Underrated Gems: 1408

 

        Happy Halloween you guys, it’s been one thing where I show you the evolution of the genre. Although, it’s been unfortunate that I didn’t show you more horror films to check out. You may have notice that I jumped through decades and missed out some great ones at various points. Regardless, let’s end this month with a bang with this underrated film from 2007. 1408 was a short story from Stephen King, one of many that I will cover don’t you worry. Anyways, let’s start.

1. The Room

        You know it’s a Stephen King movie, he’ll write about any mundane or ordinary object and manage to make it scary or unique. Like, how can a hotel room be scary, but given that he made a clown scary and a killer car, King has this aspect nailed down. 

        Anyways, so the film is about the author Mike. He’s a writer about the paranormal that stays in haunted hotels. He manages to dispel the myths by saying that the hotel is desperate for customers since he believes that hauntings are a way for motels to bring in new cliental. He’s an established author and manages to get a book signing. To which there are sparse attendees. 

        While sifting through his mail, he receives a postcard of the Dolphin hotel in New York City. Specifically of visiting room 1408. Mike tries to book the room, but the receptionist attempts to have him book a different room in the hotel. 

        What I find interesting is that the hotel has this old look to it. Additionally, as he walks in the lobby, there’s a woman with a baby, albeit with an old fashioned baby carriage. Sam Jackson plays the manager, he’s in the movie in a short time in spite of him getting second billing. He tries and ultimately relents to have Mike get the room.

        Throughout the movie, Mike tries to survive the room. I feel that the whole room is a character. Making Mike go insane and attempting to make him kill himself. It’s an unknown force that has a kill count from people killing themselves from either jumping out the window or drowning. In any bad horror movie, there would be a moment to explain why something is supernatural. Either an ancient burial ground or that the place is haunted. 

        What I like is that we don’t know. For some reason, this specific room is just a malevolent force that attempts to get Mike. What it does so well is that it manages to differentiate how Mike sees the various ghosts. Prior to him going into the room, he sees a coroners report of various deaths. What he sees sometimes is ghosts who look like static. And when he sees them fall to the ground, they dissipate into nothingness. 

        The overall main idea is this motif of facing the unknown. As I said earlier, Mike is a skeptic and thinks that room 1408 is just a publicity stunt. When the weird stuff starts to happen, he thinks he was drugged and the manager is just messing with him. It works well since Mike is scared, and the room does something extreme. Bringing up his past, including his dead daughter.  

2. The Other Story

        In between Mike attempting to survive, the room brings back vivid visions of his past. We learn that he was married and that his daughter Katie died of an ailment. As she lays on the hospital bed, Katie asks her Dad if Heaven exists. He says yes, but he knows that to him it doesn’t. Again, it ties back into the central element of the film, confronting the unknown as the skeptic. The whole sequences involving his family is spaced out to give the audience a breath from the room trying to kill him. 

        Specifically, it gives Mike more character with his background as to why he’s a skeptic. He wanted to save his daughter and is mad at his wife for attempting to lie to her just to make her happy. Not that he’s bad father, but he was attempting to try anything to save his daughter. I think it works since, it would be easy to make a character a skeptic and not base it on anything. 

3. Overall

        This is a severely underrated film, especially since it’s an adaptation of Stephen King’s work. It came out during the glut of Saw movies and terrible horror remakes. And, it came out the same year for another King adaptation The Mist. 1408 is a great psychological horror movie. Showing and challenging us to see what is real and how to confront the past. 

The Blair Witch Project Review

        1999 was the pinnacle year in terms of film. There were two horror films that were in the pop culture that have made an impact. The Sixth Sense and The Blair Witch Project each utilized a unique way to make their films unique and grow the genre in terms of depth. Blair Witch specifically used the internet in its marketing which was brand new at the time. I’ll talk about that later, anyways, here’s what I think.

1. Three people in Search of a Witch

        The film is roughly simple in the whole story. Three college students go hiking and make a documentary to find the elusive Blair Witch. Since you probably know what kind of movie this is just by seeing the poster. It doesn’t go well. Soon weird stuff starts to happen and the trio each bicker of being lost in the woods. 

        While the approach is very simple, given the fact that the whole movie is presented as a thing that may have happened. What I like is that the performances of the trio sell it. Mind you, the entire film was improv on the spot. Specifically, when they were hiking, the director would leave messages in canisters that the actors had to be in a specific mood to sell their performances as they were recording themselves. And they have walkie-talkies to communicate if they have to do another take.

