Universal horror

[avenger00soul]

My favorite Universal monster film has got to be The Wolfman with Lon Chaney Jr. I enjoy Dracula quite a bit too b/c Lugosi is a fine actor, but he's also in The Wolfman so I'm getting the best of both worlds. What's yours?

[Krzychu]

The Wolfman was great! Wonderful make-up. I love Frankenstein's series of Universal Studio. In my opinion those films were made from the bottom of one's heart. More horryifying, more theatrical and more authentic... Golden era of horror movies.

[MichaelMyers]

I always liked "Creature From The Black Lagoon" and liked "King Kong" for sentimental reasons. Go figure. "The Deadly Mantis" was a little-known Universal flick but was good I thought.

[Ritualistic]

ahh man there is so many I love... but my all time favorite is "creature from the black lagoon"

[ShamSham04]

The Universal Monster Collection...ehhh, gotta love em!

My favorites would have to be Frankenstein and Creature From The Black Lagoon.

[crazy clown]

creature drom the black lagoon.

maybe the remake can be as good as the original

[avenger00soul]

Originally posted by crazy clown
creature drom the black lagoon.

maybe the remake can be as good as the original

If del Toro is still directing it, I have high hopes for it.

[crazy clown]

yea me to

[hollywoodgothiq]

I used to love THE WOLFMAN when seeing it on television as a kid. As an adult I've had a couple chances to see it on the big screen at film school and film festivals, and it just hold up for me for some reason. At least not as well as some of the others.

BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN seems to be the most highly regarded, crtically. My personal favorite is DRACULA (even acknowledging the film's many flaws).

[The_Return]

I think my signature says it all...

[ManchestrMorgue]

My favourite would definately be Dracula.

I think that is probably because as far as the story goes, I have always preferred the Dracula story to Frankenstein/Wolfman/etc. It might also be because as a child that was the Universal horror that I was most eager to track down and see - I think I got a chance to see Bride of Frankenstein first, and then Frankenstein.

However, I feel that the first two Frankenstein movies are technically superior, and it is obvious that The Wolf Man is 10 years newer than Dracula. But Dracula will always have a special place with me...

[alkytrio666]

Bride of Frankenstein, hands down the best of all.

I do love Draucula for its chilling gothic atmosphere and comfortable plot.

And I absolutely love The Invisible Man. Fun, dark, and amazing special effects.

[alkytrio666]

Originally posted by MichaelMyers
and liked "King Kong" for sentimental reasons.

I love it, too. In fact it's one of my favorites.

But it's RKO, not Universal.

[Doc Faustus]

Creature is really amazing. It was a great followup to the Universal Horror of the 30s and 40s, taking the atmosphere and heart and bringing it into a more modern context. Visually, philosophically, everything, it's incredible. It and the Wolfman are my absolute favorites, although Bride of Frankenstein has some of the best scenes in the history of horror. Without Universal's contributions, there'd be no horror films that could appeal to any audience.

[phantomstranger]

Dracula
The Creature from The Black Lagoon
Psycho
The Wolf Man
The Bride Of Frankenstein
Frankenstein
Son Of Dracula

[jedicow]

you know...i have never seen any of those classics on a big screen. i need to correct that.

[phantomstranger]

Originally posted by jedicow
you know...i have never seen any of those classics on a big screen. i need to correct that.



If you ever get a chance to see any classic horror movie (and for that matter any kind of classic film) on the big screen..Do so! You will not regret it. The big screen was how these pictures were meant to be seen.

[hammerfan]

You really, really do!! ;)

[filmmaker2]

I totally agree. I have had almost no chances to see old Universal classic horror flicks on the big screen, but I have tried to see them when I can, and it is a special warm feeling. It's also nice to be around a bunch of people who feel the same way. Everyone savors every flicker of light on that screen!

I saw a special screening of "Bride of Frankenstein" last Halloween season and it was pretty darn sweet.....I loves me teh movies.

[HollywoodGoth]

I used to love THE WOLFMAN when seeing it on television as a kid. As an adult I've had a couple chances to see it on the big screen at film school and film festivals, and it just hold up for me for some reason. At least not as well as some of the others.

Not that anyone cares, but I saw THE WOLFMAN again on Netflix instant viewing, and it was better than I remembered. Still not a "masterpiece" but I guess it deserves to be regarded as a "classic."

[ManchestrMorgue]

Not that anyone cares, but I saw THE WOLFMAN again on Netflix instant viewing, and it was better than I remembered. Still not a "masterpiece" but I guess it deserves to be regarded as a "classic."

It is a good film, with some great actors.

It has a snappy storyline, and comes across as a lot "glossier" than most of Universal's earlier horror films.

It also manages to convey a degree of sympathy for the Larry Talbot character, a successful device in many of the good werewolf films.

[Marya Zaleska]

I particularly like the Universal horror films.

The Wolfman is my favorite.

