The Ape Man: 1943

   And so it begins.  My gorilla-based movie marathon is now in effect, all until I get to my twentieth review.  So sit back and enjoy!

   Conducting weird scientific experiments, crazed Dr. James Brewster, aided by his colleague Dr. Randall, has managed to transform himself into a hairy, stooped-over ape-man. Desperately seeking a cure, Brewster believes only an injection of recently-drawn human spinal fluid will prove effective. With Randall refusing to help him, it falls to Brewster and his captive gorilla to find appropriate donors.

   

   "The Ape Man", is an interesting little piece of work that famous actor Bela Lugosi just happened to be a part of.  His acting is...well, let’s just say that it’s the same as any other film he's been in.  He does what he can with what he has, and what he can do is act.  His character as The Ape Man looks a bit like The Wolf Man with a hunched back, but he still has a human side to him.  But that's kind of what I'm trying to get at; none of the characters have character added onto them during the movie.  Your first impression of every actor will stay the same throughout the sixty three minuet duration.  I do like how the majority of the film focuses on the character that is the most interesting, and that's The Ape Man.  However there is less emphases on who he was before he was turned into a human/ape hybrid.  But I suppose that doesn't really matter because aside from his appearance and posture Bela Lugosi doesn't act any differently from a human being.

    The sound quality ranges throughout the duration of the film. In the exposition it is very poor, but nearing the end you begin to understand the dialog better.  Being this not a huge problem at first glance, it does have an effect on the movie in its entirety.  Since the sound is not that great during the beginning, there leaves allot to be desired to understanding the exposition of the film.  To be fair though, you do infer what you missed by the context of the movie later on.  Speaking of, the movie’s plot has a very distinct resemblance to, "The Invisible Man".  You have a scientist who says, "Stand back!  I'm going to try science!", and in effect has something go horribly wrong.  The scientist then spends the remainder of his days trying to concoct an antidote in order to reverse the effect.  They will never learn.

   "The Ape Man", was an interesting movie.  I managed to have a neutral feeling from start to finish.  Just from the name I could tell that this wasn't going to be that great of a flick.  Though to be fair it’s not something I wouldn't mind viewing again.  However, I do respect Bela Lugosi and I don't think that this movie respected him as an actor.   After all of the sophisticated roles that he's been in, it’s really insulting that he be re-casted as a human-monkey hybrid!  It’s the last thing I would expect from a horror icon such as him.  But, alas, any good business is better at marketing than at what they actually do, and I believe this is the case for this film.  They must have known that if you take a big star and put him/her in a not so big production, it’ll pay off.  I will admit that this was not Bela Lugosi's best role, but if you're interested in a bit of this legends history, I would recommend this to you.  Besides, at sixty three minutes, what have you got to lose?

 Verdict

I give this film 4 spinal fluid injections out of 10

 Note:  It has come to my attention that I have looked over one major problem.  This movie is a virtual remake of, "The Ape", from 1940.  I should have reviewed that movie before this one but all I really want to do now is post this. So join me next time as I delve into the first installment of this film starring Boris Carloff!

 

Next Review:  The Ape 1940

Dracula: 1931

Synopsis

The ancient vampire Count Dracula arrives in England and begins to prey upon the virtuous young Mina. 

   Happy Halloween everyone!  For today's review I needed to have something special, and I think that Iv'e found it.  "Dracula", from 1931.  For anyone that knows film, this was a very important time because it was the birth of a new era, "The Golden Age".  This was the time that all the iconic monsters came out; The Wolf Man, The creature from the black lagoon, The Mummy, Frankenstein, and Dracula.  This is a very important movie because it marked many timeless classics to remembered forever.  One of the many aspects about the film generates from the Hungarian actor, Bela Lugosi.  Of course this was a sudonym for his real name, Bela Blasko.  But to be respectful I don't refer to him by this name.  His character of Dracula would forever set the way future Dracula's acted, sounded, and looked.  But, it's a bit confusing being the fact that, "Nosferatu", the original Dracula, takes place in Germany, but the icon of Dracula is Hungarian.  But aside from that, these two films should be looked at separately, mainly because, "Dracula" had the film rights to be based off of the Bram Stoker novel, and, "Nosferatu" didn't.  


   Lets talk about the atmosphere.  For any good film, an effective ambiance is required, and Todd Browning pulled this off very accurately.  Every type of horror setting is put into play. There are dark, dilapidated castle walls, bats, carriages, dungeons, cobwebs, and midnight fog.  Everything about it just screams horror authenticity.  The music, if any, consists of, "Swan Lake", which only appears in the credits.