        To me, it works since we get to see the anxiety gradually build up as the movie progresses. At first we see them as close friends, then have the level of uneasy spring up as they each argue and fight. Aside from potentially seeing the witch, or other supernatural happen in the woods. One can interpret the movie as being deliberate since the two guys were getting tired of the director’s quest of finding the witch. 

        There’s one word to describe this movie. Verisimilitude is one since the whole film appears to be based on an event that really happened. Found footage movies weren’t actually evented by this film to start with. Cannibal Holocaust is attributed as the first horror film to be labeled as found footage. Additionally, the whole idea of something documented isn’t even new in any artful medium. Books such as Dracula and Frankenstein each contained diary-like entries to give an idea to the readers that what they’re reading did happen. 

        Lastly, the whole storytelling method is like a retelling of a fable. The be careful what you wish for is old, but the way the film goes about it makes it fresh. Since they ask the people in the rural Maryland town about the witch, they decide to go deeper. Unaware of what exactly is lurking in there. It mixes well the suspense and how one’s hubris becomes the downfall. 

2. Internet Marketing 

        It must be lauded that this film successfully marketed itself in the internet. No one knew about the endless potential that this new way of information can expand the movie’s mythos and advertise it. I can imagine that the studios thought the internet was just a digital advertisement board of promoting a movie. Which it is sometimes, but the level of dedication to create the whole missing people and the witch must be commended. I think the real irony is that the marketing was probably too good, since many people believed that the stuff that is shown did happen. 

3. Is it Scary?

        This is the thing that is going to draw lines in the sand, whether it was scary or not. Well, I can understand that people walked into the film expecting to see the witch and not getting to see it. And I can hear that people just wanted to be scared off their seat and was let down. Now those perspectives can mean well, but I think what the filmmakers had in mind was old-fashioned but warranted. 

        The main idea is that what we don’t see is scary. Now, I get the feeling that it was entirely what the filmmakers had planned. Had we had a shot or a brief glimpse of what the witch looked like may be either a bummer or just a letdown. Since, we see all this weird stuff happen and it just appears in the woods. Along with other noises and twigs snapping, it could be anything and our imagination can try and guess if it’s the witch or something more natural or sinister. 

        Honestly, I prefer this method of being ambiguous on purpose. If no one hadn’t read the extra info about the witch, then the movie will just have a creepy thing going for itself. Since we don’t have the expert in the group to really explain what’s going on is the advantage. It’s the mystery and not knowing is the film’s redeeming and best asset.

4. Legacy

        The Blair Witch Project was massively successful despite having the budget of half a million. Any film grossing 200 million with that budget is a success story in of itself. I think the only bad thing that came after was the sequels. Blair Witch 2 was a disappointing movie, because the original intent was to expand the whole idea of the first film and make it more ambiguous. But the studio made it into a horror movie that took itself too seriously and ruined a potentially great sequel. 

        It wouldn’t be years later until J.J. Abrams produced the film which brought back the found footage sub-genre with the monster movie Cloverfield. Just the following year, Paranormal Activity made the found footage mainstream since it created a series. That got progressively worse, but that’s another topic. In 2016, there was another film called Blair Witch. A direct sequel were one of the main characters has ties to the trio. Like most things, it wasn’t good and it briefly showed the witch. 

        If I may just briefly talk about it. I feel that the film does everything wrong as a follow up. It doesn’t feel like it’s found footage, just look at any clip. The camera’s they use are too good and that there’s special effects that are used. All that intrigue that was shown during the first movie is gone since we all had no clue what the witch looks like. And the key thing is that it feels like a movie. It's a bit of an oxymoron, but it should've at least been shot on a cheap camera or phone. Having it use pro cameras made it too fancy, lacking the limitations the documentarians had in the first film.

 

5. Overall

        The Blair Witch Project is an ambitious film that tries to breath depth into horror. While it’s not the first film to act as a found footage, it can at least be credited by using the internet to market itself and build the mystery of if the witch exists.  

The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (1974) Review

 

        I will always love the 70s in terms of filmmaking. When watching any movie at that time, there’s a filming aesthetic where it feels real. It’s evident with this film. The Texas Chainsaw Massacre feels like an authentic grindhouse film. I’ll get to the meaning of what a Grindhouse is. I feel that it’s up there with the best horror films in the 1970s, just coming out earlier than Halloween to be considered a slasher horror film.

