HORROR MOVIES 101

The Invisible Man

So we've talked in this group about many of the classic monsters usually associated with the Universal classic horror movies such as Dracula, Frankenstein and his monster, and the Wolfman.

I recently just saw The Invisible Man after reading the H.G. Wells novel.  Would you say this character fits into the same category as the above named monsters?  I noticed that there are actually more Invisible Man sequels than Wolf Man sequels, and maybe just as many as there are Dracula sequels.

I think he's actually potentially the most frightening of all of these villians.

Re:The Invisible Man

Risselada:

So we've talked in this group about many of the classic monsters usually associated with the Universal classic horror movies such as Dracula, Frankenstein and his monster, and the Wolfman.

I recently just saw The Invisible Man after reading the H.G. Wells novel.  Would you say this character fits into the same category as the above named monsters?  I noticed that there are actually more Invisible Man sequels than Wolf Man sequels, and maybe just as many as there are Dracula sequels.

I think he's actually potentially the most frightening of all of these villians.

I cannot let this one just go by ...   The Invisible Man  was a GREAT movie!   Directed by the same insane genious who gave us  Frankenstein  and  The Bride Of Frankenstein .   The title character was played by a very young Claude Raines who later went on to become Lawrence Talbot's father in  The Wolf Man .   I am happy that you enjoyed this movie, Rizzo, and I notice that you have been watching a few of these 'oldies-but-goodies' of late and you seem to be enjoying them....   I have to ask you about this.   Do you think these movies are pretty cool or what?   Have you watched  The Hunchback Of Notre Dame  yet?

   Anyhow, I think there was only one official 'Universal' sequel to  The Invisible Man  and that was  The Invisible Man Returns .   I think there were a few remakes and TV shows but those don't really count as 'sequels'.   Unfortunately, or rather Fortunately, The Invisible Man was never included in any of the great 'monster-mash' movies of the 30's and 40's .   Each and every one of these movies counted as a sequel to The Wolfman, Dracula, and The Frankenstein Monster.   He did 'show up' in that Abbott and Costello movie... 

   And, yeah, the Invisible Man is really not very scary ...   he is nothing but a man only you cant see him.   Have you ever tried to fight someone in total darkness to where you can't see at all?   It is not pleasant but it can be done.   Who would you rather be locked in a room with; The Invisible Man, Hannibal Lector or Dracula?

                                                                         < GOR > 

Re:The Invisible Man

Dr_Gor:

I cannot let this one just go by ...   The Invisible Man  was a GREAT movie!   Directed by the same insane genious who gave us  Frankenstein  and  The Bride Of Frankenstein .   The title character was played by a very young Claude Raines who later went on to become Lawrence Talbot's father in  The Wolf Man .   I am happy that you enjoyed this movie, Rizzo, and I notice that you have been watching a few of these 'oldies-but-goodies' of late and you seem to be enjoying them....   I have to ask you about this.   Do you think these movies are pretty cool or what?   Have you watched  The Hunchback Of Notre Dame  yet?

Yes, I have been watching many of these lately, and I have been enjoying some of them.  So far those three directed by James Whale are definitely my favorite.

I have not yet watched The Hunchback of Notre Dame, although I have been meaning to.  I have been thinking I'll like it a lot actually.  One because it's rated so well on sites where people can rate movies, but also because it's directed by William Dieterle.  And although I've only seen one other movie by him so far, The Devil and Daniel Webster, it's one of my very favorite movies.

I notice that there is also a version of The Hunchback of Notre Dame that was released in 1923 staring Lon Chaney.  Have you seen this one?  How does it stack up?

Dr_Gor:

Anyhow, I think there was only one official 'Universal' sequel to  The Invisible Man  and that was  The Invisible Man Returns .   I think there were a few remakes and TV shows but those don't really count as 'sequels'.   Unfortunately, or rather Fortunately, The Invisible Man was never included in any of the great 'monster-mash' movies of the 30's and 40's .   Each and every one of these movies counted as a sequel to The Wolfman, Dracula, and The Frankenstein Monster.   He did 'show up' in that Abbott and Costello movie... 

