Universal Classic Monsters Marathon

[asterixsmeagol]

In 2020, I did an October marathon of the Halloween, Friday the 13th, and Nightmare on Elm Street franchises, watching one movie each day for all 31 days in October.
The next year I did a James Bond marathon leading up to the release of No Time to Die.

Last year I was going to do one for the Universal Classic Monsters, but real life stuff got in the way and I just didn't have the time to put into watching 31 movies, but things are a little calmer this year. I have quite a bit of work travel lined up, but as long as I'm thinking ahead and I can rip all of my Blu-rays for the coming week, I should have time to watch everything! There are a lot of different lists of what counts as part of the franchise, but I am going to consider the 30 films included in the "Complete" Blu-ray collection. I'm doubling up on the first of the month with both the English and Spanish versions of Dracula, and then if all goes to plan I'll continue with one movie per day in release order through the 30th and then watch the 1925/1929/1930 versions of The Phantom of the Opera as a grand finale. If I fall behind, I'll probably just skip the old Phantom.

Watch	Released	Title
10/1/23	2/14/31	Dracula (English and Spanish)
10/2/23	11/21/31	Frankenstein
10/3/23	12/22/32	The Mummy
10/4/23	11/13/33	The Invisible Man
10/5/23	4/20/35	The Bride of Frankenstein
10/6/23	5/13/35	Werewolf of London
10/7/23	5/11/36	Dracula's Daughter
10/8/23	1/13/39	Son of Frankenstein
10/9/23	1/12/40	The Invisible Man Returns
10/10/23	11/20/40	The Mummy's Hand
10/11/23	12/12/40	The Invisible Woman
10/12/23	12/12/41	The Wolf Man
10/13/23	3/13/42	The Ghost of Frankenstein
10/14/23	4/17/42	Invisible Agent
10/15/23	10/23/42	The Mummy's Tomb
10/16/23	3/5/43	Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man
10/17/23	8/12/43	Phantom of the Opera
10/18/23	11/5/43	Son of Dracula
10/19/23	6/9/44	The Invisible Man's Revenge
10/20/23	7/7/44	The Mummy's Ghost
10/21/23	12/15/44	The House of Frankenstein
10/22/23	12/22/44	The Mummy's Curse
10/23/23	6/29/45	House of Dracula
10/24/23	5/17/46	She-Wolf of London
10/25/23	6/15/48	Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein
10/26/23	3/19/51	Abbott and Costello Meet the Invisible Man
10/27/23	2/12/54	Creature from the Black Lagoon
10/28/23	5/13/55	Revenge of the Creature
10/29/23	5/23/55	Abbott and Costello Meet the Mummy
10/30/23	4/26/56	The Creature Walks Among Us
10/31/23	2/16/30	The Phantom of the Opera (Original)

 

[asterixsmeagol]

Dracula (1931, English)
The movie that arguably started this whole franchise. (Although the 1925/1929 Phantom of the Opera predates it, it doesn't have any of the crossover elements that mark this early cinematic universe.) The main things that drive this classic are the amazing performances of Bela Lugosi as Count Dracula and Dwight Frye as Renfield. It's been a long time since I have seen the movie or read the book, but as it happens, I am participating in the Dracula Daily "real-time" readthrough of the novel this year, so the original story is fresh in my mind. While I do think the movie is quite good as its own piece of art, it is a truly terrible adaptation of the novel. Character motivations are not as clear, mostly due to the strange combinations/splitting of book characters into their movie counterparts. The movie opens with Renfield travelling to Transylvania to meet the Count and help him get his affairs in order to purchase an estate in London (or rather, to lease it in the movie). This exchange also happens over a single night, and then they depart by boat the next day. Then Dracula meets Harker (who is the one visiting Transylvania in the book), Mina, Lucy, and Seward at a playhouse, and then they all meet up with Dr. Van Helsing at Seward's estate. The timeline continues to be drastically compressed, which does help give the movie a more driving narrative (even if it feels slow to a 2023 viewer), but it does make some lines nonsensical, like Lucy dying after a series of blood transfusions, apparently sometime between going to bed and the hospital opening the next morning.

