Horror Express (1972)
 |
| pic source |
Christopher Lee, Peter Cushing, and Telly Savalas fighting evil on a train? Yes. Please.
Though this wasn't a Hammer Horror production, Chris and Pete still deliver LOL-level dialogue with unmatched elegance in Horror Express. It's a period piece too, so the fellas can dress up, and Cushing even gets to handle a comically large shotgun.
Using a set borrowed from Nicholas and Alexandra, the production hides its low budget well whenever the baddie isn't on screen. The train cars look great, as do the costumes. The editing waffles between awkward, competent, and (unintentionally?) comic, while the direction is......present.
In 1906, scientician Sir Saxton (played by Lee) finds a two-million-year-old ape man frozen somewhere in China, then boxes it up and hauls it onto a Trans-Siberian train. Then the dumbest characters immediately start dying. Saxton's frenemy Dr. Wells (played by Cushing), tries to find out WHAT'S IN THE BOX and then teams up with the scientist and an inspector (Julio Peña) to solve the crime and stop the evilness. About an hour into the story, Telly Savalas appears, all dick-swanging and cigar-chomping, portraying a Cossack general without even attempting an accent. (He and his troops only serve to stretch the film out to its 88-minute length.) Will Dracula, Dr. Frankenstein, and Kojak outwit the evil not-just-an-ape-man on the train? Or will they all say screw it, hop off at Kharkiv, and do vodka shots until the snow melts?
Eyes are the key to the film. Violence happens through the eyes and to the eyes. And the mystery of the evil thing is solved via a disembodied eyeball in a scene that I had to watch thrice to ascertain it was intended to be funny. (Answer: Probably not.) And though brains are revealed, the zombies near the film's conclusion have nothing to do with said brains.
As much as I may jest about the film overall, most of the WTF questions I wrote down during the film were actually answered by the script. I would absolutely watch it again, though the tale itself would be even better as a sci-fi short story or novella, one with a skeptical tone and more trepanning.
Verdict - Who loves ya baby? Me, kinda.
Now the whisky part!
Distillery: Banff
Ownership: DCL (proto-Diageo)
Independent Bottler: Cadenhead
Range: Authentic Collection
Region: Speyside (Deveron)
Age: 17 years old (August 1976 - June 1994)
Maturation: ???
Outturn: ??? bottles
Alcohol by Volume: 60.5%
(sample from a bottle split)
Like the sibling cask I reviewed 10½(!) years ago, this Banff comes from Cadenhead's green glass era, which means nothing is really known about the maturation vessel and outturn. But I do love me some Banff, and this is my last Banff sample. Of course, four years ago I said I was on my last Banff sample then, so let's all make a wish on the morning star for another reasonable Banff bottle split to come my way. That's five Banffs (or six) in this paragraph, so I should be able to remember which distillery this whisky comes from.
NEAT
Malt, toffee, and dark chocolate appear first in the nose, followed by apricots and brine. And it works! There's a little bit of toasted oak and soap somewhere in the middle. After 45 minutes, notes of baklava and dusty books sneak out. The palate is loud but approachable, and quite creamy in texture. Tart nectarines, salt, burlap, and white chocolate dominate, with the soapy hint staying far in the background. It finishes very salty, with milder notes of metal, nectarines, and coal smoke.
DILUTED to ~46%abv, or nearly 2 tsp of water per 30mL whisky
The sunnier nose offers lemon peels, lime juice, moss, and barley grist, with musty oak and root beer hard candies in the back. The lightly sweet palate shows toasty oak with a hint of malt, Sugar Daddy candy and the tart stone fruit. It gets a bit minerally after a while. It finishes with salt and metal, tart fruit and bitter herbs, and the quiet coal smoke note.
WORDS WORDS WORDS
Many of these green glass bottle Cadenhead releases can be nearly undrinkable at full strength, so I appreciate that this Banff isn't rocket fuel. The nose, neat and diluted, is a complete treat, with a great balance of oak and spirit. The palate might require extensive dilution experiments to find its best spot, though I'm not sure how that would play out on a whisky that's occupied a sealed bottle for 30+ years. At 46%abv, the soap notes completely vanish and the flavors may be more balanced. Had the coal smoke appeared in the palate itself, and if the finish were longer, I'd give this whisky a bigger rave. Still, if this is my last Banff, I feel very lucky to have had this opportunity to taste it.
Availability - Secondary market
Pricing - ???
Rating - 87
