Every time I watch this movie I think about how her entire existence was wrapped up in the whims of men. Decided when she lived and when she died. Wanted to try and capture that.

(More of my work can be found here )

I’ve been digitizing our old family VHS tapes and found this full recording of Beetlejuice’s Rock and Roll Graveyard Revue from December 2000.
It’s the original version of the show, with Beetlejuice and the classic Universal Monsters performing on the old castle stage.
Pretty fun piece of Universal Monsters history that I thought this group might enjoy.

https://youtu.be/9INr4VE3lU0?is=tLi_QH9UtgBStULU

Anyone play this board game? I do at least once a year every October. Well designed. Good solo mode too.
I just lost the game because the Wolf Man ate too many villagers.

I am a new fan to UM, and I am loving the films! Frankenstein (1931) has to be my favorite so far, but there is this flaw that James Rolfe pointed out: why did Fritz help Henry create the monster only to torment it after wards?

Was it because he knew it wasn’t going to turn out how Henry wanted it to be and he couldn’t keep him self calmed any longer so he decided to mess with the monster?

Did he just wanted to abuse him after so many of years of being treated like the bottom of the ladder?

it's an interesting scenario because one he'd still be viewed as a freak by society but as a paid spectacle instead of an outcast hiding itself away from humanity. With being a monster that's both an abberation of both science & God would immediately make him a top attraction no doubt.

Plus & this is more of a possibility, I'd imagine the circus freaks becoming a sort of community to him. From the simple performers, but most specially to the people with physical differences, rare medical conditions or unique talents who'd understand exactly what it feels like to be rejected by polite society. But I'd imagine they'd be scared of him at first & would experience a sort of existential reckoning learning about his origins.

It's an interesting scenario and the result changes depending on which version of story & thee Monster you pick either the Boris Karloff version or the Book one.

Also depends on the type of circus by time period since the og Frankenstein took place in the 1700s it'd be a circus from that time period which I read aslo has freakshow attractions. For Universal's Frankenstein it would be a 1930s ones where the freakshow attractions were heavily commercialized & popularized by Barnum & Bailey.

Thoughts?

Cleaning up some things in my basement, I came across 6 of the original 8 still sealed! These are still my favorite cover arts.

Abbot and Costello meet Phantom would have been cool imo.

Claude made by Casino Casual :)

Still looking for Wolfman or Mummy.

On the one hand, I think the Monster might have been just as happy with another male monster as he would've been with a female monster as long as they loved him (romantically or platonically). When he was with the old blind man, they had a genuinely happy platonic relationship.

On the other hand, when Dr. Pretorius says he's going to make him a "woman friend," the Monster says "Woman...friend...wife." Of course, there's the possibility that he doesn't know what a wife actually is, and thinks it's just that-- a "woman friend." The only exposure he could've had to the concept was his encounter with Henry's wife, Elizabeth, but that doesn't necessarily mean he understands that she's Henry's romantic partner rather than his friend. It's worth noting that when he first sees the Bride, he asks "friend?" instead of "wife," despite having heard the word before.

As far as sexual attraction goes, I don't think that had anything to do with it, because the Monster most likely doesn't know the facts of life. I doubt that anyone ever gave him "the talk."

Personally, I think Henry should've just made a Franken-dog for the Monster and called it a day.

Loosely interconnected movies straight to streaming based on the original monster designs but making the story structure a bit more modern. Let me know your thoughts!

Does anyone know if 19 crimes did a Halloween theme this year? I got Dracula a few years back for my birthday and my fiancé got me bride of Frankenstein last year 💚

This might be an unpopular opinion, but as much as this film was beautiful, historically accurate, and a pretty neat adaption of the actual "Invisible Man" novel, I think there was some lost potential that would've made this film a bit more thrilling and engaging that could've truly enhanced the "horror" aspect of Griffin's character more.

Instead of the lead protagonist Adeline knowing who Griffin is from when she studied at university with her late husband Kempt for instance from the start, why not Griffin be some obscure pupil that Kempt studied with in his past that he never bothers mentioning to Adeline as Kempt very much didn't tell his wife? That way Griffin is this mysterious stranger that Adeline has no clue about and there's things Adeline truly doesn't know about her dead husband; secrets kept from her as he never truly respected her due to only viewing her as a wife with wifely duties and not a partner with the same scientific interests as him.

For some reason, this version of the film tried making Kempt out to be a good guy, which honestly didn't do much since he wasn't alive in the film to be a character other than being the determining factor to want to protect Kempt's honest "legacy" or whatnot, which got forgotten about once Adeline got Griffin's journals and is implied going to use them to her curiousity. So what was the point of this change in Kempt if it wouldn't make her the better woman in the end?

Instead of Griffin slowly losing his mind as the film goes on from his invisibility with Adeline just simply trying to deal with and comprehend her old colleague's actions(which was predictable), why not Adeline also go through a dramatic change in her character that may lead her down a darker path? Such as becoming more fascinated and attracted to her loveless late husband's invisible classmate?

We already have a few invisible man films where the Invisible Man is represented as a toxic abusive partner that the woman knowingly must escape. What if this time the woman protagonist ignored all the psychotic behavior in her partner by wearing rose tinted glasses? She "sees" him for his good qualities, that being his intelligence, relatability to her interests, and always wanting to listen to what she has to say and eventually asks if he can be "her" partner?

The horror would be she's aware he's invisible and has all this destructive power to take people out or pretty much do anything, but due to her own insecurities at being a woman who's felt "unseen" for a long time(especially after being in a loveless marriage for years), she quickly finds herself smitten with Griffin and let's her guard down around him more and more, eventually the two getting freaky in the sheets and she soon finds herself being a willing accomplice to his crimes, which may or may not backfire on her later.....

But perhaps that's just the type of film I would've preferred to see? What do yous think?

Living luxury right now boys.

I watched Bride of Frankenstein after watching the original back to back, because of Roger Ebert’s huge praise, expecting it to build on the original. Instead, it felt like a campy mockery.

I get that Bride gets historical credit for in many ways it was very progressive, but watching them back to back completely kills the tone. The 1931 Frankenstein worked because Karloff’s monster was a tragic, haunting image wrapped in real horror. He was a force of nature, not a punchline.

Bride replaces that raw dread with a theatrical circus. Frankenstein should have been treated like John Carpenter’s Halloween a self-contained masterpiece that never needed a franchise but of course studios just couldn't leave the money on the table.

It’s telling that actual horror masters look back to 1931 for inspiration, not 1935. John Carpenter cited the original Frankenstein as a major influence for Michael Myers specifically because of that visceral, uncompromising terror, not the goofy camp of Bride.

I thoroughly enjoyed the original, but bride, left me quite disappointed.

🧟 The Holy Grail of Frankenstein Collectibles! 🔥

One of the most incredible Frankenstein pieces out there: the legendary Smooth Frankenstein casting, inspired by the life-cast head used in Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein.

This example reportedly dates back to a Tony Pitocco casting, featuring outstanding hair work and finishing that captures the look of a genuine vintage-era Universal Monsters collectible. The proportions, sculptural detail, and old-school craftsmanship make this an exceptional piece for any serious Frankenstein collector.

The history behind these castings is fascinating, and finding one with this level of presentation is something special. It's exactly the kind of piece that makes collecting vintage monster masks so rewarding.

A true grail piece for Universal Monsters enthusiasts. 🧟⚡