Anyway, what struck me first about this film was its presentation. It claims to be a horror film, but it doesn't share any of the characteristics of horror films from that period save Karloff's performance (which I'll discuss later). In the '30s and '40s US horror films were usually based around Gothic concepts and literature (hence Frankenstein, Dracula, and Zombies). "Tower of London, being a historical film, obviously cannot fit into this genre. Something that is missing is the expressionist influence that nearly all the horror films had in that era. Also, horror films usually have low key lighting present, and this one didn't. This is even truer in early horror because lighting had to fill the roles that makeup and special effects could not accomplish. This entire film employs high key lighting or neutral lighting. Not that this film is boring, but I wouldn't consider it a horror film.
Now, what may give someone some way to consider this a horror film is Karloff's performance. Mord is a bald, hunchbacked executioner who shows no scruples as he murders various people. His feet are almost webbed as he moves. He also has the trademark unnatural loyalty to his master (Richard). I wish that the film had described their relationship further, but I suppose that a history textbook would do that just as well. Also, Rathbone's portrayal of Richard was worthy of a good horror film. He removes marionettes of those ahead of him (for the throne) as he kills them. He also has a devilish smile. Unfortunately, the other actor's (including Price) didn't act in accordance to the genre of film they were portraying. However, I wouldn't say they acted poorly.
Where this film also shines is its effective use of blocking to overcome technological restraints. The battle scenes are very stylized, but given the censorship of the time, they work well. What I mean is that during the Battle of Bosworth sequence, hundreds of actors are visible and all of them are fencing with each other. I really hate thinking that "Birth of a Nation" is the progenitor of battle scenes like this one, but that's another story.
So, how does "Tower of London" stand today? Well, I cannot give an honest opinion because I had no frame of reference. Here is what I think given the ability I now have. I would rate it as average due to the difficulty of the plot line (for most viewers). Also, Karloff fans will be disappointed that his role is much smaller than it usually is. Also, the film falsely proclaims to be a horror film when it isn't.
Now, what may give someone some way to consider this a horror film is Karloff's performance. Mord is a bald, hunchbacked executioner who shows no scruples as he murders various people. His feet are almost webbed as he moves. He also has the trademark unnatural loyalty to his master (Richard). I wish that the film had described their relationship further, but I suppose that a history textbook would do that just as well. Also, Rathbone's portrayal of Richard was worthy of a good horror film. He removes marionettes of those ahead of him (for the throne) as he kills them. He also has a devilish smile. Unfortunately, the other actor's (including Price) didn't act in accordance to the genre of film they were portraying. However, I wouldn't say they acted poorly.
Where this film also shines is its effective use of blocking to overcome technological restraints. The battle scenes are very stylized, but given the censorship of the time, they work well. What I mean is that during the Battle of Bosworth sequence, hundreds of actors are visible and all of them are fencing with each other. I really hate thinking that "Birth of a Nation" is the progenitor of battle scenes like this one, but that's another story.
So, how does "Tower of London" stand today? Well, I cannot give an honest opinion because I had no frame of reference. Here is what I think given the ability I now have. I would rate it as average due to the difficulty of the plot line (for most viewers). Also, Karloff fans will be disappointed that his role is much smaller than it usually is. Also, the film falsely proclaims to be a horror film when it isn't.