User reviews

OK, I admit it. I love 30's and 40's B horror films. They generally have great atmosphere and wonderful characters. Are both the atmosphere and the characters over-the-top? Yeah, most of the time, but that is part of the charm. You don't watch these movies looking for great cinema. You watch them for the perpetually foggy streets. What city or what country makes no difference, 9 times out of 10 there will be fog. You watch them for the crazed characters. You watch them for the dripping-with-venom dialog. You also have the wonderful look that black and white creates. Things are stark and heavily shadowed.

You watch these films simply because you love the time and the genre. Not for great writing and most times not for great performances. You either love these period B films or not. Had I lived during the era you would have never gotten me out of the theater.

If you approach this looking for zombies, especially an whole valley full of 'em, you'll be sadly disappointed yet I can't help it...I like this short little movie just the same. Maybe it's the wonderful atmosphere this film has what with mysterious going ons in the night, graveyards and tombs figuring into the plot. Or maybe it's the old fashioned villain who truly looks like a fiendish fellow...Ian Keith as the thought to be dead Ormond Murks, who now needs the blood of the living to stay alive.

And while there may be a number of outdated stereotypes (by today's standards) at work here especially in terms of the frantic female Nurse Susan Drake who is easily spooked and frightened leaning upon the always steady and sure male Dr. Terrance Evans..still there's a certain innocence to this style of Horror which makes it fun...kind of hard to explain really. It's only being an hour long doesn't hurt either.

Dr. Maynard (Charles Trowbridge) tells Dr. Terry Evans (Robert Livingston) and his nurse, Susan Drake (Lorna Gray), about the theft of ten pints of blood from his lab. Later, he is visited by Ormand Murks (Ian Keith), a man Maynard had once had committed to an insane asylum.

What attracted me to this film is quite simple: it is old and it is short. I am all about short films to watch while eating breakfast, and I am all about watching older movies (as a reviewer, my job simply cannot be done properly without knowing the history of film, particularly horror).

Ian Keith plays a very cool, creepy man, wrongly judged insane, who wears a grave robber outfit. He is the highlight of the film, and what makes this one more horror fans should see. There is also a fun homicide detective scene where they question Lorna Gray and try to get her to falsely confess to murder. The back and forth is pretty fun, and it makes me wish that Gray was in more films like this (or like her Three Stooges work).

After Dr. Rufus Maynard (Charles Trowbridge) is found murdered, Dr. Terry Evans (Robert Livingston) and his pretty nurse Susan Drake (Lorna Gray) turn amateur detective to prove their innocence. Their investigation leads them to the home of insane undertaker Ormand Murks (Ian Keith), who has used a voodoo potion to achieve immortality, but who requires a constant supply of blood to stay alive.

This cheapo B-movie could be accused of misleading the viewer: with just a passing mention of the titular valley and only one 'zombie'-- the very alive looking Murks -- its credentials as a living dead movie are extremely questionable. The film is actually more of a murder/mystery as Evans and Drake sleuth their way into danger, stumbling across assorted embalmed corpses and becoming trapped in a creepy old crypt (while narrowly avoiding being throttled by the villain's hand which emerges slowly from the shadows -- very Scooby Doo!). It's routine stuff but, at under an hour long, the film doesn't outstay its welcome, and Keith, as cape-swishing, cane-wielding Murks, makes for a wonderfully theatrical bad guy.

4.5/10, rounded up to 5 for the 'hilarious' closing gag.

The 40s weren't exactly known for high-quality genre fare, but there are always exceptions, and the premise here sounds interesting. I do rather think the telling here is troubled in at least some measure given instances of lagging pacing, a variable but often lighter tone, and ill-fitting wry humor (from bullying and ignorant police, naturally). On the other hand, those deeply unlikable cops are counterbalanced by the fabulous, combative wit of other characters, and the pacing and occasional tonal issues by tinges of atmosphere that the feature ably fosters. That atmosphere comes to us by way of smart use of lighting, the more haunting of those chords in the music, and Ian Keith's dramatic, imposing performance as the antagonist. It's still true that the horror 'Valley of the zombies' offers is more thematic than it is actualized, yet between Dorrell and Stuart E. McGowan's screenplay and Philip Ford's capable direction, this is sufficiently well made to rise a little bit above the more middling level of some of its contemporaries.

