Rasputin: The Mad Monk (1966) User Reviews

Another classic Hammer film!!

[kergillian · 7/10 · 1 June 2001]

I've read quite a few reviews of this film shunning it do to lack of historical fact or shoddy scriptwriting. Obviously these people have no clue about what Hammer films are and what they're meant to be. This film is another Hammer classic, hilarious and well-acted, excellent quality cinematography, and not to be taken the slightest bit seriously.

Christopher Lee is *the* hammer actor (well...with Peter Cushing running a close second;), and he plays the *perfect* Rasputin! The evil dictator laugh down-pat, the eyes are beyond eerie, and even his gait, his posture, his body language all work perfectly. And Barbara Shelley is definitely a solid, stereotypical, 'femi-victim', and she plays beautifully off of Lee.

The only qualm I have about this film is the ending, which was a touch too anti-climactic...although I bought the special edition with trailers and TV spots at the end which improved the ending dramatically (I wish I could find one of those 'free Rasputin beards'...)

Overall: This is not one of the best Hammer films, it's not Blood of Dracula or The Devil Rides Out...but it's up there, and it has all the great elements: cheezy soft-gore effects (love that severed hand!!), *almost* nudity, maniacal laughter, tension-riddled music...it's fun from beginning to end! 7/10.

Christopher Lee boosts otherwise routine film

[b-rain · 6/10 · 16 October 2001]

Hammer delves into Russian history with Christopher Lee as the mysterious monk who worms his way into the royal family. Ignoring political aspects(The czar isn't even shown!), Rasputin is presented as a purely evil figure, the same as Dracula. Lee's over-the-top performance raises this a little above routine, but not much. Excellent production values though. Image Quality: Anchor Bay's dvd looks very good. The letter-boxed, anamorphic transfer is presented at a 2:1 aspect ratio, cropped slightly from the original 2.35:1 Sound: mono, acceptable quality Extras: The audio commentary, with Lee, Barbara Shelley and others, makes this disc worth getting. Very enjoyable and informative, with Lee being the obvious highlight

Hammer's best pseudo-historic epic

[funkyfry · 7/10 · 29 October 2002]

Hammer Film's relatively unambitious adventure in historical exploitation is lifted above the norm by 2 major factors: the genius of set designer Robinson and the fine heavy styles of Chris Lee and Barby Shelley, pros of the genre in every sense. The scene with Rasputin smoking in bed while Shelley cowers in a gathering of blankets is a classic visual statement.

This film tells the story of Rasputin with more of an eye to screen exploitation values than truth (which I think is how it should be, as Plato said that truth is rarely a likely story), including a scarring incident with acid -- what Hammer Film would be complete without facial mutilations? Chris Lee's use of his body and hands is notable; Don Sharp's direction is fine. If only it wasn't quite so cheap, and thus confined (mostly to one or two houses, which is all Bray Studios was), this could have been a really good film. Mediocre script also helps drag it down, but Lee and Shelley's styles are so forceful that it is almost unnoticeable.

Historically inaccurate hokum which Christopher Lee fans will adore!

[Infofreak · 5 April 2003]

It goes without saying that Hammer's look at the infamous Rasputin is historically inaccurate and should NOT be watched by anyone looking for a history lesson. But who cares when a movie is this damn entertaining? Hammer vet Christopher Lee has an absolute ball playing the wine-guzzling, womanizing Russian mystic and con-man. This role really lets Lee cut loose from his Dracula persona and he takes full advantage of it, leering, laughing, boozing, even dancing! Christopher Lee fans will absolutely lap this movie up! I wouldn't say it was his best performance, but it's certainly one of his most enjoyable. The cast also includes some familiar faces, and Barbara Shelley ('Village Of The Damned', 'Quatermass and the Pit') is particularly fine, as is Richard Pasco as Zargo, the disgraced alcoholic doctor who Rasputin manipulates for his own ends. I can honestly say I've only seen one of two duds made by Hammer, and this is certainly not one of them. It's a bit of a potboiler I suppose, but a very good one, with strong production values, and overall it's a lot of fun and Lee is magnificent! Recommended to Hammer, and most especially, Christopher Lee fans.

Works best as a Christopher Lee vehicle.

[Hey_Sweden · 7/10 · 16 February 2013]

This viewer is not surprised to learn that this Hammer production is far from being an accurate portrayal of the real-life Russian peasant monk. It's to be expected that for the sake of a good show that films such as this will play fast and loose with the facts. However, it must be said that this IS a damn good show.

Lee is allowed the chance to really cut loose for once, and he does a marvelous job of going over the top as the lusty, life-of-the-party Rasputin, who has genuine healing abilities but also a very conniving and self-serving nature. After gaining some attention for curing a sick woman, he soon finds a means of manipulating his way into the royal family of early 20th century Czarist Russia. Naturally, there are those who aren't fooled by him and will seek to destroy him once they have the chance.

