Turns out that Dracula had a daughter. Who knew, right? I consider this movie to be underrated by most. It just seems to me that Dracula's Daughter never quite gets the credit it deserves. Maybe it's because it's without the great Bela Lugosi. People often speak of how Universal Studios should have done more Dracula movies with Lugosi and the fact that they didn't is just a lost opportunity, and that may be so. BUT..... Dracula's Daughter can hold it's own against any of the other Universal Monster sequels. In fact, Son Of Frankenstein is the only sequel I can think of that I like more than this movie.
Gloria Holden plays Countess Marya Zaleska. Like her father, she too is a vampire stalking the streets of London. Apparently she followed Dracula there, hoping to burn his body while performing a sacred rite that would lift the curse of vampirism from her and allow her to lead a normal life. She has her familiar, Sandor, in tow as well. Sandor doesn't seem too sure that Zaleska will be able to reverse her condition. If he truly felt that she could give up her undead night life, I'm sure he'd do what he could to put an end to it. At some point, the Countess promised to turn Sandor into a vampire as well and he's starting to get a bit impatient, though it doesn't show early on. The two of them make a formidable pair.
Now, the continuity does seem to break a bit at the beginning of this movie. We supposedly pick up right where Dracula (1931) ended, but there is no Johnathan Harker or Mina in sight. Renfield's body is in a different place than we remember and Professor Van Helsing seems to have found a nice hat he likes. It might sound like I'm just nit-picking but seriously, this doesn't even remotely look like the same castle ruins that we left off with in the first movie. Oh and the police, who couldn't be bothered to help previously, have shown up just in time to question Van Helsing as to why there is a corpse with a stake driven though it. Van Helsing is arrested and spends most of the movie in police custody.
From here the movie pretty much follows the first in that our heroes (Who in this case are therapist and his secretary aided some by the police chief and Van Helsing), attempt to discover the identity of this vampire that is loose in London at night, and put an end to it. All while the Countess is hiding in plain sight, much like Dracula did in the first movie. Zaleska does manage to escape back to Transylvania though and it's a delight that she did because it gives the viewer an excuse to gaze upon that great castle set from the first movie and even explore part of the caste that we didn't see the first time around.
Don't let the fact that Countess Zaleska wants cured fool you. She has her cold hearted, blood thirsty moments. As far as I'm concerned, Zaleska is a vampire worthy of being mentioned along side all the greats. She might not have seen eye to eye with her father but they both knew how to terrorize a city. I highly recommend this movie.
GRADE: A
Monday, February 16, 2015
Dracula (1931)
I feel like anything that I can say about this movie has already been said. Most anyone that loves these classic movies, loves Lugosi's Dracula. And they should because I'm not sure that any actor has ever owned a role like Lugosi did in this movie. That commanding presence, that thick accent, those hand gestures.........all iconic. A role that ended up being both a gift and curse to the man. But I'm not covering any new ground by pointing those things out. We're all aware of it. We're also well aware of how good Dwight Frye and Edward Van Sloan are in this and how atmospheric this movie is, so I don't feel the need to go into any of that in great detail.
There is no question that this movie is great. The only real questions surrounding this movie generally are "Do you enjoy watching this with the updated Philip Glass score?" or "What color was the inner lining of Lugosi's cape?". I've tried to watch Dracula with the Philip Glass score and I didn't care for it. After about 20 minutes, I stopped. The fact that there is no music in this movie, save for the Swan Lake piece, adds an eerie quality to it. And what about that snippet of Swan Lake that we hear at the beginning credits? We hear it again at the beginning of The Mummy but I have to be honest; every time I hear that music, I think of Lugosi's Dracula. And for the record, the inside of Lugosi's cape in the movie is gray. At least that's my understanding. We envision it as red, but if the cape were red, it would have been much darker on film. I believe Lugosi went through many colored capes in his career. Before filming Dracula, Lugosi of course played him on stage. Some early reviews pointed out that the inside of the cape was purple, others say orange. I think I read that his Dracula cape from A&C Meet Frankenstein was of a pink/salmon color. But in Dracula (1931) it was said to be a grey/silver.
