Topic: Horror.......Hammer Horror

[metaldams]

OK, the Bond thread's died down, so I thought I'd start something else.

I know Bud_Jamison's a fan, but are there any other Hammer Horror fans here?  I'm not expecting this to get quite as many hits as Bond, but I'm hoping there are at least a few other fans here.  Peter Cushing, Christopher Lee, Oliver Reed, Dracula, Frankenstein, The Mummy, lots of blood, lots of castles, lots of goth, and lots of Victorian hotties, I think Hammer movies are fun.  Here are some of my favorites.

[youtube=425,350]0qc4_8Srf9E[/youtube]

FRANKENSTEIN MUST BE DESTROYED (1969) My favorite

[youtube=425,350]udqm1gw28xo[/youtube]

DRACULA: PRINCE OF DARKNESS (1966)

[youtube=425,350]oynquOmh3SM[/youtube]

PLAGUE OF THE ZOMBIES (1966)

[Bud_Jamison]

All your pics are CLASSICS!

This is in the same league IMO...

Frankenstein Created Woman

[metaldams]

All your pics are CLASSICS!

This is in the same league IMO...

Frankenstein Created Woman

Yes, that is a good one!  I really love the Universal stuff too, but as their monster series went on, it was just one monster rally after another and they just fizzled out.  Hammer tried different things, and FRANKENSTEIN CREATED WOMAN is a great example.

I have all the Dracula's, but I've yet to see the last two in the Frankenstein series.  They'll be on this year's Halloween list.

[Bud_Jamison]

of course I have a great love for Universal as well.

Don't read anything about the other two frankenstein films, better enjoyed that way.  All you need to know is that "Evil" is not a direct sequel to "Must be Destroyed" and should be enjoyed for what it is.  "Monster from Hell" is a chilling end to the series, another personal favorite and guilty pleasure.  The real end of an era, much like Besser Stooge shorts.

[metaldams]

of course I have a great love for Universal as well.

Don't read anything about the other two frankenstein films, better enjoyed that way.  All you need to know is that "Evil" is not a direct sequel to "Must be Destroyed" and should be enjoyed for what it is.  "Monster from Hell" is a chilling end to the series, another personal favorite and guilty pleasure.  The real end of an era, much like Besser Stooge shorts.

I've seen clips of that big furry monster in MONSTER FROM HELL, looks fun!

My Hammer "gulity pleasure" is the guy who drinks the blood in TASTE THE BLOOD OF DRACULA.  First he goes on to berate the older gentlemen in grand thespian fashion for not drinking a chalice of blood and "disrespecting the master," only to go on to have one of the greatest death scenes in all of filmdom.

[Curly4444]

Brother your speaking my language. I cant believe there's others that like hammer horror. I was able to see some thru my library and netflicks. My favorite one is The Curse of the Werewolf(1961). Fell in love with it when i was a kid, and still love it today.

Other favs are:

The Evil of Frankenstein (1964)
The Brides of Dracula (1960)
The Curse of Frankenstein (1957)
Horror of Dracula(1958)

I love Hammer horror films because of Peter Cushing and Christopher Lee. Awesome actors.

[Seamus]

Hammer fans represent!

Metaldams' picks are pretty solid.  Frankenstein Must Be Destroyed is probably the highpoint of the Frankenstein series.  I think you'll enjoy Monster from Hell this Halloween.  I've never understood why that one gets kicked around a little by the fans.  It's got its flaws (David Prowse's makeup as the titular monster for one; looks more like the Monster from the One-Day Gorilla Suit Rental Shop), but it's a solid entry with some fine acting and great atmosphere.  Love the idea of Frankenstein being forced to lay low in an asylum (always a great setting for a horror flick), and the implication at the end that Frankenstein had lost what little grip he ever had is a nice (if low-key) way to end the series.

Watching the Dracula movies in sequence really drives home how one-note that series was, especially compared to the studio's more imaginative handling of the Frankenstein series, but on a movie-by-movie basis they're a lot of fun, and the first two are excellent.  Even the lesser Dracula movies have some great moments (like the blood drinking ceremony from Taste the Blood Metaldams mentioned, totally made by the actor playing Dracula's servant cranking the ham factor to 11).

