Son of Frankenstein (1939)

For this year's Countdown to Halloween, it's all-Universal Monsters, all-the-time, from Dracula (1931) to The Creature Walks Among Us (1956).  Join me daily for a fresh perspective on movies you may not have watched in a long time, if ever.  Today, a sequel that I had forgotten was one of my favorites... Son of Frankenstein!

Little did I know when I re-watched Son of Frankenstein (1939) how much I would enjoy it.  My memory would have told you that the Frankenstein sequels got worse with each subsequent edition; however, I believe this one is every bit as good as Bride of Frankenstein (1935), albeit in a different way.

Primarily, it’s the style of Son of Frankenstein that I find unique.  Its sets are somewhat abstract, sparsely decorated with high ceilings, open spaces, sharp angles and shadows.  It’s Universal Monsters via The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari.  Art Direction is by eight-time Oscar nominee Jack Otterson and Set Decoration is by seven-time nominee/two-time winner Russell A. Gausman, both early in their careers.

I had also forgotten how many iconic moments come from this third chapter in the Universal Frankenstein series.  Son of Frankenstein has the first appearance of a character named, “Ygor” (Bela Lugosi).  It has the first time an angry mob accuses a villain of crimes before he has committed them.  And it has the one-armed inspector so hilariously made fun of in Young Frankenstein.

The screenplay by Willis Cooper also has the best character development of a Frankenstein so far in the Countdown.  Baron Wolf von Frankenstein (Basil Rathbone) starts out as a humble family man with no intention of continuing his father’s experiments, but is soon enamored by the “miracle” that came to pass in his laboratory, “a miracle that the people called a monster.”

The story is multi-layered, with all pieces cleverly fitting together.  Considered a dead man even though he survived a hanging, Ygor is not a hunchback, but does live with a healed broken neck.  He’s out to exact revenge on the jury that sentenced him and is using The Monster to do it.  It is also a survivor, having lived through the explosion at the end of Bride of Frankenstein that “blew the top off” his laboratory.

However, at the beginning of the movie, The Monster lies in a coma, giving Frankenstein a reason to crack his father’s notebooks and begin some experiments of his own.  We learn more about The Monster than we ever have before: he has three times the blood pressure of a normal man.  “He’s completely superhuman,” with two bullets in his heart, yet he continues to live.

We also learn a little mythology.  Apparently, not only did the original Frankenstein attract electricity by hanging his creatures in the sky, but also “cosmic rays” that help make The Monster superhuman.  This discovery leads to the gist of the movie spoken by Frankenstein, “I as a man should destroy him.  As a scientist, I should do everything in my power to bring him back to life so he can be studied.  That would immortalize his name.”

Speaking of his name, I had forgotten that the confusion regarding the identity of the name “Frankenstein” was something that began as early as the first movies.  You know, the fact that people call The Monster “Frankenstein,” when it’s really the man.  At the beginning of the movie, his son laments that history made his father suffer for his mistake.  “Today, nine out of ten people call that creature… Frankenstein.”  Meta, in 1939!

Inspector Krogh (Lionel Atwill) lost his arm to The Monster during an attack when he was a child.  It’s replaced with a wooden replica that he must use his other arm to manipulate, often with a sudden push or pull, but is very convenient for holding darts.  You know it’s inevitable, so this isn’t a spoiler, but you almost can’t wait for him to encounter The Monster as an adult so that it can rip off his arm again.

Son of Frankenstein feels modern in many ways, particularly the way it introduces a theme early on that you know will have importance later.  Here, its fear.  Frankenstein taught his son, Peter (Donnie Dunagan) never to be afraid.  That’s convenient when a “giant” soon begins visiting him through a secret passage in the nursery of the castle in which his family just moved.

It’s refreshing to not have a screaming child when confronted with danger.  Because he’s not afraid, he’s silent when The Monster learns that Frankenstein has betrayed it and kidnaps Peter, dangling him over a pit of hot sulfur.  Earlier, Peter is kind of annoying with his standard greeting, “Well hellooo,” but he soon becomes a somewhat endearing reflection of a childhood his father never had.

