The Year in Movies: 1931 - Mystery and Horror

Dracula (1931)



It's tough not to compare Tod Browning's Dracula to Murnau's Nosferatu from nine years earlier. The ability to add sound to movies was a great reason to do a new version of Stoker's story (with all the proper rights, too, instead of sneakily changing the characters' names) and Browning was a good choice to direct it. His style is very different from Murnau's, but it's distinct and creepy and brings some beautiful atmosphere to Dracula.

But Murnau's version is actually scary and Browning's never is. Murnau's Count Orlok is a true monster, from his very appearance to his strange powers that Murnau so cleverly gives him through special effects. Browning's version - truer to Stoker's novel - is meant to be creepily charming. You don't realize he's a threat until it's too late. Which is cool, but Browning uses so little effects that even when Dracula is supposed to be frightening, it's mostly suggested by the way other characters are reacting to him.

That can be very effective sometimes, especially in the case of Dwight Frye's Renfield, who's easily the most chilling character of the film. Edward Van Sloan also adds to Dracula's menace as Van Helsing. The Van Helsing character is a giant weakness of Nosferatu, but I always have a lot of fun watching him work in Dracula, trying to first figure out who the vampire is (initially suspecting Renfield), then playing a game of wills against Bela Lugosi's monster.

I wish that Helen Chandler was a better Mina, though. Mina is the heart of any version of Dracula and it's important to get her right. Nosferatu gives her a tragically heroic role (renamed Ellen and played with full commitment by Greta Schröder). In Browning's movie, Mina is simply the MacGuffin; the object that the characters are all fighting over. She's not written very well, but she's played even worse by Chandler who never eases into the character and always reminds me that she's an actress playing a role. (Lupita Tovar is much better in the Spanish version that was shot simultaneously with Browning's using the same script and sets, but with a different director and cast. That's a different review, though.)

The movie is also dreadfully slow, but in spite of that and my misgivings about Chandler, I always enjoy revisiting Browning's Dracula for its mood and its cultural impact and especially for Lugosi, Frye, and Van Sloan. I should give a quick shout out to David Manners' John Harker, who's mostly nondescript, but has one great moment when he throws down his newspaper in disgust and leaves the room because of Van Helsing's crackpot ideas about shape-changing, immortal blood-suckers. Manners is visually pretty nondescript, but he's grown on me as an actor and I always seem to find something to enjoy in his performances.

The Sleeping Cardinal (aka Sherlock Holmes' Fatal Hour) (1931)



Unlike the silent Sherlock Holmes from 1922, this is a pretty good representation of Holmes and Watson. Holmes is smart and knows it, but his arrogance is gentler than in a lot of adaptations. Watson is always a step behind, but he's familiar with Holmes' methods and no fool. I liked these guys a lot.

I also enjoyed how much focus the movie gives to some of the supporting characters before bringing in the detectives. That helped pull me into the mystery.

M (1931)



Sort of Ocean's Eleven meets Silence of the Lambs with a gang of crooks teaming up to capture a serial killer/pedophile. Peter Lorre is super creepy and appropriately baby-faced as the murderer, but my favorite part is the cat and mouse game when the criminals have him holed up in an office building and he's working to get away from them. That section holds up next to any modern thriller.

And the film wraps up with a fascinating meditation on justice that had my son and I arguing about what the right thing to do would be. Nicely done.

The Maltese Falcon (1931)



It's been a long time since I've seen the original, so I can't compare the two versions, but I really enjoyed Ricardo Cortez as Sam Spade. He's a sleazy, but charming ladies' man in a way that Bogart can't possibly pull off. As interesting as that is, though, I couldn't really root for him the way I can with Bogart. And I kept missing Peter Lorre and Sydney Greenstreet.

It was sure great seeing Dwight Frye as a tough though. I love that guy.

The Black Camel (1931)



It's fun to see Warner Oland as Charlie Chan interacting with Bela Lugosi and Dwight Frye from the same year as Dracula. And The Black Camel a pretty good mystery story. But this is early days in the Charlie Chan series and it moves slowly. There are much better as the series goes along.

Murder at Midnight (1931)



Fun, if unbelievable and convoluted mystery about a murder that takes place during a party in front of witnesses. Once you know the relationships between the victim and the other characters, the broad strokes of the plot are predictable, but there were also a couple of twists that I didn't see coming.

