Son of Dracula

[MIB41]

While Karloff will always get my utmost respect for his role as Imhotep, when I think of an iconic mummy image, it will always be this...



And that's not necessarily reflective on how I feel about the quality of those films. But I sure like the fact Kharis got screen time, unlike Karloff's Mummy that lasted about ten seconds. I liked the Mummy to have his lumbering presence to wreck havoc and be the monster I could watch and then mimic with my AHI figures. As a kid I warmed to Chaney's monster and appreciated Karloff's interpretation much later when the story values took on more weight. But Chaney's Mummy will always hold a special place with my inner child. And for me, that is where the magic happens.

[hedrap]

Reboots. I think that's what's missing from the discussion.

Mummy's Hand was made eight years later as a reboot sans Karloff. To wait that long for a sequel and then reset the table, tells me that nostalgic history has made Karloff's Mummy more popular than it was at the time. Universal wasn't one to let a hit property lay about and ferment if it was so beloved.

Sommers Indiana Jones knockoff came about after fifteen years of development. Craven and Barker were involved for most of that time, but they were making horror films and like Carpenter's Creature, Uni had no interest in that. What Sommers made is the polar opposite of the Kharis movies.

But it was Hammer who made the de facto Mummy film and they could have incorporated any Im Ho Tep elements they wanted. But they didn't, so IMO, that shows Kharis was the template and stayed that way until the licensing upgrade and Uni Craven 80's reboot development.

When I look at Kharis and Ardeth Bey, I see Victor and The Monster as the framework. I've wondered if that was the plan for Mummy's Hand, made one year after Son Of Frank, but Karloff shot it down. So why sign Lugosi for a Bey when Uni could go fast and cheap, which worked out.

[PNGwynne]

Palitoy makes a good point--it's Aurora's success that cemented the populist Mummy.

Too, there's also an element of quantitative influence in rewatching the films as a kid. If you see a few Kharis films on Creature Feature as a generic menace, and then a more nuanced Imhotep who is mostly unwrapped, who would you choose? I mean, one-handed lurching is easier than incantations on the play-ground lol. I've really come to appreciate Karloff's Mummy more as an adult.

[PNGwynne]

The modern Mummy films did not follow the Kharis template, they elaborated upon Imhotep.

For the record--I like Hammer's Kharis, and Lee as well as Cushing and especially George Pastell bring much to the film. More than the Universal casts IMO.

But you're wrong in your generalization that Imhotep unwrapped hasn't been merchandized--he has, by Sideshow & others. I also disagree with your idea that the '30s audience didn't accept Karloff as a resurrected mummy. Of course they did, they had no other frame of reference. Other than Poe and Carter's Tut discovery, Universal created the image of mummy resurrection and menace as they did with most of their monsters.

I don't hate the Kharis formula, I just think they are lazy, simple, repetitive films--coughing up Haitian voodoo tropes with an Egyptian patina. I think--film-wise--it's essential to differentiate the '30s films under one management from the slicker formula '40s film made under another. Doubtless Universal felt Kharis was more exploitable for sequels as a generic monster, a lesser "Frankenstein"--that doesn't mean Imhotep was inferior, as a character or as a film. Look at what Uni did to the Monster in the name of sequels.

My intent here was really to discuss film and casting, not debate merchandising by backwards reasoning. If I enjoy a Kharis film, it's Hammer, Tyler, and a few scenes of Olsen's Ananka in the last programmer. Just my opinion. But of course there's room for many mummies--let's see an Aztec one.

[palitoy]

OK let's look at this way, the highest point of Monster merchandise to the general public is the 1960s, with the 70s seeing a nice revival. Aurora sold millions of Kharis models over 30 years, I'd be willing to bet the volume of single AHI Kharis figures produced likely topples all Im Ho Tep items produced in the last 20 years.

Not to mention T-Shirts, School bags, wallets, trading cards, posters, board games, Jigglers, Bend Ems, Puzzles, Flicker Rings, Don Post masks. I seriously challenge the statement that Im Ho Tep is the most merchandised of the two characters.

After the deal with the Karloff estate, IMT definitely became the Style guide Mummy and therefor Kharis got the back seat in the collector era.

I'm not saying Kharis is better, what I'm trying to punch holes in is the idea that there is a "Clear Winner" in this case on either side. It's not as easy an argument like it is when you ask whose films are better....

[Earth 2 Chris]

Lugosi would have been too hammy for the Mummy, I think. His Ardeth Bay would have read too silly. Subtlety wasn't Lugosi's strong point. He excelled in broad roles like Dracula and Ygor. Just like Chaney, Jr. excelled in "everyman" roles like Larry Talbot.

I was pleasantly surprised by Son of Dracula. It's really an early Film Noir entry disguised as a horror movie. Dracula gets owned by the Femme Fatale. I think in that way, Chaney works, because he was forever playing somebody's dupe, or some poor soul who fell victims to circumstances out of his control, from Lenny to Larry Talbot. He couldn't put across the suave continental, though.

I was never big on Carradine as Dracula. I appreciated he wanted to mimic the look of Stoker's character as best he could, but he didn't have that mesmerizing quality Lugosi had. For Carradine, it was a put-on. For Lugosi it was his natural...weirdness.

Chris

[enyawd72]

FYI Sideshow actually made three different fez-wearing Im-Ho-Teps. One 12" figure, one Little Big Head and their life-sized bust.

Also, I'm not sure what you mean...whether he's bandaged or not, Im-Ho-Tep is still Im-Ho-Tep, and there have been three times as many figures made of him as Kharis.

