970) *1/2

Looking for different ways to get extra juice out of the Frankenstein story, Hammer came up with a solid idea – reboot the franchise, tell the story of Young Frankenstein (i.e. the doctor at school) – but once this is introduced, it’s thrown away almost as quickly, and the rest of the action is a retread of the same material as Curse of Frankenstein, i.e. Frankenstein and his mate mess around in a lab, they collect body parts, build a creature, bring it to life, creature goes on rampage, etc.

 

Ralph Bates replaces Peter Cushing in the lead role and makes a fair fist of it – he’s got the right looks and sense of “bigness”. But it’s a fuzzy role – we never see why Frankenstein is so driven, or what made him is, or any formative experiences, for that matter. He’s simply a younger version of the established character. And he’s required to drive too much of the action – this badly needed a subplot driven by another character. Also, said character is confused by the fact Frankenstein has this horny side – on one hand he’s driven to bring creatures back from the dead, so much so he’ll commit murder, but on the other he takes time out to bang the (admittedly hot) maid (Kate O’Mara), and make this silly comments.

 

Indeed, there’s an element of silliness throughout the whole film – lots of throwaway gags, double entendres – which robs the story of any emotional point. There’s no pathos about the monster (David Prowse, running around bare chested and in long pants), or Frankenstein’s friend or lady friends (Veronica Carlson is given nothing to do except show her cleavage, which is great, but the purpose of a girl in a Frankenstein film is to love Frankenstein). So for most of the time this drags. It doesn’t look good either – the photography and art design, normally delights of Hammer films, is third rate. Jimmy Sangster wrote and directed this but despite his fine record he doesn't do well in either category here.

Movie review – “Fear in the Night” (1972) ** (warning: spoilers)

Jimmy Sangster’s third film as director for Hammer, and his last for the studio, saw him return to the psycho thriller genre, where he had enjoyed much success in the 60s. Once again, there’s a young woman with a history of mental instability (Judy Geeson), who is slowly been driven mad in a creepy setting (Taste of Fear, Nightmare, Paranoiac); the action shifts in the last act away from the protagonist to two baddies, who have the tables turned on them (Maniac, Taste of Fear); they can’t find a corpse (Taste of Fear); there’s a big secret about the past (all of them); the male baddie accidentally kills his fellow female baddie (Taste of Fear).

Well, the above things may be reheated ingredients but they worked for the first time, so why not a second (or third), and there’s a very strong cast, including Ralph Bates, Peter Cushing, and Joan Collins. Geeson doesn’t really convey descent into insanity, but at least she’s pretty and likeable. 

 

Sangster the director doesn’t do full justice to Sangster the writer – you feel Seth Holt or Freddie Francis would have extracted more juice and suspense out of the creepy school (although he does do something interesting things with editing). Sangster says in the commentary that he let some scenes drag on extra long in order to extend the running time – well, you can tell. I could have done with an extra scene at the end, wrapping up the fate of Geeson and Cushing a bit more.

Movie review – “Frankenstein Created Woman” (1967) ***

After the odd detour that was Evil of Frankenstein, Hammer came up with a more traditional gothic here. Even though I say “traditional”, this has an unusual concept – after an arresting opening (Frankenstein has himself revived after being dead for an hour), the doctor is determined to prove that the soul can be captured and transferred after death. He gets his chance to experiment when his assistant, Hans (yes, another Hans) is executed for a crime he didn’t convict – which gives Frankenstein a soul to play with. Then Hans’ girlfriend kills herself in grief – giving doc a body.

This is a surprisingly complex set up for writer John Elder, considering his history of not-very-good screenplays, but having done this, he doesn’t do much with the result. All that happens is the girl is revived and starts taking orders from Hans’ preserved head to kill the people actually responsible for the crime. She kills them one by one giving this a slasher film feel – or perhaps more accurately, a female vampire film feel. It’s a shame since the idea of a female Frankenstein’s monster had real appeal; ditto all that stuff about souls.

Peter Cushing is in good form as Frankenstein and Terence Young’s direction is dynamic. Susan Denberg is pretty as the girl monster – although there’s this hot publicity shot of her standing in the lab in a bikini but she doesn’t wear one in the film. The supporting cast isn’t the strongest – Thorley Walters is too fuddy duddy and comic as Frankenstein’s elder assistant, and Derek Fowlds, Bernard from Yes Minister, isn’t believable as a decadent aristocrat (the main blonde one kept reminding me of Monty Python’s Graeme Chapman). Solid guillotine action and impressive production design – a bit more “realistic” than early 60s Hammer.

Movie review – “Never Take Candy From a Stranger” (1959) ****

Being a big Hammer movie fan, I’ve heard about most of the good films from the studio – but knew absolutely nothing about this. I only watched it because it was on a DVD collection but gave it priority after hearing Marcus Hearn talk about it on the DVD commentary for Pirates of Blood River (the films share a screenwriter). The result is a startling movie, about child abuse of all things.

Although shot at Bray Studios, it’s set in Canada, and is about a family of Brits who’ve recently moved there so dad can take up a position as high school principal. The nine year old daughter visits an old man who gives her and friend candy… in exchange for taking off all her clothes and dancing. The rest of the film deals with the fall out, particularly the fact the old man is from a powerful family in the town.

Very well written, directed and acted (I didn’t recognise any of the cast except for the prosecutor and the dirty old man [Felix Aylmer], and the kid actors are good), this has special power from being made in the late 50s. You watch it and it’s hard to believe you’re actually watching it. Despite that, the film pulls few punches – it’s always clear what’s happened, what characters are afraid of happening, and the ending doesn’t cop out. Also the fact this is set during a time when child abuse was less discussed than it is now, more swept under the carpet, and it was less socially acceptable to hate pedophiles. (Love how mum is sedated by the doctor at the end). It tackles different points of view to dealing with the problems – hush it up, be careful, deny it, tell the truth. Well worth seeking out.