{"id":21143,"date":"2022-05-18T18:27:39","date_gmt":"2022-05-18T18:27:39","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.horrifiedmagazine.co.uk\/?p=21143"},"modified":"2023-09-26T08:22:17","modified_gmt":"2023-09-26T08:22:17","slug":"theatre-of-blood-1973","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.horrifiedmagazine.co.uk\/film\/theatre-of-blood-1973\/","title":{"rendered":"Theatre of Blood (1973)"},"content":{"rendered":"\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t

Film<\/p>\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t

'That damned editor's cut the best part of my review!'<\/h4>\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t

Theatre of Blood<\/h1>\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t

Paul Lewis revisits Vincent Price’s vengeful thespian in Douglas Hickox’s blackly comic 1973 horror, Theatre of Blood…<\/p>\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/section>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t
<\/div>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t

Once a late night staple on UK television, Douglas Hickox\u2019s blackly comic horror picture Theatre of Blood<\/em> (1973) is perhaps best framed as a variation on the formula established in the Dr Phibes films, The Abominable Dr Phibes<\/em> (Robert Fuest, 1971) and Dr Phibes Rises Again<\/em> (Robert Fuest, 1972):<\/strong> in all three pictures, Vincent Price plays a vengeful man who is believed by others to be dead; Price\u2019s character applies the tools of his trade in order to exact revenge upon those he believes to have wronged him, leading to a series of vignettes involving deliciously twisted methods of revenge. Where in The Abominable Dr Phibes<\/a>,<\/em><\/strong> the titular Dr Phibes (Price) delivered his revenge using techniques inspired by the ten plagues of Egypt, in Theatre of Blood<\/em><\/strong> Lionheart (Price) despatches the theatre critics who denied him a prestigious award by involving them in enactments of murders from a number of Shakespeare\u2019s plays. As Leon Hunt notes, in each of these films \u2013 and in Jim Clark\u2019s later Madhouse,<\/em><\/strong> released a year later, which also features Price in a narrative that bears similarities with the Phibes pictures and Theatre of Blood<\/em><\/strong> \u2013 \u2018Price returns \u2013 from the dead, from the \u201cpast\u201d \u2013 to avenge himself on modernity.\u2019[1]<\/strong> The films, Hunt argues, emphasise Price\u2019s \u2018potentially anachronistic persona\u2019: in Theatre of Blood,<\/em><\/strong> Price plays \u2018a critically unfashionable, scenery-chewing Shakespearian actor\u2019; similarly, in Madhouse,<\/em><\/strong> he plays \u2018an outmoded horror star attempting a comeback.\u2019[2]<\/strong><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Theatre of Blood<\/em>\u2019<\/em><\/strong>s narrative revolves around Edward Lionheart (Price), a stage actor who in 1970 was denied the Critics\u2019 Circle award for best actor. Staging his own death, Lionheart returns two years later to exact his revenge on the members of the Critics\u2019 Circle: Trevor Dickman (Harry Andrews), Chloe Moon (Coral Browne), Oliver Larding (Robert Coote), Solomon Psaltery (Jack Hawkins), George Maxwell (Michael Hordern), Horace Sprout (Arthur Lowe), Meredith Merridew (Robert Morley), Hector Snipe (Dennis Price) and Peregrine Devlin (Ian Hendry). Lionheart\u2019s murders are inspired by scenes from the plays of Shakespeare and, in committing these acts of revenge, Lionheart is aided by his daughter Edwina (Diana Rigg) and a troupe of winos. He is pursued by Inspector Boot (Milo O\u2019Shea) and Boot\u2019s assistant Sergeant Dogge (Eric Sykes).<\/p>\n

Traditionally, perhaps as a hangover from Victorian literature with its dualism of city\/countryside (the former usually depicted as a place of rationalism, science and progress; the later a space associated with superstition and ignorance), the British horror film had often focused on rural settings and the superstitions bred within them. For example, films such as Plague of the Zombies<\/em><\/strong> (John Gilling, 1966) and Dracula: Prince of Darkness<\/em><\/strong> (Terence Fisher, 1966) depict educated urban folk who encounter nightmarish events whilst travelling through the countryside. Many of these films feature a period setting, but notably Robin Hardy\u2019s The Wicker Man,<\/em><\/strong> released the same year as Theatre of Blood, relocates this type of narrative into the present day. This narrative trope may be said to look back to the classic horror tales of writers like M R James: James\u2019 stories usually featured his gentleman-scholar protagonists travelling to rural villages or seaside towns and encountering ancient horrors there. For example, in \u2018A Warning to the Curious\u2019<\/em><\/strong> (M.R. James, 1925), the amateur archaeologist Paxton travels to the (fictional) Norfolk coastal town of Seaburg and discovers an ancient Anglo-Saxon crown, but finds that owing to the discovery he is pursued by a vengeful spirit.<\/p>\n

