As I mentioned in a previous post, I may decide to group some movies together with a common theme. This group contains all "classic" horror films:
Freaks (1932)
If you boil this film down to the basic elements of its plot, it doesn't really sound like a horror film at all - a woman is attempting to marry a man that she doesn't love just to get his inheritance and his friends are the only ones that can see her plan. It sounds more like a crime thriller or film noir. However, if you make the setting a circus, the woman a trapeze artist, the man a dwarf, and most of their friends real life circus side show performers, the creepiness factor goes through the roof.
I know its not very nice to say this, because these were real people, but GOOD LORD were the sideshow people unnerving to look at. Just having them as characters in the film sets up an uncomfortable atmosphere while you are watching the movie that really pays off in the climax. After Hans (the dwarf) goes through with the marriage to Cleopatra (the trapeze artist), he eventually comes to realize that she is planning to kill him for his money. Eventually, there is a confrontation involving the 2 of them, her real boyfriend (the circus strongman) and the rest of the freaks in a rain storm that is truly full of tension that builds fantastically to the end. It is one of the great finales in horror history, and I don't think it would have been nearly as effective if regular actors had been used. Apparently, the film was too much for people at the time and it bombed, effectively killing off the career of director Tod Browning, who had also directed Dracula. A shame, as both of these films are about as good as it gets in classic horror.
Mark of the Vampire (1935)
This is another film directed by Tod Browning, but I did not like it as much as I liked Freaks or Dracula. Once again, Bela Lugosi is playing a vampire, this time named Count Mora. Lugosi spends the majority of his screen time standing around looking silently menacing, which he excels at. However, the plot of this film is just way too outlandish to swallow. The entire movie is spent making you believe that Count Mora and his daughter (a vampire too) have come back to claim the daughter of a man that was killed at the beginning of the film by having hos blood mysteriously drained. However, it turns out the whole vampire thing is an elaborate hoax put on to flush out the real killer and to get him to confess how he committed the murder. That plan is just way too ridiculous and involves way too many people to ever have been successful (I realize that I am saying that if Count Mora and his daughter actually were vampires that it would have been MORE believable than what actually happened - horror films get a suspension of belief from me that normal films don't get). The film had a good look to it, but in the end, the big reveal was just too much for me.
Werewolf of London (1935)
It goes without saying that the whole time I was watching this film, I had Warren Zevon's "Werewolves of London" stuck in my head (I kept waiting for the werewolf to get a big dish of beef chow mein, but it never happened).
Apparently, this was the first mainstream Hollywood werewolf film, preceding Lon Chaney's The Wolf Man by 6 years. It has the plot template that is pretty much the basis for every werewolf film next. The main character is attacked at night by a strange, fur covered creature, and upon the next full moon, people are mysteriously attacked before the main guy realizes that he is the cause. Eventually, his crimes are discovered, and the werewolf is killed, but he is grateful for the release of his curse. I enjoyed this film, but it is not nearly as good as The Wolf Man. Most of that is due to the fact that Lon Chaney, Jr. owns as the werewolf, where Henry Hull (this film's werewolf) is only passable. I was glad that I watched this for its historical significance, but in the future, when I want to see a classic werewolf film, its Chaney all the way.
The Thing From Another World (1951)
I have seen John Carpenter's remake many times, but I have never seen the original before now (the only bits of it I have seen at all are the clips that Carpenter has playing on the TV in the background in a few scenes in Halloween. While I definitely prefer the remake, it is very different type of film. The Thing has a different type of tension as you don't have any idea in which character the monster is hiding. Also, there is a much better use of the overbearing isolation of the surroundings (having less characters helps). In The Thing From Another World, the main sense of tension for the characters (and the viewer) is driven by the fear that they won't be able to find some way to kill the monster before he kills them. The remake has that too, but when added to the other driving forces of tension I just mentioned, it is a far scarier film than the original.
Freaks (1932)
If you boil this film down to the basic elements of its plot, it doesn't really sound like a horror film at all - a woman is attempting to marry a man that she doesn't love just to get his inheritance and his friends are the only ones that can see her plan. It sounds more like a crime thriller or film noir. However, if you make the setting a circus, the woman a trapeze artist, the man a dwarf, and most of their friends real life circus side show performers, the creepiness factor goes through the roof.
I know its not very nice to say this, because these were real people, but GOOD LORD were the sideshow people unnerving to look at. Just having them as characters in the film sets up an uncomfortable atmosphere while you are watching the movie that really pays off in the climax. After Hans (the dwarf) goes through with the marriage to Cleopatra (the trapeze artist), he eventually comes to realize that she is planning to kill him for his money. Eventually, there is a confrontation involving the 2 of them, her real boyfriend (the circus strongman) and the rest of the freaks in a rain storm that is truly full of tension that builds fantastically to the end. It is one of the great finales in horror history, and I don't think it would have been nearly as effective if regular actors had been used. Apparently, the film was too much for people at the time and it bombed, effectively killing off the career of director Tod Browning, who had also directed Dracula. A shame, as both of these films are about as good as it gets in classic horror.
Mark of the Vampire (1935)
This is another film directed by Tod Browning, but I did not like it as much as I liked Freaks or Dracula. Once again, Bela Lugosi is playing a vampire, this time named Count Mora. Lugosi spends the majority of his screen time standing around looking silently menacing, which he excels at. However, the plot of this film is just way too outlandish to swallow. The entire movie is spent making you believe that Count Mora and his daughter (a vampire too) have come back to claim the daughter of a man that was killed at the beginning of the film by having hos blood mysteriously drained. However, it turns out the whole vampire thing is an elaborate hoax put on to flush out the real killer and to get him to confess how he committed the murder. That plan is just way too ridiculous and involves way too many people to ever have been successful (I realize that I am saying that if Count Mora and his daughter actually were vampires that it would have been MORE believable than what actually happened - horror films get a suspension of belief from me that normal films don't get). The film had a good look to it, but in the end, the big reveal was just too much for me.
Werewolf of London (1935)
It goes without saying that the whole time I was watching this film, I had Warren Zevon's "Werewolves of London" stuck in my head (I kept waiting for the werewolf to get a big dish of beef chow mein, but it never happened).
Apparently, this was the first mainstream Hollywood werewolf film, preceding Lon Chaney's The Wolf Man by 6 years. It has the plot template that is pretty much the basis for every werewolf film next. The main character is attacked at night by a strange, fur covered creature, and upon the next full moon, people are mysteriously attacked before the main guy realizes that he is the cause. Eventually, his crimes are discovered, and the werewolf is killed, but he is grateful for the release of his curse. I enjoyed this film, but it is not nearly as good as The Wolf Man. Most of that is due to the fact that Lon Chaney, Jr. owns as the werewolf, where Henry Hull (this film's werewolf) is only passable. I was glad that I watched this for its historical significance, but in the future, when I want to see a classic werewolf film, its Chaney all the way.
The Thing From Another World (1951)
I have seen John Carpenter's remake many times, but I have never seen the original before now (the only bits of it I have seen at all are the clips that Carpenter has playing on the TV in the background in a few scenes in Halloween. While I definitely prefer the remake, it is very different type of film. The Thing has a different type of tension as you don't have any idea in which character the monster is hiding. Also, there is a much better use of the overbearing isolation of the surroundings (having less characters helps). In The Thing From Another World, the main sense of tension for the characters (and the viewer) is driven by the fear that they won't be able to find some way to kill the monster before he kills them. The remake has that too, but when added to the other driving forces of tension I just mentioned, it is a far scarier film than the original.
No comments:
Post a Comment