'Night of the Blood Beast' had promising script, but not much else

Night Of The Blood Beast (1958)
Starring: Michael Emmet, Angela Green, Ed Nelson, John Baer, Georgianna Carter, and Tyler McVey
Director: Bernard L. Kowalski
Rating: Three of Ten Stars

Things go from bad to worse for the scientists at an isolated observation post maintained by the US space program. First, they have the sad duty of recovering the body of an astronaut(Emmet) from the wreckage of a crashed experimental spacecraft (which they helped design). Then, they find themselves cut off from the rest of the world by a mysterious magnetic disturbance. But when the dead astronaut is restored to life by alien microbes that are breeding in his bloodstream, things are at their lowest. Well, until the parent alien shows up to check on its incubator and engage in some murderous mayhem.


"Night of the Blood Beast" has all the makings of a truly fun sci-if horror movie. It's a film that could due with a remake by a talented filmmaker with a good cast, as it could be lots of gory fun. "Evil Dead" but with aliens is the possibility that is lurking within this film.

However, what presently exists is this movie, something that's barely worth watching. While it's a fine example of how to make a film with very little money--small cast, limited sets and locations--but also of how editing can ruin a movie. Although it only runs 62 minutes, "Night of the Blood Beast" seems far longer than that, because nearly every bit of dialogue is punctuated with a pause, almost every scene runs longer than it needs to, and whenever the characters venture outside in search of the creature menacing them, it's like we get to see their entire two-mile hikes.

Of course, this could be the fault of the director rather than the editor. Bernard L. Kowalski also directed the slow-moving, almost-as-boring "Attack of the Giant Leeches" (review here). Like that other movie, this one has some nice moments--such as when our heroes return to the lab to find one of their number suspended from the ceiling with his head missing--but most of the movie is just a little too slow to be interesting.

It is, however, a near-perfect vehicle for a "Mystery Science Theater 3000"-type bash-fest if you and your friends are into that sort of thing. The cheap sets and effects, the goofy monster costume, the agenda and methods of the would-be alien overlord, the interactions between the characters, and, just as importantly, the many pauses so-pregnant-we-may-need-to-deliver-the-next-line-by-C-section, are all ripe breeding ground for witty and caustic commentary. (I'd be surprised if this film wasn't featured on the MST3K show.)

Is that the smallest continent on Earth?

Lost Continent (1951)
Starring: Cesar Romero, Chick Chandler, John Hoyt, Sid Melton, Whit Bissel and Hugh Beaumont
Director: Sam Newfield
Rating: Three of Ten Stars

When an experimental missile goes out of control and crashes on an uncharted island, Air Force Major Joe Nolan (Romero) leads an expedition to recover the guidance system and figure out what went wrong. But when the same mysterious rays that caused the missile to go of course also brings down the expedition's plane, Nolan and his team must travel through miles of wilderness, scale a mountain... and find themselves confronted with dinosaurs and other life that has died out millions of years ago elsewhere on the planet. But what is more deadly--the pre-historic creatures, or the man Nolan suspects of being an enemy agent (Hoyt) and of trying to pick off expedition members one by one.


"Lost Continent" is a film with very little to recommend it. It's got a slow-moving story that's made even more slow-moving by what seems like a never-ending sequence of the characters climbing a mountain; I used to think the driving scenes that are popular padding in crappy movies were boring, but scenes of guys pretending to be scaling a mountain on an obvious set are even worse.

Those climbing scenes are doubly-boring when the attempts at generating suspense come from extreme illogic in character behavior and actions. For example, one character is injured early in the expedition, but do the supposedly experienced leader Major Nolan leave him behind in the care of the buxom and friendly young native lass played by a cameo-ing Acquanetta near the end of her brief acting career? Nope, they drag him along on a difficult climb for no reason whatsoever other than to have his injury give rise to him slipping and falling... and ultimately to give grounds to suspect the Russian defector as a double-agent trying to sabotage the mission. It's what "The Eiger Sanction" (review here) might have been like if it had been made by morons.

Then there's the stop-motion animation that gives life to the dinosaurs that menace our heroes. Even allowing for the facts that this is a movie from 1951 and that it was more stock footage like the exterior scenes of the air force base the missile was launched from. However, after taking a quick look at the silent movie version of "The Lose World," where I assumed the dinosaurs had been picked up from, I concluded that the animation was original... just so bad that it made one think it had to state from the early decades of filmmaking. Further, these dinosaurs don't appear until about 3/4th of the way into the film, despite the fact they were a main selling point of the picture.

At every turn, this is a movie that lets the viewer down. Heck, even the promo still I used to illustrate this article has nothing to do with anything that happens in the movie. Acquanetta is never menaced by any flying creatures, as she never sets foot outside the village set.

The Rating of Three I'm giving this film is so low that it borders on a Two. I'm only being as generous as I am, because the actors are actually pretty decent given what they're working with. Plus, Cesar Romero is particularly good as the American officer who knows to be suspicious of a possible enemy agent, but who is intelligent enough not to jump to judgement until he is 100 percent certain that he is right. I always appreciate a movie that features portrayals of military officers as I have known them, not the frothing-at-the-mouth paranoid psychopaths that are so often presented in Hollywood flicks. (Of course, another reason for the portrayal of Major Nolan may be a statement on the part of the filmmakers about the Red Scare that was running through American pop culture and politics at the time this movie was made. While there were reasons to be wary, there were more reasons to be certain before accusing, could be what the movie was trying to say.)

Those few good elements can't make up for the fact that this is a movie that at every turn delivers less than it should. Heck, even the name promises more than the movie delivers. Instead of a lost continent, it presents a mountain valley on an uncharted island.

'The Screaming Skull' is a failed thriller

The Screaming Skull (1958)
Starring: John Hudson and Peggy Webber
Director: Alex Nicol
Rating: Three of Ten Stars

"The Screaming Skull" is at its best before the movie actually starts. There is a gimmicky bit where the producers promise to pay the funeral costs for anyone who dies of fright during the movie's climax. It's far more likely that a captive audience member will die of boredom or irritation before the movie runs its course, so the producers will never have to deliver on their promis, as that little bit is more chilling in a corny sort of way than most of what follows.

