|
Post by David A. Riley on Jun 23, 2011 14:31:04 GMT
Thanks for that, Franklin. I might give it a bash. I always thought Michael Ripper had the perfect name for a Hammer regular. He should have been in The Hands of the Ripper, but wasn't.
|
|
|
Post by franklinmarsh on Jun 24, 2011 7:48:51 GMT
You're welcome, David. Hope you enjoy it. I think Michael Ripper is great. He's one of those people that Hammer bashers seem to hold up as reasons why they dislike the studio's output, but he's a fine actor, especially as the copper in Plague, and the landlord in The Reptile. Is it Hammer's Phantom Of The Opera where, when you hail a hansom, if it's not driven by Michael Ripper, it'll be in the charge of Miles Malleson!?
|
|
|
Post by franklinmarsh on Jun 24, 2011 7:50:46 GMT
Oh, and going back to lycanthropy, I watched the cheap 'n' cheerful feelgood epitomise-the-1980s Teen Wolf last night, a kind of sanitised reimagining of I Was A Teenage Werewolf, which I've realised that I must get hold of.
|
|
|
Post by David A. Riley on Jun 24, 2011 8:01:32 GMT
You're welcome, David. Hope you enjoy it. I think Michael Ripper is great. He's one of those people that Hammer bashers seem to hold up as reasons why they dislike the studio's output, but he's a fine actor, especially as the copper in Plague, and the landlord in The Reptile. Is it Hammer's Phantom Of The Opera where, when you hail a hansom, if it's not driven by Michael Ripper, it'll be in the charge of Miles Malleson!? Shall have to revisit Hammer's Phantom - which is a lot better than I thought the first time I watched it years ago at the cinema - but at the time I had hopes of a phantom more like Lon Chaney's and wasn't all that receptive to a sympathetic (if still murderous) phantom! Later watchings changed my opinion. Universal too had its stable of bit part actors who regularly turned up in their horror movies. That, I think, somehow adds to their charm. Plus, even their mobs were not mindlessly vindictive - something that went badly wrong with the modern remake of The Wolfman, in which there were barely any symnpathetic characters at all (a modern trait - and failing).
|
|
|
Post by Dr Strange on Jun 24, 2011 10:40:11 GMT
Oh, and going back to lycanthropy, I watched the cheap 'n' cheerful feelgood epitomise-the-1980s Teen Wolf last night, a kind of sanitised reimagining of I Was A Teenage Werewolf, which I've realised that I must get hold of. Hmmm... I am going to resist any comment on Teen Wolf but I Was A Teenage Werewolf is certainly worth a look, if only as a period piece. Really very curious - not least as it's got a very young Michael Landon (when I first saw it on TV, as a teen myself, I only knew him from Bonanza and Little House On The Prairie), more of a Jekyll & Hyde thing really (though, arguably, that's really just a version of the werewolf myth). Actually what it is most like (to me) is Ken Russell's Altered States - which is a bit of a favourite of mine.
|
|
|
Post by franklinmarsh on Jun 24, 2011 11:11:24 GMT
[Hmmm... I am going to resist any comment on Teen Wolf but I Was A Teenage Werewolf is certainly worth a look, if only as a period piece. Really very curious - not least as it's got a very young Michael Landon (when I first saw it on TV, as a teen myself, I only knew him from Bonanza and Little House On The Prairie), more of a Jekyll & Hyde thing really (though, arguably, that's really just a version of the werewolf myth). Actually what it is most like (to me) is Ken Russell's Altered States - which is a bit of a favourite of mine. Don't hold back - I've got Teen Wolf, Too on the same disc - which apparently is exactly the same film but with worse actors. Saw IWATW many moons (arf!) ago on good ol' C4 I think. Can't quite see the link with Altered States, which I do enjoy (caught in 70mm once - staggered out of that cinema....) but virtually anything by Uncle Ken floats my boat (up to and including Lair Of The White Worm)
|
|
|
Post by Dr Strange on Jun 24, 2011 11:23:21 GMT
Can't quite see the link with Altered States, which I do enjoy (caught in 70mm once - staggered out of that cinema....) Drug-induced atavism. Have to admit to staggering a bit myself after watching a few Ken Russell films...
|
|
|
Post by markus1986 on Jun 25, 2011 22:09:03 GMT
Burke & Hare. Big disappointment. I like John Landis but thought it was a let down. The film could have omitted the whole 'Macbeth' angle - it was a pointless side track. The earlier version with Derren Nesbitt and Glynn Edwards was far superior.
Also watched (for the umpteenth time) 'Whistle and I'll Come To You.' The classic 1968 Jonathan Miller and Michael Hordern gem. I thought last Christmas's version was another let down.
