The Deadly Bees (1966)

Such a frustrating disappointment

Pretty Good

Absolutely Brilliant!

An old-fashioned movie made with new-fashioned finesse.

It's generally considered that production company Amicus were capable of making some top-notch anthologies, but when they concentrated on single-story horror yarns the results were often - not always, but more often than not - disappointing. THE DEADLY BEES may be notable as the first of the (thankfully irregular) "killer bee" movies but on all accounts it's a crushing bore. A dry script (from the usually reliable Robert Bloch, at that), insanely boring direction from Freddie Francis (this coming from a fan of his usually despised film LEGEND OF THE WEREWOLF) and a total lack of action and thrills on all accounts drag this one down from the start and only people with really high tolerance levels or an affection for British cinema from the period will find this watchable.The cast of characters is an unappealing one and none of the actors or actresses come away looking good in their roles. The identity of the bee-murderer is insanely obvious right from their very introduction and only a very young child would have trouble spotting which of the two bee-keepers is the secret killer. Come on Bloch, Marriott, et al: surely you can do better than this child's play!? The bee-attack sequences are lacking in technical skill, poorly-superimposed over the action and so detracting from any realism the film strives to create. The music is over the top and works against the film and the only good thing you can say is that the shots are composed well and the cinematography is solid.Suzanna Leigh is quite a respected actress from the period but you wouldn't guess it from this turn, which is undoubtedly her worst performance ever. Looking constipated when she strives to look scared and reduced to running around in her underwear at other times, she's totally lacking in believability and is more often than not laughable - a far cry from the fragile beauty she played in LUST FOR A VAMPIRE. Guy Doleman is a wooden jerk and Frank Finlay hams it up so much you'd think he previously worked as a butcher. While it's nice to see some familiar horror faces lower down in the cast - Michael Ripper, typecast again as BOTH a barman and a policeman and former Frankenstein's Monster Michael Gwynn as a doctor, they're uniformly wasted. No wonder this lacklustre film is so often forgotten when in discussion of British horror.

"Vicki Robbins" (Suzanna Leigh) is a British pop singer who has a nervous collapse due to her hectic schedule and is sent by her doctor to a remote place called "Seagull Island" for some rest and relaxation. When she gets to the local hotel she meets the owner by the name of "Ralph Hargrove" (Guy Doleman) who seems rather aloof and prefers to spend his time tending his bee hives. So when a dog, that Ralph didn't like, is killed by bees Ralph's wife immediately thinks he had something to do with it--and so does Vicki. Then when Ralph's wife is also killed by swarms of bees Vicki becomes even more convinced. But proving it is another matter entirely. Now rather than reveal any more of this film I will just say that it was an adequate "Grade-Bee movie" for the most part which seemed to concentrate more on mystery than horror or suspense. Naturally, as one might expect from a movie produced in the mid-60s, the special effects were rather elementary compared to today's standards. But the acting was okay and all things considered it managed to fill the time satisfactorily enough. That said, I rate it as about average.

When I rented this movie I was expecting it to contain more "horror scenes", but was pleasantly surprised that it was more of a mystery with some mild sequences.The Deadly Bees has a decent plot and the music fits in very well. This is certainly not a film that is seen or heard about very much in the United States. However, the directing, cast, and sets are all upper rank. Suzanna Leigh's performance is quite good along with the other cast members. Some of the bee scenes are a bit awkward, but overall the movie was well done and worth renting.

Vicki Robbins (Suzanna Leigh) is a singer in bad need of a rest. Her doctor contacts his friend, Ralph Hargrove (Guy Doleman), with a farm on a remote island that promises to provide Vicki the relaxation she desperately needs. When Vicki arrives, she discovers that Mr. Hargrove raises bees. So when Mr. Hargrove starts acting suspiciously and people begin dying from deadly bee attacks, it's natural for Vicki to suspect her host. But is Mr. Hargrove behind the trouble on Seagull Island?Given the names behind The Deadly Bees, it's understandable to hope, if not expect, something better than this. Even with Amicus Productions, Freddie Francis, and Robert Bloch involved with the movie, there are far too many problems to call The Deadly Bees "good". Three prime examples of the movie's many faults include: Special/Visual Effects – Most people tend to focus on the bee attacks when discussing the effects found in The Deadly Bees. And with good reason – they're bad. But the bee effects practically shine in comparison with the matte painting used as the background for the farm. In a word, it's pitiful. It wouldn't fool anyone.Characters – None of the characters involved with the plot are in any way likable. Even the films heroine, Vicki Robbins, hasn't got much going for her. And that makes it almost impossible to root for her or care what happens to her when she comes across as so unlikable.Plot – For a movie that throws one red herring after another at the audience, it's too easy to see the outcome of The Deadly Bees from a mile away. None of the many plot twists actually work. Only the incredibly dimwitted characters in the movie like Vicki Robbins would find the outcome mysterious in anyway.There are more. I haven't even mentioned the unforgivably large plot holes or the ridiculous lapses in logic. But regardless of The Deadly Bees myriad of problems, I can't bring myself to rate the movie any lower than 5/10. Why? Despite itself, The Deadly Bees never fails to provide me with some degree of entertainment. Otherwise, how can I explain why I've now seen the movie at least three times? And, as I've always said, entertainment is the most important thing when it comes to movies and the reason I watch them.