This is a would-be thriller with the now well-worn backdrop of a widower marrying a one-time institutionalized (but very rich) woman, moving back to the isolated old mansion he shared with his first love, and the fragile psyche of the new wife either starts unraveling, or perhaps she is really being haunted by the jealous ghost of the original lady of the house... or maybe someone is trying to drive her insane again.

I can't fault the film for its I've-seen-this-a-hundred-times-before plot, because it dates from 1958, but I do fault it for being just plain bad. The script is awful, and the acting is worse. There are only two things the filmmakers do right--first, they reveal the source of Jenni's (the mentally frazzled rich wife) terror at just the right moment in the film; second, they successfully manage to convey the woman's deteriorating sanity and growing sense of isolation).he acting is worse. In fact, the only actor who delives even close to a passable performance is Russ Conway, who plays Reverend Snow.

I will also grant that the final ten-fifteen minutes of the film are actually not bad in a third-rate horror movie kinda way. But the ending isn't so good that it makes up for suffering through what led up to it. (And the filmmakers back off from making the ending as powerful as it SHOULD be by wimping out when it comes to Jenni's mental health, or lack thereof.)

Other positive notes are that aside from portions of the ending, there are a few other genuinely creepy moments, such as when Jenni is left alone in the house (which is suddenly filled with animated skulls). There are also some very nice shots of her roaming the house, and of the mysterious, shadowhaunted, vegetation-choked grounds that surround the southern mansion where the movie takes place that show some glimmer of talent on the part of the cinematographer and technical crew. Unfortunately, every time the actors open their mouths to deliver badly written dialogue with a level of acting ability that might not even get them into a high school play, whatever gains the movie made it loses. The leading lady, Peggy Webber, is a great screamer, but that's all she's good for (although I suspect the scene of her stripping down to her bra and panties was pretty racey in its day, so maybe we can list stripping among her talents).

'Terror in the Tropics' isn't what I wished

Terror in the Tropics (2005)
Starring: Mark Redfield, Jennifer Rouse, Jonathan Ruckman, Wayne Shipley, Kimberly Hannold, and Bela Lugosi
Director: A. Susan Svehla
Rating: Four of Ten Stars

A group of strangers are summoned to the reading of a will that names them as beneficiaries of a multi-million dollar estate. The trip is dangerous to all, not just because of the murderer and thief hiding in their midst, but because the insane Tesla Brothers (Redfield and Lugosi) await at their destination with murderous intent.


I really, really wanted to like this movie. The idea sounded excellent--taking scenes from Poverty Row movies of the 1930s and 1940s and incorporating them into a new movie by shooting scenes with modern actors. I still think it's an excellent idea... I just think Svehla and the fine folks at Midnight Marquee failed to execute it properly.

The biggest problem with the film is the story, or, more accurately, the stories.

There are two distinct stories here, and they are completely unrelated... we have a thief who stole the real map to Skull Island (King Kong's home) and who launched a failed expedition to it, and then we have the will-reading storyline. Both also feature unnecessarily subplots and characters... the Skull Island story treats us to a unnecessary (and, in context, utterly illogical) flashback to the failed expedition, and the will-reading story sees the shoehorning of a the archetypal fiery girl-reporter and sexist photographer into the going-ons. If the filmmakers had focused EITHER on the Skull Island/detective storyline OR the will-reading/evil Tesla Brothers storyline, the end product would have been far better.

(The filmmakers seemed to have recognized this problem as some point, and they write out a trio of characters in a lame fashion at about the 3/4 mark.)

Another problem is with the actors. For the most part, they aren't bad. They are about what I'd expect in a production like this... if it hadn't been billed as a tribute to the low-budget films of the 30s and 40s.

There's no sign that ANY of the actors here bothered taking the time to examine how actors of that time performed the characters they were playing. I saw no sign that any of the performers were making any attempt to bring the sort of energy to their parts that just about EVERYONE displayed in the films back then... and that includes the two actors who came closest to feeling like they belonged in a Monogram Picture--Jonathan Ruckman (who was playing the typical dishwater love interest) and Mark Redfield.

Then there's the new footage. The incompatibility of the acting styles aside, a number of bad decisions were made when the new footage was filmed. Prime among these was the string of cheap plastic party flags featured prominently on the ship-board set. On the flip-side, however, the first scene with the city editor was very impressive in its use of green-screens. (Later, when a ballroom scene uses similar tricking-in of backgrounds, it's badly done... but old-time office that wasn't actually there looked GREAT.)

Finally, there's the film's main selling point... the re-use of Lugosi, Karloff, and Lon Chaney Jr. footage in new and fun ways. Observant readers may already have noticed that when I listed the stars of the film, I didn't mention Karloff and Chaney, even though they're listed on the DVD case. Well, that's because Karloff is featured in some "Mr. Wong" footage that's incorporated in a very awkward and gratuitous fashion--and the Chaney is featured only in some bits taken from "The Indestructible Man" and it's almost as pointless as the Karloff bits.

Lugosi is used very cleverly in the picture, and his "new" character of Vitus Tesla is incorporated quite nicely. The footage from "The Devil Bat" and "The Invisible Ghost" is put to good and fun use. It's a glimpse into what the entire film could have been like if perhaps the filmmakers had chosen to focus a bit more on story rather than trying to cram as many different B-movie elements as possible into one film with a running-time of just above one hour.

I also contend that the film has too much new footage and not enough old. There's also too many instances of the same bit being used more than once, given how little old material is actually incorporated. More thought and time should have been devoted to using and incorporating the archive footage.

For all my complaining, I do want to mention that the filmmakers did blend old and new footage in a very impressive way during the film's climax as the hero attempts to get his hapless new girlfriend (Hannold) safely away from the Tesla Brothers. If the rest of the film had been this good, you'd be seeing a Fresh Rating instead of the measly Three Tomatoes I've giving it now.