There is so much I like about Son of Frankenstein!  On top of everything I’ve described, and other delights I encourage you to discover, it has a phrase that’s so obvious and funny that it becomes sublime.  As the finale begins, Inspector Krogh declares, “There’s a monster afoot.”  Yes there is.  But there’s also one of the most overall entertaining Frankenstein movies afoot.  It’s one of my favorites.

Tomorrow: The Invisible Man Returns!

The Countdown Continues

I hope you're enjoying this year's Countdown to Halloween: all-Universal Monsters, all-the-time, from Dracula (1931) to The Creature Walks Among Us (1956).  Continue to join me daily for a fresh perspective on movies you may not have watched in a long time, if ever.

Phase 2 will include movies from 1939-1946:

• Son of Frankenstein
• The Invisible Man Returns
• The Mummy's Hand
• The Invisible Woman
• The Wolf Man
• The Ghost of Frankenstein
• Invisible Agent
• The Mummy's Tomb
• Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man
• Phantom of the Opera (1943)
• Son of Dracula
• The Invisible Man's Revenge
• The Mummy's Ghost
• House of Frankenstein
• The Mummy's Curse
• House of Dracula
• She-Wolf of London

We've got a long way to go and the fun has only begun!

Dracula's Daughter (1936)

For this year's Countdown to Halloween, it's all-Universal Monsters, all-the-time, from Dracula (1931) to The Creature Walks Among Us (1956).  Join me daily for a fresh perspective on movies you may not have watched in a long time, if ever.  Today, another strike out... Dracula's Daughter.

One thing I love about the Universal Monsters sequels is the attention paid to continuity between them.  Both Bride of Frankenstein and Dracula's Daughter begin where Frankenstein and Dracula ended.  Yeah, there might be a bit of revisionist history in the second chapters, but it's mostly disguised with adjacent scenes we just didn't see the first time around.  For example, at the same time Van Helsing is staking Dracula in the original movie, police are racing down the castle steps; we just don't see this occurring until the sequel.

In Dracula's Daughter (1936), the police presence, specifically that of Scotland Yard, is felt so heavily that at times it's more criminal mystery than horror thriller.  Sir Basil Humphrey (Gilbert Emery) basically replaces the role of disbelieving family members that were featured in Dracula.  This depersonalizes the stakes (pun intended), even though the movie attempts to add a love triangle among a former student of Van Helsing's, Jeffrey Garth (Otto Kruger), his assistant, Janet (Marguerite Churchill) and the villain, Contessa Marya Zeleska (Gloria Holden), aka "Dracula's Daughter."

Zeleska is not literally Dracula's daughter.  Figuratively, she became his daughter when she suffered "the curse of the Draculas," which I assume means became his blood slave.  She may be the first reluctant vampire character in movies in that she wants to be "free… free forever."  However, a burial ceremony to destroy her master's body does not actually release her.  She continues to be interested in alternative cures that Garth offers, such as hypnosis.  But it seems mostly lip service as she continues to carry on her "father's" wicked ways.

The genders are reversed, but Zeleska's goal is the same: to have a partner with whom she can spend eternal life.  At her side is a creepy looking guy named Sandor (Irving Pichel), who could be interpreted as the real villain of the story.  You get the feeling that even if Zeleska could escape the darkness, Sandor would try to prevent it… or kill her instead.

The locales are also reversed.  Dracula begins in Transylvania and moves to London.  Dracula's Daughter begins in London and moves to Transylvania.  Instead of literally carrying her victim with her for the climax, Zeleska takes Janet.  Her victim, Garth, chases after them.  It then becomes somewhat of a hostage situation where one life is offered for another.

How much you enjoy Dracula's Daughter may depend upon how much you like Holden in the role.  Personally, I don't think she's as charismatic as Bela Lugosi was as Dracula.  Soft spoken with a deep voice, her high cheekbones make her look more like Cher than anyone else.  She uses her ring to mesmerize her victims, but it's her voice alone that almost lulled me into a trance.  It would be best to distance her relationship with Dracula, but when she gives her interpretation of lines like, "I never drink… wine," you're reminded this is an inferior product.

