myneesh This is great 70s horror! Feels like a Hammer film. Horror with a little humor done perfectly.

manchester_england2004 I'll get straight to the point - I love this film and think it's one of the best horror films of all time. Many people won't agree and that's fine. But I'm going to use this space to talk about this film and what it is that I think makes it so great.Christopher Lee is at the top of his game as an anthropologist who discovers a frozen monster in Manchuria and travels back to Europe on a trans-Siberian express train with it. It isn't a giveaway to say that the monster was merely in hibernation and wakes up as the ice it's contained in melts. There's a great atmosphere, brimming with suspense and tension. The twists and turns in the story are well-executed and the film will keep you on the edge of your seat as you wonder how all this will end.The always dependable Peter Cushing is equally great as a scientist traveling on the same train. Cushing's wife had recently died and he didn't want to star in this film. But Lee persuaded him to do it, and while this may be selfish of me to say, I'm glad he did. It's one of the few films where they are on the same side in the battle of good versus evil and it's brilliant to watch them together.I could never write a review for this film without mentioning the late Julio Pena, who played Inspector Mirov. He died a few months after filming was complete and before the film's release. But I'm sure his knowledge that he delivered his best performance of his career in his film will help him rest peacefully. He's absolutely fantastic to watch in action and the Mirov character himself is perhaps the most interesting police inspector to feature in a Spanish horror film, as well as being one of the most interesting fictional police inspectors ever.The other actors are great too. Alberto de Mendoza gives the performance of his career as a Rasputin-like mad monk named Pujardov. Silvia Tortosa, Georges Rigaud and many more are all great in their roles and hold our interest in their scenes. Helga Line is given an unusual role as a mysterious character, not what she at first seems. It's a pity she's written out of the film so early on.Eugenio Martín directs the film very differently from the way most Spanish horror films are done. Spanish horror films, like British ones, are often very entertaining (like Paul Naschy's many films for example) but rarely scary and having what I call a "safe edge" to them. By that I mean you feel almost 100 per cent sure that certain characters who you could pick out would make it to the end of the film. The atmosphere, combined with the twists and turns, lead you to suspect none of the characters are safe and that anything could happen. Martín's direction capitalises on the claustrophobia of the train setting to the full. He times the shocks and surprises well. Some people complain about the frequent exterior shots of the train between scenes. But I think they miss the point that Martín is reminding the audience that the characters are trapped in a potentially fatal situation. The icy cold of the Siberian countryside is not exactly a place one could consider an escape either, something Martín clearly wants to emphasise. The other thing being emphasised I believe is that the train journey is very long and that the dangers aboard the train will persist for what seems like an eternity.Overall, HORROR EXPRESS is an unsung horror masterpiece in my opinion. It's simply a magnificent, fun film to watch on a Friday or Saturday night.

begob A British scientist transports an ancient fossil on the trans-Siberia express, but the fossil wants to bury the passengers ...Nice Hammer-style horror with a well paced story and solid performances. The setting is period cosmopolitanism in colonial Asia, with the usual class-based conservatism of the genre but also a nice line in self awareness: "Monsters? But we're British, you know!" The plot device of the train is well executed, and the development of the threat never goes overboard. The only weaknesses are that there's no character development, and the ending is rushed.Performances are standard from these actors, with a brief flare-up of "what you are I wouldn't eat" from Telly Savalas. Music is of its time - a little grating in the opening sequence, but not excessive.Overall: well told story that sits comfortably in the Hammer tradition.

Andrei Pavlov Good sides Location. The whole story happens on the train. It's peculiar. Remember "Blood" (the video game)? The most thrilling level (my opinion) was on the train that was running through the darkness. Music. It's impressive. Actors. They are grand and gorgeous. All the ladies and gentlemen are hoity-toity from top to toe. Cossacks. To witness this kind of cliché (in costumes and behaviour) is entertaining.Bad sides Cossacks. Yes, they are in a bad one too. They are not just funny but pathetic too. And they are speaking English which makes them unrealistic (couldn't they hire real Russian actors with minimum lines and maximum show-off?). Russian characters here DO look fake. Western audience will not notice it probably.Ugly sides Words. Too much explanation near the ending (by the beast itself). It spoils the enigma of the initial scary moments. Too many words in a horror flick should be avoided. And making speeches about the terror from the outer space is boring. Fake monk. Absolutely unrealistic and loony monk. Instead of battling the beast he kneels before him asking for power, but in the beginning of the movie he acts like a prophet. His way of behaviour and looks are very unorthodox for an orthodox priest (too much make up is used by the actor, by the way), so the director shouldn't have put him in the movie (or at least on the train) at all to keep this feature running in the right direction. In "Exorcist" the priest is credible and perhaps that is why that cinema became a worthy classic. And do you remember the priest in "Prince of Darkness"? He is depicted as a buffoon too. Can't put "a worthy classic" tag on it too.Verdict: being very well polished on the outside (costumes, music, scenery), the cinema is shallow in its impact upon the viewer, mostly due to unrealistic characters. And there is not a single tough screen guy or a memorable lady to rely on or to sympathize with - just cannon fodder.Sorry for this sketchy comment, much is left to be added still.The IMDb rating for this one is OK, - a 5 out of 10 from my side. Thanks for attention.