Wednesday, May 16, 2012
If you're looking for that OTHER Shades of Gray (Grey)...
... here are some photos for your enjoyment.
Tuesday, May 8, 2012
Great cast and locations, but lackluster direction
The Green Glove (aka "The Gauntlet") (1952)
Starring: Glenn Ford, Geraldine Brooks, and George Macready
Director: Rudolph Mate
Rating: Four of Ten Stars
A down-on-his-luck US Army veteran (Ford) returns to France in the years following WW2 to retrieve a gem-encrusted relic he left behind in a villa on D-Day. But he is soon framed for murder by an unscrupulous art dealer (Macready) who is also trying to recover the artifact, and treasure becomes secondary to dodging police pursuit.
"The Green Glove" should have been much better than it is, given the great cast (which, in addition to the stars listed above include such genre-picture stalwarts as Cedrick Hardwicke and Gaby Andre) and the spectacular settings it was filmed in... and that doesn't even take into account the smorgasbord of thriller conventions that are crammed into the story, what with it being a man wrongfully accused on a treasure hunt with a good-hearted woman while being pursued by mysterious forces.
But, despite all the potential here, the director seems incapable of generating any real suspense, squandering almost every build-up with a confrontation that is either badly staged, too abrupt, or both. In fact, the part of the film that works best is a comic relief sequence where Glenn Ford and Geraldine Brooks' characters spend the night at an isolated country inn. But I think that part of the movie shines mostly because you've got two good actors doing their thing without clumsy staging getting in the way... and because everything else around them is lackluster.
The director's insecurity with his subject matter (or maybe the producers recognizing the dog they had on their hands) is made painfully evident right up front, with an over-use of narration, setting a stage that the film itself was setting far more effectively as it unfolded.
Although... the "insta-romance" that develops between Ford and Brooks isn't as hard to swallow as it is in several other films of this kind. This is both because there seems to be real chemistry between the two performers, but also because everything else around them is so unconvincing that the you'll find you'll want something to hand onto as the film unfolds.
For this kind of story done right, you should check out "The 39 Steps" or "Young and Innocent" from Alfred Hitchcock.
Note: One of the things that attracted me to this movie was a half-remembered comic book series that I read as a kid. I think it, too, was called "The Green Glove" (or maybe just "The Glove") and it was a quirky horror strip about a cursed, jewel-encrusted gauntlet that entered the lives of the characters and caused some even of poetic justice or transformation before being lost again until the next episode. From the art style, I think the series must have originally been English or Spanish in origin, even though I was reading them in Danish translations.
Does anyone else remember these comics?
Starring: Glenn Ford, Geraldine Brooks, and George Macready
Director: Rudolph Mate
Rating: Four of Ten Stars
A down-on-his-luck US Army veteran (Ford) returns to France in the years following WW2 to retrieve a gem-encrusted relic he left behind in a villa on D-Day. But he is soon framed for murder by an unscrupulous art dealer (Macready) who is also trying to recover the artifact, and treasure becomes secondary to dodging police pursuit.
"The Green Glove" should have been much better than it is, given the great cast (which, in addition to the stars listed above include such genre-picture stalwarts as Cedrick Hardwicke and Gaby Andre) and the spectacular settings it was filmed in... and that doesn't even take into account the smorgasbord of thriller conventions that are crammed into the story, what with it being a man wrongfully accused on a treasure hunt with a good-hearted woman while being pursued by mysterious forces.
But, despite all the potential here, the director seems incapable of generating any real suspense, squandering almost every build-up with a confrontation that is either badly staged, too abrupt, or both. In fact, the part of the film that works best is a comic relief sequence where Glenn Ford and Geraldine Brooks' characters spend the night at an isolated country inn. But I think that part of the movie shines mostly because you've got two good actors doing their thing without clumsy staging getting in the way... and because everything else around them is lackluster.
The director's insecurity with his subject matter (or maybe the producers recognizing the dog they had on their hands) is made painfully evident right up front, with an over-use of narration, setting a stage that the film itself was setting far more effectively as it unfolded.
Although... the "insta-romance" that develops between Ford and Brooks isn't as hard to swallow as it is in several other films of this kind. This is both because there seems to be real chemistry between the two performers, but also because everything else around them is so unconvincing that the you'll find you'll want something to hand onto as the film unfolds.
For this kind of story done right, you should check out "The 39 Steps" or "Young and Innocent" from Alfred Hitchcock.
Note: One of the things that attracted me to this movie was a half-remembered comic book series that I read as a kid. I think it, too, was called "The Green Glove" (or maybe just "The Glove") and it was a quirky horror strip about a cursed, jewel-encrusted gauntlet that entered the lives of the characters and caused some even of poetic justice or transformation before being lost again until the next episode. From the art style, I think the series must have originally been English or Spanish in origin, even though I was reading them in Danish translations.
Does anyone else remember these comics?
Wednesday, May 2, 2012
It's the Final Battle (#4)!
Every month this year, until the Mayan-predicted End of the World, I am producing a ROLF! Final Battle product for NUELOW Games.
Given that the world has survived yet another month, the fourth one just saw release. The cover for it, by Darrel Miller and Karl M., is on display below. Click here for more information, or to download your very own copy from RPGNow.
Given that the world has survived yet another month, the fourth one just saw release. The cover for it, by Darrel Miller and Karl M., is on display below. Click here for more information, or to download your very own copy from RPGNow.
Monday, April 30, 2012
Jess Franco at his near-best
The Awful Dr. Orlof (aka "Screams in the Night") (1964)
Starring: Howard Vernon, Diana Lorys, Conrado San Martin, Ricardo Valle, Maria Silva, and Perla Cristal
Director: Jess Franco (as "Jess Frank")
Rating: Five of Ten Stars
A former prison doctor turned mad scientist (Vernon) is abducting party girls with the intent of grafting their skin onto the body of his daughter who was horribly burned in a fire. A none-too-bright Police Onspector (San Martin) is assigned to catch him, but it's the Inspector's lovely girlfriend (Lorys) who does much of the detective work to break the case... and then falls into the maniac's clutches.
If you've ever wondered what Hammer Films' celebrated gothic horror flicks would have looked like without the touch of an brilliant director like Terrence Fisher, you don't have to look any further than "The Awful Dr. Orlof".
What we have here is a film that's pretty damn good by the standards writer/director Franco sank to later in his career, but when compared to other entries in the gothic horror genre from the late 1950s and early 1960s, it's visually flat, unevenly plotted, and generally un-engaging due to the fact that we never get a real sense of how the various characters in the film fit together. Sure--we know the Inspector and his ballerina girlfriend are soul-mates, but why on earth do Dr. Orlof's henchmen stick with him? Why did he break them out of prison in the first place? And why is he using a blind man to help him with the killing--it's a creepy twist, but it doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Without knowing the answers to these, we never really understand what motivates half the film's main characters... although it's clear Franco thinks we should empathize with them for some reason or another.
This film could have been a crushing bore if not for some fairly effectively staged murder scenes (featuring hints of the gratuitous nudity and sadism that is a hallmark of most of Franco's and the occasional visual flourish where Franco takes full advantage of the black-and-white medium. (The still above is taken from the very best of these... a scene so effectively lit and staged that it's what made me think of Fisher's efforts for Hammer Films.)
"The Awful Dr. Orlof" was not as bad as I had expected it to be, but there are far better films in this genre to check out before you get to this one. That said, I suspect Franco fans will love it, if they haven't already checked it out.
