Theatre of Death (1967)

"But I didn't scream..."

I was expecting this to be a rollicking Hammer-style horror B Movie, with all the fun that implies. After all, it's a Grand Guignol-themed and horror-coded film in which Christopher Lee receives top billing. Instead... well, this is a deadly serious and rather clever Grand Guignol whodunit with a rather clever and impressive plot full of twists and turns. The direction is surprisingly ambitious with lots of hand held camerawork, and both Julian Glover and Christopher Lee really shine.

Lee, despite his billing, is not the star here. But he's a compelling, fascinating character, a genius. Philippe Darvas is the greatest of all duirectors of Grand Guignol, yet he's also a deeply controlling human being who can be as cruel as he is charismatic. Glover is the true leading man and carries the film throughout, with the two female leads being relative unknowns.

It is, perhaps, mildly disappointing that the film is set in Paris yet visually it doesn't feel like it. Yet the film is carried by the two main performances, the direction, and the devilishly clever plot, in which clues arew laid throughout and paid off satisfyingly, one by one, as the film reaches its climax.

This film may, I suspect, displease many as it isn't the type of film it appears to be. On its own terms, though, I found it most enjoyable and in no way deserving of the obscurity into which it seems to have fallen.

The Gorgon (1964)

 "It never ceases to amaze me that the most noble work of God, the human brain, is the most revolting to the human eye.

It's been a while since I've blogged a Hammer horror- partly, I admit, because a lot of the remaining ones are sequels that have to be acquired and seen in the right order, but partly because, well, there are only so many left. 

Still, this is one of the more well-known ones that I hadn't hitherto seen, and it has a stellar cast, from Christopher Lee as the intellectual hero with, er interesting hair to Patrick Troughton as a Prussian policeinspector complete with spiked helmet. But the realstand-out performance is from Barbara Shelley who, despite the many charismatic figures on screen, carries this film.

There's a very nice twist towards the end, and a nicely done red herring. The effects for the Gorgon herself are... well, a bit pants, which is a shame, because the plot is clever and the conclusion highly effective and satisfying aside from that... although surely Professor Meisner ends the film about to be arrested for the apparent murders of Carla and Paul?

It's a melodrama, of course, with all that implies... but that's Hammer for you. With the one excaption of the gorgon itself the film looks superb, the script is captivating and clever, and the cast is one of true Hammer royalty. This is truly one of the highlight's of Hammer's most fertile period in the mid-'60s. Hugely enjoyable.

Bitter Victory (1957)

 "All men are cowards in some things..."

This film does not, it seems, have much of a reputation. Richard Burton gets top billing here as Captain James Leith, but far more interesting is Curd Jurgens, perennial German officer in World War II films but this tiome an officer- albeit South African- in the British Army, as Major David Brand. Brand is the protagonist, but a far deeper and more fascinating one than a mere hero would have been. Both he and Burton are superb, and both characters have real depth. The script is exquisite; this feels as much a serious play as a war film, despite the gripping action scenes.

Both men are candidates to lead an important, dangerous mission from Cairo into German-held Libya. Yet there is friction, with Leith being an old flame to Brand's wife Jane. Brand is an inexperienced staff officer, out of his depth in action, whereas Leith is a volunteer, a former archeologist, a philosophical man with a deep, dark soul. The general chooses Brand to lead, as Leith is "an intellectual. Besides, he;s Welsh." Well then.

The scenes between the two men are gripping. Leith sees Brand's failure to kill in action, yet this is no moral failing. Where Brand disgusts is in his dishonesty and the extent to which he goes to hide his failure, trying to kill Leith, subtly, and ending up with a reputation as a killer amongst his men and, indeed, his wife. Yes, this is an action film, and a good one. There is suspense. Yet, as a character drama, this is almost as good as anything by Miller or Rattigan.

Not only that, we get to hear Christopher Lee doing a cockney accent.

Star Wars: The Clone Wars (2008)

 "The desert is merciless. It takes everything from you."