Also watched Dead of Night. Hugo the ventriloquist doll is still as scary as ever.
|
|
|
Post by H_P_Saucecraft on Jun 30, 2011 18:32:33 GMT
Return Of The Fly (1959)
Vincent Price returns, this time to try & discourage his nephew from carrying on the work of his father.
He's not successful & the predictable happens. This sequel is better for being in black & white, and loses the too saccharine style of the original. It's more like a 30s universal in the style of some of the shots, & there seems to be more than a little Frankenstein in there.
An enjoyable sequel, & for me the better film.
Never Let Me Go (2010)
Really not sure what I can say about this, I felt a bit blank either way. It's one of those films that seems well enough made & good, but also seems like it has no ultimate point (perhaps the point itself?). A lot happens, but then it doesn't if you understand.
The film itself is a dystopian tale following 3 clones, created specifically for organ donation & kept in an institution until they are young adults (I'm not spoiling anything, the film gets this out the way fairly early on, it's not a twist).
It certainly lingers a bit & may need a re-watch.
|
|
|
Post by andydecker on Jul 1, 2011 9:53:44 GMT
Dracula (BBC 2006)
Been on a binge for british tv, so after buying The Cambridge Spies and Marple I stumbled upon this. I have watched the first half and am very on the fence. Of course the story had to be inevitably re-written - is there any Dracula movie which just follows the book without throwing half of the story out? -, but I thought the approach not uninteresting. A bit dodgy in places, but the idea that Holmwood is suffering from syphilis and desperatly seeks a cure is at least a novel idea. That he stumbles upon a cult which wants to bring Dracula to England not so.
But the casting sometimes is just odd, especially Mina Harker who just isn´t looking like the role should, and Dracula - who is now supposedly 900 years old, which would make him what, a Byzantine? WTF - is too modern, more of the brooding romantic type than the bitter warlord and rapist he should be.
At least the look of the movie is very good as always with this BBC productions, beautiful locations.
To be continued.
|
|
|
Post by lemming13 on Jul 1, 2011 13:21:03 GMT
Aah! No! Not Marple! I'm sorry, but that's one thing that winds me up immensely, turning Aunt Jane into some pseudo-Yank cop show crap. Just because some audiences can't remember more than a single word for a title... MISS Marple. She is definitely and unrelentingly Miss. A gentleman of the period could comfortably go by surname alone, it was accepted, but the only females referred to by their surname with no title were servants and film stars. Anyway, nobody does it better than Joan Hickson (Margaret Rutherford is fun, but she only plays Margaret Rutherford).
|
|
|
Post by David A. Riley on Jul 1, 2011 13:42:45 GMT
Aah! No! Not Marple! I'm sorry, but that's one thing that winds me up immensely, turning Aunt Jane into some pseudo-Yank cop show crap. Just because some audiences can't remember more than a single word for a title... MISS Marple. She is definitely and unrelentingly Miss. A gentleman of the period could comfortably go by surname alone, it was accepted, but the only females referred to by their surname with no title were servants and film stars. Anyway, nobody does it better than Joan Hickson (Margaret Rutherford is fun, but she only plays Margaret Rutherford). I agree. I can't understand why they had to name the serie's Agatha Christie's Marple. Sounds downright rude. Mind you, wait till we get the new American version courtesy of Disney, with a younger, more glamorous "Miss" Marple. There'll be spinning inside graves then! David
|
|
|
Post by franklinmarsh on Jul 1, 2011 14:03:06 GMT
Aah! No! Not Marple! I'm sorry, but that's one thing that winds me up immensely, turning Aunt Jane into some pseudo-Yank cop show crap. This just gives me a vision of a tweedy, hat-pinned Julia McKenzie kicking down a door, brandishing a .44 magnum and shouting "Freeze, mother****er!!" at the vicar. Must watch Return Of The Fly.
|
|
|
Post by Johnlprobert on Jul 1, 2011 22:57:55 GMT
Just this minute finished watching the new Mondo Macabro DVD of Jess Franco's Lorna the Exorcist. I may write a review when I've recovered, if I ever do....
|
|
|
Post by Dr Strange on Jul 2, 2011 15:58:28 GMT
Aah! No! Not Marple! I'm sorry, but that's one thing that winds me up immensely, turning Aunt Jane into some pseudo-Yank cop show crap. This just gives me a vision of a tweedy, hat-pinned Julia McKenzie kicking down a door, brandishing a .44 magnum and shouting "Freeze, mother****er!!" at the vicar. Could only be an improvement, as far as I am concerned.
|
|