Bride of Frankenstein (1935)

Over the past few days as I continue my countdown toward Halloween, I have enjoyed my trip back into the world of classic Universal Studios monsters. Today, I decided that it was time to venture into that world once again with the 1935 entry Bride of Frankenstein. 

Plot/ Mary Shelley reveals the main characters of her novel survived: Dr. Frankenstein, goaded by an even madder scientist, builds his monster a mate.

Sequels to movies can be a mixed bag with only a handful living up to the baseline set by the original. In this case, that could not be further from the truth, as it not only meets but also surpasses the original in almost every way. There is so much to like with this one, as it builds upon an idea mentioned in the Mary Shelly classic novel. The cast is wonderful with solid performances littered throughout including the returning stalwarts Colin Clive and Boris Karloff repeating their roles from the original, the setting and atmosphere work really well, the storyline is layered and complex, and the visual effects, cinematography, and production elements surpass those of the original. Truly, everything is tremendously done and honestly, it should be held in a higher regard than the original Frankenstein. Yes, it does have a short run time and it leaves the viewer wanting more, but that is something that to me does not hurt the film in any way. In the end, it is always a great debate on which early Frankenstein film is the best. For me, it is the Bride of Frankenstein hands down because it shows that if a sequel is done right, it can be a powerful entry into a franchise. If you have never watched this one, you are missing out. Head to Shudder and check it out!

Dracula (1931)

After spending most of my night last night working on my video for the Poe Arts Festival Poetry contest, I decided to jump back into the classics today. My next selection from Shudder was the one that started it all, Dracula from 1931.

Plot/ The ancient vampire Count Dracula arrives in England and begins to prey upon the virtuous young Mina.

For me, this was one of my first horror films that I watched back in my younger days and one that still resonates with me today. While I do love the classic silent unauthorized adaptation Nosferatu, there is something with the adaptation that takes the Bran Stoker story to an all-new level especially when you remember that the movie was made in 1931. Whether it was the amazing performance by Bela Lugosi or the technical vision and work of Tod Browning, this film creates one of the most iconic and memorable films of the history of cinema. Of course, there are other factors that help make this one great. All of the performances are solid and work within the storyline; the setting and cinematography create something dark and atmospheric, and as the first in the run of Universal Monsters the movie allows the rest of the universe grow by laying a tremendous foundation everything that would follow. Yes, the ending is a bit mellow and there are some head-scratching moments, but those do not really hold the movie back in any way. In the end, this movie remains a must see (along with Nosferatu) for fans of the vampire genre and one that stands tall in horror history. If you have not seen it, you are missing out.

The Invisible Man (1933)

With Halloween being right around the corner, it is fun to sit back and enjoy the classics from Universal Studios. Last night it was The Mummy, and tonight, I followed that one with the classic The Invisible Man from 1933.

Plot/ A scientist finds a way of becoming invisible, but in doing so, he becomes murderously insane.

Being in a classics mood, this adaptation of the H.G. Wells sci-fi classic may be one of the best movies of the golden era of the Universal Monsters. Complete with some of the best special effects of all time, this movie boasts tremendous creativity, cinematography, and technical aspects. The performances, especially Claude Rains, are outstanding, the storyline is interesting, and as I mentioned already the effects are tremendous especially considering that this movie was shot decades before the first computer was ever thought of. Yes, it does lack the scenery that made the other Universal Monster movies so memorable and the overall story lacks the layered depths of the other films from the studio, but those elements do not hurt the movie in any way. In the end, like the other classic monster movies of the early 1930s, this movie is a must see. Sure, it often overlooked in comparison to the other timeless entries from Universal Studios, but from a cinematic and technical perspective, it should sit near the top of the chart and it remains one of the most memorable sci-fi films ever made. Go to Shudder and check it out.

The Mummy (1932)

After watching an entire series last night in Lore, I decided that I wanted to go back to the roots of horror for my next movie and review. My viewing choice for the evening is the 1932 Universal Studios classic The Mummy.