It is often pointed out that we never get around to staking poor Lucy in the heart. It was scripted but never shot due to budget/time restraints. So Lucy must still be wondering about London, preying on children right? I think for the benefit of this movie and the sequel (Dracula's Daughter), I'm going to assume that Dracula took care of Lucy himself, deciding that she was drawing too much attention. This is London after all, not Transylvania. The vampires ability to survive depends on laying low and in secrecy. That's my story and I'm sticking to it.
One last thing. I can't recommend the Blu-Ray enough. If not for the picture, then definitely for the sound quality, which is amazing. Lugosi never sounded clearer or better.
GRADE: A+
There is no question that this movie is great. The only real questions surrounding this movie generally are "Do you enjoy watching this with the updated Philip Glass score?" or "What color was the inner lining of Lugosi's cape?". I've tried to watch Dracula with the Philip Glass score and I didn't care for it. After about 20 minutes, I stopped. The fact that there is no music in this movie, save for the Swan Lake piece, adds an eerie quality to it. And what about that snippet of Swan Lake that we hear at the beginning credits? We hear it again at the beginning of The Mummy but I have to be honest; every time I hear that music, I think of Lugosi's Dracula. And for the record, the inside of Lugosi's cape in the movie is gray. At least that's my understanding. We envision it as red, but if the cape were red, it would have been much darker on film. I believe Lugosi went through many colored capes in his career. Before filming Dracula, Lugosi of course played him on stage. Some early reviews pointed out that the inside of the cape was purple, others say orange. I think I read that his Dracula cape from A&C Meet Frankenstein was of a pink/salmon color. But in Dracula (1931) it was said to be a grey/silver.
It is often pointed out that we never get around to staking poor Lucy in the heart. It was scripted but never shot due to budget/time restraints. So Lucy must still be wondering about London, preying on children right? I think for the benefit of this movie and the sequel (Dracula's Daughter), I'm going to assume that Dracula took care of Lucy himself, deciding that she was drawing too much attention. This is London after all, not Transylvania. The vampires ability to survive depends on laying low and in secrecy. That's my story and I'm sticking to it.
One last thing. I can't recommend the Blu-Ray enough. If not for the picture, then definitely for the sound quality, which is amazing. Lugosi never sounded clearer or better.
GRADE: A+
Friday, February 13, 2015
Abbott & Costello Meet The Invisible Man (1951)
It seems that I've made it to my last "Invisible" film for a while. And it's one that I was looking forward to because Bud & Lou have never failed to entertain me. Abbott & Costello movies used to come on weekly when I was a kid, so seeing them again is like revisiting people that I haven't seen in a long time.
The standard Abbott & Costello gags are here as well as some new ones and they work as usual. I don't know why they felt the need to change the names of Bud & Lou in these movies, because I'd rather just believe that the same duo are getting into a new set of hijinks movie after movie after movie. Worked for The Three Stooges, right?
The Invisible Man in this one is a boxer who's been framed. Despite his rough and tough attitude (you know, because he's a boxer), he's very patient with the bumbling private detectives that are helping him. (When they aren't trying to turn him in to the police.) We also get a Claude Rains reference here that connects this movie to the original Invisible Man. Thankfully, unlike Dr. Griffin from the first movie, Dr. Gray does manage to find a cure for the invisibility. And what timing too since boxer, Tommy Nelson had just managed to clear his name.
This has long been my second favorite Abbott & Costello movie. And if ever there was an Abbott & Costello movie that I feel could be reworked and remade, it's this one.
GRADE: B
The standard Abbott & Costello gags are here as well as some new ones and they work as usual. I don't know why they felt the need to change the names of Bud & Lou in these movies, because I'd rather just believe that the same duo are getting into a new set of hijinks movie after movie after movie. Worked for The Three Stooges, right?
The Invisible Man in this one is a boxer who's been framed. Despite his rough and tough attitude (you know, because he's a boxer), he's very patient with the bumbling private detectives that are helping him. (When they aren't trying to turn him in to the police.) We also get a Claude Rains reference here that connects this movie to the original Invisible Man. Thankfully, unlike Dr. Griffin from the first movie, Dr. Gray does manage to find a cure for the invisibility. And what timing too since boxer, Tommy Nelson had just managed to clear his name.