It's up in the air, at this point, whether I'm going to blog the Clone Wars series, as there are over a hundred bloody episodes. Eek. But it seemed worthwhile to have a look at the initial TV film and experience Ahsoka's first appearance, having only known her from the recent live action stuff on Disney Plus.

All the same, I rather enjoyed this. I'm not sure I liked the rather odd animation style, but this was a nice little bit of fanwank to pass the time. You could tell the voice actors were different- although kudos for getting both Samuel L Jackson and Christopher Lee- but for the most part they were quite convincing.

The story, a sinister attempt at diplomatic skulduggery on the part of Count Dooku to use Jabba the Hutt's bizarrely cute son as a pawn against the Republic, is rather good, though. So is the nuanced characterisation of Anakin Skywalker which, if anything, is better than anything we see onscreen during the prequels. But, of course, the main reason for watching this is to meet a very young, enthusiastic, rather awesome Ahsoka as she becomes Anakin's apprentice against his will and, rather ttouchingly, a genuine bond starts to fall. This rather pivotal bit of characterisation is handled very well indeed.

I also enjoyed the campest Hutt in history, and the comedic incompetence of the separatist droids that is, quite rightly, played for laughs. This probably shouldn't be seen as any more than what it is, but I rather enjoyed it.

Gremins 2: The New Batch (1990)

 "I've got rabies, and I'm supposed to get the flu this week."

Oh, I love this film. It is- and I know this is a weird thing to say for a Hollywood sequel-a different level of wit, enjoyment and fun from ther original. fourth wall? you're dead?

Yes, this is a sequel. We have Billy and Kate, moved to New York. We have some very real, surreal and, I suspect, very dated satire of Wall Street and the absurdities of thre reagan era. Reagan was no Trump, but, well, he was stupid. It's all excellent stuff. Poor Mowlgli.

But that barely scratches the surface. The first breath in the fourth wall comes from the mime artists being escorted out of the police van. Then we have, yeah, the Hulk Hogan interview. The fourth wall dies at this point, even after the review of the first movie which has hilarious consequences. It's sad to see the great Christopher Lee in a character part, but he's superb.

The knowing wit is hilarious throghout. This cannot, sutely, have been written by committee. Halleluljah. And I can't even begin to touch on the satire. This is the Reagan era. Corporate culture was insane.

There's so much to talk about. The old man- Kato in the old Green Hornet movie serials- dues. Poor Gizmo is bullied. So is Billy, unappreciated at work. The whole satire on 80s corporate excess is exquisite. At one point the lift asks for a car to be removed beause it's cheap and old.

I adore this film. If you don.'t ,then I shall challenge you to a duel. Sith Re Leicrster cheese. Be warned.

The Oblong Box (1969)

 "We have knowledge of things you know nothing of..."

This film is an odd yet enjoyable beast. It's an adaptation of an Edgar Poe Story, sort of, as it has pretty much no scenes or characters in common with it other than the coffin itself. This is no sea voyage along the Eastern Seaboard of the USA, but a British horror film of the late '60s with literally all the tropes that implies.

This is no bad thing.

It's 1865, and looks good, as such historical films often do, Vincent Price stars, inevitably, given the double whammy of British cinema of this time worshipping him and given him work and, of course, his association with Poe, courtesy of the great Roger Corman, having ceased but five years before.

The script is original, not Poe in the slightest, par for the course for a British horror film of the period, but it works. Both Price and Christopher Lee are amazing.

Gordon Kessler's direction is Jekyll and Hyde. His domestic scenes are ho-hum, but his scenes of horror and excitement are creative and inspired. The film centres on African voodoo, the opening scene feels- and is- quite unthinkingly racist- yet the sensitive treatment of Harry Baird's noble african character goes some way to mitigate, and the script goes some way to show colonialism as the original sin behind all of this.

This is not, perhaps, a great film. But, for those of us who love this type of horror, it is exquisite.

The Torture Chamber of Dr. Sadism (1967)

 "The blood is the life..."

