I've often considered Plague of the Zombies to be one of my favourite Hammer productions, with it's eerie location and unsettling make-up effects. This on the other hand is one I often overlook on repeat viewings of horror films from this period, despite it being the second part of the intended double bill. With the same rural village, the same Cornish moors and the same big manor house (which still burns down at the end) it's an odd experience, but cost saving efforts like this are nothing new. I'm reminded of Dracula Prince of Darkness and Rasputin The Mad Monk sharing both cast and castles. And like those two I prefer over the other. But in this case is the second feature really a let down or is it just a less imaginative chiller?
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/1ac8f/1ac8fac6bd068f99e5e1cc68cc063730a65e0776" alt=""