The Hammer studio does an immaculate job, as always, in recreating the sights and sounds of a period piece. Top talents such as production designer Bernard Robinson and (supervising) editor James Needs are at the top of their game. Don Banks composed the very unsubtle, thunderous music score, which does come in handy when Rasputin is required to make an entrance.

The excellent cast includes beautiful Barbara Shelley and Suzan Farmer, Francis Matthews, Dinsdale Landen, Renee Asherson, Derek Francis, and Joss Ackland; other than Lee, the performer that really stands out is Richard Pasco as Dr. Bruno Zargo, an alcoholic who becomes putty in the hands of the mad Rasputin. Lee himself is a delight, his rich voice booming with authority. He simply commands the screen, and keeps the right insane, evil glint in his eyes at all times.

The most entertaining of all the scenes is one in which a furious Landen unthinkingly rushes into a confrontation with Lee only to find himself outmatched. The final battle is an exciting one, with Rasputin proving to be exceedingly difficult to finish off.

Overall, this isn't top drawer Hammer, but it's still quite enjoyable, and worth a viewing for fans of the studio and star.

Seven out of 10.

Thoroughly enjoyable

[tomgillespie2002 · 6/10 · 13 February 2011]

For a keen horror fan, I have seen precious little of the Hammer horror universe. You can imagine my delight when I was gifted the Hammer DVD Collection for Christmas which consists of 21 films from the vault of the great British institution. I felt spoiled for choice. When opening the box I was greeted by the mad eyes of Christopher Lee, gazing out from amongst a gigantic beard and El Topo-esque haircut. I felt obliged to choose this as my introduction to what will no doubt become a fixation with Hammer, and the film I will remember years into the future when I'm no doubt walking the Earth, trying to find all the tiny forgotten films Hammer produced before they became famous.

For those of you who don't know, Grigori Rasputin was a real-life Russian mystic/hypnotist/con-artist who had a heavy influence on the Tsarist government of Emperor Nicholas II and his wife Alexandra, after apparently healing their son Alexei as he lay dying from haemophilia. The film is less concerned with the politics of the time, and instead focuses on Rasputin's love for drinking, women, and generally being a bit of a bastard, as he hypnotises and heals his way through society and into the bed of lady-in-waiting Sonia (Barbara Shelley).

The film wastes no time introducing Rasputin's maverick attitudes to monkhood, as he heals a saloon owner's wife on her death bed so he can get served a drink, and proceeds to sing and drink the night way before hacking a man's hand off in a fight. Fleeing to Moscow after being hauled in front of the bishop for his unorthodox ways, he gains influence over a disgraced doctor and begins to plan his rise to power.

The film's main strength is undoubtedly Lee's performance as the mad Russian, as he dominates every scene with his intense, piercing eyes and booming voice, with his towering frame overshadowing everyone that comes across his path. The scene in which he does a celebratory dance after beating a challenger in a drinking contest only to mistake some onlookers for laughing at him is both weird and intimidating as he demands an apology. It is a great mix of thespian presence and Gothic camp that makes the Hammer films, and more notably Christopher Lee's performances for the studio, that extra bit special.

Rasputin The Mad Monk is a thoroughly enjoyable film, anchored by Lee's performance and Hammer's usual beautiful Technicolour cinematography, and is made all the better by leaving out the politics and concentrating on creating a memorable film character.

www.the-wrath-of-blog.blogspot.com

The Evil Rasputin

[claudio_carvalho · 6/10 · 8 December 2018]

"Rasputin: The Mad Monk" is an average Hammer film, but with Christopher Lee and the lovely Barbara Shelley in the lead roles of the evil Rasputin and the sweet Sonia respectively. The story is highly entertaining and it is funny to read that it is "historically inaccurate". My vote is six.

Title (Brazil): "Rasputin: O Monge Louco" ("Rasputin, The Mad Monk")

Not particularly brilliant, but quite good fun if taken for what it is

[TheLittleSongbird · 6/10 · 15 June 2015]

Rasputin: The Mad Monk is not one of those films where you should expect a history lesson, about two things are true but apart from that the film does play fast and loose with Rasputin and his life, which will leave historians in despair. As a film on its own terms(which I've always found a much fairer way to judge), while not great and while nowhere near Hammer's best(somewhere in the middle for me), Rasputin: The Mad Monk is fun.

It has two main flaws. One is that Rasputin: The Mad Monk has some very confined sets- in number and sometimes visually- that look like they were left over from previous Hammer films(quite a departure from Hammer's usual production values standard), when the film could have shown the beautiful Russian landscapes which would have given more of a sense of place. The wealthy also at times could have been more extravagant, the costumes are very attractive don't get me wrong but the low budget stops it from being more than that. The other flaw with Rasputin: The Mad Monk is the rather shoddy script, that contains flat dialogue, one-dimensional character writing(and this is including Rasputin, one of the 20th century's most colourful and interesting historical figures) while ignoring the political state of Russia at the time which would have brought some tension, and a few decent ideas that were sadly vaguely explored.

