MovieChat Forums > And Now the Screaming Starts! (1974) Discussion > Peter Cushing's role

Peter Cushing's role

posted 19 years ago by mattpt83
8 replies | jump to latest

Hey everybody-

i saw this movie the other nite on AMC too (nothing like a good, old-fashioned horror movie to recover from a sickness!). I was a little disapointed with what the screenwriter did with Peter Cushing's role. For half the movie, i was waiting for him to show up and pull a Van Helsing and battle the ghost, succesfully sending the ghost straight to hell or something. While his performance was good (when isnt it?), i felt they didnt do anything with his character and he was totally superflous-- i kept waiting for him to kick some supernatural heiny, but it never happened. i dont think his character was at all essential to the storyline, though the movie did get cooler with his presence. i mean, what did he actually DO? he walked around, talked to people, walked around some more, talked to some more people and (FINALLY) got the true story out of Fengriffen, but couldnt have he wife have done all that (in fact, wasnt that EXACTLY what she was doing for the first 50 minutes of the movie??!)? I mean, c'mon, he didnt even stop the curse! weak! let me know what you guys think. also, i have a question: in the prologue, Catherine remarks how she tries to remmeber back before her life got creepy and scary: so, are we to assume that after the baby is born, its a little monster and things are still terrible? if so, the movie just gets more depressing and i just wish Cushing could have done SOMETHING (for instance: "uh, so catherine... yeah, um, maybe you should like, uh, put your kid up for adoption or something....") haha.

[–] the lioness 18 years ago

Cushing is just there to be there, I guess. I think the studio put him in this movie to draw audiences b/c the other two actors, Olgvy & Beacham, weren't very popular with audiences just yet. I've got a question for you...why stay in the house when you've got a restless spirit about and no one has a clue as to how to get rid of it?!

As for Catherine's baby, its not a monster,it just has a hand missing at birth. Plus, since the child is a product of rape, he can't claim the family inheirtance unless he's allowed to so as to keep the whole thing quiet.

Strange movie...

[–] mattpt83 18 years ago

the problem being: who was the rapist? we the viewers know it was a ghost, but will that explanation hold up in court? who knows; this was during the Age of Enlightenment, but people still had plenty of superstitious beliefs, especially in the more rural areas, so its speculation as to whether a jury/Magistrate would have bought the whole ghost-rape thing. probably not, but hopefully the kid was more good-natured than his supernatural father....

why go into a house with an angry spirit? good question! but then, we would have significantly less horror movies....

[–] DC-Tiki 18 years ago

I agree with the original post, in terms of story structure, Cushing's role seems rather observational and very ineffective in the plot. It is strange that they didn't just let the wife figure it all out herself, Cushing could've taken on the role of the original doctor perhaps if they really had wanted him in the film!

[–] vancleef1980 16 years ago

I disagree i think it was a nice touch that he couldn't stop it happening. Whether this was intentional or not and knowing how Milton Subotsky worked it probably wasn't. Subotsky always stated that Cushing likes working for Amicus as he is cast in different roles compared as apposed Hammer. Dr Pope is probably the closest to any character he played for Hammer but this time evil won and he was ineffectual.

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Harold_Robbins 14 years ago

Amicus must have let him keep the blond, poofy wig to wear in Hammer's FRANKENSTEIN AND THE MONSTER FROM HELL the following year.

"In my case, self-absorption is completely justified."

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]