LEADING LADIES: ZITA JOHANN

0
mummy 1932 karloff - johann

Boris Karloff and Zita Johann in THE MUMMY (1932).

 

Zita Johann only had eight screen credits, but one of them is well-known to horror fans.

When she starred opposite Boris Karloff in THE MUMMY (1932) she delivered one of the great performances in a Universal monster movie. Her portrayal of Helen Grosvenor, the reincarnated Princess Anckesen-Amon, was mystical, mysterious, tragic, and very sexy.

And in terms of classic horror, that’s all she wrote. It was one and done for Johann, which is too bad, because she was really good in THE MUMMY.

Here’s a partial look at Johann’s film career:

THE STRUGGLE (1931) – Florrie – Johann’s film debut is in this drama about alcoholism, the final feature directed by D.W. Griffith.

TIGER SHARK (1932) – Quita Silva- Romance directed by Howard Hawks, also starring Edward G. Robinson and featuring J. Carroll Naish.

THE MUMMY (1932)- Helen Grosvenor – one of Universal’s best monster movies. Slow-paced but eerie to its core, this Karl Freund directed thriller features a remarkable performance by Boris Karloff as the living mummy Im Ho Tep, who, once resurrected, seeks out the mummified body of his former love, the Princess Anckesen-Amon.

THE MUMMY is really a tragic love story. Im Ho Tep’s life is shattered when his forbidden love, the Princess Anckesen-Amon, dies at a young age. When he tries to resurrect her using the Scroll of Thoth, he’s found out and sentenced to death. He meets a horrifying end as he’s buried alive.

Centuries later, in 1921, his mummified body is discovered and accidentally resurrected. He resurfaces in 1932 and helps archeologists unearth the tomb of the mummified Princess Anckesen-Amon, in the hopes of once more bringing her back to life.

While attempting to do so, he discovers Helen Grosvenor (Zita Johann), who’s the splitting image of Anckesen-Amon. Convinced that Helen is Anckesen-Amon reincarnated, Im Ho Tep seeks to kill her and bring her back to life so they can live together for all eternity.

THE MUMMY also features the phenomenal make-up work of Jack Pierce, and fine supporting performances by Edward Van Sloan and David Manners, but it’s Boris Karloff and Zita Johann who drive THE MUMMY.

Johann’s wide eyes and dark features give her a sensual, mysterious presence. She makes for a strong, independent female character, and she’s convincing as the reincarnated princess.

In THE MUMMY, Johann delivers one of my favorite performances by an actress in the Universal monster movies.

RAIDERS OF THE LIVING DEAD (1986) – Librarian – Zita Johann’s final screen credit in this 1980s zombie flick.

Zita Johann was born on July 14, 1904 in Austria-Hungary. Before acting in the movies, she performed on Broadway starting in 1924.

In THE MUMMY, she and director Karl Freund did not get along. According to Johann, Freund went out of his way to make her life miserable on set. That being said, Johann did develop the reputation for being a difficult actress to work with. Evidently, she turned down lots of scripts, which may explain why she made so few movies.

I wish Johann had made more movies. Her performance as Helen Grosvenor has always been a treat for me and one of the best parts of THE MUMMY. Watching Johan portray Grosvenor, you’ll easily see why Karloff’s Im Ho Tep was in love with her.

Johann passed away on September 20, 1993 in Nyack, New York at the age of 89 from pneumonia.

Zita Johann – July 14, 1904 – September 20, 1993.

I hope you enjoyed this LEADING LADIES column and will join me again next time when we look at another leading lady from horror cinema.

Thanks for reading!

—Michael

Advertisements

IN THE SPOOKLIGHT: STEPHANIE (2017)

1
stephanie

Shree Crooks as STEPHANIE (2017)

STEPHANIE (2017), a horror film about a little girl facing an unknown horrific threat all by her lonesome almost works.

Almost.

What stops this flick from ultimately succeeding is a lack of courage on the part of the filmmakers to take this story to the deepest dark places it should have gone. Instead, we have a plot tweak midway through that changes everything, and the film is worse off for it.