Francis Matthews is also rather stiff and dull, very like how he was in Dracula: Prince of Darkness, and while she does a decent job still Suzan Farmer has very little to do other than look as fetching as possible. As exciting, hugely entertaining and as tense as the climax was, it also was a touch anti-climatic and Rasputin's death was handled too quickly and too easily(from personal view).

However, the lighting is both colourful and eerie, and Rasputin: The Mad Monk is filmed beautifully and stylishly. So the film didn't look completely cheap, despite the obviousness of the low-budget. The music score is thunderously grandiose in the most thrilling of ways, giving off genuine chills and excitement. Sharp's direction is efficient enough, managing to mostly keep the story interesting and maintaining the appropriate mood. The story is mostly fun, and includes some horror elements that are handled with tension and creepy atmosphere without being gratuitous as well as some mystery elements that bring glimpses of suspense.

The best thing about Rasputin: The Mad Monk is the cast. Barbara Shelley(better utilised than she was in Dracula: Prince of Darkness) is luminous but also brings vulnerability and vast dramatic intensity, and Richard Pasco is effectively twitchy. Christopher Lee walks away with the film though to the extent that he literally IS the film, with his larger than life presence, wild appearance, chilling penetrating stare and deep and very distinctive voice it's a towering performance in every sense of the word, and it's so much fun to watch him.

On the whole, Rasputin: The Mad Monk is not a great film as such and people should look to the 1996 film starring Alan Rickman for a more accurate account of the man and his life, but it does provide some good entertainment when not taken seriously and viewed as it's meant to be and is worth catching for Lee alone. 6/10 Bethany Cox

Great Performance from Lee

[Reviews_of_the_Dead · 7/10 · 27 September 2019]

This is an interesting film in that it is one of the lesser known and seemingly not talked about from Hammer. I first came across the title when I was looking through a horror encyclopedia. All I knew was that it was from the 60s and from this production company, which I tend to enjoy these works. I did like to see that the late great Christopher Lee was playing the title role as well. I did give this a rewatch as a potential Summer Challenge Series pick for the Podcast Under the Stairs as well.

Synopsis: thrown out of his monastery for licentious and drunken behavior, Rasputin (Lee) travels to St. Petersburg to try his luck. Through a dalliance with one of the czarina's ladies in waiting, he soon gains influence at court with his power of healing and hypnotism. But he also makes enemies.

We start this in a small inn. The keeper's wife is ill and it doesn't seem like the doctor can do anything to help her. There is a somber feeling until Grigori Rasputin enters. He demands two bottles of wine. He learns through the patrons why the mood is so down. He goes upstairs and with his hands, he cures the woman of her fever. A party is thrown in his honor. Rasputin drinks a lot and goes off with the innkeeper's daughter to a barn. As they're kissing, her suitor shows up and a fight ensues. The daughter is no longer in the mood, but Rasputin won't take no for an answer. He is chased away from the barn by the rest of the men.

Much as the synopsis states, Rasputin is banished from his monastery as he is using it for his own carnal needs as well as food and shelter. He is in a horse drawn coach, hearing stories about St. Petersburg. He takes the reigns and they head toward this destination instead.

Rasputin is determined to make his way and finds the chance when Dr. Zargo (Richard Pasco) comes into the same tavern with a friend. His friend boasts that Dr. Zargo can out drink any man there. Rasputin takes up the challenge. Also coming this to tavern is Sonia (Barbara Shelley). She was at a ball thrown for the Tsarina (Renée Asherson), but Sonia convinces her brother Peter (Dinsdale Landen), his friend Ivan (Francis Matthews) and his sister Vanessa (Suzan Farmer) to come here instead. Sonia has a wild side and when she drinks strong vodka, she starts to laugh to the point where she can't control herself. Rasputin was finishing his dance and believes her to be laughing at him. He confronts the table, noticing the beauty of Vanessa. This upsets the men and they must be broken up.

Rasputin takes advantage of a drunken Dr. Zargo by taking him home and staying there. Things all turn when Rasputin gets his in when Sonia comes looking for him to apologize. He then hypnotizes her with a plan that will get him in front of the Tsarina. This is just the start of his master plan.

Now to start this review off, I will admit that I don't know a lot about Grigori Rasputin other than that he was crazy, made some interesting predications and he was evil. I also heard about his death according to reports was quite legendary. Just by glancing at a few things, this film is not historically accurate. This will probably be the most that I talk about it, but you shouldn't come into this thinking it will be.

What I like about this is the presence of Rasputin. A lot of this goes to Lee. The moment he comes into the inn at the beginning, with his long beard he just commands the screen. This is in due part to how tall he is. He chews up the scenery every time he's on screen. What I also love is that he's a scoundrel. I know that in his latter years with Hammer, he was over playing Dracula. I can tell here that he probably enjoyed this role of drinking, dancing and just being this evil character. He could showcase his screen presence.

I want to shift a bit to talk about the pacing, because it is a bit slow and I think that is in part to the type of movie this is. It only runs 91 minutes, but I'll be honest, I felt most of them. I don't want you to think that I hated it though. This is a character study where not a lot happens to be honest. It is a good chunk of seeing Rasputin come up with a plan to get him into a place of power and then we see those trying to figure out a way to stop him. I did like the ending and sticking with how strong-willed Rasputin was. He ruins the lives of so many people around him.

