Last Seen pre-1970 Classic/Vintage Horror Movie?

[FryeDwight]

Originally Posted by Tommy Jarvis

The Haunting 1963 ★★★★

The Haunting definetily is a classic.

There are several things to love about this movie. From the way it takes its time to set up the characters over the special effects that were amazing for the time to small details.

Like the combination of Eleanor's inner monologues and her Frances McDormand-ish way of staring into the distance with several degrees of fear and unease. Or how you can feel said unease and discomfort slip into the cheeky young getabout.

Four stars well deserved.

The Phantom of the Opera 1925 ★★★★

Every horror fan should treat him/herself to a bit of vintage every now and then. Visit/revisit the classics with Chaney, Lugosi, Karloff,... or go on the hunt for forgotten and/or underrated gems.

You can enjoy this one for the score, for the overacting that was par for the course in silent movies, for Chaney's great performance as the Phantom,... and that one reveal that still holds up to this day.

Once again, TJ score two hits out of the park! We saw POTO a couple of years back on the big screen and despite the overacting by the supporting performers, Chaney is aces!

As for THE HAUNTING, so creepy! I saw in the Panama Canal Zone at an "Owl Show" which was usually horror films starting at 10:00. It really had the audience on edge, but some frustration when Eleanor is thinking (quite a lot in this film) as most of the films I saw back in the CZ had Spanish subtitles, but for whatever reason, Eleanors inner dialogues were in Spanish!
Showed it many years later to a group, one who loved FANGORIA type films, but was riveted by the film and practically leapt out of his seat in a scene involving a missing person

[FryeDwight]

THE TWO FACES OF Dr JEKYLL (1960).>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>SPOILERS>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Not many people seem to know about this Hammer entry, but it's pretty damn good and I feel it's held up better than many of their offerings. While it's got the bare bones plot of Jekyll trying to find the duality of man, it has many differences. Jekyll is podgy and tired looking, while Hyde is handsome and so jittery that He can't sit still (Good performances by Paul Massie) and maybe it's because He holds a grudge from treatment from former colleagues, his best friend is a drunken gambler constantly hitting him up for $$ to get out of messes He created and said friend is boffing Mrs Jekyll! While Hammer had unpleasant characters in their films, there seems to be an overabundance in this...so many unsavory types here! Also, so much sexual content; they were really pushing the envelope here! Hyde's exotic mistress (where You see some actual nudity and the dance with the snake!), a conga line of dancers constantly revealing their undies and just an extremely misogynistic treatment towards ALL the women here, including a precursor to FRANKENSTEIN MUST BE DESTROYED where Hyde
gets even, as it were, for Jekyll's unfaithful wife.
Christopher Lee is very good here as the friend (although why You would want a guy like this as Your friend escapes Me) and an early appearance by Oliver Reed. ***1/2

[Sculpt]

Originally Posted by FryeDwight

THE TWO FACES OF Dr JEKYLL (1960).>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>SPOILERS>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Not many people seem to know about this Hammer entry, but it's pretty damn good and I feel it's held up better than many of their offerings. While it's got the bare bones plot of Jekyll trying to find the duality of man, it has many differences. Jekyll is podgy and tired looking, while Hyde is handsome and so jittery that He can't sit still (Good performances by Paul Massie) and maybe it's because He holds a grudge from treatment from former colleagues, his best friend is a drunken gambler constantly hitting him up for $$ to get out of messes He created and said friend is boffing Mrs Jekyll! While Hammer had unpleasant characters in their films, there seems to be an overabundance in this...so many unsavory types here! Also, so much sexual content; they were really pushing the envelope here! Hyde's exotic mistress (where You see some actual nudity and the dance with the snake!), a conga line of dancers constantly revealing their undies and just an extremely misogynistic treatment towards ALL the women here, including a precursor to FRANKENSTEIN MUST BE DESTROYED where Hyde
gets even, as it were, for Jekyll's unfaithful wife.
Christopher Lee is very good here as the friend (although why You would want a guy like this as Your friend escapes Me) and an early appearance by Oliver Reed. ***1/2

Thanks for reviewing this one. I have not seen it yet. It sounds like an interesting take. Have you read the novella Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde? If so, did you have a take on what you thought the novella was saying?

I've seen Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde 1931 with Fredric March, the 1941 version with Ingrid Bergman and Spencer Tracy, and neither stick to the story of the novella Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde. Which is a shame, because it's by far the better story, and would make a great film. The novella lets the reader apply whatever symbolism they see in the story, whereas the movies tend to name a philosophical bent not in the novella or seem to not leave room for there to be one.

I think the 1931 is the superior film of the two, mainly because the creative camera work, effects and pace. The Spencer Tracy version is rather odd, and just doesn't work as a cohesive story. The leads and plot are underdeveloped. I'm not sure what they were trying to say, if anything at all.

