Showing posts with label laboratory. Show all posts
Showing posts with label laboratory. Show all posts

Saturday 7 June 2014

THE SIX FACES OF FRANKENSTEIN: BRAINS AND EYEBALLS

 
'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'. Troy Howarth

Read the whole feature HERE 
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. - See more at: http://petercushingblog.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/hammer-film-productions-evil-of.html#sthash.DxCN8cmr.dpuf
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. - See more at: http://petercushingblog.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/hammer-film-productions-evil-of.html#sthash.DxCN8cmr.dpuf
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. - See more at: http://petercushingblog.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/hammer-film-productions-evil-of.html#sthash.DxCN8cmr.dpuf
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. - See more at: http://petercushingblog.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/hammer-film-productions-evil-of.html#sthash.DxCN8cmr.dpuf

Tuesday 3 December 2013

COLOUR ME FRANKENSTEIN : THE BARON IN LIVING COLOUR



It’s virtually impossible to comprehend the impact that The Curse of Frankenstein had in 1957, much as it’s impossible to appreciate what a shocker James Whale’s Frankenstein was all the way back in 1931.  Terence Fisher’s Gothic classic broke new ground and filmmakers have since picked up the gauntlet and unleashed films that are far more graphically violent; Fisher himself would finish his career with his goriest film ever, Frankenstein and the Monster from Hell, in 1972.  One of the film’s major innovations was that of color – it wasn’t the first horror film to be produced in color, of course, but it was the first ever Frankenstein in color.



The use of color is one of many elements which helped The Curse of Frankenstein to stand out from the rest of the pack.  Fisher and cinematographer Jack Asher sensibly realized that the color should be used for emotional effect; as such, they threw caution (and logic) to the wind by indulging in some stylistic flourishes which would later be expanded on in Hammer’s subsequent horror films – and those of Roger Corman in America and Mario Bava and Riccardo Freda in Italy.  Consider the scene in the forest where the pitiful creature (Christopher Lee in one of his best, yet least appreciated performances) encounters a frightened blind man (a marvelous Fred Johnson) and his little grandson (Claude Kingston).  In order to heighten the tension on a subliminal level, Fisher had the crew pain the leaves red – literally.  This effect is almost lost in the current, faded home video prints, but one can still get a sense of it – and it certainly must have looked grand when the prints were newly circulated in 1957.  It was a showy bit of technique for a director not revered for his stylistic prowess and no one less than Michelangelo Antonioni would reuse the idea in his watershed thriller Blow Up (1966).



The color red is prominently featured in the film and for good reason: it’s the color of violence… the color of passion.  Both are on ample display here, as the randy Baron (Peter Cushing at his most icy) takes advantage of his servant Justine (Valerie Gaunt), only to have her killed off by his creature when she reveals that she’s pregnant with his child!  As the Baron conducts experiments in his makeshift attic laboratory, he is prone to wiping blood on his jacket – a gesture which looks natural and thoughtless, but which would have been worked out in detail by the ever-meticulous Cushing.


Other bursts of primary colors are evident as well, notably in the multi-colored liquids found in the lab scenes.  Fisher and Asher would go on to hone this technique in Dracula (1958), The Revenge of Frankenstein (1958) and The Hound of the Baskervilles (1958) before positively perfecting it for The Mummy (1959) and the otherwise disappointing The Man Who Could Cheat Death (1959).  As such, the film doesn’t have scenes bathed in the same irrational but visually sumptuous pools of red, blue and green lighting familiar from those later films – but as with all good staring points, The Curse of Frankenstein has little signposts which allude to where their experiments in color would take them.