Starring: Howard Vernon, Diana Lorys, Conrado San Martin, Ricardo Valle, Maria Silva, and Perla Cristal
Director: Jess Franco (as "Jess Frank")
Rating: Five of Ten Stars
A former prison doctor turned mad scientist (Vernon) is abducting party girls with the intent of grafting their skin onto the body of his daughter who was horribly burned in a fire. A none-too-bright Police Onspector (San Martin) is assigned to catch him, but it's the Inspector's lovely girlfriend (Lorys) who does much of the detective work to break the case... and then falls into the maniac's clutches.
If you've ever wondered what Hammer Films' celebrated gothic horror flicks would have looked like without the touch of an brilliant director like Terrence Fisher, you don't have to look any further than "The Awful Dr. Orlof".
What we have here is a film that's pretty damn good by the standards writer/director Franco sank to later in his career, but when compared to other entries in the gothic horror genre from the late 1950s and early 1960s, it's visually flat, unevenly plotted, and generally un-engaging due to the fact that we never get a real sense of how the various characters in the film fit together. Sure--we know the Inspector and his ballerina girlfriend are soul-mates, but why on earth do Dr. Orlof's henchmen stick with him? Why did he break them out of prison in the first place? And why is he using a blind man to help him with the killing--it's a creepy twist, but it doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Without knowing the answers to these, we never really understand what motivates half the film's main characters... although it's clear Franco thinks we should empathize with them for some reason or another.
This film could have been a crushing bore if not for some fairly effectively staged murder scenes (featuring hints of the gratuitous nudity and sadism that is a hallmark of most of Franco's and the occasional visual flourish where Franco takes full advantage of the black-and-white medium. (The still above is taken from the very best of these... a scene so effectively lit and staged that it's what made me think of Fisher's efforts for Hammer Films.)
"The Awful Dr. Orlof" was not as bad as I had expected it to be, but there are far better films in this genre to check out before you get to this one. That said, I suspect Franco fans will love it, if they haven't already checked it out.
Sunday, April 29, 2012
Tony DeZuniga dead at 71
I have just heard that another of my favorite artists has died.
Tony DeZuniga, whose artwork graced the pages of just about any comic book genre you care to mention--passed away today in a hospital in his home country of the Philippines. He was 71. The cause of death has yet to be announced, but he had a stroke this past Tuesday and was already suffering from pneumonia.
I am particularly fond of the work he did on DC's and Marvel's horror titles; DC's "V", "Arak", and "Jonah Hex"; and Marvel's "Fool Killer" mini-series (even if he was unceremoniously and rudely dumped from the title before its completion) and "Conan" black-and-white magazine material. John Buscema reportedly did not like the way his and DeZuniga's styles interacted, but I thought they made a great combo. I also thought he was one of the best inkers for Carmine Infantino... as much as I loved Infantino when he was inked by less "heavy-handed" artists, DeZuniga had a knack for making Infantino more accessible to those who might not otherwise appreciate his unique style. (Their collaborations in the pages of "Spider-Woman" and "V" are ones I was particularly fond of.)
Here are some samples of DeZuniga's artwork. Click here to see other posts featuring some of his art, as well as reviews of graphic novels featuring his work.
Tony DeZuniga, whose artwork graced the pages of just about any comic book genre you care to mention--passed away today in a hospital in his home country of the Philippines. He was 71. The cause of death has yet to be announced, but he had a stroke this past Tuesday and was already suffering from pneumonia.
I am particularly fond of the work he did on DC's and Marvel's horror titles; DC's "V", "Arak", and "Jonah Hex"; and Marvel's "Fool Killer" mini-series (even if he was unceremoniously and rudely dumped from the title before its completion) and "Conan" black-and-white magazine material. John Buscema reportedly did not like the way his and DeZuniga's styles interacted, but I thought they made a great combo. I also thought he was one of the best inkers for Carmine Infantino... as much as I loved Infantino when he was inked by less "heavy-handed" artists, DeZuniga had a knack for making Infantino more accessible to those who might not otherwise appreciate his unique style. (Their collaborations in the pages of "Spider-Woman" and "V" are ones I was particularly fond of.)
Here are some samples of DeZuniga's artwork. Click here to see other posts featuring some of his art, as well as reviews of graphic novels featuring his work.
Wednesday, April 18, 2012
Wednesday, April 11, 2012
Wednesday, April 4, 2012
Picture Perfect Wednesday:
The Substitute Easter Bunny
The Substitute Easter Bunny
Hilary Swank is ready and willing to step in should the Easter Bunny be unable to perform his duties.
Saturday, March 31, 2012
Wednesday, March 28, 2012
Why We Honor the Easter Bunny!
He brings eggs that are the source of Badge- Booth- and Playboy Bunnies, as proven by this photo!
April 8th is Easter Bunny Day! Today is Exclamation Point Day!
April 8th is Easter Bunny Day! Today is Exclamation Point Day!
Friday, March 23, 2012
Tone Loc: Wild Thing
Workin' all week 9 to 5 for my money
So when the weekend comes I go get live with the honey
So when the weekend comes I go get live with the honey
Wednesday, March 21, 2012
Happy 70th Anniversary, Casablanca!
I've been told that today, March 21, 2012, there are numerous theaters across the United States that are showing "Casablanca" on the big screen in celebration of the film's 70th anniversary.
I hope you're lucky enough to have it showing somewhere near where you live. If you've never seen this fine film--which stars Humphrey Bogart, Igrid Bergman, Paul Henreid, and Claude Rains, and tells the tale of an American in Nazi-occupied Casablanca who is forced to choose between love and righteousness when he has the opportunity to regain his old flame by letting her resistance-fighter husband fall into the hands of the German-allied Vichy-French.
With its near-perfect balance between suspense, comedy, and romance, this film is a great example of the kind of films that once made Hollywood great.
I hope you're lucky enough to have it showing somewhere near where you live. If you've never seen this fine film--which stars Humphrey Bogart, Igrid Bergman, Paul Henreid, and Claude Rains, and tells the tale of an American in Nazi-occupied Casablanca who is forced to choose between love and righteousness when he has the opportunity to regain his old flame by letting her resistance-fighter husband fall into the hands of the German-allied Vichy-French.
With its near-perfect balance between suspense, comedy, and romance, this film is a great example of the kind of films that once made Hollywood great.
Monday, March 19, 2012
'Over-Exposed' is nice showcase for Cleo Moore
Over-Exposed (1956)
Starring: Cleo Moore, Raymond Greeleaf, Richard Crenna, Donald Randolph, and Isobel Elsom
Director: Lewis Seiler
Rating: Six of Ten Stars
An arrest for vagrancy ends up leading to a young woman (Moore) to discover that she has a talent for photography. She parlays that talent in to wealth and fame, trampling on supporters and friends as she climbs her way to the top. But at the pinnacle of fame, she becomes a target for the mob when she witnesses a murder.
Despite showing lots of talent, actress Cleo Moore seemed to have been treated more like a pin-up girl than an actress by studio publicists. In films where she had bit parts, such as "Women's Prison" she was all over the promotional material in varying states of undress, and in films where she was the lead, such as this one and "One Woman's Confession", sex appeal also seemed to be emphasized over anything else.
And this is rather a shame, because I think Moore had greater talent as an actress than she ever really had the opportunity to show, and I think that is exhibited best in this picture than any others I've seen her in.
Moore's character goes through several stages during this film and she gets to portray a range of emotions... always tinged with a mixture of hardness that seems born from a rough life rather than any sort of emotional or mental defects. In a couple of scenes, she is particularly effective in showing emotional pain with some rather subtle acting that manages to keep the audience's sympathy for her character as she behaves like a bitch to those who care for her. Moore deftly keeps the character on the side of seeming tragic while a lesser actress might have caused her to come off as pathetic.