Dracula (1931, Spanish)
For some reason, rather than just dubbing the English movie into Spanish, Universal Studios decided to re-film the entire thing with Spanish actors concurrently with the English production. They used the exact same sets as their English counterparts, filming at night. The costumes are also identical, though they do appear to have at least paid to have separate copies made to fit the Spanish actors. The scenes are also blocked in almost the same way, and in every instance that they differ, I prefer the Spanish version. However, I still think the English version is the clear winner out of the two; the Spanish performances just aren't as good as the English ones, with the exception of Eduardo Arozamena as Van Helsing, who I much preferred to Edward Van Sloan as Van Helsing. (A funny note, despite Van Sloan's Dutch name, he is American-born and to my ear plays Van Helsing with a Scottish accent!) I also do like Pablo Alvarez Rubio as Renfield, but I still think Dwight Frye was better. One more strange note on language: although most of the cast are Central and South American, I believe they are all speaking with Castillian accents. Maybe this was to give a more European feel to the movie? But if that's the case, I don't know why the American actors didn't all try for English accents.

 

[asterixsmeagol]

Jrzag42, I just saw your post that you are doing a similar watch through! Do you want to try to sync up and watch in the same order so we can compare notes? I'd love to have you join me daily in this thread.

 

[Jrzag42]

Jrzag42, I just saw your post that you are doing a similar watch through! Do you want to try to sync up and watch in the same order so we can compare notes? I'd love to have you join me daily in this thread.

I would love to! I will say, our lists differ slightly though. Your list omits She-Wolf Of London, which I assume is either to make room for an extra Phantom Of The Opera, or just a difference in our collections. I'm sure that She-Wolf is awful, but personally I'm not interested in more Phantom. I'm thinking, I'll save She-Wolf for day 30, so that up to that point our lists will sync up. I have other plans for day 31 entirely (either an homage such as Monster Squad or Van Helsing, or just Halloween to fit my prior traditions). Also worth mentioning that I'm skipping Spanish Dracula. Also also, my reviews probably won't be as in depth as yours.

 

[asterixsmeagol]

Oops, I do also have She-Wolf in my set, I just forgot to add it to the list. I thought it was weird that they were counting both versions of Dracula as part of the 30 movies since the Spanish version is just listed as a special feature on the first disc! I've re-inserted She-Wolf in its proper place on the 24th, so now we'll each only have the one extra day to fill on the 31st.

 

[asterixsmeagol]

Frankenstein (1931)
Wow, another timeless classic. Again, the main driving force for this movie is the performances by Boris Karloff, Colin Clive, and Dwight Frye as the Monster, Dr Frankenstein, and Fritz (the Doctor's assistant, who is frequently misidentified as Igor, a character from later films). I had forgotten how quickly these movies started recycling cast: Edward Van Sloan (Van Helsing from Dracula) is back here as Dr Waldman. But, to be fair, they didn't know they were going to cross over yet so at this point he's just in two separate movies. I didn't mention it yesterday, but both Dracula and Frankenstein have beautiful matte paintings. They're so good that often I have to really look hard to figure out which part of the backgrounds are matte, miniatures, or sets! It took me about halfway through the grave robbing scene to realize that the gravestone and statue in the background were just paintings! One more strange thing about this movie is the lack of score. There is a bit of incidental music here and there, but for the most part scenes are very quiet.

Dracula's score is even stranger (again, I should have talked about this yesterday). There was no music written for the film originally. The music that plays over the opening credits was borrowed (I assume royalty-free) from Tchaikovsky's Swan Lake, and the small bits of Wagner's Die Meistersinger von Nürnberg heard during the play are also probably short enough that they got away with using them for free as well. However, the Blu-ray also includes an additional audio track which adds the score written by Philp Glass in 1998.

I have to praise the restoration of these films for the Blu-ray. They look terrific, but I have two small gripes: The audio could have used the same cleanup that the video got, and I wish they had included an era-appropriate Universal logo before the opening credits rather than the widescreen CGI version from 2018 when the Blu-rays were printed.

 

[Jrzag42]

I thought it was weird that they were counting both versions of Dracula as part of the 30 movies since the Spanish version is just listed as a special feature on the first disc!

