C:\Documents and Settings\Owner\Desktop\Monster\TEXT

Transcription

Classic Horror Film Board
Unofficial Archives
"Who Played The Monster, Film by Film"
All posters retain their copyright
All photos reproduced for reference and review only
Volume 2
Screen Pgs 26 -39
10/24/05 - 11/06/05
Unofficial CHFB Archives: Who Played Frankenstein's Monster --------------------------------2
taraco
(10/24/05 3:41 pm)
Stuntman Hall CEO speaks ...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------I just received a response from John Hagner, Founder and CEO of the Hollywood Stuntmen's Hall of Fame in
Moab, Utah. Both Parker and Perkins are in the Hall.
Hagner said this:
'Hi David: Eddie Parker doubled for Lon Chaney, Jr. as The Wolfman and Gil Perkins doubled for Bela Lugosi as
Frankenstein ... they were both two of the top stuntmen back in the 40s and 50s.'
Obviously, I asked for more information and hopefully he can share more of his insights.
david
Edited by: taraco at: 10/24/05 3:44 pm
georgechastain
(10/24/05 4:00 pm)
Re: EDDIE PARKER -- A Size for Every Purpose!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------That's kinda hard to believe. One of the only characters we know for certain was Parker was the Mummy in A&C
MEET THE MUMMY. In the scenes where he is standing right behind Lou Costello, he doesn't really tower over
him the way you'd expect if he was that tall. In fact, he looks slightly shorter than one of the two fake Mummies
(supposedly Micheal Ansara) in the scenes where the three Mummies are seen together. He also doesn't look that
much taller than Marie Windsor in the scene where he tussles with her and you can see when he throws he to the
floor that she's only wearing nomal heels. None of the photos I've seen lmake him look especially big. Maybe Tom
Steele just meant that Parker was a pretty hefty guy. After all, Steele was pretty lanky.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So in this publicity photo, is Klaris standing on a box like most of the
other Universal mummies, or are the boys standing in the hole in Ted
Newsom's earlier argument about Ed Parker's height, or maybe both?
Ted Newsom
georgechastain
(10/24/05 4:13 pm)
Re: Stuntman Hall CEO speaks ...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------He certainly SHOULD know, David. I'd like to know what kind of records they have to go on. Hopefully they
have much better stuff than the studios sometimes saved -- payroll vouchers, contracts, career scrapbooks and info
from the guys themselves. And the previously mentioned taped interviews?!
But I will have a heckuva hard time ever believing that there's only one guy in the FMTWM costume besides Bela,
after all we've been through here. I don't think I'm the only one.
Edited by: georgechastain at: 10/24/05 4:43 pm
taraco
(10/24/05 4:35 pm)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------->>He certainly SHOULD know, David. I'd like to know what kind of records they have to go on.
That's precisely what I asked him in my follow-up email, George. I also told him that photographic evidence is really
confusing. Anyhow, hope he can add more to the discussion.
Also, he said sheepishly, is this THE Stuntman Hall of Fame? It's called the Hollywood Stuntmen's Hall of Fame in
Moab, Utah. Are there any others?
david
georgechastain
(10/24/05 4:56 pm)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------There's a Stuntmen's Association of Motion Pictures website:
www.stuntmen.com/
And I took the liberty of sending e-mail to their general query address, [email protected], last Thursday, Oct. 20.
No reply yet, and I may never hear from them, but here's what I wrote:
Subject: Request for information about the career of Eddie (a.k.a. Ed or Edwin) Parker and other old-time stuntmen
There's an enthusiastic debate going on now about the stunt performers who took part in the classic Universal
Frankenstein series of eight films made between 1931 and 1948. As you know, complete credits were not given even
for actors in many films, much less the people involved
in support capacities. Over the years some stuntmen have been credited with work in these films, but the credits have
been based less on studio records, interviews and published articles than on hearsay and speculation. Among the
stuntmen mentioned are legendary performers like Eddie Parker, Gil Perkins, George DeNormand, Bud Wolfe, Dale
Van Sickel, Ed Payson and Carey Loftin, doubling for famous actors like Boris Karloff, Bela Lugosi, Lon Chaney
Jr., Glenn Strange and other actors in the Frankenstein films, or playing the Frankenstein Monster in other films in
the same period.
A group of well-informed horror film experts and movie enthusiasts are currently examining the evidence available
on the Classic Horror Film Board at:
http://pub20.ezboard.com/bmonsterkidclassichorrorforum
The specific discussion is called "Who Played the Monsters (film by film)" and may be found at:
http://p075.ezboard.com/fmonsterkidclassichorrorforumfrm38.showMessage?topicID=285.topic
The discussion is growing by leaps and bounds, and is gathering lots of attention in the fan community. The findings
of the group will be published, and are likely to result in the definitive attibution of stunt performer credits in the
eight Frankenstein films, reflected in Internet Movie Database entries on the performers involved, and the
information published in books and articles about this classic film series far into the future.
The evidence being discussed primarily consists of all published information known to the group, and frame by
frame examination of the films themselves.
I'm writing to see what information might be available in your archives -- studio records, career credit information,
recorded interviews, etc. -- about any stunt performers involved with these Universal films: FRANKENSTEIN,
BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN, SON OF FRANKENSTEIN, GHOST OF FRANKENSTEIN, FRANKENSTEIN
MEETS THE WOLFMAN, HOUSE OF FRANKENSTEIN, HOUSE OF DRACULA, and
BUD ABBOTT AND LOU COSTELLO MEET FRANKENSTEIN.
Again, the specific stuntmen we're currently discussing include EDDIE PARKER, GIL PERKINS, GEORGE
DeNORMAND, BUD WOLFE, DALE VAN SICKEL, ED PAYSON and CAREY LOFTIN. If you have any
information about other stunt performers who may have been involved in these films, or if you can suggest other
sources of information we could look into, we will be very grateful for anything you can do to assist us in our
investigation.
We all think very highly of the work of the stunt performers in the films we enjoy.
Thanks for your time and attention to this request.
Sincerely,
George Chastain
georgechastain
(10/24/05 5:11 pm)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Moab sounds like it might have at least started as a shrine to the group of stunt performers that worked with John
Ford on his westerns (Cliff Lyons, Frank McGrath, Fred Kennedy, etc.), but John Hagner is a writer on the subject
and he ought to be very well-informed... though maybe he just read Tom Weaver's interview like everybody else,
which certainly could be interpreted as a definite statement, coming straight from the horses' mouth. (Just
speculation, Ted -- glad to see you're taking the news so well!)
taraco
(10/24/05 5:26 pm)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Excellent letter, George...far more complete than mine was. This may get more interesting still...
Count Gamula
(10/24/05 5:50 pm)
Re: EDDIE PARKER -- Industry Giant
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Another indication of Parker's height might be found in A&C MEET DR. JEKYLL AND MR. HYDE. Karloff was
only average height (his bowed legs shortening him a bit) but from the publicity photos of Jekyll and Hyde together,
they don't look radically different in size.
Kerry Gammill
Edited by: Count Gamula at: 10/24/05 5:52 pm
taraco
(10/24/05 6:33 pm)
Re: EDDIE PARKER -- Industry Giant
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------For those who have forgotten why it matters, Don Glut maintains Parker was used for the larger Monster shots
because Perkins was shorter. Not sure we are finding that. So far...
georgechastain
(10/24/05 6:36 pm)
Publicity photos
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------This may seem implausible, but both of these A&C movies have scenes with more than one person made up like the
primary monster -- do we have absolute assurance WHO it is in the publicity photos? It might have a lot to do with
timing, but who can tell for sure. There may be a whole new category -- stand-ins for stunt doubles for photography
sessions -- that nobody's ever looked into. In Jack Pierce's day it would have been a totally different matter, but once
they started using masks, it MIGHT have been anybody behind them.
Not trying to give you a fast shuffle, but I still believe Tom Steele above a PR photo, and I know what I saw in those
four chapters of RADAR PATROL. But if further exploration is required, so be it.
Eddie Parker must be spinning in his grave.
TomWeaver999
(10/24/05 6:39 pm)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------'Hi David: Eddie Parker doubled for Lon Chaney, Jr. as The Wolfman and Gil Perkins doubled for Bela Lugosi as
Frankenstein <<
I'm afraid I have the feeling he just went to IMDb or some place like that, and came back with that answer.
Hagner's an oldtime stunt guy too, by the way. Well, not like Perkins and Parker, but I bet he goes back to the '50s.
taraco
(10/24/05 7:10 pm)
Re: EDDIE PARKER -- Industry Dervish
------------------------------------------------------------------------------->>I'm afraid I have the feeling he just went to IMDb or some place like that, and came back with that answer.
Not sure, because I was fairly detailed -- not as much as George -- but fairly detailed in my email. It wasn't just who
doubled for who, but I mentioned the conflicting versions and how most histories have listed only Parker...
Plus, I haven't really seen any place online, including IMdB, list it that way. As of today, IMdB lists Parker and
Perkins as 'stunts' in FMTWM, but does not specify further.
But I've emailed John back so we'll see if more information emerges...
david
federal operator 99
(10/24/05 8:26 pm)
Re: EDDIE PARKER -- Industry Dervish
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------I re-rendered the table strap-breaking sequence from FMTWM into an (admittedly) blurry, zoomed and cropped
.AVI file. I tried to flatten the tonal qualities (reducing the contrast) to bring out the detail lost in the shadows. Here
are six frames from the result... and I still can't help feeling I see another apparition of Ted's worst nightmare -- "The
Phantom of Parker!" ...
Edited by: federal operator 99 at: 10/24/05 8:29 pm
HalLane
(10/24/05 8:44 pm)
Re: EDDIE PARKER--Industry Dervish
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------FedOp-- You're a man after my own heart. Just look at that first frame; note the distance between the right eye/nose
and the left eye/nose: that nose swings like a gate. Look at that previous portrait of Eddie: the one where the eyes
face us, the ears face us, the mouth faces us, and the nose points off toward Mecca!
By the way, sorry for those last two posts; in my zeal to stay on topic I may have dropped the brain jar, but I think
I've got it now...
HalLane
(10/24/05 8:47 pm)
Re: Stuntman Hall...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HalLane
(10/24/05 8:57 pm)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------I can't seem to get back in and attach a comment to the above picture, so I'll just start a new one. Above are all of the
doubles -- stunt-baroness, stunt-Mannering and stunt-Talbot. It's kind of a Zapruder moment because the one we
really want to see is covered by the falling beam. So here we have no more buwwets.
Oh wait a minute...well, what do you know...one buwwewt weft...
give me a few minutes....
georgechastain
(10/24/05 9:43 pm)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------That blowup of the stand-ins is GREAT, HalLane. Highly speculative, but I think the stunt-Chaney on the table
resembles the photo of Walter DePalma in the MagicImage HOUSE OF DRACULA book... and the stunt-Baroness
seems VERY full-cheeked, though that could be an unusual effect of having her head tucked a bit. I checked Babe
DeFreest and a couple of other Republic stuntwomen, but nobody has those cheeks ... but then I took that great
blowup Fed Op showed us of the "Eddie" Monster carrying the barely-decent stunt-Baroness up the stairs (that Ted
turned into a colorful lobbycard) and rotated it 90 degress... and the gal in Frankie's arms seems to have VERY full
cheeks too!
HalLane
(10/24/05 10:04 pm)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------George, depalma1 is how I named that image because that's where I was going with this. I never saw the HoD book
(my collection ends with HoF unfortunately) but it sounds like I had the same photo (the one where Lon's sipping
water?) in mind to scan next (even tho Forry ran it in a HoF article). Somewhere in the early days I speculated that it
was Eddie strapped down as Talbot and I wanted to officially retract that position based on the above shot; sounds
like we're on the same page, sir.
Edited by: HalLane at: 10/24/05 10:31 pm
HalLane
(10/24/05 10:13 pm)
Re: EDDIE PARKER -Industry Deviated Septum
----------------------------------Meanwhile, here's our boy!
Logic dictates that these
should be mannequins, what
with all the falling debris, but
it doesn't look like that to me.
Maybe the debris was balsa
wood, or maybe this is how
Eddie broke that nose (?)
Now here's the thing: this
image is a jpg of a 4/c scan of
a pre-screened offset printed
yellow newsprint page. Not
too clear. But apparently this
same image was used, believe
it or not, as a Realart lobby
card! Someone must have this
card (not me, unfortunately), but I see that Robert Brosch lists an archivally photographed print of it in one of his
catalogs. Might be worth checking out.
Oops, I take it back-- this scan came from IT'S ALIVE!. Maybe Greg Mank has the card. Anybody got his number?
taraco
(10/24/05 10:44 pm)
DePalma?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Wait a minute. You guys are going too fast.
Are you saying that the double for the pre-transformation Chaney on the table there in FMTWM (above), is actually
Walter De Palma, the same guy who production records show doubled briefly for Strange on the fiery dock in
A&CMF?
Do I have that right?
david
'Oh Chick...'
georgechastain
(10/24/05 11:10 pm)
Re: DePalma?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------David -The MagicImage Filmbook for HOUSE OF DRACULA has a full-page picture (p. 48) of a guy the same height as
Lon Jr. giving the Wolf Man a drink of clear liquid (water? gin? vodka?) from a glass through a straw. The guy has a
pronounced hook nose, a low hairline and a full head of dark hair. When I saw HalLane's picture of the stand-ins,
this guy's face immediately came to mind and I scurried to find the book. The caption is:
"Lon Chaney, in his fourth Wolf Man film is aided by his stunt double Walter DePalma. Their friendship spanned
several decades."
taraco
(10/24/05 11:31 pm)
Re: DePalma?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Here's the photo George mentioned. from set of HOUSE OF DRACULA, Chaney and stuntman Walter De Palma -who looks to be the double on the laboratory table in FMTWM (see photos above), and who also doubled for
Strange in A&CMF on the fiery dock, briefly (as seen in photos several pages back):
david
taraco
(10/24/05 11:39 pm)
Re: DePalma?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Here's (presumably), De Palma during the fire scene in A&CMF. Production records found by Greg Mank indicate
both Glenn Starnge and De Palma, and the dummy at the end, were used to film this scene.
Anyhow, it DOES look like him:
Incidentally, we may need an image index to
this thread at some point. There are SO many
posts and pages that it is hard to find things
sometimes. Page 26 is a good marker. It has the
last full film-by-film list.
Anyhow, De Palma lives again!
david
Ted Newsom
(10/25/05 12:29 am)
Delightful, de-lovely, DeChegney?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------I think a clearer view of that F M W still will show that 3 (at least) of thr 4 actors are actually the real ones: Massey,
Knowles and Chaney. That fella on the right, with the nice straight nose and chin CLEFT, though, remains as
mysterious as the Man in the Moon. Or Mars.
The explosion shot shows the doubles.
taraco
(10/25/05 12:45 am)
Re: Brian DePalma
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Greg Mank says he reviewed the production records and they show De Palma listed as working at night during the
fire scene in A&CMF.
At some point -- because the thread is getting so unwieldy -- everything will be put into one narrative. Right now,
this is similar to raw notes, which is why I'm kinda hoping we can stay on point and keep it semi-coherent. Just
semi...
david
georgechastain
(10/25/05 12:45 am)
Re: Delightful, de-lovely, DeChegney?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------I think a clearer view of that F M W still will show that 3 (at least) of thr 4 actors are actually the real ones: Massey,
Knowles and Chaney. That fella on the right, with the nice straight nose and chin CLEFT, though, remains as
mysterious as the Man in the Moon. Or Mars.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------I AGREE with you, Ted... except for that last part, of course.
Mysterious only because he seems to be as shapeless as the Man in the Moon, like Laughton's Quasimodo -- some
people see him as short, some tall... some big, some small... chinless, cleft... nose dressed right, nose dressed left...
Who can it be? It's Little Morphin' Eddie.
taraco
(10/25/05 12:52 am)
Re: The Man on the Operating Table
------------------------------------------------------------------------------->>That fella on the right, with the nice straight nose and chin CLEFT, though, remains as mysterious as the Man in
the Moon. Or Mars.
He actually looks like LUGOSI to me!
(Although, that was the point, right? To look like Lugosi!)
david
Edited by: taraco at: 10/25/05 12:55 am
taraco
(10/25/05 1:06 am)
Monster roadies ...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------One thing I'm picking up from all this -- several of the same stunt men listed on each film, pickup shots with whoever
is around, Chaney's pal DePalma joking around with him, Perkins laughing with another stuntman about Massey, the
stuntmen themselves working on hundreds of films -- is that the sets in the 40s, like now, were mostly blue-collar
affairs with a permanent cast of characters.
And in that environment, with skilled makeup guys around to make anyone look like anyone, it could very well be
that Perkins played one week, Parker another afternoon, even someone else later.
We have no PROOF of any of that, of course. But it seems that a lot of the usual suspects were hanging around. And
some of them, like De Palma suddenly showing up in A&CMF, apparently were enlisted to wear the makeup when
needed.
If the truth emerged that it was Perkins and only Perkins, and all these conjectures and noses and lips and Eddie
Parker eyes are merely wishful thinking and playful shadows, I could accept that very easily.
But it is also not beyond the realm of probability that Parker is indeed buried in the makeup there someplace -- the
lab table, one of the shots carrying Ilona, a fight shot?
We can prove who WAS there. It's hard to prove who wasn't. But perhaps these efforts to reach stunt experts may
bear sudden fruit. Hope so.
david
'Will our search....never end?'
Rick
(10/25/05 2:16 am)
Re: Monster roadies ...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Way back in the early decades of this incredible thread, there was some speculation that there may have been an
earlier reference to Eddie Parker doubling in FMTWM than the Don Grant/Glut article in MODERN MONSTERS.
Well, there was, sort of. In HORROR MONSTERS #5 (1962) there is an article cleverly titled, ôWill the Real
Frankie Please Stand Up?ö The piece is a quickie overview of the monsterÆs changing appearance from film to film.
In the short section on MEETS THE WOLFMAN, the writer says, ôLugosi also used a double in approximately half
of the monster scenes. The double was probably Eddie Parker, who was working for Universal during that period.ö
As was typical for Charlton, no byline was given. Perhaps it was one of the ôSad Staffö listed on the editorial page.
Maybe Editor Sanzar Quasatoad. Or Associate Editor Quaszar Sanatoad. Of course, the article, even beyond the
æprobably,Æ proves nothing. Except that there was at least one fleeting, qualified reference to Parker pre-1966.
Also, I havenÆt read the long-ago mentioned Filmfax article by Jim Harmon on George DeNormand and his
work on BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN. But, while prowling through my old mags, I did find what is probably
HarmonÆs first word on the subject. In MONSTERS OF THE MOVIES #2 (Aug. 1974) thereÆs a two-page
interview of DeNormand, by Harmon. In the interview DeNormand sounds very much like the real deal. When asked
the title of the Frankenstein film heÆd worked on, DeNormand says, ôI wasnÆt paying much attention to titles then.
I moved from one picture to another too fast. The first thing I did was down in some kind of pitàJimmy Whale was
the director.ö Harmon suggests it was the scene under the burned-out mill. DeNormand says, ôYes, that sounds right.
The thing I remember most vividly is getting into that makeup. It took hours. I sat in one chair and Karloff sat in the
other. Jack Pierce, a real artist, made up Boris, and I drew his assistant, Otto Lederer. He followed the makeup step
by step on me. Otto was a big, good-natured fellow, always cracking jokes. It broke up the tedium of sitting in that
chair.ö Harmon then asks if DeNormand remembers any doubling other than in the pit. DeNormand says, ôI
remember there was one scene where Frankenstein--thatÆs me--goes nuts and starts to smash up everything in this
laboratory.ö I havenÆt re-watched BRIDE to check, but is it possible that George DeNormand did some of the
stomping around just before Boris blew them all to atoms? To me, DeNormandÆs story about the makeup has the
ring of truth. And since the only two scenes he seemed to remember are the pit and the lab, maybe our credits for him
need some rethinking.
Also, in my mag search I came across MAD MONSTERS #5, with its ôFilmbookö on FRANKENSTEIN
MEETS THE WOLF MAN. There are four photos of the monster in the article. Two are Lugosi, one is the famous
pub shot of Gil Perkins, I guess, toting the babe-I-licious Miss Massey, and one is of whomever is strapped to that
table just before the climax.
This thread is amazing. And I am glad to finally have something to add to it, even if I never will get all the
crumbling newsprint off my hands.
TomWeaver999
(10/25/05 4:11 am)
Re: The Man on the Operating Table
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------<< Jack Pierce, a real artist, made up Boris, and I drew his assistant, Otto Lederer. >>
Otto Lederer definitely worked on BRIDE, yes.
"Smash up everything in this laboratory" ... well, there's BRIDE, where the Monster does a little bit of damage. But
maybe also SON, when the Monster starts throwing and kicking all the lab stuff off the edge of the lab into the sulfur
pit?
I tend to think it's NOT a '40s movie since he doesn't mention fire or the Wolf Man.
DonM435
(10/25/05 7:16 am)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------In HORROR MONSTERS #5 (1962) there is an article cleverly titled, ôWill the Real Frankie Please Stand Up?ö
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Aha! Back on Page 8 of this thread I swore I'd read a reference to Parker prior to the Glut/Grant landmark, even said
it might have been in one of the universally-depricated Charlton mags. That's it. Thanks for verifying this, Rick.
taraco
(10/25/05 9:44 am)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------That's really terrific information, Rick.
Thanx for finding the Parker reference, the DeNormand interview and, especially, taking the time to type in the
quotes and other information you found. It really adds to the discussion.
I'm struck by the use of the word 'probably' for Eddie Parker in HORROR MONSTERS #5. It seems what became
etched in Vasarian stone later began as a supposition, even in the early monster magazines.
Recall, too, that Don Glut posted way back that he first read about a stuntman being used in an issue of MONSTERS
AND THINGS.
Dennis Druktenis has reproduced a copy of the first rare 1959 ashcan issue, but it does not include anything on
Parker or the films involved. Perhaps he has the other issues. I'll email and ask.
Only two issues of MONSTERS AND THINGS were printed, the
second one in April, 1959.
The second issue's cover promises the 'Story of Frankenstein' inside.
Here's a copy of the cover. DOES ANYONE HAVE THIS ISSUE?
(If so, can you let us know what it says, if anything, about the
stuntman, or Eddie Parker?)
Again, thanx Rick and everyone who digs into their various vaults.
Good man, good man.
david
'He was ... hunting.'
georgechastain
(10/25/05 11:48 am)
Re: Monster references...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------...for which this film scholar shall dine:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------EDITED
I have both issues of MONSTERS AND THINGS (the first monsterzines I ever bought), but I believe Don Glut only
said that he first read about Lugosi being doubled in that magazine, not Eddie Parker's name.
Vol. 1, No. 2 (April 1959) of MONSTERS AND THINGS has an article called "The Story of Frankenstein" by
Marie Oliveri. This feature provides a whirlwind tour of the Universal series, with very brief capsule descriptions
and a nice selection of photos, including the famous one of Belastein strangling the Wolf Man from FMtWM. The
coverage of that film says:
"Next in the series was 'Frankenstein Meets the Wolfman' -- and by this time even the movie-makers had given up
trying to pin the name on the doctor instead of his creation. In this film, Bela Lugosi played the Monster. Ironically
enough, he had refused the original part back in 1931, because it was not a speaking role and Lugosi was
tremendously proud of his voice. It's also interesting to know that in 'Frankenstein Meets the Wolfman,' an unnamed
stuntman filled in for Lugosi in every heavy scene, including the famous fight scene between the two creatures of the
title. Lugosi came in as the Monster only for a few close-ups, to growl a few times! Since he was 58 years old at the
time, however, you can't really blame him!"
Later in the article, this synopsis is given:
"In 'Frankenstein Meets the Wolfman,' the Monster doesn't appear until the second half of the picture. Then Lon
Chaney as the Wolfman (in one of his hairless stages) finds him under the burned ruins. Wolfman frees Monster,
who turns out to have 20-20 vision again. Of course, after another fight in the ruins of the castle, one of the villagers
