Horror Cinema

[Agent Purple The Illustrated Man Find all posts View Profile Close Agent Purple]

Yeah, I get the feeling I've linked to those guys' videos before in this thread, but don't feel like checking right now (long day at work, but at least my dental exam went well).

[Space Cop The Dandy Find all posts View Profile Close Space Cop]

Yeah, I get the feeling I've linked to those guys' videos before in this thread, but don't feel like checking right now (long day at work, but at least my dental exam went well).

After I posted it, I saw the same guys did one of the Backstreet Boys. It seemed really familiar and I thought you might have posted it even before you mentioned it. For better or worse, I'm more familiar with Garth Brooks than the Backstreet Boys.

[Hypo Lil' Leaguer Find all posts View Profile Close Hypo]

‘Invisible Man’ Finds Director, Sets New Course for Universal’s Monster Legacy

“Upgrade” director Leigh Whannell has signed on to direct a reboot of “The Invisible Man.” The project reunites Whannell with Jason Blum, who is producing the Universal Pictures movie through his Blumhouse banner.

Whannell will also pen the script.

The move is part of a fresh strategy for Universal’s monsters properties, bringing creative directors with distinctive visions to the classic characters and moving on from the interconnected Dark Universe concept.

Whannell, who is co-producing, has previously worked with Blumhouse Productions on hit films including “Insidious: The Last Key” and “Upgrade.” Johnny Depp was previously attached to “The Invisible Man,” but sources say he will not appear in this film. He may be featured in another one of the monster movie projects in development, sources say.

Universal has tabled the idea of an interconnected universe and is reassessing how to keep the enduring characters relevant for a new generation. Sources tell Variety that Universal remains committed to creating compelling filmmaker-driven projects based on characters from the studio’s vast monsters legacy.

“Throughout cinematic history, Universal’s classic monsters have been reinvented through the prism of each new filmmaker who brought these characters to life,” said Peter Cramer, Universal’s president of production. “We are excited to take a more individualized approach for their return to screen, shepherded by creators who have stories they are passionate to tell with them.”

The decision comes after “The Mummy” fell short of expectations at the box office, which led to the studio taking a new look at the strategy for the remaining monster characters including Frankenstein and Dracula.

By not mandating a unified, connected universe of monster stories, the studio will be able to open up the characters to filmmakers who will be inspired to create their own unique stories. Insiders say Universal has met with a number of prominent directors for various properties, and “The Invisible Man” is one of those new films. But hiring Whannell does not necessarily mean this will be the next monster movie to go into production, as other pitches are also coming together revolving around different characters.

Several versions of “The Invisible Man” have gotten the Hollywood treatment, with the most well-known being James Whale’s 1933 original adaptation of the H.G. Wells story, starring Claude Rains and Gloria Stuart.

Upcoming titles for Universal’s new monster strategy will be rooted in horror, with no restrictions on budget, tone, or rating, and no expectation that they will exist as part of a shared universe. An insider close to the process said freeing up the characters’ origins and stories to different interpretations will help them appeal to modern audiences.

The talent previously attached to various monster roles like Depp, Javier Bardem, Tom Cruise, and Russell Crowe still have the option to appear in the movies after a filmmaker with a new vision is brought on.

As for Blum, the super-producer has already started 2019 off strong with his 11th No. 1 opening as M. Night Shyamalan’s “Glass” grossed more than $100 million globally over the four-day MLK weekend. His next release is the sequel to 2017’s “Happy Death Day,” due on Feb. 13.

[Big Daddy Dave Skywalker Moisture Farmer Find all posts View Profile Close Big Daddy Dave Skywalker]

universal really are going to give the monsters another shot? I have to give them credit for getting up after they fall down...again and again...

[Space Cop The Dandy Find all posts View Profile Close Space Cop]

universal really are going to give the monsters another shot? I have to give them credit for getting up after they fall down...again and again...

They've seriously said "we're doing it different, now it counts" every time. So far, I'd say the Wolfman remake was the best shot, but they pretty much turned their back on that one too. It sounds like they've killed the intended Bride flick.

[Hypo Lil' Leaguer Find all posts View Profile Close Hypo]

Bringing in Blumhouse is a good move and what they should've done from the beginning, they'll keep the budgets low and make it easier for these things to turn a profit.

[Space Cop The Dandy Find all posts View Profile Close Space Cop]

...they'll keep the budgets low and make it easier for these things to turn a profit.

Yeah, that's how the original Universal horror flicks made so much money; they didn't cost much to begin with (especially the sequels).

