British Horror A-Level Resources Materials

FEC film education consortium for

HERTFORDSHIRE

British Horror Film A-Level Workshop compiled by Darren Elliott

!

FEC

film education consortium for

HERTFORDSHIRE

BRITISH HORROR FILM: A - LEVEL WORKSHOP INTRODUCED BY: STEPHANIE MUIR (WJEC EXAMINER, HEAD OF FILM STUDIES, RICHMOND UPON THAMES COLLEGE) DARREN ELLIOTT (FILM EDUCATION COORDINATOR (UNIVERSITY OF HERTFORDSHIRE)

This event is designed to complement and support the study of Film Studies’ FM2 Section B which includes a Genre: Horror option. This Horror Film event will support elements if this option, covering an general discussion of (particularly) British Horror Cinema history throughout the decades, close consideration of the Horror genre and it’s many sub-genres’ narrative development, recurring themes and representation. The event will also set in place horror film production via various British (and some coAmerican) studios and how genre conventions are often influenced by context and social impressions. Students will hopefully begin looking more closely at such classic titles and how they represent a particular ‘Britishness’ The event is also suitable for Undergraduates of Media and Film Studies with an

interest in controversial British Cinema History, British Studios and the Horror Genre. Stephanie Muir (WJEC Examiner, Film Studies Coordinator, Richmond Upon Thames College) will introduce the event centering on the various British studios, and production history of the Horror film in Britain, offering up a consideration of a "very British Horror film# and how the British Horror#s themes are indicative of the culture in which it is conceived, one that is rife with political, sexual and cultural repression. Then case studies of significant British Horror titles films from the 40#s through to present day will be delivered via a clip led screening session which will demonstrate how cinema and culture enjoy a symbiotic and counter influential relationship, production histories of each titles will be explored, and brief textual analysis of films and the clips involved will reveal how horror directors manipulate the films spectators and include allegories of common and contemporary cultural anxieties.

BRITISH HORROR FILM A-LEVEL WORKSHOP: PROGRAMME DEAD OF NIGHT (Cavalcanti/Crichton, GB 1945) DRACULA (Terence Fisher, GB 1958) THE DEVIL RIDES OUT (Terence Fisher, GB, 1967) WITCHFINDER GENERAL (Michael Reeves, GB 1968) FRANKENSTEIN MUST BE DESTROYED (Terence Fisher, GB, 1969) BLOOD ON SATAN!S CLAW (Piers Haggard, GB, 1971) VAULT OF HORROR (Roy Ward Baker, GB, 1973) FRIGHTMARE (Pete Walker, GB 1974) THE! DESCENT (Neil Marshall, GB 2005) 1

DEAD OF NIGHT (CAVALCANTI/CRICHTON GB, 1945)

DEAD OF NIGHT (Cavalcanti/Crichton GB, 1945) DEAD OF NIGHT EALING STUDIOS, 1945 DIRECTORS: ALBERTO CAVALCANTI, CHARLES CRICHTON, BASIL DEARDON, ROBERT HAMER. PRODUCER: MICHAEL BALCON ADAPTED FROM STORIES BY H.G. WELLS, E.F. BENSON, JOHN V. BAINES & ANGUS MCPHAIL. STARRING: MICHEAL REDGRAVE, MERVYN JOHNS, GOOGIE WITHERS, BASIL RADFORD, NAUGHTON WAYNEM SALLY ANNE HOWES.

Ealing Studio#s Dead of Night has a reputation of being one of the most important English supernatural thrillers, if not easily defined as horror - it is certainly one of the most influential British films for horror directors and easily one of the most scary films from its era. The film deals with one aspect of the Gothic literature strain that is not often picked up in the Horror genre, the ghost story. The film is the first horror/thriller film that collects short stories told by a gathering of characters, what is now known as the portmanteau or anthology film. Such a format would go onto influence a whole cycle of movies from Amicus Films in the 60#s - 70#s. The central conceit revolves around an uneasy gathering of middle class people in a drawing room where people tell their stories as the night draws in. As each story is revealed, the narrative turns in a circle and all the action is eventually exposed as a collective nightmare which is about to come true. Within this structure, and excuse for frights, there is a tension between the representation of reality and its many layers. Robert Hamer#s story, the Haunted Mirror, is a clear development of this idea. The Mirror having been bought by a soon to be married couple, its baroque glass reveals to the husband to be, a world difference from his own, as he glimpses the sight of a roaring fire, a lush ornate bedroom, in a completely different world to his own which is oppressive and bare. Beginning to feel a presence, his girlfriend worries that he is being possessed. It is eventually revealed that the previous owner killed his wife and later himself by slashing his throat in front of the mirror. She finally released her husband from the spell by smashing the mirror into pieces. This episode is perhaps prophetic of the same cinematic screen or mirror, that Hammer would hold up to a collective consciousness of the 50s - 70#s who would flock to see a world different from their own historically and culturally in their period horror, in order to liven and animate their own lives. The movie opens with architect Walter Craig (Johns) arriving at a country house party where he reveals to the other assembled guests that he has seen them all in a recurring dream. He has no prior personal knowledge of them, but he knows that each has a disturbing story to tell. The other guests attempt to test Craig's foresight, while entertaining each other with various tales of uncanny or supernatural events that they experienced or were told about including a racing car driver's mysterious premonition of a fatal bus crash; a humorous tale of two obsessed golfers, one of whom is haunted by the other's ghost; a ghostly encounter during a children's Christmas party (a scene cut from the initial American release); a haunted antique mirror; and the story of an unbalanced ventiloquist (Michael Redgrave) who believes his amoral dummy is truly alive before all the stories are revealed !with a twist ending. Cavalcanti#s final episode within the film is perhaps the most remembered and disturbing.

