Oh my, how the mighty hath fallen. Last year Mark Gatiss released his three-part ‘History of Horror’ (And if you haven’t seen it, I seriously recommend you search it out), and though a later episode focused on my favourite period of horror, the 70’s social commentary horror of America, the preceding episode on the 30’s and 40’s showed me just how successful and influential Universal’s horror series was. Their interpretations of Dracula and Frankenstein, in particular, have become the definitive portrayals within popular culture. But it’s all gone to pot. The rule of diminishing returns cast its magic here, people became terrified by different things, and Universal couldn’t keep up. The Universal monsters vanished off our screens and returned to the great unknown.
Even now, they are sitting on a goldmine and not really bothering to tap into it. There seemed like some sort of renaissance in such horror series might occur from Columbia in the early 90’s with the appalling ‘Bram Stoker’s Dracula’ (possibly the worst film in Francis Ford Coppola’s filmography) and the hugely underrated ‘Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein’ (in my mind the definitive adaptation), but it came to nothing. ‘Van Helsing’ seemed to be their attempt to start the ball rolling again, but look what happened there. In one fell swoop, they ruined 4 of their main characters (I’m including Hyde in this, who got further ruined in ‘The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen’ the year before). And we all know how ‘The Wolfman’ went down (Not as excruciatingly bad as everyone makes out, but still lousy enough to warrant what will likely be a dreadful DTV sort-of sequel later this year).
The point is, mainstream American horror cinema is dreadful- it’s all the same, focused on gore, not saying anything about our society (I can only think of few impressive mainstream american horrors in the last decade like ‘Saw’, ‘Paranormal Activity’, ‘The Last Exorcism’ and ‘Drag Me To Hell’, which doesn’t really count on account of being a very black comedy). The Koreans, Japanese, French and Spanish are leading the way now, and I feel it is a perfect time to bring back the Universal Monsters en masse. And here’s how…
How to do it
Don’t roll your eyes, but Universal should sit up and look at how Marvel Studios did it with ‘The Avengers’. We saw beloved icons, some we hadn’t seen before, brought to the screen and grew in popularity before a huge crossover. Now these characters are just as popular as Batman and Spiderman. You had a godfather in Kevin Fiege who, though some may not be fans, had an overriding vision he stuck to and never let up. He hired directors who were passionate about the characters and were fantastic filmmakers in their own right. And he had everyone from day one stick to a framework with elements of continuity and foreshadowing. So, to some extent, Universal should do this with their monsters.
Most of the hard work has been done for them- Marvel had to introduce every character and their origins- but most of the characters in their catalogue are instantly recognisable the world over, and in some cases are classics of literature. Everyone knows practically all of their characters, so all the films they release are testing grounds for who/what works and who/what doesn’t. Then they need someone to oversee the whole project, make it a branch of their studio, kind of like what Harry Potter was for Warner Brothers- a long-term commitment that deserves dedicated studio space and creative personnel working in sync with each other, kind of like with Tarzan in the 30’s. This structure would work in this case. You release at least one, if not two, monster movies each year so they are ingrained in the public’s consciousness. Like a bond movie, everyone expects the next Universal Monster Movie.
We are currently seeking Films contributors on WhatCulture. To find out more about the perks of being a Films contributor, click here.
2 Comments
As an lover of Universal monsters for something like 40 years I am intrigued by your thoughts on this. I have always loved Karloff and his portrayal of the monster is very well done (even if it isn’t from the novel) so the actor would have to be someone that isn’t well known. De Niro? Seriously? That didn’t work for me. All I could say to myself was …Hey! That’s Robert De Niro! I am not much of a fan of the Branagh Frankenstein though and still have yet to watch Boyle’s play so I can’t offer/add much more but as far as the Wolfman goes I really would not want to see other werewolves in that movie. Been there, done that and MORE werewolves takes away from the special nature of Larry Talbot. I also think Nolan is better off directing James Bond movies instead of a Universal monster update. Well…..I guess Nolan already has directed some James Bond movies, but they seem to feature some guy named Batman.
Dracula? The idea of a more Nosferatu prince of darkness approach could be appealing ESPECIALLY after all this Twilight nonsense!
I have to think more about the others though.I do know I WOULD enjoy a re telling of the Invisible Man that gradually is driven mad by the invisibility drug. Someone with a terrific voice like Claude Rains (not the same voice just one that sounds as good) would help.
As far as an Avengers meet up between all of them………tough to make that one work without degenerating into another Van Helsing. It would be a tremendous challenge to make that one work.
I have to agree with you on the De Niro front- not that it was bad, persay, but it was a bit underwhelming amongst everything that was great in the Branagh adaptation. But trust me, Cumberbatch in my mind is the dfinitive creature, moreso than Karloff, of who I am a huge fan. I think a Nosferatu-like Dracula would change everyone’s perceptions of Vampires again. Vampires…are not…SEXY! They are parasitic zombies out to drain people of their blood, not brooding, sparkly nymphomaniacs with big hair! And the beauty of Van Helsing is showing whoever directs a team-up how NOT to do it!