Moore is supported by good performances from the rest of the cast, especially from Raymond Greenleaf as the burn-out drunk who becomes Moore's gateway to the world of photography and who rediscovers his own gift while helping to develop hers. Greenleaf's character is kindhearted and funny, and is so likable that viewers will almost despise Moore's character for not making a greater effort to keep their relationship intact later in the film.
I probably would have rating this film a 7 if not for the ending. Given it was made in the 1950s, I suppose it comes as no surprise how things turn out for Moore's character, but couldn't the screenwriters have paired her a more manly man? Richard Crenna's character spends most of the movie whining and being obnoxiously insecure (possibly even jealous) about Moore's success. Sure, he punches out a few gangsters, but it still seemed wrong that Moore should give up her career for someone like that.
Starring: Cleo Moore, Raymond Greeleaf, Richard Crenna, Donald Randolph, and Isobel Elsom
Director: Lewis Seiler
Rating: Six of Ten Stars
An arrest for vagrancy ends up leading to a young woman (Moore) to discover that she has a talent for photography. She parlays that talent in to wealth and fame, trampling on supporters and friends as she climbs her way to the top. But at the pinnacle of fame, she becomes a target for the mob when she witnesses a murder.
Despite showing lots of talent, actress Cleo Moore seemed to have been treated more like a pin-up girl than an actress by studio publicists. In films where she had bit parts, such as "Women's Prison" she was all over the promotional material in varying states of undress, and in films where she was the lead, such as this one and "One Woman's Confession", sex appeal also seemed to be emphasized over anything else.
And this is rather a shame, because I think Moore had greater talent as an actress than she ever really had the opportunity to show, and I think that is exhibited best in this picture than any others I've seen her in.
Moore's character goes through several stages during this film and she gets to portray a range of emotions... always tinged with a mixture of hardness that seems born from a rough life rather than any sort of emotional or mental defects. In a couple of scenes, she is particularly effective in showing emotional pain with some rather subtle acting that manages to keep the audience's sympathy for her character as she behaves like a bitch to those who care for her. Moore deftly keeps the character on the side of seeming tragic while a lesser actress might have caused her to come off as pathetic.
Moore is supported by good performances from the rest of the cast, especially from Raymond Greenleaf as the burn-out drunk who becomes Moore's gateway to the world of photography and who rediscovers his own gift while helping to develop hers. Greenleaf's character is kindhearted and funny, and is so likable that viewers will almost despise Moore's character for not making a greater effort to keep their relationship intact later in the film.
I probably would have rating this film a 7 if not for the ending. Given it was made in the 1950s, I suppose it comes as no surprise how things turn out for Moore's character, but couldn't the screenwriters have paired her a more manly man? Richard Crenna's character spends most of the movie whining and being obnoxiously insecure (possibly even jealous) about Moore's success. Sure, he punches out a few gangsters, but it still seemed wrong that Moore should give up her career for someone like that.
Wednesday, March 14, 2012
Monday, March 12, 2012
'Weird Woman' has Lon Chaney Jr at his best
Inner Sanctum: Weird Woman (1944)
Starring: Lon Chaney Jr., Anne Gwynne, Evelyn Ankers, Elizabeth Risdon, and Lois Collier
Director: Reginald Le Borg
Rating: Eight of Ten Stars
While studying native rituals and superstitions, an anthroplogy professor (Chaney) falls in love with marries the daughter of an old mentor (Gwynne). Upon his return to the United States, he discoversn that his wife is a fervent believer in the native gods and that she has been practing rituals that she believes will protect him from the evil intentions of one of his colleagues (Ankers). Appalled that his wife believes in such supersitious nonsense, he forces her to destroy all the charms and fetishes she owns... but as soon as he does this, his life and career start falling apart.
"Weird Woman" is a decent adaptation of one of Fritz Leiber's best novels, "Conjure Wife". It features a nice, tight script, great performances by the entire cast, and a surprise ending that at the same time manages to reinforce and cast doubt on the film's central premise--that the "powers of the supernatural" are nothing but supersition and fear causing believers to act in ways that create self-fulling prophecies.
Of particular note in this film is by Lon Chaney Jr., who is seen giving one of the best performances of his entire career. The character he is playing could easily have come across as a self-satisfied jerk in the hands of an lesser actor. His attitude toward his wife and her beliefs is obnoxious in the extreme, and some of his interactions with the staff and students of the college he teaches at borders on high-handed with a wiff of false humility. But Chaney infuses the character with an air of insecurity that makes the viewer accept and even forgive his behavior.
"Weird Woman" is one of the best entires in the "Inner Sanctum" movie series, and it's one of the best films to come out of the Universal Pictures' horror revival in the 1940s. Fans of classic mystery films, the Universal Pictures horror collection, and Lon Chaney Jr. will all find a lot to like in this one.
Starring: Lon Chaney Jr., Anne Gwynne, Evelyn Ankers, Elizabeth Risdon, and Lois Collier
Director: Reginald Le Borg
Rating: Eight of Ten Stars
While studying native rituals and superstitions, an anthroplogy professor (Chaney) falls in love with marries the daughter of an old mentor (Gwynne). Upon his return to the United States, he discoversn that his wife is a fervent believer in the native gods and that she has been practing rituals that she believes will protect him from the evil intentions of one of his colleagues (Ankers). Appalled that his wife believes in such supersitious nonsense, he forces her to destroy all the charms and fetishes she owns... but as soon as he does this, his life and career start falling apart.
"Weird Woman" is a decent adaptation of one of Fritz Leiber's best novels, "Conjure Wife". It features a nice, tight script, great performances by the entire cast, and a surprise ending that at the same time manages to reinforce and cast doubt on the film's central premise--that the "powers of the supernatural" are nothing but supersition and fear causing believers to act in ways that create self-fulling prophecies.
Of particular note in this film is by Lon Chaney Jr., who is seen giving one of the best performances of his entire career. The character he is playing could easily have come across as a self-satisfied jerk in the hands of an lesser actor. His attitude toward his wife and her beliefs is obnoxious in the extreme, and some of his interactions with the staff and students of the college he teaches at borders on high-handed with a wiff of false humility. But Chaney infuses the character with an air of insecurity that makes the viewer accept and even forgive his behavior.
"Weird Woman" is one of the best entires in the "Inner Sanctum" movie series, and it's one of the best films to come out of the Universal Pictures' horror revival in the 1940s. Fans of classic mystery films, the Universal Pictures horror collection, and Lon Chaney Jr. will all find a lot to like in this one.
Thursday, March 8, 2012
Happy International Day of the Woman!
Here are some -woman (and -lady) pictures!
 |
| By Alan Davis |
 |
| By Milton Caniff |
 |
| By Gil Kane |
Wednesday, March 7, 2012
The Milla Jovovich Quarterly:
The Case of the Missing Pants
The Case of the Missing Pants
Saturday, March 3, 2012
The world is still here... for now!
Why does the sun go on shining? Why does the sea rush to shore? Don't they know it's the end of the world, 'cause Mayans didn't carve any more?
We're now a little over two months into the year where the world is supposed to end... or so some people think, because some ancient Mayans ended a calendar some time this year. (There's some dispute as to the exact date, but the year is generally agreed upon. By people who apparently don't understand the way calendars tend to work.)
Still, in celebration of us all being here, I present Skeeter Davis performing her signature song "The End of the World".