2

DRACULA (Terence Fisher GB, 1958) DRACULA 1958 HAMMER FILMS DIRECTOR: TERENCE FISHER, PRODUCED BY MICHAEL CARRERRAS, ANTHONY HINDS AND ANTHONY NELSON KEYS WRITTEN BY JIMMY SANGSTER ADAPTED FROM BRAM STOKER’S NOVEL. DIRECTOR OF PHOTOGRAPHY: JACK ASHER STARRING: PETER CUSHING (Van Helsing) CHRISTOPHER LEE (Dracula) and MICHAEL GOUGH (Arthur Holmwood), CAROL MARSH (Lucy Holmwood)

Of all the monsters that Hammer adapted, Dracula proved by far the most successful and acceptable in terms of box-office takings and continued audience popularity. This was partly due to Christopher Lee’s take on the role, which had previously been portrayed by Bela Lugosi in the Universal originals. Lee’s version was a very erotic, sensual and physical almost ‘pin-up’ Dracula, which give heft to the film’s many scenes of vampiric seduction. Now female audience members could understand why period women were swooning at the sight of Lee’s bloodshot red hypnotic eyes. Lee’s dashing entrances in many of the Hammer Dracula adaptations would become fames, as statuesque and every inch the vampire aristocrat. In Dracula, his role is largely a mute one, pursued by the more articulate Van Helsing. The film is typified by the classical opening sequence in which Lee appears first as a menacing shadow between pillars at the top of a stair case, who then glides effortlessly down the staircase into close up to reveal a gentlemanly and classy dashing hero-type figure. He is the classic Gothic villain, the charming and intelligent host who can turn the genteel world of Victorian women upside down by turning them into ravenous sexualised objects, one way or another. He is pitted against a stuffy, old fashioned Van Helsing, representing the unity of science and Christian religion. With Curse and Dracula, Hammer’s horror conventions were set in stone (see Studios section), sex and horror were united and in glorious technicolour, much to the censor’s horror. Dracula even drew a horrified response from a critic from the Observer who pleaded, ‘Can anything be done about it? Of course is can, if anyone in authority takes some trouble’. It seemed that Lee and Hammer’s Dracula were having just as devastating an effect on contemporary audiences as well as on the heaving bosoms on screen. Both films were made soon after the appearance of kitchen-sink dramas on television, in film and at London’s Royal Court theatre. The birth of the angry young man - is clearly seen in Hammer’s depictions of these two cinematic icons. Christopher Lee’s Count is every part the 60’s sexual predator. There is a physicality to the relationship between these two angry young men, Van Helsing and Dracula and is displayed clearly in the films final fight between the two in which Cushing pins the Count to the floor with an impromptu candle-crucifix, before leaping high to rip down the drapes to reveal the morning sun which reduces Dracula’s arm to ashes. It was this scene in particular alongside the sexual tensions that were now rendered obvious in scenes between Dracula and Mina. These scenes were though out as all the more disgraceful as they were in colour. One censor commented, ‘the version we saw...was in black and white. The final version will be in colour and in addition, in our opinion, will make certain scenes intolerable’. On several tumultuous occasions Carrerras wrote letters between chief censor John Trevelyan concerning reshooting of the scenes which depict Dracula’s disintegration, and the suggested removal of scenes in which Dracula seduces Mina, the violence implied had the censors crying ‘rape!’. Complaining that reshoots and reedits would be costly and thus mean the end of Hammer productions, a British studio, saw an uneasy truce between the censor and Hammer. Dracula was passed with minor cuts. The final scene between the two ‘pillars of British horror’ is also the only moment of Hammer’s Dracula series where Van Helsing and Dracula stand face to face in the interior of his own castle, the finale finally reducing Dracula to ashes while the credits roll. Hammer, realised quickly that they had perhaps been too hasty in killing their villain-money-maker, and thus dreamed up a multitude of ways in which to resurrect the Count ! over the years, starting with Dracula: Prince of Darkness, through to Taste the Blood of Dracula, Scars of Dracula and Dracula has Rise From the Grave with Lee reprising the role many times.

3

THE DEVIL RIDES OUT (Terence Fisher GB, 1967) THE DEVIL RIDES OUT (Hammer Films UK) 92 minutes colour Director: Terence Fisher Producer: Anthony Nelson Keys D of Photography: Arthur Grant Supervising Art Director: Bernard Robinson Editors: James Needs, Spencer Reeve Screenplay: Richard Matheson (from original novel by Dennis Wheatley) Starring: Christopher Lee (Duc De Richleau), Charles Gray (Mocata) Patrick Mower (Simon Aron), Nike Arrighi (Tanith), Gwen Ffrangcon Davis (Countess D!Urfe)

This adaptation of Dennis Wheatley#s novel finally got the go ahead in 1963 – with censorship issues surrounding the Satanism of the film eventually relaxing after the Witchcraft and Occult Act of 1957 that permitted media acknowledgement and representation of witchcraft and satanism. The film battled with the censor over Richard Matheson#s original script (I Am Legend), Carreras and the censor asked for cuts to the script – the budget was under consideration for further cuts. Eventually it was made for £285,000 (around £4.5 million). 1920#s London, Rescuing their young friend Simon Aron from a devil worshipping cult, the Duke de Richleau (Christopher Lee) and Rex van Ryn also take another initiate Tanith under their wing. Having disrupted a Satanic gathering on Salisbury Plain (at which the devil himself puts in an appearance) they find themselves under relentless attack from the cult#s all powerful leader, Mocata, (Charles Grey) who is determined to lure the young people back The film presents Fisher#s work at its most refined and typical. Renowned as an at times, pedestrian, even reactionary director, Fisher was often obsessed with detail, control and symmetry in the films shots and production. Themes that recur are dualism between Good and Evil, Light and Darkness, Spirit and Matter and are often symbolised via images of the bourgeois against those of madness, decay and death, usually building to a major confrontation that ends in destruction. Also moralistic attitude towards sex and sexuality, despite the films overt presentation (for that time) of sexuality. The film has a peculiar dream-like quality to it, both in terms of its aesthetic, its look but also in its narrative struggle to ascertain what is real from what is illusion or hallucination, often blurring the two together. Events and scenes are often echoed within the narrative frameworks, repeated or encouraging a sense of deja vue. The Duke#s status (indeed influenced by Lee#s star status which has previously been always associated with darkness and evil) is an ambiguous one, and the parallel between his good and Mocata#s evil is often also blurred. Fisher uses the films surreal and cyclical style to echo scenes in which Mocata#s attempted possession of Maria in a library, is paralleled with an earlier scene in which De Richleau hypnotises Marie in the very same room, both men are attempting achieve the same ends. The film is more akin to a psychological thriller rather than an out and out horror, with only one set piece, the film#s battle within the pentacle, approaching anywhere near horrific conventions. This scene features a prolonged attempt to survive a night by the four agents of good, as they are assailed by the forces of evil conjured up by Mocata while they hold up inside a pentacle drawn on the library floor. This is typical of both Fisher#s work and Hammer#s horror conventions, a final spectacular, clash between good and evil. The scene is also partly selfreferential as there is a clear cinematic element at work here in the illusions and temptations that are "projected# around the characters in the library, referencing the connection between audience and main protagonists, and the sheer cinematic spectacle of Hammer#s works. The only way the characters can survive is if they can distinguish between fantasy and reality, much like the Horror film spectator themselves. The sequence starts with counterfeit people, replicas of the film#s characters appear before them in evil form, and ends with the amplified hoofbeats that herald the arrival of the film#s major iconic demon, the Angel of Death on horseback that towers above the ! heroes. four 4