There's the basis for a great idea here.  Before Garth understands the true reason for Zeleska's torture, he likens her "obsession" to that of an alcoholic and proposes a method to make her similarly fight her will.  You'd place an alcoholic in a room with a bottle and not allow him/her to drink, but I'm not sure what Garth would put in a room with Zeleska, a blood bag?  The movie, rightfully so, is more interested in the action and soon abandons his practical efforts in favor of Zeleska's failures to go straight.

Van Helsing's lack of participation in it all is curious.  His primary purpose is, for us, to state the obvious, and for the other characters, to recap events from the first movie.  His commentary with Sir Basil and relationship with Garth is a bridge to what's really happening, but his actual participation in events is limited.  When Garth charters a plane to Transylvania, Van Helsing exclaims, "Stop him!  He's going to his death!"  Even when he joins at the end, it's only to respond to a comment about how beautiful Zeleska's body is.

"She was beautiful when she died… 100 years ago," says Van Helsing.  Probably intended to be serious, I laughed when he said that.  Likewise, at the beginning of the movie when someone asks how long Dracula has been dead, I laughed when Van Helsing said, "About 500 years."  Intentional or not, there's more humor in Dracula's Daughter than in its predecessor.  But there's less style.  The sequel has none of the atmosphere of the original, and it's particularly noticeable in what are supposed to be the exact same settings, such as Dracula's Transylvania castle.

Compared to the other sequel, Bride of Frankenstein, Dracula's Daughter… well, doesn't compare.  The time between making the two Frankenstein movies was shorter than that between the two Dracula movies, so maybe that has something to do with the approach taken.  Dracula's Daughter seems to have established the pattern for the multitude of Universal Monsters sequels that followed.  I don't know that any of them could be considered good movies, but a lot of them are fun.  However, this one is not one of my favorites.

Werewolf of London (1935)

For this year's Countdown to Halloween, it's all-Universal Monsters, all-the-time, from Dracula (1931) to The Creature Walks Among Us (1956).  Join me daily for a fresh perspective on movies you may not have watched in a long time, if ever.  Today, one that never quite took off... Werewolf of London!

It’s no wonder 1935’s Werewolf of London didn’t kick off a franchise similar to Universal’s Dracula, Frankenstein, Mummy or Invisible Man.  It’s an odd version of the familiar werewolf story with elements of which I’m not aware of appearing in any other subsequent movies.

Specifically, the story revolves around… botany.  The flower isn’t wolfbane that blooms when the autumn moon is bright; it’s something called “mariphasa” that produces an antidote for “werewolfery.”  Yeah, I’ve never heard the term “werewolfery” in any other movie, either.

Dr. Glendon (Henry Hull) is the botanist who brings home the flower after a trip to Tibet, a trip where he happens to be bitten by a werewolf.  There are some interesting touches in the movie, such as when his bloody arm phases to a scarred arm to indicate a passage of time and his return to London.

Directed by Stuart Walker, whose career spanned 12 movies in only four years, Werewolf of London unfolds at an even pace for most of its 75-minute running time.  However, near the finale, it speeds up with one of the earliest examples I know of the fast intercutting of short scenes with different people talking on the telephone.

Dr. Yogami (Warner Oland) follows Glendon home from Tibet in pursuit of the flower.  There’s an interesting plot twist late in the movie, even if you figure it out much earlier than it’s revealed.  With the familiar pattern of Universal horror movies, there is not only a love triangle, but also another villain to make the monster more sympathetic.

Early during his return, Glendon neglects his wife, Lisa (Valerie Hobson), telling her that as soon as he finishes his experiment he’ll be more human.  Little does he know that as the mariphasa buds bloom, hair begins to grow on his hands.  Luckily, he can poke the flower to make it stop.

It becomes more difficult for him later, though, when the flower is stolen by Yogami and he “instinctively seeks to kill the thing it loves best,” Lisa.  He must kill one human being each night of the full moon or remain forever afflicted.  Hence, there begins a series of “mysterious Goose Lane murders.”  When given the likely explanation, an inspector says, “This is Scotland Yard, not Grimm’s Fairy Tales.”