We're now a little over two months into the year where the world is supposed to end... or so some people think, because some ancient Mayans ended a calendar some time this year. (There's some dispute as to the exact date, but the year is generally agreed upon. By people who apparently don't understand the way calendars tend to work.)
Still, in celebration of us all being here, I present Skeeter Davis performing her signature song "The End of the World".
Wednesday, February 29, 2012
Princesses of Mars:
The Long-Lost Part Fifteen
The Long-Lost Part Fifteen
Strange things can happen when you travel bodilessly in time and space, back and forth to Barsoom where the scantily clad Martian princesses dwell. For example, a series of portraits of them might skip from Part Fourteen to Part Part Sixteen for no apparent reason.
 |
| By Shane Glines |
 |
| By Steve Lightle |
 |
| By Mike Hoffman |
 |
| By Gene Gonzalez |
Monday, February 27, 2012
Male Call Monday: The Return of Miss Lace
During WW2, the legendary Milton Caniff created a comic strip targeted exclusively at U.S. military personnel. It featured the sexy Miss Lace, a young lady who was doing her part to lift the spirits of America's men in uniform... even if that sometimes meant she had to engage in a little hand-to-hand combat herself when a soldier became a little too amorous.
Click on the strips to for larger, more legible versions.
Sunday, February 26, 2012
Death makes a house call....
Inner Sanctum: Calling Dr. Death (1943)
Starring: Lon Chaney Jr., Patricia Morison, J. Carrol Naish, Ramsay Ames, Fay Helm, and David Bruce
Director: Reginald LeBorg
Rating: Six of Ten Stars
A brilliant hypnotherapist (Chaney) becomes the prime suspect in the murder of his shrewish, unfaithful wife (Ames) when he suffers an unexplained blackout during the weekend she was murdered.
"Calling Dr. Death" was the first of six films based on the popular radio drama anthology series "Inner Sanctum", each starring Lon Chaney Jr. in the lead role. It is a series that belongs both in style and quality with Universal's Wolf Man and Mummy pictures of the early 1940s--most of which also starred Chaney--in that these films a low-budget B-pictures that vary greatly in quality... and rarely manage to touch the heights of Universal's horror films from the early 1930s.
Like the radio series they draw from, the "Inner Sanctum" films are more mysteries than horror flicks, but it varies from installment to installment how far they lean toward which genre.
"Calling Dr. Death" is a straight mystery that, despite being rather slow-moving manages to generate quite a bit of tension as its multi-layered plot casts suspicion first on one character, then another... and ultimately seems to settle on a conspiracy between two characters. Eventually, the film relies on a surprise twist, which was well-executed and very dramatic, even if it pointed back to the character I had initially thought would be the killer. The method used was also similar to what I had figured, but the motivation was completely different, but it fit logically with the rest of the film's storyline. (The twist ending must be a lost art.)
Featuring a solid cast, with Chaney as the high-strung hypnotist and J. Carrol Naish as the relentless, hard-nosed police detective who is hellbent on proving "Dr. Death" guilty of killing his wife, leading the pack. Ramsay Ames was almost unrecognizable as the shrewish wife, and Patricia Morison.
This isn't the greatest of mystery films, but it's got a great cast and it pays off nicely if you're a little patient with it. If you're a fan of Lon Chaney Jr. and a classic B-movie mysteries, it's worth checking out.
Starring: Lon Chaney Jr., Patricia Morison, J. Carrol Naish, Ramsay Ames, Fay Helm, and David Bruce
Director: Reginald LeBorg
Rating: Six of Ten Stars
A brilliant hypnotherapist (Chaney) becomes the prime suspect in the murder of his shrewish, unfaithful wife (Ames) when he suffers an unexplained blackout during the weekend she was murdered.
"Calling Dr. Death" was the first of six films based on the popular radio drama anthology series "Inner Sanctum", each starring Lon Chaney Jr. in the lead role. It is a series that belongs both in style and quality with Universal's Wolf Man and Mummy pictures of the early 1940s--most of which also starred Chaney--in that these films a low-budget B-pictures that vary greatly in quality... and rarely manage to touch the heights of Universal's horror films from the early 1930s.
Like the radio series they draw from, the "Inner Sanctum" films are more mysteries than horror flicks, but it varies from installment to installment how far they lean toward which genre.
"Calling Dr. Death" is a straight mystery that, despite being rather slow-moving manages to generate quite a bit of tension as its multi-layered plot casts suspicion first on one character, then another... and ultimately seems to settle on a conspiracy between two characters. Eventually, the film relies on a surprise twist, which was well-executed and very dramatic, even if it pointed back to the character I had initially thought would be the killer. The method used was also similar to what I had figured, but the motivation was completely different, but it fit logically with the rest of the film's storyline. (The twist ending must be a lost art.)
Featuring a solid cast, with Chaney as the high-strung hypnotist and J. Carrol Naish as the relentless, hard-nosed police detective who is hellbent on proving "Dr. Death" guilty of killing his wife, leading the pack. Ramsay Ames was almost unrecognizable as the shrewish wife, and Patricia Morison.
This isn't the greatest of mystery films, but it's got a great cast and it pays off nicely if you're a little patient with it. If you're a fan of Lon Chaney Jr. and a classic B-movie mysteries, it's worth checking out.
Friday, February 24, 2012
The Adventures of Larry Talbot, Wolfman
In the 1940s, the Wolf Man was something of a poor stepchild among the Universal Monsters, sharing his sequels with Frankenstein, Dracula, and even Abbott & Costello. Even Universal Pictures' Legacy Collection DVD series gave him short shrift: His films weren't even included in the set bearing his name, but instead spread across three Legacy Collections. Only the original film and the first Wolf Man sequel ("Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man") are included in the set where they properly belong while the others are in "Dracula: The Legacy Collection" ("House of Dracula") and "Frankenstein: The Legacy Collection" ("House of Frankenstein").
This post reviews all the classic Wolf Man pictures--films that established the rules for cinematic werewolves that would be followed the world over for decades afterwards. They also started the "monster mash" tradition of pictures pairing werewolves, vampires, and other creatures that go bump in the night in the same picture. The films are a little uneven in quality at times, with at least one of them being butchered in post-production, but they are among the most solid of Universal's horror efforts during the 1940s, and they show Lon Chaney Jr. at his best.
The Wolf Man (1941)
Starring: Lon Chaney Jr., Claude Rains, Evelyn Ankers, Maria Ouspenskaya, Warren William, and Bela Lugosi
Director: George Waggner
Rating: Seven of Ten Stars
Engineer Larry Talbot (Chaney) returns to his ancestral home and reconnects with his roots... only to be bitten by a werewolf and find himself cursed. Will he manage to find a cure for a malady that no one in the modern world believes in before he kills someone he loves?
"The Wolf Man" isn't the first werewolf movie--I think that was Universal's "Werewolf of London"--but it's the one that brought werewolves firmly into pop culture, and most every other film, novel, or comic book that's followed in the 65+ years since its release owes one thing or another to it. In fact, there are a numer of elements that are now taken as "fact" about werewolf legends that didn't exist until the writer of "The Wolf Man" made them up.
Interestingly, this really isn't that good a movie. It's sloppily edited--leading to characters entering through the same door twice within a few seconds and other glitches--and the script shows signs of only partially implimented rewrites that gives the flm a slightly schizophrenic quality and that causes characters to seemingly forget key plot elements as the story unfolds. (The biggest one; Larry's given an amulet that will supposedly suppress his transformation, an amulet he gives to a lady friend when he thinks the werewolf stuff is a bunch of hooey. Later, though, he seems to have totally forgotten the purpose of the amulet. And let's not even consider the bad script-induced callousness of our heroine, Gwen, who cheerfully goes on a date the night after a good friend is mysteriously murdered in the woods.)