   I really like this.  It kind of shows the unlimited occasions you could use this in.  I find that if you are watching this film and not the play, "Swan Lake", you'll find that its quite intriguing to have music that feels so different from other horror films.  But it feels like it's meant to be there, somehow.  Bela Lugosi's Dracula is much the same as it is different from other Dracula's.  He is very humble, and polite with his victims, unlike Christopher Lee, in the Hammer films, but I'll get into that later.    


  Now, to be fair, I don't really know which of the movies follows the book the closest, and I still can't decide which of the films I like the best.  However these aren't all of the Dracula films.  Many productions of this horror icon have been re-imagined, remade, and resurrected, more notably from Hammer Films.  This was a production agency used solely to bring the golden age back to life.  Every, and I mean every monster was brought back in their own feature length film. As for the quality of it all, I cannot say because I have never seen a Hammer Horror Film, I just know of it.  


  A very special thing about this film in particular, is the fact that, with the golden age, comes the age of sound.  So, if you have ever seen, "Dracula" before, you have watched the first horror talkie.  However, my only complaint is that although there is talking, there isn't any music to back it up.  It's in this way that, "Dracula" can get a little slow.  But I think that the character's make up a bit for that.  I'm talking about the actor that plays Renfield, Dwight Fry.  His character in, "Nosferatu", was the one that sells Count Orlok his house.  However, in this film he slowly goes crazy and kind of reminds me of the character from, "The Vampire Bat", who also goes insane.  You know, there seems to be a pattern with characters in Vampire film history.  There always seems to be a crazy person in each of the films.  I don't know why.


  Anyway this concludes my review of, "Dracula".  Now for my verdict.  This was a very good movie.  It was mostly from Bela Lugosi, but it's different than, "White Zombie", because in that movie he was holding everything up.  In this, he deserves to act with these people, because they aren't actually that bad.  The only problem that I might have for this film is that there isn't any music forgetting the opening credits.  I think I'll give this film a similar rating to that of, "Nosferatu", because I like them both, but in different ways.  Dracula had a sense of great feeling with each role and was pure horror at its finest, and, "Nosferatu" gave off a captivating conceptual feel to the architecture and characters around them.  I don't think that you have to even like horror to enjoy this.  Unfortunately I can't show, "Dracula" to you on this site.  If your lucky enough to be able to rent this masterpiece, I encourage you to check it out, and Happy Halloween!

I give this film 8 "Children of the night" out of 10 

P.S

   

   I really liked how this review turned out, and I'm going to try and to review a, "Golden Age" film every Halloween.  Thanks for reading.

      

White Zombie: 1932

  
   This film was made during the worst part of the depression by  Victor Halperin and produced by an independent studio.  It was later released by United Artists. The film is called,"White Zombie" and happens to be one of the first (if not the first) zombie movie.  It stars Bela Lugosi as Murder Legendre, a voodoo master.  What you may want to know is that zombies were portrayed as hypnotized servants and not cannibals from beyond the grave.  These zombies are neither dead nor alive.  


   When the film starts we get to see the, "Evil Stare" of Bela Lugosi and if your're a big fan of his work which I know I am, this stare is one of his iconic looks that he brings along in most of his villainous roles.  I found out that this film says it takes place in Haiti which may have been appropriate being that there might have been superstitions about zombies existing in that area.  There is a sort of forcefulness with Murder's performance when bargaining with the owner of the mansion.  He knows that the man will do anything for Madeline, the women that he is in love with, so he, in a way has much more power over him.  I believe that this girl is the owners weakness and Murder knows this.  


   I also find it interesting how Murder gets Madeline under his spell.  The doll of her carved out of wax was very creative and I believe spawned many other techniques for voodoo charms.  Just remember that this was one of the first.  I very much like the performance of the owners struggle to let go of Madeline's ,"death", and you begin to see how much he cared for her.  


In conclusion:  Most if not all of the characters in ,"White Zombie" were forgettable with the exception of Bela Lugosi.  It was as if his performance was holding up the entire film and although I consider him to be one of the greatest horror film actors ever, even with him staring I would pass this film.  I can give the excuse of viewing this purely because of Lugosi's performance.  However if I wanted to watch Bela Lugosi, then I would have watched ,"Dracula".  To add on, there were no action scenes if you could even count the climax as being one and no pay off whatsoever.  After you view this film for yourself and feel differently about my opinion, please tell me what you thought in the comment section below.  Thank you.


3 stars


Live the life surreal,


Vérité 

    Next Review:  Revolt of the Zombies 1936