Plot/ In 1921 a field expedition in Egypt discovers the mummy of ancient Egyptian prince Im-Ho-Tep, who was condemned and buried alive for sacrilege. Also found in the tomb is the Scroll of Thoth, which can bring the dead back to life. One night a young member of the expedition reads the Scroll aloud, and then goes insane, realizing that he has brought Im-Ho-Tep back to life. Ten years later, disguised as a modern Egyptian, the mummy attempts to reunite with his lost love, an ancient princess who has been reincarnated into a beautiful young woman.

People who suffered through the latest reboot of The Mummy should definitely head over to Shudder and revisit the 1932 Universal Studios classic to burn the modern monstrosity out of their minds. While this is not a straight horror film with it actually feeling more like a gothic romance/drama only in a different location, it does have all the elements needed to make it an entertaining and memorable trip into darkness. This movie screams atmosphere and creates a dreamlike state that takes the viewer to a different place. The performances are outstanding, especially horror icon Boris Karloff in one of his most memorable characters, what little make-up effects that are used are tremendous, and the cinematography, setting, and the set pieces are remarkable. Of course, many viewers that watch this will not like the slower pace and lack of action, but those elements just help bring the story to life in a way that ties the entire movie together. In the end, this may be one of the most subdued horror films from that early 1930s Universal catalog, but it is still an amazing watch. If you have not seen it, there is no way you can call yourself a true horror fan. Head over to Shudder and watch it. It is a must see.

The Phantom Fiend (1932)

Earlier, I was reading an article on Jack the Ripper and yet another claim of solving that mystery. As a history buff, I have always been fascinated by the Ripper and enjoy consuming everything about the horrific tale. Incredibly, while searching for a movie tonight, I stumbled upon this 1930s entry based on a book about Jack the Ripper, The Phantom Fiend; a remake of the Alfred Hitchcock silent classic The Lodger.

Plot/ An enigmatic young man in a London boarding house becomes the subject of suspicion as the infamous Jack the Ripper begins his campaign of slaughter.

Being a fan of classic cinema (and of the Hitchcock silent gem), I figured I was going to be in for some head scratching moments with this one. Anytime someone attempts to remake Hitchcock, it never seems to end well. While this one is not unwatchable, there are a ton of flaws that make it fall well short of the inspiration. For me, any time Jack the Ripper is involved in the storyline, the movie has potential and this one does have potential. Unfortunately, between the uneven performances that made it feel like a poorly dubbed silent film, the poor sound quality (considering the dialog), and an ending that in no way serves justice for the original, this one is a tough watch. Sure, the storyline is not anything spectacular or groundbreaking, but there is something there that should have been better. In the end, this one is a bit of a disappointment. While it is not terrible, it is nowhere near anything that I would watch a second time.

Maniac (1934)

After taking a day off from the blog to watch Alex Jones on the Piers Morgan show, I decided to jump back into it with something else from the Original Cult Classics set. While I have watched and reviewed much of that set, there are a couple of flicks left that I have not seen. One such flick is Maniac (AKA Sex Maniac) from 1934, which is said to be a loose adaptation of the Edgar Allan Poe classics The Black Cat and Murders in the Rue Morgue.

Plot/ Don Maxwell is an ex-vaudeville ham, wanted by police, who has now found himself as the unlikely assistant to Dr. Meirschultz, a mad scientist in the business of reanimating corpses. Maxwell's gift of impersonation gets him and Meirschultz past the guards and into a morgue where they use a special serum to revive the corpse of a young woman.

OK, this is a bad movie, but it is definitely an entertaining one. Film in 1934, Maniac (AKA Sex Maniac) may be one of the first exploitation flicks out there, complete with some grainy semi-nude scenes toward the end. Yes, it has some over-the-top acting that while schlocky, does not reach the highest level of ham. The quality is grainy and at times blurry, and the storyline is incoherent at best. However, it is an entertaining watch, and it is worth watching just for the historical value. In addition, it is not even close to the worst film of the era, and measures up to many of the schlockfest B Movies of the period. Would I run out and buy it alone? No, but as part of the Original Cult Classics set, it fits perfectly. 

