The second, and lesser, of the two 'Cornish double-bill' films director John Gilling made for Hammer in the mid-60s. With the market for Hammer horror slipping, producer Anthony Hinds was forced to devise new production schedules so two films could be made more cheaply back to back using much the same sets, technicians, even supporting actors.
'The Reptile' followed on from Gilling's notable success with 'Plague of the Zombies'. It doesn't match it, although it boasts the same sense of village location and has Hammer stalwart Michael Ripper playing a publican (in the other film he was a police sergeant). Ray Barrett and Jennifer Daniel make reasonably adequate leads, and John Laurie enjoys himself as Mad Peter.
Unfortunately, Hinds' attempt to introduce a new monster (he also wrote the screenplay as 'John Elder') just falls rather flat, leaving Jacqueline Pearce to flounder as the titular snake-woman. All she can do is hiss and shimmy in not very scary make-up. Nor does Hinds convince with a contrived and convoluted back-story as to how she came to be cursed that way, despite Noel Willman's best efforts as her anguished father to explain it to us. Even the colour cinematography by the usually reliable Arthur Grant seems rather muddy.
'The Reptile' followed on from Gilling's notable success with 'Plague of the Zombies'. It doesn't match it, although it boasts the same sense of village location and has Hammer stalwart Michael Ripper playing a publican (in the other film he was a police sergeant). Ray Barrett and Jennifer Daniel make reasonably adequate leads, and John Laurie enjoys himself as Mad Peter.
Unfortunately, Hinds' attempt to introduce a new monster (he also wrote the screenplay as 'John Elder') just falls rather flat, leaving Jacqueline Pearce to flounder as the titular snake-woman. All she can do is hiss and shimmy in not very scary make-up. Nor does Hinds convince with a contrived and convoluted back-story as to how she came to be cursed that way, despite Noel Willman's best efforts as her anguished father to explain it to us. Even the colour cinematography by the usually reliable Arthur Grant seems rather muddy.