1. Grindhouse Horror

        I might as well describe what a Grindhouse film is. During the 70s, there was an influx of movies that came out that were low budget. One of the defining aspects of them is that they didn’t need to worry about quality. The technical term associated with them is that they’re exploitation movies. Mostly movies exploiting whatever new film trend is well, brand new. That’s why there were black exploitation films, sex ploitation, and the usual horror where they had buckets of blood and the level of violence that was amped to 11.

        What makes Texas Chainsaw Massacre unique is that it feels like an exploitation, but it has the care and attention of a great movie. When looking at it, it has this antiquated feel to it. Now obviously it’s nearly 50 years old, but just the shots and the locale have that authentic documentary feel to it. More so that it even opens with a title crawl that states that the events did happen. 

        Now I got to say that the movie isn’t based on a true story. However, some aspects of it are based on the infamous serial killer Ed Gein. You can see the connection between the guy and the maniacs in the film.

        Anyways, the film is mostly straightforward. A report comes in that a local cemetery has been desecrated. A group of teens including Franklin and Sally investigate to see if their dead relative’s grave was desecrated. What follows from then on is that they pick up a real sketchy hitchhiker. And then, they visit an old house and explore the property. It’s one thing where the group of guys are warned before hand to not visit, but c’mon, we know exactly what we came to see. 

        Despite having Massacre in the title, there’s not much blood spilled or multiple deaths happening. I feel that it’s refreshing when Leatherface kills the group one by one. We don’t have those camera shots of blood splatter. One specifically just feels graphic, when the girlfriend enters the house, the killer grabs her and hangs her on a hook. It’s effective cause you can feel it and the main point is not directed at the blood, but to the pain. 

2. The real villains

        When you see the movie either by looking at the cover or finding it at a streaming service, you may think that Leatherface is the villain in the film. In reality though, it’s the family of cannibals. I think one character really threw me off since I never thought that he would be that crazy in the get go. Although, now that I think about it, when he offers the group barbecue, Franklin eats it but is really slowly chewing it. 

        I think the real scary thing about the movie is that anyone that is crazy can appear normal. I think that is an underutilized way of making a horror movie. It’s a secret weapon to make up for the fact that there’s no blood. Additionally, we can see that the family has lots of cars in their property from some unfortunate victims. I think the real messed up part is the background to them. Since it’s implied that they worked in the slaughterhouse and that as retribution for being let go, they decide to kill the people that has ruined them.

3. Legacy: Or the progressively terrible sequels and remakes

        The film was a success as an independent film. No distributor wanted to release it just by the name alone. The film had a budget of 140,000 dollars, it made it back by 30 million. A sequel was made years after the fact. Cannon Films brought back Tobe Hooper expecting him to make the same thing. The sequel is a comedy, even the poster mocked The Breakfast Club. To say that it’s a worthy entry in context is tough. While yes, it’s even more bloody, many fans say that it wasn’t what they expected. 

        The succeeding sequels are terrible, even including an unknown Matthew McConaughey who acts like an idiot. Obviously in the 2000s it had to be remade. That was my first exposure, but only watching the ending. And for some inexplicable reason they made a prequel of the remake. Compounding it is that they released a stand-alone film in 3-D. Later they even gave Leatherface an origin story, called Leatherface. Lastly, there’s yet another one coming out sometime next year. Do I think it’ll be good? Nope.

 

4. Overall

        The Texas Chainsaw Massacre is a unique balance of a Grindhouse film and a great film. Its lack of blood might be a turn off. Although the side character are enough of a hold over to see just how crazy anyone can be. 

Godzilla (1954) Review

        Now we look at Japan for this day’s view into horror. It was only years after the country was bombed twice that the scars of what happened to Hiroshima and Nagasaki was still in the consciousness of many people. Godzilla was an idea from the producer Tomoyuki Tanaka when he looked over the ocean as he was flying and pondered what if a monster would rise from the waters. The studio loved it and gave him a lot of money to make the film. With that, the film made a profound impact, and introducing the most beloved monster in pop-culture.

1. Human Story

        Now, I can understand that if you watch the movie, you just want to watch the monster rip and tear across Tokyo. What makes this film great is not just the main star, but the actual human drama that is involved. It’s a series of storylines that overlap when Godzilla is gradually terrorizing the Japanese. What starts as a series of missing ships turns into a monster pillaging a village, and an onslaught of destruction being directed towards Tokyo.

