Burke & Hare

I wanted to see this having viewed and really enjoyed the Simon Pegg version.

No contest, the Simon Pegg version is far more entertaining than this one which just doesn't do it for me. Can't really explain why either, but nothing really seems to gel.

How to tell the true story of notorious grave robbers Burke and Hare? As a bawdy sex comedy of course! Throw in an extremely silly theme song that tells of the lads escapades and you soon begin to wonder just what in hell they were trying to achieve with this one. At points it takes its material seriously but quite a lot of the rest of the time, it's a knockabout comedy, with the central characters a pair of lovable rogues who go about killing people. I know time is a healer but it makes you hope that in several years time film-makers don't think enough time has passed to make a musical comedy called Fred & Rose.

While not as well known as the likes of Dracula and Frankenstein, the tale of Burke and Hare is still undoubtedly one of horror's classics (even more so for the fact that it's based on actual events!). There has been an impressive amount of films based on this story - the classic 1945 film The Body Snatcher being the best and closely followed by The Flesh and the Fiends and The Doctor and The Devils. Horrors of Burke and Hare is a somewhat more obscure film version, and while that's not surprising considering the competition - this is still a good take on the classic story and surely deserves to be better known! The film would appear to stick to the story quite closely and doesn't bring anything new to the table that wasn't already seen in previous versions. We follow two paupers, Burke and Hare, who soon realise that there is money to be made by delivering bodies to the local doctor. It's not long, however, before they realise that there's only so many dead bodies available and later set out to make some bodies of their own...

The film is directed by British director Vernon Sewell, who previously made The Blood Beast Terror and The Curse of the Crimson alter. This film is undoubtedly better than both of those. While previous films based on this story have put their focus mainly on either the grave robbers or the doctor; this one is happier to broaden its scope and focus on not only both of these, but also things as well. This would not be a flaw if the point of the film still shone through effectively; but unfortunately this is not the case and big chunks of the story and its implications are left out. There also some confusion over exactly what style the director was going for; as the film takes on a very macabre tone at first, which works well, while at other times we are shown how much fun the lead characters are having (courtesy of an upbeat pop song!). The director does present his story very well, however, and the locations used all fit the tale very well. Unlike previous and later versions of this story, this one doesn't feature any real big stars, although all the main players are effective in their roles. Overall, if you're looking for a film based on this story; there are better ones out there, but this one is still worth seeing!

With some very familiar faces from British TV & film this little film is quite good, the scenery is quite atmospheric, maybe the direction might have been a little stronger but overall it's good fun black comedy from early 70's... British style !

Like so many early 1970s British horror movies, I first saw BURKE & HARE at a drive-in as part of a double bill. I don't remember what else was showing that night but this was the movie that I came to see and it wasn't the first feature. I knew director Vernon Sewell from two earlier films, THE CRIMSON CULT and THE BLOOD BEAST TERROR and from being mentioned in David Pirie's landmark study of British horror cinema, A HERITAGE OF HORROR. Neither of those two movies were particularly good but they were entertaining, well made and boasted powerhouse horror casts (Peter Cushing, Robert Flemyng, Christopher Lee, Barbara Steele, Michael Gough, and Boris Karloff). This one didn't have the cast but it was about Burke & Hare.

I am fascinated by the Burke & Hare saga. Though he was hanged in 1829, Burke's skeleton is still on display in Edinburgh. I am also a huge admirer of John Gilling's 1959 version of the story THE FLESH & THE FIENDS. I have seen all 5 of the major cinematic versions of the story and this one is the weakest of the set which is too bad because there was real potential here. The problem is that the producers wanted to have their cake and eat it too.

They combined a horror movie with a period sex romp in the vein of FANNY HILL. The bordello scenes look like a completely different movie. The lighting is different, the music is cheerful, and the editing between the two storylines is haphazard. This is a shame because the B & H scenes are well staged and well acted by Derren Nesbit & Glynn Edwards. Yootha Joyce and Dee Shenderey are also very good as the women behind the men. Harry Andrews looks the part of Dr. Knox but lacks the depth of Peter Cushing's characterization'

I read that director Sewell envisioned a different film altogether as this lacks the tight editing of his other movies. What he thought of BURKE & HARE is probably best summarized by the fact that he quit the business after this one. Producer Kenneth Shipman, taking advantage of the new relaxed standards, made sure that there was plenty of female flesh on display (which Sewell had originally cut down quite a bit). Throw in some kinky behavior witnessed through peepholes and you have what looks like a spread for PLAYBOY magazine (or maybe it's PENTHOUSE since they're British).

While I can't really recommend the film it's not without its good points. This Redemption DVD looks absolutely gorgeous and is the uncut version. There's even a Blu-Ray edition with bonus features. Director John Landis obviously borrowed the film's overall comic tone for his 2010 BURKE & HARE with Simon Pegg and Andy Serkis which is very similar...For more reviews visit The Capsule Critic.