Shifting then to the acting. I've already touched on this, but Lee was amazing. He's an actor that I've seen in many different roles, but I think he's marvelous here. He does such a great job in this performance. I would also say that Shelley is quite attractive, but what I like is that we see her taken advantage of by Rasputin. He can sense her wildness and uses it for his own gains until she's no longer needed. Then there's Pasco who is such a broken character and much like Sonia, Rasputin's strong will takes him over. Farmer is also quite attractive. We don't see a lot of her and she's fine in the role she has. I'd say that the rest of the cast also rounds this film out for what is needed.

All that is left is filmmaking. First would be the effects, but to be honest we don't get a lot of them. It isn't that type of movie though either. I think that the look and make-up of Rasputin is spot on to pictures I've seen. We do get a little bit of blood and it is that Hammer, bright colored kind. I have a soft spot for that. There are burns from acid that are fine. Overall, I'd say what we get works and the settings don't really scream Russia, but I can overlook that. There is a gothic feel that Hammer was known for. Other than that, I think the cinematography is good to capture that feel of it being in the past. It doesn't do a lot to stand out though. The soundtrack also works. Again, I'm not getting heavy vibes of music from this country. I'm also not an expert either.

In conclusion, this film follows a character that historically is scary and it isn't that beyond question that someone like this could pop up again. It was genius to have Lee take on the role, as he does a great job with his screen presence and his performance to match it. This isn't the most exciting film, so keep that in mind. It's more of a character study. The things we see for Rasputin to continue his rise is good. I do think the rest of the acting compliments him and the ending is solid. This is a well-made movie from cinematography to make-up. I'm not sure it gives off a heavy Russian feel since the settings themselves didn't necessarily do that. I'd recommend this if you're interested in seeing a version of this character on screen or you're a fan of Hammer from this era.

My Rating: 7 out of 10.

Rasputin: The Mad Monk

[Scarecrow-88 · 6/10 · 7 October 2010]

Biligerent and boisterous monk, Rasputin, who loves his wine and women, becomes drunk with power when Her Majesty Russia, Tsarina(Renée Asherson) depends on his miraculous healing powers, saving her son from certain death. Barbara Shelley is the Lady in Waiting, Sonia, who helps nanny Tsarina's boy and is under Rasputin's spell, used by him until she is no longer needed..it is she who allows Rasputin to get into Her Majesty's good graces, as he hypnotically forces her to intentionally harm the boy so that he could heal him of his fever. Dr. Zargo(Richard Pasco)is a former physician forbidden to practice medicine, who is "adopted", so to speak, by Rasputin(he was outbeaten by Rasputin in a drinking contest, for which the monk took him under his wing). Zargo witnesses first-hand the horrible treatment of Sonia by Rasputin, merely servicing him as a tool to get better living conditions and favor with Tsarina. There's one tragic scene where Rasputin orders Sonia to kill herself because he wanted her out of his life; the reason being she bored him! This is the kind of Hammer take on history where Rasputin is a villain who destroys everyone that gets in his way or is a waste to him. The only one that matters to Rasputin is Rasputin. Lee is barely recognizable under a long thick beard and scraggly hair, barking commands and dominating those weaker than him in nearly all his time on screen. It's only when Rasputin sets his eyes on Sonia's beautiful friend, Vanessa(Suzan Farmer), that might lead to his downfall, thanks to an orchestrated plan between Dr. Zargo and Vanessa's brother, Ivan(Francis Matthews), hoping to poison the evil monk, ridding the country of such a powerful menace. Sonia's poor brother Peter(Dinsdale Landen), just trying to avenge his sister's forced suicide, gets it in the face with acid. The exciting conclusion has Zargo trying to kill Rasputin over and over, repeatedly failing, needing help from Ivan to ultimately stop this madman. Don Sharp, the director of such underrated films as THE BRIDES OF FU MANCHU, WITCHCRAFT, & THE KISS OF THE VAMPIRE, often shoots Lee from afar, taking great advantage of his grand presence, unlike other established directors who wanted to bare more emphasis on his handsome face and intense eyes. Hammer studios take liberties on the history of Rasputin turning him into a seemingly indestructible, fierce, and always dangerous threat to anyone who dares cross him. Francis Matthews, Shelley, and Farmer all starred with Lee in Dracula--PRINCE OF DARKNESS in the same year.

Lees Performance saves the film

[spacemonkey_fg · 5/10 · 10 June 2005]

Title: Rasputin: The Mad Monk (1966) Director: Don Sharp Cast: Christopher Lee, Barbara Shelly, Richard Pasco Review: Having heard that Christopher Lee acknowledges his portrayal of Gregori Rasputin as one of his favorite performances, I quickly picked this up as soon as I saw the box at my local video store! Seeing Lee playing something other then Count Dracula was nice to see, but I also couldn't help but notice the similarities.

