Vampires, Robots, and Old Ladies...A Natural Combination
Part one of this weekend's post-Halloween double feature: Vampire Over London.
I found out about Vampire Over London when I was watching the previously reviewed You’ll Find Out. As You’ll Find Out had been more of a horror comedy, I figured this one would be more of the same. I was correct on that score, though I’d also say this one trends even more towards the comedy side of the spectrum, if you can believe that.
The majority of the plot is covered by two exposition dumps early in the movie, but the basic framework the material hangs around is as follows. A young woman arrives in England, only to be kidnapped (along with her sailor boyfriend, who tries to rescue her) by a mysterious figure. We learn that this man is in league with a scientist named Von Housen (Bela Lugosi), who goes by the nickname “The Vampire” thanks to a legend about his family, though the police suspect he’s just trading on the reputation and pretending he’s a vampire to gain followers, rather than truly being a vampire. Indeed, Von Housen seems more interested in science than blood drinking, hoping to create weapons of mass destruction. His master plan is to create an army of robots, but a) he needs a lot of uranium to complete them, hence the kidnapping, and b) he’s only got one working robot at the moment, which is being shipped to him under the pseudonym Riley to avoid suspicion. Unfortunately for him, there happens to be an old lady named Mrs. Riley (Arthur Lucan, playing the role in drag) who’s also expecting a large package, and circumstances conspire to mix the two labels up. From this point on, the movie basically consists of multiple variations of Mrs. Riley bumbling around, gradually stumbling into the truth and messing up Von Housen’s plans, sometimes accidentally, sometimes on purpose. And given the use of slapstick and cartoon sound effects, I think it’s pretty safe to overall describe this movie as “wacky”.
This is definitely the sort of movie you should shut your brain off for and just consider ridiculous fun. Otherwise, some of the elements may wind up breaking your suspension of disbelief and/or annoying you. For example, we get an infodump very early on in the movie explaining who Van Housen is, which is given by the police. This implies that they strongly suspect he’s the one behind the kidnapping and the string of murders (more on that in a minute), but not only do they never act on this, there are later moments when policemen seem completely befuddled as to who this vampire character could be. Their investigation may not be the focus of this story, but a little consistency might have been nice. Then there are those murders; we’re told that The Vampire has kidnapped at least a dozen women, some of whom are later found drained of blood. And later on in the movie, a bunch of mummies are brought to Van Housen’s house. Yet we’re never told what the purpose of that was. We’re never given confirmation if Van Housen is a real vampire or not (indeed, that exposition dump made me assume it was just a ruse), nor are we told that he needed their blood for his experiments. I like the idea that he was laying the groundwork for his real objective-kidnapping the woman with access to uranium-by going on a murder spree so she’d just be one among many, but again, that’s not actually addressed. I eventually managed to get into the spirit of the thing and just take things as they came, but if you focus on plot the way I do, you may run into the same stumbling block I did.
Then there’s the matter of the comedy, which again depends on your preferences in humor. The main focus is on slapstick and the fact that Mrs. Riley is either oblivious or cantankerous (there may also be some ethnic humor in there as well, since Mrs. Riley is meant to be Irish), both of which sometimes work and sometimes don’t. Then there are the weirder moments, like a random musical number out of nowhere (there are no subsequent song and dance routines) or a running gag featuring the sailor boyfriend getting knocked out, complete with cartoon sound effects. Interestingly, the fact that Mrs. Riley is played by a man in drag is not specifically mined for humor; in fact, it took looking the movie up on IMDB to confirm that the role was played by a man, which I guess is a good thing? Then again, I gather that this was a recurring role for Arthur Lucan, so maybe the 1952 audience was more used to it, or just thought that the fact that the role was played by a man to be inherently funny. One more reason why the past is a foreign country.