However, what flaws this movie possesses are rendered insignificant thanks to an amazing performance by Lon Chaney Jr. as the tortured werewolf, Larry Talbot. "The Wolf Man" is one of those rare movies where a single actor manages to lift a weak film to the level of a classic. Although he's assisted by a supporting cast that is a veritable who's-who of 1930s and 1940s genre films, and the set designers and dressers went all out, this is truly it is Lon Chaney Jr's movie. It might even be the brightest moment of his entire career.
Chaney plays a decent man who becomes a monster through no fault of his own, and who is horrified by the acts he commits while he is the wolf man. This makes Larry Talbot unique among all the various monsters in the Universal horror picutres of the 1930s and 1940s, and Chaney makes the character even more remarkable by playing him as one of the most likeable (if a bit smarmy when it comes to the ladies) characters in any of the classic horror films. This likeability makes Chaney's performance even more powerful and causes the viewer to feel even more deeper for Larry when he experiences the grief, helplessness, and terror when he realizes that he is a murderer and the victim of a supernatural affliction that his modern, rational mind can't even begin to comprehend.
There are other good performances in the film, and they too help make up for the weak script. Most noteworthy among these is Maria Ouspenskaya who plays a gypsy wise-woman. Ouspenskaya delivers her magic incantations and werewolf lore with such conviction that it's easy to see why they've become the accepted "facts" of werewolves. (This may also be the first film where gypsies became firmly associated with werewolves.)
Although flawed, "The Wolf Man" is a cornerstone of modern popular horror, and it's well-deserving of its status as a classic. It should be seen by lovers of classic horror pictures (Lon Chaney Jr. deserves to be remembered for this film and it's required viewing for any self-respecting fan of werewolf films and literature.
Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man (1943)
Steve's Rating: Six of Ten Stars
Starring: Starring: Lon Chaney Jr., Patric Knowles, Ilona Massey, Maria Ouspenskaya, Lionel Atwill and Bela Lugosi
Director: Roy William Neill
Rating: Six of Ten Stars
When grave robbers disturb Larry Talbot's tomb, the unwilling werewolf (Chaney) awakens to the discovery that not only is he cursed to become a beast under the full moon, but he is immortal. With the help of Maleva (Ouspenskaya), a gypsy wise-woman, he seeks out Dr. Frankenstein, the premiere expert on life, death, and immortality... because if anyone can find a way to bring death to an immortal, it's Dr. Frankenstein. Will Larry find peace, or will Frankenstein's experiments bring more horror and destruction to the world?
"Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man" is a direct sequel to both "The Wolf Man" and "Ghost of Frankenstein". It's the first time two legendary horror creatures meet... and without this film, we'd probably never have been treated to "Freddy vs. Jason" or "Alien vs. Predator" or "Alvin and the Chipmunks Meet Dracula".
Unlike most of Universal's movies during the 1940s, I appreciate the fact that the creatives and executives at Universal are paying some attention to the continuity of prior Frankenstein films and "The Wolf Man", but there's still plenty of sloppiness and bad storytelling to remind us that this is a Universal film from the 1940s. (Like the werewolf mysteriously changing from pajamas into his dark shirt and pants when transformed, and then changing back into his pajamas as be becomes Larry Talbot again. Or the bizarre forgetfulness of the townspeople who drive Larry and his gypsy friend away, but who don't bat an eye when Larry is later invited to the town's wiine festival and the mayor's guest and date for Baroness Frankenstein (Massey), the granddaugher of the original monster-maker. Maybe the fact that Larry's wearing a suit and tie when he returns fooled them!)
The movie starts out strong, however. The grave-robbing and the wolf man's ressurection scene are spine-chilling. Chaney once again effectively conveys Talbot's mental anguish during the scenes where he is confined to a hospital and recovering from the supposedly fatal headwounds he receieved at the end of "The Wolf Man" (apparently, a werewolf's wounds don't heal while he's supposedly dead and piled high with wolf's bane). It looks like we're in for a thrilling chiller that's going to be better than the original film...
But then the action moves to Switzerland and things start to go wrong.
Although a seemingly endless musical number at the village wine festival is the low point, the inexplicable transformation of a level-headed medical man (Knowles) hoping to help cure Talbot of what he perceives to be a homocidal mania to crazed Frankenstein-wannabe, the seemingly laughable arm-waving performance of the Frankenstein Monster by Bela Lugosi--because Larry simply can't just leave him sleeping in his ice cave--and an ending so abbrupt that it feels like something's missing, all drag the film down to a level of crapitude that almost manages to make the viewer forget about the very excellent first half.
I don't know what went wrong with this film, but I suspect that it was decided at an executive level at Universal that the monster movies were going to be targeted at kids. It's the only explanation that makes sense of the deterioation from mature, well-developed films like "Frankenstein" and "The Mummy" to the mostly slap-dash stuff found in the movies featuring Dracula, the Wolf Man, and the Mummy for the rest of the 1940s.
My guess is that someone, somewhere, made a decision to shorten this movie and make it more accessible for kids by simplifying it. According to several sources, this film suffered more than average from butchery in the editing room where all of Lugosi's lines were deleted from the soundtrack and key scenes were cut out, such as the one where it's revealed that the Monster is still blind from the partially botched brain transplant in "Ghost of Frankenstein". This detail explains why Lugosi is stumbling about with with his arms outstretched and is seen pawing strangely at items while Larry Talbot is searching for Dr. Frankenstein's records. Lugosi's performance goes from laughably stupid to perfectly decent when one understands what he was doing. (The original screen writer says that the editing was done was test audiences thought the monster was funny when speaking with Lugosi's accent and that this is why the second half of the film was so heavilly edited. That sounds reasonable, but only if one ignores the overall direction the Universal horror movies were heading in. And the shockingly badly handled, abrubt ending. And the dangling plot threads... where DOES Maleva vanish to?)
But, a film can only be judged by what's there on the screen. While the editing left the flim shorter and more straight-forward, it also resulted in very important plot-points and probably even mood-establishing scenes and elements being slashed out. We also have a movie where Frankenstein's Monster once again has very little to do (as was the case in "Son of Frankenstein"), And, ultimately, we're left with a movie that is both remarkable for its being the first meeting of two great cinematic monsters, but also for being a clear point at which to say that this is where the reign of Universal as king of horror films ended.
"Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man" isn't a truly terrible movie. It's just rendered dissapointingly mediocre by its second half, and it just manages to earn a Six rating.
House of Frankenstein (1944)
Starring: Boris Karloff, Lon Chaney Jr, J. Carroll Naish, John Carradine and George Zucco
Director: Erle C. Kenton
Rating: Five of Ten Stars
After escaping from prison, mad scientist Gustav Niemann (Karloff) sets out to gain revenge on those who helped imprison him, and to find the notes of the legendary Dr. Frankenstein so he can perfect his research. Along the way, he accidentially awakens Dracula (Carradine) and recruits him to his cause, as well as uncovers the frozen bodies of Frankenstein's Monster and Larry Talbot, the unfortunate wolfman (Chaney) and and revives them. Cue the torch-wielding peasant mob.
"House of Frankenstein" kinda-sorta picks up where "Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man" picked up, although the method of survival for the monsters is a bit dodgey, with Frankenstein's Monster and the Wolf Man having both been frozen in a glacier so they could be revived for this film.
