Let's face it, Vincent Price was a ham actor, thus there are several levels of irony at work in this minor seventies gem. Price's Lionheart is a ham actor who really gets to let rip with his mini performances of Shakespeare; is this Price satirising himself, or simply him finding a role that perfectly suits his talents? Don't get me wrong, I like Price and all those Corman/Poe adaptations he did way back when, but in my opinion Peter Cushing was a far superior actor. Cushing invested every role he played with a dignity the parts often did not merit, and never sent up his characters/material.
As for Theatre of Blood, well, it's good, but not great. The plot is lifted directly from The Abominable Doctor Phibes, only with added implausibilty. Obviously one is meant to suspend one's disbelief (just reading the list of character names signals where the movie's tongue is, very firmly inside its cheek), but I for one like my horror movies to pass a very basic reality check: we have no trouble with the notion that zombies or werewolves exist, for example, but we hate it when people act stupidly or illogically when confronted by them. (I digress, but has anyone seen Wes Craven's execrable Shocker? Now there's a film which doesn't even play by the stupid rules it created for itself. Total rubbish.)
As for Theatre of Blood, well, it's good, but not great. The plot is lifted directly from The Abominable Doctor Phibes, only with added implausibilty. Obviously one is meant to suspend one's disbelief (just reading the list of character names signals where the movie's tongue is, very firmly inside its cheek), but I for one like my horror movies to pass a very basic reality check: we have no trouble with the notion that zombies or werewolves exist, for example, but we hate it when people act stupidly or illogically when confronted by them. (I digress, but has anyone seen Wes Craven's execrable Shocker? Now there's a film which doesn't even play by the stupid rules it created for itself. Total rubbish.)