leeper@mtgzz.UUCP (m.r.leeper) (11/05/85)
THE DOCTOR AND THE DEVILS
A film review by Mark R. Leeper
Capsule review: Freddie Francis's retelling of the
story of the Burke and Hare murders is a 1960's horror film
that somehow got made in the 1980's. It is a good film but
nothing very exceptional.
One of Britain's most respected directors of photography is Freddie
Francis. He did the photography for films like ROOM AT THE TOP, THE
INNOCENTS (a superb job), NIGHT MUST FALL, and THE FRENCH LIEUTENANT'S
WOMAN. Not quite so distinguished is his career as a film director,
predominantly directing horror films such as EVIL OF FRANKENSTEIN, DR.
TERROR'S HOUSE OF HORRORS, THE SKULL, DRACULA HAS RISEN FROM THE GRAVE,
TROG, TALES FROM THE CRYPT, and ASYLUM. His dream through his horror film
days was to make a film from Dylan Thomas's screenplay called "The Doctor
and the Devils." During his work with horror film companies Hammer, Amicus,
and Tyburn he was unable to sell the idea. Years later he did sell the idea
to Mel Brooks, who previously had produced ELEPHANT MAN, a film which verged
on Gothic horror. That is why Francis is once again directing horror.
THE DOCTOR AND THE DEVILS is really little more than a good horror film
of the style made in Britain in the 1960's. In fact, it is a virtual remake
of John Gilling's 1959 film FLESH AND THE FIENDS, with Timothy Dalton in
Peter Cushing's role and Jonathan Pryce in the part originally played by
Donald Pleasence. The film tells the true story of the Burke and Hare
murders that occurred in Edinburgh, Scotland, in the 1820's. Burke and Hare
(here renamed Fallon and Broom) would rob graves to supply cadavers to the
local medical school. When the demand outstripped the supply, they hit upon
a process to convert the wretched of the streets of the city into valuable
medical cadavers. The law, however, contended that the generation of
cadavers was an anti-social activity, and Burke and Hare became notorious
criminals.
A reasonably good script makes Fallon and Broom's crimes seem a logical
progression from stealing a corpse from a grave-robber to grave-robbing to
euthanasia to cold-blooded murder. It does not give in to the temptation of
making them seem like boogeymen, but comprehensible characters. Nor is the
doctor who apparently knowingly closes his eyes to the source of his
cadavers seem all wrong either. The script allows for some discussion of
the morality of grave-robbing for the knowledge to help prevent human
suffering.
As might be expected of a Freddie Francis film, the photography is
quite atmospheric. Unfortunately his efforts are somewhat undermined by his
budget. The city sets occasionally seem claustrophobic, making it obvious
the film was shot on a small indoor set rather than in a full-size city.
Realistically, but a drawback nonetheless, much of the dialogue is
indistinct and hence lost on the audience, including the important last
lines of the film.
It is interesting that THE DOCTOR AND THE DEVILS is playing in art
houses and being treated as if it were a film of unusual quality. Placed
side by side with FLESH AND THE FIENDS, one would be hard-pressed to choose
which is really the better treatment of the story. If the film had been
released in, say, 1962, it would have gone completely unnoticed. Give it a
+1 on the -4 to +4 scale.
Mark R. Leeper
...ihnp4!mtgzz!leeper