The Blood Beast Terror
Tigon’s The Blood Beast Terror is a Frankenstein story told from the wrong point of view. Instead of chronicling Frankenstein’s journey into madness, it follows the village constable investigating the creature.
Granted, the constable in this case is a Scotland Yard inspector played by the always entertaining Peter Cushing, but even he can’t overcome the narrative misstep.
Set in nineteenth century Britain, the film opens with a mysterious winged creature murdering a young man in the London countryside. Cushing investigates and the initial signs point to some kind of animal. He contacts the local entomology professor, Dr. Mallinger, played by Robert Flemyng, for information, but Mallinger acts suspicious.
Sure enough, Mallinger and his daughter prove complicit, harboring a large humanoid moth creature he’s created that feeds on human blood. Mallinger and his daughter flee London with the creature. Cushing pursues, desperate to find them before the creature claims more victims.
That synopsis implies more excitement than the film provides. It’s a dull affair. Cushing lacks a character arc and has little to do but react to events. There’s a murder, he investigates. Rinse and repeat. Worse still, he doesn’t crack the case as much as Mallinger blunders with an unnecessary lie.
Cushing tries to make these exposition-heavy investigation scenes work using his trademark prop-work. An early scene has him bemoaning a wet tea saucer. Later in the morgue, he’s fidgeting with his hat. And in my favorite bit, a field crime scene sequence sees him chewing—Huck Finn style—on a bit of straw. But it’s not enough.
Told from Mallinger’s point of view, the film could have worked. His is the only character with an arc and Basil Rathbone was cast in the role but died before filming began.1 Still, Cushing had made a name for himself playing Frankenstein in Hammer’s productions, and could have easily slotted into another mad-scientist role.
What’s shocking is how the script includes a lengthy sequence where Mallinger’s students put on an amateur production of a Frankenstein play in Mallinger’s living room. Director Vernon Sewell presents the scene via a static shot from the audience’s point of view, but the sequence still proves more interesting than the surrounding film—something that should have alarmed screenwriter Peter Bryan.
Bryan further missteps with an outlandish bit of plot gymnastics that sees Cushing take his daughter with him as he pursues Mallinger undercover for no logical reason save the plot needing an attractive girl to put in peril. And the final twist regarding the creature’s identity will surely make some guffaw with its inanity.
Compounding matters, despite some nice location shooting, the production betrays the limited budget with obvious day-for-night shots, and recycled bits of music where the cues don’t match the on-screen action, such as during the comic-relief morgue scenes. There’s little in the way of atmosphere and the moth creature looks like a high-end Halloween costume. Thankfully, Sewell keeps the creature off-screen for as long as possible.
What a disappointing mess. Cushing regarded the film with some distaste.2 Rightly so considering his engaging performance is wasted on a script whose flaws should have been obvious from the start. Mad-scientist stories are always better when told from the scientist’s point of view; after all, Mary Shelley didn’t title her novel, “The Constable.”