Corridors of Blood (1963)

Can you imagine a time when amputations were done without anesthetic - and that was considered completely normal?While there may be some doubt about the accuracy of this story - I believe it was an American dentist that discovered anesthesia - there is no doubt that it is a fine performance by Boris Karloff.To see him descend into madness as he pursues his dream was thrilling. Using an opium-based formula, he obviously didn't know the danger. He did this while his colleagues were mocking him for the idea that pain and the knife can be separated.Whomever discovered this, whether Bolton or another, I am truly thankful.

This is a deceptive little film. First off, because it was made and sat for four years before release, you might be inclined to think it is a dud--but that's far from true. The film is very good--good enough to almost earn an 8. Second, while the film has some horrific scenes and features Boris Karloff and Christopher Lee, it is not a horror film but more of a drama. So if you see it, don't expect monsters or madness--instead, there are just bad people and good people doing bad things.The film is set in 1840 and Karloff plays an exceptionally skilled surgeon who is dismayed that there are no drugs to alleviate the suffering of patients during surgery. Basically, people were wide awake and felt EVERYTHING during surgery and amputations! This is true, as the first anesthesias didn't come about until around 1850. Despite his concerns, other doctors didn't share his enthusiasm for change, so Karloff foolishly begins experimenting on himself--inhaling a mixture of various chemicals (including opium). Not surprisingly, he becomes addicted and this once sweet man becomes an unwilling pawn in the seedy underworld.The film gets very high marks for construction, writing, direction and the performance of Karloff. There isn't much I'd change about the film, though fans of Christopher Lee might be disappointed that his role isn't that big and his character isn't that interesting (despite the fact he's a cold-blooded murderer). Give this intelligent little film a watch--it's really very good.

Well, as it turned out, I needn't have worried that I would eventually regret my purchase of the Criterion set "Monsters And Madmen" - as this film proved superior to THE HAUNTED STRANGLER (1958).Featuring literate dialogue and a more realistic story (incidentally, inspired by the book "Triumph Over Pain" on which Preston Sturges also based his THE GREAT MOMENT [1944]!), the film was made for something like twice the budget of THE HAUNTED STRANGLER and had the advantage of being shot on existing sets at the MGM-British studios. All of this allowed for an evocative and meticulous recreation of mid-19th century London, highlighting Geoffrey Faithful's cinematography and Anthony Masters' production design. The film's opening sequence creates an admirable mood of mystery and dread, which is generally sustained throughout - propelled considerably by Buxton Orr's powerful score. Besides, here we have a truly remarkable cast - in my opinion, one of the best ever assembled for a horror film: Boris Karloff, Betta St. John, Francis Matthews, Christopher Lee (impressive as the quietly-spoken black-clad resurrectionist), Francis de Wolff, Adrienne Corri, Yvonne Romain, Frank Pettingell, Finlay Currie, Basil Dignam and Nigel Green.While the film has some thematic points of reference with the Jekyll & Hyde story (already dealt with in THE HAUNTED STRANGLER!), Karloff's mad doctor cycle over at Columbia during the early 40s (though all of these had contemporary settings), as well as THE BODY SNATCHER (1945), it manages to hold its own perfectly well - and, as such, succeeds in avoiding the pitfalls of cinematic convention into which THE HAUNTED STRANGLER falls (rather than physically turn into a monster, here Karloff becomes addicted to chloroform). The film has been much criticized for its supposed gore, but it's really quite tame (perhaps it's the intensity of the operation scenes that does the trick, suggesting a lot more than it actually shows); I know the present version is slightly incomplete, but even the few seconds of deleted footage found among the supplements isn't all that graphic! Even so, I really liked the way in which slow motion is utilized for the climax when acid is thrown into a character's face.The accompanying Audio Commentary is just as entertaining as all the Tom Weaver/Richard Gordon tracks I've heard: most fascinating here is the discussion centering around the film's chequered history - CORRIDORS OF BLOOD (by the way, though also known as DOCTOR FROM SEVEN DIALS, it was never shown under that title) was released in the U.S. as part of a double-bill with the low-brow Italian horror WEREWOLF IN A GIRLS' DORMITORY (1961), which I watched a few months back (on the other hand, THE HAUNTED STRANGLER was paired with another Gordon production, the maligned but quite effective sci-fi FIEND WITHOUT A FACE [1958], also available as a "Special Edition" from Criterion). Just as informative are the separate interviews featuring director Day and co-star Francis Matthews (he hates his performance and, amusingly, implores the audience not to watch the film merely for his sake!) and the audio-only career overview with starlet Yvonne Romain (I was surprised to learn that she's half-Maltese and, apart from enjoying her recollections of the various distinguished leading men throughout her career, I was especially glad that she mentioned the ironic fact that Oliver Reed - with whom she appeared four times in film and TV - died in Malta).Finally, I didn't generally mind the fact that both this and THE HAUNTED STRANGLER were presented full-frame rather than being slightly matted so as to duplicate their theatrical exhibition - but there was quite a bit of overscan during the credit sequence of CORRIDORS OF BLOOD...

Corridors of Blood is set in 'London 1840 before the discovery of anaesthesia' where prominent surgeon Dr. Thomas Bolton (Boris Karloff) is convinced that 'operations without pain' are possible as having your leg sawn off without any anaesthesia is rather painful. Bolton feels that by experimenting with different combinations of drugs he can create a gas which will render the patient numb & not able to feel a thing as the sharp steel of the saw & knife slices through flesh... Not everyone is convinced about his ideas though & after a terrible demonstration which fails Bolton finds lots of resistance to his idea but he carries on with his experiments & becomes addicted to the drugs he creates, after he is forced to take a 'holiday' & his privilege's are revoked he has to turn to local thugs to acquire the drugs he needs...This British production sat on the self & remain unreleased for 4 years was directed Robert Day & to be fair to it it's a pretty decent film. The first thing to say is that the inappropriate & unjustly exploitative title is very misleading & that Corridors of Blood is more a historic drama than a horror film, in fact apart from some uneasy surgery scenes there is no horror in this film. The script by Jean Scott Rogers chronicles the invention of anaesthesia in an entirely fictional story, it's a fairly interesting & watchable film but I felt it was a bit dull & not much stood out for me. It has a leisurely pace, I'm not sure whether it was conceived as a horror film & I get the impression that anyone going 'blind' into this film on the back of it having Boris Karloff & Christopher Lee in it along with it's attention grabbing title will be disappointed. The character's are OK, the dialogue is alright although I didn't think that much of the overly sentimental ending. It's a decent enough film but that's it.Director Day does OK but it suffers from the limitations you think a black and white film of this vintage would. The sets are cosy enough, the period recreation looks good but it's all rather static & a bit bland. The couple of surgery scenes are pretty grim even though they're not graphic a it's more the thought of what's going on than what is actually seen. Forget about any scares as it's just not that sort of film, there's no exploitation either.Technically Corridors of Blood is fine, it's a reasonably well crafted film with good production values. The acting is good, Karloff puts in his usual commanding performance & a young up & coming actor named Christopher Lee makes for an effective villain in an early role.Corridors of Blood is a perfectly watchable film although I'm not really sure who it's meant to appeal to, for me I was hoping for a horror film because of the title & instead I got a fictional historic drama & frankly I'd rather had spent the time watching a horror film. Worth a watch but nothing that special.