Written By Troy Howarth
Banner and Images Marcus Brooks 

Wednesday 23 October 2013

TROY HOWARTH 'CURSE OF FRANKENSTEIN' REVIEW AND LOBBY CARD GALLERY


Sometime in the 1950s, American writer/producer Milton Subotsky (later to head Hammer's rival, Amicus) approached Hammer with the idea of doing a remake of James Whale's Frankenstein.  Producer Anthony Hinds didn't think much of the idea and rightly reckoned that any infringement on the material as established in the earlier versions of the 30s and 40s would bring the legal eagles at Universal Studios swooping down on Hammer.  Hinds saw potential in completely ignoring the earlier versions, however, and decided to entrust screenwriter Jimmy Sangster with delivering a fresh adaptation of Mary Shelley's classic novel.  In 1956, Sangster was still a "lowly" production manager, but he pitched an idea that Hinds liked, and was given the chance to write his first script, for the Quatermass knock-off X The Unknown.  Hinds recognized that Sangster had talent as a writer and, better still, he also had a practical understanding of the limitations of Hammer's resources.  He could be relied upon to deliver a filmable script which wouldn't stretch the company's coffers too far.  Frakenstein would be Sangster's sophomore effort as a writer, and the final result would have undreamed of repercussions for just about everybody connected with the project.


Whereas the Universal series highlighted the character of the monster - played in the first three films by Boris Karloff, but then reduced to lesser actors with mixed results for the remaining sequels - Sangster decided to focus his energies on the character of Frankenstein himself.  It's a common misconception, created in large part by Universal themselves, that Frankenstein is the monster, whereas in fact, he is actually the creator himself.  Sangster ignored Shelley's conception of an earnest, well-intended medical student who overstretches his bounds by attempting to create life.  Instead, he recreated the character as a Byronic dandy with a sadistic streak.  The monster and the creator were to become one, in essence. 


Hinds was thrilled with Sangster's efforts and assembled a dream team to realize his vision.  Director Terence Fisher later maintained that he was owed a project by the company, but Hinds would contradict this, stating that he knew he was the best man for the job and would have hired him regardless.  Fisher's career up to that point was not terribly distinguished: a long string of low budget potboilers with little to distinguish them from the "quota quickie" pack, though he did helm a few fine pictures like Portrait from Life and So Long at the Fair.  He had also directed Hammer's earliest brushes with sci-fi and fantasy, Spaceways, Four Sided Triangle and A Stolen Face, and the thematic concerns of those films would be reflected here.  Fisher proved to be a natural for the Gothic; by his own admission, he was not a fan of the genre at the time and had not seen the original Universal horrors, and he even rejected invitations to see them, hoping to keep his own approach fresh and uninfluenced by what had come before.  He was wise to do so, as his matter-of-fact, down-to-earth approach helped to make this a very new kind of horror film.  Fisher was also given a crew that would help to define the look and style of Hammer horror: cinematographer Jack Asher, production designer Bernard Robinson, camera operator Len Harris, editor James Needs, composer James Bernard, etc.


To head the cast, Hammer elected to ignore their long-standing policy of importing a faded American name for marquee value.  This was to be a very British horror film, and only a British actor could do it justice.  Hinds turned to Peter Cushing, then the biggest TV star in the country, who surprised by the producer by enthusiastically accepting the project.  Cushing would subsequently weigh the pros and cons of doing further films for the studio, rightly recognizing that being associated with genre fare might impact his chances of getting more "serious" film work, but he eventually decided to embrace the steady flow of work, and a horror icon was born.


To play the creature (no longer referred to as the monster, lest Universal's lawyers get tetchy about it), Hinds initially turned his eye to imposing comic actor Bernard Bresslaw.  In the end, however, they decided to go with bit part player Christopher Lee.  Standing 6'5" in height, Lee also had background in mime, which would come in very handy given that the role was mute.  Lee suffered under the hands of makeup artist Phil Leakey, who was challenged with the task of devising a new monster makeup design.  His early sketches ranged from the bizarre to the ludicrous, with Lee imploring that it should just look like a jigsaw puzzle as he's been stitched together from various body parts.  The final makeup drew jeers from fans accustomed to Jack Pierce's iconic Karloff design, but it has stood the test of time and is every bit as effective a piece of work in its own way.


