Talk:The Abominable Dr. Phibes

This page is not a forum for general discussion about The Abominable Dr. Phibes. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about The Abominable Dr. Phibes at the Reference desk.

Film: British / American

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm
	This article is supported by the British cinema task force.
	This article is supported by the American cinema task force.

Horror Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Horror, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to fictional horror in film, literature and other media on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit one of the articles mentioned below, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.HorrorWikipedia:WikiProject HorrorTemplate:WikiProject Horrorhorror
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

A plague of bats?

I don't remember bats being one of the plagues. The scene of the "attacking" bats is not only amusing, but downright charming. They're flying foxes -- benign, adorable animals. WilliamSommerwerck (talk) 14:04, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This may have been the writers getting clever; one plague varies - depending on interpretation - as an attack by either wild animals or flies. So, what better way to tackle both, than by using a flying wild animal! (The flying foxes were probably more photogenic, and easier to control, than the smaller bat.) 99.196.176.254 (talk) 21:49, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on The Abominable Dr. Phibes. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090415080829/http://www.filmcritic.com/misc/emporium.nsf/84dbbfa4d710144986256c290016f76e/51600685a63efbef88256c91000a2b11?OpenDocument to http://www.filmcritic.com/misc/emporium.nsf/84dbbfa4d710144986256c290016f76e/51600685a63efbef88256c91000a2b11?OpenDocument

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:53, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Organ used…

The section about the music is slightly ambiguous, and may need clarification. The sentence beginning, “The music that Phibes plays on the organ at the beginning…”, is immediately followed by, “The organ used is the New York Paramount theater organ…”. I am presuming that the organ “played” by Phibes is a studio prop or mock up, on the set at Elstree, and the second sentence means that what the audience hears is the theatre organ, but I don’t know, and think it could be clearer. Jock123 (talk) 11:54, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's unsourced, so it's difficult to tell what might have been meant. It's possible this is discussed somewhere in a retrospective on 1970s horror films, but I'm not sure where to look. I did a search on Google Books for a few different terms, but they didn't turn up anything except the box office gross. That's useful, too, though. If we can't find any sources for this, maybe we should just remove it. There's probably something out there, though. Some of Vincent Price's later work was a bit obscure, but not this one. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 02:32, 1 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hiya NRP. I did some searching when I saw this post a couple years ago. The first thing that struck me was how unlikely it was that the production company would pay to move the organ from NY to Ellstree and back again. Pics of the NY organ look nothing like the the one used in the film. Since, like you, I couldn't find anything about the organ used for the soundtrack I removed that mention. BTW the UK bluray includes commentary by the members of The League of Gentlemen which is almost as fun as the film itself. Best regards. MarnetteD|Talk 03:56, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose there's always hope that more retrospectives will be written and the existing ones will be digitized. Check out Count Yorga if you liked this film; it's pretty similar. I've had similar difficulty in finding good sources for that film, but both of these films are mentioned often as camp classics in reliable sources. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:49, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Gosh I haven't seen CY in decades. Thanks for spurring me on to watch it again NRP. MarnetteD|Talk 17:40, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Caroline Munro ...only in the photos?

I know ... every source known to man, claims her only appearance in the film, is in the series of projected photos, and one photo on Dr.Phibes organ phone rotary dial ... BUT ... if true, Who is that laying in the coffin with him during the final act? Methinks Ms.Munro is not getting her full due! 75.104.182.200 (talk) 23:39, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Last plague

First I should say that I haven't seen the movie. Apparently, there were some liberties taken with the plagues on Egypt, as mentioned in the earlier comment about the bats/flying foxes. In the article, it says the last "curse" was darkness. In the Biblical account, darkness was second-to-last, with the death of the firstborn being the last, which was the plague that finally (though temporarily) convinced Pharaoh to let the Israelites go.

Upon reflection, it seems like the main liberty taken in this area was the order of plagues, since the doctor's son was threatened and almost died. --Cromwellt|talk|contribs 16:57, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes and sort of … in the film the “death of the firstborn” trap is set in motion, as Dr.Phibes makes his escape. ( He assumes his trap is going to go off without a hitch.).If the two events were happening simultaneously, perhaps , in Phibes plan, he would be in darkness, just before the firstborn died? Thus, accomplishing his goal as dictated in Biblical order. As many have pointed out, and Biblically speaking, you are correct in the order of the plagues, but, within the film’s reality, “darkness” is the final curse.( Detective Trout consults a Rabbi (!) whom shows him a chart, with “darkness” as the final curse.) This makes both answers correct … just on different levels. And… story-wise, having Phibes disappearing into darkness, as opposed to the firstborn dying, was probably a better ending. 99.196.176.254 (talk) 21:41, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]