I can't really recommend the film "Terror in the Tropics", and the rating I'm giving it probably on the generous side... a reflection of what I hoped it would be rather than what it is. There is a mostly botched attempt at creating movie in the spirit of the old Monogram and PRC films, but I can't help but appreciate the attempt.

However, while I can't recommend the DVD for the "Terror in the Tropics" film, I can recommend it for the extras. There's a very interesting lecture by an expert on the Poverty Row studios about why great actors like George Zucco, John Carradine, and Bela Lugosi did so much work for them.

Happy Cinco de Mayo (or sumthin')

Mexican Hayride (1948)
Starring: Bud Abbott, Lou Costello, Luba Malina, Tim Powers, Pat Costello, Virginia Grey and John Hubbard
Director: Charles Barton
Rating: Three of Ten Stars

After being framed for a swindle by a greasy conman (Abbott), Joe Bascombe (Costello) follows the scoundrel to Mexico to clear his name. Unfortunately, Joe is tricked into being the fall guy for another scheme.


"Mexican Hayride" is the first truly bad Abbott & Costello picture I've seen. Not only is the storyline illogical (even by Abbott & Costello standards), but the best gags in here will evoke mild chuckles at best. Even if it was included in a DVD multipack titled "The Best of Abbott & Costello Vol. 3", this is one of their worst.

Biggest sign this is a bad movie? The bullfighting sequence is the funniest part in here. Yes, something as repulsive as bullfighting serves as the foundation for the best jokes and routines in the film.

One very strange thing about this film is that it was based on a successful musical from the early 1940s. However, there is only one song in the film and it isn't even by Cole Porter, who wrote the music for the original stage production.

Spies and/or ghosts threaten sea voyage

Mystery Liner (aka "The Ghost of John Holling") (1934)
Starring: Cornelius Keefe, Edwin Maxwell, Astrid Allwyn, Boothe Howard, Zeffie Tilbury, Gustav von Seyffertitz, Howard C. Hickman, George Hayes, and Noah Beery
Director: William Nigh
Rating: Four of Ten Stars

A passenger liner is used for a covert experiment that will allow ships to be remote controlled and thus revolutionize modern sea warfare (modern here being 1934). But, agents of "hostile foreign powers" threaten the project, the ship's captain (Beery) has gone insane, and a shadowy figure is creeping about the ship murdering people. Will Major Pope (Maxwell) save the day by untangling the mystery and unmaking a double-agent who is closer to the experiment than anyone suspects?

"Mystery Liner" has all the elements of being a really fun "detective thriller meets mad scientist" tale, but it's too talky, has just a touch too many subplots for a film that only runs an hour, and gets bogged down in the middle and becomes very, very boring. A couple of twists near the end will revive the interest of viewers who stick with it, but they really aren't interesting enough to warrant sitting throgh the lead-up.

With average camera work and staging, blah acting all around, and uninteresting, flat characters, the only strong part of this film is the core story concepts, and they're not interesting enough to lift it above a very low 4 rating.

(Triva: This film was based on a story by Edgar Wallace, a very popular mystery/thriller writer during the first quarter of the 20th century. Hundreds of films were made that adapted his work, and I think I've seen around a dozen. None have been all that good, however.)

East Side Kids vs Fifth Column Propagandists

This post is part of my month-long observance of the 65th anniversary of the Nazi Germany's defeat in WW2.

Ghosts on the Loose (1943)
Starring: Leo Gorcey, Huntz Hall, Sammy Morrison, Bobby Jordan, Billy Benedict, Bobby Stone, Ava Gardner and Bela Lugosi
Director: William Beaudine
Rating: Three of Ten Stars

When a gang of inner-city kids decide to fix up a house as their gift to a newly wed couple, they run afoul a cell of Nazi propagandists covertly working out of a purportedly haunted house next door. Hi-jinx ensue.

I suppose I might have liked this movie if I was more familiar with the characters. I've seen listings for numerous "East Side Kids" movies, and I understand they are a spin-off from an early feature. Perhaps with a clearer understanding of who these kids are, I'd find them a little less annoying and a little more interesting.

As it is, I only got some mild chuckles out of this picture, mostly because almost every character is dumb beyond words. But it's not a funny kind of dumb like what you get from an Abbott & Costello or Mel Brooks picture, but rather a brain-hurting "I can't believe anyone can be that stupid" sort of dumb. I get the feeling the writers expected the audience to be amused first at the industriousness of the boys, then at their hijinx in the "haunted house", and then at the back and forth as they fight against the Fifth Columnists.

Speaking of the Fifth Columnists, if infiltrators and sabateurs were as stupid as the ones in this film, no espionage or terrorist rings would be able to function. Sure, these dastardly villains had invested a lot of time and money in making their hideout seem haunted, but once discovered they could either have a) stayed safely in their hidden room until the activity died down, or b) carried their printing press and papers out the secret tunnel and to the far end of the back yard where no one would have seen it until a truck could be brought in to take it away. But, if they'd been smart, there wouldn't have been a movie.

These Nazi agents aren't even particularly sinister, even if they are led by Bela Lugosi. In fact, Lugosi is wasted more here than in any other film I've seen him in, except perhaps the 1940s version of "The Black Cat."

Unless you're the world's biggest fan of the East End Kids, this is a movie you can skip. The only other reason to possibly see this movie is for the moment when Bela Lugosi puts William Beaudine's reputation for never doing more than one take a scene to the test. During one of the film's gags, Lugosi utters a four letter word ("shit"), partially masked by a sneeze. Beaudine nonetheless stayed true to his nickname of "One Shot" and Lugosi's obscene language was immortalized for the ages.

Ed Wood Double-Feature

Here are a pair of films from Edward D. Wood Jr, one that is almost a landmark and the other one of his better efforts. Consider this post part of a much-needed "setting the record straight" as to what film is a sequel to what film. (And don't trust the opinion of anyone who tells you about the sequel to "Plan 9 From Outer Space.")