The darker notions in the storytelling and of the accompanying ambience are adjoined with broader airs of mystery as lab workers Terry and Susan seek to discover by themselves the truth surrounding recent murders. Usually I'd criticize the levity in the chief characters' dialogue as unbecoming of the nature of the material, nevermind how they are written (especially as Susan is a woman prone to jumping at her own shadow). I do think that holds true here to no small degree, and for the fact of it the resulting tableau will hold less appeal for genre purists, those who have a hard time engaging with older films, or those who look above all for visceral thrills in their horror. Yet the McGowans gave Robert Livingston and Adrian Booth some genuinely sharp and clever lines to impart as Terry and Susan, and overall I think the picture is just balanced enough so that the touches of comedy, the mystery, and the underlying horror concept all blend together fairly well - a balance which itself is sadly relatively rare in genre flicks from this timeframe.

The art direction is terrific; stunts and effects are modest by most any standards, but appreciable. Even sound effects are employed well, and the cinematography; other minutiae like costume design, hair, and makeup are just swell. The narrative is fundamentally solid, despite the details in its telling that weigh upon it to its detriment, and the same definitely goes for the scene writing. The horror vibes this has to offer may be less robust than in countless other examples among its brethren, yet they are present and meaningful nonetheless; one can easily imagine what 'Valley of the zombies' would look like if it were made at any point from the 60s or 70s onward. What we have here, then, is a movie that's ultimately very well written, and very well made by the standards of its timeframe. If the final product lacks the vibrancy of that genre enthusiasts are accustomed to it's only as a matter of the sensibilities by which such titles were once made, and not a specific failing on the part of anyone here. In fact, though it's no exemplar, I'm inclined to believe that this is one of the better horror films to have been released under the Hays Code.

It's not perfect, but it's duly engrossing, certainly entertaining, and unexpectedly satisfying. That's more than can be said of innumerable features even in all the decades since. Anyone who isn't receptive to the stylings of 40s cinema won't find anything here to change their minds, yet if you're open to all the wide possibilities of what the genre has to offer, there's much more to like here than it may seem at first blush. Don't necessarily go out of your way for 'Valley of the zombies,' but if you do have the chance to watch, this is actually well worth a mere fifty-six minutes of one's time, and I'm pleased to give it a firm recommendation.

1946's "Valley of the Zombies" served as the sole starring horror film for veteran bad guy Ian Keith, like John Carradine a favorite of Cecil B. De Mille, and among the actors considered for the 1931 "Dracula" in place of original choice Bela Lugosi. Unfortunately, Republic was hardly the Poverty Row studio for decent genre roles, although John Abbott ably carried "The Vampire's Ghost" a year earlier, Keith essentially a crazed undertaker named Ormond Murks with a penchant for instant embalming. A series of blood thefts are the work of Murks, whose mixture of voodoo rituals and potions have succeeded in prolonging his life through numerous transfusions, a splendid opening sadly collapsing with Keith reduced to a skulking background figure while ingenues Robert Livingston and Adrian Booth trade witticisms while trying to clear themselves of murder. The atmosphere generated goes by the wayside as the usual dimwitted police procedural literally drains the narrative of all interest: "let's go over to Doctor Maynard's office and see if we can pick up a clue that will lead us to this peculiar party that has a passion for pickling!" A mixture of dead bodies appearing and disappearing, clutching hands that reach out from behind, even an empty crypt that won't stay empty were all old hat at the time, and only Keith's genuinely creepy performance gives this tired farrago any edge.

Ormond Murks (Ian Keith) is an ex-mental patient and mortician thought to be dead. However, he actually pretended to be dead and used some sort of voodoo mumbo-jumbo to keep himself alive forever. The only problem is, to stay alive, he needs blood....lots and lots of blood. And, he's not at all afraid to take it--draining his victims and then embalming them.

A doctor (cowboy star Robert Livingston) and his annoying nurse (Lorna Gray) are implicated in the crime--mostly because the cops are the stereotypically stupid variety. When they discover a clue, they do what anyone would do--they keep it to themselves and investigate the crime on their own!! All in all, not a great B-movie but also not bad either (aside from Gray's VERY annoying character). Kind of fun, though there really aren't any zombies in the film despite the title. Also, while the madman is able to use hypnotism to control his folks and make them do his evil bidding, this is not possible. I have training in hypnosis and would certainly use it for evil if it was possible!

