THIS IS WEEK THREE of our #PeterCushing #FrankensteinFriday On Set Snaps Album! This week, we are focused on #HammerFilms THIRD film movie in their Frankenstein/Peter Cushing series of six films; 'THE EVIL OF FRANKENSTEIN'
Conventional wisdom dictates some not-terribly-wise things
with regards to Hammer’s Frankenstein series. For one, there’s a sense that the
films form a continuous saga, though much in the films blatantly contradicts
this. For another, there’s the long-standing argument that Terence Fisher,
gifted director though he was, was somehow responsible for the conception of
the character; here again, evidence to the contrary makes nonsense of this
assertion. And lastly - and perhaps most commonly parroted - is the argument
that the non-Fisher-helmed Evil of Frankenstein is a bad film - an anomaly in
an otherwise unimpeachable series of films featuring one of Hammer’s most
beloved icons, Peter Cushing, in his signature role.'
'THE EVIL OF FRANKENSTEIN' came after a surprising moratorium
on Frankenstein at Hammer. The Curse of Frankenstein (1957) had initiated
Hammer’s golden age of Gothic horror, and its success paved the way for
everything that followed. The inevitable follow up, Revenge of Frankenstein
(1958), was comparatively light on chills but still earned a pretty penny in
the UK and the US. Even so, it would take the better part of five years for
Hammer to revisit the franchise. It could be that the seemingly definitive
finale of Revenge put Hammer in an awkward position - screenwriter Jimmy
Sangster painted himself into a corner here, with the Baron effectively
becoming his own creation. Sangster, an avowed non-fan of the gothic, wasn’t
particularly keen on recycling the character, and nobody at Hammer could come
up with a suitable follow up. Things changed when Hammer struck a deal with
Universal, however. The deal enabled Hammer to have access to the much-coveted
“monster” design of makeup genius Jack P. Pierce, immortalized in James Whale’s
classic 'Frankenstein' (1931).
ABOVE: A great photograph of 'The Evil of Frankenstein' laboratory, where we can see everything in quite close detail. Most of the lab electrical equipment was made at the carpentry workshop, made from wood, with wires, bakelite switches, plugs, motors from industrial equipment and chemistry labs.
ABOVE: Again, with quick editing on screen, hides the actual materials used by the Baron, to unattached flasks, enamel bowls, rubber tubing that is suspended, going no where! It's all very clever convincing, smoke and mirrors! Look carefully at the top of the wall behind the table, and you can see the table stands against a 'studio flat', with a gap between the wall and the fake studio set ceiling.The flat has been covered with a thin layer of plaster, from the studio plaster workshop and paint, with a few handfuls of sand added, to give it texture!
HAMMER FILMS had struggled mightily to come up with a
design for Christopher Lee’s pitiable creature in Curse, while Revenge went
against the grain and offered a handsome “creature” who regresses to a drooling
cannibal. For Evil, the idea was to start afresh - and in so doing,
producer/writer Anthony Hinds decided to go back to the Universal catalogue for
inspiration. It was a risky move, in some respects, and it remains the most
hotly contested feature of the picture.On the one hand, there’s no denying that the film marks a
step backwards in terms of concept. It seems a bit stale, a rehash of elements
and characters present in the Universal Frankenstein saga of the 30s and 40s.
As such, it’s a more old fashioned film that its predecessors - and it
certainly doesn’t aspire to the more inventive turn the series would take later
on. But while this is a demerit, it’s hard to fault the film on a purely
entertainment-based level.
DIRECTOR FREDDIE FRANCIS was something of a “flavor
of the month” at Hammer during this time - his stylish handling of several of
Jimmy Sangster’s contrived 'Les Diaboliques' riffs, notably Paranoiac (1962) and
Nightmare (1963), had typed him as a genre film maker, much to his dismay, and his
films made a tidy profit; this was enough to put him in the coveted position
previously held by Fisher, whose increasingly character-based and romantic
approach to genre tropes resulted in some costly box office wobbles.
IT DOESN'T APPEAR likely that Fisher was ever seriously considered for Evil,
though the legend persists in some circles that he dropped out due to ill
health. Francis admitted time and time again that he didn’t take these subjects
seriously - he became increasingly disenchanted with his moniker of “horror
director,” resulting in uninspired hackwork throughout the better part of the
1970s before a triumphant return to cinematography presented itself when
maverick film maker David Lynch approached him to photograph the Hammer-inspired
slice of real life grotesquerie, The Elephant Man (1960). Francis’ record as a
cinematographer is unimpeachable - he can be counted among the finest that
England ever turned out, which is no mean feat when one considers the likes of
Freddie Young, Gilbert Taylor, Jack Cardiff, Douglas Slocombe, even Hammer’s
own Jack Asher. His lack of feeling for the genre to one side, he proved a
pretty good director during the 1960s, bringing his eye for colour, shadow and
depth of field to a series of stylishly lensed horror films and thrillers. 'The
Evil of Frankenstein' is not his best work as a director, but it shows him
working at full speed within the confines of an admittedly routine and episodic
screenplay.
