Topic: Universal Horror '30s/'40s

[Shemp_Diesel]

So, I was just pondering this while watching the Son of Frankenstein/Ghost of Frankenstein double feature DVD: Which Lugosi turn as Ygor do you prefer? Myself, I have to say I enjoy both equally & can't pick a favorite.

And while the Ghost of Frankenstein Ygor is missing the gnarly teeth, he's missing none of the Lugosi cunning as proven in the scene where he first encounters Ludwig Frankenstein or later in the picture when he's tempting Dr. Bohmer with all the promises of power that will come to them if Bohmer helps Ygor getting his brain put into the head of the Monster.

Of course, that whole Ygor brain switch opened up a whole other mess as far as Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man is concerned, but I won't get into that....

[metaldams]

LOL. I'm not sure how meant that. Coincidentally after seeing the D-Bat on your list I watched it on the site I mentioned. I remembered that I had seen it before but this time I just couldn't get past the first 20 minutes.

I think THE DEVIL BAT is an incredibly fun movie, but more so in an Ed Wood kind of way as opposed to anything resembling high art....and hey, since this is a Stooge themed site, the leading lady is Suzanne Kaaren of DISORDER IN THE COURT; YES, WE HAVE NO BONANZA, and WHAT'S THE MATADOR.

[metaldams]

So, I was just pondering this while watching the Son of Frankenstein/Ghost of Frankenstein double feature DVD: Which Lugosi turn as Ygor do you prefer? Myself, I have to say I enjoy both equally & can't pick a favorite.

And while the Ghost of Frankenstein Ygor is missing the gnarly teeth, he's missing none of the Lugosi cunning as proven in the scene where he first encounters Ludwig Frankenstein or later in the picture when he's tempting Dr. Bohmer with all the promises of power that will come to them if Bohmer helps Ygor getting his brain put into the head of the Monster.

Of course, that whole Ygor brain switch opened up a whole other mess as far as Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man is concerned, but I won't get into that....

I think Lugosi is equally great in both, but he has more to carry in GHOST than in SON.  Not that the cast in GHOST is bad, it's just that SON has one of the all-time great casts in almost any film as far as I'm concerned.  I gotta say, Evelyn Ankers was always beautiful, she's the closest Universal Horror got to a Christine McIntyre as far as the combo of looks and talent go, even though Christine still wins.  That said, she was especially beautiful in GHOST OF FRANKENSTEIN.

[Svengarlic]

I think THE DEVIL BAT is an incredibly fun movie, but more so in an Ed Wood kind of way as opposed to anything resembling high art....and hey, since this is a Stooge themed site, the leading lady is Suzanne Kaaren of DISORDER IN THE COURT; YES, WE HAVE NO BONANZA, and WHAT'S THE MATADOR.

I'm shocked. I must have seen those 3 episodes a total of 200 times over the years and I never recognized her. Now I'm going to have to go back and watch that damn D Bat again! I also just learned that her last movie role was in The Cotton Club. Of course, I never spotted her.

On GHOST: I think the Universal execs screwed the pooch pretty bad on that one. They had a man-made homicidal brute that was a sympathetic character and a box office bonanza to boot and they put Igor's brain in the mix. OK, having done that they were left with "A monster indeed" to quote Hardwick. But they chicken out in Frank meets Wolf and reduce the creature to a blind, groping mess that can't even kick Talbot's dog ass. The promise of "A monster indeed" was unfulfilled.

They did the same thing with the Mummy. "Don't give him to many of those tanna leaves or he will kick the world's ass". Now that I think of it...why kill off the Bride so quickly? Think of the possibilities.

[Shemp_Diesel]

I'm starting to gain a new appreciation for The Mummy's Curse. I'm well aware that the film is far from good--and for years horror fans have been puzzled about how Kharis, the mummy could sink in a swamp in Mapleton, Massachusetts in The Mummy's Ghost and magically reappear in a Louisiana bayou for "Curse."