No valley and no zombies, at least not in the traditional sense. Instead we get a creepy character (played by an actor who doesn't look very different from Boris Karloff) called Ormand Murks. He had been committed to a lunatic asylum several years beforehand and had died there. However he comes back from the dead, but rather as a zombie he is a non neck biting vampire who needs blood to stay "alive". He is quite good value, skulking around in his top hat and cape, looking more like a phantom. There are a few good spooky scenes but the film also plays for laughs. There is a lot of wit in the dialogue, for example when two cops investigate some night time grave digging one cop asks "What do you suppose he was doing?", his colleague replies "Well he wasn't digging for potatoes!" At just under an hour Valley makes a fairly enjoyable watch for those who enjoy old black and white B movies.

Fondly remembered, just for the title. In the 70s it turned up a lot on weekends, and the later at night the better. Creature Feature Time.

This is a modest B film, but that's the key to its creepy success. Ian Keith, a veteran actor from the old school, makes an outstanding villain, in search of blood transfusions to keep himself alive. The cobwebs, an abandoned mansion and graveyard are also fun and put to good use. By the way, our heroes (Robert Livingston and Adrian Booth) are locked in a tomb for good measure.

Keith plays Ormond Merks, executed years ago for past crimes, now looking for his next "blood" victim. More of a vampire-type film, and Keith keeps it going, replete with a long, black cape and the best lines. No valley or zombies, although he does hypnotize Booth and arm her with a gun.

Very good supporting cast featuring popular character actor Tommy Jackson playing the detective on the case. Robert "Bob" Livingston plays the two-fisted hero, best known for westerns. Filmed by Republic Pictures and catch some of the area footage of surrounding Studio City (Ventura Blvd) and possibly North Hollywood back in the 40s.

Interestingly, Keith was originally considered for the role of DRACULA, before Bela Lugosi. Not too long after this film, he was considered again for the part in ABBOTT AND COSTELLO MEET FRANKENSTEIN.

Catch the closing gag line by Livingston to gal friend Adrian Booth. Best dvd is coupled with THE VAMPIRES GHOST, released through Fast Fushion Films, and with some nice artwork. A super Halloween treat, though short running time at 56 minutes.

After several units of blood are stolen from his office, a physician by the name of "Dr. Rufus Maynard" (Charles Trowbridge) informs his nurse "Susan Drake" (Lorna Gray) and a colleague named "Dr. Terry Evans" (Robert Livingston) about his plan to put a lock on the refrigerator door to prevent it from happening again. Unfortunately, after both Dr. Evans and Susan leave the office for the night, a sinister man by the name of "Ormand Murks" (Ian Keith) pays a visit to Dr. Maynard and, after a brief struggle, kills him and siphons off most of his blood. Not long afterward, upon discovering the dead body, the local police launch an investigation and, in light of the fact that Dr. Evans and Susan were the last people to see Dr. Maynard alive, consider them as the prime suspects. And since nothing they say seems to convince anyone of their innocence, they decide to conduct their own investigation--with severe consequences for all concerned. Now, rather than reveal any more, I will just say that the concept of zombies within the motion picture industry has evolved over the last 90 years to a point that the catalyst behind most zombie epidemics in the modern era focuses on a virus of some sort. But that wasn't always the case as, prior to 1968, the typical factors generally revolved around either black magic (quite often voodoo) or hypnosis. That being the case, this particular picture incorporates voodoo--along with some hypnosis thrown in for good measure as well. Having said that, however, the term "zombie" typically refers to somebody who has no will of their own. So, the term in this film might apply to his hypnotized followers instead of him. I say this because, although Ormand dabbled in voodoo and black magic potions prior to his supposed death, he seems to be more of a blood-drinking ghoul than an actual zombie. But it could go either way. In any case, this is basically an old-style zombie movie, with suspense in lieu of the action or gore more prevalent in today's movies. Personally, if it's done right, I prefer the modern approach, but that's just me. Be that as it may, while I don't consider this particular film to be one of the better zombie movies of this period, I suppose it passed the time well enough, and I have rated it accordingly. Average.