Before we move on, there’s one specific moment I want to harp on, which combines the issues of plot and comedy in a way that may encapsulate the movie as a whole. After the mix-up in packages is discovered, Von Housen activates his robot and gets it to come to his house/laboratory, bringing Mother Riley along for some reason. In order to do this, the robot ends up hitching a ride with a drunk guy who doesn’t realize what he’s got in his passenger seat. As Von Housen and his associates are monitoring the robot and sending out a signal for it to follow, the maid Tilly (Dora Bryan), the only one in the house who isn’t in on the nefarious plot, sleepwalks into the lab and flips a switch, causing things to run backwards. She backwards sleepwalks to her bed, we see stock footage of a city with cars running backwards, and inexplicably, the drunk driver and the robot swap places, so that now the robot is driving the car. The signal is temporarily lost, and the villains discover the flipped switch and flip it back. Yet the robot continues driving the car, and in fact drops the drunk guy off at his house before continuing its journey to Von Housen’s place. While it is amusing on one level, it also sums up the haphazard nature of the plot. Tilly wasn’t ever established as a sleepwalker, and the issue never comes up again, so it was clearly in service of the gag; there’s no reason why flipping the switch would do all that; and while re-flipping the switch probably should have put everything back to normal, the robot continues to be the one driving the car, presumably in order to make it easier for it to get to Van Housen (and, to a lesser extent, set up a gag later in the movie). If you’re in the right mindset, you can just accept this as more ridiculous antics, but for others, it may feel a bit too much like Admiral Plot Device was involved.
Like I said, though, I did eventually get to a point where I could just sit back and enjoy the movie on its own terms, so there was some good to be found. Mrs. Riley did have some good moments, especially as the movie went on. In fact, she sometimes displayed aspects of the “old lady who’s still smart and capable” trope that I like, and might have been a contender for my Best Female Characters list, though I’m not sure if it counts if the character isn’t actually being played by a woman. Some of the comedy bits worked just fine. And while he doesn’t have the same menace as he did in Dracula, Lugosi does bring a certain presence and dignity to the role, playing the role straight and grounding the movie somewhat, something that’s generally a subtle but necessary element to comedy. So kudos to Lugosi for pulling that off.
While I was left baffled and a bit frustrated with the movie more often than not (it doesn’t help that the ending is rather abrupt, with no real tying up of the plot), there’s a good chance that’s more a problem with me and my mindset than with the movie in general. If you like older, more slapstick style comedy and are able to focus on the humor more than the plot, you might want to give this one a look. If nothing else, there’s a chance you’ll enjoy it in a “so bad it’s good” kind of way.
CAT ALERT: At one point, Mrs. Riley opens up her piano and an obviously fake cat springs out of it towards the ceiling. I assumed it was a one-off sight gag, but a little later, a cat is seen perched on a windowsill that flees when the robot activates. Eminently sensible of it, really.
I found out about Vampire Over London when I was watching the previously reviewed You’ll Find Out. As You’ll Find Out had been more of a horror comedy, I figured this one would be more of the same. I was correct on that score, though I’d also say this one trends even more towards the comedy side of the spectrum, if you can believe that.
The majority of the plot is covered by two exposition dumps early in the movie, but the basic framework the material hangs around is as follows. A young woman arrives in England, only to be kidnapped (along with her sailor boyfriend, who tries to rescue her) by a mysterious figure. We learn that this man is in league with a scientist named Von Housen (Bela Lugosi), who goes by the nickname “The Vampire” thanks to a legend about his family, though the police suspect he’s just trading on the reputation and pretending he’s a vampire to gain followers, rather than truly being a vampire. Indeed, Von Housen seems more interested in science than blood drinking, hoping to create weapons of mass destruction. His master plan is to create an army of robots, but a) he needs a lot of uranium to complete them, hence the kidnapping, and b) he’s only got one working robot at the moment, which is being shipped to him under the pseudonym Riley to avoid suspicion. Unfortunately for him, there happens to be an old lady named Mrs. Riley (Arthur Lucan, playing the role in drag) who’s also expecting a large package, and circumstances conspire to mix the two labels up. From this point on, the movie basically consists of multiple variations of Mrs. Riley bumbling around, gradually stumbling into the truth and messing up Von Housen’s plans, sometimes accidentally, sometimes on purpose. And given the use of slapstick and cartoon sound effects, I think it’s pretty safe to overall describe this movie as “wacky”.