I guess maybe I'm saying that "Curse" is so bad that it's kind of good. And once you accept the outrageous continuity errors, the movie just has some fun characters, like Cajun Joe.

The only downside to "Curse", might be that the Goobie character doesn't exactly advance the African American cause. And Lon Chaney, who hated playing the mummy, was just plodding through the motions.

And another plus, the resurrection of the Princess Ananka. 

[Svengarlic]

Diesel, I recently viewed that film again and if you look closely you can see that under the wrappings that it was not Chaney's face. There were only maybe 2 scenes where you could recognize Lon by his distinctive downturned mouth. The rest were a stand-in. I would have to go back and watch closely, but I don't think even the closeups were Chaney.

Of course I could be wrong because Pierce also used a mummy mask for certain shots. I guess we will never truly know.

[Seamus]

You're in for a treat with DR. JEKYLL AND MR. HYDE, one of the four great 1931 U.S. Horror films (SVENGALI with John Barrymore rarely gets mentioned here and should be included as the fourth).  Miriam Hopkins is sexy in that pre-code kind of way, classic garter scene with some risqué for the time symbolism you'll never see in a code film.  She puts on a fantastic performance overall.  The melodramatic goodness vs. the bestial evil of Jekyll and Hyde is quite a contrast and there's some nice camera work as well.  I think you'll like it.

The 1941 version Svengarlic mentioned earlier I've only seen once and even though I like the principal players involved in other films they've done, I thought this version to be too glossy as opposed to the seedier 1931 version.  It has been a long time since I've seen the '41 version, though, and I plan to give it another viewing this weekend. 

The 1920 John Barrymore version is also a favorite of mine.

Saw JEKYLL AND HYDE '31 last night at the Ohio Theatre, it was everything you said it would be.  So good.  I liked the way the movie portrays pre-serum Jekyll as an unapologetic mix of good and not-so-good impulses.  Shortly after bowing out of a dinner party to personally perform surgery on a sick old woman, he's laughing off his friend's distaste at finding him in the arms of a prostitute, and his impatience at his future father-in-law's insistence that he postpone his marriage for eight months comes across as a frustrated sexual urge.  It's a nice set-up to the eventual separation of those good and bad impulses into two separate entities.  Can't remember if the Tracy version hammered that aspect home as well.

The scenes with Miriam Hopkins were a definite reminder that you're watching a pre-code film.  Part of the fun of seeing movies this old on the big screen in a room full of people is watching how a modern audience reacts to something that was made 80 years ago.  In the case of DR. JEKYLL AND MR. HYDE, some of the odd directorial choices - like the sudden jolting switches to first-person perspective - got a laugh out of the crowd, as did the first reveal of March's simian Hyde make-up (although the initial mirror transformation still got a murmur of appreciation), but you could tell the audience was legitimately disturbed by the pre-code debauchery of the Hyde character, especially in the scenes with Hopkins, whose terrified and disgusted reaction to Hyde does as much to sell us on the character's repulsiveness as March's own performance.  Fun to see how effective those scenes still are 80 years later.

[Shemp_Diesel]

Diesel, I recently viewed that film again and if you look closely you can see that under the wrappings that it was not Chaney's face. There were only maybe 2 scenes where you could recognize Lon by his distinctive downturned mouth. The rest were a stand-in. I would have to go back and watch closely, but I don't think even the closeups were Chaney.

Of course I could be wrong because Pierce also used a mummy mask for certain shots. I guess we will never truly know.

I don't have the technology capable of posting screen grabs from the film & a google search has been no help--all I can tell you is that if you skip to about the 29:11 mark in The Mummy's Curse, those shots of the mummy should prove to you that it was indeed Chaney underneath the makeup.

 

[Svengarlic]

I don't have the technology capable of posting screen grabs from the film & a google search has been no help--all I can tell you is that if you skip to about the 29:11 mark in The Mummy's Curse, those shots of the mummy should prove to you that it was indeed Chaney underneath the makeup.

