Showing posts with label hammer film productions. Show all posts
Showing posts with label hammer film productions. Show all posts

Thursday 28 March 2013

ANDRE MORELL AND PETER CUSHING: HOLMES AND WATSON: THE HOUND OF THE BASKERVILLES: STILLS GALLERY AND REVIEW



Following the success of The Curse of Frankenstein and Dracula, Hammer Studios decided to turn their attention to the work of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle. In keeping with the tone of their recent films, their choice of The Hound of the Baskervilles seemed a solid concept. Certainly it was the most famous of Doyle’s many Sherlock Holmes stories, and it was arguably also the one that was best suited to feature length adaptation. On top of that, it had a macabre component – even if the inevitable intervention of logic would render its supernatural elements easily explained by the master sleuth by the time the film faded to black. The casting of Peter Cushing as Holmes was a given, even if Hammer executive James Carreras’ assertion that he would be the screen’s first “sexy” Holmes remains highly questionable. Had the film been made a few years later, it would not be inconceivable to picture Holmes as being played by Christopher Lee (who would indeed later essay the role several times, beginning with the bizarre West German production Sherlock Holmes and the Deadly Necklace, 1962, directed by Terence Fisher), with Cushing supporting as Dr. Watson. In 1958, however, Lee was only beginning to establish a name for himself, whereas Cushing was more of a proven quantity.


Sensibly realizing that Lee was too young and too imposing to play Holmes’ right hand man and confidante, Dr. John Watson, he was instead given a chance at playing the romantic lead, a bit of casting which Lee openly relished; he would therefore become one of the few actors to lend much in the way of presence and color to the usually disposable role of Sir Henry Baskerville. To play Dr. Watson, Hammer turned to veteran actor Andre Morell. Morell was known as a prickly sort, given to speaking his mind, and he and Lee apparently did not hit it off at all – but neither ever made much of a commentary on this, leading one to suspect that perhaps they were simply too similar in disposition. Happily, no such conflict would come into play with Morell’s relationship with Cushing – they had already acted together in the controversial, Nigel Kneale-scripted adaptation of George Orwell’s 1984 (1954) for the BBC , and following Hound, they would appear in Cash on Demand (1960), Cone of Silence (1960) and She (1964). Sadly, however, this would mark their one and only outing as Holmes and Watson – while Cushing would go on to play the role many more times (always on TV, it should be noted), Morell’s association with the world of Conan Doyle would begin and end on Hound.

The film itself is a problematic one, and this is down more to the screenplay than anything else. While some Hammer fans have praised scenarist Peter Bryan for structuring the film so that it would have some consistency with the “sins of the fathers” motif that was so common in Hammer horror (and in British horror in general, if truth be told), it seems to this writer that his attempts to “Hammerize” the material results in a film that sits unsteadily between two different styles of filmmaking. The more sensational elements feel rather grafted on, while the mystery angle becomes negligible in the bargain. Viewers unacquainted with Conan Doyle’s story might hope to have some sense of surprise when the killer is finally unmasked, but thanks to the heavy handed approach, there’s never any real doubt as to “who done it.” As such, the film fails as a mystery, and while there are token gestures towards the horror crowd, it’s a little too tame and restrained to really work on that level, either.


Director Terence Fisher does manage a tremendous set piece at the beginning, however, as he details the cruelty of Sir Henry’s infamous ancestor, Sir Hugo (David Oxley). Oxley tears into his role with ferocious abandon, teerting on the verge of camp overstatement yet remaining a credible villain. His presence is sorely missed when the film switches to the present day, with Ewen Solon’s sour-faced Stapleton proving to be a dull and rather listless villain. Fisher and cinematographer Jack Asher work hard to create a sense of menace on the moors, but the cramped production values sometimes conspire against their efforts. Hammer’s use of standing sets was beginning to show through at this juncture, though Hammer’s great production designer, Bernard Robinson, certainly does what he can to disguise the subterfuge. With James Bernard’s music booming away, it’s clear that this Hound is meant to be as scary as their previous Dracula and Frankenstein pictures – but it never quite catches fire.


