|
|
Post by Salzmank on Sept 30, 2018 23:28:53 GMT
The Mummy (1932), with Karloff as a suitably creepy revenant in a twisted but poetical love story, is one of my favorite Universal horrors, but its sequels get short shrift from Universal horror fans… Does anyone else here actually like them?
I found this clip of the first sequel (Karloffless, of course), The Mummy’s Hand, on YouTube, with Christopher Lee (with a great Hercule Poirot-esque moustache!) hosting a showing. Enjoy!
|
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Oct 1, 2018 0:57:47 GMT
I hadn't seen the sequels aside from the '59 Hammer remake. The original 1932 film is good but it was never really one of my favorite Universal Monster movies.
|
|
|
|
Post by Salzmank on Oct 1, 2018 1:02:51 GMT
I hadn't seen the sequels aside from the '59 Hammer remake. The original 1932 film is good but it was never really one of my favorite Universal Monster movies. Oh, I’m a big fan of the ’32 film—it’s slow and poetic and creepy, I think (the closest a studio came to making a poem out of horror, to paraphrase Everson). I’m not a fan of the ’59 film, unfortunately, though I do think Lee makes a good- looking mummy. The Uni sequels, including this one, are a lot of fun—I mean, they’re not scary in the least (none of the Universals are anymore, but it seems like the Mummy sequels don’t even try), but they’re fast-paced and entertaining. The sets in this one (borrowed from James Whale’s Green Hell) are amazing. |
|
|
|
Post by Salzmank on Oct 1, 2018 1:20:35 GMT
And now, aptly, I’m watching Green Hell. Enjoying it even more so far!
What a cast for a “b,” too: Douglas Fairbanks Jr., Joan Bennett, John Howard, George Sanders, Alan Hale (Sr.), Vincent Price! And directed by Jimmy Whale and photographed by Karl Freund, at that.
|
|
|
|
Post by Salzmank on Oct 1, 2018 1:28:49 GMT
ETA: I’m somewhat amazed this has a reputation as one of the worst movies ever made. I’m enjoying it a great deal, and Whale’s direction is, as usual, remarkable—you can tell his unique style in a second!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 1, 2018 1:30:27 GMT
My favorite Universals are The Old Dark House and Dracula's Daughter.
|
|
|
|
Post by Salzmank on Oct 1, 2018 1:32:23 GMT
My favorite Universals are The Old Dark House and Dracula's Daughter. Excellent choices. If I had to choose a top 5 list, The Old Dark House and Dracula’s Daughter would probably be in it. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 1, 2018 1:33:52 GMT
I kinda wish the complete Monsters bluray set was available for a good price. I don't care to buy the individual monster sets with so much repetition of titles.
|
|
|
|
Post by them1ghtyhumph on Oct 1, 2018 2:03:16 GMT
Honestly, didn't like Dracula's Daughter at all, except for the opening Von Helsing sequence.
As some critic said "Making Dracula's Daughter without Dracula was akin to making Bride of Frankenstein without the Monster".
Didn't do much for Gloria Holden's career.
Bela made more this movie than he did for Dracula
|
|
|
|
Post by Salzmank on Oct 1, 2018 2:07:18 GMT
Honestly, didn't like Dracula's Daughter at all, except for the opening Von Helsing sequence. As some critic said " Making Dracula's Daughter without Dracula was akin to making Bride of Frankenstein without the Monster". Didn't do much for Gloria Holden's career. Is that the reason you didn’t like it? I thought it was one of their creepier films, and the bickering romantic leads (Otto Krueger and Marguerite Churchill) were better than usual. The race back to Dracula’s castle should have been included in the original (and I love the original). By the way, Dracula was originally supposed to be in it; Jimmy Whale wrote a treatment with Dracula that broke every possible Hays Code rule (probably on purpose; Whale didn’t want to direct horror films any longer). While it could never have been produced then, I would have loved to have seen that movie. |
|
|
|
Post by them1ghtyhumph on Oct 1, 2018 2:30:24 GMT
Honestly, didn't like Dracula's Daughter at all, except for the opening Von Helsing sequence. As some critic said " Making Dracula's Daughter without Dracula was akin to making Bride of Frankenstein without the Monster". Didn't do much for Gloria Holden's career. Is that the reason you didn’t like it? I thought it was one of their creepier films, and the bickering romantic leads (Otto Krueger and Marguerite Churchill) were better than usual. The race back to Dracula’s castle should have been included in the original (and I love the original). By the way, Dracula was originally supposed to be in it; Jimmy Whale wrote a treatment with Dracula that broke every possible Hays Code rule (probably on purpose; Whale didn’t want to direct horror films any longer). While it could never have been produced then, I would have loved to have seen that movie. No, I didn't like it because it barely seemed like a horror film to me. And I know Bela was supposed to be in it. That's why he made 7x more than he did for Dracula. |
|
|
|
Post by Salzmank on Oct 1, 2018 2:33:38 GMT
No, I didn't like it because it barely seemed like a horror film to me.