When STEPHANIE opens, young Stephanie (Shree Crooks) is home alone, occupying herself with her imaginary stuffed animal friends, getting into mischief as any child would do left to their own devices. She attempts among other things to cook and clean on her own, running afoul of every day threats like broken glass on the floor while walking barefoot. You’ll wince even before the supernatural elements are introduced.  Just why she’s by herself we’re not exactly sure, although there seems to have been some sort of apocalyptic incident that has wiped out at the very least the population around her.

One night, as she brushes her teeth and plays in front of the bathroom mirror, she hears a strange noise coming from the darkness. She knows what it is. Evidently, there is some sort of “monster” which enters her house at times, and to escape, she has to hide and remain silent. She hears the monster foraging throughout the house, growling and sniffing for prey, and then it leaves.

Adding to the mystery there’s also a dead body in her house, Stephanie’s brother, who seems to have succumbed to whatever malady wiped out everyone else. Stephanie it appears is immune. But then one day, Stephanie’s parents return, and while she is overjoyed to see them, she suddenly wonders why they left her alone in the first place.

And it’s at this point in the movie where the plot changes, and from here on in, things just  don’t work as well because the story enters territory we’ve all seen before and any innovative freshness the film possessed earlier disappears.

Which is too bad because the first half of STEPHANIE is really, really good, and the biggest reason why is the performance by young actress Shree Crooks as Stephanie. I hesitate to give such high praise to such a young actress, but she’s so good here she’s nearly mesmerizing. Early on, when she has the run of the house, she’s fun to watch, and later when the monster invades, you share in Stephanie’s terror. Crooks does fear really well.

So, early on the story had me hooked. I wanted to know why Stephanie was alone and just what kind of monster kept breaking into her house.  And I cared enough about young Stephanie that I was ready to watch a film about just one little girl on her own having to square off against a monstrous threat.

But ultimately this isn’t the story STEPHANIE has to tell. Her parents arrive home, and the inevitable plot twist isn’t up to snuff and only serves to steer the story into familiar territory, which is far less satisfying than what had come before it. Unfortunately, when all is said and done, STEPHANIE ends up being just a standard horror movie.

Frank Grillo and Anna Torv [recently of Netflix’ MINDHUNTER (2017-19)] play Stephanie’s parents, and while there’s nothing wrong with their performances, they unfortunately appear in the film’s inferior second half.

The screenplay by Ben Collins and Luke Piotrowski tells two different stories, and I enjoyed the first story much better than the second. The first half of the story with Stephanie home alone works so well I was really looking forward to seeing how she was going to deal with the monster in her house, but that confrontation never happens.

Director Akiva Goldsman sets up some suspenseful scenes early on, especially when the monster invades the house. Goldsman also deserves plenty of credit for capturing such a powerful performance from such a young performer. Shree Crooks completely carries the first half of the movie all by her lonesome.

Later, when the story pivots, the scares are much more standard, the results more predictable.

STEPHANIE did not have a theatrical release and was instead marketed straight to video on demand. I saw it on Netflix.

As it stands, it’s not a bad horror movie, but based on the way it started, it had the potential to be something very special, if only the initial story had been allowed to develop.

In spite of this, Shree Crooks delivers the performance of the movie. She’s terrific throughout, and she’s the main reason to see STEPHANIE.

—END—

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

RAMPAGE (2018) – Giant Monster Tale Keeps Things Light

1

rampage

I am not a fan of movies based on video games.

However, I do enjoy movies about giant monsters, and in general I find Dwayne Johnson to be an amiable screen presence.  So, while I expected very little from RAMPAGE (2018), a giant monster adventure loosely based on the classic arcade video game, I certainly wasn’t dreading it.

RAMPAGE opens in space with an experiment gone wrong. A scientist attempts to return to Earth but her ship burns up upon re-entering the atmosphere.  However, capsules containing an experimental genetic pathogen which causes its subjects to grow and mutate into unstoppable aggressors survive the flight and crash to the ground where they are ingested by a gorilla, a wolf, and a crocodile.

The albino gorilla, named George, lives in a zoo and is cared for by a zoologist named Davis (Dwayne Johnson).  When George suddenly grows and becomes aggressive, Davis tries to protect his prize gorilla, who also happens to be his friend. Have I said yet that this one is silly at times?  Well, there. I said it.