Murders in the Rue Morgue (1932)

As I was taking a walk into the early stages of Sci-Fi and Horror, I felt that my night would not be complete unless I ventured into the mind of my favorite master of terror, Edgar Allan Poe.  What a better way to close my evening but with a classic tale starring one of the greatest horror icons of all time Bela Lugosi, in the often overlooked 1932 adaptation of Murders in the Rue Morgue.

Plot/ In 19th Century Paris, the maniacal Dr. Mirakle abducts young women and injects them with ape blood in an attempt to prove ape-human kinship. He constantly meets failure as the abducted women die. Medical student Pierre Dupin discovers what Mirakle is doing too late to prevent the abduction of his girlfriend Camille. Now he desperately tries to enlist the help of the police to get her back.

I love movies based on the works of Poe (albeit loose adaptations), in fact, I can never get enough of them when I find them. Sure, some are better than others, but in same ways they always carry at least some of the flair that was woven into them decades before their transition to the silver screen. This adaptation, while running only about 80 minutes, is definitely worth watching. Filmed by Universal Studios, after their initial foray into horror, this flick features great set design and perfect atmosphere. The acting is solid, but it is Bela Lugosi that is amazing, captivating the screen during every second of his screen time. Yes, there are some flaws. Some of the cinematography is so-so and editing was uneven.  In the end, this is a classic early example of Universal Studios mastery and a film that is definitely worth watching.

Frankenstein (1931)

Over the weekend my sleep schedule got extremely screwed up. Luckily, I was able to find some great things to help pass the hours of insomnia. Nothing was greater though than finding the original Universal Studios classic Frankenstein on TCM. While I have seen this many times, it had been a while.

Plot/ Henry Frankenstein is a doctor who is trying to discover a way to make the dead walk. He succeeds and creates a monster that has to deal with living again.

It is amazing to sit back and watch what James Whale created with this very short but ultimate horror classic. Here we sit some 80 years later, and its influence is still felt in many flicks. Boris Karloff is wonderful, and definitely brings the monster to life in a way that has never been replicated. The sets, scripting and acting are perfect within the atmospheric world created in this Universal Studios entry into literary horror. Others may try to duplicate this flick and remake it with technology and modern twists, but, those versions will never live up to the original masterpiece that Karloff and Whale created.

Freaks (1932)

After enjoying some sideshow-type entertainment recently, it was time to watch something in the true spirit of the true sideshow era. Since I hve not broke down and purchased Carnivale yet, so I broke down and watched the Tod Browning classic Freaks from 1932. I guess in a way there is a lot of that I can relate to or am interested in.

Plot/ The central story is of a self-serving trapeze artist named Cleopatra (Olga Baclanova) who seduces and eventually marries a sideshow midget, Hans (Harry Earles), after learning of his large inheritance. At their wedding reception, the other "freaks" resolve that they will accept Cleopatra in spite of her being a "normal" outsider, and hold an initiation ceremony, wherein they pass a massive goblet of wine around the table while chanting, "We accept her! One of us! We accept her! One of us! Gooble gobble, gooble gobble! We accept her! We accept her!" The ceremony frightens the drunken Cleopatra, who accidentally reveals that she has been having an affair with Hercules (Henry Victor), the strong man; she mocks the freaks, tosses the wine in their faces and drives them away. Despite being humiliated, Hans remains with Cleopatra.

Shortly thereafter, Hans is taken ill (supposedly from having too much to drink at the wedding feast, but actually from poison that Cleopatra slipped into his wine) and Cleopatra begins slipping poison into Hans' medicine to kill him so that she can inherit his money and run away with Hercules. One of the circus performers named Venus (Leila Hyams) overhears Cleopatra talking to Hercules about the murder plot, and tells the other freaks including Hans. In the film's climax, the freaks attack Cleopatra and Hercules with guns, knives, and various edged weapons, hideously mutilating them. Though Hercules is never seen again, the original ending of the film had the freaks castrating him - the audience sees him later singing in falsetto. The film concludes with a revelation of Cleopatra's fate: her tongue has been cut out, one eye has been gouged and her legs amputated, she has been reduced to performing in a sideshow as the squawking "human chicken". The flesh of her hands has been melted and deformed to look like chicken feet and her lower half has been permanently tarred and feathered.