Bride of the Monster (aka "Bride of the Atom") (1955)
Starring: Bela Lugosi, Loretta King, Tor Johnson, Tony McCoy, Harvey Dunn, Paul Marco and George Becwar
Director: Edward D. Wood
Rating: Three of Ten Stars

A mad scientist (Lugosi) captures those that venture too close to his dilapidated house and subjects them to experiments intended to create a new race of radioactive supermen. When he captures a nosey female tabloid reporter (King) can it be long before his simpleminded assistant (Johnson) falls in love with her and turns on him?


"Bride of the Monster" is one of those movies that's so bad it's fun to watch if you're in the right mood and with the right group of friends. It's perfect to include in the line-up for a Bad Movie Night, because it's full of strange characters that are badly acted, situations that are badly explained and sets that are badly made, but it moves fast and has just enough redeeming features that it will keep you entertaining and laughing. (What's more, the story actually makes some degree of sense, assuming you buy into the whole mad scientist creating atomic monsters thing.)

But this is also a sad movie. Sad because it features an old and broken-down Bela Lugosi so prominently. When watching this movie, I feel the same sort of sorrow I felt while watching Peter Cushing in "The Masks of Death", because in both cases the ravages of age and illness are so visible on both men. It's sad to see such great talent at the point where it is about to be taken from the world forever. Lugosi's presence in this film is made twice as tragic because it's such a shoddy piece of work and because of a clumsily executed homage to one of Lugosi's greatest films, "White Zombie". (There are extreme close-ups of Lugosi's eyes, he does the same weird hand gestures he did while playing the Zombie Master, and the female victim appears hypnotized in a flowing white gown. Unfortunately, Lugosi's eyes look as old and tired as he is, the hand gesture seems out of place, and the gown is nowhere as stylish as the one in "White Zombie".)

Although Lugosi fans will feel a twinge of sadness to see him in this movie, they can take heart in the fact that he is treated better by both the script and the director than he was in any other of the films he did in his last decade on Earth. They can also take heart in the fact that Lugosi gets to act in this film. Wood lets him show a greater range than any role Lugosi had played since "The Black Cat" and "Son of Frankenstein".

No matter how old and frail Lugosi appears in this film, no matter how cheap and pathetic the quality of the sets around him, there is no denying that he gives a powerful performance.

Reportedly, Ed Wood promised Lugosi that "Bride of the Monster" would return him to stardom, and he certainly did all he could to deliver on that promise. Lugosi's scenes with George Becwar--where we learn of his character's tragic past and the depths of his madness--is great stuff. It's perhaps the best scene that Wood ever filmed. In fact, every scene that features Lugosi in this movie probably ranks among the best Wood ever filmed, and the weakness of the rest of the cast only helps to accentuate that even as a broken old man, Lugosi was an actor with great ability.

The scenes and the strange police captain and his pet bird in "Bride of the Monster" are really all the evidence that one should need to put a lie to the claim that Wood is the worst director ever. It takes actually watching the film to realize this, though. That said, this would be a far better viewing experience if someone actually knew how to edit a film properly took a crack at reworking it.

(As a sad footnote, even if this film had been good enough to restart Lugosi's film career as Ed Wood believed, Lugosi passed away in August of 1956.)



Night of the Ghouls (aka "Revenge of the Dead") (1959)
Starring: Criswell, Duke Moore, Kenne Duncan, Valda Hansen, Paul Marco, Tor Johnson, Johnny Carpenter, Jeannie Stevens, and Bud Osborne
Director: Edward D. Wood, Jr
Rating: Four of Ten Stars

A conman posing as a medium (Duncan) has set up shop in the old mansion where a mad scientist used to make his monsters. Lt Bradford (Moore) the police department's unofficial expert on the supernatural goes to investigate. The medium may be a fake, but who is that strange woman in black who kills teenagers who are make out in the nearby woods? And who is the woman in white who appears and disappears at will? Given that this is a film from the mind of Eddie Wood, will be ever find out?!


"Night of the Ghouls" has been described to me, by someone who's watched more Ed Wood films than any sane person should, as the best film he ever made. For most of the film's running time, I thought my friend had to be crazy to make such a claim, but the scenes grafted into the film from a early Wood horror short titled "Final Curtain" and the film's climactic minutes are actually pretty creepy. Yes... Ed Wood DOES manage to invoke a sense of dread instead of just making something dreadful. (And he even throws in a twist ending that no one will see coming.)

Wood also seemed to have made more of an attempt to maintain an internal continuity in this film than he has in any other of his film's I've seen. It's reflected in the fact that Lt. Bradford is on his way to enjoy a night at the opera when he is called to investigate the strange going-ons at the old house... so he goes on his assignment in evening dress, so his clothes match those he wore in the scenes taken from "Final Curtain" and placed here.

This being a film from Ed Wood, however, one can't expect attention to detail taken too far, now can we? Wood may have done a stellar job (by his standards) on maintaining this film's internal continuity, but he screwed up in almost every way when we look at the big picture it's part of.

"Night of the Ghouls" is the sequel to "Bride of the Monster", but the only details he gets right between the two films is that the comic relief character played by Paul Marco is named Patrolman Kelton, the hulking manbeast is named Lobo, and there was a mad scientist who once lived in a house and made monsters. He gets Bradford's name wrong (it was Lt. Craig), the location of the house wrong (it wasn't by Lake Willow but rather by Marsh Lake on Willow Road), and Lobo was very much dead at the end of "Bride". (That last one might not be a mistake, given some of the revelations that take place late in "Night", but I have a hard time giving Wood the benefit of the doubt.)

