I rather liked Horror Hotel (aka The City of the Dead - which really doesn't make sense as it's not a zombie flick). While it's no classic, it's a fun enough diversion - it's got decent atmosphere, some solid surprises, and a little more teeth than I was expecting from a 1960 horror film. And also, it was the first time I've checked out a Christopher Lee film since his passing. It's not his most memorable role, but he proves once again that he elevates everything he's in.
Horror Hotel is about a college student named Nan Barlow (Venetia Stevenson). Nan is really into her witchcraft class taught by Professor Driscoll (Lee), and asks for his recommendation for a place she can go to study up on the topic for her senior thesis - you know, look over town records, interview descendants, and whatnot. Driscoll recommends Whitewood, a very small town in the Northeastern US known for it's history of witchcraft. (In fact, the opening scene of the film is a good old fashioned Whitewood witch burning from 1692, complete with a monotone "burn the witch" chant from the villagers.) Despite the protests of her boyfriend and brother, Nan goes to Whitewood alone - and yeah, it's pretty creepy. Even if you ignore the hitchhiker that she picks up that magically vanishes, she's gawked at by everyone in town and is warned by the old blind reverend to leave town immediately.
But Nan sticks it out, and is encouraged by what she finds. In fact, the titular hotel is built on the very site of the witch burning from the opening scene. The witches name was Elizabeth Sewlyn - and oddly the somewhat cold and distant hotel owner is named Newless... coincidence? This could be considered a swerve if the two were not very obviously played by the same actress (Patricia Jessel). And getting into too much more about the plot would spoil the fun.
The main thing I liked about Horror Hotel was the atmosphere. I mean, the entire town of Whitewood looks pretty cool and is just constantly drenched in fog (at least the ground-cover kind) - I'm pretty easy to please in this respect - give me a lot of fog and I'll probably be happy. The buildings are all old and have that nice cottagey look to them. This film very easily could have been set centuries ago if it wasn't for the modern clothes and phones and whatnot. And while the film always looks good, I couldn't help but feel that things *could* have been great - despite all of the cool stuff, it's all shot pretty plainly, and the black and white image just never quite comes alive like you want it to. If there was more pizzaz to the proceedings and a little more tension visually, I think this would be brought up a lot more often when you talk about horror classics. So while it still mostly works, Horror Hotel still has the feel of a missed opportunity.
There's some decent horror/witchcraft stuff in there too. I haven't seen a ton of old witch movies, but I felt like this one went a little deeper into "legitimate" (at least to the novice) witch lore. You get plot points centered around Candlemas Eve and The Witches Sabbath. You also get some solid visuals as people from the village take part in the rites of Whitewood. Sometimes, a bunch of people in black cloaks is all you need for a cool visual.
Acting-wise, it's kind of a mixed bag. Stevenson is solid as Nan, bringing enough charm and curiosity to the role to get you on her side. And Lee is always a treat, even though this seems pretty tame as far as his roles usually go. The biggest gripe I had was with Nan's brother Richard (Dennis Lotis). He takes on a bigger and bigger role as the film goes on, and he just has a little too much "aw-shucks" cheesiness for my liking. He's not terrible, but he just doesn't fit in with the rest of the vibe of the film seems to be going for.
There isn't a lot of gore here, not that it would be expected in a 1960 film. But you do get a fair amount of tension and some surprises as far as the plot goes. It's also a little more of a mean-streak than I expected.
Overall, I wasn't blown away by Horror Hotel, but it's still a lot of fun. It takes a B-movie topic and treats it seriously - it's a risky move. If it doesn't work the result is likely to be unwatchable. But here it's played straight enough, and there's enough talent on display to make it worth your time. It's disappointing in the respect that it's painfully close to being *really* good. But you take what you can get.
I would recommend this film.
No comments:
Post a Comment