[Trey Strain Guardian of the Universe Find all posts View Profile Close Trey Strain]

Maybe the Universal monster films should be TV movies instead of theatrical releases.

[Space Cop The Dandy Find all posts View Profile Close Space Cop]

Maybe the Universal monster films should be TV movies instead of theatrical releases.

+ YouTube Video

[Trey Strain Guardian of the Universe Find all posts View Profile Close Trey Strain]

If the original Universal monster movies were being made today, they'd certainly be TV movies. The same goes for the Hammer productions. So if they're going to relaunch them as theatrical films in the 21st century, then they've got to change them fundamentally.

That's why they keep screwing it up. They're trying to recapture the magic of something while fundamentally changing it. That's an inherent contradiction.

I'd rather see a half-dozen Universal horror movies done in the original spirit for television than one done entirely differently for theaters. What they're doing is selling these movies based just on their names, and not their content.

[Space Cop The Dandy Find all posts View Profile Close Space Cop]

And the first trailer is up for the new Child's Play.

+ YouTube Video

If the original Universal monster movies were being made today, they'd certainly be TV movies. The same goes for the Hammer productions. So if they're going to relaunch them as theatrical films in the 21st century, then they've got to change them fundamentally.

That's why they keep screwing it up. They're trying to recapture the magic of something while fundamentally changing it. That's an inherent contradiction.

I'd rather see a half-dozen Universal horror movies done in the original spirit for television than one done entirely differently for theaters. What they're doing is selling these movies based just on their names, and not their content.

That's especially true of things like the Mummy sequels which barely topped an hour long. They also come from a time when they would be accompanied by a newsreel, a short feature, and a cartoon if not a whole other feature with them.

[Space Cop The Dandy Find all posts View Profile Close Space Cop]

James Rolfe did an excellent video (which I definitely recommend) trying to analyze the main Dracula adaptations objectively by faithfulness.

+ YouTube Video

Here was my comment on Youtube:

Good video; massive amount of work. I've seen all the contenders and all the others mentioned except the Turkish and I knew which was going to win, though I did think Franco would have a higher score. Even here, you can say there's a lot of subjective decisions. For instance, James focuses on the mustache for physical appearance, but Stoker also mentions hairy palms (which Coppola did) and pointed ears (Nosferatu). It also seems unfair to award an equal point for things that totally match vs. doing the same thing with different names at a different time. Factoring in those things, I think Franco would get some extra points and BBC would shoot even further ahead. But there is no such thing as a totally faithful adaptation (that would be an audiobook). They're different media.

[Big Daddy Dave Skywalker Moisture Farmer Find all posts View Profile Close Big Daddy Dave Skywalker]

I watched that video with my wife last night too. He put a TON of work into it. Now I need to see the 70s BBC version of Dracula!

[Space Cop The Dandy Find all posts View Profile Close Space Cop]

I watched that video with my wife last night too. He put a TON of work into it. Now I need to see the 70s BBC version of Dracula!

It's definitely the closest, but--not surprisingly--that also makes it much slower. It feels a lot like one of the BBC's other Victorian adaptations except there's a blood-sucking fiend! I gotta get it one of these days, but I have to admit I won't watch it as often as I do Lugosi, Langella, and Oldman (which is probably like once a year). I really want to track down the Turkish version now.



I always feel mixed about these discussions of "most faithful." On the one hand, I agree with a lot of fans that baffling changes are often made that make no sense even for budget or popular reasons.



But on the other hand, it's a pointless argument. Besides the fact that certain changes need to be made and the director and actors want to leave their stamp on it; it's just a different format. It can't be the book. For instance, the novel might say Mina and Lucy talked about her engagement. If the movie provides dialogue for that, they've changed the book (because we don't know the words). If they just showed them talking and had voice over, they'd be 'more faithful,' but still making an artistic choice and probably pissing off the audience who tends not to like excessive narration. Or, for another example, a book might take the time to describe a room in detail. How does the film show that? Contain all the features described and nothing else? Dwell on the set with long establishing shots? If the author didn't mention the windows, is it a 'change' to show windows? What's 'faithful'?

[Agent Purple The Illustrated Man Find all posts View Profile Close Agent Purple]

Just watched Rolfe's video myself, and damn if he didn't go the distance in coming up with what has to be a definitive analysis as to faithfulness in adapting one of the biggest novels ever. It actually makes me want to rewatch the Oldman version because I haven't seen that in years.