Daughter of the Dragon (1931)



Aside from the problems of non-Asian actors playing Asian characters, I always enjoy Warner Oland as Charlie Chan. That doesn't make him a good Fu Manchu though. He's not threatening enough, though Daughter of the Dragon's script gives him a pretty good scheme to implement.

As the title suggests, it involves his daughter, played by Anna May Wong. She's great in the role, but the character has super shaky motivations for taking over her father's vendetta against an English family. And not just that, but she also has extremely good, personal reasons not to pick up that mission. But even though her struggle isn't really earned, the movie does some interesting things with it and there are enough pulpy elements to keep the story entertaining.

The Phantom (1931)



I usually have a high tolerance for slow-moving movies of the early '30s, especially if there's an old, dark house involved, but I couldn't finish this one. Without an interesting actor to latch onto or any sort of plot development that I haven't seen done better in countless other mystery/horror films, it became too much of a chore to keep going. Dull and unremarkable.

Frankenstein (1931)



Seen it a million times, but I'm still surprised at how scary and creepy it is. Not much faithful to the plot of Mary Shelley's novel, but very faithful to its themes.

My only issue is the way it rushes through parts of its final act. Everyone learns about the monster and processes that information really quickly. On the other hand, I'm not sure I actually want a slowed down version.

Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde (1931)



The inventive camera work can be distracting, but the performances are so earnest and March's makeup is so effective that the movie is legitimately horrifying, even today. Miriam Hopkins is especially heart-breaking as Hyde's terrorized, primary victim. March's Hyde is easily the most monstrous of movie monsters from that era.

31 Werewolves | The Return of the Vampire

Some folks apparently consider 1944's The Return of the Vampire to be an unofficial sequel to Universal's Dracula starring Bela Lugosi in 1931. They argue that Lugosi is playing Dracula again in all but name (his name in Return of the Vampire is Armand Tesla) and that it's only because the movie was produced by Columbia, not Universal, that it's not a legitimate sequel.

But there are several plot differences that keep Return of the Vampire separate from Dracula, in addition to the title character's name. First of all, Tesla's enemies don't have any direct analogues to characters from Dracula. I suppose it's possible to draw comparisons between Dracula's Mina and Ven Helsing and Return's Lady Jane and Professor Saunders, but not without a lot of stretching. And there's no one to represent Jonathan Harker or Dr. Seward.

The difference that's important to this post though is the vampire's servant, a werewolf named Andreas who does Tesla's bidding and protects his coffin. This isn't a serious werewolf movie by any stretch (actor Matt Willis' makeup is more cute than frightening), but it goes to show how big a deal werewolves were beginning to be after the success of The Wolf Man. For another B-movie werewolf story from the same time, check out my review of 1942's The Mad Monster.

Edward and Bela

I don't understand why everyone gives them such a hard time. Their movies may suck, but they're a great couple.

The 32nd Day of Dracula: Nap Time

Thanks for counting down to Halloween with me! I need a nap, so the blog's going to ease into a more manageable schedule for a little while.

The Corpse Vanishes (1942)

Who's in it?: Bela Lugosi; Luana Walters (Superman's mom in the Superman serial); Tris Coffin (King of the Rocket Men)

What's it about?: A girl reporter investigates the mysterious deaths and disappearing bodies of society brides.

How is it?: People come up to me and say, "Mike, I like Bela Lugosi in Dracula, but I what I really want to do is explore his crappy, B-movie horror films. Where should I start?"

Okay, no they don't. But if they did, I'd point them towards The Corpse Vanishes. It's full of bad actors and cornball sequences, but it's also got a some legitimately great moments and an excellent main character in Patricia Hunter (Walters) to take us through them.

The cheesy stuff is super cheesy, starting with the very first scene at a wedding in which the actor playing the groom has no idea where to look or what to do with himself during the ceremony. Hunter gets off to a shaky start too. She's callously exuberant in front of grieving family members because a dead bride means a huge story for her. I usually gloss past that kind of sloppy characterization in these movies, because I know that the filmmakers just couldn't be bothered to do something human and realistic. I think the first time I saw The Corpse Vanishes I just rolled my eyes and thought, "Oh, THAT'S what kind of movie this is."