"Night of the Ghouls" is another sad little movie from Edward D. Wood, Jr. Unlike most of his output, this film actually does manage to achieve what he was going for in a couple of spots. Interestingly, some of those bits were scavenged from an earlier movie, one that Wood perhaps spent more time on than he did his other efforts. Plus, as mentioned, Wood actually tries to maintain continuity from scene to scene. On the very heavy downside, though, the film meanders and wanders through its storyline worse than "Plan 9 From Outer Space". Most people with better things to do than watch Ed Wood movies will probably not even GET to the good parts, because they'll have turned the movie off, because it doesn't seem to hold a focus for more than a minute at a time. The wandering nature of the screenplay drags the film down from a low 5 to a low 4.

Yes, this may well be Ed Wood's finest effort--I still think that honor probably goes to "Glen or Glenda?" but I understand my friend's point having sat through the film. I also consider this another bit of evidence that Wood WASN'T the world's worst director. That's not to say you'll miss anything if you spend your time watching something else!

(Speaking of watching something else.... Remember how I said that this is a sequel to "Bride of the Monster"? Some who like to pass themselves off as film critics or reviewers have stated it's a sequel to "Plan 9 from Outer Space". If you come across someone making that claim, you are witnessing an idiot in action. And he or she is a lazy idiot, because anyone who WATCHES "Night of Ghouls" who has also seen "Bride of the Monster" will easily pick up on the connection. There are NO links to "Plan 9" in this film, as far as the story goes.)

'The Devil's Hand' isn't worth holding

The Devil's Hand
(aka "The Devil's Doll" and "The Naked Goddess") (1961)
Starring: Robert Alda, Linda Christian, Neil Hamilton and Ariadna Welter
Director: William Hole, Jr.
Rating: Three of Ten Stars

Good-guy Rick Turner (Alda) is lured into a Satanic cult by telepathic temptress Bianca (Christian). When he discovers the cult is responsible for his fiance's heart-trouble via a voodoo curse, Rick must choose between the cult and true love. But the voodoo-doll making cult leader, Frank (Hamilton), has ways he believes will keep Rick with the devil worshippers.


"The Devil's Hand" has some interesting aspects, and some potentially interesting plot developments (the journalist who has infiltrated the cult, the cult's ability to infitrate hospital staff, the true sorcery involved--even if Frank uses stage magician tricks to have the demon god "pass judgement" during ceremonies), but none of these are really explored.

For the most part, this is a woodenly acted melodrama where the charcters are motivated to take actions for no reason other than the script says they must... except for the black cultists; the one beating the voodoo drum and the one who simply HAS to dance whenever the beat is on. Clearly, they're motivated by natural rythm. (And even taking into account this film dates from 1961, the racist stereotype was grating here, particularly since the cult is established to be worldwide, what with Bianca encountering it in Tibet).

I say just let your fingers walk right by "The Devil's Hand".

Tarzan's recycled TV adventures marred by lazy editng

Tarzan and the Trappers (1958)
Starring: Gordon Scott, Rickie Sorenson, Lesley Bradley, Maurice Marsac, Sol Gorse, William Keene and Eve Brent
Directors: Charles F. Haas and Sandy Howard
Rating: Four of Ten Stars

Tarzan (Scott) stops a brutal trapper (Bradley) who has been raiding his jungle, and later finds himself the subject of a hunt staged by the trapper's vengeful brother (Gorse).

"Tarzan and Trappers" consists of two (or perhaps even parts of three) episodes of an unsold TV series, which explains not only a bizarre grouping of story threads--the first half of the movie sees Tarzan fighting one group of villains while the second half of the movie introduces a whole new set of bad guys who come in as result of his actions on the first half--but also a weird sense of chronology where on one hand it's seems clear that the main events of the movie are separated by days or weeks (and that the second half even takes place over at least two days), yet the film's denouement implies that the trappers Tarzan fought in the first half of the film were captured and convicted in the morning, the revenge plot is hatched and executed in the afternoon, and Tarzan is home for the special dinner promised to him by Jane at the film's beginning.

This chronological confusion comes about due to the slipshod way the episodes were edited together. The denouement from the first episode (the first half of the movie) was moved to the very end--the first part of the movie COULD have been a very busy, very long day--even though it really doesn't connect at all with the events of the second film. The package would have been far better served if they producers had excised all references to the dinner Jane was making, or if they had left the two episodes intact, with the first denouement where it belonged.

As far as the acting goes, everyone does a decent job in this film. Gordon Scott makes a fine Johnny Weismuller copy, although while Eva Brent certainly is pretty in her small role as Jane, she doesn't have Maureen O'Sullivan's screen presence.

'Attack of the Giant Leeches' is boredom

Attack of the Giant Leeches (1959)
Starring: Ken Clark, Jan Shepard, Yvette Vickers, Bruno VeSota and Gene Roth
Director: Bernard L. Kowalski
Rating: Three of Ten Stars

A small town located on the edge of a swamp and inhabited primarily by unpleasant hicks is menaced by giant leeches. Will the studly game warden (Clark)--one of three citizens with a double-digit IQ--save the day?

"Attack of the Giant Leeches" is one of those movies where the various characters can't get eaten by the monsters soon enough. This is partly because they're portrayed by second-rate actors delivering badly written dialogue, but also because the film is just plain boring.

The movie reaches its high point when the local shopkeeper (Bruno VeSota) chases his wife (the town slut, played by Yvette Vickers) into the swamp after catching her with one of her lovers. There's some genuine tension and suspense in that scene, and it's the only bit that materializes in the entire movie.


(Later scenes might have had some suspense to them, but it's ruined by the fact the "giant leeches" are obviously plastic and their suckers look more like eyes than suckers. They effect is not one of horror but one of goofiness.)

There is one important lesson to be taken from this film: If you think you are hearing an angry leopard or wildcat while wandering through a swamp, it's probably just the mating cry of a giant leech.

I suppose, in fairness, I should acknowledge the fact that the movie lets us oogle a sexy chick getting dressed as her slobby husband oogles her getting dressed. I guess that's a little bit of entertainment value right there.



(Although it did make me wonder: Do most women really put their shoes on before they've even finished putting on the rest of their clothes? It seems like they always do it that way in the movies....)

