Upon first viewing, I didn't warm up to "Tower of London" much. The story of 15th century political intrigue wasn't exactly what I was looking for when popping in a quote-unquote Universal Horror movie. This is, after all, the same historical material that inspired Shakespeare's "Richard III" and modern soap opera "The Tudors." Rewatching this movie tonight, I discovered, surprise surprise, it is a horror movie, at least parts of it anyway.Granted, a large portion of the film revolves around royal politics. There's lots of talks of familial relations, of marrying the right people, of who's next in line to the throne. As generally accepted by fiction, but not necessarily history, Richard III murdered his way up the royal line, all the way to the king's throne. In tradition with Shakespeare, Basil Rathbone's portray of Richard includes a hunchback. After the exile of Henry Tudor and the death of his mingling brother Edward, the film shows Richard's inclinations for murderous conspiracies kick in.And that's were the film's horror elements come from. The film invents the character of Mord, a royal executioner with a clubfoot, childhood friend of Richard, played by Karloff. Mord is one of Karloff's most sadistically evil characters. Karloff's head is shaved and his all ready imposing frame is further padded out, making him look especially intimidating. This is a man who gleefully grinds an axe before the gallows, has no qualms about stabbing an old man while he prays. Interestingly enough, Mord is also responsible for spreading rumors, gossip that slowly erodes at the public's trust of Prince Edward V and his brother. Richard's manipulation of the boys takes up a large portion of the film's middle section. The moment Rathbone first considers murdering the children even causes Karloff's totally immoral character to pause for a second. The scene where the boy princes are killed has got to be one of the darkest moments in Post-Code thirties cinema.This is largely an actor's film. Rathbone gives an interesting performance. Richard III is never more then a calculating villain. Even his generous public area or the scenes with the woman he plans on marrying are never more then mechanical moves towards power. It's still a very good performance, strictly because Rathbone imbues every line and turn with a sinister attitude. Among the supporting cast is a very young Vincent Price as Duke George, played here as a foppish alcoholic. The best scene in the movie is the drink-off, like a duel but with booze, between Rathbone and Price. Another example of two great actors playing it over the top against one another. There's some dark comedy sprinkled throughout too, most of it coming from Mord's causal brutality, such as opening a iron maiden and letting a body fall out as calmly as you and I take the garbage out.The horror content peaks during the scene where a prisoner of the Tower is tortured for information. Whipping, hot irons, the rack, all of it displayed in as much graphic detail as 1939 would allow. (Which might be more then you'd think.) Could the roots of post-millennial torture horror be in this little seen period drama? Probably not, but it's fun to think so. The story climaxes with a huge battle scene, which is fine but marks the end of the horror elements. Rathbone is given a surprisingly lackluster death scene but Karloff's dramatic dive off a cliff makes up for it. After 90 minutes of brutality and darkness, the overly up-beating ending is a real tone breaker. "Tower of London" honestly isn't pure horror but, every time I see the film, I'm surprise at how closely it skirts up against the genre.

The picture begins with a foreword : ¨No age is without its ruthless men -who , in their search for power , leave dark stains upon the pages of history . During the Middle Ages -to seize the tower of London was to seize the throne of England . In 1471 this has been done by Edward IV (Ian Hunter)- who has violently deposed the feeble Henry IV (Miles Mander) and holds him prisoner . Within the deep shadows of the Tower walls lives the population of a small city , some in prison cells and torture chambers , some in palaces and spacious lodgings , but none in peace . A web of intrigue veils the lives of all who know only too well that today's friends might be tomorrow's enemies¨ . As this excellent film tells the story of power-hungry Richard III Crookback (an incisive Basil Rathbone who features an acclaimed acting) , 6th in throne succession , subsequent and eventually crowned king , the English monarch who brutally executed the people who attempted to get in way to the throne . Richard eliminates those ahead of him in succession to the throne, then occupied by his brother King Edward IV of England. Richard , Duke of Gloucester , is a dominant , unstoppable , mean lord , gross black spider of a figure that devours or possesses everything on its path . After the death of Edward he becomes Richard III, King of England, and he needs only defeat the exiled Henry Tudor to retain power . Deformed and ruthless English king Richard battles Prince of Wales' army , as the opposing forces converge in Gloucester-shire and the Prince prays for victory at the Priory of Hereford . This melodrama is based on historical events , during Two Roses War , ¨Red Rose (York)¨ ruled by Edward IV and Richard III followers and ¨White Rose (Lancaster)¨ Henry VII followers who vanquish them . There finally takes place battle of Bosworth , in which Richard III is defeated and takes over the kingdom , a new ruler named Henry VII Tudor.Dazzling , hypnotic entertainment that was deemed extremely graphic for its time and some of the torture scenes had to be cut before it was released . More interested as historical drama than as a terror film , the picture profits from a magnificent cast who gives over-the-top interpretations . Well produced and atmospheric picture , being stunningly directed by Rowland V .Lee , which gives Boris Karloff one of his best characters as the shaven-headed executioner who looks like a forerunner of ulterior roles . Gorgeously polished visuals are perfect foil for the slimy , evil goings-on . The battle scenes were an ordeal to film. Principally shot on August 19, 1939 at a ranch in Tarzana, the fog machine proved ineffective in the face of high winds. The 100-degree heat caused the 300 extras to suffer and rain machines caused the soldier's cardboard helmets and shields to disintegrate. Additional battle scenes were shot on August 22 and on September 4, 1939, but the California heat continued to play havoc with the cast, crew and equipment . Production wrapped on 4 September 1939, 10 days and nearly $80,000 over budget . Tremendous black and white cinematography by George Robinson and stunning dramatic impact in one of the most successful Universal films ever made . Good musical score , though studio heads were alarmed that the score contained nothing but period music and ordered a new score be written ; time considerations ultimately prevented this, with Frank Skinner cobbling together pieces from his score from The son of Frankenstein , only pieces of the original score survived the final cut. Other films dealing with this historic personage are the followings : ¨Tower of London¨(1962) by Roger Corman with Vincent Price as Richard III , Michael Pate , Sandra Knight ; it results to be a sophisticated remake and Price plays a role taken over in the 1939 rendition who coincidentally appeared as the doomed Duke of Clarence ; the classic ¨Richard III¨ (1955) starred and directed by Laurence Olivier with Ralph Richardson , John Gielgud , Cedric Hardwicke , this is the landmark version of the Shakespearean play . And modern take ¨Richard III (1995) by Richard Loncraine with Ian Mckellen , Jim Broadbent , Robert Downey Jr and Nigel Hawthorne , being set in an imagined 1930s London of swanky Art Deco .