This is a cheap German film which, like many of its ilk, happens to star Christopher Lee who, while phoning it in by his standards, cannot help but ooze charisma. It is, I must observe, a splendidly lurid translation in English, despite being essentially a version of Poe's The Pit and the Pendlum, as becomes quite obvious at the end... with said pendulum clearly positioned at crotch level. Ouch.

I don't know any of the other actors; Lex Barker is apparently a former Tarzan. But this is a well made little film, with locations and sets evoking nineteenth century Germany superbly, if less expensively than Roger Corman. Karin Dor is extremely attractive. 

Yet let us not pretend this is anything other than a B movie cashing in on Lee's name. It is corniness itself, splendidly soo. The "priest" character is very silly. Lee only gets moderate amounts of screen time. The plot is risible. The butler is hilariously violent. The opening seqence with the Count's execution is not so lurid as promised, what with his supposedly being quartered by four horses, which it appears we are going to graphically see untilthe camera cuts to what os undoubtedly a lurid shot, but equally undoubtedly a shot of a painting. This film is not one for torture rubberneckers. Nor is it unmissable for Christopher Lee fans. It's nothing special. But it's a fun little B movie.

And we love those, don't we?

To the Devil a Daughter (1976)

 “Damn you!”

I thought this was supposed to be a terrible film, the flop that ruined Hammer. It may not be as good as The Devil Rides Out, Hammer’s previous Dennis Wheatley adaptation, but few films are. Why is this film, which I have just thoroughly enjoyed,so widely disliked?

This is an oddity. Hammer did very few films in 1974, but here comes their last hurrah, two years later, post-dating the attempted revival of the format by Tyburn. And, as far as I can see, this is a wonderful Satanic horror film, not quite up there with Hammer’s very best but very much bubbling under. The plot is gripping, the direction sublime, the tension exquisite, the performances superb. Christopher Lee has never been more charismatic nor more evil. Richard Widmark is the perfect tough guy hero. Klaus Kinski’s daughter is bloody good. Honor Blackman and Denholm Elliott are extraordinary in supporting roles.

I’m baffled as to why this flopped. I enjoyed this much more than Don’t Look Now last night.

The Creeping Flesh (1973)

 "That is why I shall have to employ someone for whom eythics have no significance..."

This is (SPOILERS, even if I remain vague) a film which relies entirely on a last minute twist, upon which all relies and about which I;m not going to be able to say much. I'm not generally strict on spoilers but this is literally a last minute revelation which raises a poor to average film, based on seemingly silly concepts, to a film based on a script which actually has some merit.

Not that the production can be much faulted: Freddie Francis directs and Peter Cushing and Christopher Lee star in a horror film, not actually by either Hammer nor Amicus, yet which evokes both. The question is not whether or not the film is well made; it's about to what extent the last minute twist redeems what has until then been a ho-hum film.

There, I suppose, feminist subtexts here, about how feminine expressions of sexuality are seen, in quite horrifying scenes involving mother and daughter, about how expressions of female sexuality are seen firstly as invitations to rape and, upon resistance, as insanity.

The poster decives in that the skeleton, while impressive-looking, is not seen moving until a brief, dramatic scene at the end of the film. Yet there is an interesting feminist subtext here in a script which takes its time to reveal what is really going on while appering really quite silly for most of its length. It's alsoa film in which awidowed Cushing is made to mourn his late wife.

This is an interesting curiosity, perhaps. But the last minute twist does not save it from mediocrity.

The Two Faces of Dr. Jekyll (1960)

 "Is there anywhere a man who simply takes?"

This is an unorthodox adaptation of Robert Louis Stevenson's novella- with the action for some reason moved from Edinburgh to a London with a dark underbelly- but it works. This is, incredibly, the first film adaptation of this that 've blogged, but it's a bloody good one.

Paul Massey is, of course, magnificent in his dual role, but it's extraordinary that the film should have Hyde be young and handsome- a cad and a seducer- while Jekyll should be aged and bearded with make-up. It's a mystery that Massey's career should be so relatively sparse on the evidence of this.

