The Monster Maker (1944)
The Monster Maker (1944)
I love bad movies, there is something punk rock about low budget films. I feel like if you look at the big budget Hollywood films, it is like looking at the over bloated arena rock and prog-rock bands in the 1970s, and how music was becoming something exclusive to those with a lot of money and skill, and then the Ramones came along in 1975 and proved that you needed neither money nor actual talent to make music, that you could just throw together three chords and a lot of passion. I think that is true when you look at filmmakers like Ed Wood or Roger Corman, they showed us that you can do it yourself, you don't need the big production companies, you didn't need millions of dollars, hell often times you don't even need actual actors or even film permits, just a bare minimal knowledge of how to shoot and produce a film, and you too can make great films. Before either Roger Corman or Ed Wood there were "poverty row" production companies like Majestic and P.R.C. doing exactly that, someone has an idea, they get together a script, a cast, and work fast and work cheap. Some of these films are labours of passion for those without the skill, money, or connections to work for the big studios, and some are simply nothing more than a quick cash grab, by making a film in a genre that has proven to make money (I think there are more of those films than the passionate films honestly). Some of these films are great, and some are nothing more than cheap imitations of successful films. But I find something beautiful and wonderful about this DIY approach to filmmaking.
The Monster Maker is a low budget "poverty row" quickie released by PRC (Producers Releasing Corporation). The film tells the story of Dr Igor Markoff who sees a woman named Patricia Lawrence who he thinks is the reincarnation of his deceased wife, so he tries to woe her against her wishes. Her father Anthony Lawrence tries to talk to Dr. Markoff, to tell him to back off, because his daughter is feeling harassed. Dr. Markoff doesn't take this well and infects him with a disease called acromegaly, which only he has the cure for, meaning that he can hold him hostage exchanging his daughter for the cure. Dr. Markoff's assistant Maxine, who has dedicated herself to him, feels used and is starting to reconsider working for him, and starts standing up to him, telling him that he is a monster. But can she stand up to her mad scientist of a boss, and can Mr Lawrence be saved without giving his daughter over to the fiendish Dr. Markoff?
The Monster Maker was directed by Sam Newfield, and produced by his brother Sigmund Neufeld. The film has a screenplay by Lawrence Williams, Pierre Gendron, and Martin Mooney. The film was distributed by Producers Releasing Corporation in 1944. Most critics wouldn't even bother reviewing PRC releases, and those who did gave the film mostly negative reviews. Looking at the film in retrospect, on Rotten Tomatoes the film holds a scant 3% rating, not the lowest I have seen, but definitely down there. But the question then bares asking, is it really that bad of a film?
The Monster Maker stars J. Carrol Naish as Dr. Igor Markoff, Ralph Morgan as Anthony Lawrence, Wanda McKay as his daughter Patricia Lawrence, Tala Birell as Maxine, Terry Frost as Bob Blake (Mr. Lawrence's agent), Glenn Strange as Steve (who works for Dr. Markoff), Alexander Pollard as Stack (Mr. Lawrence's butler), and Sam Flint as Dr. Adams (Mr. Lawrence's doctor). It is interesting probably the most famous actor of the film (at least in the horror genre) Glenn Strange, is in such a minor roll, that if you don't look close you might not even notice it is him, which is too bad, because he is a much better actor than some of the people with larger roles. The acting in the film isn't bad, I would describe it as mediocre at best though, and most of the characters feel like stock characters, like low budget imitations of bigger budget films.
So I posed the question before of whether this film is really all that bad, and I am going to try to answer that, because it isn't a simple yes or no. The acting is mediocre, the script and plot is rather generic of the mad scientist horror trope, the direction is fairly competent, the pacing feels strange, and it makes a short film feel longer than it really is. So I guess by all means, yes this is a bad film. But that doesn't mean it isn't an enjoyable film. Though most of the characters are quite forgettable, the story itself is interesting, and there are some pretty decently looking effects, especially the metamorphosis of the character of Anthony Lawrence as the disease takes hold and deforms his body. I am torn, like on one hand, I actually did enjoy this film, but on the other hand it is hard to defend the film, it is hard to tell you what I like about this film. I don't know if it is a case of rooting for the underdog, or if it is a case of appreciating the filmmakers ineptitude, but somehow in their ineptitude actually pulling off a decent film. I think a film like The Monster Maker belongs on a collection of public domain films that you get, with like 50 films for $25 type thing, and yes this film is worth every cent of the 50 cents that it would cost in a box set like this. I feel like around Halloween you found a copy of The Monster Maker in a dollar bin of slim cased DVDs at your local discount store, that it would totally be worth picking up. This is not a must see film, not even a recommended film really, but it is an good film to throw on on a cold rainy October evening, to get your ready for the Halloween season. If you never saw this film you aren't really missing anything, but at the same time, if you get a chance to watch it, it isn't a terrible way to spend an hour of your time (the film has a run time of merely 62 minutes). So I guess is it really that bad? No not at all, there are so many worse films out there, this isn't even close to being one of the worst, the guess the problem with the film really lies not in how actually bad it is, but the fact that it is just a bit mediocre. I like this film, but I will never love this film. So if you find it on a public domain collection, go ahead and check it out, or if you see it on some television station that plays old movies like TMC or something along that lines, by all means check it out, but it isn't worth hunting for.
