by Mx. Kris Vyas-Myall

In the Middle East, there have been some fascinating archeological finds of late. Mr. Ian Blake of the British School of Archeology in Jerusalem has been exploring an area on the Dead Sea coast previously thought to be barren. In fact settlements and finds have been discovered from the late Chalcolithic until the Byzantine era.

Whilst further in-land this survey found the site of an early Christian Hermitage.

At the same time, in Damascus, an excavation of the Unmmayad Mosque courtyard has unearthed an ancient temple believed to be from 10th Century BC.

The excavations have so far revealed impressive structures including a 6” 6’ diameter column and there are further hopes they may find evidence of the Temple of Jupiter which supposedly stood on the site as well.

Whilst in the Middle East archeologists appear to be uncovering old structures, nearer to home Hammer studios have been rebuilding old stories for modern audiences.

The rise, fall and rise of a Great British film studio

In the mid-1950s Hammer was primarily known as a studio making second feature Crime thrillers, with only a couple of forgettable science fiction efforts (Spaceways, The Four-Sided Triangle) under their belt. This changed with them acquiring the rights to adapt Nigel Kneale’s SF Horror TV serial The Quatermass Experiment.

Whilst many were skeptical of the changes made (including Kneale himself) the film was a big success and they further adapted both The Abominable Snowman and Quatermass 2. However, it is between these that The Curse of Frankenstein premiered and began the Hammer format as we know it.

In it they take the themes and general ideas of the book but are willing to go their own direction with the film itself. In doing so they created a unique gothic tale that manages to be true to the spirit of Mary Shelley’s books without being a simple retread of what came before. It also established the two great stars of Hammer, with Peter Cushing as the titular Frankenstein and Christopher Lee as his creation.

This formula was continued to even greater success with Dracula, with Cushing as Van Helsing and Lee as the titular count. It is a dark gothic take which really outshines any previous adaptation, whilst still being free enough to be entirely its own story. Compared to the standard big monster movies that we usually saw at the cinema in the late 50s, it was astounding.

After that the studio began to produce horror takes in the same mold with a reasonable degree of quality you could expect from each release.

The Damned is, I believe, the last Hammer film to be covered by The Journey, and there is good reason for that. The studio’s output since then has been mediocre at best. The Evil of Frankenstein and Curse of The Mummy’s Tomb were terrible sequels, Kiss of the Vampire was a forgettable attempt to do a new tale in the mold of Dracula. Worst of all, is She. An attempt to film new version of the H. Rider Haggard story that should absolutely have never seen the screen.

It would have been easy to think the studio would never recover from this and continue a downward spiral of subpar efforts. However, they have started this year with a brilliant pair of screamers.

Dracula: Prince of Darkness

The big selling point of Prince of Darkness is the return of Christopher Lee as Dracula. Whilst this is the third film in the series, the second film did not contain Lee at all, so this return 8 years later is a welcome one.

Knowing this anticipation Terence Fisher makes a clever trick of building up the audience’s anticipation.

One of the best is when we are given a full build up to what we believe is the reveal of Dracula waiting in the darkness, but it turns out to be his servant Klove, with Philip Latham given the outline of Lee’s Dracula from the first film.

This then elevates the scenes when Dracula finally appears halfway through the film, even then he is used sparingly and feels like a dangerous force of nature rather than Bela Lugosi’s evil count. Instead, he is silent, almost animalistic, and unbelievably powerful.

One thing I struggle with is that I do not wish to spoil the film’s conclusion. But it is also one of the best parts of the story. So, I will just say that it makes fascinating use of the vampiric mythology and the character of Diana gets a wonderful moment that feels fully earned by the script.

It is not perfect though. It may seem like a small point, but the setup of it all does feel cliched, with the tourists finding a strange old dwelling and get caught up by the threatening denizens within. With the other ways the film goes in new directions, I wonder they could not have done something different?

Overall, four stars.

The Plague of the Zombies

Hammer has done vampires, werewolves, mummies and even a gorgon, so it was inevitable they would do their own zombie film. Of course, as is the way with this studio, they like to put their own twist on the theme.

Instead of the Caribbean, Plague is set in Cornwall. As the title suggests, a mysterious illness is running rampage through a small town and the local Doctor cannot understand it. When he sends for Sir. James and Sylvia Forbes, they attempt to disinter their bodies but discovers the corpses are missing.

Andre Morell and Diana Clare make a great father and daughter investigative team for this story. They manage to tread a careful line between displaying the warmth of their relationship without making it feel out of place in a gothic horror. Sylvia needs to be called out for being able to really drive the narrative along and being a fully rounded character, so often missing from women in horror.

In spite of it being a gothic period piece, it also feels very contemporary. Throughout the whole film the themes of class are front and center. From Claire trying to save a fox from the local hunt, right to mine workers being exploited at the end.

This should not be seen to mean that there are not any scares in here. In fact, there are some excellent scenes of terror. I would say it takes a gentler approach to horror than the creeping dread on display in Prince of Darkness, but it is rare to see a horror film succeed so well as both a piece of social commentary and deliver gothic scares.

There is the obvious question that must be raised, of the use of voodoo in this film and whether it is still appropriate to show it in this way. For me it is interestingly done as the threat is not from Haitian people but from a white person exploiting these traditions for his own unscrupulous ends. However, perhaps in future films it may be worth excluding these elements altogether? Just a thought.

Overall, this is a much deeper horror film than it first appears and a real jewel for the studio.

A solid four stars.

Hammering It Home

I believe these two pictures are among Hammer’s best output so far and definitely far ahead of what we have seen coming out over the past couple of years. Hopefully, this is a sign of what is to come soon.

The studio has already filmed two other originals for release later in the year, The Reptile and Rasputin, The Mad Monk, along with an adaptation of Norah Loft’s The Devil’s Own. If these match the quality of these two movies, the studio can be said to have had a spectacular return to form. I am looking forward to what we will see.

One final recommendation, if you are interested to know more about Hammer’s films, I would highly recommend this radio show, which gives great reviews and behind the scenes details on the studio’s output.

---

---