Yes indeed. No doubt. But when the Horror Host Svengoolie said on his show that Lon hated the Mummy makeup a stand-in was hired to shoot certain scenes, being the curious geek that I am, I watched very closely and sure enough I can only say that he was recognizable to me by his huge build and distinctive face in a couple of scenes.

This host has been going to shows and screenings for some 20 odd years and has talked to many old Universal characters and horror fans. I have been meaning to send him an Email on the Mummy issue and other things that he cannot confide on the air. Maybe I will do it now.

[Shemp_Diesel]

Just some thoughts that came to me while watching Frankenstein Meets The Wolf Man:

The idea of the Monster having Ygor's brain--while I admit it was a rather great scene at the end of Ghost of Frankenstein when the newly revived monster is talking with Ygor's voice, ultimately, I think the idea essentially robbed the Monster of any pathos he had left at that point.

Now he was a totally evil creature, bent on who knows what kind of machinations--still, it would have been interesting to actually get to see Bela's "whole" performance as the Monster in "Meets the Wolf Man" and who knows--maybe if Curt Siodmak had written some better dialogue for Bela, we monster film fans would have gotten to see it.

Btw, that was the real problem--not that the Monster had a Hungarian accent, but the rather shitty dialogue given to Bela. I might imagine people in the screening room were chuckling a bit when the Monster was spouting stuff like "I will live to see the fruits of my wisdom for all eternity."   

[Svengarlic]

  I have to figure that Frankenstein died more times than any other movie character. The guy died at the end of every picture. I wonder if thoughts of another entry after "Ghost" was a consideration in the mid-production switcheroo? A blind Hungarian monster in a suit coat would not have played in Poughkeepsie .

[Svengarlic]

Frankenstrang and the fish



  This must be a photo op during filming of A&C Meet Frankenstein (fingernail polish) and "Mr. Peabody and the Mermaid" circa 1948

[Svengarlic]

Here's an interesting photo. Job meets Cliff and The Bride?

 

[Signor Spumoni]

I realize this isn't germane to the current topic, but I have a question about a Universal Studios 1931 horror production.  Has anyone seen the Spanish-language "Dracula," made there?  By almost every measure it is said to be superior to the familiar Bela Lugosi version, although there is disagreement as to whether Lugosi or Carlos Villarias is better.  I don't speak or understand Spanish, and I've never seen the Spanish version, so I have no basis for comparison.  If anyone has an opinion, I'd love to hear it.

BTW, funny photo of "Job, Cliff and the Bride."

[Shemp_Diesel]

I've seen the Spanish version of Dracula--personally, I didn't see what all the fuss was about. I'm not saying it's bad, but anyone who accuses Lugosi of being a ham should take in Carlos Villar as Conde Dracula and the actor who plays Van Helsing is also comical. I really have to raise my eyebrows at the critics who proclaim that Spanish Drac tops the Lugosi version, "Scene for scene, shot for shot."

Just my $0.02....

[Signor Spumoni]

Thank you, Shemp_Diesel!  If I can't see it, it's good to read a review.

[Shemp_Diesel]

Signor Spumoni, have you ever considered buying any of these...


http://www.amazon.com/Dracula-Universal-Studios-Classic-Collection/dp/B000035Z3K/ref=sr_1_5?s=movies-tv&ie=UTF8&qid=1410205906&sr=1-5&keywords=dracula


http://www.amazon.com/Dracula-Collection-Spanish-Draculas-Daughter/dp/B0001CNRLG/ref=sr_1_12?s=movies-tv&ie=UTF8&qid=1410205906&sr=1-12&keywords=dracula


http://www.amazon.com/Dracula-75th-Anniversary-Universal-Legacy/dp/B000GPIPSS/ref=sr_1_1?s=movies-tv&ie=UTF8&qid=1410209588&sr=1-1&keywords=dracula+75th+anniversary+edition

[Signor Spumoni]

Shemp_Diesel, I live close to the bone, financially, thus I don't buy movies.  But I'll tell you my fantasy:  to have a house with, among other things, a little private cinema decorated in the manner of the grand, old movies houses.  Then I would buy movies!   