Having read the novella, I personally think the intention was to highlight the state of mind some humans descend to with alcohol, notably violent and deranged alcoholics, as an initial specific recognizable marker. The portrayal of "serum" is to note the medium or vehicle is not the focus, but rather an exploration of the destination (perhaps evil), the curiosity and the decision to go there.

Many theories come up regarding the intention of the story, including dualities, id, ego, superego, addiction, etc. One of the theories of the novella (published 1886) revolves around the impact of The Origin of Species (1859). Some interpreted the work to mean humans evolved from (modern) apes. That the work was looking at if man was to devolve into a beast, or what was the layer below "the evolution to humankind". When I read that, I began to think that the film Altered States was actually another Jekyll and Hyde adaptation.

[FryeDwight]

Originally Posted by Sculpt

Thanks for reviewing this one. I have not seen it yet. It sounds like an interesting take. Have you read the novella Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde? If so, did you have a take on what you thought the novella was saying?

I've seen Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde 1931 with Fredric March, the 1941 version with Ingrid Bergman and Spencer Tracy, and neither stick to the story of the novella Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde. Which is a shame, because it's by far the better story, and would make a great film. The novella lets the reader apply whatever symbolism they see in the story, whereas the movies tend to name a philosophical bent not in the novella or seem to not leave room for there to be one.

I think the 1931 is the superior film of the two, mainly because the creative camera work, effects and pace. The Spencer Tracy version is rather odd, and just doesn't work as a cohesive story. The leads and plot are underdeveloped. I'm not sure what they were trying to say, if anything at all.

Having read the novella, I personally think the intention was to highlight the state of mind some humans descend too with alcohol, notably violent and deranged alcoholics, as an initial specific recognizable marker. The portrayal of "serum" is to note the medium or vehicle is not the focus, but rather an exploration of the destination (perhaps evil), the curiosity and the decision to go there.

Many theories come up regarding the intention of the story, including dualities, id, ego, superego, addiction, etc. One of the theories of the novella (published 1886) revolves around the impact of The Origin of Species (1859). Some interpreted the work to mean humans evolved from (modern) apes. That the work was looking at if man was to devolve into a beast, or what was the layer below "the evolution to humankind". When I read that, I began to think that the film Altered States was actually another Jekyll and Hyde adaptation.

Hey Sculpt, Thanks for the kind words. I did read the novella, but it has been awhile, time to get on with it! I still think the best version of the story is the 1931 version, very good. I'm not crazy about the Tracy one and I remember seeing the Jack Palance version WAY BACK and mostly remember the DARK SHADOWS music. If You're really in the mood for more Jekyll/hyde, check out DR BLACK AND MR HYDE with Bernie Casey. Not as bad as it sounds and a hilarious trailer!

I'm pretty sure We talked about what the story might have been a metaphor for and We both agreed that alcohol was probably the one. It was a couple of years ago and show how much time I have on my hands that I can remember it

[FryeDwight]

NIGHTMARE IN THE SUN (1965). I never heard of this until discovering a review in SHOCK CINEMA and caught it on YOUTUBE. It begins with THE POSTMAN ALWAYS RINGS TWICE territory with a Trophy wife (Ursula Andress, who is a knockout here) bored and unhappy with her marriage to an older guy who tends to drink (Arthur O'Connell from ANATOMY OF A MURDER). Said wife is somewhat slutty (as SC describes Her "...the hottest piece of ass in town"), even sleeping with the sheriff (Aldo Ray!)!

She picks up a drifter (John Derek, who was married to Ursula at the time) who is planning to return home to his wife, although He finds time to canoodle with her. Her husband has had enough, shoots Ursula and the Sheriff conspires with the town to put the blame on the "stranger" and NITS almost become an episode of TV's THE FUGITIVE with a whole bunch of riff raff looking for him. Good cast (including Sammy Davis Jr as a Truck Driver), but an impressive team up by Robert Duvall and Richard Jaeckel as two motorcyclists who join the search and whose relationship is rather, shall We say, suspect. ***

[Sculpt]

House of Dracula (1945)
6/10

Dracula (John Carradine) breaks into Dr. Franz Edelmann (Onslow Stevens) house and wakes him up at 5 AM while he's asleep in his reading chair and asks him to cure him of his vampirism. Later that day Larry Talbot (Lon Chaney Jr) asks to be cured of his lycan... let's just call it werewolf-ism. Plus, the doctor's hunchbacked female assistant has been waiting to be cured for even longer. And he finds Frankenstein's Monster in the sea caves below his mansion. There's a lot to do.

The dialogue of the opening scene is actually well done and enticing. Can Dracula really want a cure? Are you sure you can trust him? There's also a well-done scene where one of the doctor's assistants is playing Moonlight Sonata and Dracula helps morph it into a trippy horror piece. There are some things to like in this film, and it's intriguing to find out how or if the problems get solved.

Ultimately, the dialogue and plot become annoyingly simple-minded and dull. Dracula never discusses why he wants to be human. None of the monsters fight each other. Each plotline has a disappointingly abrupt ending.