What's surprising about The Corpse Vanishes though is that it doesn't stay that way. At least, Hunter doesn't. She turns out to be quite smart and resourceful. Lugosi's Dr. Lorenz is an incompetent body-snatcher and does a horrible job of covering his trail, but he's still smarter than the local authorities and has gotten away with several murders/corpse-thefts before the movie even begins. Hunter puts it all together though and chases down the story, seeing it as her way off the newspaper's society page where she's been stuck for a while.

Gender politics are all unspoken in the movie, but they're present. No one ever says why Hunter's been stuck covering weddings, but it's obvious that her editor doesn't have a lot of confidence in her, even when she comes up with reasonable theories about what's going on with the missing brides. He shoos her off on her story mostly to get rid of her and later seems to forget that he gave her permission to investigate. Because of how little he supports her, I almost forgive her for her early, inappropriate excitement over the opportunity to report a real story.

It leads her of course to Lorenz' creepy house full of misfits, hidden tunnels, and secret laboratories. Things get silly there - I especially love the part where a mute necrophiliac stalks Hunter while eating a turkey leg - but Hunter keeps it all grounded enough that it never goes off the rails. I also like her relationship with Dr. Foster (Coffin), a local physician helping Lorenz try to cure his wife. Foster is kind and appropriately concerned for Hunter's safety, but he never tries to swoop in and take over. She's the star and he supportively lets her be it. That's pretty refreshing for 1942.

Rating: Good.

31 Days of Dracula | John Carradine (1944)

Unlike Frankenstein, Dracula didn't get a lot of direct sequels at Universal. There was Dracula's Daughter in 1936 and Son of Dracula in '43, but neither featured the Count. Dracula's Daughter had Edward Van Sloan reprise his role as Van Helsing against a new threat; Son of Dracula stars Lon Chaney, Jr. as the title character.

It wasn't until 1944's House of Frankenstein - when Universal decided to put its three biggest monster stars in the same movie - that another Count Dracula was called for. I haven't been able to learn why Lugosi didn't return for it - he was clearly willing to do it for Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein - but for whatever reason, the role went to John Carradine for both House of Frankenstein and it's sequel, House of Dracula.

Carradine's difficult to get used to for those expecting a Lugosi-like Count, but he does have his charms. He's still cultured and refined, his tall, lanky frame is imposing, and he's got a great, deep voice. Of the three Dracula's we've looked at so far, he's probably the closest to Bram Stoker's description. It's too bad the two movies are so silly, but they're also a lot of fun. House of Frankenstein features Karloff's return to the series (as the mad scientist this time) and J. Carrol Naish (who appears in tonight's 50 Horror Classics movie) as his hunchbacked companion. House of Dracula is probably most notable for having a pretty, female hunchback.

31 Days of Dracula | Bela Lugosi (1931)

As Caffeinated Joe said in yesterday's comments, this month is the COUNTdown to Halloween wherein we visit with 31 different Draculas (or close derivations). I wish I had room in the subject line to include COUNTdown as a permanent title, because that's awesome.

I don't know what's left to say about Bela Lugosi's version of the Count from Tod Browning's classic film. He's not as terrifying as Max Schreck's, but he's got that suave, exotic thing down and man, that thing he does with his hands. It's worth remembering that he reprised the role in Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein, which I'm guessing most people reading this have seen. But if you haven't, please reward yourself and check it out. It's hilarious, but Lugosi and the other monsters (Lon Chaney Jr as the Wolf Man and Glenn Strange as Frankenstein's Monster) play it totally straight.

I should also mention that when Browning was filming his version of Dracula, a Spanish team used the same set and script to make a Spanish-language version. It's actually better than Browning's in several respects, the most memorable to me being the Spanish version of Mina. I really can't stand Helen Chandler's performance in the English version. It's worth watching not only because it's good, but it's also fascinating from a film study standpoint to see how different filmmakers made use of the same resources.

The biggest thing that the Spanish version doesn't have though (besides Browning's style) is Lugosi. It's an iconic performance and had a bigger influence on future interpretations than any other.

White Zombie (1932)

Who's in 't?: Th' scurvy Bela Lugosi

What's 't about?: A lily-livered swabbie hires a pox-faced bilge-rat (Lugosi) in Haiti t' enslave a beautiful lass t' his will. Th' lass' husband objects.