        Most of the people attempt to figure out what is causing all of it. A scientist says that due to repeated Hydrogen Bomb tests, they’ve awakened an ancient creature that is associated with the dinosaurs. Soon the Army arrives and attempts to stop the raging beast. It’s a staple of Godzilla that he’s practically invincible against any artillery directed towards him. 

        The scientist’s daughter soon meets an associate and learns that he’s been developing a secret weapon that can possibly kill Godzilla. Overall, the film’s story continues as everyone tries to survive the attack and the scientist’s daughter trying to tell her fiancé about her acquaintance’s secret weapon. 

        I feel what works to make the monster attack more impactful is by having the film be played straight and serious. There’s never a moment where something stupid happens or someone acts dumb. The whole movie acts like it’s a serious problem, so much so that when he’s terrorizing Tokyo, we see people running in fear. The secret to making it effective is to see the aftermath. There’s a moment where we see a group of nurses caring for the injured, and a quick glimpse of a dead body with a child crying. 

        Like I said, there’s a group of people who watch a monster movie but just want the monster. My rebuttal is that’s ok. But the real detriment is that it be boring to watch a monster just destroy. Having no drama or any real reason to be invested would make any sort of destruction feel hollow because we don’t have a central character or an ensemble to make the devastation feel impactful.  

2. King of the Kaijus

        Now we can talk about the main star. Translated from Japanese, Gojira is the combination of the words Gorilla and Whale. Godzilla has an interesting design, obviously he looks like a dinosaur with his body looking scaly and the dorsal fins which is evocative of the Stegosaurus. This is the first time that the idea of putting the man in a rubber suit was new. Although, the actor had a tough time walking since he couldn’t see in the suit, and it got hot. One last thing is his iconic roar. The producers wanted to use an animal sound, instead they used a leather glove rubbing on a stringed instrument.

        What sells the intimidation of the monster is that we see him mostly from the ground looking up. It’s a classic shot where it’s supposed to communicate that he’s a dominate force of nature. And really, he’s a symbol of what the Japanese had to go through. It’s one thing where we think of the creature as being silly. To put it into perspective, the creature was created from repeated bomb testing. It hits home hard for the civilians who had to live through being bombed. 

 

3. Legacy

        Regardless of the subtext, the film was massively successful. In spite of what happened in the end, a sequel was commissioned, and it was the first time Godzilla had faced another monster. There have been 5 phases of Godzilla films. This film started the series which is dubbed the Showa era. The succeeding ones are referred to as the Heisei, Millenium, and Reiwa eras since they ushered in a different take of the monster. 

        Mostly reinventing the look of Godzilla and introducing new monsters that have become allies and enemies. Some of them have been released in the United States with varyingly rates of success. The American version of Godzilla had extra scenes of actor Raymond Burr being in the film to describe what was happening. And most of the sequels having god-awful dubbing.

        Since the Japanese had made most of the Godzilla films, Hollywood decided to try it. 1998 was the first time an American studio released an adaptation. It wasn’t good and the monster didn’t even look like Godzilla, despite having the name. What’s funny is that the Japanese studio Toho renamed the creature Zilla and have their star kill the American monster in one of his movies. 

        Years later, Warner Bros. decided to be the next studio to try it. They started the Monsterverse films with Godzilla in 2014 and bringing King Kong in his own film. Although, Universal Studios have the rights to the beast and allowed Warner to use him, except referring to him as just Kong. The two beasts from the West and the East fought for the first time in nearly 60 years with their recent film Godzilla vs Kong. Me personally, I never understood the love for Godzilla, although there was a period where he was the hero and we love to root for him when he goes against a different monster or a mechanized version of himself. 

4. Overall

        The film fits in with the 50’s Atomic age of horror films. It utilizes the anxiety of what the Japanese went through and created a reptilian menace that is the representation of destruction. Godzilla ’54 is the best one out of all his films that came out later. 

 

Dracula (1931) Review

 

        I’m back, and let’s continue with my exploration into horror movies. This film is the most important in pop culture. Based on the book by Bram Stoker of the same name, well let me rephrase that. Many people aren’t aware that the film adaptation was actually based on the stage adaptation on Broadway. I picked this film due to the fact that it has sound, and how it was the beginning of an interconnected cinematic universe of monster films from Universal Studios. And most importantly, tell you guys how I feel about it. 

