La maledizione

Odd film, this. Not being the biggest fan of Hammer, I always felt Amicus a more competent stable (neither really produced a film that was actually frightening, but they could be entertaining, and Amicus were glossy and lurid.) This one is a little-known piece that always gets bad reviews but I happen to like it. Firstly, it has a splendid cast. Secondly, the camerawork is something to behold, the sickly lurid colours blending in with the gorgeous period costumes and attractive, dramatic locations. There is also a little more going on here than meets the eye. Perhaps a subtle nod to the Glamis Castle story...? There's a little bit of class war going on, and despite its vivid rape scene I can't help feeling this isn't quite the exploitation movie it appears. For an early 70s movie it does at least treat the issue seriously; the effect it has on the victim and the fact that no measures can atone for it are believable.

A word to the excellent music, beautiful but interspersed with a spooky zither. And Geoffrey Whitehead is very good. The graveyard climax is pretty powerful too, and the closing shot as a camera wanders an empty room to the Bible is a cut above what one expects from this genre. The bad points are the tacky severed hand, the occasional Grand Guignol hamminess and the fact that the film does rather overplay it's hand...it spends so long building up to its revelation that by then it will always be a let down.

And one other criticism...Catherine recovers from her wedding night ordeal ridiculously quickly, which totally contradicts the film's central premise. Still, the open window symbolism and the Malleus Mallificarum references are neat, as is the wonderful scene of Charles standing by the window as the snow falls and reading the lines from Milton's Comus. This film honestly isn't as bad as you may think and you could certainly do alot worse on a dark winter evening!

Oh My God! I'm putting Stephanie Beacham up for Queen of The Scream. This woman can sure sustain. This film must have one of the longest and shrillest screams in movie history. It was so piercing and unyielding I had to turn down the volume on my soundbase. WOW!

I can vaguely remember not thinking too highly of this film when I watched it in my youth. However, now some years have passed and my tastes have matured - along with my age - I find I appreciate the hell out of this movie.

For one thing, the "future ghosts" that Catherine Fengriffen sees aren't as confusing for my old nogging as they once were. Truthfully, the entire story is superb. I love tales about ghosts and curses, and this is probably the best of its kind.

Roger Marshall wrote the screenplay, which was based on a novel by David Case - which I'm keeping a sharp eye peeled for; the film's so good I want to read the book. It's a wonderfully constructed tale of the supernatural and revenge. I won't go into too much detail as I don't want to spoil the picture for you, especially as Marshall does a beautiful job of peeling back the layers.

Marshall's screenplay is interesting and entertaining and will keep the audience's attention locked to the screen. Thankfully, Roy Baker's direction strengthens the story and adds to its drawing potential. He has a creative eye for composition and atmosphere and is happy to combine both to achieve some outstanding results. Two of which stood out for me.

One is when Catherine is cautiously examining the portrait of Henry Fengriffen. Baker uses a slow closeup zoom to draw you into the painting. He cuts to Catherine: She's looking worried and more than a tad apprehensive. Back to the slow zoom. Back to Catherine. Back to the painting... and... POW! You must watch the film (no spoilers here) to find out how the scene concludes. Bakers composition of the sequence and his use of the slow zoom and cuts builds the tension of the scene. You know something is coming though you won't expect what does... I didn't.

The second being the vision of the ghost through the leaded light window. This works on so many levels. We can see the fear on Catherine's face and know she's seen something unpleasant. Baker flips the camera lens onto the stained glass window. The darkened hues of purples and greens in the window's leaded design are visible... but behind that, there's a blurred image. The colours and shades are so similar that you can't discern what you're looking at. Until Baker uses the slow zoom again. This time it draws you towards the window. However, your attention's fixed on what stands beyond. As we draw nearer the blurred vision sharpens until we can see the empty eye sockets and the missing right hand. This is a beautiful and disturbing shot. I loved it.

Luckily for us, the audience, the entire movie's filled with the same excellent camerawork. "Screaming" is one hell of a lush, plush, and classy film. A stunning piece of eye candy.

However, if neither the acting nor the special effects had possessed the same attention to detail, the entire film would be a lot worse. Thankfully, they did. In all truth, this flick has the best eyeless make-up and severed hand I've seen. The FX people were artists.

Stephanie Beacham is superb in the role of Catherine Fengriffen. Catherine's a determined youthful woman who is wholly interested in her husband, his ancestry, and his estate. Beacham uses her full acting range to reflect Catherine's emotions. She does this, not only through her dialogue but by using facial features and body language, especially to show Catherine's fear and worry. Baker uses this talent to inject most of the eeriness into the film. This combination of Baker's direction and Beacham's acting hooks and holds the audiences' attention. Based on this performance, Beacham deserved the top billing in this film.

However, it's the heavy hitters and crowd-pleasers who take pole position.

As always, Peter Cushing is impeccable in his role as Dr Pope. Though it's easy to understand since there are elements of Baron Von-Frankenstein and Dr Van-Helsing in this character. Therefore, Dr Pope is a snug fit for Cushing and he wears him as he would his favourite smoking jacket.

Herbert Lom, though, extends his repertoire with the nasty piece of work that is Henry Fengriffen. Lom comes across as weighty, strong and indignant to the thoughts of others. He is the lord of the manor and that puts him second only to God. I wouldn't want to cross Henry.

Then we have Patrick Magee. Who's at his dithering, doubtful, and hesitant best as Dr Whittle... and whittle he does.

Ian Ogilvy plays Charles Fengriffen, husband to Catherine. He's the doubter of the pack. He doesn't fully trust in the family curse or that his beloved has visions of ghosts. He fears for her mind and her sanity. Ogilvy gives a splendid performance as the worried and concerned hubby. It would have been nice to have Charles Fengriffen in a few more scenes, especially with his missus - they have just wed, after all. I felt Charlie to be slightly under-used. It would also enhance Catherine's character more.