One would be hard pressed to fault Hammer for their casting of Cushing and Morell, however. Cushing’s hawk-like visage and thin frame made him ideal casting, though his average stature is rather unfairly shown up by Fisher on occasion – when playing scenes opposite very tall men like Lee and Francis De Wolff (as the sour-pussed Dr. Mortimer), it would have made better sense to minimize this, but Fisher elects to have the other actors towering over Cushing, who has little choice but to look up at his co-stars when he should be firmly in control of the scene. Cushing’s devotion to the role was absolute, and he added bits of business straight from Conan Doyle, as well as from Sidney Paget’s famed illustrations from the original Strand Magazine publications of the stories. He brings intensity to the role, but he does sometimes rely too much on favored mannerisms. There are moments when his decision to emphasize the character’s theatricality verges on ham acting, but he manages to convey the character’s aloof nature and addiction to cocaine without becoming as over the top as Jeremy Brett would later be in the rightly celebrated Granada TV adaptations of the Conan Doyle canon. It is a performance that compares favorably with Basil Rathbone’s iconic, possibly definitive, portrayal for Fox and Universal in the 1930s and 1940s, but he would arguably grow into the role and play it with greater subtly and effectiveness when he took over the deer stalker from Douglas Wilmer for the BBC television series of the 1960s.


Morell’s challenge was arguably greater, in that the character of Dr. Watson had been reduced to the level of caricature courtesy of Nigel Bruce’s portrayal opposite Basil Rathbone in the afore-mentioned series of films. Make no mistake, Bruce was a charming and engaging performer, and his blustery portrayal had tremendous chemistry opposite Rathbone’s aloof and somewhat acerbic master detective, but it was a portrayal that was far removed from Conan Doyle. In the stories, Watson is really the author’s mouthpiece, and it is he who narrates the action and fills the reader in on the characters and their motivations. Far from being comedy relief, Watson is a solid, dependable medical man with a military background; he may seem “dim” compared to Holmes, but that’s merely because Holmes represents a kind of intellectual ideal. Watson is the everyman, and Morell’s interpretation is faithful to this conception. Morell resists the urge to play up the comedy, though he does have a few moments of subtle humor along the way.


It is, in short, an ideal pairing of two fine actors – and it is this, above anything else, that makes Hammer’s Hound linger in memory. Cushing’s wound up, energetic portrayal contrasts nicely with Morell’s more restrained approach, and the two men clearly have genuine respect and affection for each other. They make a wonderful team, though other vehicles – notably Cash on Demand and 1984 – would play them off as rivals. It’s to be regretted that Hound was something of a flop at the box office, as this killed off a potential series of Cushing/Morell/Hammer Holmes adaptations. Had they had a chance to grow into the roles and establish more audience familiarity, it’s possible that Cushing and Morell would have eclipsed Rathbone and Bruce in the mind of the public. As it stands, however, we only have this one, flawed vehicle to judge them from – and if the film itself has problems, there’s little doubt that the two actors acquitted themselves beautifully and were determined to remain as faithful as possible to Conan Doyle’s original conception. For this reason alone, the Hammer Hound remains an essential entry in the Holmes on film canon.


Monday 4 March 2013

USA NEWS: MILLENNIUM ENTERTAINMENT TO RELEASE HAMMER FILMS BLU RAYS AND COLLECTORS SETS IN USA FROM APRIL 2013


NEWS: REPORTED IN VARIETY TODAY! Millennium to Release Hammer Titles in U.S.

Deal covers pics inculding 'Dracula: Prince of Darkness,' 'Frankenstein Created Woman'

Millennium Entertainment will distribute titles from Exclusive Media’s Hammer library in the U.S. in a deal that covers Hammer titles going back to 1966’s “Dracula: Prince of Darkness.”


Millennium said the alliance will introduce the Hammer Horror brand to a new audience not familiar with the Hammer titles classic line and provide limited edition Blu-rays and Collector’s Sets over the next several years.

