The Absolutely Diabolical Hammer Films Thread

[R-T-C]

I remember them talking about bringing the studio back to 'make horror films for young people' or something like that. I'm guessing they realised that this is an absurdly saturated market already, and abandoned the plans.

I'd love it if they returned and made period horror films, there is a distinct lack of those these days. With a few decent, but not overly well known actors, who are prepared to stick with the company for a few films they could make some new horror icons a la Cushing and Lee.

I think it is about time for a new round of Poe adaptions and classic monster movies. With Hammer style editing, no flashy music or quick cuts, they could attract a good swathe of more mature cinema goers.

[JamieC460]

Originally Posted by R-T-C

I remember them talking about bringing the studio back to 'make horror films for young people' or something like that. I'm guessing they realised that this is an absurdly saturated market already, and abandoned the plans.

I'd love it if they returned and made period horror films, there is a distinct lack of those these days. With a few decent, but not overly well known actors, who are prepared to stick with the company for a few films they could make some new horror icons a la Cushing and Lee.

That's exactly what they should do. I don't know about the rest of you guys, but I really can't get "Into" modern horror movies. They all seem the same, unimaginative drivel and aimed at a teen market.

The only exceptions I can think of over the last ten years or so, are the Hannibal Lector movies, but then again, these featured real actors rather than teen pin-ups.

[bes]

Originally Posted by John Hodson

Bes; I've been trying to work up the enthusiasm to add another non-anamorphic DVD to my collection (and while I really prefer The Pirates Of Blood River DSP is quite watchable), but it looks to me like it may be too late already - seems like Devil Ship Pirates is going OOP..?

Out of print eh? Dagnammit! I suspected as much; there are some Amazon sellers who are charging up to fifteen quid for it, which is pushing it for a non-anamorphic barebones dvd!
The Pirates Of Blood River turns up on cable sometimes, but is terribly cropped. Maybe a US dvd label will do these films justice in the near future...

[Nebiroth]

Apparently, the Hammer titles from Warner, licensed from Canal-Plus, are going OOP. The rumour is that they are being re-licensed to Universal (who have a pretty poor record in r2, IMHO). The affected titles are:

She
Dracula: Prince Of Darkness
Plague Of The Zombies
Rasputin The Mad Monk
One Million Years B.C.
Frankenstein Created Woman
Quatermass And The Pit
The Vengeance Of She
The Devil Rides Out
Scars Of Dracula
Horror Of Frankenstein
Lust For A Vampire
Blood From The Mummy's Tomb

Most of them are fairly easy to find, with the exception of She and Vengeance of She. Some are available in r1, r4 and other parts of r2, such as Germany. However, some of the r1's are Anchor Bay releases, also OOP (such as Frankenstein Created Woman).

[John Hodson]

If anyone's interested Amazon US has some Hammers - including some of the alledgedly OOP doubles - on offer right now;

The Horror of Frankenstein - $8.97
The Devil Rides Out/Rasputin the Mad Monk - $8.97
Four Sided Triangle/X The Unknown - $8.97
Frankenstein Created Woman/The Legend of the 7 Golden Vampires - $8.97
The Lost Continent/The Reptile - $8.97
The Mummy's Shroud/The Plague of Zombies - $8.97
Prehistoric Women/The Witches - $8.97
The Vengeance of She/The Viking Queen - $8.97
Blood from the Mummy's Tomb - $11.97
Lust for a Vampire - $11.97

[Nebiroth]

Unfortunately, a lot of them are marked "normally ships in 5-8 days". Meaning Amazon don't actually have them in stock. And they're unlikely to be able to get new copies, since these have been out of print for over a year.

DVDPacific have some of the doubles, and while they're a tad more expensive (made up for by massively lower postage), they really do have them in stock; some of them don't even have the Low Stock indicator, so they have plenty.

Amazon don't seem all that good at removing OOP titles from sale; really, they should only show these as being Marketplace available.

They have done this for the Dracula, Prince of Darkness/Satanic Rites of Dracula double, but ironically have the even rarer and much longer OOP Satanic Rites disc as being on Special Order, 1-4 weeks!

Not ALL the AB Hammers are OOP. AFAIK, Horror of Frankenstein is still in print.

[John Hodson]

Originally Posted by Nebiroth

Unfortunately, a lot of them are marked "normally ships in 5-8 days". Meaning Amazon don't actually have them in stock. And they're unlikely to be able to get new copies, since these have been out of print for over a year.

I think it's worth a punt; my The Lost Continent/The Reptile has just shipped.

[dunctay]

There were copies of The Devil Ship Pirates for £5.99 on ebay last week
ive bought one as it will be hard to find in the future if its out of print.