The story is about Gregori Rasputin, a monk who was exiled by the church for being a drunk and a womanizer. He has great powers which he uses in benevolent acts like healing people but also uses them for evil things like taking over Russia! In this Hammer film we see Rasputing slowly working his way up the social ladder by using his mind controlling powers on certain key individuals who will no doubt help him become more prominent and powerful.

The strength of this film no doubt lies in Lees performance. His incredibly evil and selfish Rasputin is a memorable performance by Lee and one that will be enjoyed very much by Lee and Hammer fans alike. Hey he is a Monk who escapes to the local pub to drink and get it on! Here we see Lee actually engage in conversations! Here we see Lee dancing! Here we see Lee going after the chicks! Drinking and getting drunk like a skunk! Lee obviously had a ball breaking away from playing the ever classy and quiet Count Dracula and it shows.

On the downside the film is kind of low on production values. You can tell when a Hammer film is cheap because usually the action takes place in one or two rooms. And the action doesn't go anywhere else. Here from what I could read on the film they used the sets from "Dracula Prince of Darkness" and you can tell this specially when you see the outside of the Czars castle. It has a strange resemblance to Draculas castle in Prince of Darkness.

But putting that aside the main fun here is watching Lees Rasputin being evil. No matter how historically inaccurate this film might be, its great to see Rasputin use his powers to lure women to bed, to kill anyone who will get in his way in his quest for power. This movie is not a history lesson, its a Hammer film! And Hammer is good at being sleazy and fun. Hammer just took the basic idea of Rasputin and some minor historical details and made a fun flick out of it.

All in all it was a fun film, with some budgetary limitations. Still, that didn't stop it from being a lot of fun. Specially by watching Lee devour the screen being so evil. I've seen a few Hammer duds and this ain't one of them.

Rating: 3/5

History, the Hammer way.

[The_Void · 8/10 · 22 December 2004]

The story of the monk that rose through Russia's hierarchy to become, arguably, more powerful than the Tsar and Tsarina seems, to me anyway, to be a rather strange choice of film for Hammer to take on. Of course, there are definite horror elements in the tale, but of all the stories in the world, this one is a rather odd choice in spite of this. However, Hammer are known for being innovative and doing things that most studios wouldn't even dream of, and I for one am very glad they did do a take on this tale; as it's actually a very good film. As you might expect, the film follows the story of Grigori Rasputin; a Russian monk with the power to heal. However, Rasputin is also a blasphemer; and the film follows his tribulations after he is thrown out of the monetary, as he drinks, sleeps and hypnotises his way across Russia, until he eventually falls in with Sonia; lady in waiting to the Tsarina. The rest, as they say, is history. Well, sort of.

As you might expect, the film isn't very historically accurate and Don Sharp appears to be more keen to focus on Rasputin himself than his place in history, which is no bad thing in my opinion as it makes for better horror. This film is a very different kind of horror to what we're used to from Hammer, as it's very character based and doesn't rely on blood and monsters to tell its story. Now don't get me wrong, I like blood and monsters as much as the next Hammer fan; but this film is a welcome departure in my opinion. The history surrounding Rasputin (SOME of which is shown in the film) is, actually, quite scary; how a blaspheming, crazy monk can rise through Russia's hierarchy like he did is surreal, and is made more so by the fact that it is actually true. The excellent Christopher Lee brings the monk himself to life. Who else but Christopher Lee could have played Rasputin? I wager that nobody else could have, and Lee is awesome in this role. His screen presence and charisma combine with what we expect Rasputin would have been like to great effect and although this is a campy horror film and cant really be taken seriously as a historical study; I think Lee has captured the essence of Russia's finest love machine to a tee, and I doubt it will ever be done to the same standard again.

Fanciful But Still Entertaining

[sddavis63 · 6/10 · 20 February 2009]

If one wants to learn about the life of Rasputin then this movie is certainly not the place to start (or to end, or to make a pit stop anywhere in between!) One certainly can't deny its entertainment value, though. Grigory Rasputin is one of history's more controversial and mysterious characters (frankly, probably worth a more serious film tribute than he seems to have received from anyone) and while these qualities are present, the bare bones of Rasputin's life (and death) are, in fact, barely depicted; woven around a fanciful tale that's fun even if mostly fiction. Christopher Lee did a pretty good job with the title character. Rasputin is portrayed as a womanizer and a drunkard, more concerned with his own pleasures and advancement than anything else, who - by his miraculous healing powers - manages to develop a relationship with the Russian royal family (and, especially, the Czarina.) The relationship with the Romanov family isn't really the centre of the story (which is partly why there's no historical value here - it's that relationship and its political implications that makes Rasputin important to history.) Instead, as you would expect from Hammer Films and Christopher Lee, the movie focuses on Rasputin's evil and licentious deeds, questions the source of his power (the suggestion is that it's satanic) and seems far more interested in the mad monk's hypnotic power over women than anything else. The details of his death are especially fanciful - if only because we know at least some of the details of his death, meaning that the dramatic license taken here is especially obvious - and bear (with the exception of the attempted poisoning) almost no resemblance to what actually happened. Still, it's a short and reasonably entertaining treatment of a truly fascinating character, and if it moves anyone to become more interested in the actual historical figure of Grigory Rasputin, then it could even be of of some value. If I were rating it on its historical value it would get a 1 or 2, but it's clearly not intended as a historical treatment of the subject. For its entertainment value alone - 6/10.