THE DEVIL RIDES OUT (Terence Fisher, UK 1967)

WITCHFINDER GENERAL (Michael Reeves GB,1968) Witchfinder General Tigon/AIP 1968 Director: Michael Reeves Producer: Tony Tenser " Writer/Screenplay: Tom Baker, Ronald Basset Cast: Vincent Prince (Matthew Hopkins), Ian Ogilvy (Richard Marshall), Patrick Wymark (Cromwell)

"[British Horror]…especially in its overpowering use of landscape – contains the seeds of something which… is as intrinsically native to England as the Western is to America# ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! David Pirie,

!

Witchfinder General (a.k.a The Conqueror Worm - a US cash in on the success of Roger Corman#s Poe series) was once of the boom of Witch film from the 1960#s. It features a pastoral family featured are described as "strangers in their own village# and are consequently held at trial and hanged for witchcraft. Directed by Michael Reeves, it was a collaboration between Tigon and American International Pictures – Tigon was touted as a rival to Hammer#s conventional formula yet it embraced the explicitness of Hammer (its lurid colours, and violent imagery) and blended them with even more explicit displays of flesh and violence, yet Reeves# direction subtly undercuts these elements in presenting a bleak and pessimistic view of Britain and its landscapes. The film was based on the actual memoirs of Matthew Hopkins (played by Vincent Price) the Witchfinder General from the 17th century who was under the direct orders of Parliament to rid the country of witches after having claimed he had the devils list of all the witches in England. He made a thriving business and hanged in total 61 women in Suffolk and 100 in Bury St Edmunds. Here he is presented as the outsider, who is invited in to the rural village (a familiar motif in period witchcraft films) but here he is presented as the monster and there are no witches on display and the horror comes from the act of accuser no the persecuted witch. Witchfinder, makes use of real locations in Norfolk, lending a cold, harsh, often dank environment in which the characters are isolated rurally. It is stated in the film that witchcraft is a result of "a lack of order in the land that permits strange ideas#. This lack of order, may also come to represent an emerging diversification of religion in the 1960#s and 70#s with many alternative religions being taken up in favour of the mainstream religions. Fittingly, it may also suggest that such a lack of religious order, in that witchcraft itself was now becoming an alternative religious choice to be adopted, that such a "strange idea# as the witchcraft film could possible be conceived and especially presented in such an ambiguous fashion, whereby witchcraft is seen as plausible as in the Hammers# The Witches and in The Wicker Man and in Tigon#s Blood on Satan’s Claw – and the accusers or representatives of the church are portrayed as monsters. Reeves was heralded as being the new enfant terrible of British cinema, having directed a camp low budget horror, The She Beast previously, and the return of Boris Karloff as a mad doctor bent on possessing the mind of a young bored and angry young man in 60#s London in The Sorcerers. Witchfinder was Reeve#s third and final film before his death via drugs overdose in 1968. His films were imbued with a gritty, downbeat and harsh view of life, either historical or contemporary, colour is often bleached out of the frame, characters are brittle, cold and difficult to identify with, good and evil is blurred. Reeves# nihilistic direction suited the Horror Genre perfectly, and his films both at the time and retrospectively received critical acclaim as breathing new life into a genre rife with sequels, camp and predicable "sound stage# period horror and lightweight anthologies. Many studios and directors began to exhibit Reeves# dark and gloomy world view within their typical fare, Hammer#s Frankenstein Must Be Destroyed and Blood on Satan’s Claw are two examples of Reeves# influence.

5 !

FRANKENSTEIN MUST BE DESTROYED (Fisher GB, 1969) FRANKENSTEIN MUST BE DESTROYED DIRECTOR: TERENCE FISHER 1969 HAMMER FILMS UK (ELSTREE STUDIOS) PRODUCER & WRITER: ANTHONY NELSON KEYS DIRECTOR OF PHOTOGRAPHY: ARTHUR GRANT STARRING: Peter Cushing (Baron Frankenstein), Veronica Carlson (Anna Spengler), Freddie Jones (Professor Richter), Simon Ward (Karl Holst)

"Scientist…Surgeon…Madman…Murderer…. Search the length and breadth of Europe…hunt him…track him down. No matter what the risk…Frankenstein Must Be Destroyed…# Made around the same time of Michael Reeves# death (the new Brit-Horror enfant terrible (Witchfinder General) Frankenstein Must Be Destroyed is clearly influenced by Reeves own gruesome, pessimistic and nihilstic style and tone. It presents Baron Frankenstein, many years after Mary Shelley#s original events (which the film assumes the viewer is aware of), as a frighteningly changed man. On the run form the police, Frankenstein blackmails Anna Spengler and her fiancé into helping him kidnap his former colleague, Dr Brandt from a lunatic asylum. Anxious to exploit Brandt#s knowledge, Frankenstein cures his insanity but also transplants his brain into the body of the undead Dr Richter. Cushing#s later version of the Baron is a dark but dandified gentlemen, who it seems has an unhinged humanitarian determination for brain transplantation (in order to preserve great minds from inevitable loss). Terence Fisher, having worked with the story of Frankenstein in many forms over the years as Hammers# premium director, this time twists the tale with the Baron#s dual status as monstrous aristocrat by continually including juxtaposing images which work to continually disrupt one another e.g. Frankenstein buys a flower for his button hole and is cross cut with the flower bed in his lodgings erupting the water main bursting with the remains of Dr Brandt, which upsets the Baron, exclaiming it#s "ruined my plants!#. Often touted as Fisher#s most cynical film (and last film), the extremely gruesome atmosphere comes not only from the wince inducing brain operations but also from the cold world the characters inhabit. Critics have often commented on Hammer#s Elstree films as exhibiting a "trademark, dry and arid look#, in referencing Elstree#s sets which were rather more spare and threadbare than Bray Studios# lush locations and mansion houses. Hammer#s Elstree films, despite displaying a despairing decimated quality, often are all the more effective for it, lending the films an decaying feel. The change of attitude towards the Baron (Frankenstein) is made apparent in the film#s title, transformed from a creative subject to an object requiring destruction. Hammer#s Frankenstein is defined in relation to particular understandings of society, the monster and the women, and it is through shifts in this network of relations that the Baron is repositioned and revalued. The despair of Reeves# films (and obvious influence) is met in an ending in which not only Frankenstein – but everyone is destroyed. It is also about the Baron#s continual subjection of the film#s heroine, Anna - rendered a servant in his demands for her to bring refreshments and not to involve herself in the world of men. Via these two twin strands, the paternal and outdated patriarchal authority of the Baron#s role is determined. The film can be read as a struggle against the impossibility of female subjectivity – the Baron#s outdated treatment of woman is frustrated with her new found status as a business woman (she owns and runs boarding house), when she eventually causes his discovery the Baron disposes of this empowered woman first which then sets off a self destructive implosion of the Baron that represents and characterises earlier Hammer productions. Oppression of women, is the lifeblood of Hammer, but Fisher#s film seem to represent it as outdated, both sexist patriarchy, represented by the Baron (who is the Frankenstein that must be destroyed) need to be extinguished but only at the cost of the explicit destruction of the woman. The film#s excessive conclusion ends in multiple deaths, exhibits a Reeves-like nihilism that signals simultaneously a recognition of the destructiveness of a particular type of masculinity, (Baron ! Frankenstein) and an inability to find a credible alternative within the cycle#s terms of reference.