First three-film set will be released in April and include “Dracula Prince of Darkness,” Peter Cushing in “The Legend of the Seven Golden Vampires” and “Frankenstein Created Woman.”


Hammer has been part of Exclusive Media since 2008. Launched in 1934 as a specialist in horror, it returned to features after a three-decade absence in 2010 with “Let Me In.”

Sunday 10 February 2013

SUSAN DENBERG: THE GIRL FROM POMERANIA: FRANKENSTEIN CREATED WOMAN RARE STILLS GALLERY



IN 1966, Frankenstein Created Woman. And what a woman! Austrian actress Susan Denberg would become the only distaff “creature” in the Baron’s repertoire, and she marked a major improvement over such patchwork creations as Christopher Lee in The Curse of Frankenstein (1957) or Kiwi Kingston in The Evil of Frankenstein (1964). Indeed, Denberg remains one of the most bewitching, yet enigmatic, presences in the annals of so-called “Hammer glamour.”


SUSAN DENBERG was born Dietlinde Ortrun Zechner, on August 2nd, 1944, in the village of Bad Polzin, Germany, which is now known as PoÅ‚czyn-Zdrój, Poland. She appears to have enjoyed a normal childhood, much of it being spent with her family in Vienna, but the allure of other cultures proved too strong, and Dietlinde would relocate to England in 1962. She is rumored to have worked as an Au Pair girl during this time, before catching the eye of a talent scout and beginning work as a chorus girl. This line of work took her briefly to America, where she would meet and fall in love with lounge singer Anthony Sciotti; they would be married in 1965 and divorced just six months later. Soon after, she set her eyes on a career in film, making her debut with a guest spot (as the imaginatively named character “German girl”!) on the ABC TV series 12 O’Clock High. She then caught the eye of executive at Warner Bros., who set about rechristening her with a more “Anglo” sounding name. A campaign was launched, where fans were encouraged to write in with their choice of a new name for the starlet-to-be; Susan Denberg won the vote across the board, and the rest as they say is history.


THE NEWLY CHRISTENED DENBERG made her film debut opposite Stuart Whitman in the Norman Mailer adaptation An American Dream (1966). Denberg was already delving into the potential for sex and drugs, and she was rumored to have been romantically involved with Whitman, filmmaker Roman Polanski, performer Sammy Davis, Jr., and numerous others. The story goes that she even tried to net legendary movie tough guy Lee Marvin, but he never returned her calls. 1966 would also see Denberg getting her widest “exposure” when she bared all for an issue of Playboy; she would be in the running for Playmate of the Year, but eventually lost out to another contender.


THE PLAYBOY PICTORIAL inevitably piqued the interest of Britain’s Hammer Studios, who would offer Denberg the plum role of Christina in their upcoming sex-and-horror special, Frankenstein Created Woman. The studio’s publicity mill played up the sensational aspects, even hiring Denberg to pose with star Peter Cushing in a series of publicity stills for a “creation” sequence that was never part of the narrative itself. Fans salivated over these images of Cushing “introducing” his bikini-clad creation, and rumors inevitably have circulated that the sequence was deleted from the film because of censorship. The reality, however, is much more mundane: Hammer was simply exploiting their new starlets obvious assets in their own inimitable fashion.


CHRISTINA WOULD OFFER DENBERG the toughest role of her career. She begins the film as a pitiable, scarred, shy young woman who is deeply in love with Frankenstein’s young assistant, Hans (played by Robert Morris, who would later go on to play a supporting role in Roy Ward Baker’s film of Quatermass and the Pit). However, her father (Alan MacNaughton) is murdered by three pampered youths (Peter Blythe, Barry Warren and Derek Fowlds) when he foils their attempt to rob his establishment, and the uncouth youths put the blame on Hans. Given that Hans is known for a volatile temper, and was observed arguing with the father because of his disapproval over his courtship of Christina, he is summarily executed. Christine is devastated and commits suicide. The Baron, for his part, sees the two deaths as being opportune - he’s been experimenting with the idea of transplanting souls from one body to another, so why not transfer Hans’ into Christina’s body, thus making them “one”? Inevitably, things do not work out as planned - the resurrected Christina, her scars and other defects corrected by the Baron’s surgery, turns into a seductive vamp and sets about killing off the three youths, one by one…