Glendon’s transformations are creatively filmed.  As he walks through a set, each time he emerges from behind an obstacle, he’s advanced a little further.  His werewolf, though, is more man than wolf, walking upright and even putting on clothes rather than ripping out of them.  However, it is described as, “Neither man nor wolf, but a satanic creature with the worst of both.”

Growing up, I remember seeing pictures from Werewolf of London in Famous Monsters and books about classic horror movies.  Hull always looked so good made up as the werewolf.  The moving image of him, though, does not quite live up to those pictures (and those memories).  This is one of the reasons the movie is a little disappointing and is not one of my favorites.

Bride of Frankenstein (1935)

For this year's Countdown to Halloween, it's all-Universal Monsters, all-the-time, from Dracula (1931) to The Creature Walks Among Us (1956).  Join me daily for a fresh perspective on movies you may not have watched in a long time, if ever.  Today, one of the most popular... Bride of Frankenstein!

Many people consider Universal's Bride of Frankenstein (1935) to be the greatest horror movie ever made.  I'm not one of those people.  That's not to say it's not a classic; it definitely is.  And while the finale is a tour de force for director James Whale, I don't care much for earlier parts of the movie.  In these parts, the subject matter leans heavily toward the magical or mystical rather than the scientific horror of creating human life.

If you think about it, it's not that much of a fantasy to believe Henry Frankenstein could reanimate a man stitched together from parts of dead bodies.  All it takes is a jolt of electricity strong enough to jump-start him.  That's science.  But it's harder to fathom Dr. Pretorius growing a race of miniature people from seeds.  They also have tiny thrones and ballerina costumes.  I'm not sure what that is... magic?

Pretorius (Ernest Thesiger) is a former colleague of Frankenstein's (Colin Clive) who appears at his sick bed following the events of Frankenstein (1931).  He has ideas of his own about probing the mysteries of life and death, but needs Frankenstein's help to proceed.  Specifically, he wants to create a female companion for The Monster (Boris Karloff).  Frankenstein is reluctant at first; however, when Pretorius and The Monster join forces, they blackmail him to participate.

While Frankenstein recovers from being tossed from a burning windmill, The Monster has escaped a fiery death and roams the countryside.  It doesn't take long for a mob to assemble and they actually capture him for a brief period of time until he also escapes their chains.  Again wandering on his own, he encounters a blind hermit for what may be the most iconic scene in Frankenstein history.

"I cannot see and you cannot speak," the hermit (O.P. Heggie) says, and when The Monster realizes someone accepts him for what he is, he sheds a single tear.  He's soon speaking, albeit in one-word expressions: bread, drink, smoke, friend = good; alone = bad.  Wood?  Wood = fire, which sends The Monster on the run again.  Hiding in a cemetery tomb, he meets Pretorius, who shares his plan.  Soon, The Monster has two new words: "Woman. Wife."

In subsequent versions of the story, the character of Pretorius doesn't exist.  The fact that he's here makes me wonder if it doesn't lessen the impact of the purpose for creating a mate for The Monster in the first place.  The Monster is basically a pawn for Pretorius's mad idea, instead of the driving force for his own wishes.  Also, holding Elizabeth (Valerie Hobson) hostage doesn't set the stake high enough when Frankenstein was originally so unconcerned about her.

In other words, it's all a little contrived.  However, it gets us to that finale, which is spectacular!  During the creation, the camera angles tilt, the edits speed up, the close-ups of Frankenstein and Pretorius increase.  It's very exciting, intense and suspenseful.  Then there's the reveal: "The bride of Frankenstein," as bells chime on the soundtrack.  In what is perhaps the second most iconic scene in Frankenstein history, she rejects her mate.

"She hate me.  Like others," The Monster realizes, while stumbling dangerously close to laboratory controls.  “Get away from that lever, you’ll blow us to atoms!” cries Pretorius.  In the final moments, The Monster is in control, determining who deserves redemption and who does not, who lives and who dies.  At the end of two movies, it seems The Monster has become the most human of them all.

Tomorrow: Werewolf of London!