blows up a dam which is conveniently located up a hill in back of the ruins. The flood waters sweep down,
apparently drowning both Wolfman and Monster as the remaining walls collapse."
Earlier in the article, there's a paragraph updating the Monster's status at the time of publication, mentioning
FRANKENSTEIN'S DAUGHTER, FRANKENSTEIN -- 1970, THE CURSE OF FRANKENSTEIN, and THE
REVENGE OF FRANKENSTEIN, and concluding:
"....and at this writing [we] are waiting for FRANKENSTEIN CREATED WOMAN as well as a Frankenstein TV
series."
Hope this helps, though we're back at square one with the search for earlier Parker plugs.
Edited by: georgechastain at: 10/25/05 11:51 am
taraco
(10/25/05 12:29 pm)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------->> but I believe Don Glut only said that he first read about Lugosi being doubled in that magazine, not Eddie
Parker's name.
You're exactly right, George. Sorry for my mistake and I've corrected the post above.
Thanx especially for excerpts from the magazine...
Pinning down the first known printed reference to Eddie Parker --by name -- is what we need to do now somehow.
Was it Modern Monsters? Horror Monsters #5 (1962)? Famous Monsters??
david
HalLane
(10/25/05 12:42 pm)
Re: Delightful, de-lovely, DeChegney?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------I think a clearer view of that F M W still will show that 3 (at least) of the 4 actors are actually the real ones
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yep, that was exactly my point: three are the real deal, but the fourth isn't Lugosi.
Let's go right to the film: obviously Lugosi begins the sequence, well lit to showcase his patrician features. But as
Knowles starts up the machines, just before the baroness comes in, there's been a cut: the lighting now casts shadow
on the monster's left side, as shown above. Also the lower strap, which was below Bela's knees, is now above the
bent knees of a much taller man. Now we come to the strap-busting shot; but there's been another cut: now the
monster is lit from the left with the shadows falling to the right. And there's no lower strap at all; he just slides to the
floor.
What I'm saying is: One scene, Three set-ups. And three different performers for all I know. That's why I think that
particular shot deserves closer scrutiny.
I will point out what I haven't seen mentioned before: that Eddie Parker w/o makeup bears a much stronger facial
resemblance to Bela than does Gil Perkins (and even moreso to Bela Jr!), and that might hypothetically be a reason
for someone to want to use him in a closeup where he basically makes no attempt to hide his face, as stuntmen
usually do. Just an observation.
(By the way, Ted, I loved that hypothetical monster dialog a few pages back! That's the version I want to see! Maybe
Universal can hire Kerry Gammill to draw it up for us).
HalLane
(10/25/05 1:21 pm)
The Man on the Lab Room Table
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Here's different still from a slightly different angle of Gil Perkins in KING KONG (MY
FAVORITE FILM, BY THE WAY). I suppose it could be him as the "second shooter"
in that scene I talk about above.
"Man, this fog is thick! Charlie, I wish you'd make your soup as thick as this!"
federal operator 99
(10/25/05 8:43 pm)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------In a thread that has (sadly) seemingly served to underscore the brevity of Bela's scenes in FMTWM, I thought I
would add these frame grabs of Lugosi as a particular vital and -- dare I say -- even ferocious adversary of the Wolf
Man:
And the clearest frame I've been able to grab to date of the monster-in-ice:
And a montage that more clearly shows Ted's laugh-line/scar
in the actor's left cheek, not to mention a suggestion of the
peculiar expression(s) of which Tom spoke:
Edited by: federal operator 99 at: 10/25/05 8:52 pm
george
chastain
(10/25/05 8:52 pm)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Regarding the Op's latest barrage of magnificent frame grabs -- even before they've finished downloading, I spotted
something: note the position of the forehead scar on Bela and the guy in the ice (who looks more like Gil Perkins
than ever to me). When I was harping on the difficulty of being sure of the orientation of the images being compared
(left leaning nosebreaks, missing earlobes, et. al.) this is what I was talking about. Surely one or the other of these
clips was reversed in the cutting room?... unless Jack Pierce was mighty lax in what he permitted to be done with his
monsters!
OOPS -- they finished downloading, and suddenly the first big image of Perkinstein has magically been reversed -so now it's oriented properly! My mistake (what's going on, Fed Op?!)
OK, so NOW my argument is: how do you know some smart guy processing those images from the film hasn't
reversed something?!?! Easiest thing in the world to do with Photoshop.
It's too bad Bela didn't get a chance to try some of those faces in a fiery climax... they're a big improvement on Lon's
frogface, IMHO.
federal operator 99
(10/25/05 8:56 pm)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------note the position of the forehead scar on Bela and the guy in the ice
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Sorry, George, I first posted the photos "flopped" (or "mirror-imaged"), then re-edited the post with the pics in their
proper orientation...
georgechastain
(10/25/05 9:01 pm)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------S'OK, Fed Op -I was getting pretty cocky, and you took me down a peg, but I re-edited my note to reflect what happened anyway...
but I think my basic point is still valid -- the processing of photography includes plenty of opportunities for flopping
an image. Whether it's on the movie screen, or on the Web, or printed in a book, things can easily get reversed,
sometimes by accident, sometimes intentionally.
HalLane
(10/25/05 9:21 pm)
Re: The Man on the Lab Room Table
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here's our Eddie
getting his clock
cleaned by Eddie
Dean in Shadow
Valley (PRC 1947).
Awww...and
look...he's wearing
that "frowny face"
he likes to use
when he's bustin'
straps. Good thing
he doesn't need his
Jack Pierce
prosthetic chin
dimple for this
shot.
The Batman of Gotham
(10/25/05 9:30 pm)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------He also has a decidedly defined ear lobe, too. As I see it.
- GJS
georgechastain
(10/25/05 9:34 pm)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Are you sure that's Ed, HalLane? I never would have recognized him from that shot!
Ted Newsom
(10/25/05 10:17 pm)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Oh, George, George, stop opting for the dyslexic editor theory. The Ripper was Sir William Gull, operating on his
own but protected by the Masonic brotherhood. Let's get up to date.
Is that really Parker? The pic probably identifies him as such, but I don't know... Parker seems to have a softer face-this guy looks pretty grim, like Roy Barcroft or somebody like that.
Fed Op! What's the chance of getting one of those super-duper pics of the strap burster in profile. NOW we've got a
REAL ear to compare! (And if the ears match, I'll eat another crow. I'm getting to like it.)
georgechastain
(10/25/05 11:38 pm)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Here's our Eddie getting his clock cleaned by Eddie Dean in Shadow Valley (PRC 1947). Awww...and look...he's
wearing that "frowny face" he likes to use when he's bustin' straps.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Didn't mean to doubt you, HalLane -- I've been going thru old books and
magazines tonight, trying to find stuff to contribute to the Quest, and I just ran
across that same photo of the 2 Eddies in one of Alan Barbour's books -- he
certainly would know! (Always loved his books, especially the ones on serials.)
I guess the dark hair might've thrown me, in most of the stuff I've noticed him in
he seems to be sandy-haired, a redhead or some other sort of fair-haired boy.
While I was looking at one of Barbour's other books (on westerns) I stumbled
upon this shot ... here's that picture you wanted of the "strap burster in profile,"
Ted:
(I know, you meant the MONSTER on the table, not Eddie Parker. Just rattlin'
your cage (snicker)...
Count Gamula
(10/26/05 12:12 am)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Are you sure that's Ed, HalLane? I never would have recognized him from that shot!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------I think the one Eddie Parker picture we have here that's not Eddy is a page or two back. It shows a guy with a
mustache and dark curly hair with his head thrown back from a punch. I know it's identified as Parker in one of Alan
Barbour's books, but it doesn't look anything like the other pictures I've seen of him.
Kerry Gammill
Rick
(10/26/05 1:12 am)
Re: Ilona's underwear and other delights in Frankenstein fil
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Did anybody else, while slo-mowing through GHOST OF FRANK, find yourself taking a long look at Evelyn
Ankers' bedroom scene, where she's talking to Cedric wearing a rather revealing negligee?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------No, but, actually I haven't seen GHOST in quite a while, probably should give it a look...
Hopping back for just a moment to BRIDE and George DeNormand...the man said he busted up a lab, but there's not
really a lot of that in BRIDE. But, as we all know, the end of that movie was re-jiggered to save the good doctor. Is it
possible there was more lab-busting that got lost when the ending was altered?
PShields79
(10/26/05 1:28 am)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Check out the makeup (cotton? or latex?) around the Monster's electrodes in that great ice close-up. Looks like they
might fall off pretty easily. And check out the heavy makeup around the right sideburn.
And does that forehead looked squashed to you?
taraco
(10/26/05 3:04 am)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------In the close-up of the Monster in the ice, the dimple seems really prominent, so distinctive that I wonder why it was
not covered with makeup.
Unless it IS makeup? A built-up dimple to match Bela?
But those indeed are the best, most telling frame grabs yet, Federal One.
From recent photos, unless any are in error, it seems more Perkins than Parker in the ice. But I'm convinced Parker
does have an ear lobe. And that's no small thing!
So what's the most convincing case for Parker being the Monster in any scene, at this point?
-------------------------------------------------------------Note also:
-- First printed mention of a stuntman used in Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man (that
we've found so far): MONSTERS AND THINGS #2 (1959)
-- First printed mention of "Eddie Parker" as the stuntman (that we've found so far):
HORROR MONSTERS #5 (1962): Article, which has no byline, says the double was
"probably Eddie Parker."
Can we find anything earlier? Anyone willing to flip through their pre-62 oldest Famous Monsters?
Also, the Don Glut/Don Grant article mentioning Eddie Parker apparently appeared in MODERN MONSTERS (all
four issues of which were printed in 1966). Does anyone know which issue?
(#1 had an alien in swamp cover, but cover blurbs a Frankenstein article; #2 had Bela as Dracula; #3 had the
Mummy; #4 had the Invisible Man). I don't have the actual magazines; going by a price guide.
david — Edited by: taraco at: 10/26/05 4:04 am
Count Gamula
(10/26/05 4:26 am)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------In the close-up of the Monster in the ice, the dimple seems really prominent, so distinctive that I wonder why it was
not covered with makeup.
Unless it IS makeup? A built-up dimple to match Bela?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------I don't understand this logic, David. Why do you
wonder why Perkin's chin dimple was not covered
up and at the same time wonder if it was added
deliberately to match Bela's? As for it being
make-up, with all due respect to Jack Pierce, it
would have been beyond his ability to do such a
flawless and seamless chin appliance with his
techniques. look at the obvious blends of the
electrodes on the neck and the forehead piece. That
is a real chin, with perhaps some slight shading
added. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if that chin
helped convince the producers that Perkins could
pass for Lugosi in the big introductory close-ups. Lugosi's chin dimple was one of his most distinctive features and it
was the feature of Perkin's that most closely resembled Lugosi.
Kerry Gammill
Edited by: Count Gamula at: 10/26/05 4:33 am
federal operator 99
(10/26/05 7:18 am)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Fed Op! What's the chance of getting one of those super-duper pics of the strap burster in profile. NOW we've got a
REAL ear to compare!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------These are the best images I can capture of the strap-buster, due to the actor's distance from the camera and the
lighting of the scene (I've tried to make adjustments for both, but nothing to revealing, I'm afraid)...
[Redacted]
Ted Newsom
(10/26/05 8:35 am)
Re: Monster chasm
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Hey, Kerry... I have been severely upbraided for referring to that indentation as a dimple. Someone here (ahem.
Kaff-kaff) said it is properly a cleft. I wouldn't want you to go through similar social embarrassment.
Thing look like a dam' dimple t'me, tho'.
Hey, Perry... from the lumpiness of the jaw scar, I'd guess it's a mortician's wax build-up with the scar carved in after
the fact. With cotton and collodion (or, heaven forbid, a rubber plliance, which is unlikely) you could taper it better
at the edges, like the earlier joins between the rubber headpiece and Karloff's real face. The attached electrodes
always looked to me as if they were anchored by a thin rubber appliance which was glued on. Just poking a couple of
pieces of real metal into nose putty would be pretty unstable.
David?!?! What is it with your beauty mark fixation? You and the beauty mark, David S and his hairy arms! The
answer is yes! Yes! It's there to match the one on Lugosi's face! Arrgghh! Good call.
Now, it's kind of a superficial attempt at matching-- as if that's going to transform a Perk into a Lugo, or vice versa.
With a tip of the hat to Pierce, his design ability did not run to Adrian Messenger style duplication of faces. I can't
think of one example in the 30 years he was active. Old age makeups, yep, glamour, absolutely, monsters and
characters, yupyup. But no Rick Baker style Landau-to-Lugosi things. It's next to impossible, and certainly wasn't an
option back then with cotton and collodion. Even that Landau thing doen't work very well; it's a suggestion, but not a
tranformation. Check out the unsuccessful attempts to make Vincent Price into his various enemies in The Mad
Magician; Clay Campbell's work, I think; again, not very successful. It's rather like real plastic surgery as opposed to
movie plastic surgery: you can alter the physog by additions and/or shading, but you can't make it over into a
duplication of someone else. You can kinda do it nowdays with a complete latex face, using an exterior mask made
from the old actor's face and an interior negative-mold of the new actor (John Goodwin transformed me into a
near-duplicate of Chaney's Phantom for a print ad; amazing. Nothing of my features left except the eyes.)
The Monster's beauty mark is a residual visual element carried over from the Karloff original design, a darkening of
the actual indentation of Karloff's face when he took his partial bridge out. It's consistent through all three of his
films, but of course vanishes with Chaney, whose full face didn't and couldn't be made to look cadaverous. You can
make a thin face look a little heavier (at least nowdays, with appliances), but you can't make fat cheeks look sunkern.
Likewise, Lugosi didn't have Karloff's angular features and apparently he didn't have Karloff's false teeth, not that he
would've worn Karloff's false teeth anyway. The little spot also carries over into the Glenn Strange make-up, and,
again, his big, craggy face was not the nearly triangular one of Karloff, so making a sunken impression was
impossible.
(It's a bauty mark rather than a hollow in the faux-Monster on Route 66. Probably one of the things Karloff referred
to when he said there wasn't enough time to do it properly.)
So apparently the feisty little make-up guy was quite proud of the simple transformation of a rangy stuntman into an
aristocratic character actor with this dark dot of an eyebrow pencil. Personally, I don't think it quite works the way it
was intended. I can sorta see a difference between Perkins and Lugosi... hmm...
Agree with the idea that Perkins may have been cast partially because of the chin. Very surprising that Pierce didn't
do a nose to emulate Lugosi's however.
Regarding the profile-- with my close-up request, I guess I was thinking of the facing-right Ilona-Grabber rather than
the Strap-Breaker. And I guess we're agreed that Mr. Massey-Clutcher is Perkins anyhoo, right?
Edited by: Ted Newsom at: 10/26/05 10:31 am
Ted Newsom
(10/26/05 8:37 am)
Question for the ages
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------So what's the most convincing case for Parker being the Monster in any scene, at this point?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Rumor.
And Professional Stuntman Bart Andrews.
I think you'll find the Parker article in MM # 4, the mummy issue, which ties into the now-disproved theory that Big
Ed doubled Chaney.
taraco
(10/26/05 9:20 am)
Re: Question for the ages
------------------------------------------------------------------------------->>Why do you wonder why Perkin's chin dimple was not covered up and at the same time wonder if it was added
deliberatly to match Bela's?
Merely speculating from all angles.
I do think the dimple -- er, cleft -- argues persuasively to Perkins in the ice shot.
Thanx on MODERN MONSTERS, Ted, although my price guide shows #3 was the Mummy cover. If anyone has
the issue and can check on what the Don Grant (Glut) article said about Parker, it would be greatly appreciated.
david
HalLane
(10/26/05 9:35 am)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------A blizzard of visual activity. I'm impressed.
Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------I think the one Eddie Parker picture we have here that's not Eddy is a page or two back...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Kerry, I agree with you: he's kinda got that Dick Foran thing going on, tho he's supposed to look like Roy Barcroft in
Haunted Harbor (Republic 1944), hence the little mustache, but who am I to put the lie to Alan G. Barbour? I
suspect if Mr. Barber were still with us he just might be eating a little crow.
I used to be the prepress manager for Marvel Comics @ American Color (before I quit to stay home and change
diapers), and the first thing I learned was how easy it is to say something stupid in print and have it become Gospel,
so I try to be careful. I say we withdraw that photo from the mix until such time as someone can prove it's our Mr.
Parker.
Dr Gangrene
(10/26/05 9:47 am)
Parker vs. Perkins
------------------------------------------------------------------------------So do these look like the same people?
Not to me.
Dave, you're absolutely right to try to find people who
knew these fellows. Relatives, associates. fellow
stuntmen - surely there has to be someone still around
who remembers them talking about working on these
films.
Edited by: Dr Gangrene at: 10/26/05 9:49 am
georgechastain
(10/26/05 9:51 am)
Re: Monster chasm
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Hey, Kerry... I have been severely upbraided for referring to that indentation as a dimple. Someone here (ahem.
Kaff-kaff) said it is properly a cleft. I wouldn't want you to go through similar social embarrassment.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------My argument was all about the visual context, Ted and David:
guy in ice, dimple; guy on lab table, cleft (with fleeting apparent pseudo-dimples possibly resulting from clenched
chin muscles and/or concealment of base of cleft).
Perkins and Lugosi and Kirk Douglas = dimple. Parker and Cary Grant = cleft.
georgechastain
(10/26/05 9:59 am)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------I think the one Eddie Parker picture we have here that's not Eddy is a page or two back. It shows a guy with a
mustache and dark curly hair with his head thrown back from a punch. I know it's identified as Parker in one of Alan
Barbour's books, but it doesn't look anything like the other pictures I've seen of him.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------I actually have an easier time seeing Parker in that shot than I do in the other, Kerry -- the lip shrubbery is
misleading, for sure... he's got the same kind of hair, at least. I looked in my "Big Box of Westerns" in the basement
(mostlyl cheezy homemade tapes) to see if I had a copy of that Dean/Parker shot, but nope.
With Alan Barbour at least you can have SOME confidence that he's seen the movies he talks about.
Greater fanaticism hath no man than to watch Eddie Dean movies for the sake of an argument.
HalLane
(10/26/05 10:07 am)
Parker vs. Perkins
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------So do these look like the same people?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Not to me they don't; never did.
I have been thinking that the strap-buster looks a lot like the final shot of the monster, standing in his street shoes and
getting the water dumped on him; the pronounced character lines in the cheek and the stocky build remind me of this.
Did Perkins specifically say he was the monster in that shot or could he have been the jumping werewolf, the one
still wearing the electric dog collar and enough butt-padding to fill a Pampers ad (neither of which Chaney
apparently had any use for)? Perkins would seem to be a slender fellow, judging from those KING KONG photos.
georgechastain
(10/26/05 10:10 am)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Thanx on MODERN MONSTERS, Ted, although my price guide shows #3 was the Mummy cover. If anyone has
the issue and can check on what the Don Grant (Glut) article said about Parker, it would be greatly appreciated.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Got it right here, David. Don's article about Eddie Parker is in MODERN MONSTERS #3 (with the Mummy cover),
August 1966: "Monsterman for all Occasions", "A MODERN MONSTERS Exclusive!" by Don Grant, pp. 50-57.
There's also a picture of Lou and Klaris from A&C MEET THE MUMMY in the article on the Mummy, p. 42. He's
identified as "Eddy Parker."
Gotta go print and mail posters, but I'll be back later! This is too much fun to miss.
Dr Gangrene
(10/26/05 10:23 am)
Re: Monster chasm
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
again, looks like two seperate fellows to me, perkins on the left with
the dimple, someone else (Parker?) on the right with a chin cleft. The
face on the left looks squatter and broader, the one on the right longer.
HalLane
(10/26/05 10:58 am)
Re: Monster chasm
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here's one that Alan Barbour didn't identify. Anyone know
if Gil Perkins was in Angel and the Badman (Republic
1947) with the Duke? Either way, I can see this guy wearing
neckbolts and black lipstick.
I meant the guy in the middle.
TomWeaver999
(10/26/05 11:03 am)
Re: Monster chasm
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------<< surely there has to be someone still around who remembers them talking about working on these films <<
I wouldn't be so sure, I'm afraid. Up until the '70s, I bet you could count on the fingers of one hand the people who
talked seriously to horror oldtimers about their classic credits, for print. By the time all these questions were "born"
(in the minds of fans), 90 percent of the answers had died. And most of the paperwork had been scrapped (or put in a
box in some warehouse, never to be seen again).
Ted Newsom
(10/26/05 11:19 am)
The Face on Mars
federal operator 99
(10/26/05 11:52 am)
Re: What does Bela See???
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------I think Bela is mocking us, because he knows he has no less than three (count 'em -- 3) different stunt doubles in
FMTWM!....
Double No. 1:
Double No. 2:
Double No. 3:
rvoyttbots
(10/26/05 12:08 pm)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Back to Bataan was a war movie, your showing a photo from a western (?) I believe the strap-breaker is Parker. The
iceman is definitely Perkins. I got a feeling that Pierce didn`t do the makeup on the stuntman with the protruding
brow and too much lipstick. (A crossdressing Frankie! O, my!)
Edited by: rvoyttbots at: 10/26/05 12:11 pm
HalLane
(10/26/05 12:09 pm)
Re: Monster chasm
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Great screen grabs, FedOp! Now we're gettin' down to business!
I kinda think that #2 and #3 might be the same guy on different days, made up by an assistant or something. I thought
you meant the other #3, the guy throwing barrels (remember him?). The guy with the pug nose and the boyish
face...the guy who seems comfortable working in wagons...the guy who...is starting to sound like...Dave Sharpe......
rvoyttbots
(10/26/05 12:17 pm)
Re: Monster chasm
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Can you put the photo of the sissy looking Frank next to the strapbreaker? And what`s with the beauty mark on the
cheek?
Ted Newsom
(10/26/05 12:19 pm)
Monster set design
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------The wider view of Strapp-Breaker is pulling me toward the multiple stuntman theory, believe it or not. I'd never
noticed the framing and the generic quality of the set. Logically there would be no design or photographic reason to
have the masonry in the foreground; I don't think there's anything like that in the wider views of the set, since it
seems three-sided, open from the main camera position. One reason-- perhaps THE reason-- to put that in there is to
mask off a portion of what isthere because they didn't want to go to the extent of recreating the entire set after the
fact (say, for instance, if this shot was made after the flood shot and, supposing again, the floor or even the lower part
of the operating table was damaged). There's still no proof other that facial comparison that this guy is Ed Parker,
and that gets us back to this dreadful cart-before-the-horse logic. Since popular myth is that Ed Parker played the
Monster, he HAS to be the Monster in there somewhere.
Mr. Straight-Arm DOES look different from the other two monsters-- but damned if he doesn't look like Glenn
Strange, and we know he isn't. Again, there is a possible interior-logic explanation for this guy's idiot windmill arm
movements-- he could have been told to emulate Lugosi's movements earlier in the film (which were done because