hilarious Hammer fun

[killercharm · 5/10 · 10 March 2023]

This is a hilariously fun Hammer flick. It's got great storytelling as well as great dancing. The shame about the dancing is that it is absurdly easy to see that the dancing isn't done by the beautiful Mr. Christopher Lee. This is one of the many reasons Hammer films never are great. The particular version of cost-cutting that they tend to choose are detrimental. Nonetheless there is much to enjoy in this Hammer flick. Mr. Lee plays the titular bad-guy with relish. Rasputin follows his nose until he reaches great heights, bedding all the women he can and leaving them in his wake. It's the story of the best bad-guy in history, the religious fanatic who had his own khlyst cult, which was even more perverse than the true khlysts. Besides his over indulgences in sex he also adores liquor. Once he cures the tsarevich of an attack of hemophilia the tsarina takes him under her wing. It's goofy, sloppy fun.

It stands up quite well on its own.

[bamptonj · 28 October 2001]

Without the benefit of comparison, I found this a very entertaining thriller. Once more we are treated to a superb Christopher Lee performance; this time as he plays the infamous monk who insinuates himself into the Russian Royal court through hypnotic, albeit mystical subterfuge.

I have read reviews of those disappointed with this version and though I can not purport to have seen any of the others, may I suggest that perhaps familiarity with the subject matter thereby gained has bred some contempt for this version which may contain any number of historical inaccuracies. For I am sure that those uninitiated with the Rasputin tale - or who are at least willing to forgo their usual academic prejudice - and who delight in Hammer's 60s catalogue, will instantly warm to this film.

Exuberant Chris Lee Performance and Just Enough of That Hammer Touch

[LeonLouisRicci · 7/10 · 7 November 2014]

It's an Odd One to be Sure and Falling Somewhere in the Mid-Range of Hammer Studio's Output of Always Interesting Films is this Christopher Lee Vehicle that Utilizes the Tall Actor with the Distinctive Voice Quite Effectively.

Efficiency, for the Studio, was the Word as the Sixties Unfolded and Hammer Seemed to get a Bit Lazy and Detached from Their Art and the Movies Sunk Somewhat in Charm, Style, and Charisma.

However, if it's a Hammer Film, it's Worth a Watch. This One is Average for the Studio, but Above Average Overall. Elevated by Lee's Bombastic, Yet Internalized Performance. Sure its Flamboyant and Fictionalized, but the Actor does Maintain a Suffering Soul, just Below the Surface. There is Pain in there Somewhere, but it is Overwhelmed and Corrupted by the Hedonism.

The Movie can Look Cheap at Times, for a Hammer, that Usually could Mask Low Production Values and Present the Movies with a Rich Look that made the Lack of Money Moot. But, these Sixties Hammers, with Some Exceptions, were Claustrophobic with Minimal and Confined Sets and Virtually No Outdoor Shoots.

Overall, it is an Entertaining Movie with Some Brutal Moments and a Killer Ending. Historically Inaccurate by All Accounts, but this is Pulpy Fiction and Although Not the Best in the Hammer Filmography, it has Enough of an Edge, Thanks to Lee and the Studio Delivering Just Enough Sex and Violence to Make it a Guilty Pleasure.

"The power is mine, and I shall use it as I please."

[classicsoncall · 6/10 · 7 January 2024]

For a Hammer film, this is not quite horror, but might just as well have been. As a real historical character, Rasputin was a Russian mystic and holy man, known for his licentious behavior and love of alcohol. A lot of the story does parallel events in Rasputin's life without ever really coming to grips with the real historical figure. Which is OK because after all, this is a Hammer production. A specific scene that marks it as such is the bright red Hammer blood flowing from the wrist of Sonia (Barbara Shelley), mesmerized by Rasputin to do his bidding and then sent on her way with a hypnotic message to destroy herself. This is a role that really allows Christopher Lee to cut loose, involving himself in a rough and tumble brawl in which he cuts off the hand of an opponent, and gleefully dancing at an inn where he becomes the center of attraction. That dance was a fairly physical exercise making me wonder if it wasn't a stunt man in Lee's place because you could never see his face clearly until it was over. Having worn out his welcome by the brother of the woman who killed herself, Rasputin is set up for poisoning, and in somewhat of an approximation to the real Rasputin's murder, it takes a number of attempts to finally do him in. As much as can be known about the death of the historical mystic, the fatal event was a gunshot to his forehead, where here, his tumble out of a tsarist castle window served its purpose to close out the story.