Finally released to cinemas as The Curse of Frankenstein, the film was the first Gothic horror to be filmed in color - and the added bonus of some then-graphic gore and an emphasis on busty women in cleavage-hugging period gowns outraged critics and tickled audiences.


Seen today, The Curse of Frankenstein remains one of Hammer's finest films.  Fisher directs with a sure and steady hand.  The characterization of the Baron it matched by Peter Cushing's superb interpretation.  Lee's creature is at once pitiable and genuinely frightening; it is most assuredly one of his most under-valued performances.  The production values are solid and belie the film's low budget.  It also set the style for everything which would follow and did so in a way that seems far more sure-footed than it probably should.


The character would be revisited in a series of sequels, with Cushing appearing in all but one of them - that one being an ill-advised parody of sorts, The Horror of Frankenstein (1970), starring Ralph Bates.  Sangster would pen the first follow-up, The Revenge of Frankenstein (1958), while Hinds himself handled writing chores on most of the other entries.  Ironically, it was the Hinds and Sangster-free Frankenstein Must Be Destroyed (1969), written by Bert Batt, which would mark the series' high watermark.  The various writers brought different interpretations to bear on the character of the Baron, making it impossible to view the series as one long-running saga, but Cushing's commitment to the role made the films a delight.  The Curse of Frankenstein may not be as audacious as some of the later entries, but it still remains one of the best of the lot - and a classic slice of Hammer horror.


Appropriately enough, the film was the first of the initial Hammer Gothics to hit blu ray through Icon and Lionsgate.  Their Region B/Region 2 blu ray/DVD combopack was met with much derision, however, owing to a flawed transfer.  Word has it that a 4K master was provided by Warner Brothers, but Hammer failed to capitalize on the format's capabilities by cleaning up the image and going for a sharper, better defined image.  As is so often the case with these controversies, however, the extreme reactions are a bit over the top.  While the presentation is far from definitive and will never be used as a reference quality disc for showing off the capabilities of the medium, it's still quite watchable - especially in the full frame transfer which restores some information missing in the 1.66 version which was also included.  Colors are a bit pale and the image isn't as sharp as one would like, but it marks an improvement over the DVD edition from Warner Bros and restores a shot which had been censored for many years (you'll know it when you see it).  The disc is also overflowing with extras, including an informative and entertaining commentary by Jonathan Rigby and Marcus Hearne and a wonderful featurette about Cushing.




Review: Troy Howarth
Images: Marcus  Brooks




Monday 2 September 2013

AND THEN HE CREATED WOMAN: SOUL SEARCHING AND DECAPTATIONS IN FRANKENSTEIN CREATED WOMAN


Baron Frankenstein (Peter Cushing) discovers a technique of isolating the soul, thus preserving life indefinitely; he chooses a disfigured village girl (Susan Denberg) to experiment with, perfecting her body via surgery and then transferring the soul of her recently-executed lover (Robert Morris) to occupy her body….


Hammer and Universal’s collaboration The Evil of Frankenstein (1964) proved successful at the box office, but it still took a little while for the writers at Hammer to concoct a new Frankenstein adventure.  By the time Anthony Hinds delivered the next installment, he had decided to harken back to a warmed over idea first mooted in the late 50s, which had been designed to cash in on the success of Roger Vadim’s scandalous and successful And God Created Woman.  The reference may have been a little out of date by the time Hinds found a way of making the idea work, but it still had obviously exploitable elements.  In 1966, when the film went before Arthur Grant’s camera, Hammer had split with Universal and they were in the midst of a money-saving production arrangement with Associated British in the UK and Twentieth Century Fox in the U.S.  It was producer Anthony Nelson Keys who concocted the idea of making two films back to back, each utilizing essentially the same sets and much of the same crew.  The first films to employ this tactic were Dracula Prince of Darkness and Rasputin the Mad Monk, produced and released in the UK in 1965 (US release: 1966), and these were followed by the “Cornish duo” of Plague of the Zombies and The Reptile, released in 1966.  Frankenstein Created Woman and The Mummy’s Shroud, both produced and released in the UK in 1966 (US release to follow in 1967), would bring this short-lived tradition to a close.  The advantages of the technique clearly were outweighed by the deficits in the long run, and in terms of what was showing on screen, these last two suffered from production values which appeared positively anemic compared to the lush and beautiful Hammer gothics of the late 1950s and early 1960s.


