ALL SCI-FI

[Phantom]

A young medical student, intrigued with the idea of scientifically creating a perfect human, fashions a warped parody of a man and pays the price when the creature escapes and seeks revenge.

The genesis of Mary Shelly’s novel is too well known to repeat here. Suffice to say, it caused a sensation when published. A frequent subject of stage plays, the tale continued to fascinate people over the following 100+ years.

The first movie version, made in 1910, was a logical choice, but you have to wonder what took them so long to get around to it. After all, George Melies had been producing his magical science fiction/adventure stories since 1902, mining the works of Jules Verne for ideas and covering not only his famous Trip to the Moon, but also voyages under the sea and to the North Pole.

The Selig Polyscope Company released the first screen version of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde in 1908 with Hobart Bosworth, a matinee idol favorite, in the title role. There are no photographs from this lost film and no written word extant from historians or publicists who saw it. And there were numerous movies depicting all manner of ghostly visitations and Satanic chicanery (most of them bordering on the comedic).

The simple answer may be that, like Dracula who had to wait until 1921, the Frankenstein saga was just too grim for audiences at the dawn of the art form, not to mention the difficulty of condensing Shelly’s dense, philosophical novel into a one-reel format (the standard of the day).

It was the Thomas Edison Studio that finally green-lighted the project. Edison, himself, had no interest in making movies; it was enough that his company was producing them while he went on his way perfecting the newest inventions percolating in his ever-inquisitive mind.



Considered the first American horror film (not quite), the story is a combination of Grand Guignol, occultism and science fiction. Shelly, herself, was vague on the details of bringing life to her stitched together creation.

Faced with the same difficulty, director J. Searle Dawley solved the problem by placing the nascent humanoid in a kind of bake oven in which it appeared to grow out of some arcane combination of chemicals and swirling steam.



The effect was achieved by building an effigy, burning it to a crisp, then reversing the film to make it appear as if it were growing into existence. We can only wonder what effect this sequence had on audiences in 1910, unfamiliar with how it was all achieved.



This digital enhancement of the creation scene is closer to what audiences would have seen in a crisp, new print in 1910. Unused to graphic horrors, it is probable they reacted much the same way as the crowds who saw The Exorcist sixty years later.





Aware of the possibility of offending his audience, Searle devised a simple escape by intermittently cutting away from the Monster to Frankenstein watching the process through a window on the chamber. Censors could excise all shots of the creature, keep the emphasis on Frankenstein and not lose the entire scene.

A moment lifted directly from the novel. The Monster follows the exhausted Frankenstein to his bed chamber. Awakened by the ghastly creature, he abandons his creation, who vows revenge.



The Monster returns to Frankenstein’s house and threatens his fiancé, Elizabeth. Much of the 12-minute truncated story, explained only by intermittent title cards, must have been confusing to those who had never read Shelly’s novel.


Another enhanced image of the Monster.

We never see Olge’s hideous face in great detail. What we know today as basic or traditional editing was still a few years away.

Although directors were experimenting with the editing process, most films were shot with a stationary camera in a single take. Although D.W. Griffith was cited as inventing many of the editing techniques that freed the cinema from its static point of view, that is historically incorrect. Griffith’s brilliance was in adapting the discoveries of other directors into a coherent narrative series with a natural flow.



Without the resources to expand the novel as written, the authors had to come up with an alternate conclusion and fell back on the theme of the doppelganger, literally “double walker,” that had been a feature of literature as far back as John Donne and Dante. The Monster, therefore, was Frankenstein’s evil twin who, when exposed to the pure love between Frankenstein and Elizabeth, ceases to exist and is absorbed into a mirror where his image is replaced by the scientist.



Augustus Phillips as Frankenstein and Mary Fuller as Elizabeth are forgotten figures today.



Charles Ogle’s name survives on the strength of this one movie, despite racking up 330 film credits between 1908 and 1926. Ogle was the son of a minister from Ohio. At his death in 1940, he could not possibly imagine that he would become a part of motion picture history and famous to a generation of movie fans, most not yet born at the time of his passing. The Ogle Award for Science Fiction/Fantasy audio dramas is named after him.


Charles Ogle and Antonio Moreno in Flaming Barriers (1924).

An estimated 90% of all the silent films made are irretrievably lost, and Frankenstein was among them until the 1970’s when the only surviving print was discovered in the possession of Alois Dettlaff, eccentric collector, preservationist and difficult curmudgeon.

Dettlaff refused to part with his copy, despite the emergence of bootleg editions, until 2003 when he released it to DVD, mutilated with watermarks of his name. He died in 2005.

The Library of Congress purchased it from his daughter in 2014 for restoration and distribution. It is on the AFI list of culturally and historically significant movies.
_________________
What Is Essential Is Invisible

[Bud Brewster]

______________________________________________

This video is apparently the best version we have, but you'll have to turn the audio off to eliminate the horrible noise that some misguided person thought was "music" which would enhance the film.

_____ Frankenstein (1910) New Restoration 2020!


___________
_________________
____________
Is there no man on Earth who has the wisdom and innocence of a child?
~ The Space Children (1958)

[WadeVC]

I've watched this gem more than once . . . heck, more than 2 dozen times, and it still enthrall me.

Despite its age, I still find this silent a good bit of creepy fun.
_________________
"You look like a pooped out pinwheel."
-Robot Monster

[Bud Brewster]

______________________________________________

You're absolutely right, Wade! This classic stands the test of time.

Sadly, most of the sequels reduced the "monster" to little more than a malfunctioning robot which lumbered around with his arms outstretch while he growled at people.

They even beefed up Karloff's lean physique to make him look more imposing!

Compare this to the lean, cadaverous body of the Monster in the first two movies . . . the ones in which the Monster struggled to escapade the murderous mobs, and who befriended the blind hermit.

Hollywood thinks very little of both their producers and their movie audiences.

Sadly, these greedy men have come to realize that there's more money in the pockets of the below-average masses who attend movies, than there is in the pockets of the above-average people who appreciate the efforts of Tinsel Town's true geniuses!
_________________
____________
Is there no man on Earth who has the wisdom and innocence of a child?
~ The Space Children (1958)