The Revenge Of Frankenstein

     Narrowly escaping death by guillotine, Baron Von Frankenstein flees to another city, re-names himself Dr. Stein, and begins his mad experiments yet again...   

      "Curse Of Frankenstein" was hugely successful, and of course a sequel would follow.  The film made stars out of Christopher Lee and Peter Cushing, and though Lee did not return to the sequel, the presence of Cushing and director Terence Howard help make the follow-up just as entertaining.  "The Revenge Of Frankenstein", released in 1958, once again offers the campy and lush delights that the original Hammer film offered so generously. It remains one of the most atmospheric and best put together of all the Hammer films.  Flawless sets, gorgeous cinematography, creepy and atmospheric lighting, and a wickedly funny and macabre humor all make this Hammer feature one of the most memorable. Even for late 50s standards, this movie is surprisingly good and effective.  

     Although "Curse Of Frankenstein" somewhat followed the original story, in this installment the rule book was completely thrown out.  And that's not necessarily a bad thing.  This sequel is continually compelling with just as much inventiveness and campiness that the original offered so greatly. In the summer of 1958, with the premier of this sequel and "Horror Of Dracula", the reputation of Hammer was cemented as a viable and extremely profitable franchise.  This was the Golden Age Of Hammer and this was a great, entertaining sequel.

Horror of Dracula

        London's Hammer Studios had just scored a smash hit with  "The Curse Of Frankenstein"in 1957, and had successfully put a new spin on Mary Shelley's classic tale.  So it only made sense to follow that one up with the studio's own re-telling of the immortal Count Dracula. "Horror Of Dracula", released in 1958, would be the first of Hammer's wonderfully atmospheric Dracula series.

     "Horror of Dracula" is another lush, Technicolor take on Stoker's novel that became the first vampire movie to incorporate blood, red eyes, and fangs, actually.  There is an unsettling, eerie vibe in pretty much all of the Hammer productions, especially the Dracula series.  Take for instance Dracula's castle- it's nightmarish, creepy, and just plain weird looking.  It's like something hallucinated in a fever dream.  The sunlight also works well in these movies.  Those sun-dappled woods for some reason really gets to me. I can't quite put my finger on what exactly it is, but something about these movies creep me out.

     Director Terence Fisher got rid of the cobwebs, howling wolves, and other Gothic trappings of  Browning's "Dracula", and completely retold the classic story. Christoper Lee makes a fantastic Dracula- with his bloodshot eyes and fangs dripping blood, he is truly startling and eerie.  I would have to say Christopher Lee's Dracula is one of the most frightening of them all- there is just something about Lee and that damn creepy castle that's downright chilling. He inherits the role from Lugosi and completely makes it his own.  And of course Peter Cushing brings to life in my opinion the most iconic Van Helsing of any Dracula film.  He simply is the character.  Critics were shocked and outraged over the explicit bloodletting and Technicolor gore, but the movie is quite tame compared with movies of today.

     Although based on Stoker's famous novel, they don't even bother staying true to it.  Director Terence Howard and writer Jimmy Sangster simply take the characters and make up their own rules along the way.  And it actually works quite well.  Peter Cushing and Christopher Lee successfully re-invented the classic monsters from Universal, and although it makes several deviations from the original novel by Bram Stoker and the Bela Lugosi film version, there is something truly riveting about this re-telling.  It's a gorgeously eerie film that looks sensational.

         "Horror of Dracula" is considered by many horror fans to be one of the greatest vampire films ever made- and it certainly is one of the most gorgeous to look at.  It's truly a lavish production.  These films are marvelous, even the bad ones- and they are strangely addictive as well.  When the mood for Hammer hits, it hits hard.  And these films are perfect to watch in October.  Or any time of the year, for that matter.  Good stuff.  Good stuff, indeed.

   

The Curse Of Frankenstein

      By 1957, the last time we had seen Frankenstein's monster shambling onscreen was with Abbott & Costello. The shock factor had long since faded.  Frankenstein, Dracula, The Mummy, and The Wolfman,  had become somewhat stale by the late 50's- basically played for laughs at this point. And the boom of sci-fi/horror films that permeated most of the 50's had rendered the old Universal horror films as rather antiquated. However, a British film studio thankfully decided there was still some life and shocks left in the old monsters, and a film was released that would begin Hammer Films' long legacy in the re-imagining of Universal's Classic Monsters.  

    "The Curse Of Frankenstein" took the horror genre by storm and successfully re-invented the Universal monsters for a whole new generation of fans.  For the first time, movie audiences were treated to the classic tales of Frankenstein, Dracula, and other great horror icons of the past, only now dripping with Technicolor blood and gore.  Not to mention some downright delicious Gothic atmosphere.

      Critics absolutely hated  "The Curse Of Frankenstein" for its depictions of graphic violence, but audiences ate this stuff up in droves. "Curse" was actually the first Hammer film in color, and began the second wave of cinematic horror to pick up where the Universal films left off some 25 years prior.  Fans tend to compare "The Curse Of Frankenstein" to James Whale's original masterpiece, but in the end there's really no point.  The two films are so different from each other that there's really no proper way to compare them.   

     "The Curse Of Frankenstein" became a landmark horror film in its own right, for many reasons.  For one, it's an extremely well-made film.  It's lush, it's moody, and quite solid in its narrative.  Boris Karloff may be the definitive Monster for many purists, but Peter Cushing is arguably the definitive Baron Frankenstein.  He became a star with his portrayal of the mad doctor- he was born to play this role and it made him a horror icon forever.

    Christopher Lee, in his own right, is quite chilling as the Creature.  Maybe not quite as effective as Boris Karloff, but Lee's interpretation certainly terrified audiences of the day, and has become iconic in its own right.  (To be fair, seeing "The Curse Of Frankenstein" for the first time- it is hard to forget Boris Karloff in his shambling, legendary performance.  But there is something rather chilling about Lee's interpretation as well...)  It would also be the beginning of horror history's most famous partnerships- Christopher Lee and Peter Cushing.

      "The Curse of Frankenstein" is lushly photographed and possesses a sinister, sordid atmosphere- an firmly sets the tone of all Hammer productions to come.  

       Gloomy castles, foggy grounds, and a colossal sense of dread and doom permeate this legendary take on Mary Shelley's classic tale- and are a big part of what makes Hammer Films so special in the first place.  Classic horror all the way.