CHUD.com Community › Forums › SPECIFIC FILMS › The Franchises › Frankenstein
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Frankenstein

post #1 of 14
Thread Starter 
Lugosi really needed a better agent. As horror fans (or Ed Wood fans) know he turned down the role of the monster because it wasn't a speaking part. Karloff went on to ride that role to fame. But it should be noted, Karloff wasn't exactly a creative genius himself. He didn't like the fact that the monster talked in Bride of Frankenstein. As we all know, Bride is the best of the series. Possibly the best of all the Universal Monsters films (I sure think so, but there's a strong Wolf Man fanbase out there that thinks otherwise). Karloff only agreed to do the third film, Son of Frankenstein, if the monster became mute again. This ended up diminishing the monster's presence. Ironically, Karloff spent the entire film in the shadow of Bela Lugosi's superior Igor performance. But at least he had that cool furry vest.
Lugosi and Lon Chaney Jr both played the monster role with disasterous results. Poor Bela got his wish to play the talking monster in Frankenstein Meets The Wolf Man, but his delivery was so bad and his accent so thick they ended up removing all his dialogue in post. There are still a few scenes where you see his mouth moving. Chaney's monster in Ghost of Frankenstein is a bit better, but he just doesn't have the face for it. The only other person who managed to pull it off was television stuntman Glenn Strange. Just like Lugosi said, Strange's monster required no acting, just walking and growling. And yet he made it work.
A toast to the House of Frankenstein!
post #2 of 14
Here's one for ya - If Lugosi is available to play Ygor in Son of and Ghost of Frankensteinand the Monster in Frankenstein Meets The Wolf Man, why the hell isn't he playing Dracula in either House of flick? He comes back to hang with Abbott and Costello; why's he MIA for JUST those two flicks?
post #3 of 14
Thread Starter 
This is a good question. Where's Scott Standridge when you need him?
Maybe Lugosi was hopped up on goofballs at the time.
post #4 of 14
I haven't seen Bride of Frankenstein yet, but is it really better than Frankenstein?
post #5 of 14
Yep. It's as if the filmmakers' tools evolved exponentially in 4 years. Smarter script, better score (shit, did Frankenstein even have a score?), more assured direction, and Ernest Thesiger.
post #6 of 14
Thread Starter 
Yes. Yes it is.
That's not to say Frankenstein sucks. But Bride has more going for it- a musical soundtrack, better production values, better story, Dr. Pretorious, gay subtext, Elsa Lanchester.
Just zoom past the scene with the little people. That's the film's Achille's heel.
post #7 of 14
Homunculi - they never make anything better.
post #8 of 14
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil!
better score (shit, did Frankenstein even have a score?)
Nope.
post #9 of 14
I would agree that Bride of Frankenstein is without a doubt the strongest of the original franchise, but I have to admit having a soft spot for Son of Frankenstein. (First one I saw as a kid on late, late night television.) Strangely enough, I still haven't seen any of the other Universal ones, although I've been meaning to grab one of those DVD sets for a nice marathon.
post #10 of 14
I actually prefer the original to Bride. Bride is great for its ideas and its wackiness, but the original is the quintessential Universal horror pic. It's just so goddamn classic. Bride goes off the rails, in a good way mind you, but it's off the rails nonetheless. I also love Colin Clive and he gets upstaged by the hammy but enjoyable Dr. Pretorious in Bride.

The Wolfman is probably my favorite, follwed by Creature and Frankenstein.
post #11 of 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobClark
Ironically, Karloff spent the entire film in the shadow of Bela Lugosi's superior Igor performance.
Everybody knows Karloff does not deserve to smell his shit.
post #12 of 14
I actually think Karloff was the better performer overall. Lugosi was a fucking icon, but he didn't have much range. Karloff was a great actor who could do stone cold, warm and personable, and Chinese! I actually don't think his stuff as Frankenstein was even nearly his best work, nearly all of his performances in shit-ass poverty row cheapies were damn good. I actually like his Mr. Wong movies a lot.
post #13 of 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil!
Homunculi - they never make anything better.
I wonder how small Pretorious could make his homunculi? Imagine a scenario where a microscopic steampunk submersible, piloted by an odd assortment of trained homunculi, is injected into Frankenstein's monster and they explore the strange patch-work innards mixed with electrical conductors of the reanimated corpse. It's Fantastic Voyage meets Universal Monsters. Hell, inject them into Dracula, or even better, inject them into Larry Talbot so they can observe a werewolf transformation from the inside.
post #14 of 14
Bride of Frankenstein absolutely dwarfs the first film. It's far more imaginative and creative. And fuck Karloff, because having the creature finally speak did wonders for the character. I can't hate on Karloff too much, though. He was the one true Grinch.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: The Franchises
CHUD.com Community › Forums › SPECIFIC FILMS › The Franchises › Frankenstein