|
By
WAYNE KLEIN
The Great Depression became
a horror show all its own so it's no surprise that
escapist entertainment ruled the day in the
1930's. James Whale's "Frankenstein" became a
runaway hit with character actor Boris Karloff
cast as the Monster. Whale's deft staging and
direction defies much of the static look of the
time (due, in part, to the constraints of the
sound equipment) creating a unique, gothic look
with an underlying sense of black humor at its
heart. Included in this set are also five Dracula
films and four related to The Wolf Man.
The first film departs significantly from Mary
Shelley's classic novel. In Shelley's original
"The Monster" demonstrates intelligence has the
power of speech. In "Frankenstein" be becomes a
lumbering, giant brute with the comprehension of a
small child. Boris Karloff's daring performance
relies on his ability to convey through pantomime
and gestures vs. dialogue. The film made Karloff a
star and horror icon after a career trapped in bit
parts in a variety of mediocre films. Karloff
wasn't actually an unknown as he had already
turned in a great performance in the original film
version of "Scarface" but it broke the character
actor mold he had been cast in.
The series hit an all time high with "Bride of
Frankenstein" one of the best, most complex horror
films ever made. Laced with black humor,
over-the-top camp and packaged in a moody,
expressionistic look "Bride" remained the
highwater mark for director Whale and the genre.
It was never topped. Each successive film slid in
terms of quality. "Son of Frankenstein" works
primarily due to the top flight cast, marvelous
and moody cinematography and sharp direction by
Roland V. Lee. "Ghost" has a number of clever plot
twists but fails due to execution and "House of
Frankenstein" features a desperate attempt by
Universal to pump life back into a series that had
run its course.
Extras include two marvelous documentaries on the
first two films, trailers for the other films in
the series. The documentaries hosted by film
historian David Skal and director Joe Dante touch
on the difficulties that Whale faced in making
both movies. We also get colorful insight from
horror author Clive Barker and make up artist Rick
Baker. The latter in particular provides an
informative interview on the difficulties in
creating the make up for the 1931 film and how
groundbreaking it was.
While much ballyhooed when it was first released
in 1931, "Dracula" really never takes flight. The
talky, stilted film lacks the refined humor and
edgy direction that made Whale's two films so
memorable. Todd Browning who had shown a flair for
horror and suspense films made with Lon Chaney in
the 1920's, fails to bring the subject to life
despite a marvelous opening sequence. Browning's
film plays little better than the stage version
but all the inventiveness of Stoker's story has
been drained of life replaced with Hollywood
filmflam. Bela Lugosi became Dracula for many
years in everybody's mind. He certainly makes the
character interesting and colorful. Dwight Frye's
scenery chewing turn as Renfield almost matches
Lugosi's flair and nearly steals the picture from
the star.
The Spanish version of "Dracula" truly is the
treasure here. Unlike Browning's film, the Spanish
version has visual style to spare and snappy
direction and performances throughout the film.
The sequels promised more but frequently delivered
less. "Dracula's Daughter" was originally to be
directed by James Whale. The film starts off with
a promising premise (courtesy of David O. Selznick
writing under a pseudonym) but quickly degenerates
into another talky melodrama. WIthout an actor
like Lugosi as its centerpiece, the film falls
flat today. "Son of Dracula" promises the most
with its atmospheric direction by German director
Robert Sidomak. Sidomak's flair for moody visuals
and the flighty pacing of the film keeps it from
becoming just another B movie. "House of Dracula"
the last in a long exhausted line of Universal
horror pictures thankfully closed out the saga
(until "Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein"
nearly a decade later).
The extras include only one documentary "On the
Road to Dracula" which provides an exhaustive
overview on the history of the novel, play and
finally the 1921 German adaption "Nosferatu" and
Lugosi's film. We learn much of the turmoil behind
the production and how Lon Chaney's untimely death
prevented him from starring in the film himself.
Finally we get to meet the best argument I've seen
for laser hair removal in sometime. Lon Chaney,
Jr. stars in George Waggner's "The Wolf Man" which
has its moments and created one last horror star
and durable character for Universal. Chaney plays
Larry Talbot. Attacked by another werewolf (why
this one looks like a wolf and Talbot doesn't when
he changes is never explained) and cursed to turn
into half beast/half man when the full moon
shines. Waggner's cast includes the marvelous
Claude Rains as Larry's dad (interestingly enough
Rains turned down the role of Dr. Frankenstein in
"Son of Frankenstein")and the lovely Evelyn
Ankers. Bela Lugosi has a featured cameo as well.
Again, the sequels fell into the trap of the
diminishing law of returns. "Frankenstein Meets
the Wolf Man" almost escapes its B movie title due
to some nice acting and nifty production values.
The other two films are "Werewolf of London" a
weak early effort telling much the same story as
"The Wolf Man" but with less style and wit. "She
Wolf of London" becomes nothing more than an
anemic knock off of the same themes.
The set comes with busts of the various monsters
as portrayed by Karloff, Lugosi and Chaney, Jr.
Although purchasing them separately might offer a
bit more flexability as the films in the "Dracula"
and "The Wolf Man" sets aren't quite as good as
those in the "Frankenstein" set. All three sets
come with a special featurette with director
Stephen Sommers hawking "Van Helsing" his
variation on these classic monster movies. We get
a generous helping of Sommers' commenting on how
these films influenced his, interviews with actors
from "Van Helsing" and a bit of footage from the
new film as well. As an advertising tie in, it's
not bad.
If you have a hankering to visit a simpler time
when monsters had excess hair, bad skin and needed
1000 sunblock, I'd suggest picking up this set of
early horror classics. Keep in mind, though, that
the production values are nothing compared to our
CGI driven entertainment today. They do have heart
and soul something missing from the gore fests
that pass for horror films today. |