Geoffrey Whitehead is outstanding as the woodsman Silas. He carries himself with an air of confidence. Silas is a sturdy man. He possesses a keen mind and has a pragmatic sense of right and wrong. This persona gives him a palpable ominousness, which makes it clear why people are wary of, and even fear, him.

All horror fans, all lovers of films and filmmaking, and anybody looking for a great waste of time gather around and lend me your ear. Get off your chairs and find yourself a copy. "Screaming" should be on all your watch lists. If it isn't, then scribble it down... now!

I won't say this is a must-watch film, but it's one you should think twice about before missing it.

Ratings: Story 1.5 : Direction 1.5 : Pace 1.5 : Acting 1.5 : Enjoyment 1.5 Total 7.5 out of 10

Now jump in your horse and trap and take a jaunt over to my Absolute Horror list and see where the bloody hand crawled into my charts.

Take Care and Stay Well.

Even in 1973, there was not much new about a haunted mansion with a curse placed on the family who owns it, but this take on the genre still has a few things going for it. Beacham (stunningly appointed in a dazzling array of ornate hairpieces, hats and gowns with her bosom taking center stage) is a bride arriving at her groom's estate for the first time. On her wedding night (to Ogilvy), she is menaced by a ghastly figure with a stump for a hand and two blown out eyes. Or is she imagining the whole thing. She can't get anyone to tell her any details about the history of the house, chiefly during the time that Ogilvy's grandfather ran it, and any time someone relents and decides to fill her in, they are struck dead. Amazingly, Ogilvy is more concerned about his wife's mental state than the fact that people keep turning up dead at an alarming rate! Family physician Magee sends for noted psychologist Cushing, who tries his best to sort through the rubble of the mystery (while a hilarious severed hand watches ominously from under tables and behind boxes. Shouldn't this fella be at the Addams' house?) A lot of the film is a rehash of the, by now tiresome, "now it's there, now it's not" sort of thing and the standby, "But I can't tell you" line of dialogue. The pace is a little too leisurely to support such commonly seen material and storyline. However, the acting is excellent all around, so that, along with some creative direction and decent music, helps to keep the viewer interested for the most part. There are several striking bits of camera work in this movie. Cushing doesn't appear until halfway through the film at least. He gives his customarily strong performance, lending class and distinction to the film. Lom really should have had one of those cameo billings with his character name listed after as he only appears briefly (but effectively) near the very end of the film. Magee is appropriately musty as the old family doctor. Beacham is ravishing and gives a very solid performance. Though fourth-billed, it is really her story and she rises to the occasion beautifully with moments of radiance and terror. She has one memorably amusing faint and some riotously fun reactions to all the creepy goings-on. Ogilvy does well in a very underwritten and sketchy role. He and Beacham scarcely share any meaningful scenes together. The rest of the cast is made up of decent British character actors who give their roles a nice air of dread and flavor. The story isn't quite unique enough and the result isn't quite memorable enough for this to count as a horror classic, but it has plenty of merit nonetheless and isn't a bad way to while away a little time.

British film company Amicus were the masters of the horror anthology, but they also produced single plot movies, this being one. Here we have a delightfully Gothic tale about a curse, haunted paintings and a crawling, severed hand. The film is very well shot, has lovely sets and boasts a very fine cast. However it is not the "gory horror" that the newspaper TV guide described back in the 1980's when I first watched it, it is also slow at times. Perhaps this was a short story that has been stretched to 90 minutes, it sometimes feels like it. But is does have some effective horror moments, plus there is a rape scene which I found to be the most shocking part, so not suitable for kids. Many years ago when I was attending college one of the bus drivers was a spitting image of Silas the woodsman, we did chuckle about that! Certainly not one of the best Amicus movies but still an enjoyable late night horror.

-- And Now the Screaming Starts! Was an attempt by Amicus Productions to move away from the Portmantaeu movies that was their stock in trade, to make a horror movie of only one story. The reason is not to compete with Hammer Films, since there really was no rivalry between the two companies, but just to show that they could if they so chose to go that route as well. What is evident is that their inexperience in this department shows greatly, making the film an enjoyable misfire, if ultimately a frustrating experience.

Story is set in the late 18th century and newlyweds Charles and Catherine Fengriffen move into Charles' family estate. Almost immediately Catherine starts to have terrifying visions, even experiencing what she feels is definite contact with something not of the natural world. Is she going mad? Or is there something seriously malevolent lurking around the dark corridors of Fengriffen Mansion?

What follows is a number of fun and creepy horror sequences very poorly glued together by a minimalist back story and thin characterisations, the Amicus production team just hurtling as quick as possible to the next scene involving Stephanie Beacham being freaked out and screaming. And of course for us to observe her quite magnificent heaving bosom. On reflection it's a collage of more famous and better movies, so a portmanteau movie that's not actually a portmanteau movie!

The cast list features Peter Cushing, Herbert Lom and Patrick Magee. Cushing doesn't show up until late in the day, and as classy as he was as an actor, he is phoning it in here. Lom only appears in an extended cameo flashback, which is annoying since the character is deliciously warped, sort of what Emeric Belasco was for Legend of Hell House. While I'm still not sure what Magee's purpose in the film was? Seriously!

Beacham and Ian Ogilvy's new marriage just sort of sits there without rhyme or reason, interesting threads such as Cushing taking an interest in sexual relations with demons never get expanded upon, and really there's no big finale to crown the story; though skeleton abuse does hold some macabre enjoyment value. Yet in spite of all its problems, it's still a fun night in with the lights off. Beacham's bosom, severed limbs and a vengeful curse from the past ensure it's worth watching for sure. 6/10