Enter Dr. Kate Caldwell (Naomie Harris) who used to work for the company that created the rogue DNA.  Yep, once more, the bad guy in the film is yet another— repeat after me– evil company!— this time led by the ice-cold Claire Wyden (Malin Akerman) and her goofy brother Brett (Jake Lacy). Kate tried to expose the evil company for what it was, but was jailed for her efforts.  Worse yet, she blames the death of her brother on Wyden’s faulty research. As a result, Kate wants to take Wyden down, and she and Davis join forces because she tells him that if he wants to save George, Wyden has the answers.

But not so fast! Enter shadowy government agent Harvey Russell (Jeffrey Dean Morgan) who wants to stop the monsters, Davis’ and Kate’s rogue efforts, and the Wydens. He sure has his hands full.

And all three giant monsters are stomping towards Chicago, drawn there by a signal set up by Claire Wyden to bring them there so she can reclaim her research and save her company. What. A. Stupid. Plan.

Yes, everyone’s heading to Chicago, for one big climactic— rampage!

But don’t expect a horrific monstrous finale because RAMPAGE keeps things light. The best thing I can say about RAMPAGE is that it tries to have fun throughout, and for the most part, it is a fun movie.  It’s also a rather silly movie and as such doesn’t do its giant monster tale many favors.

Director Brad Peyton, who also directed Dwayne Johnson in the earthquake melodrama SAN ANDREAS (2015), keeps the action safe and tame. The best action sequence is the final one, when all three monsters converge in Chicago. Before that, there are a few okay scenes, like the hunt for the wolf, and the sequence where George wakes up on the plane, but really nothing all that spectacular.  That being said, I enjoyed RAMPAGE more than SAN ANDREAS.

The screenplay by four writers, Ryan Engle, Carlton Cuse, Ryan J. Condal, and Adam Sztykiel is a mixed bag. In general, it does a good job telling its monster story and moves it along nicely towards it climactic showdown in Chicago. But a lot of the dialogue is pretty bad. Most of Dwayne Johnson’s lines don’t work.  His one liners come off as “Arnold Schwarzenegger-lite.”

And the friendship story between Davis and George made me want to gag. It’s sappier than a maple tree. As such, the rampaging George is more akin to Mighty Joe Young than King Kong.

The monsters are also a mixed bag. The close-ups of George look pretty good, but the giant Wolf and Crocodile didn’t really impress me. Yet another example of underwhelming CGI effects.

Dwayne Johnson does his thing, and per usual, he’s entertaining throughout. He makes Davis a likable character who’s easy to root for. And seriously, there aren’t too many actors on the planet who could share a scene with three gigantic CGI monsters, take part in their physical rampage, and look believable doing it.

Naomie Harris, so memorable as Moneypenny in the new James Bond movies, as well as having notable roles in a bunch of other films, including MOONLIGHT (2016) and OUR KIND OF TRAITOR (2016), to name just a couple, doesn’t fare as well here in RAMPAGE. Her character, Dr. Kate Caldwell, in spite of her dramatic desire for revenge against the Wyden company, is reduced to being Dwayne Johnson’s sidekick and eventual love interest.

Jeffrey Dean Morgan as government agent Harvey Russell does his best Negan shtick, the character he plays on THE WALKING DEAD, only this time he’s one of the good guys rather than the villain. Morgan gives the liveliest performance in the movie.

Malin Akerman, who co-starred with Jeffrey Dean Morgan in the dark superhero flick WATCHMEN (2009), is sufficiently ruthless as Claire Wyden, but in a strictly cartoonish way. Likewise, Jake Lacy seems to be having fun as her bumbling brother Brett. Lacy enjoyed a memorable brief bit in THEIR FINEST (2016) as the American war hero with no acting experience thrust into a lead movie role.

RAMPAGE isn’t bad. It has giant monsters, Dwayne Johnson, and some decent giant monster action sequences, but its silly script keeps things a bit too light throughout and never becomes all that engrossing. Instead, it plays out like a Saturday morning cartoon of yesteryear.

—END—

 

A QUIET PLACE (2018) – Smart Horror Movie Riveting and Scary

1

a-quiet-place

Talk about quiet horror!