1. Bela Lugosi

        He steals the show as Count Dracula. Lugosi actually started as a stage actor and coincidentally played the Count on stage. He advocated hard to play the character on film, eventually landing the role and taking a pay cut. Since the film starts in Hungary, Lugosi retains his Hungarian accent. He only did it since his wife at the time liked it. It’s one of his defining features that has been imitated to various extents. Blehh. 

        So the film is mostly about him attempting to get a location in London. He hypnotizes a real estate agent, Renfield to become his minion. They sail to London and the Count kills the men on the ship. What follows is Dracula finding victims to retain his presence. Since the film is fairly tame due to the film code at the time by not allowing any signs of blood or kills on screen to be presented. The film is mostly straight forward and just has a very creepy approach. One last tidbit is that the film doesn’t have music. It was believed because sound was brand new to audiences, the idea of hearing music wouldn’t be believable.  

        One takeaway is that makes Dracula scary is him not blinking. In fact, how he hypnotizes anyone is shown when the camera is at him and his eyes are lit up, while the surrounding frame including his face is darkened. It’s the only kind of aesthetic that is being presented that I could find. Another thing is just how the character can just blend into the environment. He can be unassuming and go for the kill when no one is expecting. We do see that when he bites a young woman. 

        Obviously when you’re dealing with Dracula, you need a Van Helsing. He is the expert into the supernatural and a doctor in the asylum. When he sees one of Dracula’s minions in the hospital, he suspects that Dracula is around. Even though the encounter between Van Helsing and the Count is brief, you can see just how different he is. With the expert being old and the Vampire being young, albeit stealing his victim’s blood.

        It’s unfortunate that Lugosi only played Dracula twice. He had a chance to be Frankenstein in Universal’s next installment, but was passed on. The actor had financial troubles, so much so that after Dracula came out, he declared bankruptcy. Lugosi ultimately had a second chance in acting, although in real cheesy sci-fi films where he was type casted in mad scientist roles. When he died, he was buried with the Dracula cape that he wore. 

2. Proto- MCU

        As I mentioned before, Dracula was the first entry into Universal’s monster series. It practically made the studio into a horror juggernaut. Such as when they released more monster films like Frankenstein, The Mummy, The Invisible Man, The Creature from the Black Lagoon and The Wolfman. Only rarely would some of the creatures interact among each other. Mostly in the forms of fights for some. The series lasted for twenty years. 

        It wasn’t until Universal remade The Mummy in 1999 that prompted them to gradually remake their classic monster films in the 2000s. Unfortunately, the Tom Cruise version of The Mummy was supposed to rival the Marvel Cinematic Universe by calling the universe it’s set the Dark Universe. The movie wasn’t good and all plans were scrapped. That is until Blumhouse and Universal made a unique take on The Invisible Man last year. 

3. The Spanish Version

        Little do people know that there exists a Spanish cinematic version of Dracula. It’s one of the rare instances where the two productions were being filmed in the same time and being released simultaneously. I’ve even read that it’s actually superior to the Bela Lugosi one. Having seen tidbits, it’s more cinematic and it doesn’t hold back on the level of violence. So there you go, a second recommendation if you’re interested. 

4. Overall 

        To say that the film is important is underselling it. Every spoof or reference can be traced back to this film. We wouldn’t even have the Count Chocula’s cereal that only comes out every October. Bela Lugosi’s Dracula is an absolute classic for cinema and for horror. 

The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari Review

        The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari is in my opinion, the best silent horror film to come out in the 20s. It came out at a time where the medium was being experimented. I can attest that it’s one of the first film before Citizen Kane to utilize a non-linear way of storytelling. I’m revealing too much, here’s what I think of this gem. 

1. German Expressionism 

        When viewing the film, the immediate thing to notice is the overall set design. The style is referred to as German Expressionism. The style is from what I gathered, a style that emphasized the artist’s inner feelings or ideas over replicating reality, and was characterized by simplifying shapes, bright colors and gestural masks and brushworks. Just to make it simple, the shots that you see from the film stills is the style.

        Everything is bent at an odd angle and a door doesn’t even look what we think of a door. It’s something to look at since at a glance, it looks like a unique set design to set up this unique world that the film takes place in. Even the title cards in various parts of the film replicate that style. So with all that, why exactly does the film look like that? This is one of those moments where the art style actually serves the point in the entire film. 

