Hammer Pictures
Dan
Love the pictures of the Hammer Rave/Vamp movie, its hard to keep myself together because I'm so much looking forward to see 'the HORROR OF HAMMER on the big screen yet again. SO BRING IT ON !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Is it on the big screen then? I haven't heard much about the release other than you can download episodes in 4 min segments?
share
Kingmonkey-2
I've just been to the Memorabilia.co.uk at the NEC Birmingham where I meet one of the cast and director to Beyond The Rave, I was told that though the film is still going to be a great one Hammer are aiming to start small then grow from there, this means the film is for more DVD and on-line. I still think they may show it at one or two selected movie houses.
Dan.
I've been suspicious of this new "Hammer film" ever since it was annouced. And now it sounds like it's not even going to be an actual film! Just an internet release. It does look alot more expensive and bigger budget than I first thought though so why not the cinema release?
shareHammer does have a fan base and makes money from showing films at random film houses at chosen times, they also make money around the world by selling the DVD's, posters and so on. Hammer may have a income but not like they did when they were at they peak so I think it is wise to start small then grow from there, Peter Cushin & Co. may have been good at acting, Hammer may have been a good compainy but neither started big at first, so you could say it's the same Hammer all over again just a bit fresher to their fan's of today.
Dan.
Were they not involved in the new Cushing film THE LOST then?
shareProduction came from British Phoenix Films and Bum Hand Film Production, neither were conected to Hammer, 'The Losts' Distributer was Customflix and had no conection to Hammer, from the two locations that were used for filming Berkshire seems the only conection to Hammer and Peter Cushing because Hammer Horror films such as Dracula, Curse of Frankenstein/Werewolf and many more even my favouret Frankenstin Created Woman were filmed there.
shareThe company name "Hammer" has been bought. The company producing this film are the company who have bought the name and are therefore called Hammer. It is NOT the same company that brought us the hammer horror's of the 60's and 70's.
shareI was answering the question if Peter Cushing/Hammer had any conection to Cushing's last film 'The Lost', I'm aware that Hammer is owned by a different company but just like the 'old' Hammer they aim to follow the trend of the time as well as bring somthing different to the screen, they are also starting small with the aim to grow from it just like the 'old' Hammer did, No matter how big they are they have already have a fan base which I feel will take away any worrys when it comes to marketing themselves so I think it is going to be interesting to watch them grow, from the point of any Hammer fan old or new.(Hammer started horror in the late 50's and were around a long time before that)
shareDoes it matter it's not the exact same company? The thing that was great about Hammer was that it was quality British horror films. If the new Hammer are dedicated to doing that, then I will be happy. There have been a number of great British horrors since hammer, which I am equally proud of as a Brit. So it's all good and it's nice for the name to live on. If they start rolling out crap they will be unlikely to stay around for long and I very much doubt that anyone even wanting the hammer name would be likely to aim for Hollywood style all FX no depth horror. So it's all cool.
They have to start small, but it would be great if some way down the line they were able to attract some established British horror directors like Danny Boyle (28 days later), Neil Marshall (Dog Soldiers/The Descent) or even Rob Green (The Bunker). I always felt there is enough talent in the UK Horror wise that if they were just to get together they could easily have something as big as classic Hammer going again. Bring in a few classy actors on the way.
This first film I will judge when I see it, but it is a first time director and a pretty unknown cast so definitely starting at a minimal budget. StilL Ingrid Pitt is there so there is something. :)
--
I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. My life is my own.
Fenris Fil I like your view of Hammer and the view of the brit. horror, I agree that the British should stay with there 'pure horror'/'black hummed' horror films (not saying they all have black hummer).
Hollywood have FX but no horror, nearly ever film is from famouse horror books/a untrue tall, from someone else/or a remake of a Europe/Japanis flick.
There's: 'The Thing' 'Friday 13th' 'Hallowen' 'Omen I/II' 'Rosemary's Baby' 'Blare Witch Project', all the others are to old to be seen as fresh horror or are copies from other films like 'Saw' or 'The Others',
Please tell me I'm wrong.
''Fenris Fil I like your view of Hammer and the view of the brit. horror, I agree that the British should stay with there 'pure horror'/'black hummed' horror films (not saying they all have black hummer).''
UK Horror doesn't need Humvees in the films...
Also the view of Hammer you are exposing is *beep* to be honest. Real Hammer fans do not want any ''Hammer'' to turn out juvenile, teeny slasher *beep* We want well-made, well-acted Gothic horror mixed with a few contemporary horrors and thriller. We do not just want it to be crappy ''British Horror'' like now. That is not what Hammer was about. They made films that nobody makes whereas crap like 'Beyond The Rave' is the sort of thing everyone makes.
What people do not make is Gothic horror, which is what Hammer was famous for. You had Victorian, and then Edwardian, set Dracula films, Georgian/Regency and then Victorian Frankenstein films, the Victorian 'The Plague of Zombies', the Edwardian 'The Reptile', the Georgian 'Curse of The Werewolf', not contemporary nonsense about dance clubs and drug-culture.