Shh! No yelling! This is A QUIET PLACE.

A QUIET PLACE is a new horror movie by director John Krasinski, known mostly for his recurring role as Jim Halpert on the comedic TV show THE OFFICE (2005-2013) starring Steve Carell. Krasinski both directs and stars here, along with his real-life wife Emily Blunt.

A QUIET PLACE is a simple thriller that nonetheless works well.  Its tagline, “If they hear you, they hunt you,” sums up the film perfectly.

It’s yet another horror movie about an apocalypse, as this time it’s strange violent creatures that roam the countryside preying on human beings. They’re unstoppable and they’re hungry.  They’re also blind. To make up for their lack of sight, they possess incredible hearing, and thus that’s how they hunt. It’s exactly as the film’s tagline says, if they hear you they hunt you.  So, to survive, you have to be awfully quiet.

It’s kind of a silly premise, when you think about it, that these creatures would have made it this far without being stopped, but that being said, there’s nothing silly about the rest of A QUIET PLACE. It’s a solid thriller throughout.

A QUIET PLACE basically follows one family trying to survive among these creatures. They live in silence in their farmhouse.  There’s the father Lee (John Krasinski), mother Evelyn (Emily Blunt), teen daughter Regan (Millicent Simmonds) who happens to be deaf, and younger son Marcus (Noah Jupe). They live in mortal fear of the creatures, having lost their youngest son to one of them in the film’s pre-credit sequence.

They’re also quite resourceful, devising a system to communicate with lights and creating an undergound sound proof room. But with three of these creatures living in the vicinity of their farm, they need to be.  And, oh yeah.  Evelyn is pregnant and is about to give birth. So much for a quiet place!

A QUIET PLACE possessed the same tone as another recent apocalyptic horror movie, IT COMES AT NIGHT (2017), a movie I liked a lot. The big difference between the two is the threat was never defined in IT COMES AT NIGHT while here in A QUIET PLACE the threat is made known at the outset.

The creatures here reminded me of things found in the CLOVERFIELD universe. In fact, for a time, Paramount considered making this movie a part of the CLOVERFIELD franchise, which would have made perfect sense. The chilling scenes in the cornfields were also reminiscent of similar scenes in M. Night Shyamalan’s SIGNS (2002).  That being said, A QUIET PLACE isn’t derivative of these films. It stands on its own.

A QUIET PLACE starts off— well, quiet, and after a jarring pre-credit scene moves slowly for a bit before really picking up steam during its second act.  There are some really suspenseful scenes in this one. The centerpiece and the most intense scene by far is the entire birthing sequence when Emily Blunt’s Evelyn is trying to give birth while there’s a creature pursuing her.  Scary stuff!  And I loved every minute of it!

As I said, early on, things are really quiet, as the characters need to be silent, and with a minimum of dialogue, very little happening on the soundtrack, it made for a very different kind of viewing for a while. All the folks in the audience munching on popcorn seemed to stop and the theater got really silent.  Some of the younger audience members, teenagers, couldn’t contain themselves and felt the urge to shout out comments every once in a while, but once things heated up in the second half, they fell frighteningly silent.

I really enjoyed A QUIET PLACE.  The acting was superb.  John Krasinski is solid as Lee Abbott, the caring dad who will stop at nothing to protect his family.

I thought Emily Blunt gave the best performance in the film as mom Evelyn Abbott. Like the rest of the family, she’s haunted by the death of their youngest son.

Millicent Simmonds, deaf in real life, is excellent as Regan, the daughter who has issues with her father, since she believes he blames her for her little brother’s death. And Noah Jupe, who we saw in last year’s WONDER (2017) as Auggie’s friend Jack Will, makes for a very frightened Marcus Abbott.

A QUIET PLACE has a smart screenplay by Bryan Woods, Scott Beck, and John Krasinski. Its story is frightening throughout, and its characters likable and believable. It’s not perfect. I thought it was slow-going at first, and its resolution, the steps taken by the Abbotts to combat the creatures, made me scratch my head in disbelief that no one else had thought of this before.