Yet just as interesting is the very Hammer treatment of Jekyll, who is a scientific obsessive on the way towards obsession himself- a character who owes as much to Hammer's Frankenstein as the novella. His early dialogue on the duality of man sounds positively Nietzchean, and I'm sure this is intentional.

Indeed, Jekyll is a neglectful husband, whose wife is having an affair with the spendidly unscrupulous Paul, played with superb loucheness by Christopher Lee, who absolutely nails a role which is completely against type.

This is ultimately a gripping and fresh version of the tale which dares to give us something new. It's another early Hammer triumph, whatever the critics may have said at the time.

The Terror of the Tongs (1961)

 "Like all occidentals, you find it impossible to accept the inevitable."

This is one of those occasional non-horror films Hammer did in their glory days, a tale of a tong rather than a vampire and something a bit different for Jimmy Sangster to write and Christopher Lee to star in.

You can see from the pic that there's an unfortunate amount of yellowface here, prominently so with Lee; it appears that, aside from Burt Kwouk (who inevitably appears), there are no Chinese actors available for speaking roles so the Chinese characters all have to be played by white actors with various degrees of yellowface. Some attempt to sound Chinese; the likes of Lee and Roger Delgado sound English as ever- or, in the case of Yvonne Monlaur, French.

It's a fairly standard revenge plot, although with surprisingly little action overall, with Geoffrey Toone suitably square-jawed as the heroic and very British Jackson Sale.

It is, of course, all told from the perspective of the colonising British, with lots of unfortunate othering of Chinese ways and Chinese culture; it's not just the yellowface that means I'm hardly not exactly going to be able to deny the casual, unthinking racism and racist tropes that permeate this film, many of which no doubt have failed to catch my attention. There's a character called Confucius, after all. But it was 1961, and the past is a foreign country. It's also interesting to see Hong Kong as a place where cultures meet, and what that means for organised crime.

Lee is decent enough- he phones in his performance somewhat, but he's good enough to get away with it. Roger Delgado is also excellent- charismatic and commanding. The plot is standard stuff but decent enough. The direction, though, is sadly flat and uninspired, with unimaginative camerawork and lighting. But the script and performances raise the film to the level of an entertaining curiosity, from a time when no one batted an eyelid at portraying cultures in this way.

The Devil Rides Out (1968)

 "In magic, there is neither good nor evil."

It's been many years since I've seen this film, certainly a decade and a bit. I well remember being impressed with it, and this viewing has cemented its excellence for me. This is, without a doubt, the finest Hammer film I've seen, and the finest performance I’ve ever seen from a compellingly charismatic Christopher Lee. On the strength of this performance is staggering that he wasn’t asked do play more parts as the hero protagonist. He radiates authority and steadfastness as few actors can.

It’s not just the excellence of its leading man that elevates this film to greatness, though. For one thing Richard Matheson’s superb script, full of incident and tension and using up all the best occult tropes such as the chalk circle and sacrifice, adapts Dennis Wheatley’s novel superbly. I’ve never read any Wheatley and may never do so- occult-themed pulp fiction is not really my thing- but it’s clear that he’s a little vague in his definition of Satanism, conflating it with the worship of pagan deities and “magic” as it would presumably be understood by Aleister Crowley or, indeed, Alan Moore, and combining ritual with the kind of orgies that would be a nightmare for we introverts. But it certainly makes for a first class suspense-based horror film. And Charles Gray is a wonderfully urbane baddie.

More than that, though, this is Terence Fisher’s claim to greatness. Everything about the way this film is shot is magnificent- taut, terrifying, and deadly serious. This film shows him- and Hammer- to be capable of far more than the cheesiness for which we know them. A truly outstanding gem of a film.

Crypt of Horror (1964)

 "In some houses death is a tenant."

