My take: Do you like Clue or the House on Haunted Hill? This was a precursor to those tales and will feel very familiar to you.

In The Cat and the Canary, the seventh movie in Studies in Terror, a wealthy old man passes away. All of his relatives gather in his creepy old mansion for a reading of the will, hoping to get their share of the fortune.

A creepy hand reaches out from the wall to snatch young Annabelle’s jewels in The Cat and the Canary.

Young and beautiful Annabelle West, played by Laura LaPlante is named the heir, but there is a catch. If a doctor declares that she is mentally unsound later that night, she will lose the fortune and the new heir will be one who is named in a different sealed envelope.

(Side note: as a lawyer, I have to warn all other fellow lawyers that you need to forget everything you know about wills and estates law while watching this film.)

During the night, we discover that the mansion is filled with secret panels and passageways. We also learn that a madman is on the loose. And the lawyer who holds the sealed envelope naming the hopeful heir is murdered.

Yes, this is a story we have heard over and over again. But the fun in watching it lies in the fact that you are watching one of the first. According to Studies in Terror, this was a film that launched a hundred copycats. While watching The Cat and the Canary, I continually compared it to Clue, The House on Haunted Hill, and episodes of Scooby Doo.

A new theme emerged while I was watching this film. It was directed by the same man who directed Wax Works, Paul Leni. In my opinion, the intervening years did much to improve his directing abilities, and it was fun to see how he had improved his style.

I would recommend this movie to fans of classic movies and those who love films where the characters are all locked together in an old creepy mansion.

I found the movie on Netflix Instant Watch. I also found it on youtube without musical accompaniment:

My take: A fast campy story that was fun to watch.

The sixth movie listed in Studies of Terror, The Unknown comes in at a short 41 minutes. But in the short time, a lot happens and the story moves quickly.

Lon Chaney and Joan Crawford in the Unknown

The plot involves characters in a gypsy circus in Spain. The leading man, played by Lon Chaney, is an armless knife thrower named Alonzo. He is obsessed with Nanon, played by Joan Crawford, a young girl who is terrified of hands (I’m not making this up). Alonzo thinks that this will make things easy in his pursuit of this girl. But there is another suitor, the dashing strongman Malabar. Also, Alonzo happens to still have his hands (yes, it is this ridiculous).

To give more away would ruin the quick story, and it is worth a watch. While the tale is far fetched and at times even ridiculous, the campy tone and fast pace make it entertaining. Also, I was truly surprised by how hot Joan Crawford was in 1927. I am a straight female and I couldn’t take my eyes off her.

By today’s standards, I would not call this film terrifying. But I would still recommend it to people who are interested in old-timey horror, especially since the star is Lon Chaney of Phantom of the Opera fame.

If you want to watch it, you may have to hunt down a DVD copy. I got a copy through Netflix’s DVD service. Here is a good amateur trailer that I found on youtube that can give you a feel for the film:

I also really enjoy this poster:

Poster for The Unknown (1927)

My take: The acting of Conrad Veidt alone makes this a film you must watch. He displays his emotions with the slightest movements of his hands and eyes, and, as a result, you are drawn right into the story.

The Hands of Orlac is the fifth movie listed in Studies in Terror, and it is the first that I am certain I will watch again. It follows the tragic story of Paul Orlac (played by Conrad Veidt), a pianist who is injured in a train crash. Unable to save his hands, the surgeon replaces them with the hands of a recently executed murderer.

Conrad Veidt as Paul Orlac in The Hands of Orlac.

When Orlac awakens and discovers the origin of his new hands, he is filled with despair and fear. He begins to believe that his hands are driven to murder and other nefarious acts. Watching Veidt’s Orlac, you puzzle over whether it is all in his mind or if his hands do have some evil purpose.

This movie was incredibly fun to watch. With Studies in Terror next to me, it didn’t take me too long to realize who I was watching: Conrad Veidt played Cesare in the Cabinet of Dr. Caligari and Ivan the Terrible in Waxworks. Suddenly a theme emerges, and that theme made watching Conrad Veidt’s latest work all the better.

The strong emotions he portrayed as the troubled somnambulist Cesare shine through in The Hands of Orlac. Watching his expressions, you are drawn into his tale and can sympathize with the horror and pain Orlac is feeling.

