THE SKULL (1965)

Director: Freddie Francis

Writers: Milton Subotsky, based on Robert Bloch’s story “The Skull of the Marquis de Sade”

Producers: Max J. Rosenberg, Milton Subotsky

Cast: Peter Cushing, Christopher Lee, Patrick Wymark, Peter Woodthorpe, Jill Bennett, April Olrich, Maurice Good, Nigel Green, Patrick Magee, Michael Gough, George Coulouris, Frank Forsyth, Anna Palk, Paul Stockman, George Hilsdon, Jack Silk 

In London, England, author Christopher Maitland (Peter Cushing) collects strange artifacts used for research in his writings about the occult. Anthony Marco (Peter Wymark), the rather shady procurer of many of Maitland’s curios, presents the writer with the opportunity to own something really special: the skull of the notorious 19th century French author and nobleman the Marquis de Sade. Maitland soon falls under the skull’s frightening influence. 

The Flashback Fanatic movie review

The Skull is not only a change of pace from the anthology horror films that Britain’s Amicus Productions are best known for, it remains a unique tale of possession. The story is simple and the main cast is small. A lot of time is spent in the head game that the skull is playing with Peter Cushing’s character Christopher Maitland. This results in many dialogue-free stretches of surreal and eerie events that confuse and terrify Maitland as he is being brought under the skull’s evil control.

This was the first of the Amicus Productions fright flicks based on the writings of Robert Bloch. Of course, Bloch will always be best known as the writer of the novel Psycho that was adapted into Alfred Hitchcock’s classic 1960 film. Bloch would adapt many of his short horror stories for the scripts of three later Amicus anthology films. This time around, one of his tales is the basis for an entire film. Oddly, he did not write the script himself. 

Perhaps the lack of Robert Bloch’s further involvement resulted in a rather troubled production. It seems that the original short story‘s adaptation did not provide enough incidents for a feature-length film. Director Freddie Francis is supposed to have reworked co-producer Milton Subotsky’s script. Then there had been a lot of rearranging of scenes in the editing room as Subotsky was second-guessing just how to put the final narrative together. 

Fortunately, the final product resulted in a stylized descent into possession told almost entirely from the perspective of Christopher Maitland. This is almost a one-man show with the great Peter Cushing. Although he may have an ethical lapse ignoring Marco’s means of providing occult artifacts, Cushing’s Maitland appears to be a decent person, so his fate seems undeservedly tragic and that makes the skull all the more diabolical. 

Joining Cushing is Christopher Lee in a featured role as fellow artifact collector Sir Matthew Phillips. He tries to warn Maitland about the evil threat the skull of the Marquis de Sade poses. The often aloof and commanding Lee seems rather vulnerable here and earns our sympathy while always appearing dignified. 

The Skull is a casting delight for fans of British horror films. Beyond the teaming of Cushing and Lee, there are many other familiar faces from the genre such as Michael Gough, Nigel Green, Patrick Magee, Patrick Wymark, and George Coulouris. Of special notice is Peter Woodthorpe as the seedy landlord Bert Travers. Besides Peter Cushing, he is my favorite performer in the film. He is immediately unlikable and seems almost as disreputable as his sleazy hypnotist Zoltan in The Evil of Frankenstein (1964), another Freddie Francis-directed/Peter Cushing-starring production. 

Director Freddie Francis dealt with horror quite a bit for both Amicus and their rival Hammer Films. He brings a lot of inventive visual style to the intimate terror experienced by Cushing’s character. Francis manages to make the skull as much of a personality as the characters portrayed by the flesh-and-blood actors.

As in “The Man Who Collected Poe,” another of Robert Bloch’s stories featured in the later Amicus anthology film Torture Garden (1967), the message here seems to be a warning about the dangers of collecting mania. Although I am a devil-may-care chap, I am certain that my film fetishism is perfectly harmless. I only acquire evermore movies and memorabilia to rouse my cinema enthusiasm and share it with others. Now, what’s the harm in that? However, I will admit that I would kill to get a print of The Man Who Could Cheat Death (1959) with the long-missing topless Hazel Court footage.