This is, so to speak, a spaghetti horror, with Christopher Lee being a kind of Clint Eastwood here (not a phrase I ever thought I'd write) as the star and only native English speaker amongst a largely Italian cast in L'Aquila. It's reasonably straightforward sdaptation of Sheridan Le Fanu's Carmilla with a few names changed but the plot largely left intact, and will be interesting to compare with Hammer's The Vampire Lovers when I inevitably get there.

And it's the plot that makes this film surpisingly good. Lee is, as ever, superb, and well-cast as a Count Karstein who worries that his ill daughter may have been possessd by the spirit of a powerful witch of an ancestor- a true gothic situation with an evil from the distant past threatening a castle and deserted village. The historical Italian setting really emphasises this sense of an ever-present past threatening the present.

This film is, perhaps, a collection of all the usual '60s horror film tropes with all the above plus more. But what makes it special is the unusally intricate plot, with twist and turns throughout and a rather effective whodunit element towards the end. It's weird that all the dialogue except Lee's is dubbed, but the script is surprisingly strong and the film well-directed, and done as straight horror with no ttempt at high camp whatsoever- a dangerous thing to mattempt with this sort of film but just about pulled off successfully.

Overall, this is surprisingly good, and deserves an audience beyond the usual Christopher Lee completists.

Star Wars: Attack of the Clones (2002)

“I’m programmed for etiquette, not destruction.”

I tried to like The Phantom Menace but, while I found a good concept at its core, I didn’t entirely succeed. This time around, despite a couple of uncharismatic leads, I was surprised to find a film that was pretty damn good.

Ewan McGregor, though a good actor, is far too hopelessly miscast and awkwardly stiff as Obi Wan, a problem which remains. I didn't find Hayden Christensen t all bad as Anakin, despite his reputation, and his acting is sound- but he just doesn't have the charisma. These two aside, though, we have an engaging cast led by Natalie Portman, a superb baddie in Christopher Lee, and a bigger role for the Jedi council. We also have an exciting and well structured film that both cleverly moves the plot arc forward and convincingly develops the characters.

The main arc- the beginning of the clone wars and Palpatine assuming more power, chipping away at democracy in the beleaguered Republic as he ostensibly increases its security with a clone army-hints at an old tension between liberty and security, and it's clear that Anakin, influenced as much by Palpatine as his actual mentor Obi Wan, is on the side of the authoritarians. Yet I'm surprised more is not made of the Roman parallels- a Republic with an overstretched web of territory becoming more and more swayed by the necessity of a strong military, and even a popular politician manipulating himself into the position of Dictator, like Caesar. The political skulduggery is very well handled indeed.

Yet so is the gradually and convincingly developing romance between Padme and Anakin, which is entirely believable. And Anakin begins as likeable and not really a bad bloke- what's wrong with reasonably questioning authority, having a sexuality, being idealistic? And his only sins here are the urge to protect his mother and the woman he loves. It's only when he slaughters the Tusken Raiders as revenge for his mother, including the children, and when he lets slip his authoritarian leanings, that hints of darkness begin to appear in him as they do with the Republic itself.

But there's also plenty of action throughout, some good comedy with C-3PO and R2-D2, and some actual wit and humour in the dialogue, a joy to behold. We even get to see a cool, Kiwi origin for Boba Fett (not named here as a Mandalorian!), a lightsabre contest between Count Dooku and the awesome Yoda, and a confrontation scene between legends Christopher Lee and Samuel L. Jackson.

I think I'll come out and say it; there are a couple of flaws, yes, but the second of the prequels is a bloody good film.

The House That Dripped Blood (1971)

"The one with Be;a Lugosi, of course. Not this new Fellow.

Time for another of Amicus' splendid portmanteau films, I think, and a haunted house theme can't go wrong. Indeed it doesn't and, while this is perhaps not up there with the finest of Amicus' stuff, it is nevertheless a highly enjoyable film with a magnificent cast of British character actors.

A framing device having been devised with an inspector investigating the bizarre disappearance of the house's latest tenant, we jump into the first segment, and perhaps the best, as Denholm Elliott excels as a horror seemingly becoming obsessed with his latest murderous creation, seeing him anywhere. The twist is clever, and the mood effective.

