Talk:Universal Classic Monsters/Archive 2

Recent edits
So on attempting to clean-up some recent edits made, I've like to point out some thinks which are either falsely applied and should either be removed or re-organized.
 * The AV Club article is a fairly poor write up with many historical errors on the history of the studio and the monsters.
 * "[Freund] using expressionistic effects to highlight the monster’s powers." while Gary D. Rhodes notes in his book ''Tod Browning's Dracula (2014)" that Univerasl specifically stated they didn't want Dracula to be part of the "Caligari-School".
 * "Universal’s horror slate stalled out in the mid-’30s, but returned in force in the ’40s." which is also not true. Per information in the Son of Frankenstein article, the re-release of both '"Dracula and Frankenstein, Son of Frankenstein'' was released in 1939 and made more money than previous outings, and that "The film performed well at the US box office; according to The Hollywood Reporter, the film had reaped greater returns than any prior horror film in key city openings.".

I wouldn't mind using this article as some context, but as a history of the series would be inappropriate. Thoughts? Andrzejbanas (talk) 10:16, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Inclusiveness
So I think the current table this page has is one of the best organized the page has had in a while.

However, I think the definition of Universal Classic Monsters can be reworked.

This is the definition the official Universal Monsters Facebook page uses (https://www.facebook.com/OfficialUniversalMonsters/):


 * "Universal Monsters or Universal Horror is the name given to a series of distinctive horror, suspense and science fiction films made by Universal Studios from 1923 to 1960. The series began with the 1923 version of The Hunchback of Notre Dame, and continued with such movies as The Phantom of the Opera, Dracula, Frankenstein, The Mummy, The Invisible Man, Bride of Frankenstein, Werewolf of London, Son of Frankenstein, The Wolf Man, and Creature from the Black Lagoon. The iconic gallery of monsters created by Universal has created a lasting impression on generations of avid moviegoers around the world."

I think this is one of the most inclusive definitions of the brand, and films that fall in this definition seem to be what they'll often use in merchandising.

I think we could create a catch-all "other" category that features films that have been merchandised under other forms of the Universal Monsters/Universal Classic Monsters/Universal Horror brand. In this category, we can include films referenced in official Universal Monster social media, Funko products, the Universal Studio's Classic Monsters Cafe, even the Peacock film franchise category.
 * Thanks! I normally wouldn't mind, but a social media prose with no attributed source feels a bit weak-ishf or me. I'm kind of waiting for some more scholary person to take a better look at these as it's really iffy what is and what isn't part of the series. As seen through the decades, it's definition of what is and what hasn't been branded varies on home video releases, and whatever Universal seems to have the right to at the time. Again, from all the Universal Film stuff i've read, the term is rarely used to in any serious critique as it's not really a film series, but a loose franchies with no real set details on why some things belong and others don't. (why include a non-horror film with Hunchback of Notre Dame, but completely ignore the Captive Wild Woman series? When i originally tried to re-do the article, my biggest frustration was that there was no real serious scholarly study of the group or how it's organized outside the Billboard interviews where it discussed that the groups were lumped together to market them as a "series" or a recognizable brand. So yeah, i'd kind of want to dance around promo facebook stuff if we could. Andrzejbanas (talk) 04:50, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
 * hum...im not sure what would be best method. Universal probably didn't make much coordinated effort of collecting these films into one series/franchise back in 1930s-1950s. Only Dracula, Frankeinstein and Wolfman ever crossed path with each other, and I don't think that was coordinated effort by the studio to build it up to an Avengers: Endgame type climax rather a spur of the moment. Since The Mummy, Phantom of the Opera, Creature from black Lagoon, and the Invisible man never crossed path with anyone.

Just by looking at the individual characters sets that make up the 30-Disc collection:

Dracula: Complete Legacy Collection; Dracula / Drácula / Dracula's Daughter / Son of Dracula / House of Frankenstein / House of Dracula / Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein

Frankenstein: Complete Legacy Collection: Frankenstein / Bride of Frankenstein / Son of Frankenstein / Ghost of Frankenstein / Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man / House of Frankenstein / House of Dracula / Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein

The Wolf Man: Complete Legacy Collection The Wolf Man / Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man / House of Frankenstein / House of Dracula / Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein / Werewolf of London / She-Wolf of London

The Mummy: Complete Legacy Collection The Mummy / The Mummy's Hand / The Mummy's Tomb / The Mummy's Ghost / The Mummy's Curse / Abbott and Costello Meet the Mummy

The Invisible Man: Complete Legacy Collection The Invisible Man / The Invisible Man Returns / The Invisible Woman / The Invisible Agent / The Invisible Man's Revenge / Abbott & Costello Meet the Invisible Man

Creature from the Black Lagoon: Complete Legacy Collection: Creature from the Black Lagoon 3D / Revenge of the Creature 3D / The Creature Walks Among Us

Phantom of the Opera : Phanton of the Opera (1943) (the 1925 film is not inlcuded in any shape or form even if it is not a lost film. Maybe Universal decided to avoid it because its a public domian) Note: Abott & Costello play different characters in all of these films so these titles are misleading.

I would argue that only first three have legitimate shot at being considered same franchise or shared universe. While the remaining four don't cross path with anything. In the Animated series Monster Force first three cross path, + the mummy and Creature but no Phantom or Invisible man DoctorHver (talk) 01:46, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Lon Chaney Phantom of the Opera
It was the first Universal Classic Monster before Bela Lugosi Dracula. Should get representation. Silent Film Era Doremon764 (talk) 15:59, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

"Monster Mash (upcoming film)" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Monster Mash (upcoming film) and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 September 1 until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 05:59, 1 September 2022 (UTC)