My collection doesn't even have the Spanish Dracula. I guess I should mention that I have the collection on DVD, it didn't occur to me that there might be a difference in bonus features. The organization of the discs in the case is awful, maybe there's a designated bonus disc buried in there. For what it's worth, I do have a separate Dracula collection that does feature it.

Here's my Dracula review from last night, I figured I should move it to this thread:

Dracula (1931) - For October, I'm going to attempt to watch a classic Universal monster film every day. Today was of course Dracula, the only one I've already seen in the past. I watched it with the Philip Glass score, which was simply phenominal, it was effectively tense and atmospheric. Man this movie is just real good, I don't know what to say about it. Why does Renfield here remind me of Crispin Glover?

Now to watch Frankenstein! This is the only instance where I've actually read the book first (or at least most of it, years ago). I'm a bit afraid that I won't be able to enjoy it knowing the differences, but I'm excited nonetheless. I've had Frankenstein merchandise in the past using the movie's likeness, and I always feel guilty having merchandise based on something I haven't seen. This will help with that, I think!

 

[Jrzag42]

Frankenstein (1931) - The film differs significantly from what I recall of the book, but it works. In the book, I believe the doctor abandons the monster as soon as it comes to life. In the film, he abandons the monster after witnessing it getting violent, and finding out that he accidentally used a criminal brain. In the book, the monster ventures off, learns a bit, becomes vengeful, and starts killing off the doctor's family one by one. Here, the monster is far less intelligent and not at all malicious, the murders he commits are accidental. Both characters are more or less altered to be more sympathetic. I just find this interesting. There's plenty of other changes, but in the end it's not worth comparing them.
The movie feels a bit tighter than Dracula, and the first half is pretty perfect. The final act drags on a bit for me. I think the film would benefit from a score like Dracula eventually got.
I already get why Bride Of Frankenstein is generally regarded as superior. This just feels like the beginning of a story. We barely get any of the monster out and about in the world. The final act almost feels rushed, despite me previously mentioning that it drags on.
In the end, I had a fun time, and I'll surely revisit this in the future. There's so much to be said, but not much that hasn't been said before.

 

[Jrzag42]

The Mummy (1932) - All day I've been expecting to watch The Invisible Man, only to get home and realize that The Mummy was next. I've never been interested in The Mummy, any iteration of it, so I didn't expect much. It was...ok. It was nice seeing Boris Karloff in a more articulate role after Frankenstein. Other than that, I didn't care much for this, and it didn't fully hold my attention. Still, I'm left weirdly excited for more Mummy content.

 

[asterixsmeagol]

The Mummy (1932)
I agree with Jrzag42, The Mummy is not as good as Dracula or Frankenstein, but I think I liked it more than he did. As with the first two movies we watches, the performances are the main highkight. Karloff does a good job of raising the banal material to a higher level than the movie otherwise deserves. While his performance as Frankenstein's Monster is probably more iconic, he gets more opportunities to show his prowess here. The only other really great performance was Bram Fletcher cracking up upon seeing Imhotep come to life. We also get another appearance from our old friend Edward Van Sloan, playing another academi, this time named Dr Muller, and again I am unimpressed with his performance. It was was nice to get some location-shot footage, but it could have been stock footage purchased but well purposed for use here. The makeup for the Mummy effects, especially the first shot of his face is remarkable, even by modern standards. This was also the first of the series to have significant scoring, though it reused Swan Lake as the opening credits music and elsewhere throughout the film the score was only sporadically present. Still, it did a good job of helping the creepy ambiance.

 

[DetectiveStrange]

@asterixsmeagol Have you seen the Dracula: Restored fan edit? I recommend it!

 

[DetectiveStrange]

I think the lighting in The Mummy is quite beautiful - some gorgeous shots in that movie, which makes sense, since director Karl Freund was a cinematographer as well. The Invisible Man is fantastic - perhaps the Universal Monsters film that feels the most modern.

IMO, one underrated gem is Son of Frankenstein - not as great as the first two, but very good, giving us a nice Frankenstein trilogy.

 

[Jrzag42]

We also get another appearance from our old friend Edward Van Sloan, playing another academi, this time named Dr Muller, and again I am unimpressed with his performance.

