Showing posts with label Universal Monsters. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Universal Monsters. Show all posts

Thursday, November 07, 2019

The New INVISIBLE MAN Trailer starring Elizabeth Moss Hits All the Right Notes

 

Universal Pictures has been trying to revive their Movie Monsters for a new audience for the past few decades to very mixed results. Their catalogue of creatures runs is a library of Classic Horror that includes: The Mummy, Dracula, Frankenstein's Monster, The Wolfman, The Invisible Man, and The Creature from the Black Lagoon. That's a menagerie that should form the foundation for a media empire, and it did.

In the early 20th Century, Universal dominated the horror movie market with these characters, but they also contributed to their downfall. As the popularity of the characters dwindled as audiences had come to think of them as cliche, Universal began to parody the characters in order to keep them fresh. When Abbot and Costello met Frankenstein, it wasn't in a production from a rival company. No, it was Universal who produced the picture and to financial success. That success diluted the brand as a Universal brand, even as they held copyright and trademark over many of the characters.

The Hammer Studios revived many of these characters, and in the Gothic setting, and eventually did so with distribution agreements with Universal. In the documentary Flesh and Blood, Christopher Lee states that Hammer's Horror of Dracula saved Universal Pictures from bankruptcy. This information is repeated in The Encyclopedia of Hammer Films. Hammer's productions initially treated the characters seriously, but updated the gore and sexuality to match the times. They too eventually fell into the parody/irony trap with productions like Dracula A.D. 1972.

While viewers in the early 1980s saw the release of An American Werewolf in London, an excellent Wolfman story distributed by Universal, they also saw other compelling adaptations of the monster like Joe Dante's classic The Howling. As the characters moved into the public domain, the Monsters were set free and Columbia/Sony took advantage of that freedom with films like Wolf, Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, and Bram Stoker's Dracula.

By the late 1990s and early 2000s, it was clear that if Universal wanted to demonstrate that these characters were "truly theirs," they would have to do something special. Their first foray, 1999s The Mummy, stands out as an excellent film that combines Pulp action and Horror storytelling, but as that franchise wandered into cheesy sword and sorcery films (as much as I love them) like The Scorpion King or bizarre and confused films like Van Helsing (Frankenstein's monster as Duracell for Dracula's Incubator is a strange premise) the relaunch momentum faded as it became stylistically confused. Universal's other serious attempt, the underrated The Wolfman, got lost in the shuffle.

Enter the 2010s and a renewed effort to revitalize the brand with a focus on creating a "shared universe" for the characters. In this new model, inspired by superhero films, Universal produced the "superhero Dracula" film Dracula Untold where Dracula takes on the curse for noble reasons and it is suggested that Dracula will be one of a cast of monsters who will fight a greater evil "Creature Commandos style" in a future Team-Up film. The shared universe was expanded with a new The Mummy featuring Tom Cruise as the target of the Mummy's obsession, with a gender reversal on Mummy and beloved. The film also features Russell Crowe as Dr. Jekyll/Mr. Hyde. My own "headcanon" has Tom Cruise's character as Frankenstein's Monster "Adam," but that's a conversation for another time. The Tom Cruise film earned sufficient money that it didn't kill off the idea of continuing Classic Monster productions. As Scott Mendelson points out in his Forbes article discussing the new The Invisible Man trailer, it wasn't really a success either. In large part because the "Dark Universe" shared universe model seems to be off putting to many fans. I'm not among those fans. I'd love to see the shared universe Monsters vs. Satan film, but that's just the role playing gamer in me.


This leaves us with the new The Invisible Man trailer. Where does it lie? Well, it certainly doesn't seem to be a part of the "Dark Universe." What it does seem to be is a great updating of the original Horror tale. Universal Pictures seems to be on the verge of repeating their success with Hammer Films by teaming up with Blumhouse Productions for this latest Classic Monster movie. Blumhouse is the perfect production company to develop The Invisible Man. The story should be a commentary of the evil men would do if they possessed the Ring of Gyges that is accessible to a modern audience. By incorporating elements of Gaslight, a 1944 MGM film that is particularly salient today, with the traditional Invisible Man story, the potential is through the roof.

If the trailer for The Invisible Man is any sign. It will be a new classic and be further evidence of Blumhouse's ability to channel modern fears into classic tales.


Thursday, August 20, 2009

The Wolf Man (2010): The Signs Seem to Hint at a Classic Movie Renaissance

When it comes to iconic horror characters, Universal has the catalog to beat all catalogs. The classic Universal monsters include The Mummy, Dracula, The Wolfman, Frankenstein, and The Creature from the Black Lagoon -- classics all. Each of these monsters touches at a different "fear button" deep within the human psyche. For many, it is Dracula -- with his vampiric combination of death and sex -- who resonates most deeply and draws viewers and readers to peer into the abyss that can await.