Well the featurette on the The Invisible Man DVD mentiones The Invisible Woman, Invisible Agent, and The Invisible Man's Revenge as all being sequels.  And they were all made by Universal.  Have you seen any of them?  They say the effects in the last one were some of the best.

Dr_Gor:

And, yeah, the Invisible Man is really not very scary ...   he is nothing but a man only you cant see him.   Have you ever tried to fight someone in total darkness to where you can't see at all?   It is not pleasant but it can be done.   Who would you rather be locked in a room with; The Invisible Man, Hannibal Lector or Dracula?

I don't know.  The Invisible Man does have a lot of abnormal strength and is quite megomaniacally deranged.  Although if you think about it, he is totally naked so he probably gets cold and more suseptible to blows to his testicles.  I guess the last question would depend on further context.  Why are we in the room?  What kind of a room is it?  What's in the room?  Things like that.  But I'd love to play your game, so give me some specifics.

Re:The Invisible Man

   Ok, Rizzo, first about the 1939 version of  The Hunchback Of Notre Dame .   I am assuming you recall a rather lengthy conversation we had about this movie in another group.   I mentioned that I did not particularly like Lon Chaney Sr.'s 1923 silent version.    This is an anomaly as I am a HUGE Lon Chaney fan and I have more than a few of his movies in my collection.   His version of  The Hunchback  was my least favorite of his movies  ( The Phantom Of The Opera was my favorite) and here is why...   I was spoiled in that I had seen the 1939 version first and it instantly became one of my favorite movies of all time.   And it still is!   And then I read the novel in elementary school and it became one of my favorite books!  (I have read it more than once).   There were a couple of interesting later versions of this movie, one starring Anthony Quinn and another starring Anthony Hopkins, but none of these hit the nail on the head like Charles Laughton's performance in the 1939 version.   By the way, as I mentioned before, NO movie version has yet depicted the rather dark and creepy ending in the novel.   I think it might be time for a Peter Jackson remake of this one...

   Back to Lon Chaney ...   The reason I did not like his version of  The Hunchback  was not for anything he did...  as always he did his own make-up and stunts and they were nothing short of astounding...   but because the writers/producers/director basically 'raped' this story and tried to boil it down to it's basic elements to make a 60 or 70 minute silent movie.   It failed.

    About our 'game' ...  (and PLEASE,  any of you other 'horror-hounds' may jump in whenever you want) ...   Ok, I will get specific...   What if 'Jigsaw' were to lock you in that basement restroom with one of the three aforementioned homicidal maniacs and says that whoever lives will get to go...   I don't know about you but I would take The Invisible Man...

                                                                       < GOR >   

Re:The Invisible Man

Alright, sorry Gor.  I do know feel like you have said all of this stuff about The Hunchback of Notredame movies before.  I guess I have a bad memory.  But I appreciate you going over it again.

Dr_Gor:

About our 'game' ...  (and PLEASE,  any of you other 'horror-hounds' may jump in whenever you want) ...   Ok, I will get specific...   What if 'Jigsaw' were to lock you in that basement restroom with one of the three aforementioned homicidal maniacs and says that whoever lives will get to go...   I don't know about you but I would take The Invisible Man.

Ok, well in that situation I may choose The Invisible Man only because in a windowless room I could maybe smash out the lights and then his invisibility wouldn't be useful anymore.  And while in that situation Hannibal would be at the same disadvantage, he's probably a bit more clever and sadistic.  And Dracula I would never want to fight in the dark.

But if it was in a room in the middle of the day with windows and sunlight, I may have to pick someone other than The Invisible Man, unless there were like bags of flour laying around or some other shit I could try to throw on him to see him.

Re:The Invisible Man

The Hunchback of Notredame is one of my favorites too BUT it's so sad, I just can't watch it too much (and I agree with you about the silent version, it just doesn't stack up to the 1930s version).  Doc, what is the ending in the book?  I know, I know, I should read it but I don't think I can bring myself to read the story because it just breaks my heart (and I have enough things in my life to do that right now). 

