Rainey Dawn Like all films labeled "History" this does not mean the story is entirely true - there will be people who once lived and places in history that are real but it does not mean what you see on film is historically accurate. Hollywood will take the facts then ad-lib or fill in the blanks. Keeping this in mind I will rate this film like I do other "History" films - I will NOT base my rating on historical accuracy nor inaccuracy but purely Hollywood CINEMA entertainment! I like Vincent Price so I am admittedly biased - but I think his portrayal of King Richard III was good. In real life we really do not know all that much about Richard's personality - only from stories written by others who might have exaggerated, simply lied about him because they did not like him OR maybe they were fairly accurate stories. I think Price did the best he could with the information he knew about the real King Richard III - and not just Price but the writers and the rest of the cast/crew did their best as well to give us this movie. I found this movie to be a good dramatization.This film is NOT a remake of the 1939 film of the same name ("Tower of London"). The 1939 film stars Boris Karloff, Basil Rathbone & Vincent Price. The 1962 film only borrows the title from the 1939 film. The two stories are completely different from each other. One final note: I think it's cool they found the REAL King Richard III's body - buried under a parking lot where he fell in battle many many years ago. Love him or hate him - it's nice his remains are found: for the sake of history and the "royal" family.8/10

rixrex Not anywhere nearly as well done as the 1939 version, this Corman/Price vehicle has to be the weakest of their collaborations.Price is generally too hammy here, not well-directed as in other Corman films, and definitely nowhere near his excellent performance in Witchfinder General. Sets are pretty much bare-bones, effects and battle scenes look like stock footage superimposed over characters acting out in front of a black curtain.The murder of the two young heirs to the throne of England is the best scene and very effective, however. The end of this film of a mere 79 mins. is very welcome to the viewer as about 70 mins. of it are practically a complete bore. Pretty much one to forget unless you have to collect every Corman/Price film ever made.

LCShackley Roger Corman took a break between such cinematic masterpieces as LITTLE SHOP and THE RAVEN to invade Shakespearean territory in TOWER OF London. I usually enjoy the Price/Corman schlock films, but this one was SO badly misconceived that I found myself fast-forwarding through scene after scene. Did Shakespeare have murders? Corman has more!! Did Shakespeare have ghosts? Corman has a dozen!! (Many poorly double-exposed and some not sized correctly for the scenes.) And of course, we have to have a Poe-inspired torture chamber with a damsel on the rack. Are you getting the picture? Then there's Vincent Price, looking silly in a Prince Valiant wig, mugging away through scene after scene showing his full range of horror-film facial expressions. His trademark mincing-lisping delivery, which works well in many contexts, doesn't lend King Richard much gravitas. There's no tragedy here, just grand guignol.So if you want to see a classic historical tale reduced to the lowest common denominator, be sure to catch Corman's TOWER.

The_Void The team of Roger Corman and Vincent Price is undoubtedly most famous for the adaptations of Edgar Allen Poe's works, but it would be unwise to ignore this interpretation of William Shakespeare's play 'Richard III' as it's one of the duo's finest hours! This same story was brought to the screen 23 years earlier with the 1939 film of the same name (also featuring Vincent Price), but Corman's version, although obviously made on a limited budget is still a great version of the tale. The plot features prominent themes of envy, greed and insanity, and the story of one of England's most famous rulers is interesting for its own merits, and Corman's portrayal of it makes it interesting for fans of classic horror also. The plot begins with the death of the current king of England, Richard's brother. The throne is intended to go to the brother's son, but King Richard has other ideas as he begins to murder all those that stand in his path to the most coveted seat in the country. However, what he doesn't count on is his conscience getting in the way; and before long, he is being haunted by the ghosts of his victims.Every film in the Corman's Poe Anthology is filmed in colour, but here Corman shoots on black and white film, and it does the story no end of favours as the atmosphere always feel thick and foreboding, and gorgeous shots of smoke filled locations help to increase the tension. The fact that the film stars the great Vincent Price is most definitely its strongest element. Price is best at playing villains and people suffering from mental torment, and here he gets to do both in the meaty role of King Richard III. Price's acting style certainly suits Shakespearian roles as he's never afraid to go over the top, and I'm sure Corman was always happy to capitalise on this fact as Price is allowed to let rip completely during many instances of the film. Price also manages to look sinister while he's being hammy, and just small things such as the little hat that Price wears give him an understated villainy that suits the role like a glove. The supernatural elements of the film are well utilised, and Corman is happy to capitalise on the horror aspects of the play at all times. The ending is a little abrupt, but overall, this film is a definite 'hit' and one that shouldn't be missed by Price, Corman and even Shakespeare fans!