Nick Freeman cites Theatre of Blood,<\/em><\/strong> along with Dracula A.D. 1972<\/em><\/strong><\/a> (Alan Gibson, 1972) and Death Line<\/em><\/strong><\/a> (Gary Sherman, 1973), as one of a group of British horror films that attempted to buck this trend, relocating horror within the metropolis.[3]<\/strong> In the 1960s, London had been depicted within British cinema as a space of social change and class\/gender conflict, in films such as Alfie<\/em><\/strong> (Lewis Gilbert, 1964) and The Knack\u2026 and How to Get It<\/em><\/strong> (Richard Lester, 1965). The city had been the location for crime films, spy pictures, social issue films, and comedies, but \u2018its potential as a setting for horror films remained largely untapped,\u2019 save for a few notable exceptions such as The Sorcerers<\/em><\/strong> (Michael Reeves, 1968).[4]<\/strong> London-set horror films of the early 1970s, such as Death Line<\/em><\/strong> and Theatre of Blood,<\/em><\/strong> attempted \u2018to redress the balance [\u2026] reveal[ing modern] London\u2019s potential as a city of nightmare.\u2019[5]<\/strong><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

As with many horror films, Theatre of Blood<\/em><\/strong> explores the weight of the past, or rather it shows how the past is in conflict with present-day attitudes. Most obviously, this is depicted within the film in the conflict between Lionheart\u2019s approach to acting, and his vow to only play roles in the plays of Shakespeare, and the attitudes of the critics: as Freeman notes, \u2018Price takes the Shakespearean canon back to the world of Victorian melodrama, and then into a bloody confrontation with modernity.\u2019[6]<\/strong> The film opens with references to the past: the titles sequence features Michael Lewis\u2019 mournful score accompanying brief fragments of footage from early silent cinematic adaptations of Shakespeare\u2019s plays, highlighting the theatrical characteristics of early cinema: in doing so, this montage offers a eulogy for this type of traditional theatrical performance which, during the mid-20th Century, had come to be seen as old-fashioned owing to \u2018new\u2019 acting styles such as the Method. (The Method was, of course, associated with the big screen, and for most audiences represented in performances by American actors such as Marlon Brando, Montgomery Clift, James Dean, and Rod Steiger.)<\/p>\n

Within Theatre of Blood\u2019<\/em><\/strong>s story, the classical, theatrical approach to acting is embodied by Lionheart, whose performance style is criticised by the other characters (both the professional critics who denied Lionheart the award, but also Inspector Boot, who is investigating the murders) as \u2018vigorous\u2019. Of course, the metafictional implications of this are readily apparent: the criticisms of Lionheart\u2019s classically dramatic performances mirror the criticisms that were often levelled against Vincent Price himself. One may recall the well-documented interactions between Price and Michael Reeves, who had directed Price in Matthew Hopkins: Witchfinder General<\/em><\/strong> (1968). By all accounts, Reeves battled during the production of that film to encourage Price \u2013 who was forced on Reeves by the American coproducers, AIP \u2013 to tone down his acting style. Price later recollected that \u2018Reeves didn\u2019t really know how to deal with actors. He would stop me and say, \u201cDon\u2019t move your head like that.\u201d And I would say, \u201cWhat do you mean?\u201d And he\u2019d say, \u201cThere, you\u2019re doing it again. Don\u2019t do that.\u201d [\u2026.] Afterwards, I realized what he wanted was a low-key, very laid-back, menacing performance. He did get it, but I was fighting with him every step of the way. Had I known what he wanted, I could have cooperated.\u2019[7]<\/strong><\/p>\n