But thank you very much for going to the trouble of posting the links.  That was nice.   

If I ever fall heir to a fortune from a long-lost relative, I'll build that house with the cinema and have everyone over.   

[metaldams]

The Spanish Dracula is better in the sense that the camera work is better and you get to see the sets a bit more, but Lugosi himself is the superior Dracula.

Interesting note about the Spanish Dracula is that the actress who played Mina, who I think did better than Helen Chandler, is named Lupita Tovar.  She's still with us at age 104.


http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lupita_Tovar

[Svengarlic]

I saw the Mexican release as well Sig, at a midnight showing in Tijuana some years ago. I was in no condition to judge, but the crowd howled with delight throughout. BTW, it was not necessary to light up. 



Here's a site that discusses the issue of the two productions, with a slide show. Just click on the photos and scroll down. 

http://nilbogmilk.blogspot.com/2013/08/dracula-1931-spanish-version.html

[Signor Spumoni]

Thank you, Metaldams, for your views on El Dracula v. Dracula.  Also thank you for the information on Lupita Tovar- - fancy being 104 years old!

Svengarlic, I'm surprised you remember that showing of the Spanish Dracula, all things considered!  Thank you for the link.  It offered good comparison and contrast as well as photos.  I enjoy seeing many kinds of photos, but especially these right now.

Judging from the information you folks gave, I think Lugosi probably made the better Dracula.  He brought a certain menace to the role as well as the suggestion of antiquity.  Villarias' bugged-out eyes comes across as more comical than anything, at least to me.  This reminds me of the scene with Dracula's brides, which was, for me, spoiled by the fast -motion action.  I thought a slow transformation would have worked better.

Thanks to you good gents, I can now die happy because I know about the Spanish Dracula.   

[Svengarlic]

Thank you, Metaldams, for your views on El Dracula v. Dracula.  Also thank you for the information on Lupita Tovar- - fancy being 104 years old!

Svengarlic, I'm surprised you remember that showing of the Spanish Dracula, all things considered!  Thank you for the link.  It offered good comparison and contrast as well as photos.  I enjoy seeing many kinds of photos, but especially these right now.

Judging from the information you folks gave, I think Lugosi probably made the better Dracula.  He brought a certain menace to the role as well as the suggestion of antiquity.  Villarias' bugged-out eyes comes across as more comical than anything, at least to me.  This reminds me of the scene with Dracula's brides, which was, for me, spoiled by the fast -motion action.  I thought a slow transformation would have worked better.

 

I'm confused. Are you referring to the more recent Bram Stoker's Dracula here?

And you're right about the crazy over acting by Drac in the Sp. version. But you know that the Mexican theater goers at that time were probably quite easy to please, and used to the over acting in silent films, where mugging and wild gesturing was the name of the game.

[Signor Spumoni]

I'm confused. Are you referring to the more recent Bram Stoker's Dracula here?

No, not to "Bram Stoker's Dracula," but to the classic one.  Perhaps it is the stop-motion animation that looks, to me, like sped-up motion.

[Svengarlic]

I'm confused. Are you referring to the more recent Bram Stoker's Dracula here?

No, not to "Bram Stoker's Dracula," but to the classic one.  Perhaps it is the stop-motion animation that looks, to me, like sped-up motion.

Hmmm....I don't recall it at the moment.  Well, that will give me something to look for the next time I watch it. BTW In my mind Dwight Frye was the most memorable actor in the original. As a kid I would adopt that maniacal laugh to ward off bullies. (garlic around my neck did nothing)

[Signor Spumoni]

I hope the maniacal laugh helped.  The bad thing about garlic is that it keeps your friends away, too.