ABBOTT AND COSTELLO TRY TO RUIN "FRANKENSTEIN"

          In the late-1920s, Carl Laemmle Jr., the head of production at Universal pictures, requested horror as a genre on which to focus, resulting in a string of classics--most notably, Dracula, Frankenstein, The Mummy, Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, and The Invisible Man. Some of the films deserve their fame more than others; all, however, share in common a degree of gravity, strong emotional truth fantastically presented.
          After 1936, however, when the tenure of Laemmle Jr. ended, something horrific occurred. Somebody else at the desk a few years later figured those old horror movies might just hold a little more blood for the squeezing. So, with nary an intent to appreciate the genre, a second cycle of Universal horror flicks got cranked out, riding on the success of the first.
          Like a kid smashing together a toy in each fist, Universal came up with Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man. Then it was the House of movies--House of Frankenstein, House of Dracula. By 1948 this schlock degenerated into the Abbott and Costello series billed as hilarious spoofs, yet holding genuine thrills and chills.
          Nothing could be further from the truth.
          What Abbott and Costello do for classic Universal monsters is right up there with what they did for religion with the lost film Abbott and Costello Meet Moses. In that one, Charlton Heston, playing Moses, pops up from behind a crate, causing the short fat one, Lou Costello as Wilbur, to point and stammer ineffectually, finally frantically calling out for the taller one, Bud Abbott as Chick, who comes over and says, "What's the matter with you? Get back to work!" Then when Chick leaves, Moses appears behind another crate, scaring Wilbur a second time, and the whole bit gets repeated again.
          Billed as a hilarious spoof of Biblical movies, while also providing genuine spiritual thrills, what this lost film did was make people hate Moses.
          Same sort of thing with the not lost stuff.
          One movie in history truly is hilarious and also pays legitimate homage to the Universal classics, Young Frankenstein (1974), produced by Twentieth Century Fox.
          The original films already have problems enough. For one thing, why is Frankenstein's monster so symmetrical? To indicate the haphazard collection of robbed separate parts stitched together, everything should be wrongly proportioned. Why does Dracula have a tiny little coffin for a potato bug? Vampires can't handle the shape of the cross, but there are cross-shapes all over the floors and the walls of Dracula's castle. Why?
          When Lon Chaney Jr. turns into the Wolf Man, he's wearing a white tank top t-shirt. But then in the next scene he's wearing a dark long-sleeved button-down shirt. NO WAY!
          The better werewolf movie--and it's a mystery why we rarely see any mention of it--is the earlier film Werewolf of London (1935), starring Henry Hull. More to say about that film another time.
          The Mummy is basically a cheap Dracula re-make. Both of those movies start with the best scenes, then taper off for the bulk of the picture. A lot of drawing room nonsense, not enough action.
          Yet these are the films that we love, despite House of Abbott Meets Costello. The classics open magnificently with great use of silence broken only by lovely old crackles and pops in the film, like a favorite vinyl LP. The films have their flaws, yes. They're not like the books, no. But one thing's for sure: They make Abbott and Costello look like crud.

Screwing up the title of my article is inexcusable.

"Try to Run Franke"?

Holy shit. All they had to do was simply cut and paste. 

So yeah, this is why I don't let them run my articles anymore. Wasn't their first time screwing up one of my titles, either. They've even managed to get my name wrong in a couple issues. And never had the character to print a correction, much less apologize for their errors.

Then to cap it all off, they never once paid me for my work anywhere near on time. Always took them about four months--literally four months--before they finally met their responsibilities. Even at the vastly reduced rate which I allowed, like charity. 

I helped them out for a long time, and I was the best part of that paper, I promise you.

Never again.