************SPOILER*****************
I was intrigued by the relationship between Dracula and Dr Edelmann. Dracula also starts a relationship with one of the assistants. It would have been fascinating to hear Dracula talk about why he no longer wanted to be a vampire or lie about it. Perhaps these are only interests of modern film. Eventually, Dracula deceives Dr. Edelmann, and they never even have a discussion about the betrayal. Of course, films are not shot in chronological order, but the film feels like it was... as if halfway through shooting they were told they had a week to finish it.

[FryeDwight]

Originally Posted by Sculpt

House of Dracula (1945)
6/10

Dracula (John Carradine) breaks into Dr. Franz Edelmann (Onslow Stevens) house and wakes him up at 5 AM while he's asleep in his reading chair and asks him to cure him of his vampirism. Later that day Larry Talbot (Lon Chaney Jr) asks to be cured of his lycan... let's just call it werewolf-ism. Plus, his hunchbacked female assistant has been waiting to be cured for even longer. And he finds Frankenstein's Monster in the sea caves below his mansion. There's a lot to do.

The dialogue of the opening scene is actually well done and enticing. Can Dracula really want a cure? Are you sure you can trust him? There's also a well-done scene where one of the Dr's assistants is playing Moonlight Sonata and Dracula helps morph it into a trippy horror tune. There are some things to like in this film, and it's intriguing to find out how or if the problems get solved.

Ultimately, the dialogue and plot become annoyingly simple-minded and dull. Dracula never discusses why he wants to be human. None of the monsters fight each other. Each plotline has a disappointingly abrupt ending.

************SPOILER*****************
I was intrigued by the relationship between Dracula and Dr Edelmann. Dracula also starts a relationship with one of the assistants. It would have been fascinating to hear Dracula talk about why he no longer wanted to be a vampire or lie about it. Perhaps these are only interests of modern film. Eventually, Dracula deceives Dr. Edelmann, and they never even have a discussion about the betrayal. Of course, films are not shot in chronological order, but the film feels like it was... as if halfway through shooting they were told they had a week to finish it.

You are right...there is so much to do and not nearly enough time to do it all!!

Despite the silly premise, HOD is a fun little time waster. You do wonder about Dracula, why He changes his mind so quickly-the Assistant wasn't all that!. Also, it's not wise to screw over someone trying to help You, and again a repeat, but a Timex and calendar might have helped Drac finalize his plan.

I really like Lionel Atwill here, even if He is going by route. Sadly, He was sick and I believe You can hear him coughing loudly in the scene where He is interrogating Dr Edelmann and Talbott provides an alibi.

[FryeDwight]

JOURNEY'S END (1930). Based on a successful play and early in the sound era, this WW1 film is static with lots of slow spots/talking, but stick with it. I think this was James Whale's first film and it also introduces Colin Clive (FRANKENSTEIN, BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN, MAD LOVE), Billy Bevan (DRACULA'S DAUGHTER, RETURN OF THE VAMPIRE) and David Manners (DRACULA, THE MUMMY, THE BLACK CAT).

Clive is the Captain of the group who is so burned out by war and liquor that his nerves are shot, but feels He still has to do his duty. A fine performance by Colin and an even better one by David, whose character was a student of Clive and looked up to him and finding his behavior objectionable. In most of is films (especially the three listed), David always played a fey and ineffectual doofus and it's a shame He couldn't have gotten more roles like this. ***

[Tommy Jarvis]

The Vampire Bat 1933 ★★

A not all too memorable vampire/detective drama.

Did not do much for me on this watch (partly since I was getting pretty tired by that hour). Should perhaps give it a rewatch at a later date.

[Sculpt]

Originally Posted by FryeDwight

You are right...there is so much to do and not nearly enough time to do it all!!

Despite the silly premise, HOD is a fun little time waster. You do wonder about Dracula, why He changes his mind so quickly-the Assistant wasn't all that!. Also, it's not wise to screw over someone trying to help You, and again a repeat, but a Timex and calendar might have helped Drac finalize his plan.

I really like Lionel Atwill here, even if He is going by route. Sadly, He was sick and I believe You can hear him coughing loudly in the scene where He is interrogating Dr Edelmann and Talbott provides an alibi.

Yes, I was happy to see Lionel Atwill. If I had him in the cast, I would have rewritten the script to give him a featured part. It was a tad painful to see him wasted in such a small saltless part.

I forgot to mention too, there's two scenes where Dracula is either transforming into a bat or from a bat. Those are the best-looking transformations I've ever seen... and that was 1945.

Let's face it, I think this film would be of most interest to 10-year-olds or the heart of 10-year-olds in horror film fans. To have all these monsters and none of them fight is just being cruel.

I read in wiki that the original script was Wolf Man vs. Dracula and the censors gave it a series of cuts, so it was rewritten many times. Makes you wonder what the original script was like?