The story is at once intellectually ambitious and thematically troubling.  The concept of Frankenstein using science to “capture” the soul is a heady one – and it is this which has endeared the film to Hammer buff/Oscar winning filmmaker Martin Scorsese – but it is inconsistent with the character’s belief system – or lack thereof.  There’s something inherently troubling about the notion of Frankenstein even accepting the notion of the soul, let alone addressing this “life essence” in such terms.  The screenplay makes no effort to explain how he even came to light upon such an experiment.  The concept of the character is also closer to Hinds’ swashbuckling, light hearted version of the character from Evil – and the presence of the character’s burned hands (which render him incapable of delicate surgery, thus necessitating his use of the drunken village doctor played by Thorley Walters to serve as his hands) definitely ties the film into that previous adventure.  Thus, the fans who insist upon attributing the character’s growth and nuances to director Terence Fisher fail to acknowledge some practical realities.  While Jimmy Sangster had conceived the character as an amoral dandy who ends up literally becoming his own creation, Hinds’ reboot changed him to an altogether more positive force for change and innovation.  After this, in Frankenstein Must Be Destroyed, the character would change back to the more ruthless nature of the earlier Sangster versions, this time with Bert Batt handling screenwriting duties, while Hinds’ final visitation of the character in Frankenstein and the Monster from Hell (1972) finds him wedged somewhat between the good natured rogue of his earlier screenplay and the deranged genius of Sangster and Batt.  In any event, the Baron present in Frankenstein Created Woman is virtually reduced to supporting player status – thus making this the closest Hammer ever came to sidelining Peter Cushing in his most iconic genre role, just as they had done with Christopher Lee in the Dracula franchise.  That’s not to say that Cushing isn’t given ample screen time – he certainly is – but the dramatic arc of the story is more concerned with the other characters in the long run.


The “monster” this time is played by Susan Denberg, a former Playboy centerfold who caught the eye of Hammer’s managing director, Sir James Carreras.  Carreras knew an exploitable asset when he saw it, and he wasted no time arranging for the stills photographer to shoot a variety of pictures of Denberg (kitted out in a sort of bikini made of bandages) being “birthed” by Cushing.  These images captured the imagination of fans, and a rumor persists in some circles that they are the only surviving evidence of a “creation scene” which was never filmed in the first place.  Denberg had very little actual acting experience at the time of filming, but under the tutelage of Terence Fisher, she delivers a rather touching and effective performance.  She’s dubbed by another performer, but the dubbing is of good quality, and her physical movements and reactions show that she had genuine talent beyond her obvious good looks.


Cushing, of course, performs beautifully.  It would have been easy for him to walk through this part by this stage in the game, but he was much too professional to adopt such a mentality.  He plays the role with warmth and sly humor, making this an altogether more “lovable” Baron Frankenstein than the character we first got to know in The Curse of Frankenstein (1957).


The other standout performance is by Hammer/Fisher favorite Thorley Walters, who plays the drunken and disgraced Dr. Hertz.  Walters always bore a slight resemblance to Nigel Bruce, the English actor known for playing a bumbling version of Dr. Watson against Basil Rathbone’s most canonical Sherlock Holmes, and indeed he was even cast in the role in Fisher’s disastrous experiment in German filmmaking, Sherlock Holmes and the Deadly Necklace (1962), which cast Christopher Lee as the great detective.  This film, however, presents Walters at his most “Bruce-as-Watson.”  The character is a self described “broken down, drunken old muddlehead,” and he effectively stands in for the audience in his relationship with the brilliant Baron.  It’s Walters’ function to ask an increasingly exasperated Cushing to explain what he’s doing, and it’s a tribute to Walter’s natural likability as an actor that this never comes off as strained or contrived.  Walters would go on to play one more role for Fisher (as the short tempered but even more idiotic police inspector in Frankenstein Must Be Destroyed) and then one last role for Hammer (as the burgomaster in Vampire Circus, 1971), but Dr. Hertz arguably remains his most beloved characterization.