'Zombies of Mora Tau' fails to live up to its potential

Zombies of Mora Tau (aka "The Dead That Walk") (1957)
Starring: Gregg Palmer, Autumn Russell, Allison Hayes, Joel Ashley, Marjorie Eaton, Morris Ankrum and Gene Roth
Director: Edward L. Cahn
Rating: Four of Ten Stars

A group of callous treasure hunters and the residents of an isolated African farm are beset by swimming zombies protecting a treasure trove of cursed diamonds.


While watching "Zombies of Mora Tau" my mind repeatedly wandered to the work of another director who was turning out cheap horror movies in the 1950: Edward D. Wood. This is film is not that much better than "Bride of the Monster", making it one of many bits of evidence that whoever first decided it was cute to slander Wood with the "worst filmmaker ever" label was an ignorant twat.

"Zombies of Mora Tau" is a film with a weak script being performed by a cast who are actors in the sense they can hit their marks and deliver their lines but who otherwise seem fairly free of any actual talent for acting. It further suffers from the fact that the costume designers or make-up artists didn't have the creativity to make the zombies look even halfway interesting--even "White Zombie", which is borrowed from/paid homage to on a couple of occasions here, did a far better job at this, way back at the dawn of the zombie movie genre--and it didn't have the budget to actually make the cool idea of underwater zombie attacks look believable.

This is one of those movies that is brimming with potential, but it remains nearly entirely unrealized because of the incompetence of the filmmakers and the paltry budget they had to work with.

Almost despite itself, the film manages to mount a number of creepy moments, such as when the slutty femme-fatale wife of the captain of the salvage ship (played by Allison Hayes) rises from the dead as a zombie and then sets about to kill her former colleagues, including her husband. However, even the creepiest moment in the film is marred by cheapness and bad acting.

As bad as I think this movie is, I did keep watching it and not because I was wondering if it could get any worse. No, in this instance, I kept hoping it would get better, because I kept thinking, "Wow... this could be a really scary scene if there was some more blood here" or "Good actors could have made this actually seem as intense as it's supposed to be" and so on.

I'm sure anyone who likes zombie movies will have a similar reaction when viewing this film. It is so full of what-could-have-been material that it will feed the imagination of any but the most braindead horror fan. This quality, coupled with the laughably bad execution of just about everything present on screen, makes it a great movie to consider for inclusion in a Bad Movie Night.

It's a shame that the film industry only seems interested in remaking movies that were already good to begin with. If there's a movie that deserves to be remade, it's "Zombies of Mora Tau". You wouldn't even need a new script. With a few minor tweaks and a modern approach to executing the story, the existing script would be the perfect foundation for a kick-ass film. (It would need a enough of a budget for decent diving and underwater scenes, though. Just imagine: "Into the Blue" with zombies! How cool would THAT be?!)

A mystery-comedy that fails to excite

The Crooked Circle (1932)
Starring; Ben Lyon, James Gleason, Zasu Pitts, and C. Henry Gordon
Director; H. Bruce Humberston
Rating: Four of Ten Stars

The clandestine battle between the criminal society of the Crooked Circle and the adventurers and amateur detectives of the Sphinx Club comes to a head in a haunted house, as the villains attempt to discredit key Sphinx Club member Brand Osbourne (Lyon) and kill the club's leader.


"The Crooked Circle" is a chaotic comedy/suspense film that tries to cram entire too much into its brief running time. The idea of the Crooked Circle vs. the Sphinx Club is pretty nifty, as are the subplots and plot twists related to it. Similarly, the hijinx of the dimwitted motorcycle cop (Gleason) and the cowardly housekeeper (Pitts) in the haunted house are pretty funny. However, when the two portions of the movie are combined, they distract from one another and make the overall film messy and frustrating to watch.

This is one of the many hundreds of movies that is filled with great ideas that are badly executed. Although it features some decent acting (Pitts, Gleason, and Gordon--as a sinister Hindu with shadowy motives--are excellent in their parts) and some well-done sets and decent camera work, the film really isn't worth sitting through.

Cinematic Black History Milestone:First Black Sidekick Who's Smarter Than the Hero

King of the Zombies (1941)
Starring: Dick Purcell, Mantan Moreland, John Archer, Joan Woodbury and Henry Victor
Director: Jean Yarbrough
Rating: Four of Ten Stars

Mac (Purcell), Bill (Archer), and Jeff (Moreland) are forced to land on a mysterious island after their plane runs low on fuel. Here, they find a mysterious family who aren't at all what they seem... and who are the center of a Nazi cult of undeath.


"King of the Zombies" is one of those movies that you should not show to your ultra-liberal, hyper-PC friends. Their heads will explode when Moreland (as Jeff, friend and loyal servant to adventuresome pilot, Mac) starts in on his stereotypical, subserviant negro comedy routine--a character that was common in this sort of film through the late 1940s.

There's a difference here, however. Unlike most films where the black comic relief character is a cowardly goof who needs the guidance and protection of the dashing, capable white hero to get safely through the night, it's actually Jeff who recognizes the danger faced by the heroes. If Mac and Bill weren't a pair of racist jackasses, who dismiss everything that Jeff has to say without even the slightest bit of consideration, there would have been fewer lives lost as the trio struggles against the Nazi zombie master.

Unfortunately, I doubt the filmmakers were aware of this irony, either while reading the script, during shooting, or while assembling the final product. If they were, it goes unnoticed by any character in the film. Given the overall lack of quality in this too-slowly-paced, mostly badly acted low-budget part horror/part wartime propaganda film, I am almost certain the juxtaposition of the very clever black character against the dull-witted white heroes is a complete accident.

I can't really recommend "King of the Zombies", but I do think Mantan Moreland's performance is an excellent one, as he has great comedic timing and a whole raft of truly hilarious lines. The fact that Jeff ultimately emerges as the brightest character in the film is also something that's noteworthy, and I think it gives the film a unique twist.

Great remake project for Roman Polanski?