mostly because he's supposed to be blind, but there's a photo of him walking through the village at night with a
clock-maker sign off to one side, and he's holding his arms straight down with unflexed fingers, just like Mr.
Werewolf-Wrestler does.)
HalLane
(10/26/05 12:23 pm)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Back to Bataan was a war movie...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Gulp! Of course you're right; I knew I got up too early to read these posts. I'll go back and fix it. Then I'm going back
to bed.
What I meant to type was, of course, Angel and the Badman (Republic 1947).
The still from Back to Bataan is a nice one, tho. Wayne looks just like Nick Fury. Maybe I should just post that one
too. G'night, folks.
taraco
(10/26/05 1:00 pm)
Re: Look Sharpe, be Sharpe!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Ya know...even there on the wagon...the dimple, man. The dimple.
Count Gamula
(10/26/05 1:28 pm)
Re: Monster chasm
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Anyone know if Gil Perkins was in Angel and the Badman (Republic 1947)?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Looks kinda like him except for the mouth. Perkins looks a lot like Dave O'Brien (who is not in the cast list for
ANGEL AND THE BAD MAN) and would have been a great double for him. I wonder if he might have work on the
Captain Midnight serial.
Kerry Gammill
HalLane
(10/26/05 1:46 pm)
Monster set design
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------I'd never noticed the framing and the generic quality of the set
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Good point, Ted. This is what I'd been proposing earlier: one scene, Three different lighting set-ups (see stills posted
above)-- and that doesn't include any changes made when the doubles were brought in for the explosion.
I realize that the height of the actors is irrelevant when they're wearing the big shoes, but I meant earlier that the
sequence starts with Lugosi, but the next shot has a face that kinda "looks like Lugosi" as David pointed out, but the
body has changed while as you pointed out the other three "real" actors are still there. This is where the switch was
made while Lugosi was probably in his trailer with a cigar and a slice of birthday cake, and the fact that the knees
change position from shot to shot suggests that it may not be a mannequin.
Just trying to put a positive spin on some conflicting visual information.
Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------"...connect the plus to the minus...."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Count Gamula
(10/26/05 2:17 pm)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------In case I haven't said so before, I think the guy getting off the table might be Eddie Parker. Perkins' face is leaner and
the "dimple" does look more like a "cleft" in that scene. The nose is still throwing me off, though. Did someone say
Parker's nose was broken at some point? Was it before or after 1943? It's hard to tell who the stiff-armed guy is
because the make-up is so different. Must have been a rush job by an assistant or something. Too much lipstick and
the eyelids are too heavy giving him a kinda dopey look. The brow looks too high up too. There is a bit of a dimple
or cleft visible in one shot, though, confusing things all the more.
Kerry Gammill
federal operator 99
(10/26/05 3:06 pm)
Re: Of clefts and dimples...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------No doubt this is Eddie Parker, as all the really pronounced clefts and dimples are displayed by the girls that
surround him?...
HalLane
(10/26/05 3:06 pm)
Look Sharpe, be Sharpe!
------------------------------------------------------Then there's this bozo, Shepard Wong...I mean
Ghost of Frankenstein.
I'm trying to stay on target, and I thought this
guy reminded me of the guy taking a shower in
his street shoes @ the end of FMTWM, but
now I don't know. That face seems pretty
lumpy (never mind the crooked flattop).
Mebbe we'll just put this aside for now.
And speaking of putting things aside, and in
the interest of expediency, I think this bum
nose business is a bum steer. Since I'm the one who first floated that particular boat, I suggest we remove it from the
equation; just because Eddie had one in 1943 doesn't mean it was pronounced in 1942. I don't believe in putting the
cart before the horse either, and I don't insist that Eddie's getting off that table, but I just feel that he plays the
monster in that movie somewhere, because after all
Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------"...every legend has a basis in truth!"
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------And who am I to argue with Carl Denham?
Rick
(10/26/05 3:12 pm)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Can we find anything earlier? Anyone willing to flip through their pre-62 oldest Famous Monsters?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------I sorta did that yesterday. I can't say I fine-tooth-combed them, but I flipped through and checked any article that was
in the ballpark, anything about Frankenstein or the individual films, anything about the Wolf Man, or Karloff,
Lugosi, Chaney Jr., Strange, stuntmen. I checked all the FMs from 2-25 (except #4--#1 and #4 are the two I've never
owned...sigh), all the Fantastic Monsters except #1 which I know I have but could not find, all the Charltons, and
odds and ends like the Shrieks, Monsters and Vampires (is that the title?), Journal of Frankenstein, a few other
things. I didn't find anything else of interest to this thread. And now that I look at this list, I realize I didn't check
Castle of Frankenstein. What's up with that? I'll check CoF if I have time, which may not be the case for a couple of
days.
My searching did find lots of neat stuff, especially in the letters columns. Missives from Mark McGee, John Soister,
Dave Szurek, a photo of young Bill Warren with Forry, and, best of all, a 1977 letter (in Photon?) from a very
worried Timothy R. Lucas, who was quite concerned about a Bava article because he, young Timothy, was working
on the definitive Bava book. Hey, Tim, good luck with that!
taraco
(10/26/05 3:17 pm)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Thanx for checking, Rick. Even the finding of no-mentions is something, if you know what I mean.
david
taraco
(10/26/05 3:26 pm)
Re: Stiff arming
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>Will you hurry up and finish this thread boys, the President is waiting for this information!
It wil probably never be finished!!
But hopefully, with more interviews and research, we can come up with a preliminary finding. And yes, this could be
a great article. The first CHFB Special report! Hopefully!
Still several people we need to reach, though, so let's not close the Vasarian books quite yet...
david
Ted Newsom
(10/26/05 3:45 pm)
Re: Stiff
-------------------------------
arming
-----------------------------------------------
rvoyttbots
(10/26/05 3:45 pm)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------There is nothing in FM 1 except a photo on pg 55 of the stuntman carrying Ilonna Massey. He has the beauty mark
on his right cheek and a very distinctive chin cleft and the scar on the right temple. It looks like the back of his head
piece near the neck bolt has come loose. And there is nothing in issue 4.
OK, I checked back and it is the same photo on pg 7 of this thread which most here believe is Gil Perkins.
TomWeaver999
(10/26/05 4:52 pm)
Re: Stiff arming
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Seeing SON OF FRANK in 35mm the other week, I think I noticed a couple times when Karloff does the stiff-arm,
outstretched-fingers bit -- for instance, in the scene where the Monster (lying down) quickly climbs to his feet and
grabs Wolf. It didn't look to me like he closed his fingers around Wolf's clothing at all, just kinda jumped up and
chopsticked him in place with the stiff arms.
HalLane
(10/26/05 6:31 pm)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Just thought I'd throw this out there for a quick show of hands. It's
Dave Sharpe from Daredevils of the Red Circle (Republic
1939).The head shape looks about right for barrel boy, but he'd
need a putty dimple on the chin. And have you noticed how baggy
the barrel thrower's pants are? That guy is small. Any takers?
Edited by: HalLane at: 10/27/05 9:16 am
rvoyttbots
(10/26/05 7:04 pm)
Re: Stiff arming
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------I believe the sloppy makeup job on sissy Frank is a plus for the idea another stuntman was used besides Perkins to
reshoot the Wolf Man/Monster fight after principal photographer wrapped for the film.
specterman
(10/26/05 7:28 pm)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Man I hate to even bring this up but I was talking about this thread to another dyed in the wool monster kid and he
swears he had an issue of a monster mag from the early 60's that said Yakima Cannut filled in for the monster in one
of the films somewhere.
Rick
(10/26/05 8:09 pm)
Re: Stiff arming
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Just had another possible idea for research. If anyone has any of Warren's SCREEN THRILLS, it might be worth a
look. I used to have the whole run, but got rid of them decades ago. Literally. But, as I recall, there was a lot of
coverage of serials and b-westerns and, I think, stunt men. I'm positive that's where I first read of Yakima Canutt, and
possibly of Dave Sharpe and Dale Van Sickel. I have no memory of anything to do with the Frankensteins, but, as I
said, it's been ages.
Ted Newsom
(10/26/05 8:15 pm)
Re: Stiff arming
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------I don't remember any mention of monster films in Screen Thrills, but ya never know.
Yakima Canutt indeed.
Hey, maybe Yak wore the yak hair? Or he was the mystery double in GHOST OF FRANKENSTEIN?
Or maybe Ray Corrigan.
Or... arrggghhh.
taraco
(10/26/05 8:50 pm)
Re: Stiff arming
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------I'm sorry. Yakima Canutt??
He is...
TomWeaver999
(10/26/05 9:00 pm)
Re: Canutts
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Considered the dean of alllll stuntmen. Received a special Oscar "for creating the profession of stuntmen as it exists
today." Gil Perkins (of all people!) told me that Canutt's last stunt was about 1940, when he was on a rearing horse
that fell over backwards and right on top of Canutt, and the saddle horn went right into his body, into his stomach I
think, and tore him all up inside. After that, he did a lot of second-unit directing (including the chariot race in
BEN-HUR), etc.
TomWeaver999
(10/26/05 9:06 pm)
Yak
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Oh, he DID double Chaney Jr. at least once, and I think got injured: Battling the Brahma bull (or whatever) for
Chaney in ONE MILLION B.C.
HalLane
(10/26/05 9:28 pm)
Yak
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------The Dean of Stunt Doubles!
I won't even mention the chin.
georgechastain
(10/26/05 10:10 pm)
Re: Yak
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------And he doubled John Wayne many times in the early days, as well as losing a lot of fights to him as a heavy...
another big guy -- though in those days you could always wear a HUGE 10-gallon hat with a very tall crown to
compensate for height differences.
I think a lot of Eddie Parker's doubling for John Wayne was around the same time, in Duke's earliest B-westerns and
serials. A couple of them are discussed at length in FORGOTTEN HORRORS Vol. 1.
Yak DID do at least one monster part, sorta -- in his autobiography, STUNT MAN, there's a great shot of him made
up to double a gorilla (but it looks more like a wereape than your typlcal gorilla suit) in the 1932 movie CIRCLE OF
DEATH.
His most famous stunt, which Yak created, perfected, and performed many times, was jumping from a runaway
wagon onto a team of galloping horses , falling through them onto the ground, being dragged under the wagon and
slowly working his way back to the end of it, then climbing up over the back end again -- as recreated in RAIDERS
OF THE LOST ARK. In one film I saw him do a complete backflip under the wagon during the process!
Unbelievable.
"Yakima" was a nickname from his rodeo champion days that stuck -- his real name was Enos Edward Canutt.
TomWeaver999
(10/26/05 10:21 pm)
Re: Stiff arming
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------<< In one film I saw him do a complete backflip under the wagon during the process! <<
ZORRO'S FIGHTING LEGION, if I'm not mistaken. I have a feeling the backflip part of that stunt wasn't intentional
... but it sure was spectacular!
Count Gamula
(10/27/05 6:09 am)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------And now that I look at this list, I realize I didn't check Castle of Frankenstein.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------I remembered there was an overview of Frankenstein films in COF #2 and I checked it the other day but it didn't
menion anything about stunt doubles. It did go on and on about how terrible Bela Lugosi was in FRANKENSTEIN
MEETS THE WOLF MAN. This was the first Monster Magazine I ever had when I was about 8 years old. I'm glad I
never read the aticles back then. I don't think I was ready to hear such harsh words about the films and stars I thought
were the greatest in the world. Thank goodness I found Famous Monsters soon afterwards. It's "no such thing as a
bad monster movie" atitude was more in tune with my thinking at the time.
Kerry Gammill
Rick
(10/27/05 7:13 am)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Just finished a pleasant, memory-jogging slog through all 25 issues of Castle of Frankenstein and I did manage to
find a small nugget, a bridge of sorts from the 1962 HORROR MONSTERS article which mentioned the possibility
of Eddie Parker doubling Lugosi in FRANKENSTEIN MEETS THE WOLF MAN, to the now-notorious Don Glut
piece in MODERN MONSTERS (1966) which pretty much sealed the deal for decades to come. CASTLE OF
FRANKENSTEIN # 6 (1965) features the third and final part of a Lon Chaney Jr. life story titled “Son of Chaney”
by Richard Bojarski. The famous publicity still of the Lugosi Monster choking the Wolf Man is reprinted with a
caption which reads, “Lugosi was seen nearly everywhere except where strenuous action was needed. These scenes
were played by famous stuntman Ed Parker.” This seems to have been adapted by Bojar (or the caption writer) from
the body of the article: “Although Bela Lugosi was approaching sixty and physically unsuited for the role of the
Monster, he still ranked among the Big Three (with Karloff and Chaney) and was readily available. Fortunately, the
makeup concealed his age and the use of stuntman Ed Parker for the more strenuous scenes sustained the illusion.”
Once again, there’s nothing new there, certainly no evidence of any sort. But, it is one more pre-Glut Parker
reference, and, most importantly, though Bojarski could have gleaned this ’information’ directly from the earlier
article, he somehow managed to lose the ‘probably’ which MODERN MONSTERS used to qualify Parker’s
participation.
One more tidbit from CoF. This comes from #25, the final issue. The copyright date was 1975, by which time we
were well-Glutted, of course. This article was easy to spot. Title: “Spotlighting Ed Parker, An Unknown Monster
Star.” It was five pages, mostly photos, with text by Vincent Bossone. We learn here that Edwin Parker played the
Frankenstein Monster in SON…, GHOST…, …MEETS THE WOLF MAN, and HELLZAPOPPIN. Busy Eddie
also doubled for Chaney in all three of his Kharis flicks, for Buster Crabbe in all the FLASH GORDONs and in
BUCK ROGERS, for Karloff in A & C MEET DR. J AND MR. H, and played most of Universal’s sci-fi critters of
the fifties. Photos accompanying the article show someone in the mummy suit from …CURSE, someone holding a
dummy on a rooftop in GHOST OF FRANKENSTEIN, someone Monstering on the Campus, some Mr. Hyde
threatening Bud Abbott, the Metaluna Mutant, a Mole Person, and, last but not least, Eddie Parker himself as Klaris.
So I guess that settles it. Can’t argue with all that photographic evidence. Eddie Parker was in every horror movie
made from 1936-1956. At least. All hail!
Dr Gangrene
(10/27/05 9:14 am)
Re: Stiff arming
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------I contacted two stunt guys yesterday who were good friends with Gil Perkins and worked with him a lot. I just got an
email back today with phone numbers of each and a hearty welcome: "Hi Larry - give me a call at home and I may
be able to help you. Gil was a friend of mine."
So hopefully one of these guys will remember Gil telling them about working on these films!! They're in LA, of
course, so later today I'll try to give them both a call, see what we come up with!!
HalLane
(10/27/05 9:32 am)
Re: Stiff arming
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------If anyone has any of Warren's SCREEN THRILLS, it might be worth a look.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Weren't these edited by Sam Sherman, the same Sam Sherman who does all those "Blood Island" commentaries
these days, or am I way off base with this. If it is him, he seems to have lot's of backstage stories to tell, being a
movie producer and all, maybe even things that weren't "fit to print". Anyone know how to get in touch? Unless of
course he's died recently or something.
taraco
(10/27/05 9:40 am)
Re: Stiff arming
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Great magazine sleuthing, Rick (and Kerry)...Must be fun to gingerly turn the pages of four decades ago! And Doc,
that interview is promising. Can't wait to hear.
georgechastain
(10/27/05 9:47 am)
Richard Bojarski's mention of Ed Parker in CoF #6 (1965)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------CASTLE OF FRANKENSTEIN # 6 (1965) features the third and final part of a Lon Chaney Jr. life story titled “Son
of Chaney” by Richard Bojarski. The famous publicity still of the Lugosi Monster choking the Wolf Man is reprinted
with a caption which reads, “Lugosi was seen nearly everywhere except where strenuous action was needed. These
scenes were played by famous stuntman Ed Parker.”
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Bojarski's THE FILMS OF BELA LUGOSI wasn't published until 1980, but Bojak's coverage of FRANKENSTEIN
MEETS THE WOLF MAN includes this interesting paragraph:
"For the strenuous fight scenes, stuntman Eddie Parker doubled for Lugosi. Jack Pierce's makeup for the
Frankenstein Monster was created by prop maker Ellis Burman, who made a headpiece of leather and rubber, closely
following the design used in the previous sequel.
He also created Wolf Man's rubber nose. Lugosi and Chaney were not permitted to dine in the studio commissary
during lunch hours because other diners objected to their gruesome appearances."
The stillustrations include a nice clear reproduction of that photo of Chaney discovering the monster behind the ice
in which it's obviously Lugosi.
I'm pretty sure Richard isn't online, but perhaps someone who knows him could give him a call? He always seemed
to me to be one of the more literate and well-informed writers in the old zines.
taraco
(10/27/05 10:06 am)
Eddie Parker: The paper trail ...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Here is where the paper trail stands:
Documented references to Eddie Parker as the Frankenstein monster in FRANKENSTEIN MEETS THE WOLF
MAN:
-- MONSTERS AND THINGS #2 (1959): Article mentions unnamed stuntman doubling for Lugosi.
-- HORROR MONSTERS #5 (1962): Unbylined article says "probably Eddie Parker" doubled for Lugosi.
-- CASTLE OF FRANKENSTEIN #6 (1965): Writer Richard Bojarski's article includes caption, “Lugosi was seen
nearly everywhere except where strenuous action was needed. These scenes were played by famous stuntman Ed
Parker.”
-- MODERN MONSTERS #3 (1966): Article by 'Don Grant' (Don Glut), cites Eddie Parker as double (Still hoping
for actual quotes).
Thanx, everyone. And keep them coming!
david
HalLane
(10/27/05 11:35 am)
Re: Monster chasm
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Perkins looks a lot like Dave O"Brien...and would have been a great double for him.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Jeez, Kerry, Gil Perkins sure does look like Dave "Devil Bat" O'Brien. And O'Brien did stunts too y'know, at least he
did in those Pete Smith shorts.
I wonder how he's fixed for dimples?
BTW, do you ever speak to Al Williamson? He's a bigtime stuntman fan; I believe he knew Dave Sharpe and others.
I'll bet he has an anecdote or two to share. Just a thought.
"GOODNIGHT, DR. CARRUTHERS." "GOOD-BYE, ROY."
georgechastain
(10/27/05 11:36 am)
Re: Eddie Parker: The paper trail ...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------MODERN MONSTERS #3 (1966): Article by 'Don Grant' (Don Glut), cites Eddie Parker as double (Still hoping for
actual quotes).
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------David -- here are all the pertinent Frankenstein quotes from Don's article. I'm sure he'd change many of the
comments now if he could, but I think there's still lots of food for thought here.
(Opening statement):
"If you were asked the name of the second person to portray the Frankenstein Monster in a Universal Pictures horror
film, you would answer Lon Chaney, Jr. And you'd be wrong.
....
"This man has been seen in horror roles, usually unbilled or doubling for major sinister stars like Boris Karloff, Lon
Chaney, Jr., Bela Lugosi, etc. since the Thirties, until his death due to a heart attack in 1957 after doing a fight on a
TV comedy variety show. And yet, most fans don't even know his name.
However, if any of you MODERN MONSTERS readers are fans of movie stuntment, you've probably heard of
Eddie Parker, a six-foot-four action daredevil and weight-lifter."
....
"As for the Frankenstein Monster, it was Eddie Parker who was kicked into the bubbling sulphur pit as [sic] the
climax of SON OF FRANKENSTEIN. Parker also groped about under the blue-gray grease paint, electrodes, and fur
coat for Karloff in many of the long shots, where identification of Karloff would have been extremely difficult due to
the image size and distance. Next time you see SON OF FRANKENSTEIN, watch Parker hoisted up through the
floor of Basil Rathbone's laboratory, then cut to a medium shot of Karloff."
"GHOST OF FRANKENSTEIN saw Eddie Parker again as the Mosnter of many parts. In two particular shots,
obviously photographed back-to-back, the Monster and Ygor enter the door which leads to Sir Cedric Hardwick's
lab. The lighting has been somewhat reduced, but if you watch these scenes closely, you can see Parker's face
peering through the makeup. The second of these two shots has the Frankenstein Monster walking in with the little
girl he has taken, hoping to get her brain transplanted into his own skull. Parker also "died" at the film's sparking
ending, as the blind Monster stumbled through the burning, exploding, and collapsing laboratory. The scenes were
repeated when used as stock shots years later in Universal's HOUSE OF DRACULA."
"Eddie Parker should have been given star billing for what he did in FRANKENSTEIN MEETS THE WOLFMAN.
The very first shot of the Monster, a huge close-up filling the entire screen, is actually Eddie who made an adequate
Frankenstein Creature indeed. Then Chaney, Jr., as the Wolf Man in human state, helps his [sic] stiffly out of the ice,
to which we cut to Bela Lugosi stalking around. Parker did just about everything as the Monster in this motion
picture: the fight with the Wolf Man; carrying the girl; just walking around. In fact, it was Lugosi who doubled
Parker. Lugosi's Frankenstein Monster looked quite sick compared to other actor's versions, and the strength of
Parker as the brute makes one wish that he had been given the role of the Monster throughout the entire film -- with
screen credit."
"As Glenn Strange did his own work throughout HOUSE OF FRANKENSTEIN, HOUSE OF DRACULA, and
ABBOTT AND COSTELLO MEET FRANKENSTEIN, Parker hung up his scars and electrodes and retired as the
creature made from dead bodies."
"But not before playing the Frankenstein Monster in a comedy bit in Universal's HELLZAPOPPIN' with Olsen and
Johnson."
....
"I am not trying to discredit Karloff, Chaney, Lugosi, Franz, etc. by revealing the fact that Eddie Parker actually did
many of their scenes. No doubt these actors could well have performed on their own, except for some obviously
hazardous scenes, like the GHOST OF FRANKENSTEIN fire, the MUMMY'S CURSE cavein, the SON OF
FRANKENSTEIN sulphur plunge, etc. A leading performer has enough to worry about than to undergo the
unpleasant make-ups and riggings for scenes taken in such longshot that they cannot even be recognized.
But we do feel that this relatively unknown actor/stuntman does deserve credit for the thrills and terror he has
conveyed on the screen. Eddie Parker was great, whether battling super-heroes like the Masked Marvel, Rocketman,
Batman, or as a super-hero himself, like the Spider; or battling the human race, as the Mutant, Frankenstein Monster,
or Mummy. Too bad he couldn't have attained his deserved fame while still alive.
END."
As someone has already mentioned, the article is illustrated with a number of photos of monsters that are known to
be, believed to be, or might be someone other than Parker in the part, including the famous still of the Monster
carrying Ilona, a close-up of the Monster's face behind the ice, the Monster on the Campus carrying Joanne Moore
(claimed for Parker but unverified?), and Metaluna Mutant (two photos).
It also includes the climactic lab photo from FMTWM we've examined here, with Knowles, Massey and Chaney
(strapped to the lab table) in the shot, but with a stunt double for Lugosi -- looks like Parker to me, but ?
And a good full-page portrait from TARANTULA, and another from A&C MEET J&H.
Ted Newsom
(10/27/05 11:47 am)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------See how this stuff snowballs?
1943-- Lugosi is doubled by obvious, uncredited stuntman (or men). Film plays for years.
1957-- Film & other Universals play all over the joint in the Shock Theater package; renewed interest in all things
Monster. The enthusiastic fan-level base of film scholarship is established.
1959-- Thirteen years after the fact, an anonymous writer finally points out in print that Lugosi was doubled in the
film by someone else, in a borderline-reputable one-shot magazine done (presumably quickly) to cash in on the
success of FAMOUS MONSTERS.
1962-- Somebody else guesses at the identity of the Frankie-Stunter, based on-- what? The fact that some guy played
other monsters ten years later (i.e., the Mummy) and was credited?
1963-- A third somebody does what research he can (pickin's were pret-ty slim in 1963, lemme tell ya) refers in
presumed good faith to the previous somebody's guesswork.
A heretofore-unidentified, uncredited, unknown stunter and bit player is definitively identified as "famous stuntman