I agree with Rizzo, if it's in the daylight and I can't see someone that is trying to kill me, I think that would scare me more than Frankenstein (of course Dracula in the day light would be much, much better because he would be a pile of ash...hee hee).  And I think what made the invisible man more scary is that he started to go crazy and was not a rationale man anymore (of course not as crazy as Hollow Man).  Insane people scare me more than monsters - Hannibal Lecter would fall under that category too. 

Re:The Invisible Man

divinemsjunebug:

(of course Dracula in the day light would be much, much better because he would be a pile of ash...hee hee).

Not to nitpick, but actually the real original Dracula would be just fine in the daylight, and just as powerful and nimble from what I remember of the book.  His only restriction during the day is that he can't transform into other creatures like wolves or bats.  I think Nosferatu was the first Dracula movie that indroduced the idea of Dracula disintigrating in daylight.

Am I right here?  Gor??

Re:The Invisible Man

Risselada:

divinemsjunebug:

(of course Dracula in the day light would be much, much better because he would be a pile of ash...hee hee).

Not to nitpick, but actually the real original Dracula would be just fine in the daylight, and just as powerful and nimble from what I remember of the book.  His only restriction during the day is that he can't transform into other creatures like wolves or bats.  I think Nosferatu was the first Dracula movie that indroduced the idea of Dracula disintigrating in daylight.

Am I right here?  Gor??

   You are quite correct, Rizzo.   I was going to bring that point up and you gave me the perfect opportunity.   In ALL of the original Vampire lore sunlight is NOT dangerous to Vampires.   There are several old stories of Vampires walking around in daylight with no ill effects at all (including 'Dracula')...   this was one of the 'embellishments' that were later added to the the Vampire myth.   (super-human strength was another)....   And I think you may be correct in assuming that  Nosferatu  was the very first case of a Vampire being killed by sunlight.   In the original  Dracula , the Vampire has an IRON stake pounded through his heart and is beheaded by a bowie knife...   I think this would kill most ANYBODY or ANYTHING!   There is an old joke about 'if you think somebody is a Vampire, pound a wooden stake through their heart and if they die you were correct' ...   much like the Salem Witch Trials...   I think that this (sunlight) part of of the myth comes from the Vampire's preference to hunt at night...   much like the shark or panther...

                                                                       < GOR >     

Re:The Invisible Man

Dr_Gor:

You are quite correct, Rizzo.   I was going to bring that point up and you gave me the perfect opportunity.   In ALL of the original Vampire lore sunlight is NOT dangerous to Vampires.   There are several old stories of Vampires walking around in daylight with no ill effects at all (including 'Dracula')...   this was one of the 'embellishments' that were later added to the the Vampire myth.   (super-human strength was another)....   And I think you may be correct in assuming that  Nosferatu  was the very first case of a Vampire being killed by sunlight.   In the original  Dracula , the Vampire has an IRON stake pounded through his heart and is beheaded by a bowie knife...   I think this would kill most ANYBODY or ANYTHING!   There is an old joke about 'if you think somebody is a Vampire, pound a wooden stake through their heart and if they die you were correct' ...   much like the Salem Witch Trials...   I think that this (sunlight) part of of the myth comes from the Vampire's preference to hunt at night...   much like the shark or panther...

                                                                       < GOR >     

However he does need to sleep in boxes of dirt from a certain part of his homeland.  I remember that is essential, but I can't remember the specifics.

Re:The Invisible Man

Risselada:

                                                                      

However he does need to sleep in boxes of dirt from a certain part of his homeland.  I remember that is essential, but I can't remember the specifics.

    The Vampire must sleep in his grave, be it by day or night.   According to the older legends, the Vampire would exit and re-enter his grave either by clawing and digging through the earth or by turning into a 'mist' which could exit and enter a grave through a few small holes, appearantly neatly drilled into the earth, with no explanation as to how, that extend the 4 to 6 feet to the coffin below...   It is historical fact that several dead bodies were dug up and 'killed again' during this Vampire craze in Europe.

   I may be wrong, but I believe it was Bram Stoker and  Dracula  that invented that theory of the Vampire spreading a layer of dirt from his grave in the bottom of his casket and traveling the world...

                                                                           < GOR >