I also like The Creature From The Black Lagoon, The Bride Of Frankenstein ( scared the hell out of me!), Dracula and The Creeper ( Rondo Hatton).

http://i238.photobucket.com/albums/ff213/buckybeau/LouisGreerAsGrannyLou2-4.jpg

Countess Marya

[Marya Zaleska]

Good morning!

Let me get over here to my old creaky chair and sit down.

OK! Dress straightened, glass of claret in hand , shawl on ( it's sort of cool here) and granny reading glasses on.

Here are my favorite Universal horror films.

1) The Wolfman
2) The Creature From The Black Lagoon
3) The Bride Of Frankenstein
4) Dracula (1931)
5) Dracula's Daughter ( Marya Zaleska, my pseudoname here at the forum)
6) The Brute man ( The Creeper - Rondo Hatton)
7)Frankenstein
8) The Werewolf Of London
9) The Invisible man
10) Son Of Dracula
11) The Black cat
12) The raven
13) The Mummy
14) House of Dracula
15) The Inner Sanctum series with Lon Chaney, Jr.

The problem is that I like most of them, just some better than the others.

Well, thanks for listening!


http://i238.photobucket.com/albums/ff213/buckybeau/GrannyRelaxingWithHerPipe-4.jpg

Countess Marya

[Robert_Dunbar]

I love this. You never hear people mention Rondo Hatton in conversation anymore. (I did try to organize a Rondo Hatton look alike contest once, but for some reason it just didn't catch on.)

Personally, I've always been partial to the extended-monster-family films.

BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN is magnificent. (I've always thought Tod Browning incredibly overrated -- I know, I know, an unpopular sentiment. But James Whale! Now there's a genius.)
DRACULA'S DAUGHTER may not have a whole lot going for it -- the plot fairly creaks -- except for Gloria Holden ... who is more than enough to carry the film. Such presence. One of the great horror performances.
SON OF DRACULA probably qualifies as one of those indefensible secret vices, which one would never dream of giving up. Chaney is certainly no Lugosi. (And has anyone else noticed that the title means nothing?) But the film generates an almost deliriously fatalistic atmosphere, as though everyone involved with it had suddenly lost their minds ... to the audiences' delight.

As for the others, nothing really compares with THE MUMMY. It's elegant, obsessive, chilling. Karloff and Zita Johann bring a level of artistry to their performances that always seemed (to me) representative of the best that Universal had to offer. Karl Freund, the director, was actually responsible for those Gothic moments in DRACULA that most people remember with such fondness. (He'd been the cinematographer on that film. The later, clumsy, pedestrian sequences, where interesting things always seem to be happening just off screen, are much more typical of Browning's talking pictures: poor soul never really got comfortable with the technology.) And David Manners and Edward van Sloan are both on hand from the earlier film to further enhance the similarities, their performances considerably more polished now.

Plus I have my caveats.

THE WOLFMAN is entertaining but principally because of its production values. Chaney is a pathetic, hulking lump of an actor, alcoholic, violent, xenophobic. (And, one hears, when in his cups "sexually confused." Oh dear.) And if tiny, elegant Claude Rains was meant to be his father, what the hell are we to assume that mom looked like? But Chaney does bring a convincing pathology to the role (especially if it's viewed as a metaphor for alcoholic blackouts). The forthcoming remake of CREATURE FROM THE BLACK LAGOON is generating a lot of interest just now, but the original remains just a mildly amusing (and mildly embarrassing) trifle, certainly not in a league with the studio's earlier masterworks. Just my two cents.

It's wonderful to see how much discussion this topic has generated. Years ago, I reviewed a book called UNIVERSAL HORRORS, the Studio's Classic Films, 1931-1946 (by Michael Brunas, John Brunas and Tom Weaver). I heartily recommend it to anyone with a real interest in cinema history. And Mark Vieira's "HOLLYWOOD HORROR from Gothic to Cosmic" is truly brilliant as is "PROJECTED FEARS" by Kendall Phillips. (Okay, so Kendall is a friend -- it's still an awesome book.)

[The Vault of Horror]

The best:
Bride of Frankenstein
Dracula
Frankenstein
The Invisible Man
The Phantom of the Opera
Dracula's Daughter
The Mummy
The Mummy's Hand

Fun:
Son of Frankenstein
The Wolf Man
Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man
House of Dracula
The Mummy's Tomb
The Mummy's Ghost
The Mummy's Curse
Creature from the Black Lagoon

Bad:
Ghost of Frankenstein
House of Frankenstein
Revenge of the Creature

Haven't Seen:
Son of Dracula
Werewolf of London
Invisible Man Returns
Invisible Agent
The Creature Walks Among Us
Phantom of Opera (Claude Rains version)

[Robert_Dunbar]

Haven't Seen:
Son of Dracula
Werewolf of London
Invisible Man Returns
Invisible Agent
The Creature Walks Among Us
Phantom of Opera (Claude Rains version)

I'm shocked. You must immediately see "Son of Dracula" and "Werewolf of London."

http://www.judexfanzine.net/v1/imatges_arxiu/SON-OF-DRACULA-2.jpg

http://exclamationmark.files.wordpress.com/2006/11/werewoflondon.jpg

[The Vault of Horror]

I know, pathetic, isn't it? And I actually have Son of Dracula as part of the Dracula Legacy set, plus I taped Werewolf of London off AMC's Monsterfest a couple years back. I just haven't ever gotten around to watching them.