Now, I have heard the most recent people to buy the Hammer name are making a Gothic horror called 'The Woman in Black'. This does sound to be a good start and I hope it is well-done. If they stick to that they will be worthy successors to Hammer and worthy of the name.
If you love Jesus 100%... keep it to yourselves, perverts!
Hammer is not just horror and is not always set in victorin/edwarian times, u can't have seen that many Hammer films or have seen the work that was made for TV(now on DVD).
To The Devil A Daughter/The Witches/One Million Years B.C./The Viking Queen/She/The Nanny/Quatermass And The Pit/Prehistoric Women and many more are pure Hammer but are no where near the victorin/edwarian times.
Hammer even made comides.
Hammers sway more to horror but their main aim is to make films that have new appeal, an aproch that is fresh. Beyond The Grave may be *beep* to many but using the internet as a way to tell Hammer fans their back was a fresh and moden way. Hammer films may seem old and set in their ways but when they were made it was seen as as a fresh and some times scary way of making films
"It's Hammer time, WOWOWO, Hammer time!"
''Hammer is not just horror and is not always set in victorin/edwarian times''
I never said it was. Read my post properly. Hammer made all sorts of films, including some films based on mediocre sitcoms, however, Hammer Horror is what we are talking about as it is the most relevant to 'Beyond The Rave' - although it seems like it is neither ''Hammer'' nor ''Horror''!
''u can't have seen that many Hammer films or have seen the work that was made for TV(now on DVD).''
I have seen almost every film they made after 57 and many that they made before it. The output of Hammer in the horror category was overwhelmingly ''gothic''. They made some contemporary films as I have said, but they were mostly thrillers rather than supernatural horrors. They sadly made some 70s-set Dracula films - which do not even fit in the same series as the flashback action starts in 1872, whereas the first meeting of Dracula and Van Helsing was in the 1880s in 'Dracula'.
As for the TV output (which was quite minor) I am re-watching 'Hammer House of Horror' at the moment. Your comments in justification for 'Beyond The Raves' thus fail due to your presumption that I have not seen many Hammer films, when I in fact own almost all of the Gothic horror films, some non-Gothic films and even some comedies made by that production company. And I do not confuse films by AIP, Tyburn, Tigon etc. with Hammer, I just mean Hammer themselves - though I own many films by those companies too.
''To The Devil A Daughter/The Witches/One Million Years B.C./The Viking Queen/She/The Nanny/Quatermass And The Pit/Prehistoric Women and many more are pure Hammer but are no where near the victorin/edwarian times.''
Lets break them down shall we.
'One Million Years B.C.' and 'The Vikings Queen' are not horror films, they are adventure films. They are both, however, historical rather than contemporary and thus have no bearing on your case at all.
'Quatermass and The Pit' is a great sci-fi film with horror elements but is more science fiction than horror too.
'She' is set just after WWI, an era considered to still be ''Edwardian'' by many (1901-1919, with the end being the signing of the Treaty of Versailles; though some do prefer to follow the reign of Edward himself, which is from 1901-1910 - which would make 'She' near the Edwardian era as it is set in 1919). Your logic is truly failing. The sequel to 'She' was contemporary because that is the only way the film could work. It is, however, partly set in a ''period'' location because the city in which Kilikrates lives is still very much a part of the ''Classical'' world. These films are again adventure rather than horror.
'The Nanny' is a thriller. As are 'Straight On Till Morning' and a few others that you should have mentioned but didn't. You could make a claim that they are horror because the line between thriller and horror is narrow, however, most of the horror output are still ''period'' films, usually Victorian or Edwardian but sometimes (and ''sometimes'' being the key word) contemporary.
Another one you COULD have mentioned is 'Blood From A Mummy's Tomb' which is set in the present day (at the time it was made) and is also a supernatural horror (based on 'The Jewel of Seven Stars' by Bram Stoker - so it should have been Edwardian). The film might have well have been a period film as you more often see the ''tomb'', the Edwardian mansion house, and even some period scenes set in ancient Egypt and some scenes set when Andrew Keir's character was young, rather than specifically contemporary locations.
'To The Devil A Daughter', considered an inferior film by many was modern. Yes. As also was 'The Witches'.
I have not seen the ADVENTURE film 'Prehistoric Women' for some time but I was sure it is set in the 20s or 30s, but come to think of it it was contemporary - not that it matters, it is set in a ''prehistoric'' jungle camp mostly.
Lets look at most of the horrors shall we:
'The Curse of Frankenstein' - Set the trend for Gothic horror, set in the Regency era (specifically before Victorian took the throne, much like most Regency Hammer films).
'The Revenge of Frankenstein' - See above.
'Frankenstein and The Monster From Hell' - See above; despite being made last it seems to be set before most of the sequels.
'The Evil of Frankenstein' - Victorian.
'Frankenstein Created Woman' - Victorian.
'Frankenstein Must Be Destroyed' - Victorian.