[hedrap]

I have never seen a bandaged Karloff product labeled "Im Ho Tep", just as I can't recall a Universal license for a fez-wearing alchemist labeled "The Mummy". Even Sideshow and Hasbro never produced an Im Ho Tep figure. Universal, from the first theatrical release, emphasized bandaged-Karloff as "The Mummy" and then went with Kharis for decades. As MIB laid out, we only went back to Karloff when (post Star Wars) licensing had major value and the estates got involved.

So while we diehards may know Karloff was not Kharis, pop culture made Kharis synonymous with the vengeful bandaged Mummy. And I don't mean the name "Kharis" as a product label. Universal conflated the image of any bandaged Mummy to mean Kharis' storyline, discarding any idea of Im Ho Tep underneath. And all the knock-offs in pop culture have followed the Kharis template

[palitoy]

Kharis's image adorned hundreds of pieces of merch in the 60s and 70s.

Four movies and a remake by Hammer, it's not open and shut as to who owned the Mummy image at all IMO, it's totally up for debate and I think based a lot on personal preference.

[MIB41]

I think Lon Chaney Jr. gave an admirable job in the role but it was clearly not his strong suit. He could be imposing for his scale, but he lacked that presence which was essential to play this kind of role. Carradine was probably one of the most ill-cast Draculas I have ever seen during Universal's monster run. There was absolutely nothing about him that was imposing. He looked more like a grave digger than a vampire and his vocal quality could not have been more off the mark. I think Werewolf summed it up best by describing him as a "birthday party magician". That's about as accurate as it comes. I also think performances like Carradine's really set the whole image of vampirism ablaze with camp. Onslow Steven's performance as Dr. Franz Edelmann (transformed by his blood) only added fuel to that flame. That whole chase sequence between the villagers and Edelmann is the closest thing to a Looney Tunes cartoon brought to life, I have ever seen. It has to be one of the funniest non-intended moments of suspense in a horror film. I laugh hard every time I watch it. But I digress.

I think when it comes to Chaney and the Mummy image, you have to look at different eras for actor dominance. With the rebirth of the Universal Monsters in the 60's and 70's, it was definitely Chaney's image as the Mummy that adorned products like Aurora monster kits, figures like AHI monsters, and even the jigglers. It was a common sight to see Chaney's image as the Mummy adorned on everything. By the turn of the 80's though, the Karloff image took hold and that's when you started seeing the Remco figures with Karloff inspired artwork and that wave carried forward. I suspect Sarah Karloff played a big role in promoting her father's image since monster merchandise enjoyed another resurgence in the 80's and the video age was exploding. That was around the time when the estates of these actors really became a little more business savvy and got their ducks in a row regarding who could use their dad's likeness on product.

[enyawd72]

But Kharis became "The Mummy" in movie pop culture, not Im Ho Tep. The Kharis/Ardeth Bey formula was the winner. No one looks at a Mummy, even in the 30's, and sees old wizardry. They see a zombie/ghost monster. Even the 90's Mummy films didn't change that iconography.

If The Mummy formula was Kharis and Bey, with Karloff and Lugosi, it would have been the Mummy film and arguably the best Uni Horror film of all. That's why to me, Hammer whooped Universal with their remake. Hammer distilled the elements and outside visuals, like highlighting the eyes, little was found in the Karloff film.

I couldn't disagree more.

Karloff is the Mummy in pop culture, and the merchandising proves it. Karloff's Im-HoTep was an actual character, while Kharis is little more than a prop. Don't get me wrong, I love Chaney and Lee as Kharis, but there is only one original MUMMY.
Strictly looking at licensed merchandise,
Kharis has a Marx figure, Aurora model, Colgate Soaky, Horizon model, and Hasbro 12" figure. That's it.
Im-Ho-Tep has a Remco mini-monster, Remco 9" figure, Remco puppet, Hasbro 12" figure, U.S. postage stamp, Sideshow 8" figure, two different Sideshow 12" figures, Sideshow quarter scale figure, Sideshow life size bust, two different GeoMetric model kits, Moebius model kit, Diamond Select figure, EMCE figure, and a second Diamond Select figure on the way...

It's pretty clear who the most popular Mummy is, and it ain't Kharis.

[TrekStar]

Chaney as Dracula was a take it or leave it for me, although we got see him in a monster role without his face hidden
in make up, the scene where he's floating across the swamp was pretty cool. We're just used to associate him
as the Wolfman his title role, but he's the only universal actor to play all 4 of the major monsters, and I think he did them well.

[hedrap]

But Kharis became "The Mummy" in movie pop culture, not Im Ho Tep. The Kharis/Ardeth Bey formula was the winner. No one looks at a Mummy, even in the 30's, and sees old wizardry. They see a zombie/ghost monster. Even the 90's Mummy films didn't change that iconography.

If The Mummy formula was Kharis and Bey, with Karloff and Lugosi, it would have been the Mummy film and arguably the best Uni Horror film of all. That's why to me, Hammer whooped Universal with their remake. Hammer distilled the elements and outside visuals, like highlighting the eyes, little was found in the Karloff film.

[PNGwynne]

No, Lugosi would have played it like Drac, which is inappropriate. For me, the reserve, the obsessive formality, the suggestion of a fragile revenant, makes Karloff's Imhotep great.

Look at the later formula Kharis films--nothing but shambling zombie riffs.

[hedrap]

When it comes to the Mummy, people remember bandaged Karloff because it fit his build, features, etc...but not Im Ho Tep because Boris is very stiff in the role, (pun for Pngy). Lugosi would have made Im Ho Tep very memorable due to the female obsession. Bela would have had passion, where Boris was just too proper and made it more wizardry.

EDIT: I've read the "Karloff's Dracula" idea, and can see his Im Ho Tep as Dracula, but within the story confines of Mummy, it doesn't work. It's like The Ghoul, there's something missing.