Eddie Parker" ("Famous"? To whom, pray tell? Yak Canutt?)
1966-- It's carved in granite, or at least pulp paper.
I will no longer hold Don Glut at all responsible for this. I'll lay the causality firmly at the feet of Quodzar Zanatoad.
Or Zontar Quasitoad.
taraco
(10/27/05 12:00 pm)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------->>1962-- Somebody else guesses at the identity of the Frankie-Stunter, based on-- what? The fact that some guy
played other monsters ten years later (i.e., the Mummy) and was credited?
I'm with you on all of that, Ted, except on this one.
We're still not sure whether this was a 'guess' in 1962, or whether it was based on something we haven't found or
discovered yet.
That's not to say Eddie Parker is or was the correct answer, but this started somewhere and we either need to find the
mysterious HORROR MONSTERS writer, or keep digging!
If it was a guess, then yes, it surely had a butterfly effect! (Maybe we should coin a new term for research based on
faulty information: The Eddie Parker Effect)
But I still think the Eddie Parker information came from somewhere...
Oh, and George, thanx for those excerpts from the Don Grant (Glut), MODERN MONSTERS article. Yes, that
surely did propel all this through the years.
Those joining us late should look page to Page 10 of this thread, where Don Glut apologizes for much of that
information in a letter first published right here!
david
TomWeaver999
(10/27/05 12:51 pm)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<< Weren't these edited by Sam Sherman, the same Sam Sherman who does all those "Blood Island" commentaries
these days <<
SCREEN THRILLS was indeed edited by Sam "Blood Island" Sherman, who's alive and well and will probably be
prowling the halls of Chiller this weekend.
georgechastain
(10/27/05 1:06 pm)
BART ANDREWS -- Well-intentioned Fanboy or Antichrist?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------1962-- Somebody else guesses at the identity of the Frankie-Stunter, based on-- what? The fact that some guy played
other monsters ten years later (i.e., the Mummy) and was credited?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Ted, your conclusions about WHY those claims were made for Ed Parker's credits in Don Glut's original article
are as wildly conjectural (one might even say suppository) as anything in the text. Many pages back I posted some
information published in a late '60s "Tom Steele International Fan Club" newsletter, including this list of names on
the masthead:
HONORARY PRESIDENT -- TOM STEELE
EXECUTIVE PRESIDENT -- Don Glut
VICE PRESIDENT -- Bart Andrews
ART DIRECTOR -- Larry M. Byrd
HONORARY MEMBERS:
Richard Alexander
Kirk Alyn
Roy Barcroft
Kenne Duncan
Howard Lydecker
Dave Sharpe
Glenn Strange
Dale Van Sickel
We know that Don Glut knew Roy Barcroft, Kenne Duncan and Glenn Strange well enough to have them play parts
in
his amateur films.
And that he knew Tom Steele well enough to run his fan club.
From Bart Andrews participation as Vice President of that club, and as a performer in some of Don's films,
I presume that Bart Andrews knew at least some of these same people too -- and I believe you pointed out
that he was one of the people present when Glenn Strange talked about his career and was tape-recorded.
I'm taking a real leap into hypothesis here, but I think it's safe to presume that the other guys on the list above
were also accessible to Don Glut, and by extension, Bart Andrews.
The absence of MANY other names of serial and B-movie performers who were alive at the time
is a reasonable indication of that to me.
As I said before, ALL of these people would have stories to tell about Eddie Parker, among many other
things of interest to eager young fanboys.
I put it to you -- if YOU had a chance to talk to any of these guys (you probably have, actually), wouldn't you
have a million questions for them? Isn't it at least CONCEIVABLE that some of that feedback found its way into the
article?
More palaver about Bart Andrews follows; this is too long already.
HalLane
(10/27/05 1:07 pm)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------It also includes the climactic lab photo from FMTWM...Looks like Parker to me, but?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Is it a clear enough photo to share with the rest of the class? That's the shot I want to get a better look at! (I believe
the original Screen Service or Universal code was 1279-60).
So you're a printer, eh George? I thought I smelled ink in your veins. Thanx for the research.
Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------"It isn't in there. I Know." .... "Please......"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HalLane
(10/27/05 1:13 pm)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------And thank you for the confirmation, Tom! (I hope someone from here going to Chiller is thoughtful enough to take a
paper and pencil along).
georgechastain
(10/27/05 2:20 pm)
More Bartmania and a Blob of E-gorboo
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------[redacted]
Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Is it a clear enough photo to share with the rest of the class? That's the shot I want to get a better look at! (I believe
the original Screen Service or Universal code was 1279-60).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HalLane: It's the same shot that was posted here pages ago -- I'll
take a look at it and see if I can get a sharper image; if so, I'll
post it soon.
And incidentally, that was a GREAT blowup of the mystery
Monster's face on the roof with the Janet Ann Gallow dummy
from GHOST! I've been noodling over who it might be with
those deep grooves in his face (we'll have to come up with a new
term for them). Looks kinda like Lon to me, but seems a bit
more haggard and older than usual; maybe he had a real bad
night.
I've been going through all sorts of old zines in my collection,
including SCREEN THRILLS ILLUSTRATED (a real fave
when I was a kid) and even FAVORITE / WILDEST
WESTERNS, but spotted nothing earth-shaking about Eddie
Parker there... though I did find a couple of letters in STI that
illuminate the following image, which I'll quote shortly.
Here's an interesting photo from Larry Ivie's MONSTERS
HEROES #4, March 1969:
Pretty good stunt for an amateur, I thought.
TomWeaver999
(10/27/05 2:26 pm)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------I'd like to see a list of credits for Professional Stuntman Bart Andrews (and to know why he is non-existent in any
and all books about stuntmen, on movie castlists, etc., etc.). Right now he is (in my book) just some kind of Bizarro
World character, with nothing known about him except that he did "stunts" in a Don Glut home movie, and that he
used to steal his own friends' movie memorabilia. Consequently, I have to plead guilty to not really placing a lot of
stock in what he at some point MAY HAVE SAID that unnamed stuntmen at some point MAY HAVE SAID to him
about Eddie Parker et al.
Edited by: TomWeaver999 at: 10/27/05 2:28 pm
taraco
(10/27/05 2:33 pm)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Let's remember that Don Glut says -- in this thread, to me -- that he first heard the name Eddie Parker from Bob
Burns in 1964, and that's AFTER the name was published in HORROR MONSTERS in 1962.
If Bart Andrews is the progenitor, fine, but we're still not quite there yet.
Senor Burns is just back from New Zealand and we should give him some days to get re-time zoned. But perhaps he
can shed more light on where HE heard about Eddie.
So stay tuned...david
georgechastain
(10/27/05 3:13 pm)
Bart Andrews -- Complete Zero or Beast 666?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------I'd like to see a list of credits for Professional Stuntman Bart Andrews (and to know why he is non-existent in any
and all books about stuntmen, on movie castlists, etc., etc.). Right now he is (in my book) just some kind of Bizarro
World character, with nothing known about him except that he did "stunts" in a Don Glut home movie, and that he
used to steal his own friends' movie memorabilia. Consequently, I have to plead guilty to not really placing a lot of
stock in what he at some point MAY HAVE SAID that unnamed stuntmen at some point MAY HAVE SAID to him
about Eddie Parker et al.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Tom -- I make absolutely NO claim that Bart was anything remotely like a "professional stuntman," I only meant to
show that he was an eager amateur with strong aspirations and perhaps even a little ability in that general direction. I
DO think that enobling him with the "professional stuntman" monicker was an understandable 20-somethingish
gesture of camaraderie from Don Glut to a friend, not entirely deserving of the sneering and spitting on the ground
that often accompanies its use to describe Andrews around here. And I think his personal failings and the
circumstances of his death have absolutely nothing to do with his genuine enthusiasm for the films he and Glut
enjoyed, and both of their good intentions regarding film credits, regardless of their accuracy.
Here's a letter from Bart Andrews that was published in SCREEN THRILLS ILLUSTRATED Vol. 1, No. 2 (#2)
(September 1962):
"FUTURE STUNTMAN'S FAVORITE
SCREEN THRILLS ILLUSTRATED is the greatest. I must admit I enjoyed it better than Famous Monsters,
Westerns, and Spacemen. I have always been an active fan. I get a great kick watching great stunts and stuntmen in
films. You can see STI is right up my alley. I hope to see lots more on David Sharpe the daredevil stuntman. John
Wayne has given generations of action fans tons of movie excitement, lets see lots of the Duke in future issues. Here
are some great action scenes and ideas for coverage in future issues: John Wayne action & fight scenes from--THE
SPOILERS, PITTSBURGH, SEVEN SINNERS, THE ALAMO, RED RIVER, QUIET MAN and THE
COMMANCHEROS. I hope some of these ideas materialize soon. I'll be waiting for the next thrill packed issue.
Yours truly (a future stuntman),
BART ANDREWS,
BROOKLYN, NEW YORK"
Here's another from STI Vol. 2, No. 2 (#6) (October 1963):
"STUNTFAN SPEAKS OUT
Never has a magazine caused such a rejuvenation in the film world. Years back the serial, Western and action film
were held in high regard. Every Saturday, children and adults would rush to the neighborhood movie theatre to see
such heroes as CAPTAIN MARVEL, FLASH GORDON, SUPERMAN, CAPTAIN AMERICA and many others.
Action and excitement were big boxoffice and the studios turned these films out on an assembly line basis.
Then in the mid-1950's the adult "true to life" tear jerker dramas ran the serial and honest to goodness action pictures
off the road. Luckily there still was Duke Wayne for the real action fan. Serials were almost forgotten, action movies
were turned out in low caliber and it seemed that movie excitement was gone.
Then it happened. STI, STI, STI, the magazine for the let down serial and action fan. Once more CAPTAIN
MARVEL and other serial and action heroes and heroines are back. The action and comedy thrillers were
re-introduced to people who loved them and brought them before people who didn't know what they had missed. The
stuntman finally became recognized as a top ranking individual in the action movie and serial.
Right now in the New York area no less than three top Republic serials are being shown on TV, one being aired after
midnight for adult viewing. I recently saw one of the old serials that Dave Sharpe did the stuntwork in. His
spectacular acrobatics are in a class nobody else could hope to enter. I think that STI should do some coverage on
Mr. Sharpe, one of Hollywood's top daredevils.
Stuntwork and second unit directing have always been my ambition. I produced several of my own stunt movies,
each reel was in the tradition of some famed stuntman or action star. I used the stunt and fight styles of John Wayne,
Ward Bond, Dave Sharpe, Fred Graham, Yakima Canutt and Tom Steele. Enclosed are the picture strips of my
buddies and I in action. Keep making STI the greatest.
Bart Andrews
Brooklyn, New York"
The editor replied "judging from the strips, you have done an excellent job" but regretted that the filmstrips couldn't
be reproduced as well as still photos. No pictures were published.
Again, I didn't mean to even IMPLY that he was a professional, but I do think his intentions and ambitions deserve
to be appreciated rather than demonized. Our favorite hobby is largely built upon the labors of fanboys.
taraco
(10/27/05 3:28 pm)
Re: Bart Andrews -- Complete Zero or Beast 666?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------That's a nice post, George. Thanx for including those fascinating STI letters, too.
And yeah, let's give everyone the benefit of the doubt until we see what evidence yet uncovered emerges. Even if
Eddie Parker was a fantasy made up from wholecloth, or a truth stretched further than it was, we can finally correct
the record today.
Don Glut's letter on Page 10 was quite a step in that direction. Now the goal should be, I think, to determine what
truth there was, if any, to the Eddie Parker as the Monster belief in the first place.
david
TomWeaver999
(10/27/05 3:28 pm)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Tom -- I make absolutely NO claim that Bart was anything remotely like a "professional stuntman" <<
Oops -- sorry, George, I wasn't referring to your post at all when I wrote that. In fact, I hadn't yet SEEN your newest
post while I was writing that. "Professional stuntman" is what Andrews has been repeatedly called throughout this
thread, and I don't think he has a single credit, and I thought that rated a mention again. Sorry!!
Rick
(10/27/05 3:48 pm)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------The quotes provided by George make it painfully clear just how pervasive the Glut info quickly became. The article
in CoF #25 by Vincent Bossone which I mentioned above, published nine years after Glut's piece, reads like a
condensed, slightly altered version of its MODERN MONSTERS predecessor.
georgechastain
(10/27/05 3:51 pm)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Oops -- sorry, George, I wasn't referring to your post at all when I wrote that. In fact, I hadn't yet SEEN your newest
post while I was writing that. "Professional stuntman" is what Andrews has been repeatedly called throughout this
thread, and I don't think he has a single credit, and I thought that rated a mention again. Sorry!!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------I wasn't upset about your post, Tom, I was working on transcribing those STI letters anyway -- and I'm glad you
didn't get miffed at ME for speaking up for Bart (not that I really thought you would)! I have the utmost respect and
admiration for your work and I follow it eagerly -- MONSTER KID MEMORIES is one of my absolute favorite
books of all time, of ANY sort... and I can't WAIT to read the one you're working on with Bob Burns now!
And that goes for you too, Ted Newsom -- ED WOOD: LOOK BACK IN ANGORA and the Ronald Stein
soundtrack CDs are fabulous -- and I've been waiting years to see THE NAKED MONSTER! What's happening with
that one?!?
TomWeaver999
(10/27/05 4:25 pm)
Gil Perkins
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Dr. Gangrene, if/when you hear from these stunt-friends of Perkins, ask if any of 'em have a contact # for Perkins'
daughter Susan -- I think she might be a VERY good source. I remember calling HIM once and getting her instead,
and she started talking about stuntmen -- and I don't mean Yakima Canutt and Dave Sharpe and the other "famous"
ones, I mean, we were talking Rube Schaefer and Stubby Krueger and people like that. She knows her stuff.
Ted Newsom
(10/27/05 4:41 pm)
Re: Gil Perkins
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------"Rube Schaefer and Stubby Krueger "
Jeezus. Sounds like aliases for Squeemy Ellis in INDESTRUCTABLE MAN.
Somebody along the way said something like, "Ed Parker, yeah, Eddie was in FRANKENSTEIN MEETS THE
WOLF MAN."
Somebody else leaped to the wrong conclusion.
A bunch of people leaped from there.
This isn't that hard. It really isn't.
Dr Gangrene
(10/27/05 4:51 pm)
Re: Gil Perkins
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Dr. Gangrene, if/when you hear from these stunt-friends of Perkins, ask if any of 'em have a contact # for Perkins'
daughter Susan
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------You got it, Tom - and if I get a number I'll be sure to pass it your way since you have talked to her before.
I talked to Bob Herron today - he worked with Gil and Eddie both in several films - he didn't have any recollection at
all about Gil's mentioning anything about the Universal films.
He DID give me a number for the Stuntman's Association, so maybe they would have a contact for her. Tell you
what, I'll email their number to you and let you call - they'd probably be more cooperative with a professional writer
than some wacky horrorhost!
Meanwhile I'll make some more calls and see if I can round up anything at all. Bob Herron was the one I really
wasn't sure about - but other leads look more promising.
Edited by: Dr Gangrene at: 10/27/05 4:53 pm
TomWeaver999
(10/27/05 4:55 pm)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Bob Herron (a great guy) and Eddie Parker were Beasts of the Dark (in THE MOLE PEOPLE) together.
georgechastain
(10/27/05 5:02 pm)
Parkerphobia and other treatable disorders of the mind
[redacted]
Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Somebody along the way said something like, "Ed Parker, yeah, Eddie was in FRANKENSTEIN MEETS THE
WOLF MAN."
Somebody along the way said something like, "Ed Parker, yeah, Eddie was in FRANKENSTEIN MEETS THE
WOLF MAN."
Somebody else leaped to the wrong conclusion.
A bunch of people leaped from there.
This isn't that hard. It really isn't.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Except for all that troublesome visible evidence that's plain as day for anybody with open eyes and mind to see...
(I'm smiling, Ted, I swear I'm smiling.)
But that's the most likely explanation of the origin of Bart Andrews' opinions and misconceptions to me, not credits
but actually thinking he really recognizes Ed Parker in something, most likely FMTWF. Like I do.
Nobody responded to my post about Castle films -- but was their adaptation of FMTWM available before Don's
article was published? And does it include all or most of the fight sequence? That would be a likely place to think
you can spot Ed Parker, IF the lab table sequence is included... just before the hot bulb burns through the film.
TomWeaver999
(10/27/05 5:08 pm)
Re: Gil Perkins
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------The lotta-time-on-his-hands soul who recently added the Castle versions of the Universal oldies to the IMDb has 'em
down as 1966, I think -- which sounds right to me. I think it was not too long after that, that I first discovered 'em.
And I can't picture ads for 'em in the first FMs I bought (around issue #31, 1964-ish), which again leads me to
believe they came along a bit later.
Edited by: TomWeaver999 at: 10/27/05 6:44 pm
georgechastain
(10/27/05 5:31 pm)
I capture the Castles
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------The lotta-time-on-his-hand soul who recently added the Castle versions of the Universal oldies to the IMDb has 'em
down as 1966, I think -- which sounds right to me. I think it was not too long after that, that I first discovered 'em.
And I can't picture ads for 'em in the first FMs I bought (around issue #31, 1964-ish), which again leads me to
believe they came along a bit later.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------I just grabbed a handful of my old FMs from around that time, and I SWEAR to you that the very first one I opened,
#25 from October 1963 (KING KONG cover, mostly text), includes a 2-page Captain Company spread for "A
complete collection of horror & monster movies" in 8mm and 16mm, including Abbott & Costello in ROCKET &
ROLL, WAR OF THE PLANETS, KILLER GORILLA, IT CAME FROM OUTER SPACE, ABBOTT AND
COSTELLO MEET FRANKENSTEIN, BATTLE OF THE GIANTS, ABBOTT & COSTELLO MEET DR.
JEKYLL & MR. HYDE, FRANKENSTEIN MEETS THE WOLFMAN ("Here's your cup of tea . . . an eerie,
spine-tingling, nerve-chilling story of your two favorite all time great Monsters, Frankenstein and Wolfman will fill
your cup with terror and send you to bed to dream of happy nightmares."), Boris Karloff in THE MUMMY, THE
CREATURE FROM THE BLACK LAGOON, THE BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN and Bela Lugosi as DRACULA.
No mention of Castle films by name, and the illustrations are just photos, not the great box art; $5.75 plus 25 cents
for handling for 8 mm, $10.75 plus 25 cents for 16 mm. Actually a lot of money at the time, especially considering
how much more bang for your buck you get these days, film-wise. Some things ARE better these days than ever.
Of course this proves absolutely nothing, but it does at least suggest a possibility. I was poor as a churchmouse in
those days (we lived on a farm in South Carolina), but even I had one of those Castle films, A&C MEET
FRANKENSTEIN, purchased at Sears, and I projected it many times and paused it precariously over and over to
examine it in infinite detail. Just the coolest thing in the world, or so it seemed at the time.
blackbiped
(10/27/05 5:51 pm)
Re: Gil Perkins
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------And does it include all or most of the fight sequence?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------I've watched the Castle version of FMTWM so many times I can tell you just what it consists of.
Much of the opening sequence is included, with Lon's hospital transformation scene spliced in just before he grabs
one of the graverobbers.
After the other one runs away we jump to the scene where Vasec is carrying the dead girl -- he scoots out of the
frame and the townspeople have their little talk that ends with them hearing the wolf's howl and marching away to
hunt for him.
The Wolf Man leaps toward the camera and snarls at them, they shoot at him, he backs into that hole and falls
through it.
Jump cut to the close-up of Bela reacting to the sound of the water turning the turbines. Another jump cut to a
close-up of the Wolf Man after the fight sequence is already in progress, then that great wide-mouthed close-up of
Bela. The rest of the fight is pretty much as seen in the complete film.
Legend, oh legend, the third wheel legend...always in the way.
Edited by: blackbiped at: 10/27/05 5:53 pm
Joe Karlosi
(10/27/05 5:52 pm)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------I've always thought the Castle Films 200' version of FMTWM was one of the best. Shows just about everything
you'd want in a short time.
---------------------"It's MORE ... than a hobby!"
georgechastain
(10/27/05 6:06 pm)
Castle films version of FMTWM
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------blackbiped -So the lab table sequence ISN'T in it, or...?
Joe Karlosi
(10/27/05 6:07 pm)
Re: Gil Perkins
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------You didn't ask me, but No, the lab scene definitely isn't in it.
taraco
(10/27/05 6:08 pm)
Re: EP
------------------------------------------------------------------------------->>Somebody else leaped to the wrong conclusion. A bunch of people leaped from there.
That may indeed be the story behind Eddie Parker's Frankenstein legacy. But maybe not... It will be great if we
eventually find out!
david
georgechastain
(10/27/05 6:35 pm)
Castles in the sky...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------You didn't ask me, but No, the lab scene definitely isn't in it.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Oh. Well. Never mind. Another of my theories shot to hell...
taraco
(10/27/05 7:12 pm)
Susan Perkins...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------A Susan Perkins was listed as a long-time employee of 20th Century Fox in one of his obits.
Count Gamula
(10/27/05 7:15 pm)
Re: Monster chasm
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------BTW, do you ever speak to Al Williamson? He's a bigtime stuntman fan
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------I haven't talked to Williamson in many years. Unfortunately, I hear he now has Alzheimers.
Kerry Gammill
Rick
(10/27/05 7:16 pm)
Re: I capture the Castles
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------"The lotta-time-on-his-hand soul who recently added the Castle versions of the Universal oldies to the IMDb has 'em
down as 1966, I think -- which sounds right to me."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------I'm 95% or more sure that I was collecting Castle Films well before '66. I was 16 years old in '66 and was moving on
to girls and show business, selling my comic collection, no longer reading every word of FM as soon as I got it.
Matter of fact, it just occurs to me...I'm positive that I had some of them by '62 at the latest. I didn't see THE
MUMMY till Shock Theatre in '62 and I remember being surprised by it because the Castle Film was cut together so
differently (and brilliantly I thought) that the story of the 'real' movie wasn't what I expected. I didn't have this same
reaction to FMTWM because, while I did have the Castle version, I had already seen the movie way back in '57. So
I'm saying the Castles were available '62 at the latest.
TomWeaver999
(10/27/05 8:05 pm)
Re: EP
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Suddenly 1966 is starting to sound very wrong to me! ; )
HalLane
(10/27/05 8:50 pm)
Al Williamson
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Thank you for getting back to me on that, Kerry. I used to work with Al back in the Dragon Lady Press days. I wish
him all the best.
HalLane
(10/27/05 10:23 pm)
Chiller
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Tom Weaver's mention of the Chiller con got me to think: there's one guy still around who was on the set of
FMTWM: Bela G. Lugosi. Has anyone ever asked him if he remembers the guy(s) dressed like daddy? He may have
even met Eddie Parker in costume (who I still think looks a lot like him). Come to think of it, Jr. was photographed
on the set of two other Franks. (I should cut him some slack on Son, but look how much Donnie Dunagan came up
with-- I'll bet he remembers if it was Bud Wolfe or George DeNormand!). Anyway, it just seems so obvious that I'm
sure someone"s already thought of it.
Just beatin' the bushes for info.
Before the clock runs out.
Count Gamula
(10/28/05 12:38 am)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------I got the Castle version of ABBOTT AND COSTELLO MEET FRANKENSTEIN around 1963.
Kerry Gammill
The Batman of Gotham
(10/28/05 12:47 am)
Re: EP
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------there's one guy still around who was on the set of FMTWM: Bela G. Lugosi. Has anyone ever asked him if he
remembers the guy(s) dressed like daddy? He may have even met Eddie Parker in costume (who I still think looks a
lot like him). Come to think of it, Jr. was photographed on the set of two other Franks. (I should cut him some slack