This is definitely the sort of movie you should shut your brain off for and just consider ridiculous fun. Otherwise, some of the elements may wind up breaking your suspension of disbelief and/or annoying you. For example, we get an infodump very early on in the movie explaining who Van Housen is, which is given by the police. This implies that they strongly suspect he’s the one behind the kidnapping and the string of murders (more on that in a minute), but not only do they never act on this, there are later moments when policemen seem completely befuddled as to who this vampire character could be. Their investigation may not be the focus of this story, but a little consistency might have been nice. Then there are those murders; we’re told that The Vampire has kidnapped at least a dozen women, some of whom are later found drained of blood. And later on in the movie, a bunch of mummies are brought to Van Housen’s house. Yet we’re never told what the purpose of that was. We’re never given confirmation if Van Housen is a real vampire or not (indeed, that exposition dump made me assume it was just a ruse), nor are we told that he needed their blood for his experiments. I like the idea that he was laying the groundwork for his real objective-kidnapping the woman with access to uranium-by going on a murder spree so she’d just be one among many, but again, that’s not actually addressed. I eventually managed to get into the spirit of the thing and just take things as they came, but if you focus on plot the way I do, you may run into the same stumbling block I did.
Then there’s the matter of the comedy, which again depends on your preferences in humor. The main focus is on slapstick and the fact that Mrs. Riley is either oblivious or cantankerous (there may also be some ethnic humor in there as well, since Mrs. Riley is meant to be Irish), both of which sometimes work and sometimes don’t. Then there are the weirder moments, like a random musical number out of nowhere (there are no subsequent song and dance routines) or a running gag featuring the sailor boyfriend getting knocked out, complete with cartoon sound effects. Interestingly, the fact that Mrs. Riley is played by a man in drag is not specifically mined for humor; in fact, it took looking the movie up on IMDB to confirm that the role was played by a man, which I guess is a good thing? Then again, I gather that this was a recurring role for Arthur Lucan, so maybe the 1952 audience was more used to it, or just thought that the fact that the role was played by a man to be inherently funny. One more reason why the past is a foreign country.
Before we move on, there’s one specific moment I want to harp on, which combines the issues of plot and comedy in a way that may encapsulate the movie as a whole. After the mix-up in packages is discovered, Von Housen activates his robot and gets it to come to his house/laboratory, bringing Mother Riley along for some reason. In order to do this, the robot ends up hitching a ride with a drunk guy who doesn’t realize what he’s got in his passenger seat. As Von Housen and his associates are monitoring the robot and sending out a signal for it to follow, the maid Tilly (Dora Bryan), the only one in the house who isn’t in on the nefarious plot, sleepwalks into the lab and flips a switch, causing things to run backwards. She backwards sleepwalks to her bed, we see stock footage of a city with cars running backwards, and inexplicably, the drunk driver and the robot swap places, so that now the robot is driving the car. The signal is temporarily lost, and the villains discover the flipped switch and flip it back. Yet the robot continues driving the car, and in fact drops the drunk guy off at his house before continuing its journey to Von Housen’s place. While it is amusing on one level, it also sums up the haphazard nature of the plot. Tilly wasn’t ever established as a sleepwalker, and the issue never comes up again, so it was clearly in service of the gag; there’s no reason why flipping the switch would do all that; and while re-flipping the switch probably should have put everything back to normal, the robot continues to be the one driving the car, presumably in order to make it easier for it to get to Van Housen (and, to a lesser extent, set up a gag later in the movie). If you’re in the right mindset, you can just accept this as more ridiculous antics, but for others, it may feel a bit too much like Admiral Plot Device was involved.
Like I said, though, I did eventually get to a point where I could just sit back and enjoy the movie on its own terms, so there was some good to be found. Mrs. Riley did have some good moments, especially as the movie went on. In fact, she sometimes displayed aspects of the “old lady who’s still smart and capable” trope that I like, and might have been a contender for my Best Female Characters list, though I’m not sure if it counts if the character isn’t actually being played by a woman. Some of the comedy bits worked just fine. And while he doesn’t have the same menace as he did in Dracula, Lugosi does bring a certain presence and dignity to the role, playing the role straight and grounding the movie somewhat, something that’s generally a subtle but necessary element to comedy. So kudos to Lugosi for pulling that off.
While I was left baffled and a bit frustrated with the movie more often than not (it doesn’t help that the ending is rather abrupt, with no real tying up of the plot), there’s a good chance that’s more a problem with me and my mindset than with the movie in general. If you like older, more slapstick style comedy and are able to focus on the humor more than the plot, you might want to give this one a look. If nothing else, there’s a chance you’ll enjoy it in a “so bad it’s good” kind of way.
CAT ALERT: At one point, Mrs. Riley opens up her piano and an obviously fake cat springs out of it towards the ceiling. I assumed it was a one-off sight gag, but a little later, a cat is seen perched on a windowsill that flees when the robot activates. Eminently sensible of it, really.