Director Fisher handles the action with grace and economy.  His excellent use of framing and editing is evident throughout.  The various “revenge” scenes, wherein the “possessed” Christina, driven by the vengeful spirit of her lover, visits retribution on the men who used to torment her, are beautifully executed, even verging on the surreal at times.  Indeed, the basic concept of the “monster” taking revenge on three pampered, well-to-do louts would be brushed off and used to even greater effect by Hinds for Taste the Blood of Dracula (1969).  On the downside, despite Fisher’s best efforts, the film simply looks cheap – even tacky at times.  Arthur Grant was always a cinematographer for whom speed and economy meant more than experimentation – his lighting was always perfectly solid and professional, but it never sought to emulate the poetry of Jack Asher or even Michael Reed.  His work here is similarly professional but uninspired, and this, coupled with some unusually cramped looking sets, helps to make this film look the cheapest of all the Hammer Frankenstein films – that is, unless we count Jimmy Sangster’s Horror of Frankenstein (1970), an ill-conceived attempt to rejuvenate the franchise at the box office by casting youthful Ralph Bates in the lead role.


Despite its shortcomings, however, Frankenstein Created Woman remains an engaging film.  Fisher’s flair for handling drama and characterization gives the film genuine “soul,” and the performances help to compensate, as well.  The impact is aided by a wonderful, melancholy soundtrack by James Bernard.  It may not emerge as top tier Fisher, but it is still a well done and enjoyable addition to the franchise.


Images: Marcus Brooks


Monday 19 August 2013

THE BARON REBOOTED: THE EVIL OF FRANKENSTEIN : HAMMER FILMS 1964


CAST:
Peter Cushing (Baron Frankenstein), Peter Woodthorpe (Zoltan), Sandor Eles (Hans), Kiwi Kingston (The Monster), Katy Wild (Rena)

PRODUCTION:
Director – Freddie Francis, Screenplay – John Elder [Anthony Hinds], Producer – Anthony Hinds, Photography – John Wilcox, Music – Don Banks, Special Effects – Les Bowie, Makeup – Roy Ashton, Art Direction – Don Mingaye. Production Company – Hammer.


SYNOPSIS:
Forced to leave town because of their experiments, Frankenstein and Hans return to Frankenstein’s hometown Karlstad and set up laboratory in the abandoned Frankenstein chateau. Frankenstein then finds his original creation frozen inside a glacier and restores it to life. Only it will not respond to his commands. And so Frankenstein comes up with the idea of obtaining the services of Zoltan, a disreputable carnival hypnotist, to hypnotize the monster into obeying him. Zoltan is successful but has less than scientific interests at heart. With the monster responding only to his commands, Zoltan uses it to rob and take revenge upon the town authorities.


COMMENTARY:
General opinion holds The Evil of Frankenstein, the third of Hammer’s Frankenstein films, to be one of the duds of the series. One is at a loss to understand why. I, to the contrary, hold The Evil of Frankenstein to be one of the best of the series. With the preceding two entries, The Curse of Frankenstein (1957) and The Revenge of Frankenstein (1958), Hammer had kept the same essential creative team – director Terence Fisher, screenwriter Jimmy Sangster and star Peter Cushing – in place. For The Evil of Frankenstein, Hammer producer Anthony Hinds replaced Sangster on script, while Freddie Francis inherited the director’s chair. Freddie Francis was an up and coming director who had worked as an award-winning cinematographer in the previous decade, had made his genre debut with Vengeance/The Brain (1962), followed with a couple of Hammer’s psycho-thrillers, Paranoiac (1962) and Nightmare (1963), and then attained some success with the first of Hammer rival Amicus’s anthology films Dr Terror’s House of Horrors (1964) just prior to this. Francis, whose output to the Anglo-horror cycle has been underrated, would go on to become its next most prolific director to Fisher. (See below for Freddie Francis’s other films).