John Krasinski does a terrific job directing as well. The early scenes, though slow-paced, take full advantage of sound, or lack thereof.  With a nearly silent soundtrack during its first half, all sounds are magnified and used to full effect.  And once the film takes off during its second half, the suspense is pretty much nonstop and a heck of a lot of fun.

A QUIET PLACE is a high quality horror movie, the kind of film like last year’s GET OUT (2017) that helps raise the bar for the horror genre.

It’s my favorite horror movie of the year so far.

—END—

 

 

IN THE SPOOKLIGHT: GODZILLA VS. THE SEA MONSTER (1966)

1
godzilla vs. the sea monster

Godzilla and Ebirah duke it out in GODZILLA VS. THE SEA MONSTER (1966).

When I was a kid in the 1970s watching Godzilla movies on the Creature Double Feature, GODZILLA VS. THE SEA MONSTER (1966) was not one of the Godzilla flicks that made the rounds back then.  I didn’t see it for the first time until the mid 1990s.

GODZILLA VS. THE SEA MONSTER is one of the early “silly” Godzilla movies, films where Godzilla pretty much is a giant monster superhero saving human kind from monsters, aliens from outer space, and assorted human villains.  Here, he takes on human villains and the giant sea monster known as Ebirah.

My favorite part of GODZILLA VS. THE SEA MONSTER is the story it tells and the characters it creates.  Most of the time, the storylines in the old Godzilla movies were pretty bad, and the characters uninteresting.  In fact, in general, you had to sit through a pretty boring movie and wait for Godzilla to show up before things got interesting.  But that’s not the case here with GODZILLA VS. THE SEA MONSTER.  It boasts one of the more fun stories in a 1960s Godzilla film, and it certainly contains some of the series’ more interesting characters.

So, it’s one Godzilla movie where things are a lot of fun even when Godzilla is not stomping on the scenery. But that doesn’t mean that Godzilla still isn’t the best part of this movie

Basically, a young man in search of his brother who had been lost at sea convinces two of his friends to help him steal a boat so they can search for his missing brother.  It turns out, the boat they choose happens to be inhabited by a jewel thief named Yoshimura (Akira Takarada) who’s hiding inside the boat.

Eventually, the four men find themselves shipwrecked on an island run by evil militants who are running a slave trade, and these militants are protected by the giant sea monster Ebirah. Lucky for our heroes, they discover Godzilla sleeping inside a cave and use lightning to wake him up, and of course, being Godzilla, he immediately gets cracking at seeking out and destroying all the evil elements on the island.

It also turns out, that the missing brother found himself on Mothra’s island, and so eventually Mothra shows up to help out when Godzilla’s intentions aren’t all that clear. That’s the fun thing about Godzilla. Sure, he’ll smack down the bad guys, but that doesn’t mean he won’t stomp on the heroes as well.

If this sounds silly, that’s because it is silly, but it’s all framed in a quick-moving fun storyline in which jewel thief Yoshimura often has to use his “thief skills” to help get his new young friends out of jams. Plus there’s a hopping 1960s music score that sounds like a cross between the Adam West BATMAN TV show and a Sean Connery James Bond movie.

But the bottom line is the entire flick is a heck of a lot of fun, and it’s one of my favorite GODZILLA  movies from the 1960s.

Akira Takarada, who plays Yoshimura the jewel thief, also starred in the original GODZILLA: KING OF THE MONSTERS (1956) as the heroic Ogata, as well as in KING KONG ESCAPES (1967). He’s excellent here as Yoshimura.  Takarada’s co-star from first GODZILLA, Akihiko Hirata, who played Dr. Serizawa in that film, plays the villainous Captain Yamoto here.  Both actors have appeared in multiple Godzilla movies over the years.  Hirata passed away in 1984 at the age of 56, but Takarada is still with us.

The other interesting thing about GODZILLA VS. THE SEA MONSTER is that it was originally written to be a King Kong movie, a follow-up to KING KONG VS. GODZILLA (1962). Eventually that idea was scrapped, and Kong was replaced by Godzilla, which explains some of the different behaviors displayed by Godzilla in this movie.  First and foremost, Godzilla is very protective of the lead female character here, which isn’t indicative of Godzilla’s behavior in any other movie.  On the other hand, showing affection towards the female lead is one of Kong’s signature movie traits.  What a Lothario!

