Later "Universal Horrors"--consensus?

[PNGwynne]

What do fans here think of later ('40s) Universal Horror films?

While I can enjoy The Mummy's Hand and The Wolf-Man for their slick production and good story-telling, later entries just seem tired to me, with lesser casting. Of course, A&C Meet Frankenstein is a wonderful, fun Valentine to the series.

I mean, I would rather re-watch most any Val Lewton film of the same period than a Universal re-hash. In my opinion, nothing tops the Whale films or the sinister, perverse, over-designed The Black Cat.

Maybe WWII gutted the series? Although, I think the Hammer films ran out of steam, too.

[Earth 2 Chris]

I think all of the post-Karloff Mummy films are of the "B" variety. Great fun, but they reused a lot of footage, the plots had huge holes, etc.

The Wolf Man was Universal's last great horror flick of that classic era. It was an "A" effort, I feel. Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man is an A- effort. It even trumps the original in some of the eerie Wolf Man sequences, but continues the Frankenstein series downward spiral into endless brain transplants. The fact that Lugosi's lines as Ygor/Monster were cut shows Universal was starting to churn out these flicks like sausage. Great tasting sausage, but it's not steak!!!

Oddly enough, I recently watched "The Black Cat" and was somewhat underwhelmed. I felt Lugosi and Karloff were fantastic, but the plot was a mess. I understand it's perverse, with Satanism, incest, necrophelia, etc, but I think it was a bit thrown together. I'd heard how great it was for years, and felt it was a bit overhyped.

Chris

[Werewolf]

The Wolfman and Creature from the Black Lagoon are fantastic.

[madmarva]

Son of Dracula isn't that bad either, although Chaney's miscast. It's better than Frankenstein meets Wolfman to me, because the latter really breaks down once the Frankenstein plotline is introduced. It's almost like two different movies.

Universal missed out by not making another Wolfman solo film in my opinion.

The two House films have their charms (particularly Karloff in HoF) but they really are a mess, a fun mess, but still a mess.

Lugosi as Ygor makes Ghost of Frankenstein worth watching. As iconic as he is as Dracula, I favor his work as Ygor in Son and Ghost.

To me Bride is on another level with Frankenstein steps behind it but well ahead the other Universal films, including the Invisible Man, which Whale also directed.

Val Lewton accomplished so much more than his contemporaries at Universal in the 40s, possibly with an even smaller budget. Universal banked on popular characters and its horror "stars," while Lewton attempted maximize his opportunities by squeezing everything out of his budget to make a suspense or horror film that would appeal on a more sophisticated level than the Universal films of the same period.

I dearly love those Universal films of the 40s for what they meant to me as a kid, but Lewton made better films.

[Goblin19]

They're all fun on some level. The last ones had tpo many miscasts, such as John Carradine and Chaney as Dracula. For me, I compare them to the lesser Abbott and Costello movies. They're so steeped in nostalgia for me that I enjoy them for what they are, while still acknowledging that some are just okay.

[PNGwynne]

I have to admit I forgot about Creature--it's pretty awesome for a King Kong remake ;-)

The Black Cat is convoluted but I don't consider it a mess. Its style & thematic content certainly puts it well above, for example, The Raven or The Invisible Ray IMO.

I do really enjoy Ygor, but I can compartmentalize him in Son...

Regarding Carradine's Dracula, I sometimes fantasize about him having the lead in Son of Dracula.

And I'm a stalwart fan of all things Phantom, but Claude Raines sure isn't Chaney, Sr. I read that Raines' scarring was toned-down for war-time sensabilities.

[Bruce Banner]

Love the whole monster cycle from Universal... both the early classics and the later sequels.
Big fan of the Kharis Mummy movies and the later Frankenstein installments, too.
Always thought it would have been great if Universal could have added The Mummy to the "House" pictures in some way. I heard they thought about doing it, but ultimately abandoned the idea.


__

[thunderbolt]

love he two House of movies and Son of Drac, and the Mummy ones that were set in Louisiana.

[Earth 2 Chris]

Universal missed out by not making another Wolfman solo film in my opinion.

Agreed. Frankenstein Meets... is really like a mash-up of an "A" Wolf Man sequel, and a "B" Frankenstein.

I like "Ghost", but the fact that the monster wants the little girl's brain is just...baffling. It's like no one at Universal understood if your brain went, YOU WENT WITH IT!!!

I know many feel Chaney was miscast as Dracula...and he honestly was. BUT, he did a great job considering. Kind of like Michael Keaton as Batman. Had no business in the role, but once he was there, he made it work. I was watching the Chaney Jr. bio-doc on the Universal Blu-Ray set just last night, and some believed his very physical, threatening performance suggested some of Christopher Lee's take, 15 years later. I can see that.

The Val Lewton stuff is certainly superior in mood and sophistication to the 2nd horror cycle at Universal. The Body Snatcher alone is one of the best movies of the period, and perhaps Karloff's best performance. I LOVE that movie.

Chris

[madmarva]

While it would probably flop, I'd like to see a TV series based on the old Universal monsters with Larry Talbot chasing Dracula around the world to stop his nefarious plots. Basically, what happened after Dracula and the Wolfman went off that balcony at the end of Abbott and Costello meets Frankenstein.

The monster could be educated and maybe work both sides when it's to his advantage or even be a double agent in Dracula's camp but secretly working against him. Yeah, it's a sophomoric or even childish idea, but I'd like to see it.

The globe-trotting aspect could work in the Creature and the Mummy, Zombies and witches and what not.
They could visit the Island of Lost Souls, run into the Invisible Man, Jeykl and Hyde. Revisit character like Renfield, Fritz, Ygor, Maleva or their descendants.

I'd make it kind of soapy, but with action. Dracula would be a J.R. type, evil but magnetic. Talbot more of a Bobby Ewing type, too good hearted for his own good. One step behind but always struggling forward.

[Earth 2 Chris]

^I like it. And with shows like Once Upon a Time being a hit, it could work. I've always felt that Larry Talbot emerged as the hero of the Universal films when viewed as a series, and liked how he was so proactive in A&C Meets Frankenstein.

I'm on the hunt for a copy of Jeff Rovin's Wolfman book, that picks up wher A&CMF leaves off. I hear it's pretty good.

Chris

[madmarva]

I know many feel Chaney was miscast as Dracula...and he honestly was. BUT, he did a great job considering

You've got to give Chaney credit for being game for anything and until he started repeating the same performance as flunkies in various westerns, he generally gave solid performances. He was really good in Of Mice and Men and the B-level noir programmers in the Inner Sanctum series are melodramatic but enjoyable for what they were.

[madmarva]

Sorry for the double post

[madmarva]

Yep, that's the plot from his book. It's a fun read for a fan of the films. I think a good TV show runner could take the basic premise, expand it and do something fun with it.

Rovine doesn't do much with the monster, much like Universal after Frankenstein Meets Wolfman. I think you could make him an interesting character, by keeping the pathos of Karloff's portrayal, but educating him like in Shelly's original work and other spinoffs. The monster would be conflicted. He has a big heart, but also this need for revenge against humans who mistreat outcasts. He wants to do what's right, but he still has that murderous streak from that abnormal brain. You could even give him multiple personalities using a mumbo jumbo explanation of the various body parts and brains leaving different imprints on his soul, or something.

[Earth 2 Chris]

I've heard Karloff stepped away from the role, partially due to his fear that the character was becoming a prop. His prediction slowly became true. It's a shame Strange never got a whole lot to do as the monster, as he had the best look of the bunch, outside of Karloff himself.

Chris