It is not clear why The Evil of Frankenstein is almost universally regarded as such a dog in the Hammer pantheon. Just look at the opening scenes that hit one with the fervid intensity of something out of a Hieronymous Bosch nightmare brought to life – a little girl sees a body being stolen from a hut in the forest in the middle of the night and calls a priest. The body is taken to Frankenstein who removes the heart before the paling body snatcher, dismissing his queasiness with a curt, “He won’t need it anymore,” before the priest bursts in, cursing Frankenstein’s abominable experiments and smashing the lab equipment. It’s a sequence lit with such a feverishly eerie intensity that it attains a genuinely nightmare atmosphere of dread chill. Nothing else in the film quite manages to match it. Certainly, there are a number of images littered throughout that have a lingering memorability – the deaf-mute beggar girl and her strange relationship with the monster; the monster found buried in the side of the glacier; and one especially memorable scene where the monster gets up and begins to agonizingly shuffle around the lab while Frankenstein looks on, coldly clinically taking notes.


The Evil of Frankenstein presents some confusion to the continuity of the Hammer Frankenstein series. For some reason, Freddie Francis conducts a flashback that offers a potted retelling all the essentials of The Curse of Frankenstein anew. However, this makes changes to continuity – Frankenstein now appears to have merely been driven out of town, not executed. Where the events of The Revenge of Frankenstein fit in becomes somewhat confusing – the Hans character is carried over from Revenge, but Frankenstein’s new body and his escape from the gallows is forgotten about. It’s a puzzle as to why the film creates the flashback – some of this is to set up plot points for later on – although without much rewriting this could all have been made to carry over from Revenge. What tended to lose many people was the addition of the Zoltan character, which takes the story considerably away from the Frankenstein mythos. Indeed, you could almost see this as Hammer’s attempt to craft their own variant on The Cabinet of Dr Caligari (1919).


With The Curse of Frankenstein, Hammer did not have the copyright to use the Jack Pierce designs for the Boris Karloff monster makeup from Frankenstein (1931) and so Phil Leakey came up with his own original designs. Apparently Universal has relaxed their copyright restrictions by the time of The Evil of Frankenstein and the makeup on Kiwi Kingston’s monster is closely modelled on the Pierce designs, the only time the Hammer Frankenstein’s came close to resembling the Universal originals. Production designer Don Mingaye and special effects man Les Bowie collaborate to come up with not one but two of the series very best creation sequences, with lightning bolts and generator coils crashing in the best Kenneth Strickfaden tradition. And on the whole, The Evil of Frankenstein is a Hammer Frankenstein entry that is well worth re-evaluation. 


The other Hammer Frankenstein films are:– The Curse of Frankenstein (1957), The Revenge of Frankenstein (1958), Frankenstein Created Woman (1967), Frankenstein Must Be Destroyed (1969), The Horror of Frankenstein (1970) and Frankenstein and the Monster from Hell (1973).


Freddie Francis’s other genre films are:- Vengeance/The Brain (1962), Paranoiac (1962), Nightmare (1963), Dr Terror’s House of Horrors (1964), Hysteria (1965), The Skull (1965), The Psychopath (1966), The Deadly Bees (1967), They Came from Beyond Space (1967), Torture Garden (1967), Dracula Has Risen from the Grave (1968), Mumsy, Nanny, Sonny and Girly (1969), Trog (1970), The Vampire Happening (1971), Tales from the Crypt (1972), Tales That Witness Madness (1972), Craze (1973), The Creeping Flesh (1973), Legend of the Werewolf (1974), Son of Dracula (1974), The Ghoul (1975), The Doctor and the Devils (1985) and Dark Tower (1987).


Review: Richard Scheib
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...