        The film is mostly a recounting of memory from the main character Francis. He tells his story of encountering Dr. Caligari to an asylum inmate. As I mentioned prior, the film acts like a flashback. Francis and his friend encounter a circus that is run by Dr. Caligari who uses a somnambulist named Cesare to answer the questions of the audience. Throughout the film, a series of murders happen throughout the town. Francis thinks it was Caligari and tries to have him arrested. 

        What is great about the film despite being 101 years old is that even though it’s not scary as a horror movie, it can at least be appreciated as a movie that was succeeding at that time. No one could’ve imagined just how visually striking and good the plot is. Those are probably the main reasons as to why anyone should at least watch an old horror film. To really see just how quaint it was and see just how influential the film was in the succeeding years.

        If there is one more thing to talk about is the monster in this story. Cesare is the mascot of the film due to his body and purpose in the film. He is the circus freak to Caligari and the overall focus in the whole film. What I like about him is that his body is very lanky. In a way that when he runs away from the Dr. he mirrors what the human body can look like with German Expressionism. No one could've thought that the succeeding films that have come after this one, is that the monster usually goes for the girl. Sort of like King Kong where he carries the girl, Cesare is the first instance of where we see that. 

2. Authority

        If there was an actual theme around the movie or just the overall point of it is that it’s mostly about authority. We see that Dr. Caligari controls the hapless somnambulist to do whatever he wants with no shame or empathy. Even with the town that the film takes place has that theme being presented visually. With the painting of the town having the main building be at the top with the surrounding buildings being lower due to class status. 

        There is one other thing that is actually part of the plot. It happens near the end and it encapsulates the whole theme in general. To save myself from spoiling the film, I’ll say that with how the film is being told is supposed to be anti-authority. With the whole set also representing just how Francis’ mind is. Considering he’s from the asylum and from the story he is telling makes him seemingly be an unreliable narrator.

3. Overall

        No question that the film has been influential. For one, Tim Burton perhaps watched the movie and adopted its unique visual aesthetic. With the small things like the mad scientist, monster who steals the woman, and the psychological aspect to horror, The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari is one of the most important horror films to be made in the early 20th Century. 

 

Frankenstein (1910) Review

 

        It’s October and you know what that means, another run of horror movies by yours truly. I thought it be interesting to go way further than the 60s from last year. So, let’s start at 1910. Attached below the poster is the entire movie of Frankenstein. Don’t worry its public domain since nobody owns the movie.

1. The First Horror

        There’s only so much to talk about since the film is only just 13 minutes long. As the text says, it’s a liberal adaptation of Mary Shelly’s book. I could say that the film is the very first horror film and the first adaptation of an established property. When talking about silent films, well there’s no sound. Most of what’s of being presented is the actor’s body language to show us how they’re reacting to the situation. 

        So I might as well talk about the monster. No, its name is not Frankenstein. Just Frankenstein’s monster. If you ever hear the name from any passing mention, the first thing you think of is the big monster with a flat head and bolts on his neck, which is what actor Boris Karloff looked like in Universal Picture's adaptation. This film has a unique and odd presentation of the monster. Instead of sewing various body parts and using lighting to bring the creature to life. Frankenstein cobbles together various potions to make the monster.

        If there is one technique that is used is when Victor looks at the mirror and sees the monster in the reflection. I want to think that the filmmakers spliced the film to two and create the illusion as it’s presented. Although, when rewatching the film, the camera appears to be zoomed in since there was a shot preceding the one I’m talking of as having more space. 

        Now obviously, the film isn’t scary for our standards. What’s to be expected when watching the silent horror films of the past was that it didn’t focus on the scares that much. Instead, the films focused on the psychological aspects of the characters. Probably the first time that depth and development appeared in any horror film character. 

2. Lost Film

        Personally, it’s crazy that I can watch a film that is 110 years old. And seeing just what came after to really show just how far the medium has come in terms of aesthetics and storytelling. I feel that its an imperative mission to preserve film. Since back then, the film’s material was highly combustible. If a studio went up in flames, and it did happen, most of the films would turn to ashes. 

        For a while, Frankenstein was considered a lost film. A copy was discovered in Wisconsin in the 70s, and the owner didn’t realize just how rare the film was when he bought it 20 years prior. The amazing thing he did was release 1,000 copies on DVD. The film had a complete makeover in terms of cleaning up the film negative which was overseen by the University of Geneva. 

3. Overall

        While quaint for today’s standards, Frankenstein was the first of its kind and it’s the most important horror film and book adaptation to be released.