I'm really bad with faces. If you have two or more actors who look vaguely similar, I will struggle to tell them apart. I didn't have too much of a probldm with the previous movies, I may have gotten Lucy and Mina mixed up in Dracula but I think that's it. Meanwhile, I had that problem a lot with The Mummy. I loved Van Sloan in the previous films, but here I genuinely couldn't tell him apart from half of the rest of the cast.
On another note, you are absolutely right about the makeup, the film deserves a lot of credit for that.

 

[DetectiveStrange]

I think the first Frankenstein is great, though not as good as the second - but it did kind of bother me that his name is Henry in the movie and not Viktor, haha.

Daughter Dracula was interesting and had potential, but doesn't reach classic status for me.

Will you be taking a look at Young Frankenstein for fun by any chance? One of my favs, a great tribute/spoof to the Universal films, that makes so many references to the original. If I recall correctly, Brooks got the guy who made some of the original lab equipment in the Universal Frankenstein films to use the originals or make replicas for Young Frankenstein.

 

[asterixsmeagol]

@asterixsmeagol Have you seen the Dracula: Restored fan edit? I recommend it!

No, I wasn't aware of it. That does seem like a great idea for an edit! If I get some time I might see how hard it would be to recreate in HD.

Will you be taking a look at Young Frankenstein for fun by any chance? One of my favs, a great tribute/spoof to the Universal films, that makes so many references to the original. If I recall correctly, Brooks got the guy who made some of the original lab equipment in the Universal Frankenstein films to use the originals or make replicas for Young Frankenstein.

I love Young Frankenstein too, but I won't be watching it as part of this marathon.

 

[Jrzag42]

The Invisible Man (1933) - Definitely my favorite so far. Fantastic special effects and some great acting. It's both funny, and has a genuinely scary premise. A genius madman who can't be caught, motivated by spreading terror and gaining power? The whole thing just works, it's a very solid film. I'm a big Darkman fan, and it's cool to see the film that influenced it the most.

 

[DetectiveStrange]

It’s so good. Not exactly the same, but I got a similar feeling watching him as I did Ledger’s Joker. Another James Whale hit, even better than the first Frankenstein imo

 

[asterixsmeagol]

The Invisible Man (1933)
This is my favorite so far. You immediately get a sense of the kind of guy Griffin is when he walks into the pub and just leaves the door open behind him while demanding a room, and Claude Rains absolutely nails the performance. I continue to be disappointed by a lot of the supporting actors, who have a tendency to over act, though maybe that's just how things were in the '30s? This is especially true of the women, but I'm inclined to blame that mostly on writing and directing. I'm pleased to say that the audio on this one was much improved over the first couple of entries, with much less hissing and popping. There is still almost no incidental music, but it's absence isn't so obvious with the cleaner audio. But the real strong suit of the movie is the special effects. Obviously a lot of wire manipulation off props, but the actual Invisible Man effects are still awesome 90 years later! I honestly don't know how they did some of the shots, and I'm sure thebl 1933 audience was blown away.

As a side note, this is the earliest example of product placement I can think of. The pub owner's wife explicitly asks for a bottle of Bass beer, and then when she opens the stairwell door, a large poster for Bass can be seen clearly in the background.

 

[asterixsmeagol]

I would also like to add that it's hilarious to think that this guy's just running around naked the whole second half of the movie

 

[Jrzag42]

The Bride Of Frankenstein (1935) - Has some truly great moments throughout, but in between such moments I got a bit bored. As a whole I think the first Frankenstein is more consistent and I think I prefer it. The scenes of the monster and the blind man are the real highlights of the film. The titular bride is only really in the last 10 minutes, but manages to be so iconic. The film tried to be funnier than the first, but it comes off as more annoying and isn't as effective as The Invisible Man. It was great to see the monster become more intelligent and evolve into something closer to the book's monster.
I hated the opening, portraying the author of the book whilst recapping scenes exclusive to the movie. I don't know a ton about Mary Shelley but I refuse to believe that her portrayal as a stereotypical, docile woman, who is afraid of thunder, is at all accurate.