We then have Peter Cushing and the ever-affable Joss Ackland in a less effective segment about a creepy waxworks, elevated by the extraordinary haunted performance of the recently bereaved Cushing. But what follows, with Nyree Dawn Porter and the great Christopher Lee, is a highly effective example of the trope of the creepily evil child.

The final segment stars Jon Pertwee, showing a delightful disinclination to vary the performance he was giving each week at the time in Doctor Who, but is enjoyably charismatic as the old school horror star who buys a cursed vampire cloak from the truly awesome Geoffrey Bayldon. Ingrid Pitt as an actual vampire just adds to the fun.

Nom not all the segments are equally good. But, like all of its ilk, this Amicus portmanteau horror is massively fun to watch.

Scream and Scream Again! (1970)

“That bloody chicken wasn’t killed- it died of old age!”

 This is an odd film, not at all what the marketing, title and poster lead us to expect, but unexpectedly a rather good one.

The film's selling point is, of course, that it can boast the holy horror trinity of Vincent Price, Christopher Lee and Peter Cushing in the same horror film. But instead we get an utterly bonkers science fiction conspiracy thriller in which Cushing has but a brief cameo and the other two are not exactly in starring roles.

This is a gritty, realistic police procedural with slickly gritty direction, naturalistic acting and a basis in the more down-to-Earth end of science fiction. The plot may be utterly mad but pays off well, with the two apparently unrelated subplots- people being kidnapped and having their limbs surgically removed, while a sinister man with apparent superpowers commits a series of murders to climb up the greasy pole in a dodgy, unnamed, military dictatorship.

This all works rather well, as does the "A" plot of the pursuit of a serial killer with vampire-like attributes who kills girls whom he meets in nightclubs, which takes up an awful lot of the film. The film is, I suppose, rather disjointed, but it doesn't feel like it and is all drawn together in an effective climax. The overall effect is of a film which defies expectations in hat type of film it turns out to be, but in fact turns out to be surprisingly good.

The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers (2002)

“I’ll have no pointy earer outscoring me!”

This is probably my least favourite of the trilogy but only because it’s the middle one and therefore the least dramatic. It’s still awesome and features the extraordinary Battle of Helm’s Deep. Never mind that Mrs Llamastrangler asked halfway through if they’d walked far and had to be told that it featured scenes of brisk walking, jogging and even a bit of horse riding..

The main problem with LOTR after this point is, of course, that all the exciting adventures of Gandalf, Aragorn etc are contrasted with the crushing fullness of Frodo and Sam walking very slowly towards Mordor in hundreds of pages of never-ending prose where very little happens. Peter Jackson, quite sensibly, cuts all this down rather a lot while expanding on the good stuff. It all looks superb, of course, and makes you want to go to New Zealand, and it’s all brilliant for the same reasons as the first film. The same cast continues to be magnificent for the same reasons, with the honourable additions of our newly introduced Rohirrim characters- Bernard Hill as Theoden, Miranda Otto as Eowyn, Karl Urban as Elmer and of course Chucky himself, Brad Dourif as Wormtongue. Rohan looks magnificent, the return of Gandalf is perfectly shot and the rejuvenation of Theoden is a joy to behold. And the Ents look extraordinary.

As for the Battle of Helm’s Deep, I’m not usually good with extended battle scenes, with their visual nature and lack of dialogue, but this kept me gripped with its twists and its turns. It’s an awesome finale to an awesome film. Is it just me, though, that finds it a little odd and jarring that Frodo is treated as a “master” by Gollum and as a boss by Sam essentially because he’s the country squire, something which may have been unthinkingly normal to Tolkien’s generation but looks decidedly odd now. But the class politics of LOTR are perhaps for another day...

Rasputin: The Mad Monk (1966)

"When I go to confession I don't offer God small sins, petty squabbles, jealousies... I offer him sins worth forgiving!"