"House of Frankenstein" unfolds in a very episodic way, with the part of the film involving Dracula feeling very disconnected from what comes before and what comes after. The main storyline sees Karloff's mad doctor questing for revenge while preparing to prove himself a better master of brain-transplanting techniques than Frankenstein, and the growing threat to his cause by his repeated snubbing of his murderous assistant (Naish). The whole bit with Dracula could easily be left out, and the film may have been stronger for it.
This is a very silly movie that is basically a parade of gothic horror cliches--I thought maybe I was having some sort of hallucinatory flashback to my days writing for the "Ravenloft" line--but it moves at a quick pace, and it features a great collection of actors, has a nifty musical score, and features great sets once the story moves to the ruins of Castle Frankenstein.
"House of Dracula" is one of the lesser Universal Monster movies--it's not rock-bottom like the mummy films with Lon Chaney, but it's almost there. The film is, to a large degree, elevated by the top-notch performances from Boris Karloff and Lon Chaney Jr, and they're almost too good for this film.
House of Dracula (aka "The Wolf Man's Cure")
Starring: Lon Chaney Jr., Onslow Stevens, John Carradine, Lionel Atwill, Martha O'Driscoll, Jane Adams, and Glenn Strange
Director: Erle C. Kenton
Rating: Six of Ten Stars
Unwilling, immortal werewolf Larry Talbot (Chaney) seeks out Dr. Edelman (Stevens), hoping the doctor's cutting edge therapies will cure his affliction. Unfortunately, the doctor's other patient, Count Dracula (Carradine), endangers this hope when he out of pure malice afflicts Edelman with a condition that causes him to become a violent madman at night. It is during one of these fits that Edelman revives Frankenstein's Monster (Strange), which has been dormant in his lab since it was recovered from mud-floes under Edelman's castle.
"House of Dracula" was the third sequel to "The Wolf Man" and "Dracula" and the fifth sequel to "Frankenstein"... and it was the next-to-last stop for all three of the characters as Universal's decade-and-half long horror ride came to an end. nearly the last stop for Universal's original monsters, and it is something of a high note when compared to other Universal horror films from around the same time, even the one to which this is a sequel, "House of Frankenstein" with Boris Karloff.
The script in "House of Dracula" is stronger and more coherent than "House of Frankenstein". The effort at maintaining continuity with other films featuring the character of the Wolf Man are in evidence here, and they are greatly appreciated by this continuity geek. Also, all the various monster characters each get their moment to shine--unlike in "House of Frankenstein" where Dracula was completely superflous to the storyline and whose presense was little more than a marquee-grabbing cameo.
In this film, Dracula is the well-spring of evil from which the plot flows. Although he supposedly comes to Dr. Edelman seeking release from vampirism and his eternal life, he is either too evil or too stupid to control his desires for Edelman's beautfiful nurse (O'Driscoll). He gets his just desserts, but not before he guarentees that every brave and goodhearted character in the film is set on a path of destruction.
The climactic scenes of this film, as the insane Dr. Edelman and Frankenstein's Monster go on homicidal rampages, feature some very, sudden, casual, and matter-of-fact brutality. (I can't go into details without spoiling the plot, but two main characters are dispatched with such swift and surprisingly brutal fashion that modern-day horror filmmakers should take a look at the final minutes of "House of Dracula" and attempt to learn some lessons from them.)
And then there's Larry Talbot. The role of the wolf man in this story is the meatiest since the character's debut in "The Wolf Man". Although he still doesn't get to have the stage to himself, and he is once again a secondary character--the main character of "House of Dracula" is the unfortunate Dr. Edelman--he has some great moments... like his suicide attempt and his discovery of the dormant Frankenstein's Monster.
Acting-wise, this is also one of the better than many other Universal horror films of the period. This is partly due to a superior script that features a story that actually flows with some degree of logic and where the actors have some fairly decent lines to deliever.
Lon Chaney Jr. does his usual excellent job as Larry Talbot, but Onslow also shines as a scientific genius who's a little less mad than the standard in a movie like this (well, at least until Dracula is done with him).
John Carradine performs decently, but I simply can't buy him as Dracula. Even in his younger years, he had the look of a burned-out, alcoholic bum, and the lighting and make-up in this feature strengthen that look as far as I'm concerned. While miscast, he does a decent job.
Lionel Atwill is also on hand for another fine supporting role. The part is similar to the one he played in "Son of Frankenstein", but the role is even more interesting, as he's the voice of reason in a town that is otherwise inhabited by villagers whose favorite pastime seems to be grabbing torches and storming the castle.
When all things are taken into account, this is perhaps the best of Universal's original Wolf Man films, and it was a fitting send-off for poor Larry Talbot, as well as Frankenstein's Monster and Dracula.
But... there would be one last bow for Larry and his eternal foes.
Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein (1948)
Starring: Bud Abbott, Lou Costello, Lon Chaney Jr., Lenore Aubert and Bela Lugosi
Director: Charles Barton
Rating: Eight of Ten Stars
The reluctant Wolf Man, Larry Talbot (Chaney) learns that Dracula (Lugosi) intends to revive Frankenstein's Monster and use it as his personal super-soldier. He pursues the evil vampire lord to the United States where he finds his only allies to be Wilbur and Chick (Costello and Abbott), a couple of less-than-bright shipping clerks. Unfortunately, Dracula as an ally of his own--mad scientist femme fatale Dr. Sandra Mornay (Aubert), and she has Wilbur wrapped around her little finger. Little does Wilbur know that his girlfriend doesn't love him for his mind but rather his brain... she intends to do Dracula's bidding and transplant into the rejuvinated monster!
"Abott and Costello Meet Frankenstein" is a wild screwball comedy with the two master comedians doing their usual routines within the framework of a solid script and a story that's actually pretty logical in its own crazy way. I think it's the first fusion of comedy and monsters, and one reason it works so well is that the monsters are played straight. Even when they are involved in funny schtick (Dracula and the Wolf Man are both part of several routines), they remain as they were featured in the serious monster movies they were in. Of course, one shouldn't ask how or why Larry was once again cursed (given his cure at the end of "House of Dracula,") but otherwise the monsters are all consistent with previous films.
Too often, I hear this film written off as Universal's last and crassest attempt to wring some dollars out of their tired monster franchise. While that may be all the studio bosses had in mind, the creators involved with "Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein" managed to make a great movie that is still worth watching today. It's even superior to many of Universal's "straight" movies with Dracula, Frankenstein's Monster, and the Wolf Man (or, for that matter, countless recent so-called horror films). Much of its strength grows from the fact that has a plot that with some tweaking could be a straight horror movie.
I recommend this underappreciated film to any lover of the classic monster films, as well as lovers of slapstick comedy.
This post reviews all the classic Wolf Man pictures--films that established the rules for cinematic werewolves that would be followed the world over for decades afterwards. They also started the "monster mash" tradition of pictures pairing werewolves, vampires, and other creatures that go bump in the night in the same picture. The films are a little uneven in quality at times, with at least one of them being butchered in post-production, but they are among the most solid of Universal's horror efforts during the 1940s, and they show Lon Chaney Jr. at his best.
The Wolf Man (1941)
Starring: Lon Chaney Jr., Claude Rains, Evelyn Ankers, Maria Ouspenskaya, Warren William, and Bela Lugosi
Director: George Waggner
Rating: Seven of Ten Stars
Engineer Larry Talbot (Chaney) returns to his ancestral home and reconnects with his roots... only to be bitten by a werewolf and find himself cursed. Will he manage to find a cure for a malady that no one in the modern world believes in before he kills someone he loves?