The first shot that follows Theatre of Blood\u2019<\/em><\/strong>s opening titles offers an ironic commentary on the \u2018relevance\u2019 of classical theatre for the modern day: through a window, we are shown an image of Tower Bridge as vehicles pass over it. The camera singles out one vehicle, a removal van labelled \u2018Shakespeare\u2019s Removal, Fulham.\u2019 The camera zooms out to reveal that the window through which we have been looking is in the home of George Maxwell, who as he is reading the Financial Times asserts, in a comment that connects the theme of theatrical performance with the act of murder, \u2018That damned editor\u2019s cut the best part of my review [\u2026.] My most provocative comment too, where I said the leading lady attacked the role with both hands, [and] strangled it to death.\u2019 (The newspaper Maxwell reads is dated the 15th of March, the Ides of March \u2013 which has significance later, when Maxwell is murdered by Lionheart\u2019s troupe of winos in a perverse interpretation of Julius Caesar.)<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

New and experimental models of theatre are subtly criticised within the film itself: in the prelude to the murder of Horace Sprout, Sprout and his wife (Joan Hickson) return home from a visit to the theatre, with Mrs Sprout complaining, \u2018I don\u2019t understand these modern playwrights. What we saw this evening didn\u2019t make sense to me at all.\u2019 Dickman\u2019s murder sees him lured to the old Burbage theatre by Edwina Lionheart, posing as a young woman who is associated with a theatre group for whom Sprout has been offering criticism. In Sprout\u2019s absence, Edwina asks Dickman to watch her experimental theatre group rehearse. Dickman, driven by lust for Edwina, agrees. At the theatre, Edwina tells Dickman that the performance is \u2018living theatre with audience participation\u2019: he will be asked to play the part of Antonio in The Merchant of Venice.<\/em><\/strong> As Lionheart, playing the role of Shylock, advances on Dickman to claim his pound of flesh, Dickman notes, \u2018Living theatre, yes, but isn\u2019t this going a bit too far?\u2019 Interestingly, Lionheart\u2019s later Othello-<\/em><\/strong>inspired act of revenge against Psaltery seems once again to refer to the concept of \u2018living theatre.\u2019 The sequence sees Lionheart using Psaltery\u2019s sexual jealousy to goad Psaltery into murdering his wife (Diana Dors), effectively making Psaltery an active part of the \u2018performance\u2019 \u2013 even to the point that Psaltery, as he suffocates his wife with a pillow, mutters Othello\u2019s famous line to Desdemona (\u2018Down, strumpet\u2019) without any prompting from Lionheart.<\/p>\n

Aside from its subtle digs at modern experimental theatre, Theatre of Blood<\/em><\/strong> offers a jokey criticism of modern styles of acting such as the Method. A flashback to the meeting of the Critics\u2019 Circle after the awards ceremony in which Lionheart was snubbed shows an enraged Lionheart entering the room to declare that the critics \u2018deliberately humiliated me in front of the press, my crowd, my peers.\u2019 He opines that they (the critics) \u2018gave the award to a twitching, mumbling boy who can barely grunt his way through an incomprehensible performance\u2019: Lionheart\u2019s description of the actor who won the award ticks all the boxes for stereotypes associated with Method actors such as Clift, Brando, and Dean, who \u2018were regarded [in their performances] as mumbling and speaking in a generally inarticulate manner.\u2019[8]<\/strong> Meanwhile, in the context of the dynamic world of modern theatre, during his career Lionheart refused to appear in anything other than Shakespeare and stuck rigidly to the classical approach to stage acting. When Devlin first meets with Edwina, she reminds him that Devlin never wrote a good review of her father\u2019s performances. Devlin reminds her that her father would only appear in Shakespeare\u2019s plays; Devlin asserts that \u2018A truly great actor illuminates the present as well as the past. I attacked your father because I thought I could goad him into the Twentieth Century.\u2019<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

The film highlights the vices of the critics, embodied comically in their names (the gluttonous Larding; the lustful Dickman), thus depicting them as objects worthy of the audience\u2019s scorn and, to some extent, deserving of their status as the targets of Lionheart\u2019s twisted revenge. In undercutting the pomposity of these high-minded critics, the film places in juxtaposition the high culture represented by the Critics Circle, and Lionheart\u2019s own brand of populist theatre \u2013 with the winos who follow Lionheart functioning as both the populist\/proletarian audience for his \u2018performances\u2019 and (in the words of Leon Hunt) \u2018a kind of ultra-violent repertory company.\u2019[9]<\/strong> Ultimately, in terms of the film\u2019s conflicts between the past and the present, and between populism and high culture, the audience is led to sympathise with the former (in both instances) by the energy and vitality of Price\u2019s performance as Lionheart: as Hunt argues, \u2018how can one side with modernity when the \u201cpast\u201d is embodied in such persuasively flamboyant and wittily elegant form?\u2019[10]<\/strong><\/p>\n