Tormented (1960)
Starring: Richard Carlson, Susan Gordon, Lugene Sanders, and Juli Reding
Director: Bert I. Gordon
Rating: Four of Ten Stars

Tom Stewart (Carlson), a third-rate ladies' man, lands himself a beautiful girl with more money than brains (Sanders) and is about to tie the knot; However, he first has to dispose of his former girlfriend, Vi (Jeding). Unfortunately for Tom, he failed to realize that hell hath no fury like a woman scorned, whether she's alive or dead... and he soon finds himself haunted by Vi's floating head and other random detached body parts.

The "hero" of this film is perhaps the singularly most unlikable character I've ever been expected to feel sympathy for in a movie. Not only is Tom rotten to the core, but I get this child-molester vibe off him whenever he's around his fiance's little sister. (Of course, part of that is because he thinks she may know that he killed Vi and he's working hard to gain her trust, and eventually he tries to do the ultimate slimeball thing and kill the little kid, but there's still that vibe...)

The greatest problem with this film, and it's only partially because of its low budget, is the way things that are supposed to be scary--like when Vi's ghost manifests--are laughable. The overall flatness of the acting is also a crippling factor. Carlson does a good job as the ultimate scumbag, and little Susan Gordon gives a surprisingly good performance for a child actor... particularly when one considers that she probably got the part first and foremost by being the director's daughter.

The film does have some interesting visual flourishes, and there are several suspenseful scenes that take place in an old lighthouse. In fact, all the movies suspenseful scenes take place in the old lighthouse; whenever we get away from that location, things tend to drag a bit--except when Carlson is giving off "dirty old man" vibes around Gordon. The horror is strong at that point, whether the setting is the lighthouse or not.

The basic idea of this film--which crosses a film noir sort of attitude with a ghost story--is one that appeals to me. The execution here is sorely lacking, however.


Someone should ask Roman Polanski if he has seen this flick. I'm sure he'd have all kinds of sympathy for Tom if he did. He might even want to option a remake and relive the excitement of his youth by having Tom feed Sandy roofies and then rape her before deciding she knows too much and must die.

'Fog Island' isn't worth the trip

Fog Island (1945)
Starring: George Zucco, Lionel Atwill and Sarah Douglas
Director: Terry O. Morse
Rating: Four of Ten Stars

Leo Grainger (Zucco), a ex-convict and failed businessman, lures the people he holds responsible for framing him and for killing his wife to his mansion on on Fog Island. Dangling a promise of hidden wealth in front of them, he triggers a scavenger hunt of doom within the home's secret passages.


"Fog Island" is a confused and murky picture, and not just because almost every scene appears to be severely underlit. Story-wise, there seems to be big chunks of the plot missing, and we never do find out what Grainger's backup plan might have been if the targets of his revenge has chosen to not play the game, or what some of the clues he gave meant. It also remains unclear why he seems bent on drawing his step-daughter (Douglas) into his web of revenge. (The story actually falls apart even before it starts, because you'd have to be an idiot to accept an invitation from someone you framed and set to jail for five years when said letter declares that "justice will be done." The script does have a couple of Leo's guests discuss that going may not be too smart... but they go anyway!)

Acting-wise, the cast does a pretty good job, but the unintentional comedy is what makes this movie watchable moreso than the attempts at building suspense. The way virtually every single line that Zucco utters is dripping with ominous double-meanings, and the way the villainous supporting cast are creeping around after each other in the darkened hallways are the source of many giggles. (The intentional humor in the film is also pretty good, such as when one character suggests to another that "Crime and Punishment" would make for good bedtime reading, or when Grainger tells a guest his house was built by pirates so the guest "should have no problem finding your way around.")

As a suspense film, "Fog Island" is a failure. It's fun to watch for Zucco's over-the-top performance, though.

'Tarzan's Revenge' is not as bad as They say

Tarzan's Revenge (1938)
Starring: Eleanor Holm, Glenn Morris, George Meeker, George Barbier, Hedda Hopper, Corbit Morris, and C. Henry Gordon
Director: D. Ross Lederman
Rating: Four of Ten Stars

Eleanor Reed (Holm) is on a safari with her parents (Barbier and Hopper) and her fiance Nevin Potter (Meeker) are on an African safari to capture animals for a zoo, except the shiftless,gun-happy Nevin is more interested in shooting everything he sees. When a villainous Arab sultan (Gordon) who rules a feifdom deep within the jungle decides he wants to add Elanor to his large harem by any means necessary, it's up to Tarzan to rescue her.


"Tarzan's Revenge" has been labeled by some critics as the worst Tarazn movie ever, As usual, critics who engage in such hyperbole are wrong and the truth of the matter is that it's not a bad little movie.

Yes, it tries too hard to copy the vastly superior MGM series of Tarzan movies starring Johnny Weismuller and Maureen O'Hara (even the point where it gives Tarzan a chimp sidekick, copies the scene where Tarzan and Jane first meet, and also tries to copy the famous underwater shots of Jane and Tarzan swimming--with Elanor standing in for Jane. The film fails miserably at copying these scenes and instead just manages to call attention to the fact that it is NOT as good as the MGM-produced Tarzan films.

What is also not as good as the MGM films is the actor playing Tarzan. Glenn Morris certainly has the physique to play Tarzan, but he was an athelete and not an actor... and, boy, does that show! He hs virtually no screen presence whatsoever, only generating a little bit of excitement in the scene where he rescues Elanor from the fortress of the evil Sultan Ben Alleu Bey (played with plenty of smarminess by C. Henry Gordon. Otherwise, everyone else outshines Morris in every scene he's in, even Elanor Holm who was just as inexperienced (also an athelete, hired mostly for her good looks and physical ability) but who shows far greater talent than Morris... which is probably why Holm is the defacto star of the movie with Tarzan getting less screen time in this flick than perhaps any other Tarzan film I've seen.