on Son, but look how much Donnie Dunagan came up with-- I'll bet he remembers if it was Bud Wolfe or George
DeNormand!). Anyway, it just seems so obvious that I'm sure someone"s already thought of it.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Umm... that would be GREAT. But, from what I understand Bela G.'s anecdotal recollections aren't worth much.
Still, it might be worth a shot.
- GJS
Ted Newsom
(10/28/05 4:47 am)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------I know the Castle version of A & C MEETS FRANK was out in Costello's lifetime, because he and Bud Abbott and
a major to-do with their maganer and Universal over it; apparently Lou spotted the box in a camera store window.
Costello died in '57 or '58. And I remember seeing some of the cut-downs like A & C MEETS J/H in grade school
some time before 1962 or 63. I think the earliest ones (most of which were represented in the back of FM as early as
'63) probably were available by the late 50s, mostly for 16mm nontheatrical rental. It's not inconceivable that fans
would rent them or borrow them from friends who worked at a film rental place and go over them frame by frame. I
did, with my little 8mm F MEETS W, and realized pretty early on that the Wrestling Guy (with the white undershirt)
didn't look like Lugosi.
georgechastain
(10/28/05 5:55 am)
Castle Frankensteins
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Would it be silly or redundant to add the Castle versions to our ultimate list, with a brief mention of the doubled
scenes that survived the cut? Just a thought. They certainly represent a Monster Boom landmark of some sort, not as
significant as the release of the SHOCK packages but pretty pervasive. Some of them are not only recut but retitled,
like "Doom of Dracula" for (I think) the Carradine section of House of Frankenstein.
Here's a fine overview of Castle Film History by Mark Clark (with some nifty box art) on the Monsters from the
Vault website:
Mark Clark's Castle Films feature
http://www.monstersfromthevault.com/LittleGiants.html
And here's a nice multi-page cover art gallery:
Castle Films box covers
http://povonline.com/castle/Castle01.htm
I spotted TWO box covers that picture Eddie Parker as the monster (presumably): Klaris and Mr. Hyde.
Somebody has recently released sets of cards reproducing selected box art -- nice idea.
Here's a great page with a long list of Castle's horror titles linked to variant box designs:
Different box art for Castle horrors
http://www.angelfire.com/movies/8mmboxes/8mmuniversal.html
Wouldn't a DVD collection be fun! Maybe there's a bootleg.
HalLane
(10/28/05 9:32 am)
Re:EP
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Umm....I understand Bela G.'s anecdotal recollections aren't worth much.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------I hear ya. But the man is an attorney, with an orderly mind-- maybe a simple yes or no question, phrased properly,
might ring some long forgotten bell.
Failing that, we could always try that hypnotism stunt from BLACK FRIDAY and regress him back.
I'm pretty sure it worked for Marla English.
Chesterbelloc
Member
(10/28/05 10:34 am)
Reply
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Castle was doing digests of A&C material as early as the early fifties. I have a few here, in 16mm. The films are
retitled, but I remember that one is a short based on the wrestling match between Lou and Lon Jr. in HERE COMES
THE CO-ED'S.
georgechastain
Member
(10/28/05 11:01 am)
Reply
Re: Al Williamson
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Aside to HalLane:
Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Thank you for getting back to me on that, Kerry. I used to work with Al back in the Dragon Lady Press days. I wish
him all the best.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You worked on those Dragon Lady Press newspaper comic reprints, HalLane? They were great -- I was rereading
some of the Wash Tubbs and Classic Adventure strips very recently. So I take it that YOU have ink in your blood?
Sorry I didn't ask you before.
Bside to everybody:
Happy Halloween weekend -- I'm really having a blast this year because of this discussion, watching my favorite old
Universals and dragging ancient monsterzines out of boxes to enjoy them again -- it's amazing what was in some of
them, like an interview with Conrad Brooks about Bela Lugosi published in the late 50's!
HalLane
Member
(10/28/05 9:32 pm)
Reply
Re: Al Williamson
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------George: yes, I was the Dragon Lady Press production dept., back when a desktop & drawing board were actual
furniture and not a digital domain & Wacom tablet. Years later @ American Color I arranged w/Marvel to
color-separate Al's Flash Gordon miniseries for one very
selfish reason: I wanted to hold those gorgeous twice-up
originals in my hot little hands, if only for a little while. Al
Williamson. What a guy!
End of digression. In the interests of keeping this thread
honest, let's see if this works:
Any comments?
georgechastain
(10/28/05 9:39 pm)
Dale Van Sickel as Roof Monster in GHOST OF FRANKENSTEIN?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------I think you've got something there, HalLane! I thought that blown-up face resembled Lon quite a bit but the deep
lines under his eyes are very telling, and an excellent match for Dale!
HalLane
(10/28/05 9:58 pm)
Dale Van Sickel as Roof Monster in GHOST OF FRANKENSTEIN?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Good call, George, you know your stuntmen. As you can see, I've been flipping thru old magazines too. I recommend
listening to the MARVELOUS WOLF MAN commentary track while doing it ("there's a werewolf in camp!"), tho
it's always a letdown when it doesn't continue into the sequel.
Spot Quiz: WHO ACTUALLY SUCCEDED KARLOFF AS THE MONSTER AT UNIVERSAL? WHO WAS
ALREADY FITTED FOR A FLATTOP PRIOR TO GHOST OF FRANKENSTEIN? AND WHO MADE A
CAREER OUT OF WORKING UP HIGH?
If you answered DALE VAN SICKEL to all three of these, you'd be correct!
TomWeaver999
(10/28/05 10:04 pm)
Re: Re:EP
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------*If* Dale Van Sickel did play the Monster in HELLZAPOPPIN, having him in the makeup a few months later for
GHOST sure sounds like a good possibility. In a scene like that (up high on a roof, with nothing to measure him up
against), the fact that DVS wasn't tall-tall (IMHO) wouldn't have meant much.
HalLane
(10/28/05 10:13 pm)
Re:Re:EP
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Excellent point, Mr.Weaver. And if he wasn't that tall, it would explain why some might mistake that oversize head
from a distance for an oversize mask.
Ted Newsom
(10/28/05 10:14 pm)
Re: Dale Van Sickel as Roof Monster in GHOST OF FRANKENSTEIN
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Lumpy nose, Jey Leno chin, puffy rise beside the naso-labial fold and a second rise on the cheekbone above that,
just south of the eye. Man. Amazing.
Anyone else think the Frankie headpiece looks too small?
And if THIS is Dale van Sickle, then might he be the Monster in the fire gags at the end? Or does that have to be
Eddie Parker because this is the Old West, and we're printing the legend? Anybody know if van Sickle did other fire
gags?
(Boy, Ted, you'll jump on any wine-barrel wagon to get that Parker out of there, won't you?)
Edited by: Ted Newsom at: 11/5/05 1:15 pm
TomWeaver999
(10/28/05 11:39 pm)
Re: Dale Van Sickel as Roof Monster in GHOST OF FRANKENSTEIN
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------I'm sure Dale Van Sickel must have been part of some of the (many, many) Republic fights that took place in
flaming rooms but I don't think I ever heard of him doing anything more dangerous than that fire-wise (like Tom
Steele in flames as James Arness' double in THE THING, for instance). Another stuntman who occasionally went
above-and-beyond fire-wise was a guy named "Mushy" Callahan -- he's the running soldier in flames in WAR OF
THE WORLDS, for instance.
Ted Newsom
(10/29/05 7:30 am)
Mush
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------I'd read somewhere that "Mushy" Callahan was also a former pug who taught boxing to actors for movie roles. And
now I find out he volunteerd to have people set himself on fire. Jeeze. They musta hit ol' Mush once too often in the
noggin.
HalLane
(10/29/05 8:41 am)
Re: Dale Van Sickel
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Anyone else think the Frankie headpiece looks too small?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------I think it looks like a SON topper that he just squeezed into for the long shot. The GHOST one was a whole new
sculpt.
HalLane
(10/29/05 9:46 am)
Re: Dale Van Sickel
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Or else it is the GHOST headpiece and Dale just has a bigger head than Lon.
And howcum Sometimes I can get back in to edit these things and sometimes I can't (yes, I know WOLFMAN is two
words)? What's the magic word-- swordfish?
federal operator 99
(10/29/05 12:07 pm)
Re: Up on the housetop stuntmen pause...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From GOF, a montage of (sadly) blurry, cropped frames of the rooftop scene:
And two mystery rooftop stunt victims:
HalLane
(10/29/05 12:47 pm)
Re: Up on the housetop
stuntmen pause...
----------------------------------Yowza! I knew you'd come
up with the graphics, FedOp!
("I want some of them. 2
8x10's...Now I'm going home
to have a few laughs at your
chubby thighs...")
I can see from here that it's
definitely (IMHO) the new
Chaney flattop. And those
skinny arms/neck might fit
Chaney Sr. but not Jr!
It's like those police
procedurals, where you
eliminate everyone who didn't
do it to find the guilty party
(or in this case, the guilty
imposter/stunt double).
Quote:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------"YOUR MUDDER VAS DE
LIGHT-EN-INK!"
------------------------------------------------------------------------------Edited by: HalLane at: 10/30/05 1:31 am
HalLane
(10/29/05 1:21 pm)
Re: Dale Van Sickle
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------I think Ted Newsom's examination of Dale's nasal/sinai-peninsula would hold up in court.(And here I'm expecting
him to post a Venn diagram showing how it could just as easily be the one-armed-man from The Fugitive). And
going off Ted's lovingly colored HELZAPOPPIN' still I'll cast my vote for Dale Van Sickle there as well (but I won't
say it's carved in stone. Vulcanized rubber, maybe).
federal operator 99
(10/29/05 2:27 pm)
Eddie Parker comparisons
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------According to IMDb, Eddie Parker (as "Mac" the Ambulance Driver), with Lou Costello in Hit the Ice, compared to
the Strap-Buster in FMTWM (both films were released the same year, so nose comparisons are valid)...
blackbiped
(10/29/05 5:07 pm)
Re: Dale Van Sickle
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Strap-breaker and ambulance driver sure look like the same guy to me!
georgechastain
(10/29/05 6:34 pm)
Re: Dale Van Sickle
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------I think Ted Newsom's examination of Dale's nasal/sinai-peninsula would hold up in court.(And here I'm expecting
him to post a Venn diagram showing how it could just as easily be the one-armed-man from The Fugitive). And
going off Ted's lovingly colored HELZAPOPPIN' still I'll cast my vote for Dale Van Sickle there as well
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Many pages ago I typed in some information from Scary Monsters magazines pertaining to Gil Perkins that Tom
Weaver remembered seeing there -- the complete text of a letter from Jack Gourlay, who interviewed Perkins but
didn't seem to get any additional info from him regarding FMTWM,
and some comments extracted from a previous letter from Don Glut going over all the correct and incorrect
information his original MODERN MONSTERS article by "Don Grant" about Eddie Parker had perpetuated.
In that letter, Don mentioned some useful tidbits that I repeat now for general info (quoting myself here):
Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------He did mention that he knows Bud Wolfe doubled Karloff in SoF, and that Dale Van Sickel confirmed to him that he
did the HELLZAPOPPIN' bit... that Eddie Parker is CLEARLY identifiable as Lugosi's double in FMtWM
(throughout the film)... and that Parker MAY be Chaney's double in GoF.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------So Dale Van Sickel himself told Don that he's the guy in HELLZAPOPPIN'. Perhaps Don will provide details if
someone asks?
Ted Newsom
(10/29/05 9:43 pm)
Re: Eddie Parker comparisons
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------...that Dale Van Sickel confirmed to him that he did the HELLZAPOPPIN' bit...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------... yet did not mention doing an even more complex gag in GHOST, as we now suspect...
Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------that Eddie Parker is CLEARLY identifiable as Lugosi's double in FMtWM (throughout the film)...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------We've pretty much driven a stake through the heart of this one, except for Senor Strapp-Buster.
Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------...and that Parker MAY be Chaney's double in GoF.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------He MAY have played Rhett Butler in GONE WITH THE WIND and Trigger in UNDER CALIFORNIA SKIES,
too, but there's very little proof. Given what we know about Perkins in FMtWM and Van Sickle, there's a lot stronger
case for the fire scene to have been doubled by either of them than Parker. Is there ANY indication at all that Parker
ever specialized in dangerous fire gags? I haven't seen anything so far.
georgechastain
(10/29/05 10:57 pm)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------... yet did not mention doing an even more complex gag in GHOST, as we now suspect...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------We've pretty much driven a stake through the heart of this one, except for Senor Strapp-Buster.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------He MAY have played Rhett Butler in GONE WITH THE WIND and Trigger in UNDER CALIFORNIA SKIES,
too, but there's very little proof. Given what we know about Perkins in FMtWM and Van Sickle, there's a lot stronger
case for the fire scene to have been doubled by either of them than Parker. Is there ANY indication at all that Parker
ever specialized in dangerous fire gags? I haven't seen anything so far.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Ted (did you notice that I didn't say Ted, Ted, Ted? [in voice of Yosemite Sam]) -- I hereby distance myself from
both of my identical quotes of Don Glut; I merely quoted the entire paragraph again because that was easiest, and
bothered at all because nobody seemed to notice that Don Glut said he got his information about Dale Van Sickel
from the man himself.
But most of us seem to agree now that it appears to be Eddie as the strap-bustin' Frankenstein, and that there are
other scenes in the climax that appear to be someone other than the Ilsa-grabbin', barrel-rollin' Flattop whom we
assume is Gil Perkins 'cause he says he's in there someplace. I think the only Gil Perkins appearance that most of us
feel pretty positive about is the ice scene, because of the jaw and dimple. I'm at a major loss to be as positive about
some of those Fight Scene Frankies as I am about the lab table scene, but it does seem at least possible that some of
them MAY be Parker -- they certainly look more like Ed to me than Gil. Or they may be an altogether different guy
-- a Third Man altogether (cue the zither music, maestro). A Parker/Perkins -- or if you must have it so,
Perkins/Parker -- credit would suit my sense of justice until we have sufficent reason to attribute the performances
otherwise. But GOD what a hard-fought vindication for Ed Parker.
As to GHOST, I said many pages ago that I have no problem with surrendering the Parker credit in that film, since
there's far less visible proof of his involvement than there is in FMTWM. The Dale Van Sickel visual match for the
Roof Monster is very convincing to me. I wonder if we can yet come up with a blowup from the fire scene? It seems
logical to me that Dale Van Sickel would have done ALL the stunt doubling in that film, but as we have seen, logic
may not tell the true story.
But regarding Dale Van Sickel not piping up with a comment on GHOST when Don Glut asked him about
HELLZAPOPPIN' -- he probably didn't provide that information because he wasn't asked about it directly. That's
come up often enough to be a given.
Tom Weaver:
I finally scored my copy of the CREATURE Universal Legacy Collection just this weekend, and I've been enjoying
your superb narration track for the original film as a special Halloween treat tonight -- but I noticed almost painfully
that you commented about the inflated claims made by two different people involved with the film whom you
interviewed personally: writer Harry Essex, who sought to take credit for the ideas and efforts of previous
scriptwriters (how funny that your comment on that begins with "Harry, Harry, Harry"!), and supporting player
Henry Escalante ("Chico," dragged overboard by the Creature from the deck of the Rita), who elaborately claimed
that he had worn the Gill-man suit!
I absolutely believe everything Gil Perkins said in his interviews with you and other people (though I believe what he
DIDN'T say needs to be considered objectively too) -- but your experience with Essex and Escalante shows that even
the information obtained in first-hand interviews needs to be judged with common sense, compared with factual
evidence, and often taken "cum grano salis."
taraco
(10/30/05 10:45 am)
Beyond a doubt...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------It seems to me that a compelling photographic case has been made that it could very well be Eddie Parker in some
of those scenes.
This isn't the same as just playing a match-the-face game because, until we determine the original Eddie Parker
information is totally bogus, it seems jstifiable to try to prove it photographically.
On the Perkins side, we have his own words saying he played the Monster in the fight scene and carrying Ilona. That
is the only scene he mentions, but we've also matched the 'ice Monster' with Perkins based on photographic evidence.
Do we therefore conclude Parker WAS the Monster at times? Or, because as Ted correctly notes, there is no actual
evidence Parker was in it, do we totally rule him out?
No, I don't think we are there yet. Parker was on the set, he did play the Wolf Man, and we have found enough
examples of multiple Monsters (three played the Monster in A&C MEET FRANKENSTEIN alone!), that I don't
think we can rule out Parker playing a part.
The key is to find out how the Parker-as-Monster story began. It's either wholly wrong, or it had a grain of truth in it
and it grew to eclipse Perkins entirely. But if Parker AND Perkins played the Monster, then we need to continue
digging.
FedOp, by the way, has gone beyond the call with his frame grabs. Thanx again from all of us.
david
Ted Newsom
(10/30/05 1:37 pm)
Re: Eddie Parker
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------it had a grain of truth in it and it grew to eclipse Perkins entirely.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------As Lou Costello would say on his TV series to the chimp: "Bingo."
Absent actual paperwork, which does not seem to exist, I must paraphrase Eddie Byrne in JACK THE RIPPER
(1960): "The most infamous stuntman since BLUEBEARD (1945)... and the files will always be marked,
'Unsolved.'"
I think this calls for a permanent, ambiguous, explanatory footnote. We're 100 men feeling up an elephant, not a
pretty sight, and the final result can come to no good end.
federal operator 99
(10/30/05 2:14 pm)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------We're 100 men feeling up an elephant, not a pretty sight, and the final result can come to no good end.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------I would tend to agree, as the pictorial evidence is fairly ambiguous. Be that as it may (and at the risk of abusing said
elephant!), here are some profiles of Eddie Parker (in Hit the Ice), along with profiles of FMTWM monster doubles
(for the sake of comparison). Note: the frame in the upper right has been flopped horizontally...
Chesterbelloc
(10/30/05 2:46 pm)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------That last pic looks like Chaney,Jr. to me. Hey, maybe the Lonster was telling the truth when he claimed he played
both parts in an interview!
Joe Karlosi
(10/30/05 5:03 pm)
Re: Ted Newsom's Roundup of Usually Suspects
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------In those pics, it looks like Parker as the monster till you examine the ears - they don't seem to match!
Count Gamula
(10/31/05 12:32 am)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Those two Franks look like they have Perkin's nose to me.
Kerry Gammill
HalLane
(10/31/05 6:30 am)
Re: Eddie Parker comparisons/ Eye of Beholder
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------When I first downloaded FedOp's Mac the ambulance driver/strap-buster pictures, I asked my 12 year old daughter:
Whaddaya think, Gina, same guy? She said: "I don't know.....I don't know, dad............but those ears sure do match."
Ted Newsom
(10/31/05 12:02 pm)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------We few holdouts in the I-Hate-Eddie camp have an impossible task. You cannot prove a negative. Ol' Criswell's
line, "Can you prove it didn't happen?" No, of course not, NO-body can.
It's not that the wide-flowering story doesn't have a basis in logic or unrelated verifiable facts.
Stuntman Gil Perkins, who had no beef with Eddie Parker, stated repeatedly that Eddie Parker was in
FRANKENSTEIN MEETS THE WOLF MAN-- doubling Lon Chaney.
Parker was in a number of horror or sci-fi films at Universal in the 1950s, sometimes credited, sometimes
anonymously. He was also a utility player in other films and TV shows (HOLD THE ICE, assorted westerns).
And Bela Lugosi is clearly doubled by someone in the F MEETS W action scenes.
Via genuine research (Mank, Weaver, et alia) and our own meticulous observation, we know that others subbed for
the Monster in several of the films: deNormand in BRIDE, Wolff in SON, a dummy in HOUSE, Van Sickle and
Chaney in A & C.
We've also seen what appears to be photographic indications that there are 1 or 2 or 3 or 4 non-Lugosi's in F MEETS
W: Ilona-Carrier, Strap-Breaker, Werewolf-Wrestler, Ice-Sitter, and Barrell-Roller.
Yet the same sort of frame-by-frame examination of other films shows us a Chaney that doesn't look like Chaney but
is; a Strange that doesn't look like Strange, but is; a hairy-armed Karloff who probably (but MAY not be) Karloff on
a particularly hirsuit day.
The arguement that Parker played the Monster at all in F MEETS W rests on essentially erroneous information, that
Parker doubled virtually ALL the monsters at Universal from 1939 onward, information that has, in the main, been
disproved. He did not double Karloff in SON, there is no indication that he was in GHOST, Strange had no doubles
in either HOUSE (except for the dummy), Parker was not Kharis or The Mutant and was most probably not the
atom-enhanced Dr. Vornoff either.
There IS a certain strained logic about Parker doubling a shot or two in F MEETS W, but it rests on a unstable house
of cards, one "what-if" situation piled upon another.
IF the experienced producer, director and crew of F MEETS W were unlucky or incautious enough not to get the
material they needed the first time around, and
IF the craftsmen and production schedulers at Universal were not bright enough to book a single stuntman for the
duration of the shoot, or
IF the primary stunt double was unavailable for certain scenes, and
IF the director, photographer & make-up artist opined that yet another stuntman would be suitable for a medium shot
and would look enough like the other guy (and the actor they were doubling) to fool audiences, and
IF the primary stuntman was unaware that certain scenes had to be re-done even AFTER he had done them and
IF the primary stuntman was unaware that a pal of his (whom he worked with again over the years) had gone back
and subbed in these 3rd-stage reshoots and
IF a basically-mistaken latter-day myth identifying this guy as Edwin Parker coincidentally happened to be true-...then it becomes logical that Eddie Parker did in fact double Lugosi in the movie.
I'm not saying it didn't happen, or that it couldn't have happened. But that, to me, is an incredible stretch of
coincidences.
blackbiped
(10/31/05 12:26 pm)
Re: Ted Newsom's Roundup of Usually Suspects
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Yet the same sort of frame-by-frame examination of other films shows us a Chaney that doesn't look like Chaney but
is; a Strange that doesn't look like Strange
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------That's an aspect of this current discussion that I have a hard time with. In all the times I've seen GOF and HOF I've
never thought Chaney or Strange looked like anyone else in those shots. I always thought "there's Chaney's
chubby-face close-up" or "there's Glenn Strange making that goofy grinning face for some reason." A distaff frame
here or there plucked from a movie scene may make an actor seem "not himself" if he's caught between expressions,
but as in the above examples, we also have the actual motion-picture footage to examine in addition to a few selected
stills. To me there appears to be more than one double for Lugosi, not just one man caught in certain freeze-frames
where his face happens to look different. (I hope that made sense.)
HalLane
(10/31/05 12:06 pm)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Ted, just read your most recent post and I've got to say I couldn't agree more. Now here's the thing:
Since today is actually Halloween, I decided to load the DVD drive of this computer, as I often do, to keep me
company while I'm reading this thread. I chose a disc that I bought some time ago and have been saving (for that
special time of year) called The Devil Bat. So imagine my astonishment as I'm reading your missive to hear your
voice coming from my computer!--guess I didn't read the packaging too closely. I'm not making this up.
So obviously the burning question for me is this: Were you trying to do the commentary in a "Dave O'Brien" voice
or should I now go back and re-read all these posts and adjust for inflection?
Just asking.
taraco
(10/31/05 1:49 pm)
Re:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------->>I'm not saying it didn't happen, or that it couldn't have happened. But that, to me, is an incredible stretch of
coincidences.
Ted's post is the best summation so far of the evidence pro and con. And he's right, proving a negative -- prove that
Eddie Parker WASN'T the monster at any point in FRANKENSTEIN MEETS THE WOLF MAN -- is just about