The Monster Maker is a low budget "poverty row" quickie released by PRC (Producers Releasing Corporation). The film tells the story of Dr Igor Markoff who sees a woman named Patricia Lawrence who he thinks is the reincarnation of his deceased wife, so he tries to woe her against her wishes. Her father Anthony Lawrence tries to talk to Dr. Markoff, to tell him to back off, because his daughter is feeling harassed. Dr. Markoff doesn't take this well and infects him with a disease called acromegaly, which only he has the cure for, meaning that he can hold him hostage exchanging his daughter for the cure. Dr. Markoff's assistant Maxine, who has dedicated herself to him, feels used and is starting to reconsider working for him, and starts standing up to him, telling him that he is a monster. But can she stand up to her mad scientist of a boss, and can Mr Lawrence be saved without giving his daughter over to the fiendish Dr. Markoff?
The Monster Maker was directed by Sam Newfield, and produced by his brother Sigmund Neufeld. The film has a screenplay by Lawrence Williams, Pierre Gendron, and Martin Mooney. The film was distributed by Producers Releasing Corporation in 1944. Most critics wouldn't even bother reviewing PRC releases, and those who did gave the film mostly negative reviews. Looking at the film in retrospect, on Rotten Tomatoes the film holds a scant 3% rating, not the lowest I have seen, but definitely down there. But the question then bares asking, is it really that bad of a film?
The Monster Maker stars J. Carrol Naish as Dr. Igor Markoff, Ralph Morgan as Anthony Lawrence, Wanda McKay as his daughter Patricia Lawrence, Tala Birell as Maxine, Terry Frost as Bob Blake (Mr. Lawrence's agent), Glenn Strange as Steve (who works for Dr. Markoff), Alexander Pollard as Stack (Mr. Lawrence's butler), and Sam Flint as Dr. Adams (Mr. Lawrence's doctor). It is interesting probably the most famous actor of the film (at least in the horror genre) Glenn Strange, is in such a minor roll, that if you don't look close you might not even notice it is him, which is too bad, because he is a much better actor than some of the people with larger roles. The acting in the film isn't bad, I would describe it as mediocre at best though, and most of the characters feel like stock characters, like low budget imitations of bigger budget films.
So I posed the question before of whether this film is really all that bad, and I am going to try to answer that, because it isn't a simple yes or no. The acting is mediocre, the script and plot is rather generic of the mad scientist horror trope, the direction is fairly competent, the pacing feels strange, and it makes a short film feel longer than it really is. So I guess by all means, yes this is a bad film. But that doesn't mean it isn't an enjoyable film. Though most of the characters are quite forgettable, the story itself is interesting, and there are some pretty decently looking effects, especially the metamorphosis of the character of Anthony Lawrence as the disease takes hold and deforms his body. I am torn, like on one hand, I actually did enjoy this film, but on the other hand it is hard to defend the film, it is hard to tell you what I like about this film. I don't know if it is a case of rooting for the underdog, or if it is a case of appreciating the filmmakers ineptitude, but somehow in their ineptitude actually pulling off a decent film. I think a film like The Monster Maker belongs on a collection of public domain films that you get, with like 50 films for $25 type thing, and yes this film is worth every cent of the 50 cents that it would cost in a box set like this. I feel like around Halloween you found a copy of The Monster Maker in a dollar bin of slim cased DVDs at your local discount store, that it would totally be worth picking up. This is not a must see film, not even a recommended film really, but it is an good film to throw on on a cold rainy October evening, to get your ready for the Halloween season. If you never saw this film you aren't really missing anything, but at the same time, if you get a chance to watch it, it isn't a terrible way to spend an hour of your time (the film has a run time of merely 62 minutes). So I guess is it really that bad? No not at all, there are so many worse films out there, this isn't even close to being one of the worst, the guess the problem with the film really lies not in how actually bad it is, but the fact that it is just a bit mediocre. I like this film, but I will never love this film. So if you find it on a public domain collection, go ahead and check it out, or if you see it on some television station that plays old movies like TMC or something along that lines, by all means check it out, but it isn't worth hunting for.
Comments
Post a Comment