[Doc Faustus]

Werewolf of London is riddled with holes, but the makeup and Warner Oland are both great. Valerie Hobson, however, is one of the most irritating actresses I've ever seen. She's the only actor in Bride of Frankenstein that I'm displeased with. I understand she was a teenager at the time, but still she's nails on a chalkboard. I think the Wolfman has much more going for it than Freudian elements and good production values. I think Lon Chaney Jr. proves he could have been the actor his father was with this movie. Claude Rains exudes paternal tenderness (although yes, he must have married Julie Strain to have a son the size of Lon) and simultaneously shows all the elements of being the lord of a cursed house. Siodmak mentioned that this was meant to be like Greek tragedy and the civilized propriety and obsessive rationality Rains has shows the hubris of the modern patriarch trying to stand up against Artemis and Dionyssus alike. But, instead of through the eyes of a rational, Freudian Creon, we get to see through the viewpoint of a man haunted by the last vestiges of the earth's magic. The gypsy, the anima, the overlooked Cassandra ends up knowing the score and its beautiful. There's a hint of the Wicker Man in it all.

[ManchestrMorgue]

Son of Dracula is a good film, but Lon Chaney Jr always strikes me as being too well fed to be a member of the traditionally gaunt undead.

[crabapple]

I think the Wolfman has much more going for it than Freudian elements and good production values. I think Lon Chaney Jr. proves he could have been the actor his father was with this movie. Claude Rains exudes paternal tenderness (although yes, he must have married Julie Strain to have a son the size of Lon) and simultaneously shows all the elements of being the lord of a cursed house. Siodmak mentioned that this was meant to be like Greek tragedy and the civilized propriety and obsessive rationality Rains has shows the hubris of the modern patriarch trying to stand up against Artemis and Dionyssus alike. But, instead of through the eyes of a rational, Freudian Creon, we get to see through the viewpoint of a man haunted by the last vestiges of the earth's magic. The gypsy, the anima, the overlooked Cassandra ends up knowing the score and its beautiful. There's a hint of the Wicker Man in it all.

Nice analysis. Very nice.

[Doc Faustus]

Thanks. It's one of those movies I've watched a lot and really thought about. As someone who's both bipolar and of gypsy descent it's unavoidable.

[crabapple]

Before Larry Talbot becomes the Wolf Man, he is already, in a sense, the Wolf Man. He doesn't much care who Gwen Conliffe is. He uses devious tricks to try to pressure her into going on a date with him, despite her protests; when she finally acquiesces, it's mainly for the purpose of breaking the news to him that she's engaged, but he's not the least bit concerned with that. Talbot is a likable guy but animalistic from the start, and he is the only Universal monster doomed to suffer a curse mainly because he wanted to get laid.

[Doc Faustus]

It's like in Dante or Ovid. Things aspire toward their true nature and nature aspires to bring out the truth in people. Try as they might to fight off nature, nature wins out. The Wolf Man is in a sense more modern than the other Universal movies, because Larry isn't a lunatic, a deviant or a foreigner. They in fact point out that he's been in America. So, his humanity and his Americanness are inescapable. It's sort of American machismo that makes him so gauche with Gwen. All his noble upbringing doesn't matter a whit on account of his cowboy demeanor. Later on, he tries to outdo Gwen's fiancee at the shooting gallery, but can't shoot the wolf. With all the posturing that the shooting game presents, he's stunned by his primal manhood. Sophistication doesn't work for him. The question sort of becomes "is it more tragic that a wolf is forced to wear clothes and walk upright or is it more tragic that a man can become an animal"? I think it's wonderful that during war time a movie is made about whether we can reconcile our civilized and uncivilized selves. During war, we have the gun, we're out the shooting gallery and yet our bestial nature is staring us right in the face. The intent was probably not quite so deep, but the poetics are there.

[crabapple]

Was wondering if you'd read Curt Siodmak's science fiction novel "Skyport,"

[Doc Faustus]

No. I really should read his books. I'd love to find his autobiography.

[ferretchucker]

I also have to go with creature from the black lagoon

[crabapple]

Dracula was elegant and somewhat courtly in his approach; Frankenstein's monster was violent but never knew his own strength; the Mummy was just plain persistent.

But the Lagoon Creature, now that's a vicious fellow, with those claw paws. I wouldn't want to be anywhere near that Fish Guy!

NAPOLEON. Does the Creature have LARGE TALONS?

FARMER. I don't understand a word you just said!

[Doc Faustus]

I always assumed that the webbing between the fingers was also sharp.