This has long been my second favorite Abbott & Costello movie. And if ever there was an Abbott & Costello movie that I feel could be reworked and remade, it's this one.
GRADE: B
Thursday, February 12, 2015
The Invisible Man's Revenge (1944)
I was pleased to know that Jon Hall made a return as the Invisible Man here. Maybe we can finally get some good continuity out of these films, right? Nope! Jon Hall plays Robert Griffin, who has absolutely no relation to all those past Griffins that keep turning invisible. He also isn't playing QB for the Washington Redskins, in case anyone was wondering about that. No, Jon Hall is just a random guy named Griffin who to be honest, is a bit crazy, even before he's invisible. I can't help but feel that maybe there was an early attempt to keep some sort of continuity, but script re-writes wouldn't have it and the name Griffin just stuck around this time.
Hall's character this time does have a very different feel to him. He plays the part well and I actually enjoy him in this movie more so than Invisible Agent. John Carradine plays the doctor with the invisibility serum this time, and give him credit where credit is due, he's smart enough NOT to experiment on himself. Instead he waits for some random stranger to come upon his house in the middle of the night. Oh look, it's some guy named Griffin and as we all know the name Griffin and turning Invisible go together so well.
There is also a nice scene involving a game of darts, even if it is quite a bit unrealistic even for someone who can't be seen. It still amused me and was one of the better parts of the film. The ending as well wasn't bad and overall this movie is worth a quick watch. Even though Hall's character impressed me more in this one, I still believe I enjoyed Invisible Agent more overall, but maybe that's because I've always been a sucker for some spy stuff.
GRADE: C-
Hall's character this time does have a very different feel to him. He plays the part well and I actually enjoy him in this movie more so than Invisible Agent. John Carradine plays the doctor with the invisibility serum this time, and give him credit where credit is due, he's smart enough NOT to experiment on himself. Instead he waits for some random stranger to come upon his house in the middle of the night. Oh look, it's some guy named Griffin and as we all know the name Griffin and turning Invisible go together so well.
There is also a nice scene involving a game of darts, even if it is quite a bit unrealistic even for someone who can't be seen. It still amused me and was one of the better parts of the film. The ending as well wasn't bad and overall this movie is worth a quick watch. Even though Hall's character impressed me more in this one, I still believe I enjoyed Invisible Agent more overall, but maybe that's because I've always been a sucker for some spy stuff.
GRADE: C-
Friday, February 6, 2015
Invisible Agent (1942)
World War II is in full swing and the Nazi's want Dr. Griffin's invisibility formula. The last surviving Griffin family member is Frank Griffin. No, not Frank the brother of the original Invisible Man, but his grandson. Named after the original Invisible Man that was gunned down by the cops. No, wait, his name was Jack wasn't it? Or John? Or...........ok, the writers are little all over the place with this. Or let's just say that the Nazi's don't know what they are talking about.
This Frank Griffin, played by Jon Hall, has changed his name to Frank Raymond in order to hide himself and his inherited invisibility potion. The Nazi's find him anyway and make their demands. Peter Lorre plays one of the villains in this and I have to say, it's my favorite performance of his. The only real downside was that about half way through this flick, we learn that Peter Lorre's character is supposed to be Japanese? Huh? <SIGH> Ok, I'll just roll with it. Lorre is very menacing. Almost as if he leaped out of an Indiana Jones film. (Yes, I know this was 40 years before Indy). Anyway, Frank Raymond flees the Nazi's and joins the cause against the Germans by allowing himself to go invisible so that he may infiltrate the enemy ranks as a spy for the good guys. Good thing too because Germany was just about to bomb the United States with their super secret operatives like the next day.
And who's the surprise cameo in this one? Matt Willis. Who's that you ask? Well, he played Andreas the werewolf bodyguard in Return Of The Vampire. He plays one of the Nazi secret police here but don't blink because you may miss him.