impossible.
The accumulation of evidence does not rule him out, but it also does not rule him in. The source of the original info
is where lies the key...if we can find it!
david
HalLane
(10/31/05 1:53 pm)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Seriously, tho, I'd add this to my above post if I knew how to get back in:
For centuries people have looked at THE BIBLE as Gospel with a capital 'G' (well duh) and then the extended
version streets in the form of the Dead Sea Scrolls-- Now who do you believe? As you say, everybody has an
opinion. My motto is: RESEARCH / VERIFY / then RESEARCH SOME MORE.
DON'T WORRY: I'm all out of religious analogies, so let's get back to looking at monsters.
taraco
(10/31/05 2:21 pm)
DePalma on pier...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------In Ted's quick list, haven't we determined, at least through Greg Mank's documentation, that it was Walter DePalma
briefly subbing for Strange/Chaney on the pier in ABBOTT AND COSTELLO MEET FRANKENSTEIN?
There was some discussion of it looking like Van Sickel, but the record shows DePalma that night.
By the way, the still-operative LIST OF STUNTMEN is on Page 27 (!) of this thread. For E-Z reference...
david
dangiedr
(10/31/05 7:07 pm)
Re: once more over the barrel..
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Hi all;
Had to chime in, what a WONDERFUL thread!! This would make great hard copy reading..
my 2cents re: FMTWM..
In regards to the barrel wagon escape, I believe(after extended slo-mo/freeze frame viewing today) that it's quite
possibly Bela on the cart from about 50:21 to approx 50:25 on the dvd player read out.. My gut also says it's ONE
other stuntman thru-out the film, and that the make-up job, lighting & other variables are responsible for the
perception that it could be 2-3 guys spelling Bela during any given scene.
Happy Halloween all!- Dan McKenzie
taraco
(10/31/05 8:29 pm)
Re: Dave O'Brian comparisons
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Welcome, Dan, and thanx from all of us for the kind words. I can't imagine what it must be like to read this thread
from the beginning.
We've been trying to keep it fact-based with not a lot of incidentals, and still it's over 870 posts and counting.
Anyhow, yes, we do hope this can become a finalized article at some point. We want to keep digging, though.
Your gut that it is ONE stuntman throughout -- as Ted thoroughly champions -- is not far-fetched at all, even though
many of us, including myself, feel the looks are different enough that MAYBE there was more than one.
The film is 60 years past, and yet we still think answers are out there. Somewhere!
And yes, Bela on the wagon briefly -- maybe he said hey, that looks like fun, to throw junk all over the Universal
backlot! -- is in the corner of my mind, too. I think I'll look again at those frames you mention.
david
dangiedr
(10/31/05 10:42 pm)
Re: Who played the Monster (film by film) ...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Thanks for the warm welcome guys;
David I've been a board member since Feb.05 but rarely post.. I've been eyeing this thread and it's growth for about 2
weeks but my work schedule hadn't allowed me the chance to "tear" into it until Sun.(10/30) Afternoon.. Goodness,
what a treat!! It's cost me the annual viewings of a few of my Halloween Universal/Classic Horror mainstays these
past 24 hours, but it was well worth it!!
In regards to my Bela on the cart claim: if you'll run your dvd player in slo-mo reverse @ 50:21 there's a
"freeze-able" profile frame(the monster is almost flush with the left side of the screen) that really to these 41 year old
peepers looks like our beloved Count Tesla!
After the action cuts away (50:25 or so) I believe both Bela & Lon are being spelled by their stuntmen for the more
strenuous aspects of the "chase"..
Thanks for letting me chime in gang, off to watch CURSE OF THE DEMON!
- Dan McKenzie
HalLane
(11/1/05 2:20 pm)
Re: Who played the Monster (film by film)...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------It's surprising what you can find just by looking. Bela in the wagon?: I'll gladly take another look; I've already seen
famous acting instructor Jeff Corey jumping over the bar at the New Wine festival (he was the crypt attendant back
in Llanwelly; heck of a long walk for a short beer!). He's right next to what appears to be the hospital orderly from
London. Shows to go there was no shortage of people on those sets just looking for something to do.
I trust everyone had a refreshingly fun Halloween, so back to work! And I propose giving the overworked Eddie
Parker a well deserved break too (Ted, we want no riotin'....no riots!) and instead go back to where it all started, in
1931. There once was a man with hairy arms and street shoes.
Or was there.....
After looking at the film, the Anobile continuity book (which is cropped differently) and any number of cheesy
monster mags, here's what I see:
There's clearly someone in street shoes covered by a sheet being examined by taraco....I mean Colin Clive... before
Elizabeth etc. come knocking. You can tell by the way the sheet comes to little points, and I think David posted a
shot of one of his socks sticking out. Is this Karloff? Probably-- the fingers are tapered, the wrist is skinny, and the
skin has the dark cast of our favorite half-hindu thespian. Later that hand comes and goes: for supposedly dead tissue
it exibits a surprisingly flexible range of positions; the continuity was obviously shot out of sequence. And it sure
looks like Karloff taking the long ride to the top.
But I'll point out that there is at least one cut before he does so, and that tho the camera angles change quite a bit and
it's hard to tell, I've got at least one photo here from a shot that doesn't appear in the film (so it may be a set still) that
seems to show a monster with a heavier build than Karloff and with apparently stubbier fingers (which I'll post if
anyone wants to see).
So does this mean Karloff is being doubled? I don't know. I just tells it like I sees it. But I think back to the interview
where Boris remembered the SPFX guy way up in the rafters weilding the hot carbon scissors to make the sparks and
praying he didn't have butter fingers, and I've just gotta wonder: how come this is a stronger memory than being
hoisted 100 feet in the air by thin cables while strapped to a board with your eyes closed?
HalLane
(11/1/05 7:19 pm)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Here's that photo I mentioned; the angle is from closer to the table than in the film. I don't say it isn't Karloff, but it
just looks a little different.
[PHOTO NO LONGER AVAILABLE]
HalLane
(11/1/05 6:41 pm)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now that's what I'm talkin' about.
Edited by: HalLane at: 11/1/05 8:17
pm
nightmarekey
(11/2/05 2:07 am)
Re: Dave O'Karloff comparisons
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------But it feels like my last (& I hope it's the last) ingrown toenail "procedure".... Seriously (& that's a damnsilly word
to be bandied about with Nighteykey)... The Body In Question may well have been BK for publicity still purposes,
but I suspect that those bothersome "cuts" in the film (which were really no more than "camera perspective-as
opposed to angle-) shots were done with a double--or (1931) dummy... I'll say that it's definitely BK on the "trip
down" from the tower. And I'll further conjecture those shots were done at the same time. The "giveaway" is the
gaffe in editorial continuity (not uncommon in Whale's films, but this was under the auspices of John Fulton as well)
is after Clive & Frye unwrap the sheet and towel on "The Monster" prior to raising the table and drops the towel... as
the angle shifts, Clive drops that towel a second time....
blackbiped
(11/2/05 4:00 am)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------There's a wide shot right before the close-up of Karloff's hand when Clive is examining it, that shows the Monster
holding his hand out in a blocky and stiff manner, very unlike Karloff.
Joe Karlosi
(11/2/05 5:16 am)
Re: Dave O'Brian comparisons
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------I've already seen famous acting instructor Jeff Corey jumping over the bar at the New Wine festival (he was the crypt
attendant back in Llanwelly; heck of a long walk for a short beer!).
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------I never noticed him at the festival! Of course, I knew it was him as the crypt attendant. A funny thing is, I once
interviewed Jeff Corey for a fanzine I was doing, and our conversation included all sorts of his film appearances. I
wondered if he had any recollection whatsoever about his stint for FMTWM, but all he recalled was that he played
what he named "a grave robber" (!?), but also told me he had no other recollections, as it was only one day's work!
Edited by: Joe Karlosi at: 11/2/05 5:17 am
HalLane
(11/2/05 11:01 am)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------There's a wide shot right before the close-up of Karloff's hand when Clive is examining it, that shows the Monster
holding his hand out in a blocky and stiff manner, very unlike Karloff.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------[1st photo not available]
PHOTO NOT AVAILABLE]
I have no idea what this is going to look like, but was it any of these?
Ted Newsom
(11/2/05 11:53 am)
Re: Hand O'Karloff comparisons
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Karloff is supposed to be dead,of course. He holds his hands in a similar position in the scene where he enters then
reaches up to the light.
HalLane
(11/2/05 12:34 pm)
Re: Hand O'Karloff comparisons
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Just a coupla more variations on a theme (I know they're fuzzy, but...)
[ONLY ONE PHOTO STILL AVAILABLE]
I'll just note that the top one features the "pointy toed" sheet covering,
while the second is the "table-floating" version that "bounces" when Clive
bumps the table.
And last we have the "white-knuckle" table grabber shown above, with
traditional square feet.
Personally, I tend to think they're all the guy from FRANKENSTEIN
1970 and ROUTE 66--BUT--there's still one more shot in the film, just
before the table goes up, that isn't in the Anobile book (where the top 2 came from).Do any frame-grabbers out there
have anything useful to add?
blackbiped
(11/2/05 1:51 pm)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------I have no idea what this is going to look like, but was it any of these?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------I just got a red x on the first picture, but the third one looks like the shot I was talking about. The close-up of the
hand looking more Karloff-like comes right after that.
HalLane
(11/2/05 2:29 pm)
Re: Who played the Monster (film by film)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------The missing first picture was the third one down; hopefully the other
red x-boxes will appear here:
If it worked, refer to the description above. I swear that's the last time I do this while watching SNOW DEVILS (hey,
it was written by Bill Finger). Eddie....Eddie Parker....where are you?
georgechastain
(11/2/05 7:27 pm)
Perkins External Workin's
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------I was fooling around today with some frame blowups (working on a little digital art project I hope to spring on you
guys very soon), and I noticed something I never had before, that I think is at least as compelling as any of the
evidence I've seen so far that it is indeed GIL PERKINS cooling it behind
the ice:
Note, as usual, the dimple in the chin, the deep creases
in the side of the face, the powerful neck, and
especially, in these images, the bulbous tip of the nose
and THE SHAPE OF THE EAR. While my beloved
Eddie Parker does indeed have earlobes, I think the
shape of both of these guys' ears is very distinctive: for
example, Gil's lobes seem to be more generous, and
Eddie's seem to slope inward from the top a bit more
than Gil's.
Also: this is the first time I've ever noticed the bolts in
the Frankenstein Monster's neck being square-headed!
Have I been blind all these years?
Ted Newsom
(11/2/05 8:39 pm)
Fed Op Phantom Pix
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------I have never before had a problem with photos appearing, but the (alleged) Parker profiles FedOp postd on p43 are
invisible. It's a two-line text entry and nothing else.
I don't quite get the "flopped" reference (since I can't see the photos) -- but if what ought to be a Parker Right Ear
does not match what we know is a Monster Right Ear, then we can say goodnight, Gracie.
Ted Newsom
(11/3/05 12:18 am)
Boltz & Nuts
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------This may be a first-- and I would strongly suspect Jack Pierce wasn't behind it. The round-head electrodes are
consistent throughout the series-- except for this shot. Tres bizarre.
And, hey, that does sorta look like Gil Perkins, now, doesn't it?
taraco
(11/3/05 9:04 am)
The Face on the Floor
------------------------------------------------------------------------------Here's a clearer shot of the Monster on the floor after
being drugged in FRANKENSTEIN.
David Skal says this is someone doubling for Karloff.
Maybe it's because of that suggestion, but it actually does
look (to me), like it could be someone else. The right
wrist scar also seems different. From this point until they
carry the body into the dungeon, his face is always
concealed, face-down.
Anyhow, this photo is from the late John Parnum's
collection, reproduced in MONSTERS FROM THE
VAULT #12:
Not Karloff? Could be...
david
'Quick. They must not see this!'
HalLane
(11/3/05 10:50 am)
Re: Boltz & Nuts
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------I thought I had seen it all.
We watched agape the first time we "saw" that ragged cardboard in DRACULA after decades of invisibility. We sat
transfixed as Ted showed us that Bela-stein could bend his elbows in Spanish. And today I suspect that history has
been made again.
Ladies and gentlemen, seeing is believing, and I believe that MORE IMPORTANT even than who played the
Monster film by film, and buried like some long forgotten B-29 lost and frozen in Arctic ice, georgechastain has
uncovered nothing less than the secret origin of the FRANKENSTEIN NECK-BOLT CLICHE!!
This of course opens up a whole new avenue of investigation: did the Monster appear with bolts as opposed to Jack
Pierce's "electrical inlets" in those pre-1942 cartoons? I remember a (Porky Pig?) Looney Tunes where he's in an
auto race, and one @ a Hollywood party, and maybe in one of those "book title" things. I vaguely remember a
Fleischer or Disney cartoon which may have a Monster cameo (are these to be included on our list?; I haven't
checked pg. 27 lately). Well regardless of how they were drawn it doesn't matter: George has shown us the Rossetta
Stone of live-action Frankenstein neck bolt jokes!
If you feel a tremor today, it just may be the pillars of heaven shaking.
(Why the square bolts? Well, if Bela wore the "hero" electrodes for close-ups, and Gil did the heavy lifting, and-- as
I suspect-- a 2nd unit was shooting strap-busters and barrel-tossers, then they may simply have run out of "electrical
inlets" and sent someone to the hardware store).
Oh yeah, kudos on the Gil-iceman match, George-- one more item on the Gil-man's side of the scales-- tho it almost
pales beside that square-bolt epiphany!
HalLane
(11/3/05 11:18 am)
Re: Fed Op Phantom Pix
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------BTW, Ted (and David), I also had no end of trouble with images yesterday (just follow the trail of red x's) which I
attributed to my own ham-handedness until I watched one successfully downloaded image actually disappear! At the
EZ-Board page I recieved a message about possible server trouble, and then I couldn't access the site at all for the
longest time.
Nice MFTV still, David. In spite of the extended Pratt pinkies (which may be deliberate in this case) that left wrist
looks somewhat thicker than Karloff's and, dare I say it, hairy.
HalLane
(11/3/05 11:44 am)
Re: Fed Op Phantom Pix
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Okay, just one more thing (as Peter Falk might say): Ted, those flopped ear-whorls you reference are negligible in
that shot you can't see as I suspect the profile is the salient point being made. My knee-jerk assumed it was Parker,
but as they said in ancient Greece "the sober second thought": I'm seeing that patented Perkins
ski-jump/bulbous-tipped nose in the shot of him lifting what seems to be the "real" Ilona Massey (that about right
FedOp?). I still wonder if there might not have been a second unit shooting the "stunt-Massey" with the
sissy-face/windmill arm/silly-JohnCleese-walk Monster while Gil was being made up with yak hair to do a few
wolf-leaps, as the strap-buster who throws the beam aside while clenching his fingers "Parker-style" as he chases
Mannering doesn't look or move like sissy-face at all.OK I'm done.
georgechastain
(11/3/05 12:21 pm)
Re: Boltz & Nuts
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------This of course opens up a whole new avenue of investigation: did the Monster appear with bolts as opposed to Jack
Pierce's "electrical inlets" in those pre-1942 cartoons? I remember a (Porky Pig?) Looney Tunes where he's in an
auto race, and one @ a Hollywood party, and maybe in one of those "book title" things. I vaguely remember a
Fleischer or Disney cartoon which may have a Monster cameo (are these to be included on our list?; I haven't
checked pg. 27 lately). Well regardless of how they were drawn it doesn't matter: George has shown us the Rossetta
Stone of live-action Frankenstein neck bolt jokes!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The public misconceptions about bolts may have gotten a jump start from the advertising art for the very first film -especially the poster image of the twisted, ungainly Monster pictured in GRAVEN IMAGES on the Argentinian
one-sheet (image taken from American originals). This Creature is bristling all over with bolts as if they were
hinge-pins for his joints, which may have helped to sell the character as a sort of out-of-control robot created by Mad
Science.
One great early cartoon appearance of the Monster (and two of his genre buddies) is in Disney's B&W MICKEY'S
GALA PREMIERE. Haven't checked the image lately but I remember a frame of the scene was published in FM
with the three characters identified as Karloff as Frank, Lugosi as Dracula, and Chaney as the Hunchback -- though I
think the third character is really supposed to be Fredric March's Mr. Hyde, a more likely match for the period (early
30's).
And then there's the FRANKENSTEIN'S CAT Mighty Mouse cartoon -- why isn't THAT available, along with the
Jekyll & Hyde and Svengali ones?!
Off-Trail but way cool: speaking of popular graphics representing famous monsters, I HIGHLY recommend the
KING KONG artwork on the new 24 oz. box of Kellogg's Corn Flakes -- truly spectacular and unusually tasteful and
elegant for a cereal package, definitely a classy collectible. Almost as satisfying as the imagi-box of Wheaties with
Eddie Parker on the front.
taraco
(11/3/05 12:25 pm)
Re: Boltz & Nuts
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------The bolt shot from the photo of Gil Perkins in the ice (can I assume we all agree that's who it is?), is astounding.
How could that be?
Perhaps it was a behind-the-ice shot and who would see it and they couldn't match the bolt right so someone got a nut
and said use this, no one will know the difference??
Also, the right ear is weird. Is that Perkins' ear BEHIND a fake ear??
david
HalLane
(11/3/05 1:28 pm)
Re: Bolz & Nuts
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Off-trail reply:
I'm eating from that box of corn flakes right now.
Bela Fun Fact:
somewhere down in the KONG DVD announcements I posted an item about the time Bela Lugosi actually co-starred
with the actual giant spiders from the spider-pit scene in KONG. It's true! Go check it out and amaze your friends!
georgechastain
(11/3/05 1:16 pm)
appEARances can be deceiving
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Also, the right ear is weird. Is that Perkins' ear BEHIND a fake ear??
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------David -- to me the differences, though noticeable, are accounted for by the changed perspective: Monster's head is
turned upward and to the right, so we get a different angle on the earlobe especially. The headpiece and makeup may
have put a bit of pressure on things here or there too -- but the basic configuration of both ears definitely looks the
same to me.
One other thing I've noticed more clearly since my original post -- the unique triangular musculature of the upper lip.
Also the shape and position of the cheekbone, the curve of the jawline... EVERYTHING fits.
taraco
(11/3/05 1:35 pm)
THE LIST OF FRANKENSTEIN (1931-1953)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Because this post is at the top of a new page, here's an easy-to-find recap of the LATEST findings from this thread,
through the eight Universal classics and additional Monster appearances, including TV:
FOR FUTURE REFERENCE: THIS LIST IS AT TOP OF PAGE 46.
All names marked with an asterisk (*) indicate evidence is inconclusive or still under debate.
FRANKENSTEIN (1931) Universal
Bela Lugosi (lost screen test; no footage included in film)
Boris Karloff
*Unnamed double: Was double used in parts of creation scene and Monster drugged on floor? David Skal believes
photos show hairier arm on Monster in several such shots.
BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN (1935) Universal
Boris Karloff
George DeNormand: Brief scenes may have included 'rescue' of shepherd girl; monster lifted on pole in long shot
during 'crucifixion'; carrying Elizabeth in abduction (long shot); possibly castle explosion.
Boris Karloff (footage from FRANKENSTEIN)
TWO HEARTS IN WAX TIME (1935) MGM - 1 reel color musical
Monster is a wax dummy which comes to life; simalcrum of BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN make-up & costume; The
Monster Sings!
*Frank Hayes is billed as "Frank the Mannequin"
ONE IN A MILLION (1936) 20th/Fox - feature musical
Al Ritz; song & dance sketch on skates; simalcrum of FRANKENSTEIN make-up and costume. The Monster
dances.
SON OF FRANKENSTEIN (1939) Universal
Boris Karloff
Bud Wolfe: Stand-in for fall into sulphur pit.
THIRD DIMENSIONAL MURDER (1941) MGM 1 reel
Ed Payson (SON OF FRANKENSTEIN type make-up and costume)
HELLZAPOPPIN' (1941) Universal- feature comedy
Dale Van Sickel (wire gag in theater, throwing woman onto stage)
CELEBRITY BASEBALL NEWSREEL (1942)
Boris Karloff
GHOST OF FRANKENSTEIN (1942) Universal
Lon Chaney
Boris Karloff (archive footage from FRANKENSTEIN)
*Eddie Parker: Possibly stunt double for scene on village bridge; breaking down door, gas attack; fire climax.
NOTE: Gil Perkins, in interviews, recalls playing Monster previous to FRANKENSTEIN MEETS THE WOLF
MAN. Was it Perkins in GHOST? Another theory is Van Sickel may have been the monster on roof. In short, still
seeking evidence that Parker was the double.
FRANKENSTEIN MEETS THE WOLF MAN (1943) Universal
Bela Lugosi
Gil Perkins: Doubles for Monster in the ice scene; probably on wagon; says it was he in fight scene.
Eddie Parker Doubles for Wolf Man in fight scene.
*Eddie Parker: Has been listed for decades as double for Monster, but other evidence remains to be found. Photo
comparisons suggest it might be him getting up from lab table and briefly carrying Ilona (Don Glut insists that is the
case); possibly in second take of fight scene.
NOTE: Fierce debate continues over Parker. Some doubt that he was ever the Monster; others say photographic
evidence show Perkins did not do it all, or that even a third stuntman was involved. Research continuing.
HOUSE OF FRANKENSTEIN (1944) Universal
Glenn Strange
Dummy (Monster frozen in ice; Monster electrified on lab table)
Carey Loftin doubled for Karloff in long shots during quicksand scene; it is Strange and Karloff who actually sink in
quicksand.
HOUSE OF DRACULA (1945) Universal
Glenn Strange
Boris Karloff (footage from BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN)
Lon Chaney (footage from GHOST OF FRANKENSTEIN fire scene)
Eddie Parker* (footage from GHOST OF FRANKENSTEIN fire scene)
Carey Loftin doubles for Onslow Stevens.
ABBOTT AND COSTELLO MEET FRANKENSTEIN (1948) Universal
Glenn Strange
Lon Chaney: Doubles for Strange, who had injured his ankle. Chaney throws woman through skylight, briefly chases
the boys.
Walter De Palma: Greg Mank cites production report proving that stuntman De Palma subbed for the still-injured
Strange during fire on dock scene. Only small part of that shoot made it to film, and new shots of a recovered
Strange replaced much of it.
Dummy: Falls through dock during fire.
LUGOSI/STRANGE MONSTER TOUR (1948)
Glenn Strange appeared as Monster -- wearing a Monster mask, and his Monster boots from MEETS -- during
theater tour with Bela Lugosi promoting Abbott and Costello Meets Frankenstein.
COLGATE COMEDY HOUR (1951) NBC
Lon Chaney Jr. appears as Monster in skit with Abbott and Costello, and in dance finale.
COLGATE COMEDY HOUR (1953) NBC
Glenn Strange, billed as 'Glenn Strangle,' appears as Monster in skit with Abbott and Costello and Ricou Browning
as Creature from the Black Lagoon.
ABBOTT AND COSTELLO MEET DR. JEKYLL AND MR HYDE (1953) Universal
Eddie Parker appears as Mr. Hyde, doubling for Boris Karloff.
Chuck Hamilton appears as the Monster in brief scene in wax museum (this according to Don Glut).
Discussion on all or some of this welcome and encouraged.
Not sure this list will ever be final, but we're getting there!
david
georgechastain
(11/3/05 2:20 pm)
Re: THE LIST OF FRANKENSTEIN (1931-1953)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------David -Is there a cutoff year for the list, or are you just listing things as the major discussions get to them? If not, I'd like to
suggest adding:
* Don Glut's amateur film THE ADVENTURES OF THE SPIRIT
(1963), with Glenn Strange's final (?) appearance as the Monster, wearing Bob Burns' Frankenstein mask (the first
one produced by Don Post). Back around page 24 I posted a photo from this film showing Glenn with Bob Burns as
Superman (Don has a video clip from it on his website);
(I read somewhere that Glenn also appeared in the Flattop gettup on the Tex Williams Show, which I believe is a
half-hour country & western musical variety show, but I have no details. Anybody?)
* Boris Karloff's famous final appearance as the Monster in the "Lizard's Leg and Owlet's Wing" episode of ROUTE
66 (with Lon as the Wolf Man, the Mummy and the Hunchback, and Peter Lorre as himself).
I haven't checked it in years to see if there might be scenes that required a stunt double -- a reasonable possibility
considering everybody's age, but I don't remember anything too strenuous.
taraco
(11/3/05 3:25 pm)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------We can add those, as well as Chaney in TALES OF TOMORROW and a Danny Kaye TV appearance as the
