Years ago I worked on "Frankenthumb," part of a short series of parody films where all the characters are played by, well, thumbs (it really doesn't make any more sense than that). The director of it asked to borrow my DVD of "Young Frankenstein" for 'reference' purposes. The next day he said he was disappointed, thinking that it was supposed to be a much more funny film. I bring it up because although almost no scenes are played completely straight - and the humor isn't as easily separated as in A&CMF - the film has a serious thread running through it. The jailer scene is definitely played straight, and I personally always liked when the Creature had to scale the castle wall because he was drawn to the violin.

In regards to why Uni and others didn't continue with monster films into the 50's & 60's I had a thought. I remember in a documentary on the "Planet of the Apes" films that Charlton Heston initially refused to do a sequel, saying that films hadn't done sequels since the Andy Hardy days (or words to that effect). Were there many American franchise series in the 50's & 60's? The Tarzan films were losing steam by that point. England was providing us with the Hammers and the James Bond films. It seems to me that nowadays sequels are held in slightly higher regard than they were a few years ago. Certainly, there are few non-genre sequels being made, other than "High School Musical." People don't seem to want to go to the movies and see several films about the same lawyer for example, but they will for the same costumed law-bringer..

"I live the unknown, I love the unknown... I AM the unknown."