Well crafted little horror jaunt. Seems long dead Murks (Keith) won't stay dead, but he does need blood to keep frightening us viewers. I guess he must have had a zombie dad and a vampire mom, or some such. Anyhow he gets his needed red stuff from a doctor's office, which is fine until he stupidly throttles his supplier. Now he gets his stuff on the hoof, and our heroes Dr. Terry (Livingston) and Nurse Susan (Gray) better figure things out before he depopulates the studio of its supporting players.

I love that opening sequence, a really funny got'cha when the sheet's pulled back. Republic may have been at the bottom of the Hollywood studios, but it was at the top of the poverty row outfits, PRC, etc. So it's not surprising this horror quickie would be a little slicker than most. Happily, director Ford manages both atmosphere and pacing. The outdoor sets may be 3-feet deep, but they're still creepy. And catch the many snappy lines from our winsome Nurse Susan, especially when she and the doc are creeping through the forrest. Now, Keith really has the malevolent glower of a fiend, but his mugging at times borders on the ludicrous. I guess he needed a few more lessons from Karloff. Good also to see Livingston get off a horse (The Three Mesquiteers) and into a medical smock, of all things. All in all, the 57- minutes remains a cut above other quickies, without being anything special.

This strange little movie loses its route, when it goes for silly laughs and a final car chase, and ignores the basic elements of its subject. Perhaps if it had been titled as "Valley of the Living Dead" it could have had a better chance. As it is, it sounds as a Tarzan movie in a fake valley and fake jungle, and zombified slaves carrying baskets full of diamonds to the highlands. Its premise and the first minutes promised scares and thrills, but in the end it did not deliver.

This is not your traditional zombie film - they do not mean "zombie" in the way we think film them in films. I won't tell for it would ruin the film. With this film think Jack the Ripper is a Vampire in a way... this one is really hard to describe, you would just have to see it for yourself.

Ian Keith as Ormand Murks is super! He reminds me a lot of Boris Karloff as Cabman John Gray in "The Body Snatcher (1945)" and, as I said, Jack the Ripper. Ormand Murks is right up there with them - he is a madman.

This is a really good late at night film - great atmosphere: graveyard, a madman on the loose, talk of an asylum, embalming... if you like the classic films with these things then you should enjoy this "Valley of the Zombies".

8/10

VALLEY OF THE ZOMBIES has Dr. Ormand Murks (Ian Keith) use voodoo to rise from the dead. He's now in need of human blood and will acquire it by any means necessary. Murks' victims are found drained of blood and filled with embalming fluid.

While the police are baffled, a young doctor and nurse set out to solve the series of bizarre murders.

Keith is fantastic as the ghoulish Murks. His gaunt face, bulging eyes, hat, and cape are the perfect combination. This character could / should have been seen in other such films.

Deserves to be rediscovered...

Valley of the Zombies (1946)

** (out of 4)

There is no valley and there are no zombies in this Republic Pictures horror flick that once again proves they certainly didn't know how to do the genre any service. In the film, Ormond Murks (Ian Keith) returns from the dead and needs plenty of blood to keep alive. A doctor (Robertin Livingston) and his nurse (Lorna Gray) get accused of one of the dead man's murders so they have to set out to clear their name and this is when they stumble across the living dead. I guess, to be fair, you could consider the murderer here a zombie but he actually plays out more like a vampire with his need for blood. It's also funny when you think that Keith was originally intended to play the title role in Universal's Dracula before the role eventually went to Bela Lugosi. As you'd expect, this "C" picture really doesn't have too much going in its favor but if you must see every zombie picture ever made then you might as well check this one out. I think the best thing you can say about the flick is that it runs a very short 55-minutes and it actually goes by rather fast. Director Ford at least keeps things moving well so the pacing never becomes an issue and at least he was smart enough not to wear out his welcome. The story itself is nothing special as we get one scene after another with the doctor and nurse trying to figure out what's going on even though the viewer was let in on the secret at the very start of the thing. The screenplay, being a Republic movie, offers up a wide range of events including a car chase, a gun fight and we even get a bunch of (bad) humor thrown in. Livingston and Gray are both fairly good in their parts but the same can't be said for Keith. He goes over the top so much that I'd compare his performance to what you'd expect to see from Tod Slaughter. VALLEY OF THE ZOMBIES is probably the rarest of the "zombie" films released after WHITE ZOMBIE and perhaps that's best as I'm sure most people are going to be disappointed with it. It's certainly far from a horrible movie but at the same time there's just really not much to it.