[bes]

I purchased Devil Ship Pirates from an Amazon seller recently as it was going OOP. I watched it today and thought it was a pretty good pirate flick. The non-anamorphic widescreen transfer was acceptable as well. This was a dvd that I always intended to get in the sales but which seemed to never go down in price sadly...
Hopefully someone will get round to releasing The Pirates Of Blood River on dvd soon.

[John Hodson]

Zeta Minor's Julian Knott has updated the fabbo Hammer DVD Guide and added these interesting comments to the lead page:

I've added a lot of information about foreign releases in the latest update. None seem particularly attractive to UK or US collectors who simply want a half-decent version of the movies, but as some titles are now out of print on one side of the Atlantic or the other (or both!), these may become increasingly viable as alternatives.

It looks like all the UK Hammer titles from Studio Canal (marketed and distributed by Warner Home Video) have been deleted. This may simply signal a switch to another sales and distribution partner (and some re-packaging), or they may disappear for indefinite period. I've heard rumours that the catalogue will end up with Universal, but it's perhaps more likely that it will end up at 2 Entertain's Cinema Club label (they've licensed a number of Studio Canal titles recently). Now might be a good time to pick up any titles you're missing. That's if you can find them - they're disappearing fast!

I recently spoke to Gary Wilson, owner of record label GDI, which released a string of Hammer soundtrack CDs. These were recently listed as "new releases" by several online retailers. What's happened is that GDI have switched distributors, so the e-tailers were simply updating their listings. Although GDI has several new Hammer CDs in production - including one for Captain Kronos - it's unlikely that any new titles will be released in the foreseeable future.

[R-T-C]

For those interested I just completed a rather marathon-like review session of all six of the Hammer/Peter Cushing Frankenstein films and their DVDs:



http://r-t-c.co.uk/dvd/frankenstein/hammer/index.html

This series is certainly better than the Dracula series which rapidly became repetitive and sale. Unlike Christopher Lee who made mere cameos in his films, Cushing gets centre stage in every one and displays some remarkable talents. It is also a very interesting look at how Hammer changed over the years, with a little more gore in every film...

[gooseUK]

Originally Posted by R-T-C

For those interested I just completed a rather marathon-like review session of all six of the Hammer/Peter Cushing Frankenstein films and their DVDs:



http://r-t-c.co.uk/dvd/frankenstein/hammer/index.html

This series is certainly better than the Dracula series which rapidly became repetitive and sale. Unlike Christopher Lee who made mere cameos in his films, Cushing gets centre stage in every one and displays some remarkable talents. It is also a very interesting look at how Hammer changed over the years, with a little more gore in every film...

Excellent series of reviews there, top notch and extremely useful

I agree with your comments about the Frankenstein series being, on the whole, superior to Hammer's Dracula franchise, which has always struck me as fundamentally odd: I mean, there should have been much more scope for a series based around an immortal Vampire, in possession of so many strange unearthly powers and with the potential to live in varied timescales, than there comparitively should be in a series of films that (essentially) rehash the same old plot of a scientist stiching together his own home-made man... and, yet, the reality proves the opposite. The Frankenstein series is far more satisfying and, indeed, its watching the twist on the old familiar themes each time that partly makes them so enjoyable. Plus, you have the power-house that is Cushing I even quite enjoy the much derided Ralph Bates starring 'remake' The Horror Of Frankenstein...

With regards to the Dracula series: as admirable as it was for Christopher Lee to refuse to say this allegedly dreadful dialogue in Dracula: Prince of Darkness, I do feel such a move backfired on him as The Count would subsequently be written as mute presence in most of the following films, which rather quickly diluted his presence and impact. It soon became a case of him looking menacing, hissing, pointing and seducing the odd buxom wench - hardly the eloquent, seductive, sinister performance from The Horror of Dracula.

[John Hodson]

That's nice work

Peter Cushing is a God; no question. Lord knows how they would have got on without him, investing even the most outrageous tosh with a skill and veracity some of them frankly didn't deserve.

I still think there's alot of fun to be had from the 'Dracula' series; mid-series they might have struggled a tad, but I think there was a late-ish surge - 'Taste the Blood of...' is brilliant stuff, and how could anyone not get down for the groovy 'A.D. 1972' and the last battle between Cushing and Lee?

[R-T-C]

Originally Posted by gooseUK

...The Count would subsequently be written as mute presence in most of the following films, which rather quickly diluted his presence and impact. It soon became a case of him looking menacing, hissing, pointing and seducing the odd buxom wench - hardly the eloquent, seductive, sinister performance from The Horror of Dracula.

