Showing comments 591 to 600 of 693
21 Oct 2010, 12:51am
this really is scrapping the bottom of the barrel: no wonder christopher lee was fed up with doing these dracula films, his character was always being written into the plot as an afterthought rather than the plot revolving around him. "scars of dracula" is no exception as this is the worst hammer dracula film by far. there's no interest shown the in script, plot or acting at all. this flopped quite badly in america which is hardly a surprise.
Related to: Scars Of Dracula (1970)
21 Oct 2010, 12:21am
i was quite curious about this swashbuckling piece from hammer but i didn't find that much to enjoy. the plot is rather tediously explained which i daresay is partly due to the cuts that the BBFC demanded before releasing this film. the action scenes are o.k but nothing special.
Related to: The Pirates of Blood River (1962)
21 Oct 2010, 12:18am
contrary to what some people may think, "captain clegg" isn't a horror film from hammer, it is more of a period thriller. peter cushing takes centre stage once again as a smuggler who is masquarading as the local vicar so that his smuggling gang can carry out their illegal activities. unlike his characterization of baron frankenstein, peter cushing's character in "captain clegg" has one or two redeeming features and is not quite so evil. hammer regulars include oliver reed and michael ripper(always great to see him on screen) and a host of other british familar faces.
i like this film for its acting, pace, story and atmosphere. the only ingredient that seems to be lacking, is that there isn't a great deal of action. an enjoyable film nevertheless.
Related to: Captain Clegg (1962)
20 Oct 2010, 10:35pm
this is rather tame, routine stuff, not to mention a bit perverted at times. pual massie is miscast, he just doesn't show the passionate or tragic elements that help make up the dr. jekyll character. as mr. hyde, he is marginally better but no more than that. christopher lee semms rather out of his depth in this one. he is too stiff and rather too serious to make his performance convincing. oliver reed has a brief role as a gentleman about town and i doubt paul massie would have bested reed quite so easily in real life as in this film.
the ending is so contrived, i was pleading with the film to hurry up and bloody well end!
Related to: The Two Faces Of Dr. Jekyll (1960)
20 Oct 2010, 9:00pm
"the revenge of frankenstein" is a worthy follow up to the previous year's "the curse of frankenstein." i love the fact that it is peter cushing who dominates this film as he steals the entire thing. there is however, excellent support from francis matthews, michael gwynn and eunice gayson. i like the opening scene where it is explained why frankenstein is being condemned to the gullotine, very well written. i'm also glad that terence fisher was assigned for this hammer production, he and peter cushing were a great team. the narrative is a little bit shaky at times but that is a mere quibble: there are plenty of highlights to enjoy in this one. at one point, i never thought i would see a film where frankenstein suddenly finds himself in considerable danger where his life is at risk........
Related to: The Revenge Of Frankenstein (1958)
20 Oct 2010, 8:53pm
i didn't really enjoy this one: the plot is thinly developed and hard to follow, christopher lee is rather underused and not given enough to do and the ending is far too predictable.
Related to: Taste of Fear (1961)
20 Oct 2010, 8:49pm
i don't consider the mummy films to be as good as the frankenstein or dracula ones. this inital entry proves this. there is too much padding in "the mummy," it takes too long to get going and the flashback sequence is far too long. the scene where felix alymer is murdered in his padded cell is well done and quite creepy. christopher lee's grand entrance when he rises from the swamp is also highly effective but the plot as a whole is a disappointment. it is peter cushing's performance that saves this one, he is brilliant as the courgeous john banning. george pastell is a letdown, he simply has none of the mysterious or sinister quality of george zucco. i do enjoy the music, very much in keeping with the film's subject matter.
Related to: The Mummy (1959)
20 Oct 2010, 8:44pm
i quite like this one, even though it hasn't got peter cushing, christopher lee or michael ripper included. i wouldn't exactly say noel willman is a particularly convincing vampire, he's too wooden and boring. clifford evans is quite effective as the van helsing character but he isn't in the same league as peter cushing(then again, not many actors are). the film works up to a good climax with the unleashing of the bats - that was how "brides of dracula" was originally going to end.
"kiss of the vampire" is a fair film but not one of hammer's greatest moments by any means.
Related to: The Kiss Of The Vampire (1964)
20 Oct 2010, 5:52pm
to answer the question of the other reviewer, the reason why an american actor(brian donlevy) was cast as professor quatermass, was to give the film a chance to appeal to the american audience and also perhaps to secure any financial assistance from america for future hammer productions.
"the quatermass experiment" was the film that changed hammer's fortunes forever and help set them on the road to far greater success.
brian donlevy, jack warner and richard wordsworth are especially good in their characters but i love the whole science fiction aspect: rocket ships, an alien organism being brought to earth etc etc. only hammer could really produce the goods.
Related to: The Quatermass Xperiment (1955)
20 Oct 2010, 12:09am
this is over-rated rubbish. it is not a patch on the 1950s quatermass films which are genuine classics of the genre. this 1967 film is boring, poorly directed and slackenly paced. nothing of much interest seems to happen. andrew keir makes for a very good professor quatermass and this partially redeems the film.
Related to: Quatermass And The Pit (1967)
About Hammer |
Terms and Conditions |
©2014 Exclusive Media Group. All rights Reserved