'Tales of Frankenstein' (TV pilot) - Regency.
'The Horror of Frankenstein' - Spoof of 'The Curse of Frankenstein'. Regency.
'Dracula' - 1885. Victorian.
'Brides of Dracula' - Same as above.
'Dracula Prince of Darkness' - See below.
'Dracula Has Risen From The Grave' - A coffin might say ''Gisela Heinz 1885 - 1905'', but when I and a friend found this we were not actually 100% sure as it is pretty blink and you'll miss it. The ''05'' in the presumed ''1905'' might just be ''95'' because of how blurry the picture is or the ''5'' might be a ''3''. However, many other ''researchers'' seem to have formed the same conclusion now, so maybe we were right all along. The 1905 would put the film in the Edwardian era.
'Taste The Blood of Dracula' - Edwardian. Might be set the same year as the film before, or maybe a year or so later.
'Scars of Dracula' - Edwardian. Might be set any number of years after the film before as long as it does not exceed 1910.
'The Legend of The Seven Golden Vampires' - The captions giving the dates are nonsense and probably an afterthought. First we get a date of 1804, the year in which Dracula travels to China. This is nonsense for many reasons; van Helsing's reference to meeting Dracula would not work, the first film would not fit into the same series. The second problem is that Dracula is clearly wearing an Edwardian suit when he meets Kah. The next date is 1904 which does not seem to fit with the dates of the other stories. Hammer had grown sloppy in those years and I would love to see this film ''fixed''. I personally like to think this film, regardless of the dates, is set around 1907.
'The Plague of The Zombies' - Victorian.
'The Reptile' - Edwardian.
'The Mummy' - 1895-1898 (late Victorian).
'Curse of The Mummy's Tomb' - late Victorian or Edwardian.
'The Mummy's Shroud' - 1920.
'The Curse of The Werewolf' - Georgian.
'The Phantom of The Opera' - Victorian.
'The Hands of The Ripper' - late Victorian or Edwardian, depending on long after the Ripper murders the film is set. The Ripper murders took place in the 1880s.
'Demons of The Mind' - Regency.
'The Vampire Lovers' - Regency.
'Lust For A Vampire' - Regency (1830s).
'Twins of Evil' - Possibly Restoration era.
'Captain Kronos' - Regency.
'Vampire Circus' - Regency.
'The Two Faces of Dr. Jekyll' - Victorian.
'Dr. Jekyll and Sister Hyde' - Victorian.
'The Gorgon' - Edwardian (1910).
'The Devil Rides Out' - This one actually was contemporary, much like the lesser 'To The Devil A Daughter'.
'Countess Dracula' - By the standards of the UK, Stuart Era.
'Rasputin: The Mad Monk' - 1910s.
'Shadow of The Cat' - Late Victorian or Edwardian.
'The Man Who Could Cheat Death' - Victorian.
'The Terror of the Tongs' - Edwardian (1910).
That is about 37 Gothic horror films.
''Hammers sway more to horror but their main aim is to make films that have new appeal, an aproch that is fresh.''
Citation needed. This may have been the main aim when it came to horror and though I am a Hammer-fan, I have to admit that most of the comedies were very routine rather than ''fresh''.
''Beyond The Grave may be *beep* to many but using the internet as a way to tell Hammer fans their back was a fresh and moden way.''
It is not ''fresh''. Raving, modern vampire films are the type of thing that ANYONE can and does make; unlike the Hammer Horror of old, which kickstarted Gothic horror films and had a style that could not be replicated (thanks to Terence Fisher who directed the ''originals'').
'' Hammer films may seem old and set in their ways but when they were made it was seen as as a fresh and some times scary way of making films''
I never said anything of the kind! Of course they were fresh! Gothic horror was rare in films before Hammer. Look at Universal which made their horror films set in the 30s and 40s. However, Gothic horror does not make films old and tired for the simple reason that they do not make them much today, and because they are just a loose style in which you can add some very original elements. If ''New Hammer'' wanted to be original they could have made a very good Gothic horror film (as ''Even Newer Hammer'' seem to be doing now with 'The Woman In Black'), but instead they decided to go with the safe, cheap and unoriginal route of making a cheesy, modern, dance culture-tinged vampire film which any low-budget company could have made.
If you love Jesus 100%... keep it to yourselves, perverts!
This post was so great I didn't even read past half way and didn't need to... cos that's how great it was! :D lol
shareMy favorite Hammer Dracula is Satanic Rites of Dracula.
"It's not about money.... It's about sending a Message..... Everything Burns!!!"
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/showbiz/film/article576825.ece
[deleted]
I feel that horror of today is so bloody and prodictable that it either bores me or is simpley laugth able, I don't mind a bit of hummer like 'Scary Movie 1,2...' but when films that are ment to scare the sh## out of you make you fall asleep you know there is something wrong with horror of today. Hammer maybe starting small but I'm sure they will show the true way to make a film with less bugget, makeing a film more populare than those who make cr## films with a wast fall of money.