Tower of London is not exactly great by all means. The script does feel rather muddled, the pacing is uneven with some scenes that feel rushed and others that plod and the romantic subplot is just silly. However, it does look great, with striking cinematography and appropriately creepy settings. Frank Skinner's music gives a haunting edge and the memorable but here often grim story is full of great scenes, the two battles are spectacular, while the murders of Clarence and the two Princes are unforgettable. The whole cast give good performances, especially Leo G.Carroll, who makes any supporting character more interesting than it is. But there are three performances that are great. Basil Rathbone is a brilliant Richard, he dominates every scene he's in in every way and he never resorts to camp. Boris Karloff, with the bald head and clubbed foot, is terrifying as the Exexutioner, while Vincent Price's Clarence, the actor in a very early role and he went on to give even better performances, is memorable. So all in all, a decent film but elevated by some unforgettable scenes and three great performances. 7/10 Bethany Cox

When that martyr to morality, that paragon of piety Sir Thomas More had his head chopped off by the order of his master, Henry VIII, it's unlikely in those last moments that he asked forgiveness for the sliming of Richard III's reputation, which he accomplished while ambitiously working to curry favor with the Tudors. Richard was the last of the Yorkist line, a capable and honest king, as ruthless in politics as everyone else was at that time, and most likely, if he had not taken action, to lose his own head to the machinations of the Woodvilles, the family of Queen Elizabeth, widow of Edward IV, Richard's brother, and mother to the two young princes who were the immediate heirs to the throne when Edward died. We know that Richard took control of the princes, that they were lodged with great comfort in the Tower, that he had them proclaimed illegitimate based on a prior morganatic marriage Edward had undertaken, and that there is no record of them having been seen during the last months of Richard's reign. We also know that Henry Tudor, a minor and ambitious offspring from the royal line, returned to England, raised an army and defeated Richard when the forces of Lord Stanley betrayed Richard and attacked his flank in the middle of the battle at Bosworth Field. Tudor took the crown, Richard's body disappeared after being abused, and the Tudor propaganda machine took over. Thanks primarily to Thomas More and, later, William Shakespeare, Richard was turned into a crook-backed, club-footed, amoral monster who slew innocent children, beheaded stalwart lovers of England, wooed widows over the caskets of their husbands and, to put it gently, was an unreliable friend. When Richard was killed in battle, the Tudors saw to it that Richard's reputation as a fair and capable king died with him. And that brings us to Tower of London. Here we have a cauldron of a movie bubbling merrily away that spatters as much rancid stew on Richard almost as vividly as Shakespeare and More did. Basil Rathbone plays Richard with enthusiastic malice. As a henchman, he has Boris Karloff as Mord, a big, club-footed, bald-headed, muscular torturer, eager to use the executioner's axe or the torturer's rack and whip. "You're more than a duke," Mord tells Richard, "more than a king. You're a god to me!" Mord eagerly and admiringly acts on Richard's plans, from thrusting a dagger into the back of the mad old Henry VI to tipping Clarence, Richard's troublesome brother, into a huge vat of malmsey, then sitting on the lid while waiting for the sound of the bubbles to stop. Just as with Shakespeare's Richard, Hollywood's Rathbonian version is great fun, at least as long as Richard has center stage. Things slow down when we spend time seeing how angelic the two royal tykes are. There also is a romantic and conventional subplot between a lady- in-waiting and a young man dedicated to helping Henry Tudor bring down Richard. This is Basil Rathbone's movie, however, and he makes the most of it with icy diction and some good lines. He hands his own dagger to Mord, then sends him to where Henry VI is praying. "A fitting occasion for a blade in the shape of a cross," Richard says. "It will insure the thrust and bless the wound." Karloff gives wonderful, dreadful support. At one point we watch him step heavily on a young royal messenger with his club foot. The boy doesn't survive. Of course, we should know the outcome by now. And who did kill the two young princes? Some say Richard would have been foolish to do so so soon into his reign. Better to wait if he were going to do the deed. The most likely candidate may be the Duke of Buckingham, amoral, unreliable and impetuous, who was eager to have Richard in his debt. My money is on Henry VII. If when Henry won the crown and then found the two princes in the Tower, both with a much better claim to the throne than Henry's, their future would quickly have become their past...as it did. Those who appreciate the gleeful assassination of a person's character will enjoy Lawrence Olivier's Richard III and Ian McKellan's Richard III. Those who might appreciate reading a different point of view should look up Paul Murray Kendall's marvelous biography, Richard III.