6

BLOOD ON SATAN’S CLAW (Piers Haggard GB,1971) Blood on Satan!s Claw Tigon British / Chilton Films 1971 93 minutes Colour Director: Piers Haggard Producers: Peter L Andrews, Malcolm B Heyworth Executive Producer: Tony Tenser D O Ph: Dick Bush Starring: Linda Hayden (Angel Blake), Patrick Wymark (The Judge), Barry Andrews (Ralph Gower) Michelle Dotrice (Margaret)

‘I#d worked at the National Theatre and in television, doing series like Callan and various BBC Plays, I was quite arty farty really…[but] I remember realising that horror films are great. In horror you can deal with big issues if you want to – life, death, resurrection, terror, nightmares – as long as you entertain. You can#t deal with these issues in most commercial cinema. People just don#t want to see it.# (Piers Haggard, Shock 1996) Blood on Satan’s Claw was originally entitled The Devils Touch, with a screenplay by recent Cambridge graduate, Robert Wynne Simmons who was commissioned by Tigon to write a three part anthology film (like those proving popular with Amicus). On director Piers Haggard#s request – the film was hastily conflated into a single narrative with the action moved back some 150 years from the Victorian period that was originally envisaged. Set in late 17th century England, and ancient claw is found in a field and consequently the children of a small rural community start to play sinister games. Their leader Angel Blake is in league with a cowled, half glimpsed demon in the woods, while the others appear to be donating their own limbs and other body parts to make the creature complete. A judge from the city assesses the extent of this "general plague# and determines to use "undreamed of measures# in stamping it out. Crucial to the film#s success is the gritty period success of Witchfinder General and the aesthetic of Reeves# filmmaking, coupled with what Haggard described as his "absolutely passionate feeling for the countryside# the film#s main location was the countryside around Bix Bottom, Chilterns Valley near Henley on Thames which together create a believable self contained and isolated world and in itself is almost a character within the film. The film exemplifies the mixture of traditional horror motifs with more topical concerns – the film trades in archetypes (Behemoth spirit of the darkness) unearthed in Tarrant#s Field much like a collective memory reactivated in the minds of susceptible humans. It also reflects a "turn of decade disillusionment# like many of Reeve#s films from the late 60#s– the youthful ideal of the "alternative society# from the 60#s had come to an end (especially with the real life horrors of the Manson murders in 1969, Angel Blake#s character is more than reminiscent of victim Sharon Tate). The film and recent event set the blueprint for many 1970#s horror that focused on the lethal potential of teenagers, children and even babies. At the time the film garnered controversy for its (typical for Tigon) female full frontal nude scene which called for BBFC cuts and saw the US distributors darken the US print. Also similar censorship was meted out to a scene which sees a young man chop off his own hand in the mistaken belief that the demon#s claw is strangling him as for the film#s climax which sees a naked breasted girl dancing. The film#s climax remains one of horror cinema#s most arresting sequences, (The Wicker Man#s cruelly surreal denouement was still to come). The film moves from real time into slow motion, marked out by a devastating freeze frame on the Judge leaping out from the shadows to put an end to the witches# sabbath. The sequence plays out in slow motion as the "hopping# devil is finally thrown onto the burning pyre by the judge. The film ends with a final freeze frame over the credit, in which the judge is seen glaring out from behind the rising flame, in a sinister tableaux that suggests the Judge#s collusion with the devil himself. Despite the period detail the film#s style is a world away from Hammer, with an iconic surreal folk-meets electronica soundtrack, and with several eerie visitation sequences shot in almost complete darkness, the film conjures up a seductive representation of 17th century England, as a dark, supernatural and fearful time. Unlike Witchfinder General and The Wicker Man, it#s horrors lie not in other people, but also in the unseen devil and his occultist followers. 7

!

FRANKENSTEIN MUST BE DESTROYED (Fisher, UK, 1969)

VAULT OF HORROR (Roy Ward Baker GB, 1973) VAULT OF HORROR DIRECTOR: Roy Ward Baker, 1973, AMICUS FILMS PRODUCED BY: Milton Subotsky STARRING:Tom Baker, Denholm Elliott, Terry Thomas, Michael Craig, Glynis Johns, Anna Massey, Daniel Massey, Vault of Horror is a typical ‘hit and miss’ Amicus portmanteau-style horror made at the height of the studio’s success. Directed by Amicus’ stalwart Ward Baker, the film is a-typical in that the stories are widely varied and range from comic-horror fantasy, e.g. the opening tale of a vampire-run restaurant, domestic thriller seen in televisions’ Tales of the Unexpected series e.g. Terry Thomas’ oppressive and anally retentive husband from hell that sees his wife slaughter and dissect him into parts that are then jarred and labelled with excise precision, to the fear of mystical foreign influence, including the film’s Indian Rope trick segment that sees a career mad illusionist and his assistant wife who will murder for their latest magic trick, and the film’s final, and most effective story, which feature Tom Baker as a down-at-heel artist who while on holiday gaining inspiration in foreign lands, seeks the help of local voodoo witchdoctors to enact a bloody revenge on British art dealers and critics that have dismissed his work in swift and inventive death scenes. The film’s fragmented, ‘little stories’ are again typical of the Amicus anthology horror, which derives it’s influence from not only literary sources (the film’s final segment owes a great debt to Wilde’s The Picture of Dorian Grey), but also US pop cultural inspirations, i.e. from the Tales from the Crypt series of comics by EC comics. The stories are largely unrelated, only through a threadbare excuse given via the stories various narrators in the film’s larger narrative. In this case a group of men in an office building, enter a lift one at a time in the film’s opening titles, eventually the 5 men descend in the lift to the sub-basement where they regale each other with tales of their recurring nightmares that they continuously state after each sequence, ‘feels so real, like it actually happened’, the fact that each of the sequences ends in their own death obviously suggests, even to the least attuned horror fan that they are in face all already dead and in limbo/hell. The twist is revealed in the films final section, when the men leave the sub-basement by a door which leads in to a graveyard and each of them disappear by their own headstone, the remaining character reveals that they are destined to tell the same stories every night ‘until the end of time’. There is perhaps an tongue in cheek element to this disclaimer, that critics of Amicus’ have stated that the production company are guilty themselves, of ‘telling the same old stories’ again and again. A fact which led to the companies final demise when they ceased production in 1980 after their anthology films proved less and less popular. For a while however, Amicus were largely successful and gave audiences their fix of horror in short, sharp, comical bursts, and were the perfect antidote to horror fans that grew tired of Hammer’s historical and period dramas. Amicus films were set in contemporary environs and their fragmentary nature was an economical way of pleasing all comers - each story could appeal to a different audience member. If audiences were bored or didn’t like one tale - another one would be along in 10 to 15 minutes. Their thriller/surrealist aesthetic and short format also echoed the burgeoning influence of televisual mystery/horror series, in which audiences could get their fix of suspense and terror in 30 - 50 minute one-off weekly episodes (e,g. Hammer House of Horror). The film’s international feel, in that stories take place in different countries, to various protagonists of different nationalities also reflected the US and International investment in Amicus productions, wishing to open up the film’s appeal to wider audiences. To steer away from too much ‘Britishness’.

8

!

FRIGHTMARE (Pete Walker, GB 1974) FRIGHTMARE Pete Walker (Heritage Ltd) 1974 86 minutes colour. DIRECTOR AND PRODUCER : Pete Walker, Director of Photography: Peter Jessop ART DIRECTOR: Chris Burke SCREENPLAY: David McGillivray STARRING: Rupert Davies (Edmund Yates), Sheila Keith (Dorothy Yates) Deborah Fairfax (Jackie), Paul Greenwood (Graham) Kim Butcher (Debbie), Gerald Flood (Matthew Laurence)

"It doesn#t pay to look too closely at the plot of this horror film. Uch! Better not to look at it at all…All I can say is that the people who made this rubbish and appeared in it should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves, and that anyone attracted to it should head for the nearest psychiatrist# ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Daily Express "I#m delighted with it. I think it#s a sickening movie and I#m not surprised a colleague of yours walked out. My lighting cameraman#s pregnant wife was actually sick. No it is certainly not the kind of thing I like. I would prefer to make sentimental love stories. But I used my own money and I have given the public what it wants# ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Peter Walker (The Sun, December 74). Frightmare was a Pete Walker/ David McGillivray collaboration – inspired by the 1972 Andes Air Crash – originally produced under the title of Nightmare Farm. Pete Walker came from a history of making soft core strip films like School for Sex, Strip Poker, and Cool it Carol. It tells the tale of Edmund and Dorothy Yates are released from Lansdowne Mental Asylum. Edmund#s daughter Jackie, tries to assuage her stepmother#s cannibalistic cravings by bringing her parcels of animal offal dressed up as brains, but Dorothy soon resumes her killing spree with the aid of a Black and Decker drill. Her own daughter, Deborah has similar inclinations but is not aware of her mother#s existence; mother and daughter are reunited and end in a murdering spree. Film takes a gruesomely subversive look at nuclear families, and uses cannibalism as the means to do so (much like Texas Chainsaw Massacre (made the previous summer) and The Hills Have Eyes). Frightmare’s cannibals however are typically British are: a well spoken white haired old lady – fond of needlepoint and Tarot, and her daughter – an angelic but delinquent 15 year old. Caught between the two is a sad and defeated old man – so devoted to his wife that he spent 15 years in a lunatic asylum to be with her. The film typifies typifies both Walker and McGillivray#s recurring motif of "domestic terror#. The murders themselves are fairly tame by recent standards and occur largely unseen and offscreen – but gain form and terror from the contexts that Walker thrusts them into. The narrative prefigures 1990#s cultural anxieties of "care in the community schemes#. Dorothy#s cannibalistic mania is driven by culturally enforced repressions, her ex-consultant explains: "she was a cannibal ..I can#t put it more daintily than that, I#m afraid. The fact is she ate people. She was especially interested in their brains, I remember.# the discharged and supposedly sane Dorothy reveals a raving homicidal mania behind chintzy tea and sympathy veneer, driven both by societies desire to hide away its undesirable, the pressure to "carry on regardless# of middle class England that forces Eddie and Dorothy to cover over her unnatural desires with a middle class frontage offering an at times funny parody of the genteel inanities of middle class life. The film springs black jokes – a friend of Grahams tries to dissuade him from investigating Jackie#s family background by stating "I Think you need your head examined# little suspecting that Dorothy will soon be examining it with her drill.Abel Ferrera#s The Driller Killer lay five years in the future. Frightmare’s dysfunctional family is a very middle class one, rather than the uncultured unsocietal cannibal families of US horrors. Teenage violence is juxtaposed alongside Dorothy#s obsessive desire to ingest brains, but is portrayed as even more brutal and without reason, Debbie#s boyfriend (who leads the films first violent and horrific attack on a barman) is eventually despatched by Dorothy (via pitchfork) in an avenging moment. 9 !

THE DESCENT (Neil Marshall, GB 2005) THE DESCENT " CELADOR FILMS " DIRECTOR & WRITER : Neil Marshall Producer: Keith Bell, Christian Colson, Paul Smith STARRING: Shauna MacDonald (Sarah), Natalie Jackson Mendoza (Juno), Alex Reid (Beth) Saskia Mulder (Rebecca) Myanna Buring (Sam), Nora-Jane Moore (Holly), Oliver Milburn (Paul). #Scream your last breath# "The reason horror films are being made is that distributors and financiers see a way of making easy money. The genre is riding a wave of popularity that it hasn#t enjoyed in a long time. It has broken out of the hardcore audience section and is reaching a much more broad based audience# - Neil Marshall The Descent is Marshall#s follow up film to his debut horror, Dog Soldiers (2002) another country-#cide# horror this time focusing on a largely all-male cast of soliders sent into deepest woodland in the highlands of Scotland on a training exercise only to find themselves being stalked by real-life werewolves. The comedy of Marshall#s debut is left behind in this foray into the world of "sperlunking# or "pot-holing# as an extreme sport. This time, his cast is all-female, again the basic narrative premise is that an extreme sports-style excursion is interrupted by a monstrous form. After having lost her husband and daughter in an adventure holiday accident, Sarah decides to face her demons and attempt another expedition with five friends, problems once again arise as the women become trapped in the cave. Having to battle claustrophobia, fear, disorientation and hunger they also realise that they are being stalked by "crawlers#, cave dwelling creatures that may be descended from long lost adventurers. As a male director, it is interesting to look at Marshall#s presentation of women and femininity within the horror film (with which the horror film has had a long love affair), painting the women with broad strokes, (as is often the case in horror) Marshall sets out the women as "types#, the amazonian masculine leader "Juno#, Sarah the film#s Final Girl figure, androgyne, unable to "fit in# with the other women and "broken#, amongst others include the weeping, weak woman - Rebecca. Marshall also cinematically references other horrors in his representation of women in the film, including the eventual rebirth of Sarah, emerging from a pool of blood in which she is baptised anew becoming a vengeful, animalistic warrior - much like the creatures themselves, the iconography of this scenes is clearly taken from De Palma#s Carrie (US 1976). Marshall also references academic works on the Final Girl in the horror genre namely Carol Clover#s seminal study in Men, Women and Chainsaws. Sarah survives because of her apparent close affinity with the monsters themselves, she too has the potential to turn into a raving, mentally broken animal, the monsters it is revealed exist as a close family (Sarah being symbolically associated with motherhood and the family). Sarah#s violence and bitterness is in the end just a monstrous as the "crawlers# themselves, bitter at the loss of her own child and husband, she wipes out the crawler family too. The crawlers are not the only source of horror and anxiety in the film. Marshall, manipulates masked camera lenses, tight framing and shooting in almost pitch darkness to create a tangible claustrophobia that the audience undergo along with the trapped women. There are particularly long sequences, in which the women crawl through ever tightening spaces, and underneath rock pools in order to carry on through the caves in hope of escape or of escaping their monstrous pursuers. Marshall here also cinematically references Ridley Scott#s Alien, in his choice of tight framing and cross cutting between open and close spaces. His manipulation of the soundtrack also add to the burgeoning claustrophobia, by amplifying the women#s breathing it replicates ones own breath rebounding off walls that are closing in. The Descent was widely critically acclaimed, both in the UK and the US and is part of a recent resurgence of British Horror directors, such as Christopher Smith (Creep), Julian Richards (The Last Horror Movie, Summer Scars) Paul Andrew Williams (The Cottage) amongst others all leading a return to 70#s style gritty horror offering social commentaries on contemporary anxieties.

!

10

BRITISH HORROR FILM: A FOCUS ON STUDIOS: HAMMER KEY NAMES: James & Michael Carrerras, Will Hinds, Anthony Hinds, Jimmy Sangster, Terence Fisher

Hammer began trading as a film distribution company Exclusive (Enrique Carrerras and Will Hinds), and in 1947 James Carrerras (Enrique#s son) refounded the company as a production entity entitled Hammer. They began their production life making non-horrors that were largely unsuccessful - until their adaptation of Nigel Kneale#s critically acclaimed TV sci-fi serial The Quatermass Experiment (1953), and indeed Hammer staked claim to the first film adaptation of a TV serial. Hammer played up the controversy surrounding the films disturbing narrative, the film having been certified with an X certificate, they playfully retitled the film The Quatermass Xperiment. It#s success spawned sci-fi/ horror blend sequels and films in a similar vein (Quatermass II, Quatermass and the Pit, X - The Unknown). These were sci-fi dramas that arguably founded the British Horror movement post 1950#s. In 1957 Hammer made The Curse of Frankenstein the first of their period horrors, production was troubled from the start with financial and censorship issues. Hammer sought investment from American studios (as they had with the Quatermass and sci-fi series) their investors Eliot Hynes (AAP) were notoriously difficult and held back cash from the production, for fear that the project was a risky one - the first to challenge Universal#s version of the fames horror icon. Universal it seems were also, not too keen on Hammers variation on the Frankenstein story, and fought the film#s production all the way, staking claim to the Frankenstein name, on film at least. Their threats proved unfounded, Hammer#s version was far removed from Universal#s expressionist and literary origins, and Mary Shelley#s very European tale was not copyrighted. Hammer#s version, starring Peter Cushing and Christopher Lee (as the monster), began a career long pairing which often saw the two actors being touted as the "twin pillars of British Horror# or the "Geilgud and Olivier of Horror#. The film was however fought also by the BBFC for it#s lurid colours which, as far as they were concerned, made the horrors all the more gutteral and real, psychedelic, even,. Not only that, but Hammer#s, now distinctive, merging of sex and horror/violence, also proved too much for the chief censor John Trevelyan, and so started a continued battle between Hammer and the BBFC that continued throughout the studios early and then, groundbreaking productions.

!

11

BRITISH HORROR FILM: A FOCUS ON STUDIOS: HAMMER Critical reception of Hammer#s initial horror production was less than positive: The Tribune reported: "Depressing, degrading - for all lovers of the cinema only two words can describe this film [Curse of Frankenstein], Derek Hill in the Sight and Sound 1958/59 issue criticised the film and Hammer#s style for showing too much, instead of replying on suggestion for its terrorising moments, and thus Hammer would begin one of the major dividing and critical feature of horror academics and fans, what is more successful showing or not showing, begging a definition of the difference between the understanding of "terror# and "horror# being alternate fears. Audiences, until now had been used to largely monochromatic horror films, that were usually about the suggestion of violence and horror, the implicit rather than the explicit. Universal#s shadowy monsters were a world away from Hammer#s excesses of colour, blood, flesh and sex. Hammer#s films were vivid, dark fairytales introduced to audiences that were used to things being conservative, stale and colourless. Carrerras and Hinds are two key families in Hammer#s creation but they were often joined by a third entity - the role taken up by various talented creatives whose recurring names began to become associated with Hammer#s productions - main scriptwriter Jimmy Sangster was turned into a star, as was their main director Terence Fisher, art director Bernard Robinson, music composed James Bernard are just a few. After Curse and Dracula, Hammer became a factory for a series of moderately successful (then) exploitation horrors, made on tight budgets, with a repertory company of actors and small and sometimes over used locations and sets firstly at Bray Studios then in the early 70#s at Elstree Studios. Hammer, at its height, was more profitable than any other fully independent UK film company, in the 1950#s they had become what David Pirie has claimed "the King of the Indies#, and as such continually attracted American investment for their productions well into the 1970#s despite the initial problems encountered during the development of The Curse of Frankenstein and Dracula. They often went into deals with US distributors as well as financiers, to get films made and ensure their successful exhibition in America, but eventually lead to great financial pressure - Dracula made nearly $4 million dollars overnight - not for Hammer but mostly for Warners as distributors. Much of the criticism of Amicus productions was their non-British-ness asa Brit Horror Studios, but US involvement had already been part of British horror from very early in its conception. Continued sequelisation and repetitive narratives and titles (Frankenstein and Dracula titles were being repackaged at the rate of one per year) led to the public#s cultural boredom with Hammer productions, instead moving onto more racy and challenging horrors, such as those from Tigon. Hammer responded by "borrowing# the same explicit female nudity in their season of "Naked Lesbian Vampires# movies from the early - mid seventies (titles like, Twins of Evil, Carmilla and Lust for a Vampire were a Tudor Gates# scripted Carl Stein trilogy of such films). They had limited success, and Hammer eventually began branching out from horror to action fantasies like 10,000 Years BC, and Creatures the World Forgot (1970), the movement away from true suspense and horror, shocked Michael Carrerras, coupled with the films lack of success and the loss of Bray Studios (moving to Elstree instead), Britain was also no longer a cheap place to film. The company produced it#s last horror film To the Devil a Daughter in 1976 continuing on for 3 more years in distribution of old titles, the Hammer eventually went into receivership in 1979 and Carrerras resigned as director.

12 !

BRITISH HORROR FILM: A FOCUS ON STUDIOS : AMICUS KEY NAMES: Milton Subotsky, Max Rosenberg, Roy Ward Baker, Robert Bloch Second only to Hammer Films in terms of both British Horror cinema reputation and box office success, Amicus# productions displayed a curious mix of British Horror sensibilities, coupled with the influence and creative input of American finance, production and direction talent, often plundering American folklore and contemporary comic (or graphic novel) materials or writers (Robert Bloch (Psycho))for their adaptations. In truth Amicus productions displayed in their texts the changes that British Horror film was undergoing in the 60#s with a great deal of American financial investment into the Heritage of Horror from the British Isles. Amicus was founded by Milton Subotsky and Max Rosenberg, their films generally moved away from the previously successful Hammer period-horrors instead often setting their stories in present day setting and focusing on psychological thrillers or the supernatural. Amicus initially produced single story horror films foregrounding these elements, e.g. The Psychopath (1965) or The Skull (1965), which were relatively successful at the box office, but remained critically unpraised.

BRITISH HORROR FILM: A FOCUS ON STUDIOS : AMICUS

Amicus made a name for themselves by cornering the market in the revival of the anthology horror film or what has become known as the portmanteau horror. These films often highlight either their literary or pop cultural origins in their formal style and self-aware storytelling. Portmanteau horror films often revolve around a series of short tales of terror, either told by several characters in an initial connecting narrative (either they are stuck on a motorway, or locked in a haunted house or cellar for the evening through no fault of their own and then recount stories or true events to each other which then form the collection of mini-tales), or are presented by a "horrific host#, via such characters as "The Cryptkeeper# taken from American EC Comics "Tales from the Crypt# from which Amicus took their inspiration (and were indeed, one of the first companies to develop a comic to horror film adaptation). This, by no means, was no new feat - Amicus simply resurrected the long dead format from Dead of Night (1945) which was incredibly successful both financially and critically, such a successful format saw the release of titles like: Dr Terrors House of Horrors (1964); Torture Garden (1967); The House that Dripped Blood (1970); Vault of Horror () and Asylum (1972). Portmanteau horrors often resolved their fragmented narratives in a final twist, which often revealed a link between the preceding stories also taken from Dead of Night, the twist ranged from revealing that one of the characters is the killer, that all the characters are dreaming or indeed that all the characters are indeed dead. Amicus productions are often overlooked as examples of British horror from the 60#s - 70#s, because of their clear American connections, often being considered by purist Horror Critics as decidedly un-British, or a hybridised form of Brit-Horror, sanitised and sold off to US consumers eager to buy into the Heritage Horrors that Hammer had made popular in the previous decade. However Amicus productions can equally viewed to represent a snapshot of British horror film production history manifest in the films themselves (in style, plot, direction and narrative origins) as it inevitably collided with American culture for survival. A fate which also met Hammer Productions and Tigon. Amicus productions reveal British Horror hungry for collaboration, inspiration and investment in order to survive. A struggle that went in vain, when Amicus ceased filmmaking after their adaptation of The Land that Time Forgot in 1975, a fate which film historians have often suggested could have been avoided should Amicus have been able to move with the times in the early 70#s, embracing new British exploitation directors and trends.

13 !

BRITISH BRITISH HORROR HORROR FILM: FILM: A A FOCUS FOCUS ON ON STUDIOS STUDIOS :: TIGON TIGON KEY NAMES: Tony Tenser, Michael Klinger, Stanley Long (Cinematographer), Michael Reeves Tigon Pictures were a British production company formed in 1966 by Tony Tenser. Born out of a previous film production partnership between Michael Klinger and Tenser (who together had made Repulsion (Polanski, GB 1968) a tale of a young woman’s mental breakdown in gothic 60’s London. Both Klinger and Tenser emerged from a career on the striptease scene in London’s SOHO and began making films in the eventual period that saw an end to Hammer’s clench on the horror studio market. Instead Klinger and Tenser’s films built their reputation and their films on ‘shocks and titillation’, and were at the forefront of the British exploitation film market. Tenser and Klinger relied on previous relationships with XXX film and peep show theatres, to show their films during the daytime, and on the private cinema club circuit in London. Having split with Klinger, Tigon British Pictures made superior horrors such as THE SORCERERS, WITCHFINDER GENERAL and BLOOD ON SATAN’S CLAW, and produced suspenseful, semiexploitation horror films that foregrounded a sexually permissive youth culture (either in historical or contemporary setttings) often with extensive female nudity juxtaposed with sometimes graphic violence. As a result TIGON films and Tenser in particular would often relish their films X certificate status, using it as a marketing tool. TIGON PRODUCTIONS were often seen as a major challenge to HAMMER STUDIOS who had cornered the market in lustful, lurid sexually charged yet very ‘British’ horror as a successful export to US distributors. Largely through Reeves’ auteurist direction which influenced Tigon’s other filmmakers, their horrors would often be downbeat, morally ambiguous, dark, sensual tales often using locations (both Urban and Rural) to symbolise and add to the terror and horror of the films narratives, world away from the theatrics and studio bound stages of Hammer’s oeuvre. Although Hammer and Amicus, often coupled sexuality with horror and violence it would often do so in an implicit way, Hammer’s 60’s titles did not feature any explicit female nudity. Tigon, on the other hand foregrounded nudity within their films. As a result, and due to waning audience figures, Hammer began adopting Tigon’s unashamed presentation of female flesh and explicit sexuality. Their early 70’s cycle of ‘lesbian vampire’ movies (such as Twins of Evil) borrowed heavily from Tigon titles like The Virgin Witch (below) and took Tigon’s striptease lead females, turning them into a softcore, soft-focus sexual extravaganza of horror that had limited success. Due to Tigon’s close connections with XXX theatre’s and strip-tease venues, and their associations with quality directors such as Polanski and Reeves, their films were often tagged Art House Horrors.

!

14

BRITISH HORROR FILM: TASKS & TEXTUAL ANALYSIS TASK 1: VAULT OF HORROR, AMICUS & THE PORTMANTEAU FILM -! !

GIVE EXAMPLES OF HOW AMICUS# PORTMANTEAU FILM STYLE/FORMAT IS ACHIEVED IN VAULT OF HORROR OR THE HOUSE THAT DRIPPED BLOOD.

-! ! !

CAN YOU LIST SOME EXAMPLES OF AMERICAN/US INFLUENCES IN THE FILM, THESE CAN !RANGE FROM BRITISH CHARACTER STEREOTYPES, INTRODUCTION OF AMERICAN CHARACTERS TO LOCATIONS USED?

-! !

HOW DOES VAULT OF HORROR TYPICALLY PRESENT ITSELF AS TYPICALLY BRITISH (OR AMERICAN) FOR CONSUMPTION FOR EITHER AMERICAN OR BRITISH !AUDIENCES?

TASK 2: TEXTUAL ANALYSIS: FRANKENSTEIN MUST BE DESTROYED -! ! ! !

PERFORM SOME BASIC TEXTUAL ANALYSIS ON THE FILMS OPENING SEQUENCE. GIVE EXAMPLES OF HOW THE INITIAL PRESENTATION OF BARON FRANKENSTEIN INDICATES THIS NEW VARIATION OF THIS ICONIC CHARACTER AND HOW THE AUDIENCE SHOULD BE ALIGNED?

-! ! !

HOW DOES THE DIRECTOR USE JUXTAPOSITION IN THE SCENE AND IN THE FILM AS A WHOLE TO OFFER COMMENT ON THE BARON#S MORALS AND THE CULTURE IN WHICH HE LIVES.

-! ! !

HOW IS ANNA SPENGLER#S CHARACTER REPRESENTED IN THE FILM. HOW DOES SHE !COMPARE WITH THE FILM#S OTHER FEMALE CHARACTERS. HOW DOES THE BARON TREAT WOMEN, DOES THE FILM OFFER ANY COMMENT ON THIS?

TASK 3: BLOOD ON SATAN’S CLAW: REPRESENTATION OF FAMILY AND GENDER -! ! ! ! !

LOOK AT THE FILM#S REPRESENTATION OF WOMEN AND CHILDREN, LOOKING AT THE FILM !GIVE EXAMPLES OF HOW TIGON#S REPRESENTATION OF WOMEN IS PROBLEMATIC, IS IT !POSITIVELY OR NEGATIVELY PRESENTED? HOW IS THIS TYPICAL OF FILMS OF THE TIME? ! DO YOU THINK THAT THIS IS REPRESENTATIVE OF CULTURAL ATTITUDES TOWARDS WOMEN AT THE TIME?

-! ! ! !

HOW ARE FAMILIES AND CHILDREN REPRESENTED IN THE FILM? AS AN EXAMPLE OF EARLY 70#S FAMILY HORROR, GIVE YOU OWN EXAMPLES OF INFLUENCES IN THIS NEW MOVEMENT OF FAMILY ORIENTED HORROR FROM OTHER US OR BRITISH PRODUCTIONS.

STUDIO TASKS COMPARE & CONTRAST: -! ! ! !

COMPARE AND CONTRAST: HAMMER FILMS LATE 60#S AND EARLY 70#S PRODUCTIONS (THE DEVIL RIDES OUT / FRANKENSTEIN MUST BE DESTROYED) WITH THE NEW MOVEMENT OF !HORROR DIRECTORS NOTABLY PETE WALKER (FRIGHTMARE) OR MICHAEL REEVES (WITCHFINDER GENERAL).

! ! ! ! !

PICK ONE HAMMER FILM AND COMPARE/CONTRAST WITH EITHER DIRECTOR. ! GIVE EXAMPLES OF HOW EACH FILM IS TYPICAL OF THE DIRECTOR/STUDIOS WORKS. HOW ARE THESE FILMS REPRESENTATIVE OF LATE 60#S EARLY 70#S DISILLUSIONMENT WITHIN BRITISH CULTURE? DO YOU THINK THAT EITHER FILM IS INFLUENCED BY THE OTHER, GIVE EXAMPLES.

!

15

NOTES :

_____________________________________________ _____________________________________________ _____________________________________________ _____________________________________________ _____________________________________________ _____________________________________________ _____________________________________________ _____________________________________________ _____________________________________________ _____________________________________________ _____________________________________________ _____________________________________________ _____________________________________________ _____________________________________________ _____________________________________________ _____________________________________________ _____________________________________________ _____________________________________________ © Film Education Consortium for Hertfordshire/University of Hertfordshire !

16