The Doctor and the Devils

In the Nineteenth Century, the renowned professor of anatomy Dr. Thomas Rock (Timothy Dalton) gives classes to neophyte medicine students in the local university. Dr. Rock uses his assistant Dr. Murray (Julian Sands) to buy corpses for his experiments from body snatchers paying a little fortune for the cadavers. When the alcoholic scum Robert Fallon (Jonathan Pryce) and Timothy Broom (Stephen Rea) overhear the conversation of grave-robbers about Dr. Rock, they decide to supply fresher corpses that worth more to the doctor, killing the poor inhabitants. Dr. Murray has unrequited feelings for the cockney whore Jennie Bailey (Twiggy) that usually hangs around with the also prostitute Alice (Nichola McAuliffe). When Dr. Murray discovers that Fallon has just sold the corpse of Alice, he seeks out the worthless Fallon and Broom to stop them from murdering Jennie. Will he arrive in time o save Jennie?

"The Doctor and the Devils" is a stylish drama, but not a horror movie. The costumes, sets and art direction are amazing, with a great reconstitution of the period with muddy streets and dirty people. The excellent cast has great performances, with great names of the British cinema and the story is also good. Unfortunately the screenplay is not good and does not offer the adequate pace for this film. My vote is seven.

Title (Brazil): Not Available

The Dylan Thomas screenplay finally makes it to the screen with a few minor alterations. Based on the Burke and Hare vivisectionist murders, this film has a lot of the feel of the old Hammer movies though for the most part it is played quite a bit straighter. Credible performance by 1960's icon Twiggy. Very good, under-rated small feature.

This is the third historical grave-robbing film I've watched after THE BODY SNATCHER (1945) and THE FLESH AND THE FIENDS (1960) – for the record, other cinematic versions of the same events out there are the Tod Slaughter vehicle THE GREED OF WILLIAM HART aka HORROR MANIACS (1948) and BURKE AND HARE (1972). While certainly the least of the three I'm familiar with (due perhaps to its graphic wallowing in the lurid details of the plot), it's pretty good for a product of its time (incidentally, the mid-1980s produced an unexpected but all-too-brief outburst of Gothic Horror which also included Franc Roddam's THE BRIDE [1985] and Ken Russell's Gothic [1986]).

The film was produced by Mel Brooks' company which had also been behind David Lynch's THE ELEPHANT MAN (1980) – which, incidentally, had marked Freddie Francis' own return to being a director of photography! Timothy Dalton as the overzealous doctor has a couple of good scenes in the first half, but he is clearly overshadowed by the more flamboyant turns of Jonathan Pryce and Stephen Rea as the nefarious night diggers. The impressive cast is completed by Twiggy, Sian Phillips, Beryl Reid, Julian Sands and Patrick Stewart; Twiggy (as another whore with a heart of gold) gets to sing as well and, predictably, medical student Sands falls for her charms.

I recall the film playing theatrically but, needless to say, I was too young to catch it back then. It's based on an original, unproduced script by celebrated Welsh playwright Dylan Thomas – adapted here by future Oscar-winning screenwriter Ronald Harwood; curiously, the names of the characters have been changed from the real ones of Knox, Burke and Hare – so had been the case with THE BODY SNATCHER, for that matter, but that one had the excuse of being based on a Robert Louis Stevenson novella! Apart from the starry cast and the film's undeniably evocative look, its main asset is a spare, unusual but effective score provided by longtime Mel Brooks collaborator John Morris.

The story of Burke and Hare is one of horror's all time classics and has inspired some great films such as The Flesh and the Fiends and The Body Snatcher, among many others. The story is absolutely rife with intrigue; we have a central murder plot, plus the reasons behind the murder as well as the whole 'morality vs science' issue that runs throughout. The film has a period setting which it carries off very well, and the excellent cast all turn in great performances which helps to ensure that The Doctor and the Devils always feels like a very polished and professional production. The names used in this movie are not the real life names of the people involved - for some reason, Doctor Knox has become Doctor Rock and Burke and Hare are now Broom and Fallon, but anyone that knows the story of Burke and Hare will know what to expect. We focus on two criminals that realise they can make a killing by killing people and selling the fresh bodies to the local Doctor for seven sovereigns a time. It soon becomes clear to the doctor that the bodies aren't being taken from graves, yet he continues to accept them to test on...

The Doctor and the Devils is not the best film to be based on this classic story; though I have not seen every film it inspired, I am sure that The Flesh and the Fiends remains the best; though this is certainly an excellent take on it. The film is directed by one of Hammer's best directors, Freddie Francis, and Francis creates the period style excellently; there is nothing about the setting or atmosphere of this film that doesn't make you think that it's all taking place in the Victorian era. The cast is excellent also. The fourth James Bond, Timothy Dalton, takes the central role of the doctor and delivers an excellent performance. He doesn't do the role as well as Peter Cushing did in the 1959 take on this story...but few matches up to Cushing. The duo of Stephen Rea and Jonathan Pryce are the gravediggers/murderers and make up the core of the film excellently. The rest of the cast is padded out by Julian Sands and Twiggy in smaller but important roles. Overall, The Doctor and the Devils is an excellent and sadly overlooked take on the classic story of Burke and Hare and while it may not be easy to come by - this one is certainly worth the effort!

Another version of the Burke & Hare grave robber story. On the surface, this one has quite a few interesting things going for it. For starters, the script was based on one originally written in the 1940s by poet Dylan Thomas. That alone would be worth checking any movie out. Then we have, of all people, Mel Brooks producing it even though it's not a comedy at all. Freddie Francis, famed cinematographer and Hammer director, directs this and gives it that sort of throwback Hammer style. That's the film's strongest asset, by the way. To top it all off, there's a nice cast with Timothy Dalton, Jonathan Pryce, Stephen Rea, Julian Sands, and...um, Twiggy.

So, with all of this, why doesn't the movie work better? Well, the main problem is that it's all so drearily serious to the point of being dull. No excitement, no humor, no suspense. It's definitely not a horror movie, either, in case you were led to believe otherwise. Yes the attention to detail and getting the period right is to be acknowledged but it just reminds me why 'realism' is a double-edged sword in films. This looks realistic to the point of being depressing. I won't say you shouldn't see it because it's intriguing enough to warrant a look. But keep expectations low. If you're really jonesing for a grave robber movie, I would suggest you see the Val Lewton/Robert Wise classic The Body Snatcher starring Boris Karloff instead.