Godzilla is also found sleeping inside a cave, where in other films he pretty much lives in the ocean, and he’s strengthened by lightning, which is how Kong was strengthened in KING KONG VS. GODZILLA.

The battle between Godzilla and Ebirah is okay, and there have been far better monster battles in other Godzilla movies, but the strength of this film is the better balance between Godzilla scenes and the scenes featuring human characters.  When Godzilla is not on-screen, the action here is still engaging and fun.

GODZILLA VS. THE SEA MONSTER is not one of more popular Godzilla movies, but it’s certainly one of the more entertaining ones.

Definitely check out GODZILLA VS. THE SEA MONSTER.  Watch Godzilla battle that giant lobster monster Ebirah, and if you’re lucky enough, there might even be some leftovers for a hearty seafood platter.

Yum!

Pass the tartar sauce please.

—END—

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Halloween Special 2: Karloff, Lugosi, Chaney,Jr., Lee, and Cushing Talk Monsters

0
Lugosi_Karloff

Bela Lugosi and Boris Karloff

Welcome back to another Halloween Special.

Once again I’m conducting a mock interview with horror greats Boris Karloff, Bela Lugosi, Lon Chaney Jr., Christopher Lee, and Peter Cushing. And while this interview is completely imaginary, their answers to my questions are real, taken from quotes they really said.

So, without further hesitation, let’s get started.

MICHAEL:  Welcome everyone to a very special treat.

Joining me today on this Monster Panel are Boris Karloff, Bela Lugosi, Lon Chaney Jr., Christopher Lee, and Peter Cushing. Thank you all for joining me today.

Today I want to talk about monsters, specifically, your thoughts on just who is the greatest movie monster of all time.  And before you answer, I’m going to guess that you all will be partial to the monsters you played in the movies.  And as a famous comedian once said, “Not that there’s anything wrong with that.”

Bela, let’s start with you.  Your thoughts on the greatest movie monster of all time.

BELA LUGOSI: Every actor’s greatest ambition is to create his own, definite and original role, a character with which he will always be identified. In my case, that role was Dracula.

dracula-1931-bela-lugosi

Lugosi as Dracula in DRACULA (1931).

MICHAEL:  So, you’re going with Dracula?

(Lugosi nods)

CHRISTOPHER LEE:  I agree.

Dracula is different; he is such an exciting person.

And it doesn’t bother me to be remembered as Dracula.
Dracula-Prince-of-Darkness_lee

Christopher Lee as Dracula in DRACULA – PRINCE OF DARKNESS (1966).

MICHAEL:  It doesn’t?
CHRISTOPHER LEE: Why should it? What does bother me is when people say, “Ah yes, there goes Dracula,” or “There goes the horror king.” It simply isn’t true. I’m quite annoyed when people don’t acknowledge that I’ve done anything else.
PETER CUSHING:  People look at me as if I were some sort of monster, but I can’t think why.
 (Everyone laughs)
 PETER CUSHING: In my macabre pictures, I have either been a monster-maker or a monster-destroyer, but never a monster. Actually, I’m a gentle fellow. Never harmed a fly. I love animals, and when I’m in the country I’m a keen bird-watcher.
 MICHAEL:  Boris, what about you?
 BORIS KARLOFF: The Frankenstein Monster.
Yes, the monster was the best friend I ever had.
Frankenstein-1931-Boris-Karloff

Karloff as the Monster in FRANKENSTEIN (1931).

 PETER CUSHING:  I know what you mean.
It gives me the most wonderful feeling. These dear people love me so much and want to see me. The astonishing thing is that when I made the Frankenstein and Dracula movies almost 30 years ago the young audiences who see me now weren’t even born yet. A new generation has grown up with my films. And the original audiences are still able to see me in new pictures. So, as long as these films are made I will have a life in this business — for which I’m eternally grateful.
curse of frankenstein - you're going to help me paul

Peter Cushing as Baron Victor Frankenstein in THE CURSE OF FRANKENSTEIN (1957).