Disappointing

[HSauer · 6/10 · 29 September 1999]

With a great performance from Christopher Lee as Rasputin, and a rather red-hot (and elegant) Barbara Shelley, it's hard to imagine not liking this movie. But the script is very thin on historical fact - time and place in particular are vague - and the characterization of the villain Rasputin is two-dimensional. If this story is true, then Rasputin was not merely mad, but also magical and literally demonic. Consequently, an interesting historical character becomes the stuff of fiction, and the film fails to educate the viewer. The presence of Lee and Shelley make it worth watching anyhow.

Dracula....with a beard

[bsmith5552 · 6/10 · 5 July 2001]

"Rasputin The Mad Monk" is another of the Hammer Studios series of horror flicks that usually starred Christopher Lee or Peter Cushing, or both. This one stars Lee in the title role with the beautiful Barbara Shelley as female lead.

Lee, as he usually does in these pictures, overacts but dominates the screen when he appears. What Lee gives us is little more than his Dracula character...with a beard. The similarities in the story and Lee's portrayal of Rasputin are to obviously similar to Dracula to be ignored.

Shelley is Rasputin's means to an end (i.e. a way into the Imperial Palace)and really is given little to do other than be dominated by Rasputin. I liked her better when she played a more sinister type of character.

Still, Hammer did know how to put out an entertaining product and even though you can usually guess what's going to happen, I still enjoyed it.

Fine, but unfolds predictably

[clivey6 · 7/10 · 3 June 2009]

Christopher Lee is cast against type, hamming it up in this Hammer film as the scowling, swarthy peasant Rasputin, who antagonises all as he wins the Tsarina's confidence on his arrival in St Petersburg. I love Hammer, the good thing about English studios is you knew what you were getting, there's quality control of sorts. The look of a Hammer is of a kind, it's not sumptuous or chic but has a chintzy allure, like a boarding house or Indian restaurant of the 1970s. The plain narrative grips you; these days it would be all noise and smoke and blue lighting overshadowing the respected actors. That said, after the bravaura first half hour, the plot unfolds in a predictable way as Rasputin wins the confidence of the Tsar's family as expected, with nary a setback. It goes against the Hammer formula in that usually you have a group of folk in a strange castle getting the willies (you can't go wrong with this) or it's from the pov of the doctor in Frankenstein as he goes a bit crazy and alienates the locals. Here it's all from Rasputin's pov, and we know he's a bad guy so what gives. Dramatically it's a bit dead in parts, and while the sets are good there are few actors in it, it gets a bit claustrophobic. The Queen's court, for instance, seems to be made up of only three people. And we never see the Tsar at all. There's a missing element here. It should be all about the impact Rasputin is making on the court, but really it's just him and about three others.

Evil man of mystery.

[michaelRokeefe · 6/10 · 25 June 2011]

From the fabled Hammer Studios comes a distortion of Russian history, but its in that great vivid Hammer color. Most assuredly a lot of liberties have been taken with this tale about a "man of mystery", Rasputin, brought to life by who else but Christopher Lee. This movie shows how The Mad Monk used unexplainable evil powers to garner, or demand, influence and manipulate anyone of his choosing. Rasputin also saw himself having a physical prowess with women; and even eased entry to the court of the czar. My favorite scene is the sequence leading to his assassination; but how was this head strong character so easily duped. Remember this film forgoes accuracy in favor of entertainment. Also in the cast: Barbara Shelley, Francis Matthews, Dinsdale Landon, Robert Duncan and Richard Pasco.

Christopher Lee: "Ham/Dishonesty" Alert

[Orren · 1/10 · 21 February 2009]

One would suppose Christopher Lee would have the strength, stature, talent and experience to deliver at least a credible performance as Rasputin, in an utterly incredible, historically inaccurate thriller- farce. Not so. His performance is so ham, uncontrolled, silly, embarrassing and clearly undirected that it has not one minute of interest to either scholar or film buff. The "plot" is hopelessly inaccurate, as are the so-called characters. Lee has said he considers this some of his best work as a truly classical actor. Rubbish. "Lord of the Rings" this is not. Further, clearly Lee knows absolutely nothing about Russian history, Rasputin's role in it, the Romanovs and the Russian Revolution. There is in fact a great deal of detailed biography concerning the real Rasputin, none of which appears in this film. One would think the producers were terrified Felix Yousupov was going to sue them as he did "Rasputin and the Empress" -- the libel in that case involving Irina Yousupov, not Felix or Grand Duke Dimitri -- none of whom appear as characters in this non-effort.

Why bother writing this urgent "Ham/Dishonesty Alert"? When one tries to keep track on eBay and other sites of all serious work, film or literary, one sees hundreds of offerings for this terrible movie, with Lee's mug shot on the cover. And when one looks at the other comments here on IMDb and sees earnest questions about history from students, something just has to be said. If you are willing to read, see Edvard Radzinsky's recent books.

Squirm through this unintentional horror if you have motivation to see all 30 +/- films on Rasputin (the best is Harry Baur, the most enjoyable is Alan Rickman), but PLEASE do not pay a brass farthing for this trash.

Christopher Lee writes history!