Indeed. You know a film franchise has become tired when they could haved just used stock footage of the lead character from earlier films for the title role.

Originally Posted by John Hodson

I still think there's alot of fun to be had from the 'Dracula' series; mid-series they might have struggled a tad, but I think there was a late-ish surge - 'Taste the Blood of...' is brilliant stuff, and how could anyone not get down for the groovy 'A.D. 1972' and the last battle between Cushing and Lee?

I do love the series and have the complete set on DVD (except Satanic Rites...) need to wait for a re-release of that one. They are all fun films, but they lack the impressive power of the Frankenstein films. I think the problem was simply that Dracula had no-one to talk too, he did not have many assistants, and those he did, his character treated with scorn, this meant that there was very little dialogue that he could be given and hence his mute screentime. They wanted to make Dracula into a monster, keeping his appearences and motives surprising, but failed.

It is interesting you mention a surge in quality, actually I find the first two sequels (Dracula: Price of Darkness (1966) and Dracula has Risen from the Grave (1969) to be some of the better ones. Hammer was good at the gothic style, and these films have it in abundence. The films actually make sense as well, in PoD, the unfortunate English travellers are killed to restore him to life, and then to obtain more 'brides' as in the first film, while in RftG he is attempting to get revenge on the man who exorcised his castle.
Come Taste the Blood of Dracula (1970) his motives for revenge are very confused, and why his 'servant' died from drinking the blood is never properly explained. I thought the English setting and the lead cast were pretty good and the ending is very impressive, quite unique for a Dracula film.
Scars of Dracula(1970) is a misfire, one of the big plus points of the Dracula series over the Frankenstein films was the direct-continuity, this film attempted to restart the franchise without much sucess. I just remember it being slow and unimpressive. This would surely have been better if made as a separate non-Dracula vampire film as Hammer would do with Twins of Evil (1970), Vampire Circus (1972) et. al.
Dracula A.D. 1972 (1972) was an interesting experiment to again restart the franchise, but is only really worth watching for the ludicrous 1970s settings. The fact that becoming a vampire makes you easier to kill is always a problem with this series, and in AD 1972, Johnny Alucard discovers this to his peril. An interesting film, but not enough to save the series, or the studio.

[John Hodson]

Originally Posted by R-T-C

It is interesting you mention a surge in quality, actually I find the first two sequels (Dracula: Price of Darkness (1966) and Dracula has Risen from the Grave (1969) to be some of the better ones. Hammer was good at the gothic style, and these films have it in abundence. The films actually make sense as well, in PoD, the unfortunate English travellers are killed to restore him to life, and then to obtain more 'brides' as in the first film, while in RftG he is attempting to get revenge on the man who exorcised his castle.
Come Taste the Blood of Dracula (1970) his motives for revenge are very confused, and why his 'servant' died from drinking the blood is never properly explained. I thought the English setting and the lead cast were pretty good and the ending is very impressive, quite unique for a Dracula film.
Scars of Dracula(1970) is a misfire, one of the big plus points of the Dracula series over the Frankenstein films was the direct-continuity, this film attempted to restart the franchise without much sucess. I just remember it being slow and unimpressive. This would surely have been better if made as a separate non-Dracula vampire film as Hammer would do with Twins of Evil (1970), Vampire Circus (1972) et. al.
Dracula A.D. 1972 (1972) was an interesting experiment to again restart the franchise, but is only really worth watching for the ludicrous 1970s settings. The fact that becoming a vampire makes you easier to kill is always a problem with this series, and in AD 1972, Johnny Alucard discovers this to his peril. An interesting film, but not enough to save the series, or the studio.

The first sequel - Brides of Dracula - is a gem and benefits from a stunning transfer in Universal's 'Hammer Series' set; good story, fine acting, no Dracula, but then you can't have it all. Taste the Blood of Dracula works beautifully as a commentary on 'Victorian values', a look at the repressed sexuality and hypocracy of the era. The first two thirds of the film are excellent and as good as any in the series IMHO. Not sure if you're calling 'A.D.'s' setting ludicrous in retrospect (although the '70s were pretty ludicrous, I'll admit, at the time), but if you're going to have Counts, cloaks, vampirism then why not hot pants and floppy hats - the setting seems perfectly okay to me, although I agree gothic works best. Today, it's the score that really dates it badly; or does it add to the sense of kitsch? Lee has some good lines, some culled from Stoker (which Lee always tried to do when he was bored with the script and didn't, as he sometimes did, resort to mime); he seems comfortable with trying to put flesh on Dracula's bones so to speak, even though he was uncomfortable with - or maybe because of - the 20th century setting - "YOU demand? I have returned to destroy the house of Van Helsing, the old through the young, you and your line have been chosen to serve me in that purpose!" Great stuff.