CHRISTOPHER LEE:  Yes, and for me, quite frankly, I’m grateful to Dracula.
If people today remember me in the role and still enjoy it, I’m flattered. If, through some strange twist of fate, I was able to take a character some 25 years ago and create an impact where by I suddenly became known throughout the world, how can I complain?
 BELA LUGOSI: And never has a role so influenced and dominated an actor’s role as has the role of Dracula.
 MICHAEL:  We haven’t heard from you yet, Lon.  What’s your opinion on these classic movie monsters?
 LON CHANEY JR.: All the best of the monsters played for sympathy. That goes for my father, myself and all the others. They all won the audience’s sympathy.
  The Wolf Man didn’t want to do all those bad things. He was forced into them.
wolf man fog

Lon Chaney Jr. as The Wolfman, in THE WOLFMAN (1941).

 MICHAEL:  So, monsters are pretty special.
BORIS KARLOFF: My dear old monster. I owe everything to him. He’s my best friend.
 LON CHANEY JR.: The trouble with most of the monster pictures today is that they go after horror for horror’s sake. There’s no motivation for how monsters behave.
  CHRISTOPHER LEE:  That’s one of the reasons I will play no more monsters.
 Now villains are different.
Most people find my villains memorable because I try to make them as unconventional as possible. They are not overt monsters.
It’s easy to play a “heavy” straight down the middle, 100%, but it’s boring. I don’t think I’ve ever played a villain who didn’t have some unusual, humanizing trait. When I look back at my men with the black hats, they’ve always had something else going for them, whether it be a sardonic sense of humor or a feeling of desolation. I always try to throw as many curves the audience’s way as possible. That’s probably why people enjoy my villainy.
 LON CHANEY JR.:  There’s just too much of that science-fiction baloney.
 BELA LUGOSI:  Science fiction, perhaps.  Baloney, perhaps not.
Dracula has, at times, infused me with prosperity and, at other times, he has drained me of everything.
It’s a living, but it’s also a curse. It’s Dracula’s curse.
chaney lugosi

Lon Chaney Jr. and Bela Lugosi in THE WOLFMAN (1941).

 PETER CUSHING:  Yes.  In the early days I played a lot of comedy in the theater and on television. But once an actor becomes well-known in any kind of part, he tends to get stereotyped.

After I played Frankenstein, I was only thought of in that light. Of course, some actors are better at drama and some are better at comedy. But they can certainly have a stab at both. An actor should be able to do it all.

(Laughter)

BORIS KARLOFF: Before we go, since we’re talking about movie monsters, I just want to acknowledge Jack Pierce— the best make-up man in the world.

I owe him a lot.

MICHAEL:  Thank you all for joining me tonight.  I appreciate your taking the time to answer my questions.  And that’s all the time we have.

Thanks for reading, everybody!

—Michael

Books by Michael Arruda:

TIME FRAME,  science fiction novel by Michael Arruda.  

Ebook version:  $2.99. Available at http://www.neconebooks.com. Print version:  $18.00.  Email your order request to mjarruda33@gmail.com. Also available at Amazon.com.

IN THE SPOOKLIGHT, movie review collection by Michael Arruda.

InTheSpooklight_NewText

 Ebook version:  $4.99.  Available at http://www.neconebooks.com.  Print version:  $18.00.  Email your order request to mjarruda33@gmail.com. Also available at Amazon.com.

FOR THE LOVE OF HORROR, short story collection by Michael Arruda.  

For The Love Of Horror cover

Ebook version:  $4.99.  Available at http://www.neconebooks.com. Print version:  $18.00.  Email your order request to mjarruda33@gmail.com. Also available at Amazon.com.  

 

 

 

IN THE SPOOKLIGHT: BLOOD FROM THE MUMMY’S TOMB (1971)

1

blood_from_the_mummys_tomb_poster

One of the better parts of the awful reboot THE MUMMY (2017) starring Tom Cruise was that it featured a female mummy, but it wasn’t the first film to do this.

Hammer Films did it and did it better back in 1971 with BLOOD FROM THE MUMMY’S TOMB, a film based on the novel The Jewel of the Seven Stars by Bram Stoker.

BLOOD FROM THE MUMMY’S TOMB is completely unlike the Hammer Mummy movies which came before it, and for that matter from the Universal Mummy movies as well. Gone is the lumbering monster wrapped in bandages.  In its place is a  beautiful woman whose otherworldly powers are just as deadly.