Still quite a few non-series movies I have to check out, like the lesbian vampire stuff. 

[metaldams]

Watching the Dracula movies in sequence really drives home how one-note that series was, especially compared to the studio's more imaginative handling of the Frankenstein series, but on a movie-by-movie basis they're a lot of fun, and the first two are excellent.  Even the lesser Dracula movies have some great moments (like the blood drinking ceremony from Taste the Blood Metaldams mentioned, totally made by the actor playing Dracula's servant cranking the ham factor to 11).

Still quite a few non-series movies I have to check out, like the lesbian vampire stuff. 

Funny, because I'm watching the Dracula series in order as we speak.  To be exact, I did count BRIDES OF DRACULA and LEGEND OF THE 7 GOLDEN VAMPIRES in there too.

Yeah, the Dracula series is kind of/sort of one note.  I think Lee's best attribute as Dracula was his presence, which is one of the reasons why I find PRINCE OF DARKNESS to be the best of the series.  No gimmicks, no hyped up line reading (not that those things aren't fun), just pure horror.  I actually like the fact he's silent because his presence works so well.  Actually, there is not a bad performance or wasted scene in that entire movie.

I too haven't seen any of the vampire/lesbian epics, but I'd sure like to.  That combination sounds as good as peanut butter and jelly.

[Seamus]

Dracula's menacing silence in Prince of Darkness is also symbolic of the ominous power Christopher Lee himself had over the producers, since he claims the reason he speaks no lines in that movie is because the dialogue they wrote for his character was so god-awful that he refused to say the lines.

How about Satanic Rites of Dracula for just plain weird?  Dracula posing as a wealthy entrepreneur operating from the top floor of a business building, commanding a brace of motorcycle thugs dressed in Sonny Bono fur vests?  Interesting to see how much the Hammer style had changed by the time the studio was in its death throes in the '70s.

[metaldams]

Dracula's menacing silence in Prince of Darkness is also symbolic of the ominous power Christopher Lee himself had over the producers, since he claims the reason he speaks no lines in that movie is because the dialogue they wrote for his character was so god-awful that he refused to say the lines.

How about Satanic Rites of Dracula for just plain weird?  Dracula posing as a wealthy entrepreneur operating from the top floor of a business building, commanding a brace of motorcycle thugs dressed in Sonny Bono fur vests?  Interesting to see how much the Hammer style had changed by the time the studio was in its death throes in the '70s.

In the 70's Hammer was doing whatever it took to survive, and it wasn't just Hammer, it was AIP too.  Vincent Price movies also were becoming more modern and had more violence as well.

When Hammer first started, gothic horror with a little more blood, a little more cleavage, and a lot more color was enough to draw the kids in.  That was big in the late 50's.  In the late 60's and early 70's, these kids had their own counter-culture which they'd much rather have shown than old'fashioned Victorian set pieces.  They wanted to see beheadings, sex, nudity, and their vampires need to be lesbians.  The production code was over and the old guard needed to be more on top of things to compete.

That's why I said the Dracula films were "kind of/sort of" one note, because in a lot of ways, they were.  In other ways, though, not quite.  Those darn Victorian kids were actually having sex behind their parents backs as the series went on, and my God, I can kind of see a little through Veronica Carlson's neglige now.  Those shots of stakes going through hearts are much bloodier and held a lot longer than in the old days.  That to me is the most fascinating thing about watching the Hammer Dracula's in order.  Not only am I being entertained which each film, but I'm seeing society change before my eyes. 

[Seamus]

Yeah, great points.  The "sameness" of the Dracula movies is really mostly to do with the lack of fresh ideas for using the character in each new movie.  Stylistically, though, the Hammer Drac films are all over the map, which makes it fun to watch them in sequence.  The actual "horror" of Horror of Dracula is pretty restrained, with cloaks pulled over the victims to hide the gruesome details, and delivered in the lush early Hammer style with meticulous sets and careful direction.  As the series goes on the movies start becoming outright bloodbaths (Scars of Dracula is pretty brutal), and even the direction becomes more raw with more hand-held exterior shots.  Then they bring the series to the swinging...um...'70s for the last few, and even though those movies are the low-rent district of the Dracula sequence, at least it's an interesting failure and adds another strange texture to the series.