This is the kind of film that you know is going to be enormous fun before you’ve even seen a frame; Christopher Lee as Rasputin is a prospect that is certain to get bums on seats. Some films are purely about seeing how a certain actor handles a certain part, and this is certainly one of them.

Lee does not disappoint; his Rasputin is raucous, charismatic, larger than life, magnetic. Just, apparently, like the man himself. Not that we should expect historical accuracy from Hammer, of course; they don’t stand for anything so po-faced and serious as that. But it’s fascinating to see a film from mid-period, peak Hammer which is in their usual horror style but not really a traditional horror; the only monster here is Lee himself, and the only supernatural elements are nicely ambiguous.

Barbara Shelley is equally gripping as the tragic Sonya, and there’s a classy performance from Renee Asherson as the czarina- quite rightly, Nicky is kept out of this.

The only disappointment, perhaps, is that the ending- Rasputin’s dramatic and much-mythologised death- is both a little rushed and not particularly well choreographed, but this doesn’t spoil what is a hundred minutes of seeing Christopher Lee doing his splendid stuff.  All this and a nice little role for the great Cyril Shaps. This may be no one’s favourite film, but if you don’t enjoy this then there’s no hope for you...

The Three Musketeers (1973)

“You cannot go to the Queen with dirty legs...”

I hadn’t seen this before, amazingly, so I certainly raised an eyebrow when the opening credits revealed this film to have been scripted by George MacDonald Fraser. This gives certain expectations and, true to form, the film turns out to be a highly entertaining and rather bawdy comedy that has a lot of fun with the culture of realpolitik and duelling that prevailed in the France of Louis XIII. This is a rather straight adaptation of the novel, albeit one in which Faye Dunaway as Milady gets oddly little screen time, but one that adds a splendidly comical gloss to what was hardly the most serious novel to begin with.

This is a decadent France reigned, but not ruled over by the feckless Louis XIII, not half the man his father was or, indeed, his son will be, leaving a vacuum to be filled by the ambitious Cardinal Richelieu, a competent but oddly miscast Charlton Heston, with the far more suitable Christopher Lee in a lesser role. Perhaps they just needed a big Hollywood name, but why hardly use Faye Dunaway?

Regardless, the whole thing looks gorgeous, odd though the Hong Kong martial arts opening may be, and the cast is quite magnificent. Michael York is the perfect bumbling D’Artagnan for this film,  Raquel Welch is the perfect sultry Constance, and Christopher Lee mystifies is all A’s to why he isn’t playing the Cardinal. The film is pretty much stolen by the splendid comic acting of Spike Milligan though, who shoes us what a bloody comic genius he is.

I don’t think I’ve seen a finer version yet than this.

Sherlock Holmes and the Deadly Necklace (1962)

"I have only one ambition at the moment: to see you hanged."

Christopher Lee playing Sherlock Holmes; sounds fantastic, doesn't it? Thorley Walters as Watson? Terence Fisher directing? Why, that sounds amazing, right?  What could possibly go wrong?

What we have here is essentially The Valley of Fear with a bit of Moriarty stuff and a heist tacked on the end. It's an odd approach but it could have worked. Thing is, though, this was filmed in West Berlin with a German cast, and dubbed back into English so we don't even get Lee's voice. We see him playing Holmes... but we don't really experience it. It's so frustrating.

Worse, all the dubbing is awful, with ridiculous trans-Atlantic accents; the first thing we hear is a bunch of very American-sounding kids. And then there's the setting, and especially the cars- this seems to be set in about 1914 when the novel was written, whereas in fact Holmes was pretty much active (barring the very specific circumstances of The Lion's Mane and His Last Bow) from the early 1880s until about 1903. The cars feel wrong and jarring.

Lee's physical performance is ok, from what I can see; Walters is, I'm afraid, the bumbling type of Watson. The plot is engaging enough, but the whole thing is shot very flat and often feels am-dram with much of the acting. But the dubbing, in the end, makes it impossible to take the film seriously. You thought Dick Van Dyke's cockney accent was bad? Wait until you see Holmes in disguise here...

A real shame.