BLOOD FROM THE MUMMY’S TOMB is the story of a young woman named Margaret Fuchs (Valerie Leon), the daughter of famed archeologist Professor Julian Fuchs (Andrew Keir).  Margaret is troubled by nightmares in which she catches glimpses of an expedition led by her father which discovered a female mummy, Queen Tera, which strangely had not suffered any decomposition.  Even stranger, Queen Tera is a dead ringer for Margaret.  What’s a girl to do?

blood_from_the_mummys_tomb_queen tera

Queen Tera (Valerie Leon), looking pretty good for a centuries old mummy.

Why, investigate, of course!  Which is exactly what Margaret does, with the help of her boyfriend Tod Browning (Mark Edwards).  No, not the guy who directed Bela Lugosi in DRACULA (1931), but obviously the use of the name here is a nod to the famous director, and it makes sense here, since Browning directed DRACULA, which was based on Bram Stoker’s famous novel, and of course this Mummy movie was based on Stoker’s less famous novel.

What Margaret and Tod find out is that Queen Tera is very much alive and intent on walking the earth again, but to do that, she must kill, kill, kill, which she does by using Margaret.

While I wouldn’t place BLOOD FROM THE MUMMY’S TOMB up there with Hammer’s best shockers, it does belong in the better-than-average category.  My favorite part is that it is so different.

Director Seth Holt— who would die from a heart attack before the film was released— uses a slow almost artistic style to tell this story.  The effect is quite mesmerizing.  While you won’t be jolted out of your seat from in-your-face scares, you will be captivated by a haunting tale that subtly gets under your skin.

The music score here by Tristram Cary is also quite effective, as it lends a sense of eeriness to the proceedings.

The screenplay by Christopher Wicking is a good one.  It tells an interesting story and creates some intriguing characters.  The plot also builds to a bloody climax in which survivors are hard to come by.

Valerie Leon is okay as Margaret Fuchs/Queen Tera.  It’s kind of a one note performance, as she doesn’t exhibit a lot of range.  I enjoyed Mark Edwards much better as her boyfriend Tod Browning.  I thought he came off like a real person, and he seemed quite natural inside this supernatural environment.

I’m a big fan of Andrew Keir, and he’s very good here as Professor Julian Fuchs, in a role that was originally intended for Peter Cushing, but Cushing had to drop out to care for his ailing wife.  My favorite Andrew Keir role in a Hammer Film is his performance as Father Sandor in DRACULA-PRINCE OF DARKNESS (1966).  His role here as Professor Fuchs isn’t as significant, but Keir’s presence adds dignity and respectability to the story.

blood-from-the-mummys-tomb-valerie leon-andrew keir

Andrew Keir as Professor Julian Fuchs, trying to put an end to Queen Tera, the Mummy.

Also memorable is James Villiers as the mysterious Corbeck, a member of the Fuchs expedition which discovered the tomb of Queen Tera, who later contacts Margaret and Tod and has his own ideas as to what needs to be done regarding the mummy.

If there’s one thing I don’t like about BLOOD FROM THE MUMMY’S TOMB it’s that it lacks energy.  At first, its slow-paced eerie style works, but the film never builds on this, never becomes more suspenseful.  It does have a violent conclusion, but it’s not as powerful as you would expect.  And that’s why for me it’s not up there with Hammer’s best. It’s an atmospheric thriller and generally satisfying, but there’s just something rather passive about the whole thing.

Stoker’s novel The Jewel of the Seven Stars would be filmed again in 1980 under the title of THE AWAKENING starring Charlton Heston with similar if not lesser results.

So, really, female mummies haven’t fared all that well in the movies.  In fact, you could make the argument, that this above average thriller BLOOD FROM THE MUMMY’S TOMB is the best of the lot.

Either way, if you’re looking for a change of pace and want to watch a Mummy movie not about a slow-moving monster in bandages, one that features a female mummy in a story that is far better than the one told in the 2017 MUMMY, give BLOOD FROM THE MUMMY’S TOMB a try.

Its subtle style might be just the thing for a starry September evening.

—END—