Sergio Garrone tries to juice up the old gothic horror/mad scientist deal get up by adding gore and nudity, but still manages to bore the life out of me.The whole deal is that Klaus Kinski is a scientist whose wife has been horrifically scarred in an accident that also claimed the life of her brilliant scientist father, Ivan Rassimov, who is a character called Ivan Rassimov and not the actor Ivan Rassimov. Kinski of course has one of those labs you get in old mansions that's full of bubbling flasks and electricity,and this is where he conducts his skin graft experiments, using local girls. I'm getting bored writing this review.There's an Igor character running around the place, a couple of girls, one of which is searching for her missing sister, and some guy. Other things happen that you've seen a million times before but Garrone throws in a lesbian sequence, treachery, and Kinski talking to a toy doll but also pads things out with the girl going to the police over and over again, and the medical procedures taking forever. Does it matter if the film bored me? Would that deter others from watching it anyway? Some people love this film and think it's some sort of classic. Maybe instead of an opinion, a brief description of the film and where to find it would suffice. Or is it better to hear the opinion of someone whose watched hundreds of these rather than, say, Mark Kermode?I don't know. There's another film called Lover of the Monster which was made using the same sets and the same actors. I'm going to watch that one, even though this one bored me, so I'm ignoring my own opinion too.

Titled on my box as, The Hand That Feeds Death, but a more accurate translation, I believe is, The Hand That Feeds The Dead. Either way, of course nothing to do with the film in hand. Another confusing aspect to this title is the fact that director Sergio Garrone managed to complete another film the same year, called Lover Of The Monster, that had almost the same cast, same locations and more or less the same story. using much of the same footage. Add to that the fact this was made by the Italians with the Turkish, it is no wonder it seems a little off kilter. More than that it seems to switch from one location to another, day to night and almost story to story in the blink of an eye. On the positive side we do have Kinski (brilliant at the very end with lipstick bloodied lips) lots of gore (transplants) and a fair amount of flesh (young and female) and although it seemed ridiculous from the outset, I enjoyed it. It is bright, colourful and cheery with a really impressive laboratory with blood being pumped hither and thither. Silly yes, boring no.

This is another collaboration between crazed German actor Klaus Kinski, hack Italian director Sergio Garrone, and beautiful Dutch actress Katia Christine, and it is a marginal improvement over their other collaboration "Amanti di Mostro". The story is superficially similar to the other film. Once again, Kinski is a mad scientist married to Katia Christine, and once again he is carrying on the work of his late father-in-law (named "Ivan Rassimov" in this movie, which is perhaps an inside joke since Ivan Rassimov was a familiar character actor in Italian exploitation films during this era). But instead of Kinski turning himself into Mr. Hyde and attacking all the half-naked,local women, this movie has an "Eyes without a Face"-type plot where Kinski uses his Igor-like assistant to kidnap all the half-naked, local women in order to transplant their flesh onto his disfigured wife.Sergio Garrone (to borrow a line from "Shock Cinema's" Steve Puchalski) probably couldn't successfully direct his own bowel movement, so it's impressive here that the direction at times approaches borderline competence (or maybe that should be credited to his Turkish co-director?). Kinski generally gave two kinds of performances in movies like this--scenery-gnawing or totally phoned-in. He definitely gnawed some serious scenery in "Amanti di Mostro", but here is performance is pretty much phoned-in (he also may have stormed off the set at some point because they seem to use a double for some of his scenes). If you're a fan of Katia Christine's acting, you'll enjoy this more than "Amanti" because she has much more screen time and essentially plays two different roles, one of which is deliciously evil. If you're more a fan of Katia Christine's body, however, you might prefer the other movie because she generally keeps her Victorian garments on here. There is as much nudity and even more gore than in "Amanti", but it all comes toward the end of the movie, by which time you may have already slipped into a boredom-induced coma.Although the best thing about this might be the literal translation of the Italian title, "The Hand that Feeds Death", this was recently released on Region 1 DVD under the ho-hum title "Evil Face". I wouldn't really recommend this, but god knows I'VE seen worse movies.

The Hand That Feeds the Dead apparently is often confused with a film called Lover of the Monster. That's not at all surprising; they're both directed by Sergio Garrone, feature basically the same cast (both headed by Klaus Kinski), both were released in 1974, they both feature similar plots and even some of the same footage. Unfortunately, they're also both rubbish. After seeing Lover of the Monster recently, I had it in my head that at least it couldn't be worse than The Hand That Feeds the Dead - but I was wrong, as despite a very nice title; this film is utter dross. The film takes place in the nineteenth century and focuses on a doctor by the name of Prof Nijinski. He stumbles upon an old laboratory in his basement and begins experimenting with life and death (yadda, yadda). Of course, the experiments go wrong and end up messing with the doctors head.I have to admit that the version I saw was sourced from a Turkish VHS and was cut down to about seventy eight minutes. I don't know exactly what was cut out, but I'm guessing it was all the good bits because we haven't been left with much. I'm sure that some of the gore was cut out because I didn't see much of it; there were a few skin graft scenes but overall the film is very lacking on that front. The period setting and obvious low budget gives the film something of a gritty feel that works fairly well with the plot but is nowhere near enough to save the production on the whole. Klaus Kinski is undoubtedly one of the major stars of cult cinema, but even his presence is not enough to lift this production; frankly he looked about as bored as I was. The pace is very slow and the editing is inept, which makes the film even harder to watch. I really didn't care what happened at the end and the climax was not interesting anyway. This film has vanished into obscurity since its release and I'm not at all surprised about that. The Hand That Feeds the Dead is nowhere as interesting as it sounds and is not recommended!