Monster. Don Glut has many of these listed and I'll add as we move along here!
georgechastain
(11/3/05 3:48 pm)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Oh yeah! -- that Chaney TALES OF TOMORROW episode slipped my mind, or what's left of it.
But while I'm leaping ahead of the discussions -The Don Megowan Monster on TALES OF FRANKENSTEIN (1958) is very interesting, sort of a
Hammer/Universal crossover...
Heavyweight boxer Primo Carnera played the Monster on television too, but I don't remember if I've ever read where
or when -- has anybody seen it? Is there a tape of it?
A nifty bit of scarendipity: Carnera was the inspiration for the sadly victimized prizefighter "Toro Moreno" in the
Bogart boxing expose THE HARDER THEY FALL -- a character played by Mike Lane, the Monster in
FRANKENSTEIN 1970.
Ted Newsom
(11/3/05 5:25 pm)
Re: appEARances can be deceiving
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Good summation, please, dear Jesus, let us move on.
I've seen the ROUTE 66 show several times (alas, not when it first aired. Where was my head!?!), but it's all Karloff,
and then only briefly in about four scenes.
Karloff, as the Monster (or as Boris Karloff made up as the Monster) walks down the hall beside Chaney (as Chaney
as the Wolf Man); Karloff, Chaney and Peter Lorre lean over a stairwell railing to see the idiot leading man kiss the
simpering (beautiful) leading lady; she sees the monsters and faints, proving the old monsters can still scare people.
Milner scoots the three monsters into a basement storage froom to hide them from the hotle manager; Maharis sees
the three ghouls sitting and talking and reacts; finally Lorre and Karloff exit, smiling at the boys; Chaney's the last
monster out the door, growling at Todd and Buzz-- fade out.
Speaking of the Mike Lane connection-- do we count Karloff's appearance at the end of 1970? Lane, in the opening
scene, sure looks like a distorted version of the Universal monster, and there's that (crummy) close-up of karloff with
dyed hair and mustache...)
The Carnera FRANKENSTEIN was on NBC's Matinee Theater in the late 50s-- 1957 or so; Glut notes it in his
books; broadcast in color, though any recording is probably is b/w, or so old and crappy it might as well be.. They
also did an hour version of DRACULA with Carradine, apparently in a mustache and all. Few of these shows seem
to survive, but there's a "Suicide Club" adaptation with Kerwin Mathews floating around, so maybe there's hope.
taraco
(11/3/05 4:52 pm)
Re: appEARances can be deceiving
------------------------------------------------------------------------------->>Good summation, please, dear Jesus, let us
move on.
Hah! We may be getting to counting nose hairs
soon!
Although, truth be told, when I first saw
FRANKENSTEIN MEETS THE WOLF
MAN on laserdisc -- a sparkling, incredible
transfer, unmatched anywhere -- when Bela
awakens and gives that sly smile on the
operating table, his nose hairs were so visible I
used to point them out to people. 'Look how
clear this is! You can see his nose hairs!'
Yeah, they had the same reaction you all did
just now.
But we need a crystal-clear closeup of the Perkins and/or Parker noses, viewed from below!! (Actually, FedOp did
this back on Page 37!)
david
TomWeaver999
(11/3/05 5:58 pm)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------<< Good summation, please, dear Jesus, let us move on. <<
I'd like to know how Chuck Hamilton was i.d.'ed as the Monster in A&C MEET JEKYLL & HYDE. To the best of
my knowledge, he isn't in the movie in any other part (not that I'm sure he's in A&C MEET J&H in the Monster
part). Did someone take notice of the A&C/J&H Monster's ear or spine or something, and then start scouring
OTHER movies for a bit player with a matching ear?? Ouch!!!
The Universal records do not include paperwork crediting anybody with the Monster role, but they have paperwork
for every other actor, bit player and stuntman in the thing, which leads me to believe that the guy playing the Monster
was just an extra. Charles "Chuck" Hamilton was not an extra, to the best of my knowledge.
taraco
(11/3/05 6:09 pm)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Don Glut says it was Hamilton. I will ask him.
georgechastain
(11/3/05 8:07 pm)
Great Googly-Moogly
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------My son just sent me the URL for a great Internet resource I wasn't aware of (gotta get tuned into what's happenin',
baby) -- the Beta version of Google Print:
print.google.com/
To use it, you'll need to set yourself up with the usual free account, but it's well worth it -- I searched for both "Eddie
Parker" and "Gil Perkins" and found that generous portions of some superb print resources have been scanned into
this system, and I was able to read substantial segments of things like Don Glut's FRANKENSTEIN ARCHIVES
(which basically mirrors a lot of our findings here, with minor divergences), and a bunch of Tom Weaver's books,
etc.
McFarland seems particularly well represented.
Rather than attempting to transcribe any of the neat stuff I read online, I highly recommend that anybody who's
interested sign up and check it out yourself -- I think this is a resource that film scholars will love.
p.s. My ex-bookseller wife tells me that publishers are complaining (with some justification, it seems) about the
copyright issues involved in making such big chunks of books available online, but the portions I read just made me
want to own the books. Now all I have to figure out is where to get the money...
georgechastain
(11/4/05 8:20 am)
Incredibly Strange Music
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Searched for "Glenn Strange" in Google Print and answered my own question: Don Glut's FRANKENSTEIN
ARCHIVE has info about Glenn's TV appearances as the Monster, and quotes him about his performance on the Tex
Williams show -- he played the fiddle in full Monster drag! This was apparently some time in the late 50's or early
60's.
Glenn was an excellent cowboy musician -- even his "Sam the Bartender" character on GUNSMOKE would
occasionally entertain the Long Branch customers with his fiddle.
In the early days (when he was sometimes credited as "Peewee" Strange!), he was a member of an excellent western
band called the Arizona Wranglers who performed in a whole passel of westerns. Glenn is credited for composing
some of the songs in these and other horse operas. He also had a fine singing voice, and was often spotlighted
warbling cowboy tunes in these films. He even provided the singing voice for John Wayne is his early Republic film
WESTWARD HO.
At the Monster Bash a few years ago, Bob Burns brought along a terrific "Monster Kid premium" -- a CD called
"Frankenstein Sings" that he made from his reel-to-reel tape recordings of Glenn playing lots of fiddle tunes and
even singing a few songs like "Little Joe the Wrangler" and some of his own compositions. The tapes were made in
the 60's on a couple of occasions when Glenn stopped by for a visit with the Burnses on his way home from a
GUNSMOKE shoot, and happened to have some instruments in the car. On one session he's accompanied by a good
guitar player who had performed with Glenn that day at the Long Branch.
HalLane
(11/4/05 9:08 am)
Re: Incredibly Strange Music
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Just when you think he's gone they keep pulling him back!
Above is (fingers crossed) a slight upgrade of my favorite FMTWM still, featuring Massey, Knowles, Chaney and
Guy-Who Isn't Lugosi -- just to remind you that we may be looking at our strap-buster.
Or as that other Parker (Ray) might put it:
[Redacted]
taraco
(11/4/05 10:35 am)
Van Frankenstein...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------The search continues...
Here's a nice shot of Dale Van Sickel, who we have listed as
playing the Monster in HELLZAPOPPIN' and who some
theorize might have played the Monster in other films (there's
discussion of this back on Page 42).
Anyhow, here's the shot:
Besides being a strong match for Glenn Strange, his craggy face
shows the perils of visual matchings we've been attempting here.
A case could be made that he has enough of a cleft/dimple, the
pug nose and certainly the crease in his face to rival Gil Perkins
in the ice.
Not saying that's the case -- at all -- but the closer we look at
these guys (or as Hal says, the more dots we examine), the more
mysterious it gets.
david
taraco
(11/4/05 10:51 am)
Re: Van Frankenstein...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Here's that 8x10 George 'E-gor' Chastain (love typing that!),
posted a while ago, which was later IDed by Ted as Van Sickel in
HELLZAPOPPIN'.
HalLane
(11/4/05 10:58 am)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Voila, David, and congratulations. You've found the shot I used of Van Sickle for my GHOST/rooftop comparison,
flopped to match position (which I didn't mention as I've no idea if the above cowboy picture is oriented correctly -can't see the shirt buttons). I still think it's him, tho, for reasons of stature (the Monster's hardly taller than the old
man beside him in the scene, and look at the size of that Janet Ann mannequin) and facial contours.
BTW, I think I can improve the Monster closeup I used for comparison. Stay tuned....
HalLane
(11/4/05 12:38 pm)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well, I don't know if that's any better, but I still think the
chin, cheekbone, and deep crease in the right cheek give it
away as Van Sickle.
If anyone else wants to try it, the Monster photo is from the
GHOST OF FRANKENSTEIN Filmbook in FM #48 (later
reprinted in FM #85, tho I suspect the negative had been
duped by then as the dot is a little choked).
I was surprised to note that the filmbook was written by the
wee Brunii Bros. Those boys need to get out more!
ryanbrennan
(11/4/05 9:28 pm)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------This has been a spectacular thread, film history in the re-making, and I've enjoyed it tremendously. I can't wait to
read it in a single, coherent, concise format.
While looking through Leslie Halliwell's "The Dead That Walk" I noticed that Eddie Parker shows up in the index.
Here's what Halliwell has to say about FMTWM:
"IF the monster seems a bit schizophrenic in this picture it is probably because, although nominally played by Bela
Lugosi (which seems reasonable since his brain, or his character's, went into the giant body in the last story) all his
difficult or tiresome shots are played by a stuntman named Eddie Parker, because the 62-year-old Lugosi was so
frail. (A frail monster: that certainly isn't encouraging.) The alternation is all too obvious, especially because no layer
of make-up, however thick, could entirely conceal Lugosi's distinctive features, and the very first shot is of Parker."
On the page facing this one there is a photo from GHOST with the monster on fire. The caption reads: "The monster
(probably played in this shot by the stuntman Eddie Parker) goes up in flames."
This sounds like a re-phrasing of the information presented in "Modern Monsters." It would be interesting to know
where Halliwell got his info. He offers no bibliography and his short list of acknowledgements mentions only Don
Gate of MCA TV and Brian Lawrence and Roy Skeggs of Hammer. He further thanks "the many previous writers on
allied subjects."
Later in the book, there is a scene from ABBOTT AND COSTELLO MEET THE MUMMY in which the Mummy
is bending over with outstretched hand towards Costello. The caption reads: "Chaney's stunt man Eddie Parker takes
over in his own right as a rather cuddly mummy. Costello and Richard Deacon are speechless."
In the body of the text Halliwell comments that the mummy is dressed in perfunctory garb, "...a sort of
turn-of-the-century one-piece bathing suit with facial wrappings amounting to little more than yashmak, behind
which the healthy features of stuntman Eddie Parker shine cheerfully."
federal operator 99
(11/4/05 9:57 pm)
FMTWM Climax
------------------------------Some more frame grabs
from the FMTWM
climax:
taraco
(11/4/05 9:08 pm)
Re: FMTWM Climax
------------------------------------------------------------------------------->> I can't wait to read it in a single, coherent, concise format.
Ryan, you mean almost a thousand posts isn't coherent???
But yes, we'll make this a single narrative, using the best of what everyone has to offer, once we get even closer to
the truth. If we can!!
As for the fight scene above, if indeed it is Eddie Parker as the Wolf Man, then it would be Gil Perkins as the
Monster, as he (Perkins) has said it was in interviews.
And if that's the case, then the shot of him (Perkins), at the end there looks very much like the shot of the Monster
that some believe may be Parker!
Consider:
Compare the Monster getting up from table (the so-called strap-buster whom some have argued could be Parker),
with the image of the Monster in the fight, taken from FedOp's frame grabs above. The two look similar to me:
All I can conclude is we should take Perkins at his word.
If Parker or someone else did stand in during the fight at
any point -- which is not impossible -- it doesn't look like
we've proven that yet.
david
georgechastain
(11/4/05 11:13 pm)
Re: FMTWM Climax
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------David -Just a coupla quick comments with nothing to back them up yet.
To me, there is no way in Hell that the faces of the guy behind the ice and the strap burster are the same. The Perkins
camp may have one or the other but NOT both.
I'm convinced that the iceman is Perkins, therefore the other guy isn't. It's conceivable to me that the OTHER guy in
some of the fight scenes may not be Parker, but that guy on the lab table is Eddie Parker.
What Gil Perkins said he and Parker did is duly noted, but what he DIDN'T say speaks volumes to me. A guy who
claimed to have made so many movies and TV appearances couldn't possibly have a crystal-clear memory of all of
them. Just because he didn't mention trading places with Parker or someone else for a couple of shots one afternoon
-- or didn't know everything that went on during the production because he was off for a day or two doing 35 other
stunt jobs at Republic -- doesn't mean that it didn't happen.
(Aside -- playing both ends against the middle here:
I'm no expert, but the numbers of movie and TV appearances Perkins claimed seemed far beyond anything I've every
seen attributed to another performer. Even given that he often did brief stunts in several different films on the same
day, he also had larger, much more time-consuming roles like acting in KONG and playing one of John Wayne's
Tenneseeans in THE ALAMO, stuck in Brackettville Texas far away from other opportunities). Just a casual
observation.
Last time I strolled through the FMTWM climax I thought I could see a noticeable size difference between the
Monster and Wolfy in some scenes, even beyond the hightop and the big shoes and the werewolf's perpetual crouch
-- which is certainly as it should be. I've posted several times on the subject of Eddie Parker being a BIG guy -- both
as attested in interviews with co-workers and repeated so many times in print that it seems unlikely it could entirely
be based on Bart Andrews' willful, self-serving fabrication. I also took the trouble to check on Eddie's measurements
in the serial RADAR PATROL VS. SPY KING, in which, as I said before, he's bigger and taller than everybody else
in the picture, including Kirk Alyn and long, lanky Tom Steele, despite the evidence of the photo presented here. I'm
trying to track down a copy of one of the early John Wayne B-westerns like STAR PACKER in which there should
be a scene that shows the two of them side by side. If I can find visual proof I'll certainly post it. It's bound to be out
there somewhere. If anybody else can come up with something other than the sort of still photos that are so easily
misread, I really think that establishing the relative sizes of Gil and Eddie might provide another useful bit of
information to establish who's who in which scenes.
nightmarekey
(11/4/05 11:28 pm)
Re: FMTWM Climax
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Beautiful captures, FedOp99!!: And note those guy wires (I count 2 of 'em) in the first capture that made that
Strickfaden machine "coast" so "effortlessly" off its platform! (of course it's a famous prop, but solid enough to
support a full-grown "stunt-wolfman").....
georgechastain
(11/4/05 10:29 pm)
Re: FMTWM Climax
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------That last climactic shot Fed Op posted, showing the Monster in his street shoes and the Wolf Man leaping at him,
right before the deluge hits, is a great example of the size difference I was just mentioning... only in reverse. Gil
Perkins says it's him as the Monster in that scene, and we have no reason to doubt him -- a wild, wet scene like that
would SURELY be memorable even decades later.
But the Wolf Man sure looks like a bigger guy in this shot...
and he has a remarkably straight back, with no indication of the dreaded S-shaped spinal curvature! We have yet to
make the sort of thorough examination of spines and ears that may prove to be necessary, but this sort of stuff seems
ripe for further investigation.
nightmarekey
(11/4/05 11:49 pm)
Re: FMTWM Climax
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Not to mention the object d'morte in the lower right-hand corner of "grab #4": A leftover prop from some previous
MUMMY endeavor once fondled by Geo. Zucco and/or Turhan Bey?... Esoterica from one of the Jon Hall/Maria
Montez opuses that Producer Waggner was about to take over from the renowned Walter Wanger (who was only
rumored to have been fondled by Turhan Bey but Joan Bennett wouldn't stand for it)?? Jetsam from one of director
Niell's Sherlock Holmes adventures (which have been fondled by... everyone)???
taraco
(11/5/05 12:28 am)
Re: FMTWM Climax
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------There's only one way to get the answer: One of us is going to have to get into Bob Burns' time machine and go back
there!
And wouldn't it be wild if whichever one of us arrives at the 1942 Universal set slowly climbs out of the time
machine and slinks into the shadows. You hear the low voices of cast and crew, and the ominous sloshing of giant
tanks of water ready for the climactic fight.
You try to stay quiet and unobserved until someone -- a stagehand, the director perhaps -- catches you spying and
shouts out, 'Hey you there! You with the curved spine! Gil's hurt his cheek. It's bleeding pretty badly and we need
someone to wear the Monster makeup! Come out here and get these bolts on!'
A half hour later, your head is flattened; there are rude scars on your forehead. You shudder and duck as tons of
water crash down and electrical machines fly off tables. The spittle from Eddie's Wolf Man roar is too real and you
turn with an agonized look of eternal fear -- just like it looks in FedOp's frame grabs. You grimace just as the
strap-buster did except it's all more feral and time-trapped. And you realize. It's not Perkins. It's not Parker. No.
YOU are the Monster.
david
'Behold the Man.'
Ted Newsom
(11/5/05 12:38 am)
Re: FMTWM Climax
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Just watched the thing me-seff. Almost convinced myself that Strapp-Buster was somebody else until David pointed
out that Somebody Else is already accounted for. Trick of the light, just a trick of the light.
A couple of really minor notes of esoterica.
The barrel-kicker also appears to have barrel-kicker boots on, rather tham faux asphalt-layers, which were just so out
by 1943.
The water dump always fascinated me because the 2 guys are working in tandem. As the Park Man (presumably)
leaps down and Perkinstein backs away, they both roll down frame-left below an overhang to prevent the full brunt
of the coming Niagara from doing a wet smackdown on their heads.
Lugosi spends a great deal of his time walking with straight arms and fingers-- not too unlike the first Karloff
performance, really. As I suggested earlier, this may be the reason the Monster Stuntman (Perkins-- who else?) does
this stupid straight-arm windmill business, trying to emulate Lugosi.
As for Perkins' memory being flimsy-- there are some people who remember every detail of stuff. Tom Weaver says
the guy was spot on. I've spoken a lot to Val Guest, who's in his 90s, and he's extremely clear on details 60 and 70
years later.
There must have been at least 2 takes of the wide shot of the Monster carrying the Fake Shemp Ilona away while the
Wolf Man cuddles himself with his leather "Please Don't beat me no mo', Sir John" restraint. On the floor, at the base
of Frankie's table, is the sheet which covered him pre-strappo-busto. In the return to this angle (identically framed),
the sheet has magically backed up from the edge of the operating table.
The nearly-identical framing indicates the camera has not moved. However, this MIGHT indicate a reshoot (maybe
even on a later day), since if the shots were taken contiguously, there would be no reason to remove or reposition the
sheet.
The apparent lankiness of the Monster carrying the Fake Shemp Ilona might be because his whole body is being
strained and stetched out from hauling 120 pounds of faux Hungarian babe.
And as for Strapp-Buster-- hey, it looks like Taraco may be coming over to our side now, but before we rule it out-since Strap-Buster isn't in any shots with any Wolf Man-- what if it's Chaney himself? He did later say he played both
parts...!
taraco
(11/5/05 12:49 am)
Re: FMTWM Climax
------------------------------------------------------------------------------->>To me, there is no way in Hell that the faces of the guy behind the ice and the strap burster are the same.
I actually agree with that, too. The iceman Monster is exceedingly unique, with almost a Sub-Mariner's triangle face.
So if we stipulate that is Perkins in the ice, it comes down to the strap-burster and the fighting Monster. Or Monsters.
I think the strap-burster and the fighter in FedOp's latest grabs appear the same. Now, if that IS Perkins, then Parker
is the Wolf Man and we are getting closer. But George is right. The iceman does not look like any of the climactic
Monsters.
Here's a chart from earlier. You could make
the argument there are FOUR monsters here.
At this point, I think I'll stick with my feeling
that the table Monster and the fighting
Monster are the same. (For what one opinion
is worth). That third Monster at the bottom
there seems to have wandered in from the
Munsters. Light? Shadow? I don't think so...
david
Rick
(11/5/05 2:20 am)
Re: FMTWM Climax
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------'Behold the Man.'
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------I was just about to be the know-it-all that I try so hard to be and post this very thing when I, thankfully noticed it
tagged on at the end of your post. Michael Moorcock and I thank you.
taraco
(11/5/05 3:10 am)
Re: FMTWM Climax
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Glad I wasn't the only one who knows about Moorcock's time travel tale, Rick. I knew I couldn't get away with such
a literary rip-off at the CHFB!
Also, following Ted's lead I, too, am taking the dramatic step of actually watching the movie!
I'm halfway through, but I can pretty safely say that despite some odd photographic evidence, in the released film
itself it for sure is NEVER Bela Lugosi behind the ice. And the crease on the cheek looks unmistakably like Gil
Perkins. At least in the ice scene.
I'm also struck, even after umpteen viewings over the years, by what a sumptuous and fun production it is ...
david
HalLane
(11/5/05 8:29 am)
Ice Monster Ahead
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------...even after umpteen viewings over the years...what a sumptuous and fun production it is...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Well said, plus now there's so much more to watch for.
I've never seen Bela behind ice in the film itself -- only in that published still.
And in that ice-closeup above -- isn't Gil sporting the round 'HERO' neck plugs we're all used to? Egor, from whence
came those square bolts?
Joe Karlosi
(11/5/05 8:41 am)
Re: FMTWM Climax
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------To me, there is no way in Hell that the faces of the guy behind the ice and the strap burster are the same. The Perkins
camp may have one or the other but NOT both.
I'm convinced that the iceman is Perkins, therefore the other guy isn't. It's conceivable to me that the OTHER guy in
some of the fight scenes may not be Parker, but that guy on the lab table is Eddie Parker.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Yeah. What he said.
And that Herman Munster fella in the last picture posted by Taraco looks nothing like Perkins OR Parker to me. He
also moves differently.
Ted Newsom
(11/5/05 7:54 am)
Re: FMTWM Climax
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Has anybody ever SAID that Bela Lugosi is in the ice in the movie? I don't think so. Dollars to doughnuts, though,
he was in the ice at SOME point, 'cause that's sure as shootin' him in that still photograph. The still is also lit
differently that both 1) the cutaway shot of the ice by itself when Talbot first sees it and 2) the sequence of Chaney
pounding on it.
What's this nonsense about the Ice Man having a Namorhead? The angle, up, onto a face tllted upward 45 degrees,
makes him look like a bullfrog. When he's pulled out of the ice, he looks like the fighter-guy in all (or most) of the
fight sequence-- and both guys are Gil Perkins. (Namor? The guy's built more like Ben Grimm!)
Strange-Monster (pic 3, above)-- look beneath his lip, above his chin. There is a verticle indentation. This matches
Perkins, but not Parker. The shadows on his face disguise any detail, but the Mr. Iceman shot -- as I've pointed out
before-- has a singular, identifiable verticle crease on his left (our right) cheek, parallel with the naso-labial fold.
Perkins has that. Parker doesn't.
georgechastain
(11/5/05 8:15 am)
Re: Ice Monster Ahead
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Oh damn. Somehow posted same text twice, but second edited version includes new image. Deleting reduncant text
but can't see how to delete post. (Help, David!?) See following post.
georgechastain
(11/5/05 9:29 am)
Re: Ice Monster Ahead
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------And in that ice-closeup above -- isn't Gil sporting the round 'HERO' neck plugs we're all used to? Egor, from whence
came those square bolts?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------HalLane -The image I posted of Gil wearing the square bolts was lifted
from one of the shots Fed Op posted way back on page 36 -a trio of pix of Bela himself grimacing, an extreme closeup of
Gil as the Face Behind the Ice, and a quartet of smaller shots of
the Gil-Monster in the ice scene. I just saved the last JPEG and
increased the resolution to 300 dpi for a project I've been