How be 't?: Thar be only two good things about this movie. First, th' sets an' matte paintings create a fine, cliff-top castle fer Lugosi`s character t'inhabit an' make a pleasin' spot fer th' climax. Second: Lugosi's beard's a right beauty. Other than that, th' story be straightforward an' dull, th' actin' be horrid, an' th' editin' be non-existent. None o' th' characters act like real swabbies an' th' scenes drag on longer than a list o' Blackbeard's wives. Some o' th' zombies be a'frightenin' t' eyeball, but others be downright comical. None o' them be as sound as th' ones in Night o' th' Livin' Dead.

Rating: Mutinous Bad.

(Today is National Talk Like a Pirate Day, that's why)

One Body Too Many (1944)

Who's in it?: Jack Haley (the Tin Woodsman in Wizard of Oz); Jean Parker (The Gunfighter); Bela Lugosi

What's it about?: A dead millionaire leaves a complicated will, forcing his potential heirs to spend time in a dark mansion. Naturally, someone starts to kill them off.

How is it?: Haley gives this comedy a lot of heart as a timid insurance salesman who shows up for an appointment he booked a month before the millionaire died. Parker plays the millionaire's favorite niece and she and Haley fall for each other and try to keep each other alive.

The humor is farcical rather than joke-based, so while there aren't many laugh out loud moments, it's a lot of fun. Haley strikes a nice balance in his performance. He's comically frightened without being slapsticky about it. The funniest stuff has to do with Lugosi and Blanche Yurka as the millionaire's butler and maid. They're as suspicious as anyone and are constantly offering (possibly poisoned) coffee to the rest of the characters. Lugosi's disappointment each time he's refused is pricelessly hilarious.

Rating: Good. It's worth watching especially if you like movies about old, dark houses with lots of secret passages, but Haley is also charming. If you're a fan of Lugosi at all though, it's a must see.

Invisible Ghost (1941)

Who's in it?: Bela Lugosi; Polly Ann Young (The Man from Utah); James McGuire (Sands of Iwo Jima); Clarence Muse (Shadow of a Doubt, Porgy and Bess)

What's it about?: Lugosi suffers episodes of temporary insanity during which he murders members of his household, but doesn't remember doing so later. This isn't a spoiler, because the movie never tries to hide what's going on. The mystery isn't in who's killing people, but in how he'll get caught.

How is it?: Really silly. The source of Lugosi's fits is ridiculous and complicated. His wife ran off years ago with another man and apparently died in a car crash. She didn't really die though, but has been kept in a cellar on Lugosi's estate by Lugosi's gardener. The gardener has been trying to nurse her back to health in order to return her to Lugosi, but he also realizes that Lugosi probably wouldn't appreciate being lied to all these years, so he's procrastinating about getting her back home. In the meantime, she occasionally escapes the cellar (she's not locked in or anything) and whenever Lugosi sees her wandering the grounds, he goes into a fit of rage and kills a member of his household staff.

Still, for all the goofiness, it's hard to dislike Bela Lugosi sleepwalking his way around a spooky house and strangling people with his robe. And there are some genuinely creepy scenes of the wife appearing outside windows when she escapes. As far as I can tell, she's the "invisible ghost" since Lugosi's the only one who sees her and she's supposed to be dead, but the title could also apply to Lugosi himself since he's the unseen killer stalking the household.

Young plays Lugosi's daughter, Muse has a delightful role as Lugosi's trusty butler, and McGuire plays dual parts as twin brothers, one of whom is engaged to Young and accused of committing the murders.

Rating: Okay.

Black Dragons (1942)

Who's in it?: Bela Lugosi; Joan Barclay (The Corpse Vanishes); George Pembroke (Invisible Ghost); Clayton Moore (The Lone Ranger)

What's it about?: One by one, Lugosi kills off a secret cabal of U.S. fifth columnists during WWII. Clayton Moore investigates the murders.

How is it?: It's not a horror movie, but gets into the 50 Horror Classics collection simply for having Lugosi in it. Most of the film is an interesting spy thriller. Lugosi moves into the home of one of the columnists (Pembroke) and uses it as his base of operations while he murders the others, leaving their bodies on the steps of the Japanese embassy with Japanese daggers in their hands. Barclay plays Pembroke's niece, who also lives in Pembroke's house and seems more interested in Lugosi's character than she is in Moore's G-Man who has the hots for her.