There is one exceptional element to the film, and it's one I wish more Tarzan movies would do more with. (Joe Kubert would occassionally explore this side of Tarzan's personality in his run on the Tarzan comic book in the 1970s, but I've rarely seen it portrayed as clearly and charmingly as it is in this film. In "Tarzan's Revenge", Tarzan's actually a pretty peaceful man, a man who is concerned first and foremost with the happiness, safety and well-being of the animals in his jungle, and he only gets into fights when he absolutely has to. The gentle-demeanored Tarzan is a pretty cool take on the character, and it's one that makes this relatively dismal movie interesting to watch.

In fact, the biggest dissapointment in the film is that Tarzan is so gentle that he doesn't even give Nevin Potter the thrashing is so richly deserves. If there ever was a character in a movie who deserved to be tossed off a cliff by the Ape Man (or otherwise meet some horrible fate), it's this guy. Cowardly, stupid, and so bloodthirsty he guns down any animal he spots without even making an effort to collect a trophy, my disgust with him grew as the film unfolded. I really hoped a native would spear him, or a hungry crocodile would kill him. But, alas, not even Tarzan would finish him for me. (At least Elanor develops enough sense to not marry him.)

By the way, this film is completely revenge free, despite the title. As mentioned above, Tarzan doesn't even give Nevin Potter the asskicking he so richly deserves, and he even gives Tarzan plenty of reason to want revenge.

'The Lonely Man' seeks company in a weak western

The Lonely Man (1957)
Starring: Jack Palance, Anthony Perkins, Elaine Aikin, and Neville Brand
Director: Henry Levin
Rating: Four of Ten Stars

Jacob Wade (Palance), an aging gunfighter, who, among his many other problems, is going blind, seeks out his estranged son, Riley (Perkins), in a final attempt to forge a normal, peaceful life. But Jacob's past won't be put to rest so easy, and if psychotic gambler King Fisher (Brand) has his way, Jacob will be laid to rest.

"The Lonely Man" is a fairly run-of-the-mill western, with the plot being driven primarily by Jacob's desire to put violence behind him and attempt to up make up for all the years he wasn't part of Riley's life by teaching him all about busting broncos. The performances are about par for this sort of movie (which means they're pretty decent all around), and the film makes decent use of the natural surroundings. Unfortunately, the melodrama is slathered on so thick (particularly in the relationship between Jacob and Riley) that it drags the whole film down a notch. The horrendously stilted dialogue that is exchanged at many points during the film and pacing stumbles both near the beginning and at the middle hurt the film almost as much.

I've seen worst westerns than "The Lonely Man", but there are far better out there as well. The funnest part about the film are the presence of some of the bit-players, such as Lee Van Cleef (who has more hair on his head here than I think he ever appeared with in any other film), Elisha Cook (whose character doesn't whine even once in his repeated scenes) and Claude Akins (who plays a former partner of Jacob, and who makes for a far more sinister character than the lead villain).

Decent mystery ruined by not-as-clever as all that writers

The Limping Man (1953)
Starring: Lloyd Bridges, Moria Lister, Alan Wheatley, and Helene Cordet
Director: Cy Endfield
Rating: Four of Ten Stars

A WW2 vet, Frank Prior (Bridges), travels to England to reunite with his wartime sweetheart (Lister). As he leaves the plane at the airport, a fellow passenger is gunned down. When the investigating Scotland Yard inspector (Wheatley) discovers a connection between Prior's sweetheart and the dead man, he becomes suspicious of both of them, so Prior sets about to uncover the truth.


I have tried, but I am unable to think of another movie I've seen that is so utterly and completely ruined by an incompetent ending the way "The Limping Man" is destroyed. The ending here is so lame that it spoils whatever enjoyment the viewer may have been deriving from what seemed like an average thriller that was building toward a decent conclusion. The ending is so thoroughly botched--on every conceivable level--that I can't even say "stop the DVD player at THIS point, and you'll preserve what you liked about this film".

The first sign of trouble is an illogical plot-twist that relates to the blackmail effort directed at Prior's thrill-seeking sweetheart. It's the sort of twist that makes you wonder if perhaps the filmmakers were in trouble as far as coming up with a good ending. This is confirmed when the second twist presents itself, and pretty much undoes the entire story. (I can't go into details without revealing the ending, but, believe me, it will ruin the film for you.)

If there ever was a movie that could have been saved by a competent writer handling rewrites, "The Limping Man" is it. And if you've seen it, and if you know of another otherwise decent film so completely ruined by its ending, I'd love to hear about it.

'The Black Raven' is an inn to avoid

The Black Raven (1943)
Starring: George Zucco, Glenn Strange, Noel Madison, Byron Foulger, Wanda McKay, Robert Livingston and Robert Middlemass
Director: Sam Newfield
Rating: Four of Ten Stars

The Black Raven Inn has a reputation only slightly more shady than its owner (Zucco), but on one dark and very stormy night, it plays host to more than the usual share of crooks and creeps when someone starts murdering the men and women who have been trapped there because the bridges have been washed out.

"The Black Raven" starts strong, playing like a straight-forward cross between a "dark old house" film and an Agatha Christie-style murder mystery. However, by the time the first murder occurs, the movie has already descended into a meandering morass of filler... and when it starts getting good again--right around the time where George Zucco's character begins to show he's more than just a villainous innkeeper who makes his real living by smuggling criminals across the border to Canada--viewers are so bored they hardly notice or care.

Everything about this film is substandard, and it seems pretty clear that most everyone invovled was just there to collect a paycheck... or they're terribly miscast. Zucco, who usually seems to give a movie his all, seems to be sleepwalking through most his scenes, and I don't think Glenn Strange has a comedic bone in his body; he never should have been cast in the role as the comic relief character. Even as a murder mystery the film is fairly lazy (although it does have one minor twist to it, a twist that makes it harder than usual to guess who the killer is because it's someone that is so obvious that the character is dismissed as a suspect in the minds of experienced mystery watchers/readers).This film might be of interest if you're the world's biggest fan of George Zucco, but even then I think you might feel as if you've wasted your time when your done watching it, even at its brief 61-minutes.