Ironically, although a number of the murders feature Lionheart in traditional Shakespearian garb (as Richard III, for example), in some of the murders Lionheart updates the roles that he plays: for example, as \u2018Butch,\u2019 the effeminate hairdresser who Lionheart masquerades as in his Henry VI,<\/em> Part 1<\/i><\/strong>-inspired moment of revenge against Chloe Moon, who Lionheart sentences to burn like Joan of Arc in Shakespeare\u2019s play. \u2018Hello, I\u2019m Butch,\u2019 Lionheart, sporting a huge ginger Afro wig, asserts in a deliciously camp tone as he introduces himself to Moon. Ironically, despite his refusal during his career to appear in any plays other than Shakespeare\u2019s, in his \u2018performances\u2019 Lionheart deviates from the plays substantially: as Hunt notes, Lionheart \u2018rewrites Shakespeare by adapting his murders into elaborate serial killings \u2013 Shylock does get his pound of flesh this time.\u2019[11]<\/strong> After Lionheart sends Dickman\u2019s heart in a presentation box to Devlin, the recipient notes to Inspector Boot, \u2018It\u2019s Lionheart all right. Only he would have the temerity to rewrite Shakespeare.\u2019<\/p>\n

The emphasis on theatrics and performance is enabled by the anonymity of the urban environment: after his \u2018death,\u2019 Lionheart is dragged from the Thames by the winos that live and scavenge on its banks. Smothered in mud, he is indistinguishable from them as they attempt to strip what they believe to be his corpse of his clothes and belongings. However, on his \u2018resurrection\u2019 Lionheart is distinguished from the winos not by the visible trappings of wealth \u2013 which have become smothered in mud (including the trophy that he takes with him as he jumps into the Thames, and which remains firmly clasped in his hand) \u2013 but by his mastery of language (he quotes The Tempest:<\/em><\/strong> \u2018O, brave new world, That hath such people in\u2019t\u2019; by contrast, the winos grunt like apes) and his face, which the winos attempt to clean by pouring the meths they have been drinking over his head. During the murders, he dons numerous disguises, and despite the theatricality of Lionheart\u2019s performances, none of Lionheart\u2019s victims see through these disguises until he reveals his true identity to them: perhaps he is indeed a far better actor than they claimed him to be. Additionally, his daughter Edwina spends much of the film assisting him whilst in disguise as a young male hippy; again, this is a disguise that remains unnoticed by the other characters within the film \u2013 until, that is, she reveals her true identity during the climax. Furthermore, at several points Edwina, already masquerading as the male hippy, dons another disguise on top of that one, so as to play a part in her father\u2019s acts of vengeance: during the Cymbeline<\/em><\/strong> inspired murder, for example, Edwina is disguised as the male hippy, who in turn plays the role of a television chef. As Freeman notes, Edwina\u2019s employment as a make-up artist for films \u2018is another witty hint that, in the modern city, all is not as it seems.\u2019[12]<\/strong><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Nick Freeman has also highlighted the ways in which Theatre of Blood<\/em><\/strong> uses various locations within London as theatrical backdrops, from the warehouse which serves as the site for the first murder, to the wine cellar in which Lionheart enacts the murder of the Duke of Clarence from Richard III<\/em><\/strong>. The film juxtaposes the Burbage Theatre that Lionheart makes his hideout \u2013 filmed in the largely derelict Putney Hippodrome, which Hickox had also used in his previous film Sitting Target<\/em><\/strong> (1972) \u2013 with the penthouse of Peninsula Heights, overlooking the Thames, in which the Critics\u2019 Circle meet: many sequences alternate between the two locations as, in the theatre, Lionheart plans his crimes and, in the penthouse, the critics react to the news of the death of another member of their group. London is therefore depicted as a theatrical space, in which people perform their identities and play multiple roles \u2013 not just Lionheart but also the critics who he so despises.<\/p>\n