Hammer had tried horror and piled on the gore - and the nudity - to try and keep pace (good grief, let's face it, they tried everything, including a martial arts / vampire melding). Like the 'Carry On' films who were out-vulgared by Harrison Marks, they simply had their time.

[gooseUK]

Originally Posted by John Hodson

Hammer had tried horror and piled on the gore - and the nudity - to try and keep pace (good grief, let's face it, they tried everything, including a martial arts / vampire melding). Like the 'Carry On' films who were out-vulgared by Harrison Marks, they simply had their time.

which is why I'm actually quite happy that all these occasional rumours of 'Re-launching' the Hammer brand have (so far at least) come to zero - I just can't imagine any Hammer film made in the 21st Century feeling quite right, if that makes sense? As you say, there were a product of their time. Now, it would just feel like a marketing gimmik.

You know what though: reading this I realise that I haven't seen Dracula ad1972 in absolutely donkeys years!!! Think I might just have to pick that up pronto!

[R-T-C]

Originally Posted by John Hodson

The first sequel - Brides of Dracula - is a gem and benefits from a stunning transfer in Universal's 'Hammer Series' set; good story, fine acting, no Dracula, but then you can't have it all. Taste the Blood of Dracula works beautifully as a commentary on 'Victorian values', a look at the repressed sexuality and hypocracy of the era. The first two thirds of the film are excellent and as good as any in the series IMHO.

Brides of Dracula (1960) is an interesting film with some wonderful storybook settings, I really need to rewatch it though before passing judgement. As I suspected in my review of Kiss of the Vampire (1963), this film was originally planned as a third sequel with Van Helsing making a (final?) return, but that never came to pass, and instead it stands alone quite well.

I agree that Taste the Blood of Dracula (1970) has a very good setting, it is almost a pity that they had to work Dracula into there. It might have worked better as a sequel to Kiss of the Vampire (1963), Lord Courtley (Ralph Bates), a survivor of the first film, could have tried to initiate the three rich men into the cult of the vampire to start it up again, but freaking out in the intitiation they beat him to death, or so they think, and he returns to seek revenge. You'd get the same film just without the random appearance of Dracula, and Courtley's vampirish character would suit some dialogue much better.

Originally Posted by John Hodson

Not sure if you're calling 'A.D.'s' setting ludicrous in retrospect (although the '70s were pretty ludicrous, I'll admit, at the time), but if you're going to have Counts, cloaks, vampirism then why not hot pants and floppy hats - the setting seems perfectly okay to me, although I agree gothic works best. Today, it's the score that really dates it badly; or does it add to the sense of kitsch?

I think the setting looks pretty ludicrous in respect to the earlier films. The problem with AD 1972 is that they updated the background setting but not the feel of the film. It needed a complete stylistic and thematic revision but Hammer were just not up to that. Again I need to rewatch this before passing comment.

Originally Posted by John Hodson

Hammer had tried horror and piled on the gore - and the nudity - to try and keep pace (good grief, let's face it, they tried everything, including a martial arts / vampire melding).

Yeah, you can see with the later films that they were really clutching at straws. Fortunately, the Frankenstein films survive the added gore, and it fits in very well. Hammer certainly never hit true exploitation levels of gore and nudity - see Lady Frankenstein (1971) for an example of what a full-on explotation Hammer Frankenstein film might have looked like. Even Legend of the 7 Golden Vampires (1974) works quite well (although why did they bring Dracula into that?).

[douglasb]

I would *love* someone to make some sexy gothic or 'rural' horror with plenty of cleavage, tavern wenches, lusty farmhands, etc. Once you get past "Blood on Satan's Claw", a few Hammers, etc. there's not a lot to choose from. With all the scope for sapphic trysts, flashes of flesh and lashings of the red stuff, it's a sadly neglected genre. Unless people know better.

D.

[R-T-C]

Originally Posted by douglasb

I would *love* someone to make some sexy gothic or 'rural' horror with plenty of cleavage, tavern wenches, lusty farmhands, etc. Once you get past "Blood on Satan's Claw", a few Hammers, etc. there's not a lot to choose from. With all the scope for sapphic trysts, flashes of flesh and lashings of the red stuff, it's a sadly neglected genre. Unless people know better.

Interesting you should say that, I have optioned the film right to a very interesting book set in the civil war full of sexual encounters and such. I'm just going to do a bit more work to see if anyone would be interested in a screenplay of it...

[John Hodson]

DVD Times on the March R2 release of Hammer's Die! Die! My Darling! aka Fanatic here.