And I know Bela was supposed to be in it. That's why he made 7x more than he did for Dracula. I can understand criticizing the film, but—not this. From the funeral pyre to the “sound of bats” piano sequence to the biting of Nan Grey, what about it didn’t seem like a horror film? |
|
|
|
Post by them1ghtyhumph on Oct 1, 2018 2:50:13 GMT
Honestly, and I am REALLY not trying to be combative here, I thought the movie was just stupid, without even trying to compare it to the other great Universal horror films.
We all have our own tastes, and to me Dracula's Daughter was not in my taste range.
And I've watched it 3x, trying to pick up what others have found so appesling.
As always, to each their own.
|
|
|
|
Post by Salzmank on Oct 1, 2018 2:56:32 GMT
Honestly, and I am REALLY not trying to be combative here, I thought the movie was just stupid, without even trying to compare it to the other great Universal horror films. We all have our own tastes, and to me Dracula's Daughter was not in my taste range. And I've watched it 3x, trying to pick up what others have found so appesling. As always, to each their own. I’m not trying to combative either, I’m just wondering what you didn’t like about it. |
|
|
|
Post by Primemovermithrax Pejorative on Oct 1, 2018 3:02:43 GMT
I was planning to watch the mummy films this October.
I have seen the Mummy 1932 but the quality was garbly and AFAIK the only sequel I have seen is the A and C one, I do like the mummy design in that better than the previous Kharis with the visible face!
|
|
|
|
Post by them1ghtyhumph on Oct 1, 2018 3:05:21 GMT
What I didn't like it?
That it was a film that I waited for to watch, and was incredibly disappointed in.
Shall I watch it again and break it down point by point.
Realize I'm 68 years old, and I have only so many movies that I will watch before I die.
|
|
|
|
Post by teleadm on Oct 1, 2018 18:31:25 GMT
 The Climax 1944, a sort of sequel to The Phantom of the Opera from the previous year, since I haven't seen it myself (not many seems to have seen it) I don't have any opinion about it, and maybe it's more or a chiller than a horror movie. |
|
|
|
Post by Primemovermithrax Pejorative on Oct 1, 2018 20:15:48 GMT
Does MAN MADE MONSTER get many airings? That's one I have been interested in seeing for ages but it doesn't turn up in my usual sources.
Edit: I write that and then find it listed for viewing.
|
|
|
|
Post by Salzmank on Oct 1, 2018 20:30:24 GMT
Does MAN MADE MONSTER get many airings? That's one I have been interested in seeing for ages but it doesn't turn up in my usual sources.
Edit: I write that and then find it listed for viewing.
I haven’t seen many airings, to be honest—what channel will it be on, TCM? MeTV, Svengoolie? I’ve seen it—Everson liked it, but I wasn’t that big a fan. It’s a fast-paced “machine,” streamlined as The Wolf Man is, and it doesn’t even really try to be spooky. But there are some nice effects and a sympathetic performance from Chaney (surprisingly, Atwill underplays his mad scientist [!], though he still gets in some choice lines). Also, I see it’s currently on YouTube. |
|
|
|
Post by Salzmank on Oct 1, 2018 20:35:20 GMT
As I’ve changed the thread’s subject-line, I’d also like to praise Night Monster (’42), which is the best of the three half-horror, half-mystery flicks Universal experimented with in the early ‘40s. (The other two are Horror Island and The Black Cat, both ’41.) The role of the psychic, played by Nils Asther, should have been given to Lugosi (wasted as a red herring), but the rest of the movie is first-class, and the climax is properly eerie. (The frogs’ stopping to croak is one of the few suspense techniques that still seems to work on an audience to this day.) And Ralph Morgan is great in it.  |
|