There are notable similarities between Theatre of Blood<\/em><\/strong> and Pete Walker\u2019s contemporaneous The Flesh and Blood Show<\/em><\/strong> (1972). Like Theatre of Blood, The Flesh and Blood Show<\/em><\/strong> is a horror film that focuses on theatrical traditions. Walker\u2019s film takes its setting as a dilapidated theatre that is situated on the pier of a seaside town, where a group of young actors are despatched, one by one, by a mysterious murderer. Like Theatre of Blood, The Flesh and Blood Show<\/em><\/strong> foregrounds its theatrical setting, the derelict theatre in which the murderer resides, and thus highlights the conflict between this symbol of the past and the \u2018new\u2019 world of the 1970s – symbolised by the young actors who are hired to perform there. Traditional theatre (the killer is obsessed with Shakespeare\u2019s Othello) is contrasted with the new: the young actors who have been called to perform at the seaside theatre seem to be rehearsing a very \u2018modern\u2019 type of performance that incorporates mime and dance. The young actors are also associated, albeit loosely, with countercultural trends through their liberal approach to sex: their sexual promiscuity is one of the triggers for the killer, whose first victim was his adulterous wife. Despite their similar narratives, however, The Flesh and Blood Show<\/em><\/strong> and Theatre of Blood<\/em><\/strong> are differentiated by the former\u2019s low budget trappings, and more concentrated emphasis on sex and nudity. Nevertheless, like Hickox\u2019s film, The Flesh and Blood Show<\/em><\/strong> \u2013 in the words of Peter Hutchings \u2013 \u2018registers Shakespearean drama as a cultural practice associated firmly with the past, as something of little relevance to the present [\u2026.] At the same time, this type of drama is shown to possess a residual power and to exert a curious fascination.\u2019[13]<\/strong> In common with many of Walker\u2019s other films, the older generation In The Flesh and Blood Show<\/em><\/strong> is depicted as out of touch and in conflict with a younger generation that demonstrates an unexpected sense of agency and resistance to traditional rituals. Where Theatre of Blood<\/em><\/strong> enlists our sympathies for the past that is embodied by Price\u2019s Lionheart, in The Flesh and Blood Show<\/em><\/strong> Walker depicts the murderer (who symbolises a similar set of values to Lionheart) in far less sympathetic terms.<\/p>\n

\"Theatre<\/p>\n

Theatre of Blood<\/em><\/strong> is a superbly entertaining film, arguably the equal of the two Phibes films that Price made with Robert Fuest. There are many layers of irony within the film, which operates as a blackly comic modern-day version of a Jacobean revenge tragedy, whilst also offering an ironic commentary on attitudes to Price\u2019s own approach to acting. Seeing Price exact revenge on his critics is highly satisfying, but on the other hand there\u2019s a great deal of complexity to the film, which refuses to offer a simple black-and-white view of morality. Lionheart is by turns sympathetic and frightening: his crusade against critics has a twisted logic to it, and it\u2019s hard not to sympathise with Lionheart when he corners Devlin and asks him, \u2018How many actors have you destroyed as you destroyed me? How many talented lives have you cut down with your glib attacks? What do you know of the blood, sweat and toil of the theatrical production? [\u2026] How could you know, you talentless fools who spew vitriol on the creative efforts of others because you lack the ability to create yourselves?\u2019 On the other hand, it\u2019s equally difficult not to agree with Devlin\u2019s response to Lionheart\u2019s arguably egocentric tirade: \u2018Well, get it over with, then, just so long as I don\u2019t have to listen to that demented rubbish of yours.\u2019<\/p>\n

As with the Phibes films, the murders in Theatre of Blood<\/em><\/strong> are gruesome and exceptionally well-staged: the sequence in which (in a perverse interpretation of the scene in Titus Andronicus,<\/em><\/strong> in which Chiron and Demetrius\u2019 remains are fed to their mother) Merridew is fed his two beloved pet poodles in a pie by Lionheart and Edwina, who pose as the presenters for the television programme \u2018This is Your Dish,\u2019 has often been discussed as a sequence that inspires both laughter and revulsion. Unlike the pie that is fed to Merridew, Theatre of Blood<\/em><\/strong> is a delicious treat which leaves no sour aftertaste: it\u2019s a witty, ironic film that contains much food for thought and has a great deal of complexity.<\/p>\n


\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/span>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t

Sources<\/u>:<\/p>

[1]<\/strong> Hunt, Leon, British Low Culture: From Safari Suits to Sexploitation.<\/em> London: Routledge (1998), P.144<\/p>

[2]<\/strong> Ibid.<\/p>

[3]<\/strong> Freeman, Nick, \u2018London Kills Me: The English Metropolis in British Horror Films of the 1970s.\u2019<\/em> In: Mendik, Xavier (ed): Shocking Cinema of the Seventies. London: Noir Publishing<\/em> (2002), P.196<\/p>