[metaldams]

Yeah, speaking of direction, I'm really curious to see how FRANKENSTEIN AND THE MONSTER FROM HELL turns out.  We're talking 1974, which is towards the end, but I believe Terence Fisher directed it, and he was hammer's best director.  Should be interesting.

You mention SCARS OF DRACULA being especially brutal, well, that's the next one I'm going to watch.  It's been a while, so I look forward to revisiting it.

Now, for the already mentioned legendary scene in TASTE THE BLOOD OF DRACULA!  Enjoy.

[youtube=425,350]lU9vxWNxSyw[/youtube]

Drink, damn you!

[Seamus]

Been a while since I've seen Monster From Hell, but I do remember it felt more like "classic" Hammer than most of the other stuff the studio was putting out in the '70s, mostly because of Fisher's stately direction.  Shame about Cushing's granny wig in that one though.

That Taste The Blood clip reminds me that, if I recall correctly, Dracula wasn't meant to appear at all in that movie.  In the original script it was planned that Ralph Bates would play the vampire after being tainted by Dracula's blood (Hammer was looking to replace Lee and Cushing with more young blood in their movies, the fools).  But apparently the American distributors wouldn't back the project unless Lee was in it, so Lee was coerced into donning the fangs again, the script was rewritten to shoe-horn Dracula into the plot, and Bates' character drops out shortly after "drinking the filth." 

[metaldams]

That Taste The Blood clip reminds me that, if I recall correctly, Dracula wasn't meant to appear at all in that movie.  In the original script it was planned that Ralph Bates would play the vampire after being tainted by Dracula's blood (Hammer was looking to replace Lee and Cushing with more young blood in their movies, the fools).  But apparently the American distributors wouldn't back the project unless Lee was in it, so Lee was coerced into donning the fangs again, the script was rewritten to shoe-horn Dracula into the plot, and Bates' character drops out shortly after "drinking the filth." 

I never knew that!  Interesting. Bates would've made an interesting "Dracula," very campy based on the clip above.  The thing is, we really have gotten to the point where middle aged/older actors like Cushing and Lee have been replaced by young hearthrobs.  Today's vampires have posters that hang in the rooms of teenage girls.  Yeah, it sickens me too.

By the way, read this interesting tidbit on wikipedia about TASTE THE BLOOD OF DRACULA.  Take it for what it's worth.

"Vincent Price was originally cast to play one of the dissipated British gentlemen, but when the budget for the film was cut, Price could no longer be afforded and was released from his contract.[citation needed]"

[Curly4444]

The thing is, we really have gotten to the point where middle aged/older actors like Cushing and Lee have been replaced by young hearthrobs.  Today's vampires have posters that hang in the rooms of teenage girls.  Yeah, it sickens me too.

You have to look at it from their point of view. Who would you rather fantasize over, Robert Pattinson/Taylor Lautner or some old aging actor. The Vampire movies of today are more about romance and not Blood letting. I know id rather look at Kristen Stewart than somebody like Merle Streep.

[metaldams]

You have to look at it from their point of view. Who would you rather fantasize over, Robert Pattinson/Taylor Lautner or some old aging actor. The Vampire movies of today are more about romance and not Blood letting. I know id rather look at Kristen Stewart than somebody like Merle Streep.

I don't watch vampires for romance or sexual attraction.  If the girl's neck he's biting just happens to be attractive, it's a bonus.  I watch vampires for a combination of blood, story telling, and camp humor (when called for).

[Curly4444]

I don't watch vampires for romance or sexual attraction.  If the girl's neck he's biting just happens to be attractive, it's a bonus.  I watch vampires for a combination of blood, story telling, and camp humor (when called for).

Well, you don't sound as bad as my friend. If it doesn't follow the rules set forth by Annie Rice, he aint a watchin.