working on -- and suddenly what wasn't visible to the eye in the
smaller version was extremely obvious blown up!
(The specific image Iposted before was the one at top right in
the group of four. The squareness is slightly noticeable in
another of the images, bottom right.
But on this one, I just noticed that he appears to be sporting a
larger, regulation ROUND electrode on the other side!
Curiouser and curiouser!
George "Squarehead" Chastain
taraco
(11/5/05 8:53 am)
Movie impressions ...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------After watching FRANKENSTEIN MEETS THE WOLF MAN with new 'Monster-thread' eyes, sometimes freezing
the picture, sometimes zooming, here are my impressions:
-- Just for the record since a confusing photo exists, in the movie itself Bela Lugosi is never in the ice. I'm convinced
it is Gil Perkins, almost solely on the basis of the sharp crease in his cheek.
-- Stepping forward and back through FedOp's barrel scene, I think it MIGHT briefly be Lugosi on the wagon, but
the action seems pretty continuous and it is likely the stuntman. He looks very similar to whoever it is who busts the
straps later.
-- In the battle, Ilona's kidnap and dam-breaking finale, there's a LOT of cuts and inserts, with aggressive use of Bela
when possible. I don't rule anything out here.
-- The strap-buster: Whoever that is -- and I think it is Perkins -- the look is consistent with the guy kicking barrels.
The finale also has four intriguing moments:
1) It is Lugosi who knocks down Dr. Mannering when he attacks the Monster with the giant wrench (I had never
noticed the wrench before). You can tell this by the bumps and moles on Lugosi's upper left face, which the stuntmen
don't have.
2) It very well MIGHT be someone else carrying Ilona briefly. At least at the beginning. Might.
3) The 'Munsters-like' pasty-faced Monster at the very end is clearly a different look, if not a different stuntman. It
COULD be that the fight with the Wolf Man was so
physical -- and it is, in truth -- that they had to hurriedly
reapply the makeup. It looks like a rush job because the
cheek crease -- in fact, all facial features -- are totally
gone, as if the face had been smeared over in some
Vasarian nip/tuck gone wild. Or it COULD be
someone else.
4) Just before the water crashes down, the Monster is
much bulkier than before. Again, given the activity
they likely had to re-apply the makeup again. But he's
suddenly burly guy.
Left: Bulky Monster.
My theory: It likely is Perkins throughout the film. The battle is very aggressively staged and each moment might
have required different takes and reapplications of makeup, causing the different looks.
I'd note also that there is no he-looks-different moment in the fight where the Wolf Man is not there, too. So to say
the Monster might be Parker would mean we'd need someone else playing the Wolf Man briefly.
That said, there are frustrating moments -- the Ilona lift, how the Monster's hair looks suddenly shaggy from behind
in another shot, and the bulky WWF-sized Monster just before the water falls -- where it just flat-out looks like
somebody else. Briefly.
It's either the retakes and retouched makeups, or someone else might have been there.
So does the ice guy = the barrel guy = the fight guy? The ice guy still seems different to me. Without Perkins'
testimony I'd theorize it's Perkins in the ice and someone else through the rest of the film. But he says he was in the
fight and that Parker was the Wolf Man.
Have I gotten anywhere? I guess not, except I would love to hear an aggressive case that it is Parker as the Monster
at any point. We can't prove he wasn't there; can anyone make a renewed case that Parker was?
david
Joe Karlosi
(11/5/05 9:01 am)
Re: FMTWM Climax
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------My theory: It likely is Perkins throughout the film. The battle is very aggressively staged and each moment might
have required different takes and reapplications of makeup, causing the different looks
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------The fella busting those straps ain't the same guy in the ice. I still think Parker did the strap-busting sequence and
perhaps some of the fight. And whoever Herman Munster is, it ain't Perkins.
Gil Perkins is unquestionably in the ice (that latest Monster screen capture above looks more like those Perkins
real-life photos than I've seen yet) and in much of the fight scene, I think - but not all of it.
And does anyone hear me: THE MONSTERS MOVE AND ACT DIFFERENTLY.
Edited by: Joe Karlosi at: 11/5/05 9:04 am
Jimchig
Member
(11/5/05 10:39 am)
Reply
Re: FMTWM Climax
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------One of us is going to have to get into Bob Burns' time machine and go back there!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You do that and there'll be another name to add to the list! Who could resist donning the makeup and doing a scene?
It would only take a few bucks to grease some palms.
DonM435
Member
(11/5/05 10:40 am)
Reply
Square Neck Bolt
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------I can't find that picture now, but it looks like it could be a square-ish light source on a round surface.
blackbiped
(11/5/05 10:41 am)
Re: FMTWM Climax
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------I guess not, except I would love to hear an aggressive case that it is Parker as the Monster at any point.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Strap-buster stills compared with the various photos of Parker are very convincing to me. And to my eyes it's
obvious that he and Ice-guy are two different people.
georgechastain
(11/5/05 10:44 am)
Re: Movie impressions ...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------4) Just before the water crashes down, the Monster is much bulkier than before. Again, given the activity they likely
had to re-apply the makeup again. But he's suddenly burly guy.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------David -- To my eyes it's not a big, bulky, burly guy, waiting for the bucket brigade in the climax... it's a guy wearing
an outfit that's way too big for him, like a baggy-pants burlesque comedian or a little boy wearing Daddy's clothes.
Gil says it's him in that scene, and that Eddie Parker played the Wolf Man.
OK, I'll buy that, at least in this scene. Look at the size of the hairy guy leaping at Frank. Seems like a much bigger
man to me. Eddie Parker. The guy I think was normally wearing that particular Frankenstein suit during the time
frame these scenes were shot. We really need to nail down some particulars about size.
I guess we'll need a point by point comparison (which we've done exhaustively with Perkins but less so with Parker)
to get the best match for who it is on the lab table. I don't see the slightest resemblance to any of the pictures of
Perkins we've seen, while it matches Parker in numerous ways. You seemed to be leaning toward a Perkins/Parker
combination in most of your earlier postings, but you've obviously been thinking differently lately, and I'd really like
to know what changed your mind. If lack of studio records and interview evidence is enough to completely discredit
anything else presented and discussed here, we're all wasting a great deal of time. Studio records may not tell the
whole story, and interview comments can't always be trusted absolutely either, for many reasons.
I think the barrel roller / Ilona grabber is Perkins, though I'm not positive. I think these are the same guy shot from
different side. And I think the doofy-looking, badly made up big guy in the fight scenes looks totally different from
that guy -- but he has the same basic facial construction as Parker.
blackbiped
(11/5/05 10:48 am)
Re: FMTWM Climax
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Re: Bulky Guy -- also keep in mind that he's wearing regular shoes instead of those tall clodhoppers, which would
make the pants look a lot baggier.
taraco
(11/5/05 9:52 am)
Re: Movie impressions ...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------New page so let me repost the photo guide (hope this is handy for folks to have it here, near top of Page 48):
Anyhow, George my mind is still very open
on this. Although yes, I've been leaning more
to the Perkins side of things only because the
photographic evidence is so maddeningly
open-ended! But nothing is in stone, in my
mind.
The switching Monster clothes theory -- as in,
that's why Perkins looks so bulky, he's
suddenly wearing Parker's giant Monster suit
-- is intriguing indeed. But have we
determined whether their sizes were so
different?
I still think physical strength could have been
a factor in who carried Ilona and the like.
My biggest argument FOR Eddie Parker is
that I think the original information -- that
Eddie Parker played the monster, as
promulgated in the late 50s/early 60s -probably has some basis in truth. That's the
key thing still to find out.
Like the fire at the mill, there's more yet!
david
'The insides are always the last to be consumed.'
Chesterbelloc
(11/5/05 11:01 am)
Re: Square Neck Bolt
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------The Monster looks different in every one of those pics! I'm more confused than ever!
taraco
(11/5/05 11:05 am)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Single-Perkins Theory vs. Multiple-Monster Theory.
HalLane
(11/5/05 10:19 am)
Re: FMTWM Climax
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------I've always said that the final 'shower-monster' was bulkier -- he seems to be wearing Lon Jr's old wardrobe and
holds his hands like him too (note the long sleeves and full cut jacket)...hmmm... I know it's not Chaney, but wait'll
you see what I propose for GHOST OF FRANKENSTEIN -- (I'll save it for now, but hold that thought). The
'undershirt-wrassler' has short sleeves ( I think it's Perkins -- the nose knows) just as it's Perkins in all shots with
Massey. The goofy monster carries Massey's stunt double up the stairs and indeed does move differently; he looks
like stuntman DePalma who seems to be standing in (or lying in) for Chaney during the explosion (we know he wore
the makeup with A&C).The pronounced 'beauty mark' always accompanies Perkins, as when he pulls up his thin
lower lip in what Tom Weaver suggests is his patented gesture, while I see no such mark in the strap-buster, who has
a thick lower lip and makes a 'frowny-face'. I think those lower lips speak volumes.
And I could swear I read somewhere that Gil Perkins said he briefly wore WOLF MAN makeup; I'll confirm it if I
can, but it would explain the fact that WM sometimes looks fully packed (as in FedOp's grab w/the statue face) and
sometimes slim-armed (watch in slo-mo as he waves his arms around vigorously, something I don't really see Parker
doing -- those billowing sleeves look more like Oliver Reed!
Just before Elsa pulls on her little robe (for the sake of modesty, I guess), that bent-kneed Monster on the table is the
Guy-Who-Isn't-Lugosi whom I alluded to in my Fab-Fave-Foto a page or so back. FederalOperator99, can you do
anything to help us out here?
"I know a man...who has the power to help you...!"
And George, if my wife sees me pull out my box of John Wayne Monogram westerns and Masked Marvel serial
chapters (crooked-nosed Eddie, remember?) it's gonna be the Beast Battle of this century!
taraco
(11/5/05 11:22 am)
Re: FMTWM Climax
------------------------------------------------------------------------------->>And I could swear I read somewhere that Gil Perkins said he briefly wore WOLF MAN makeup ...
Well, that would change everything!
I was struck, watching the film again last night, how many inserts and close-ups and even actual action involved
Chaney and Lugosi during the finale.
david
HalLane
(11/5/05 11:32 am)
Re: FMTWM Climax
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------BTW, those two middle pics in the handy guide above are the same guy, IMHO.
Perkins / Wolf Man: Interviewer Paul Parla was notorious (at least in my reading experience) for providing the same
article, w/slight revisions, to more than one publication. I'm positive of this because I remember checking his by-line
on two similar interviews once and that's howcum I remember his name (also in conjunction with Charles Mitchell;
have I got that right? -- don't want to set myself up for slander/libel). Anyway, that Perkins/WM tidbit is just sticking
in my craw, and you may have noticed I have a penchant for obscure trivia. So did the Gil Perkins interview in
SCARY MONSTERS also appear (altered) in FILMFAX or OUTRE or somewhere -- you might think it would have
that kind of 'draw'. I may never throw anything away, but neither do I collate everything properly. Does anyone out
there have a run of this type mag?
Ted Newsom
(11/5/05 11:35 am)
Bulky, Nose Job, Rolling Barrels
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------My theory: It likely is Perkins throughout the film.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------David is my new best friend.
Second that on pseudo-bulky guy. Actually, the Wolf Man looks a tad bulkier, too, and I think that's because their
both wearing something like a wet suit or something in prep for the coming deluge (wet suits didn't come in until the
50s, but what the hell.) The shoes on Frankie probably account for some of the bagginess of the costume. He's got
droopy drawers down below-- the pants look more peg-legged when Whomever Happens to Be Wearning The
Costume has the four-or-five inch lifts, and as all of us now-experts now know, this guy is wearing Karloff's old
street shoes.
[Just noticed blackbiped beat me to that one. Tip of the hat, guy. Hey! You gotta name?]
federal operator 99
(11/5/05 1:11 pm)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Just before Elsa pulls on her little robe (for the sake of modesty, I guess), that bent-kneed Monster on the table is the
Guy-Who-Isn't-Lugosi whom I alluded to in my Fab-Fave-Foto a page or so back. FederalOperator99, can you do
anything to help us out here?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
These are the best I could get, and all are somewhat fuzzy, I'm afraid...
2nd PHOTO ON SCREEN MISSING
HalLane
(11/5/05 1:34 pm)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------[Redacted]
He's also in the master shot just before that, as well as subsequently, when the others have been replaced by their
stunt-dopplegang-members. But do you see what I mean: that's not Lugosi's nose or jaw; I think it's our missing link.
federal operator 99
(11/5/05 1:39 pm)
More tussling
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HalLane
(11/5/05 1:50 pm)
Re: More tussling
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Now that's the stunt-baroness (and in the top 4, not necessarily Perkins!)
taraco
(11/5/05 12:57 pm)
Ilona snatching
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------This is more from Federal Operator 99, reposted here:
Frame grabs of the Ilona abduction:
TED NEWSOM replies:
Re: Ilona snatchin'! Boo-tee-fool grabboids, Fedop.
Looked at this scene frame by frame last night and thought I saw square-head bolts. Watched it again very carefully
and realized it was a trick of the light. But those bolts on ol' IceMan, boy...
Did notice that the bolts are angled downward in these sequence. Would indicate any severe stretching by the
Monster (whomever) would knock or turn them out of proper position. I think in these shots (or at least my exam last
night) I could actually make out the circular rubber pieces to which the bolts were glued. If so, this might indicate a
slightly less-persnickety make-up man than Pierce on this footage (which would also explain the mistaken-bolt gaffe
in the ice close-up)
Now, can somebody get some nice, clean PROFILE ear shots of both Eddie and Gil and we can settle this outside
like gentlemen as we beat the crap out of each other, throw electrical machines across the room and roll in the
floodwaters?
---------------------------------------And then HalLane
Re: Ilona snatchin'!
Perkins, Perkins, Perkins and Perkins (but she's not the stunt baroness).
Onward...
Ted Newsom
(11/5/05 12:57 pm)
Not for a million dollars
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------There's an anecdote about Lugosi staying clear of a chemical gag in GLEN OR GLENDA, and in the shot, he IS very
ginger about pouring stuff into a beaker. On FMTWM, considering he
apparently collapsed when his butt froze, I think if I were him, I'd rather
not be around a live electrical gag either. (There's a line in ED WOOD, I
think, that makes a reference to some electrical snafu in CHANDU,
which had a lot of Strickfadden stuff. Any Lennig or Cremer verification
of this?)
The faux Chaney does look like de Palma-- and shorter than Chaney.
The Face of the Leaping Werewolf in the shot of him grabing PERKINS
from behind seems fatter than Chaney. Could be a trick of the light or
angle-- notice that the later frame makes Frankie's trousers look
two-toned, which wasn't true, unless we've got another of those HOUSE
OF FRANKENSTEIN style frame inserts where another pair of pants
was substituted as a subliminal trick. Where is Gerald Mohr when you
don't need him?
Note also that the Ilona-Grabber is smuggling walnuts. Or casaba
melons.
HalLane
(11/5/05 1:04 pm)
Re: Ilona snatching
------------------------------------------------------------------------------Thank you, david (hope you had plenty of coffee this morning,
we're gonna make you work)
Ted, ears lookin' at you.
And look at the size of him! Why, he might almost be
Egyptian!
federal operator 99
(11/5/05 2:20 pm)
Re: More tussling
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------A bit off topic, but note the holes in the seat of the Wolf Man's trousers!...
And also note how the Wolf Man's "fur" stops short of his pant cuff in this shot...
Ted Newsom
(11/5/05 3:03 pm)
Re: More tussling
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------I just reviewed a crppload of fotos and found that faux same Parker shot, plus the long discussion of pros and cons.
That does not look like our sweet-faced, sandy-haired, kissable-lipped Edwin, not this guy, with his crusty old face,
dark eyes (naw, I'm not gonna buy minstrel-black for a shiner, not if he's currently IN a fight), and receding dark
hair. Surely there's another REAL Eddie lurking around.
Ted Newsom
(11/5/05 2:24 pm)
But on the other hand
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------... the fleshy parts of the face are plastic and maleable. Other parts, such as the bridge of the nose and the shape of
the ears far less so, since they're filled with cartilege. Expressions can change; the shape of the ears don't.
HalLane
(11/5/05 3:42 pm)
Re: But on the other hand
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Not sure which Lunger you mean, Ted, but yes, the other two are certainly Perkins, In My Humble etc.
federal operator 99
(11/5/05 6:03 pm)
Sequential frames
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------At the risk of being somewhat yawn-inducing and repetetive (not to mention being a bandwidth hog at
ImageShack!), I've captured full-frames from the entire battle climax of FMTWM that I will attempt to post this
evening. Here's the 1st set, which I will call "Table Monsters"...
federal operator 99
(11/5/05 6:08 pm)
Sequential Frames II
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Here's some frames of the Ilona "carryout"...
federal operator 99
(11/5/05 6:20 pm)
Sequential Frames III
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------More thrashing about:
federal operator 99
(11/5/05 6:41 pm)
Out-of-sequence frames
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------[Error in sequence fixed]
federal operator 99
(11/5/05 6:28 pm)
Sequential Frames: More thrashing
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
federal operator 99
(11/5/05 7:07 pm)
Ready for my Close-Up, Mr. Neill
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Finally, Bela lights up the screen!...
Ted Newsom
(11/5/05 7:26 pm)
Dadgum it if that ain't our ol' pal Perk
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------I'd-a know'd his ol' face anywheres
Ted Newsom
(11/5/05 6:29 pm)
On t'other hand...one o' them imponderables...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------[PHOTO MISSING]
One of the things that's remarkable is the similarity of the set ups, the electrical stuff first, the explosions and debris
stuff second-almost, but not quite exactly the same angle.
Chaney and what really appears to be dePalma on the left. Same height, #2 is slimmer, appears to match the 2shot of
Wolfman Chaney & unmasked dePalma from HOUSE OF DRAC. I think we're pretty much OK with that one.
Frankie x 2 on the right... hmmm. There's a problem here. Somebody's switched things around. Could be they let the
boys loose for lunch and re-placed them for the Bifg Explosion scene... the folds of the sheet (even taking the change
of lighting into account) are not alike. The head of Frankie #2 appears held differently
The Explosion Monster (#2) is about 5 inches shorter than the Electric Monster (#1). Frankie #1 appears to be
roughly the same height as Chaney, given the addition of the 4-5" boots. Notice that he has to bend his knees to
properly fit into the table-- where the Monster on the right fits just fine.
1) It's the same guy without lifts; maybe.
2) If #1 is a stuntman, then #2 is a stuntman standing in for a stuntman.
3) Maybe #2 is a dummy (since it doesn't have to move)
4) Maybe #1 is actually Bela (although I don't think it looks a LOT like him) and #2 is Perkins. Or a dummy.
HalLane
(11/5/05 9:25 pm)
Re: On t'other hand...one o' them imponderables...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Ted, I'm actually right with you all the way (except your first 'red x' image): undershirt guy = Perkins;
Chaney/DePalma/?/and dummy below (that's the shot where he almost gets beaned by the beam -- dummy makes
sense). Right on w/wrinkles, lighting etc. I don't think the third one is Bela: if you check the film the strap came
below his knees and I think the lighting may have been different, so I think a switch of some kind was made. Can't
swear it's the Perkster, tho, and hence it is the most intriguing shot (tho it's not necessarily strap-buster either (who
doesn't even have a lower strap), so from where I sit, jury's still out).
FedOp99: you can hog all the bandwidth you want, buddy!! If they give you any trouble, just tell 'em I'll kiss that
frog! (those first 4 frames: a little foggy on my end; can't have it all).
"FRANK!! YOU'RE MAKING HIM STRONG AGAIN!!!"
Ted Newsom
(11/6/05 11:55 am)
Mudpack
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(also courtesy of ImageShack, which does, indeed, rock)
federal operator 99
(11/6/05 1:21 pm)
Re: Mystery sarcophagus
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------A leftover prop from some previous MUMMY endeavor once fondled by Geo. Zucco and/or Turhan Bey?...
Esoterica from one of the Jon Hall/Maria Montez opuses that Producer Waggner was about to take over from the
renowned Walter Wanger (who was only rumored to have been fondled by Turhan Bey but Joan Bennett wouldn't
stand for it)?? Jetsam from one of director Neill's Sherlock Holmes adventures (which have been fondled by...
everyone)???
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------To me the most curious revelation unearthed in these frames was remarked upon by Nightmarekey. Just what was the
set decorator thinking with the inclusion of this stone "sarcophagus" in the rubble foreground???
In most frames it looks somewhat Churchillian, while in the 2nd from the top it somewhat favors Teddy Roosevelt!...
Was this intentional? Did they attempt to slip it past the continuity girl? Did they suppose it would photograph out of
fra
me?...
Ted Newsom
(11/6/05 12:31 pm)
Dummy, nothin', he was smart enuf to scare me
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------A possibility... an inexpensive, uncomplaining, in-house substitute for the Monster, someone just hanging around the
make-up department ready to go to work any time, no question of time-and-a-half, bumps for fire gags or
ass-freezing or water-drenching.
Pic 1 is a blurry blow-up of the "Explosion Monster" in FMW; 2 and 3 are slightly differing angles on the House of
F electrical dummy. Pic 4 is Bobby Barber in a gag shot during the shooting of A & C; pic 5 is Glenn Strange from
the same publicity photo.
IF-- big suppositional IF-- if the stuntman in F meets W had a dummy substitute in the explosion shot, then why not
keep the dummy Frankie around? The monster in #1 -- to me-- looks like Gil Perkins, as far as anyone can tell. The
Monster in 2 & 3-- again, this is just personal opinion-- does NOT particularly look like Glenn Strange, as if the face
was either cast from a life mask of someone else, or sculpted with references of some other actor. If it HAD been
done for HOUSE OF F, why not use Strange? Surely Pierce had made a mold of Strange's face for the appliance
work, so why not whip up a head from that-- unless (!) it was less work to haul out the one from last year (1943).
The mask on little Frankie in #4 seems NOT to be based on the post-Pierce Frankie make-up on #5. The crease
under the left (our right) jawline kinda-sorta matches that of 2 and 3. The forehead clamps definitely do not match
the New Improved Frankie configuration in the Jack Kevan Version in #5-- but DO match the positions of the
clamps in #2 and 3. The position of the neck bolts on the Barber-Monster don't match that of Strange (which are
higher and more positioned toward the ears), but DO match the low-slung electrodes of #2 and #3. The baggy throat
is weird-- but when you consider Bobby Barber was a little guy, perhaps-- 'way into suppository territory here, haul
out the K-Y-- the looseness is because the rubber mask was originally cast from a guy with a big bull neck (Gil
Perkins, anyone?) The mask's mouth and nostrils seem to have been darkened to match Strange.
Several possibile explanations, all guesswork. OK, maybe the mask was farmed out to a rubber specialist like Ellis
Berman or Don Post and they used older photographs for reference rather than the current Westmore era revision.
Seems unlikely. More likely, the dummy (or rather, the dummy mask) was something they had hanging around-possibly from 4 years before (House, 1944), or maybe 5 years (FMW, Pic 1).
My problem with this whole theory is the lack of an obvious chin cleft in the dummy and/or the Barber mask. If I
squint, I think I can see it. Or maybe it's the lighting. Or maybe Eddie Parker borrowed the cleft for the weekend.
End VOLUME 2 due to large amount of photos

C:\Documents and Settings\Owner\Desktop\Monster\TEXT

Transcription

Similar documents

50035 WGAS - Turlock Poster.indd

Destry Abbott`s 2012 Fundraiser

One Sheet - CMJ Productions II Inc.

Monster Jobs - by Carpe Data

SeDaLia, MO

FULL MONSTER GBF - Horse Power Promotions

`Frightening` Frankie, `Dangerous` Drac, and (Yeah, Right!) `Weirdo

bride of frankenstein - Monsters from the Vault

Traxxas In Store Recall Poster VXL-6s ESC

click here - Sea Monster