[4]<\/strong> Ibid.<\/p>

[5]<\/strong> Ibid.<\/p>

[6]<\/strong> Ibid., P.207<\/p>

[7]<\/strong> Price, in Price, Victoria, Vincent Price: A Daughter\u2019s Biography.<\/em> New York: Dover Publications (2018), P.269<\/p>

[8]<\/strong> McDonald, Paul, \u2018Film acting and gender: Method acting and the male tantrum.\u2019<\/em> In N\u00f6th, Winfried (ed), Semiotics of the Media: State of the Art, Projects, and Perspectives.<\/em> Berlin: Moyton de Gruter (1997), P.329<\/p>

[9]<\/strong> Hunt, op cit., P.144<\/p>

[10]<\/strong> Ibid.<\/p>

[11]<\/strong> Ibid.<\/p>

[12]<\/strong> Freeman, op cit., P.206<\/p>

[13]<\/strong> Hutchings, Peter, \u2018Theatres of blood: Shakespeare and the horror film.\u2019<\/em> In: Drakakis, John & Townshend, Dale (eds), Accents on Shakespeare: Gothic Shakespeares.<\/em> London: Routledge (2008)<\/p>\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/span>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\"Picture\n\t\t\t\t<\/a>\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\tPaul Lewis\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/h4>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/a>\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t

PhD, MA, BA(Hons), PGCE, FHEA | Writer: pajlewis.contently.com | Community Photographer | Filmmaker @ grimnirpictures.co.uk | Film \/ Lit \/ Photo Lecturer | Cinephile<\/p>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/i>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/span>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/i>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/span>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/i>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/span>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/i>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/span>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/i>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/span>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/section>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\"Horrified\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/a>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/section>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t
<\/div>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t

More film ><\/a><\/h2>\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t
\"the<\/a><\/div>
\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\tDavid Lowery\u2019s The Green Knight\u200b (2021)\t\t\t\t<\/a>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/h2>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t22\/12\/2021\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/span>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\tGraham Williamson digs into the 2021 adaptation of the Arthurian legend...\u200b\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t<\/div><\/article><\/div>
\"Dr<\/a><\/div>
\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\tPhibes Lives! \u2013 50 Years Of Dr Anton Phibes\t\t\t\t<\/a>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/h2>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t03\/04\/2021\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/span>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\tJohnny Restall celebrates 50 years of Dr Anton Phibes - Malevolent Master of Music & Murder...\u200b\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t<\/div><\/article><\/div>
\"rewilding<\/a><\/div>
\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\tInspiring Rewilding (2023)\t\t\t\t<\/a>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/h2>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t08\/02\/2023\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/span>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\tAs the folk horror anthology Rewilding lands on Prime Video, its director Ric Rawlins discusses ten of its key inspirations \u2013 from Moomins to M.R James\u2026\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t<\/div><\/article><\/div><\/div><\/div>\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t
<\/div>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/section>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Paul Lewis revisits Vincent Price’s vengeful thespian in Douglas Hickox’s blackly comic 1973 horror, Theatre of Blood…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":123729,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"site-sidebar-layout":"no-sidebar","site-content-layout":"page-builder","ast-site-content-layout":"normal-width-container","site-content-style":"unboxed","site-sidebar-style":"unboxed","ast-global-header-display":"","ast-banner-title-visibility":"","ast-main-header-display":"","ast-hfb-above-header-display":"","ast-hfb-below-header-display":"","ast-hfb-mobile-header-display":"","site-post-title":"disabled","ast-breadcrumbs-content":"","ast-featured-img":"","footer-sml-layout":"","theme-transparent-header-meta":"","adv-header-id-meta":"","stick-header-meta":"","header-above-stick-meta":"","header-main-stick-meta":"","header-below-stick-meta":"","astra-migrate-meta-layouts":"set","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[12],"tags":[2016,496],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.horrifiedmagazine.co.uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/05\/Theatre-of-Blood.png?fit=825%2C709&ssl=1","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.horrifiedmagazine.co.uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/21143"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.horrifiedmagazine.co.uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.horrifiedmagazine.co.uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.horrifiedmagazine.co.uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.horrifiedmagazine.co.uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=21143"}],"version-history":[{"count":84,"href":"https:\/\/www.horrifiedmagazine.co.uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/21143\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":128171,"href":"https:\/\/www.horrifiedmagazine.co.uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/21143\/revisions\/128171"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.horrifiedmagazine.co.uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/123729"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.horrifiedmagazine.co.uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=21143"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.horrifiedmagazine.co.uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=21143"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.horrifiedmagazine.co.uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=21143"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}