[Coventry · 8/10 · 1 April 2005]

In case you're anxious to find out more about the TRUE story of Rasputin, you better search for some lame books in a library or attend classes given by nearly dead history teachers as accuracy isn't exactly this film's biggest trump! However, if you're hoping to see an exciting and atmospheric adventure, this Hammer highlight is highly recommended! It's one of the rather few movies centering on Russia's most infamous history icon Grigori Rasputin. The story especially focuses on his persona and not exactly on his place in history. Rasputin is a barbaric and womanizing drunkard, but gifted with astonishing healing powers and hypnotizing skills. When the monastery doesn't put up with his vile and aggressive actions any longer, he travels to St. Petersburg where he works himself all the way up into the Tsar-family, through manipulation of servants and innocent women. The film uses good looking set pieces and costumes but, naturally, it wouldn't be half as memorable if it weren't for Christopher Lee. Our legendary horror vet gives away one of the most energetic performances in horror-history and he really does look terrifying! It seemed to me that Lee was happy for not wearing his Dracula outfit for a change and this definitely reflects in his great acting. The tension and eeriness in 'Rasputin: The Mad Monk" entirely relies on Lee's charisma, grimaces and rude voice. The supportive cast is more than decent, with familiar names like Barbara Shelley (Dracula Prince of Darkness, Quartermass and the Pit), Susan Farmer (Die, Monster Die) and Richard Pasco (The Gorgon) as Rasputin's petrified opponents. Don Sharp once again does a solid directing job and I wish to stress again that he's a vastly underrated filmmaker. Sharp has made some really good genre movies that remain undiscovered to this date, like "Dark Places", "Psychomania" and "Kiss of the Vampire".

Don't Think Of It As A Horror Movie

[Theo Robertson · 6/10 · 30 March 2014]

Shown as part the Hammer double bill that gets shown on the UK Horror Channel the audience might feel rather cheated by the schedulers . Being a Hammer production and starring Christopher Lee you can be forgiven for thinking you're going to be watching a horror film of sorts . Add to that the fact that the station might be called The Horror Channel for a reason and you'll be disappointed that this is in no way a horror movie despite the studio brand name

That said it does have a bizarre feel down to director Don Sharp directing everything in a way that he would have directed a horror movie . As you can imagine much of this is achieved by having intrusive scary music blasting all over the soundtrack to tell the audience this scene contains a lot of menace and any second now a monster will be appearing which being a pseudo historical film will not be the case and the only scene approaching horror is a scene where a rubber hand drops past the screen . The emphasis is on "pseudo " which means from a historical point of view there's not a lot to recommend this movie and pales in to insignicence compared to something like DOCTOR ZHIVAGO which was released at the same time and was set in the period and locale . Of some interest is that being a Hammer film the little Englander mentality is present and the characters being foreign all have prominent suntans because all foreigners even ones living in a country like Russia must have suntans . Apart from that there's little other interest to the film unless you enjoy watching the Hammer repertory cast emote and overact in a rather ludicrous manner almost as if they're having a contest to see who can shout the most which has an entertainment value of sorts

Shelley lifts cheap jack potboiler.

[BrentCarleton · 5/10 · 9 August 2010]

From the get go, it is apparent that Hammer had no intention of making a film about Rasputin within the full scope of his historical context. In other words, they were not about to shell out the coin to depict crowd scenes, royal processions, military parades or peasant insurrections, though it is possible to imagine the modest Bray studio stretching to the occasion had the will been there.

The word "Bolshevik" is never uttered and we never once catch a fleeting glimpse of Tsar Nicholas much less his daughters.

This, then, in keeping with Hammer's decision to use standing sets, (slightly revamped) from "Dracula, Prince of Darkness" is a backstairs, tabloid account of Rasputin the dissolute diablos.

After all, you don't need crowd scenes to depict Rasputin raping a girl in a barn.

Notwithstanding, art director Bernard Robinson, does what he can. But make no mistake, this is not top flight Bernard Robinson, nor top flight Hammer. We aren't even given an establishing shot, (of the picture postcard variety) of St. Petersburg, and it is only in a bedroom scene with Rasputin curing the Tsarvarich Alexei, (all cream and gold with some magnificent candelabrum) that the visuals recall the peak Hammer of the late 50's-early 60's.

Worse, Hammer cribs a scene from another film, "Anastasia" to use as an establishing shot for the palace ball sequence. This shameless pilfer, would only appear to have been legal, inasmuch as "Anastasia"s producer, Twentieth Century Fox, was also the distributer of Hammer's "Rasputin," thus showing the extent to which the distributer contributed fiscally to the Hammer product, even during a film's production.

Christoper Lee is excellent as the mad monk, particularly in a tavern scene where he hypnotizes Barbara Shelley. It is Miss Shelley, however, who walks off with the film, yet again, showing that she was capable of so much more than she was ever offered.

The rest of the cast is serviceable, though cute as a pearl button, Suzan Farmer is given very little to do except look fetching, an assignment at which she excelled naturally.

For Hammer enthusiasts rather than students of Russian history.