"The Wolf Man" isn't the first werewolf movie--I think that was Universal's "Werewolf of London"--but it's the one that brought werewolves firmly into pop culture, and most every other film, novel, or comic book that's followed in the 65+ years since its release owes one thing or another to it. In fact, there are a numer of elements that are now taken as "fact" about werewolf legends that didn't exist until the writer of "The Wolf Man" made them up.
Interestingly, this really isn't that good a movie. It's sloppily edited--leading to characters entering through the same door twice within a few seconds and other glitches--and the script shows signs of only partially implimented rewrites that gives the flm a slightly schizophrenic quality and that causes characters to seemingly forget key plot elements as the story unfolds. (The biggest one; Larry's given an amulet that will supposedly suppress his transformation, an amulet he gives to a lady friend when he thinks the werewolf stuff is a bunch of hooey. Later, though, he seems to have totally forgotten the purpose of the amulet. And let's not even consider the bad script-induced callousness of our heroine, Gwen, who cheerfully goes on a date the night after a good friend is mysteriously murdered in the woods.)
However, what flaws this movie possesses are rendered insignificant thanks to an amazing performance by Lon Chaney Jr. as the tortured werewolf, Larry Talbot. "The Wolf Man" is one of those rare movies where a single actor manages to lift a weak film to the level of a classic. Although he's assisted by a supporting cast that is a veritable who's-who of 1930s and 1940s genre films, and the set designers and dressers went all out, this is truly it is Lon Chaney Jr's movie. It might even be the brightest moment of his entire career.
Chaney plays a decent man who becomes a monster through no fault of his own, and who is horrified by the acts he commits while he is the wolf man. This makes Larry Talbot unique among all the various monsters in the Universal horror picutres of the 1930s and 1940s, and Chaney makes the character even more remarkable by playing him as one of the most likeable (if a bit smarmy when it comes to the ladies) characters in any of the classic horror films. This likeability makes Chaney's performance even more powerful and causes the viewer to feel even more deeper for Larry when he experiences the grief, helplessness, and terror when he realizes that he is a murderer and the victim of a supernatural affliction that his modern, rational mind can't even begin to comprehend.
There are other good performances in the film, and they too help make up for the weak script. Most noteworthy among these is Maria Ouspenskaya who plays a gypsy wise-woman. Ouspenskaya delivers her magic incantations and werewolf lore with such conviction that it's easy to see why they've become the accepted "facts" of werewolves. (This may also be the first film where gypsies became firmly associated with werewolves.)
Although flawed, "The Wolf Man" is a cornerstone of modern popular horror, and it's well-deserving of its status as a classic. It should be seen by lovers of classic horror pictures (Lon Chaney Jr. deserves to be remembered for this film and it's required viewing for any self-respecting fan of werewolf films and literature.
Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man (1943)
Steve's Rating: Six of Ten Stars
Starring: Starring: Lon Chaney Jr., Patric Knowles, Ilona Massey, Maria Ouspenskaya, Lionel Atwill and Bela Lugosi
Director: Roy William Neill
Rating: Six of Ten Stars
When grave robbers disturb Larry Talbot's tomb, the unwilling werewolf (Chaney) awakens to the discovery that not only is he cursed to become a beast under the full moon, but he is immortal. With the help of Maleva (Ouspenskaya), a gypsy wise-woman, he seeks out Dr. Frankenstein, the premiere expert on life, death, and immortality... because if anyone can find a way to bring death to an immortal, it's Dr. Frankenstein. Will Larry find peace, or will Frankenstein's experiments bring more horror and destruction to the world?
"Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man" is a direct sequel to both "The Wolf Man" and "Ghost of Frankenstein". It's the first time two legendary horror creatures meet... and without this film, we'd probably never have been treated to "Freddy vs. Jason" or "Alien vs. Predator" or "Alvin and the Chipmunks Meet Dracula".
Unlike most of Universal's movies during the 1940s, I appreciate the fact that the creatives and executives at Universal are paying some attention to the continuity of prior Frankenstein films and "The Wolf Man", but there's still plenty of sloppiness and bad storytelling to remind us that this is a Universal film from the 1940s. (Like the werewolf mysteriously changing from pajamas into his dark shirt and pants when transformed, and then changing back into his pajamas as be becomes Larry Talbot again. Or the bizarre forgetfulness of the townspeople who drive Larry and his gypsy friend away, but who don't bat an eye when Larry is later invited to the town's wiine festival and the mayor's guest and date for Baroness Frankenstein (Massey), the granddaugher of the original monster-maker. Maybe the fact that Larry's wearing a suit and tie when he returns fooled them!)
The movie starts out strong, however. The grave-robbing and the wolf man's ressurection scene are spine-chilling. Chaney once again effectively conveys Talbot's mental anguish during the scenes where he is confined to a hospital and recovering from the supposedly fatal headwounds he receieved at the end of "The Wolf Man" (apparently, a werewolf's wounds don't heal while he's supposedly dead and piled high with wolf's bane). It looks like we're in for a thrilling chiller that's going to be better than the original film...
But then the action moves to Switzerland and things start to go wrong.
Although a seemingly endless musical number at the village wine festival is the low point, the inexplicable transformation of a level-headed medical man (Knowles) hoping to help cure Talbot of what he perceives to be a homocidal mania to crazed Frankenstein-wannabe, the seemingly laughable arm-waving performance of the Frankenstein Monster by Bela Lugosi--because Larry simply can't just leave him sleeping in his ice cave--and an ending so abbrupt that it feels like something's missing, all drag the film down to a level of crapitude that almost manages to make the viewer forget about the very excellent first half.
I don't know what went wrong with this film, but I suspect that it was decided at an executive level at Universal that the monster movies were going to be targeted at kids. It's the only explanation that makes sense of the deterioation from mature, well-developed films like "Frankenstein" and "The Mummy" to the mostly slap-dash stuff found in the movies featuring Dracula, the Wolf Man, and the Mummy for the rest of the 1940s.
My guess is that someone, somewhere, made a decision to shorten this movie and make it more accessible for kids by simplifying it. According to several sources, this film suffered more than average from butchery in the editing room where all of Lugosi's lines were deleted from the soundtrack and key scenes were cut out, such as the one where it's revealed that the Monster is still blind from the partially botched brain transplant in "Ghost of Frankenstein". This detail explains why Lugosi is stumbling about with with his arms outstretched and is seen pawing strangely at items while Larry Talbot is searching for Dr. Frankenstein's records. Lugosi's performance goes from laughably stupid to perfectly decent when one understands what he was doing. (The original screen writer says that the editing was done was test audiences thought the monster was funny when speaking with Lugosi's accent and that this is why the second half of the film was so heavilly edited. That sounds reasonable, but only if one ignores the overall direction the Universal horror movies were heading in. And the shockingly badly handled, abrubt ending. And the dangling plot threads... where DOES Maleva vanish to?)
But, a film can only be judged by what's there on the screen. While the editing left the flim shorter and more straight-forward, it also resulted in very important plot-points and probably even mood-establishing scenes and elements being slashed out. We also have a movie where Frankenstein's Monster once again has very little to do (as was the case in "Son of Frankenstein"), And, ultimately, we're left with a movie that is both remarkable for its being the first meeting of two great cinematic monsters, but also for being a clear point at which to say that this is where the reign of Universal as king of horror films ended.
"Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man" isn't a truly terrible movie. It's just rendered dissapointingly mediocre by its second half, and it just manages to earn a Six rating.