I would definitely recommend this film to fans of horror, especially if you have watched the previous films I’ve blogged about from Studies in Terror.

Here is The Hands of Orlac on youtube:

My take: Max Schreck’s vampire carries the film and makes it worth watching for his spider-like fingers and dominant presence on screen.

I’m at the third movie listed in Studies in Terror: Nosferatu. I’ll admit, I’ve seen this German horror classic before, and I have always liked it. Not only is it a solid vampire movie, especially given its age, but it is also a study in copyright issues. The film follows Stoker’s oft-told tale of Dracula. The difference: director F W Murnau never got the rights from Stoker’s estate. As a result:

Max Schreck as Count Orlok in Nosferatu

• We have Count Orlok and not Count Dracula
• The story does not take place in London, it’s set in Bremen, Germany
• The names are all different (if you are watching an old version of the film)
• Vampire bites do not create more vampires; they lead only to death

I don’t think these changes are necessarily a bad thing. Instead, they set the film apart from the book. The first time you watch it, it is similar enough to the book that you can follow it but the slight variations keep you on edge, unsure of where this particular version will take you.

One thing really popped out at me while watching this movie: somnambulism. When psuedo-Mina Harker’s character was sleepwalking, an intertitle referred to it as a “somnambulistic dream.”  I couldn’t believe it. There was that word again that I had to look up while watching the Cabinet of Dr Caligari. I only noticed because I’m trying to “watch the book.” This seems to be a theme in 1920s horror, and I wonder if it will crop up in other films.

Sleepwalking fad aside, if you like vampire movies, this is the first great one. And anyone who professes a love for horror should watch this film at least once.

You can even find it on youtube now that it is in the public domain:

My take: A bit too long but worth watching all of the creepy vignettes about medieval beliefs when it comes to witchcraft and satan.

Häxan, the second film listed in the book Studies in Terror, definitely has some creepy moments. The movie itself is almost like a documentary. The first 20 or so minutes are entirely textual descriptions of medieval beliefs along with images from that time period. It starts to get good, however, when the film starts showing those images acted out on the screen. This leads to some eerie vignettes involving:

The devil in all his creepy glory.

• Witches literally kissing Satan’s ass
• Demons sacrificing an infant
• Satan tempting a lady out of her marital bed
• A witch selling a love potion made from dove hearts and cat feces

Those are just a few of the scenes that stood out.

This is definitely a movie I would recommend to people who want to see some unique early horror. Some of the shots of the witch’s kitchen could also provide excellent inspiration for a haunted house.

I managed to find this movie on youtube (turn on subtitles or much of the film will be useless to you):

My take: It was a fun sci-fi, monster movie with some good creepy elements to it.

Rating: 3 out of 4 stars

I must had read the title at least 20 times before I saw the movie. Until I heard someone say “Quatermass” (pronounced QWAY-ter-mass)  in the film, I honestly read it as “QUARTermass.” Silly me.

Quatermass (left) and a scientist examine the lone survivor of the crashed ship.

Now that I’ve seen the movie, I know the Quatermass is the name of one of the lead characters of the film, a scientist who sent a rocket ship to space. The movie starts with the rocket ship returning to earth and crashing into the British countryside. While the ship was supposed to return home, something is clearly amiss. Quatermass and his team are unable to communicate with any of the astronauts inside. When they crack open the ship, only one astronaut is still in the ship, and he is not quite right. He has taken on a ghoulish pallor and is in a near catatonic state.

While they try to treat the remaining astronaut, they also attempt to study him in an attempt to discover what happened to the other astronauts. The astronaut seems to be changing into something else. But what kind of creature is he changing into? And after his escape from the hospital, why is he leaving a trail of bodies in his wake?

The Quatermass Xperiment is a Hammer Films Production, and it’s the first Hammer Film that I have seen. The production company is well-known for their game-changing horror movies of the 60s and 70s. This was one of their early films, but it did not disappoint. It was a fun combination between science fiction and the macabre. And this story was clearly the genesis behind many future horror plots (to state which ones would be too much of a spoiler).

I would recommend this to those who like Space horror, scary science fiction, and monster movies. I watched it online at this site. Here is the trailer for the Quatermass Xperiment, which was released as “The Creeping Unknown” in the US: