Price, Cushing or Lee?

[MikeBSG]

As a companion to the Karloff, Lugosi or Chaney (Jr.) thread, I'm launching this one in honor of the second unholy triumvirate of horror movies.

So who do you prefer? Vincent Price, from dark and sinister Missouri; Peter Cushing, who broke into films harrassing Laurel and Hardy in a Hollywood version of Oxford; or Christopher Lee, who nearly got his hand cut off by a drunken Errol Flynn and went on to play Johnny Depp's father?

[jdb1]

That's a tougher question to answer than the first set, Mike, because these three gentlemen are much more similar to each other.

I'd say Price comes first, merely because his body of work was much more varied and we got to see many facets of his abilities. I've never cared very much for Cushing - just a personal, visceral reaction. I like Lee much more, and after I saw him being funny years ago on Saturday Night Live, I developed even more respect for him.

[feaito]

It's indeed tough to choose between them because they are all very talented, but I also go with Vincent Price and the reason is that I've seen him in such a variety of roles and films over the decades, from "Tower of London" (1939), "Leave Her to Heaven" (1945), "Keys of the Kingdom" (1944) "The 3 Musketeers" (1948)and "Laura" (1944) to "The Fly" (1958), "The Tingler" (1959), "The Tomb of Ligeia" (1965) and "The Fall of The House of Usher" (1960) and "Edward Scissorhands" (1990). Christopher Lee comes second and Mr. Cushing, whom I only associate with Baron Von Frankenstein and Sherlock Holmes, third.

[cinemalover]

I've always felt that Cushing was the most talented actor of the three, though his chosen roles didn't always allow him to display his acting prowess. Lee could be the most classically scary and his role as Dracula, among others, gave him that opportunity. I am a really big fan of many of the Hammer Horror vehicles that star one or both of these gentlemen. That being said, Price has just had too many fun roles that I enjoy not to consider him my favorite of that bunch.

Everything from the Dr. Phibes movies to all the Poe adaptions, The Mad Magician and The House of Wax. He even had the ability to make really bad movies watchable like The Last Man on Earth. Combine all his move credits with his long and impressive list of guest-starring stints on a wide variety of televison shows, and he is always a face I look forward to seeing. It didn't hurt any that he had no problems poking fun at his own image.

[MikeBSG]

I can't help but have warm feelings for Vincent Price, because he was just in so much stuff. He was Egghead on "Batman," he was a guest on Red Skelton and Carol Burnett, his voice was on Michael Jackson's "Thriller," he brought Johnny Depp to life in "Edward Scissorhands" and menaced Steve Martin in "Dead Men Don't Wear Plaid." Disliking Vincent Price is somehow un-American.

As for his horror films, he was terrific in 1939 "Tower of London" and "House of Wax" showed he could be a splendid horror star. I really enjoy "Fall of the House of Usher," "Pit and the Pendulum," "Masque of the Red Death," "The Abominable Dr. Phibes" and "Theater of Blood." I enjoy him in the two Night Gallery appearances, "Class of '99" and "Return of the Sorcerer."

Movies in which Price is good but the films themselves have problems are "Tales of Terror," (Price is wonderful in the "Black Cat" episode), "The Haunted Palace," and "The Conqueror Worm." (I know I just committed horror film heresy there.)

Still, I prefer Peter Cushing.

[cinemalover]

Mike,
I always appreciate your insights. I was wondering what movies in particular make you prefer Cushing (not that there is a wrong answer in choosing any of these three fine actors)? Everything I've ever read about him suggests that he was one of the true gentlemen of cinema.

[MikeBSG]

I guess I prefer Cushing because he wasn't as ubiquitous as Price (at least in the US) and thus there was an aura of mystery about him as opposed to Price. With Price, there were occasions when you knew that he thought the material he was in was rather ridiculous. With Cushing, you usually got the impression he was dead serious about the material. (Cushing could be funny, as in his first two Frankenstein films, but he did it without raising an eyebrow at the audience, so to speak.)

Also, I am impressed at the athletic vigor Cushing brought to his films. He apparently went to Hollywood in the late Thirties determined to be the next Douglas Fairbanks. He failed at that, but he did a lot of athletic things in his movies: leaping on the table and running down it to leap at the curtains in "Horror of Dracula." Think too of the climactic fights in "Brides of Dracula" and "The Gorgon." Even as late as "Frankenstein and the Monster from Hell," he leaps on a table. He brought a physicality to his roles that Price never did.

This is not to say that Cushing never put a foot wrong. He utterly fails to impress me in "The House That Dripped Blood" and he is bland in "The Mummy." But usually he did good work.

My favorite Cushing peformances: Baron Frankenstein in "Curse of Frankenstein" and "Frankenstein Must Be Destroyed" and "Frankenstein and the Monster from Hell." Cushing doesn't just repeat the same interpretation but he shows how age as affected the arrogant genius.

As "good guy" Cushing as Van Helsing in "Horror of Dracula" and as the General in "The Vampire Lovers." Again, Van Helsing's fight against Dracula is in the nature of an intellectual challenge. The General is driven by the need for revenge.

Most emotional Cushing performance: "The Skull." (It is fascinating to see the usually articulate Cushing lose the ability to speak.)

Most frightening Cushing performance: "Asylum" (As the father in the "weird tailor" story, he clearly will do anything to get his way.)

Other good roles are in "Tales from the Crypt," "The Creeping Flesh," and "And Now the Screaming Starts."

[cinemalover]

Thanks Mike,
You make a compelling argument for the wonderful Mr. Cushing. Each of the three (Cushing, Lee and Price) certainly has a filmography well worth exploring. I recently bought a boxed set of of the MGM "Scream" collection featuring Vincent Price. I am going to enjoy revisiting all 7 of the included features (Tales of Terror, Twice Told Tales, Both of the
Dr. Phibes movies, Theater of Blood, Madhouse and Witchfinder General). I would sure like to see some company release equally nice sets filled with Cushing or Lee movies.

[MikeBSG]

I guess the curse of Cushing and Lee is that the Hammer and Amicus films were released by a variety of US companies, so the chances of getting a coherent "Package" of Cushing or Lee movies is pretty limited.

"Curse of Frankenstein" was released by Warner Brothers in the US. Supposedly, the New York office of Warner Bros. insisted on releasing the movie over the extreme dislike of Jack Warner. (Or that after the movie was released, Jack Warner came to be embarrassed by the movie and hated it.) Whatever the reason, the next Hammer Frankenstein picture, "Revenge of Frankenstein" was released by Columbia. The third, "Evil of Frankenstein" was released by Universal. The final one, "Frankenstein and the Monster from Hell" was released by Paramount. It is a real mess.

[MikeBSG]

I just watched "Tales from the Crypt" and "Vault of Horror" this week. I've never really been a big fan of EC style horror, I guess because it tells the viewer that if you don't murder people nothing bad can happen to you, and you can relax and watch the other guy get torn apart by zombies.

Anyway, in those two movies, the only bit of heart and pathos came in the story about Peter Cushing as the persecuted garbageman. It came like a breath of fresh air in "Tales from the Crypt" and pointed out how sterile and phony the rest of the movie was.

I far prefer two of the films Amicus made from Robert Bloch stories, "The House That Dripped Blood" and "Asylum." They aren't moralistic.

[cinemalover]

That Christopher Lee guy sure is resilient. Yesterday I took the family to see The Golden Compass, and there he was, bigger than life itself. He was just a background character, though I suspect his character is being set up for more play in the sequel.

[jdb1]

That Christopher Lee guy sure is resilient. Yesterday I took the family to see The Golden Compass, and there he was, bigger than life itself. He was just a background character, though I suspect his character is being set up for more play in the sequel.

Resilient is the word. Considering his age (85) he is in remarkably fine fettle. It's the Italian blood, of course - generations of olive oil consumption in the genes keeps us young and dewy.