House of Frankenstein (1944)
Starring: Boris Karloff, Lon Chaney Jr, J. Carroll Naish, John Carradine and George Zucco
Director: Erle C. Kenton
Rating: Five of Ten Stars
After escaping from prison, mad scientist Gustav Niemann (Karloff) sets out to gain revenge on those who helped imprison him, and to find the notes of the legendary Dr. Frankenstein so he can perfect his research. Along the way, he accidentially awakens Dracula (Carradine) and recruits him to his cause, as well as uncovers the frozen bodies of Frankenstein's Monster and Larry Talbot, the unfortunate wolfman (Chaney) and and revives them. Cue the torch-wielding peasant mob.
"House of Frankenstein" kinda-sorta picks up where "Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man" picked up, although the method of survival for the monsters is a bit dodgey, with Frankenstein's Monster and the Wolf Man having both been frozen in a glacier so they could be revived for this film.
"House of Frankenstein" unfolds in a very episodic way, with the part of the film involving Dracula feeling very disconnected from what comes before and what comes after. The main storyline sees Karloff's mad doctor questing for revenge while preparing to prove himself a better master of brain-transplanting techniques than Frankenstein, and the growing threat to his cause by his repeated snubbing of his murderous assistant (Naish). The whole bit with Dracula could easily be left out, and the film may have been stronger for it.
This is a very silly movie that is basically a parade of gothic horror cliches--I thought maybe I was having some sort of hallucinatory flashback to my days writing for the "Ravenloft" line--but it moves at a quick pace, and it features a great collection of actors, has a nifty musical score, and features great sets once the story moves to the ruins of Castle Frankenstein.
"House of Dracula" is one of the lesser Universal Monster movies--it's not rock-bottom like the mummy films with Lon Chaney, but it's almost there. The film is, to a large degree, elevated by the top-notch performances from Boris Karloff and Lon Chaney Jr, and they're almost too good for this film.
House of Dracula (aka "The Wolf Man's Cure")
Starring: Lon Chaney Jr., Onslow Stevens, John Carradine, Lionel Atwill, Martha O'Driscoll, Jane Adams, and Glenn Strange
Director: Erle C. Kenton
Rating: Six of Ten Stars
Unwilling, immortal werewolf Larry Talbot (Chaney) seeks out Dr. Edelman (Stevens), hoping the doctor's cutting edge therapies will cure his affliction. Unfortunately, the doctor's other patient, Count Dracula (Carradine), endangers this hope when he out of pure malice afflicts Edelman with a condition that causes him to become a violent madman at night. It is during one of these fits that Edelman revives Frankenstein's Monster (Strange), which has been dormant in his lab since it was recovered from mud-floes under Edelman's castle.
"House of Dracula" was the third sequel to "The Wolf Man" and "Dracula" and the fifth sequel to "Frankenstein"... and it was the next-to-last stop for all three of the characters as Universal's decade-and-half long horror ride came to an end. nearly the last stop for Universal's original monsters, and it is something of a high note when compared to other Universal horror films from around the same time, even the one to which this is a sequel, "House of Frankenstein" with Boris Karloff.
The script in "House of Dracula" is stronger and more coherent than "House of Frankenstein". The effort at maintaining continuity with other films featuring the character of the Wolf Man are in evidence here, and they are greatly appreciated by this continuity geek. Also, all the various monster characters each get their moment to shine--unlike in "House of Frankenstein" where Dracula was completely superflous to the storyline and whose presense was little more than a marquee-grabbing cameo.
In this film, Dracula is the well-spring of evil from which the plot flows. Although he supposedly comes to Dr. Edelman seeking release from vampirism and his eternal life, he is either too evil or too stupid to control his desires for Edelman's beautfiful nurse (O'Driscoll). He gets his just desserts, but not before he guarentees that every brave and goodhearted character in the film is set on a path of destruction.
The climactic scenes of this film, as the insane Dr. Edelman and Frankenstein's Monster go on homicidal rampages, feature some very, sudden, casual, and matter-of-fact brutality. (I can't go into details without spoiling the plot, but two main characters are dispatched with such swift and surprisingly brutal fashion that modern-day horror filmmakers should take a look at the final minutes of "House of Dracula" and attempt to learn some lessons from them.)
And then there's Larry Talbot. The role of the wolf man in this story is the meatiest since the character's debut in "The Wolf Man". Although he still doesn't get to have the stage to himself, and he is once again a secondary character--the main character of "House of Dracula" is the unfortunate Dr. Edelman--he has some great moments... like his suicide attempt and his discovery of the dormant Frankenstein's Monster.
Acting-wise, this is also one of the better than many other Universal horror films of the period. This is partly due to a superior script that features a story that actually flows with some degree of logic and where the actors have some fairly decent lines to deliever.
Lon Chaney Jr. does his usual excellent job as Larry Talbot, but Onslow also shines as a scientific genius who's a little less mad than the standard in a movie like this (well, at least until Dracula is done with him).
John Carradine performs decently, but I simply can't buy him as Dracula. Even in his younger years, he had the look of a burned-out, alcoholic bum, and the lighting and make-up in this feature strengthen that look as far as I'm concerned. While miscast, he does a decent job.
Lionel Atwill is also on hand for another fine supporting role. The part is similar to the one he played in "Son of Frankenstein", but the role is even more interesting, as he's the voice of reason in a town that is otherwise inhabited by villagers whose favorite pastime seems to be grabbing torches and storming the castle.
When all things are taken into account, this is perhaps the best of Universal's original Wolf Man films, and it was a fitting send-off for poor Larry Talbot, as well as Frankenstein's Monster and Dracula.
But... there would be one last bow for Larry and his eternal foes.
Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein (1948)
Starring: Bud Abbott, Lou Costello, Lon Chaney Jr., Lenore Aubert and Bela Lugosi
Director: Charles Barton
Rating: Eight of Ten Stars
The reluctant Wolf Man, Larry Talbot (Chaney) learns that Dracula (Lugosi) intends to revive Frankenstein's Monster and use it as his personal super-soldier. He pursues the evil vampire lord to the United States where he finds his only allies to be Wilbur and Chick (Costello and Abbott), a couple of less-than-bright shipping clerks. Unfortunately, Dracula as an ally of his own--mad scientist femme fatale Dr. Sandra Mornay (Aubert), and she has Wilbur wrapped around her little finger. Little does Wilbur know that his girlfriend doesn't love him for his mind but rather his brain... she intends to do Dracula's bidding and transplant into the rejuvinated monster!
"Abott and Costello Meet Frankenstein" is a wild screwball comedy with the two master comedians doing their usual routines within the framework of a solid script and a story that's actually pretty logical in its own crazy way. I think it's the first fusion of comedy and monsters, and one reason it works so well is that the monsters are played straight. Even when they are involved in funny schtick (Dracula and the Wolf Man are both part of several routines), they remain as they were featured in the serious monster movies they were in. Of course, one shouldn't ask how or why Larry was once again cursed (given his cure at the end of "House of Dracula,") but otherwise the monsters are all consistent with previous films.
Too often, I hear this film written off as Universal's last and crassest attempt to wring some dollars out of their tired monster franchise. While that may be all the studio bosses had in mind, the creators involved with "Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein" managed to make a great movie that is still worth watching today. It's even superior to many of Universal's "straight" movies with Dracula, Frankenstein's Monster, and the Wolf Man (or, for that matter, countless recent so-called horror films). Much of its strength grows from the fact that has a plot that with some tweaking could be a straight horror movie.
I recommend this underappreciated film to any lover of the classic monster films, as well as lovers of slapstick comedy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