Overall, it's a decent watch. I have to admit though, if not for Peter Lorre, I wouldn't be rating this movie nearly as high I don't think. He steals every scene he's in.
GRADE: C
This Frank Griffin, played by Jon Hall, has changed his name to Frank Raymond in order to hide himself and his inherited invisibility potion. The Nazi's find him anyway and make their demands. Peter Lorre plays one of the villains in this and I have to say, it's my favorite performance of his. The only real downside was that about half way through this flick, we learn that Peter Lorre's character is supposed to be Japanese? Huh? <SIGH> Ok, I'll just roll with it. Lorre is very menacing. Almost as if he leaped out of an Indiana Jones film. (Yes, I know this was 40 years before Indy). Anyway, Frank Raymond flees the Nazi's and joins the cause against the Germans by allowing himself to go invisible so that he may infiltrate the enemy ranks as a spy for the good guys. Good thing too because Germany was just about to bomb the United States with their super secret operatives like the next day.
And who's the surprise cameo in this one? Matt Willis. Who's that you ask? Well, he played Andreas the werewolf bodyguard in Return Of The Vampire. He plays one of the Nazi secret police here but don't blink because you may miss him.
Overall, it's a decent watch. I have to admit though, if not for Peter Lorre, I wouldn't be rating this movie nearly as high I don't think. He steals every scene he's in.
GRADE: C
Tuesday, February 3, 2015
The Invisible Woman (1940)
I'm wondering why or how this movie got made? It has no connections to the other films, other than it was produced under the mighty Universal Studios banner. What makes the release of this movie even stranger, is that it was released the same year as the first sequel, The Invisible Man Returns. So why two "invisible" films in one year by the same studio? It's clear to anyone that's seen these movies, that the Vincent Price starring Invisible Man Returns is the official sequel. What isn't clear is how The Invisible Woman got thrown into the mix. The Invisible Woman doesn't even credit author H.G. Wells like the rest of these movies do, which leads me to believe that this movie was always seen as a stand alone film, separate from any of the others. Maybe Universal were attempting to get a series of invisible female movies into motion, along side their current invisible male counterparts? Seems possible. Thankfully it didn't work out that way, so we never had to suffer through any cross over movie like The Invisible Couple or The Invisible Family that might have resulted when/if the two movie series merged.
But how is the movie though? Is it really that bad? Well..... no, not really. But I think I'm pretty glad that it stopped at one. The Invisible Woman seems to try and play more to comedy than terror, and in some instances it works. You're even going to be treated to a Stooge sighting in the form of Shemp Howard. Though he really doesn't shine in this, he is present. I wouldn't recommend watching The Invisible Woman purely to see Shemp. You'll be disappointed. To the best of my knowledge, this is also the only movie other than The Wizard Of Oz that I've seen Margaret Hamilton. She played the Wicked Witch of the West. Here, she plays a housekeeper of sorts. It's not a big role, but it was a nice little surprise. Other than the supporting cast, and a couple laughs, there isn't a lot to get excited about. I would have been ok never seeing this. Again, it's not a terrible movie either. It just wasn't the movie I was wanting. Expectations were fairly low and they were met. The Invisible Woman is basically the chick flick version of The Invisible Man.
GRADE: D+
But how is the movie though? Is it really that bad? Well..... no, not really. But I think I'm pretty glad that it stopped at one. The Invisible Woman seems to try and play more to comedy than terror, and in some instances it works. You're even going to be treated to a Stooge sighting in the form of Shemp Howard. Though he really doesn't shine in this, he is present. I wouldn't recommend watching The Invisible Woman purely to see Shemp. You'll be disappointed. To the best of my knowledge, this is also the only movie other than The Wizard Of Oz that I've seen Margaret Hamilton. She played the Wicked Witch of the West. Here, she plays a housekeeper of sorts. It's not a big role, but it was a nice little surprise. Other than the supporting cast, and a couple laughs, there isn't a lot to get excited about. I would have been ok never seeing this. Again, it's not a terrible movie either. It just wasn't the movie I was wanting. Expectations were fairly low and they were met. The Invisible Woman is basically the chick flick version of The Invisible Man.
GRADE: D+
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)