For me, it has always been Lawrence Talbot -- the Wolf Man -- who seemed to both capture my empathy and fear. In the classic Universal film, gentle Lawrence Talbot acquires the curse of lycanthropy and nearly destroys all that he holds dear. The Wolf Man is a wonderful deconstruction of the typical hero narrative. While I am often critical of narratives that deconstruct the hero, I am quite fond of this particular deconstruction. A part of the reason for my fondness is that this particular deconstruction ends in tragedy -- when the hero through the act of heroism becomes a force of terror tragedy should result. It is when a hero becomes a force of terror and is narratively rewarded that I find myself often annoyed. Talbot is an extremely sympathetic man. He has a virtuous heroic streak and has found someone who may be the love of his life, yet it is his actions that will doom his happiness -- actions that were noble and not vicious. This is where the horror of the Wolf Man lies, it lies in the fact that we might destroy the things we love even without action ignobly -- or at least without initially acting ignobly.



It is a timeless and classic tale, as are the tales of all the Universal monster catalog. Yet, it is not a tale that is always captured well. The original Wolf Man (1941) with Lon Chaney was a delight (itself a descendant of Werewolf of London), as were the Hammer Curse of the Werewolf with Oliver Reed as the cursed man and John Landis' 1981 An American Werewolf in London. Each pulled the right heartstrings. There have been historic "campy" tellings of the of the tale as well -- in fact most of the Universal monsters have become fodder for parody throughout the years.

By the late 80s, the "Universal Monsters" had pretty much become "universal monsters." The creatures, and their look-a-likes, could be found everywhere in popular culture. So it was no surprise that Universal Pictures claimed the right to redefine these classic characters for themselves in the early 90s. It's no surprise, but it largely lead to disappointing films that lacked the heart of the originals.

Bram Stoker's Dracula (1992) by Francis Ford Coppola lacked visual appeal, had terrible costumes and makeup, and included mediocre performances by talented actors. The film, which was the film my wife and I saw on our first date, was lackluster and an unworthy descendant of the Bela Lugosi film. Frank Langella was a more haunting Dracula in the 1979 film than Gary Oldman. Coppola's venture into the Universal Monster was a misfire that lacked heart.





Wolf -- full film at link --
(1994) starring Jack Nicholas Jack Nicholson (I blame my recent viewing of Back Nine at Cherry Hills for the error, but it's pretty unforgivable.) seemed more a Mike Nichols film than a true werewolf tale. It tried to hard to be topical and not enough time exploring the psychological aspects of the deconstructive narrative. James Spader plays the same character he played in Baby Boom (1987) -- with a bit of a twist. The film entertains as an allegory for how the business world can corrupt and consume, but it fails as a "horror" movie.

It wasn't until 1999 with the release of Stephen Sommers' take on The Mummy that Universal had a new "Universal Monster" movie that both captured the magic of the original and added a magic of its own. Brendan Fraser was such a compelling pulp hero, as Rick O'Connell, that it became easy to envision Fraser as the titular star of a Doc Savage film. Arnold Vosloo was a compelling Mummy with a compelling story -- audiences both loved and hated him. The film worked as blockbuster and as Mummy movie.




Sadly, Universal made audiences sit through The Mummy Returns and handed Sommers the reigns to Van Helsing -- more than balancing the 1999 gem with subsequent drivel. The Scorpion King "prequel" to The Mummy Returns was fun, and Sommers showed with GI JOE that he still knows how to have fun without needing to use Frankenstein as the circuit breaker for Dracula's electrical/mechanical Uterus (yes...that's the plot of Van Helsing).

Looking at the newly release trailer for 2010's The Wolf Man starring Benecio Del Toro as Talbot, it appears as if Universal has found the right director in Joe Johnston. Johnston has an extensive filmography that includes Hidalgo, October Sky, The Rocketeer, and the upcoming The First Avenger: Captain America. The inclusion of the talented and beautiful Emily Blunt as the romantic interest is a good choice. Blunt was one of the three bright spots in 2006's The Devil Wears Prada, the other being Meryl Streep and Stanley Tucci. The inclusion of Anthony Hopkins among the cast hints at a nice balance of drama, and Hugo Weaving adds some additional geek appeal.

If the trailer is any clue, then The Wolf Man will stand next to Sommers' The Mummy as a film that captures the old while adding new inspiration.