ONE OF THE KEY THINGS Francis brought to the film was a
sense of scope. Recalling the original Whale Frankenstein films with fondness,
he found the “mad labs” of Fisher’s films rather wanting. Thus, he instructed
production designer Bernard Robinson and art director Don Mingaye to go wild,
entrusting them with the better part of the budget so as to enable them to
create the most imposing laboratory set in the history of the franchise.
Francis’ faith in these expert craftsmen paid off in dividends - the film may
have its problems in terms of story and character, but it looks terrific.
Adding to the rich texture is the beautiful lighting by Francis’ friend and
colleague, John Wilcox. Wilcox photographed some of Francis’ best work -
including The Skull (1965) - and the two men were simpatico in their working
relationship. If Fisher’s first two films in the series sought to bring an air
of realism to the proceedings, Francis would go in the opposite direction,
fashioning a film that can truly be called bigger than life. It unfolds very
much like a fairy tale, and it presents the long-suffering Baron at his most
heroic and sympathetic.
PETER CUSHING is immaculate in the role, and he clearly
relishes the chance to play a bit of comedy here and there - just look at the
scene wherein he confronts the sniveling, sex-crazed Burgomaster (David
Huddelston, later to be frozen to death by The Abominable Dr. Phibes) and rants
and raves about all the elegant furnishing and clothing the latter has pilfered
from his estate. If Sangster saw the character as a villain in Curse, and a
frustrated hero in Revenge, Evil presents him as a symbol of progress. Hinds’
screenplay gets the point across by reducing everybody he goes up against to
the level of cartoonish caricature, a miscalculation which robs the story of
any real emotional resonance. Even so, the film rattles along at a terrific
pace, and Francis seizes every opportunity afforded to him to play up the
visual - there’s even a lengthy, dialogue free flashback which can be seen as a
dress rehearsal for his “purely cinematic” approach to 'The Skull', for example.
FREDDIE FRANCIS fares so well with the visual, it’s unfortunate that
he wasn’t so attentive to his actors. Cushing could have played this role in
his sleep by now, of course, but he invests the character with his usual vigour
and attention to detail. Remarkable actor though he was, he could sometimes
fall back on a catalogue of ticks and mannerisms that felt a bit forced. There
are no such reservations to be expressed with this performance, however, and
the film surely benefits from his authority and gravitas. The supporting cast
is less than stellar, however. Francis freely admitted that he felt the role of
the monster needed to be played by a big man, regardless of his acting
credentials. He expressed some reservations over Christopher Lee’s characterization
in Curse, for example, and felt that he would do better to hire an athlete or
stunt man to fill the costume. He entrusted the role to New Zealand born
wrestler Kiwi Kingston, whose acting credits would be limited to two roles for
Francis, in very close succession; he would go on to play a tough, wordless
part in Hysteria (1965).
KIWI KINGSTON may have been big and imposing, but he lacked
Lee’s ability to infuse pathos and detail to his mute, hulking
characterization. Matters aren’t helped any by a miserable makeup job, but
we’ll deal with that Achilles heel in a moment. The normally reliable Hungarian
actor Sandor Eles flounders in the admittedly poorly written character of Hans.
It was a “middle European” name the writers at Hammer favoured, as Cushing’s
assistant in 'Revenge', played by Francis Matthews, was already called Hans, and
his next lab assistant, played by Robert Morris, would be saddled with the
moniker in 'Frankenstein Created Woman' (1966)! Eles does what he can, but the
character is a dud and Francis allows him to overact in compensation. Speaking
of overacting, this brings us to Peter Woodthorpe, the accomplished character
actor with a knack for seedy characterizations; he would go on to feature
memorably in 'Hysteria', as well, before racking up one last role for Francis as
the moth-eaten landlord in 'The Skull'. Woodthorpe’s performance lays on the ham
with relish - and it has to be said, he’s a sheer delight in the role.
UNIVERSAL was able to graft a senseless “back story” explaining her origins
when they added in some newly filmed filler material for the censored US TV
print. So much of the film is so well executed, from its sprawling
sets to its magisterial score by Don Banks, that it’s rather shocking to see
how badly Roy Ashton’s makeup fares. Ashton was one of the unsung heroes of
Hammer, devising some tremendously effective make-ups on a paltry budget, but
here he was encouraged to ape Pierce’s iconic design - and the best he could
muster was a high school level imitation. The design is clunky - the head is
literally box like, attempting to mimic the flat-top look of the Universal
design. Anybody doubting Ashton’s competence
needs only to look at his design for Oliver Reed’s werewolf in 'The Curse of the
Werewolf', but 'Evil of Frankenstein' is hardly likely to be counted, as a feather
in his cap. . . and he was never happy about it either!
EVEN SO, quibbles aside, Evil of Frankenstein is grand
entertainment - and that’s all Francis ever intended it to be. There’s nothing
terribly layered or complex here; it’s just a rip roaring yarn, done with a
sense of style and scope, and it stands apart from the rest of the series as
endearingly old fashioned.
PLEASE COME JOIN US at the FACEBOOK PCASUK FAN PAGE! With posts every
day, rare images and photographs, features and prize
competitions.You'll have good company with over 34 thousand followers,
all celebrating the LIFE and CAREER of Peter Cushing OBE!
