The look of Chaney's monster


I think Lon did a great job of portraying the monster in this fourth go-round for Universal. By this time the series had moved to B status, but the movie looks great and the monster is given plenty to do, as opposed to later movies.

I've always been fascinated by the look of Chaney's monster, particularly from certain angles. Granted his face was heavier than Karloff's, but there are several striking shots in the movie where his monster looks "other worldly". Any shot straight on didn't flatter Chaney's look, but profile shots and shots from a little higher give him a really creepy look.

I've said for many years that if the movie had given Lon more of a chance to create some pathos, the movie would be regarded better by fans -- and would possibly rank ahead of Son of Frankenstein. (I personally prefer it to Son.)

Ghost of Frankenstein is solid 1940's Universal.

Strangenstein

reply

I agree with you about pathos, and something that's always fascinated me is that Chaney, who gave his "wolf man" so much personality even under all that makeup, displayed so little as the monster.

I have all sorts of guesses, from his heart simply not being in it to wishing to create a completely different impression from Karloff's expressive interpretation. There was also the matter of the makeup itself, the application of which had by then been streamlined with a heavy rubber headpiece, which Chaney may have felt constricting, considering how much emoting he characteristically did with his eyes, brows and forehead (that sounds weird, but I can think of few actors who could mobilize their foreheads the way he did).

And there's the possibility that, knowing he'd be called upon to portray two distinct personalities by the film's closing, he thought to make the contrast between "monster" and "Igor" as striking as he could. Beyond just the voice replacement, his body and facial expressions do indicate different qualities in the final scenes from those of earlier ones.

I'm greatly fond of GoF, but my personal preference still gives SoF the edge, primarily for its unique look and the exuberant playing (and scene-stealing) of Atwill, Lugosi and Rathbone. Great fun and full of darkly humorous moments.


Poe! You are...avenged!

reply

I think Chaney's lack of emoting as the monster lies with the script. He's really given little to do in that regard and Lon played it as written (and probably as he was directed). One or two scenes where he was allowed to really emote would've added immensely to an already fun movie.

reply

I've always been a fan of Chaney's monster--the look and the performance--and I thought he expressed himself well in quite a few scenes; even though he didn't speak or growl, I thought he did a very good job of pantomiming--i.e. any of the scenes with Janet Ann Gallow; I always thought it was particularly eerie and expressive how the Monster lets Dr. Frankenstein know he wants the little girl's brain for the operation.

And the scene in the courtroom when the monster comes face to face with Frankenstein--"I never saw this, man before in my life... I know nothing about him."

reply

[deleted]

His cold, emotionless, and statuesque portrayal of the monster kind of reminds me of Michael Myers.

reply