[metaldams]

Well, you don't sound as bad as my friend. If it doesn't follow the rules set forth by Annie Rice, he aint a watchin.

Well, I don't even know what Anne Rice's rules are!  I at least know who she is, though.

Frankly, I'm a 31 year heterosexual male who likes old horror movies.  I'm not in the demographic of people who would like TWILIGHT or other similar type shows, but to each their own.

[metaldams]

Watched SCARS OF DRACULA last night, and it's much better than the two that preceeded it.  Quite excellent, really.  Christopher Lee actually had something to do as Dracula, and I thought the performances were all pretty good.  The two preceeding it had fun moments but were a bit ham-fisted.

Again, very transitional as far as the love interest goes.  We're still Victorian era, but we have the wayward brother who sleeps around mixed in with the standard, I guess virginal couple who showed up in all the old horror movies.  That'll go away with DRACULA A.D. '72, when the Victorian values are completely done away with.

I've seen all these films before spread out, but watching them in order lends a new perspective.

[Curly4444]

Frankly, I'm a 31 year heterosexual male who likes old horror movies.  I'm not in the demographic of people who would like TWILIGHT or other similar type shows, but to each their own.

Hey whatcha implying bub? 


I'm also a  31 40 year heterosexual male who likes old horror movies, but i also like twilight and other vampire movies. I do like the older ones the best though.

[metaldams]

Hey whatcha implying bub? 


I'm also a  31 40 year heterosexual male who likes old horror movies, but i also like twilight and other vampire movies. I do like the older ones the best though.

I'm saying you're gay!  (Not that there's anything wrong with that, and where's the Jerry Seinfeld smiley when you need it)

No, just kidding.  All I'm saying is I'm not TWILIGHT's normal demographic, or at least what I perceive to be their normal demographic.  From my experiences, it's normally a young female audience who's into these things....but I've been wrong once or twice.

[Seamus]

I'm also a  31 40 year heterosexual male who likes old horror movies, but i also like twilight

The second part of that statement casts a lot of doubt on the first part  .  The Twilight movies (or at least the first two, haven't seen the third) seem to be targeted pretty squarely at the syrupy teenage girl demographic who think it would be just dreamy to have a boyfriend who protects them and fights over them and doesn't even care about sex and stuff cause they're just so selfless and noble.  They just come across as a teenage girl's diary fantasy, with some vampire stuff thrown in.  New Moon was just one long emo brood session sulking across the screen for two hours.  Nothing wrong with any of that, of course, as long as you leave your balls at the ticket counter before you go into the theater  .

Watched SCARS OF DRACULA last night, and it's much better than the two that preceeded it.  Quite excellent, really.  Christopher Lee actually had something to do as Dracula, and I thought the performances were all pretty good.  The two preceeding it had fun moments but were a bit ham-fisted.

Again, very transitional as far as the love interest goes.  We're still Victorian era, but we have the wayward brother who sleeps around mixed in with the standard, I guess virginal couple who showed up in all the old horror movies.  That'll go away with DRACULA A.D. '72, when the Victorian values are completely done away with.

I've seen all these films before spread out, but watching them in order lends a new perspective.

I thought the plot of Scars was pretty by-the-numbers (young people lured to Dracula's castle; terror ensues) but it still had a lot going for it.  Like you say, Lee was actually central to the story as opposed to being an afterthought.  It was a lot more graphic than the previous entries, which gave it a different kind of edge.  And Patrick Troughton's Clove character was great - a grubby little sado-masochist with a romantic streak.  Always wondered if he was supposed to be the same Clove from Prince of Darkness.  He really hit the skids if that's the case.

[Curly4444]

You guys are a riot!! 

it's normally a young female audience who's into these things

I think you're right. I just love everything vampire. Or maybe i watch it because Kirsten Stewards in it. 

[metaldams]

Well, I gotta say, teenage girls being into vampires is not new.  Those tween-war-teens in 1920's Germany had this dreamboat hanging on their walls. Sie liebt dicht, yeah yeah yeah!

[Curly4444]

Man, hes sexy.