 

This is a great film by Tod Browning, one that is completely different from the all-time horror classic, Dracula, that put him on the map as a director. Looking back at history, it is amazing that this film nearly cost him his career after casting actual deformed actors for the roles, not to mention the fact that this film had been banned in many country's for far too long. What Browning created with this masterpiece is an essential social portrait of world outside the mainstream and the true misconceptions of society. Just the fact that the "freaks" show a lot more solidarity and honesty than the `normal' people, shows the true genius within this film.

 

 

The Vampire Bat (1933)

In starting the next DVD in the four-disk set, I decided to start with the outstanding 1933 classic, The Vampire Bat. I have watched this film many times and found it worth watching every time. For those that might not have seen it, here is a synopsis.

Plot/ When the villagers of Klineschloss start dying of blood loss, the town fathers suspect a resurgence of vampirism. While police inspector Karl remains skeptical, scientist Dr. von Niemann cares for the vampire's victims one by one, and suspicion falls on simple-minded Herman Gleib because of his fondness for bats. A blood-thirsty mob hounds Gleib to his death, but the vampire attacks don't stop.

While more of a thriller or mystery in today’s sense, this movie is a great knock-off on the successful run of Universal horror films of the 1930s with the ideals from Frankenstein and Dracula clearly on display throughout the script and story. While there is no vampire, or even vampire bat killing, the doctor’s contraption to skew the minds of the commoners is genius. Over all, there are times where the small budget is visible, but in many of those cases, it actually adds to the eeriness of the film. This one is definitely worth watching again! If interest, just watch it here!

vote it up!

The Lugosi Classic - White Zombie (1932)

 

 

White Zombie  is one of the great unheralded horror classics of the 1930's and unfortunately, it is almost forgotten today, overrun by the modern flesh eating creatures that cloud the true history of zombie lore. In fact, White Zombie may be the first and oldest surviving zombie movie ever made. Unlike the modern movies of the genre that we grew up on, or can see today, these traditional zombie characters are not evil in themselves craving brains and devouring everything in their path. Instead, they are mindless wanderers, controlled by an evil shaman, who must be destroyed to save the zombies from their helpless slumber.

Actually, the characters in this movie do a great job at portraying the creepy zombies that were created in this masterpiece. They set a dark and uneasy mood throughout the film, a perfect backdrop for the voodoo-like overtones and rituals that take the film to another level. Unfortunately, the years have not been kind on this movie. For many years the film sat, tucked away, lost like many classics of yesteryear, making restoration a tough task.

Still, White Zombie, is a must see for fans of early classic cinema and historic zombie ventures. The story is very intriguing and sad, yet, told in an extremely attractive way; especially the ending, which I found fantastic and actually quite tense. In the end, it is everything that Revolt of the Zombies, is not. One more of a reason that so many people are disappointed by that specific effort put forth by Halperin Productions, who worked magic with a tiny budget on this film, creating an atmosphere full of flair and imagination.

Some of the visuals created in this movie, like the opening scene of the burial on the road or the sugar mill worked by zombies, stand tall as tremendous accomplishments on film. One of my favorite settings was the hillside graveyard, a perfect set for any movie of the period or today and the music crafted by Xavier Cugat is absolutely perfect for the mood and countenance.

Bela Lugosi is marvelous in his role as the dark voodoo prince, Murder Legendre, the supernatural force that controls his followers’ every move. Personally, his performance is at least on par, if not better than his role as Count Dracula. To me, Lugosi was at his best playing a villainous role, or at least a devious role like in the 1944 horror classic, One Body Too Many. always at his best in roles like these and just like in "Dracula" he is once Throughout this movie, the Halperin’s do a great job, focusing and cutting in split screen shots of Lugosi’s infamous stare, a trademark that transcends generations. For the Lugosi fans this movie is an absolute must!