CLEARLY, THE ROLE OFFERED DENBERG, a greater range of emotions than her initial acting jobs. Hammer may have seen her as a body to exploit on their posters, but director Terence Fisher rightly recognized that the film’s impact hinged on the credibility of her performance. He worked patiently with the young woman, helping her to hit all the right emotional notes. She responded with a performance of nuance and depth - but unfortunately for her, the studio heads deemed that her accent was too strong, so her entire performance would be dubbed by another actress. Dubbing wasn’t uncommon at Hammer, especially during this timeframe - Ursula Andress, John Richardson and, most amazingly, Andre Morell were all dubbed in She (1965), Richardson and Olinka Berkova would both be dubbed in The Vengeance of She (1967), Leon Greene and Nike Arrighi were dubbed in The Devil Rides Out (1967), Ewan Hooper was dubbed in Dracula Has Risen from the Grave (1968), Jenny Hanley would be revoiced in Scars of Dracula (1970), Ingrid Pitt’s exotic voice was erased from the soundtrack of Countess Dracula (1970), and so on. Vocal artist Jane Hands did a competent job filling in for Denberg on the soundtrack, but it still makes it difficult for one to fully appreciate her performance. Even so, Denberg’s physical performance seems heartfelt and appropriately moving, giving the film an emotional center that helps to compensate for the defects in its plotting and production values.Hammer films never attracted much serious critical appraisal in their day, but Denberg got decent notices for her work on Frankenstein Created Woman.




ALAS IT WOULD MARK HER FINAL APPEARANCE before a motion picture camera. Too much high living began to take their toll. Tired of the scandal rags in the UK, Denberg would eventually relocate to Austria, where she remains to this day. Denberg’s bouts with drugs and alcohol were well publicized, as was a breakdown which lead to electroshock therapy and a stint in a sanitarium. However, when the myth becomes more popular than reality, it tends to overshadow the latter in the eyes of the public.


AS SUCH, FOR YEARS Denberg was believed to have died - a typical example of the Marilyn Monroe prototype, wherein a beautiful starlet, having been exploited by callous producers and executives, was robbed her of her will to live and reduced her to substance abuse which would finally kill her. The reality is not so melodramatic, but it does at least have a happier ending. Denberg, who has reverted to her real name, remains firmly out of the public eye, however, and she appears to want to keep it that way. Attempts by fans to contact her for interviews have fallen on deaf ears, and so she remains shrouded in mystery… But for fans of Hammer horror, she remains a fascinating icon of sorts, and that, truly, is more telling than all the sensationalist journalism that has dogged her for so many years.



Author's Note: I would like to acknowledge the website Glamour Girls of the Silver Screen, and most especially the invaluable research of Hammer documentarian Ted Newsom, for providing ample material for me to work from in the writing of this article.

Written by Troy Howarth
Edited and Images by Marcus Brooks

Saturday 9 February 2013

HAMMER FILM PRODUCTIONS: THE EVIL OF FRANKENSTEIN: FEATURE WITH RARE GALLERY


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. There really isn’t room in this essay to delve too deeply into the first two points, but the third is of particular interest in this context.



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). 

Hammer 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 filmmaker, 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 failures. 


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 filmmaker 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 color, 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.



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 vigor 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). 


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 favored, 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. 


The larger than life characterization seems to suit the film’s milieu, and at least he brings a bit of zest to the proceedings. The normally reliable Duncan Lamont seems ill tempered and disinterested as the local policeman, however, while James Maxwell is perfectly dreadful as the irate village priest. Much the same can be said for Katy Wild, who flounders in her role as the mute waif that Frankenstein allows to tend to the creature; this character is so ill-defined, 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 makeups 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, and the pallid complexion looks very much like what it was: a lot of putty tossed together with unseemly haste. 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.



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.
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...