Unfortunately, the movie drives completely off the rails in the last few minutes as Lugosi's motivations are revealed. SPOILER: He's actually a former Nazi plastic surgeon who transformed Japanese spies (the titular Black Dragons) into U.S. industrialists so that they could become the fifth columnists. They betrayed him though and locked him in prison, but just HAPPENED to put him in a cell with a guy who looks exactly like Lugosi and was being released the next day. No bonus points for figuring out how Lugosi escaped. The movie was doing so well up to that point and would have been Good if only it hadn't tried for a shocking revelation.

Rating: Okay.

Elsewhere... Mad scientists pose as vampires

Flick Attack!



Flick Attack is a new blog by the folks behind Bookgasm, the awesome book review blog. They can explain what Flick Attack's about much better than I can:

We’ll have no news. No scoops. No rumors. No set reports. Just one kick-ass review a day, Monday through Friday, with the occasional article on Saturday to make your weekend that much awesomer.

Yep, that’s right: Every day you get one review, so take it or leave it. While everyone else pees their pants over the latest multiplex releases, we’re gonna dig through our archives and toss out something that’s not playing a theater near you. Maybe you’ve heard of it; maybe you haven’t; maybe it’s easy to find; maybe it’s not — doesn’t matter. You will read it, and you will like it.

So if you like discovering cinematic trash-terpieces, you’ve come to the right place. We’ve got horror, sci-fi, action, kung fu, comedy and sex. But no drama. If it’s tears you want, we’ll be happy to kick you in the shin.

And they're letting me play with them. My first review - for the Bela Lugosi masterpiece (and possible origin of vampires' saying "Bleh!") My Son the Vampire - went up last Monday.

Food or Comics?



This week's comics on a budget column included Beasts of Burden/Hellboy and Sky Pirates of Valendor amongst other things.

Boneyard



Finally, this week's Gorillas Riding Dinosaurs was a look at Richard Moore's Boneyard.

The 31 Monsters of Halloween: Ygor

Even the phones are dead!

The Devil Bat

If you've been paying attention to the Movie Queue section of my sidebar you may have noticed that I've been watching a lot of Bela Lugosi movies lately. I started around Halloween and I'm just now getting a bit burnt out, so The Devil Bat will be the last one for a while. But it was a good one to finish the marathon with.

I'm going back and forth about whether or not I like the story. It's easy for me to divorce the story from the cheesy effects and some of the B-level acting, but even then I'm not sure. The story goes that Dr. Paul Carruthers (Bela Lugosi) is the most beloved man in the small town where he lives. He's kind and friendly and apparently a good physician. What people don't know is that he's actually conducting bizarre experiments in a hidden laboratory in his home. He's turning ordinary bats into giant monsters and sending them out to kill.

In addition to being the local physician, Carruthers is also under contract to a local, but powerful company that makes health and beauty aids. The company is owned by two families who made their fortunes off a skin cream formula that Carruthers invented, so it's no coincidence that all the bats' victims are members of those families. Carruthers has just invented a new aftershave lotion that he asks his victims to try out before it goes on the market. Once each person puts it on, the giant bat hones in on it and attacks the scent on the victim's kneck.

It's a clever way to commit murder and the elements of freakishly large bats and hidden labs are awesome. My problem is that I never really got Carruthers' motives. We learn that he wasn't cheated out of the skin cream money, but rather that the families had wanted to profit share with him and he'd demanded ten grand in cash. Now, he's angry enough to want revenge and the only explanation we have is that he's completely insane. That's all good, I guess, except that he's so convincing as the kindly doctor and we're supposed to believe that he's been that convincing for years. I had a hard time buying that someone crazy enough to raise giant bats and send them murdering innocent people for a mistake he brought on himself would be able to put up a convincing front for very long.

There's a scene towards the end of the movie though where Lugosi kind of sells it. He finally cracks in front of someone and you can just sort of see that it's been a struggle for him to remain so friendly all these years. It doesn't make the whole thing suddenly plausible, but it makes an effort. And really, I'm glad that they didn't make the families out to be evil barons who intentionally screwed poor, old, kindly Dr. Carruthers. You really feel bad for them and want to see Carruthers get what's coming to him.

Okay, I've just convinced myself that I like the story.

This isn't Lugosi's best work. (I'd call that The Invisible Ray and maybe The Black Cat. I like him better as a good guy because it's so against type for him.) But it's definitely an above average role for Lugosi. He switches personalities flawlessly and you completely buy that he's a well-masked madman, even if you don't get how he's doing it.