FRANKENSTEIN (1931) in Universal Horrors Forum

Forum Jump

FRANKENSTEIN (1931)

Author	Comment
The Batman of Gotham		#101	[-]
Jun 3 12 12:50 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	At 8:48 Monster is on his knees during the drowning sequnce, there is a sound of splashing, then a sound which is....what?, It sounds to me like the Monster's high-pitched exclamation of surprise - followed by the Monster's grunt. - GJS
	Remove this ad
todmichel		#102	[-]
Jun 3 12 2:08 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	This sound is maybe simply caused by the cut inflicted by the British censors in 1932. Remember, this part of the movie was found in England, and is still incomplete. Not only the cut of some images is audible, but visible. Just look (frame by frame) at the very last image of the Monster standing, back to camera, before he is suddenly on his knees. The cut is quite visible in the below part of this frame. I talked about this cut decades ago, in a letter to Filmax magazine. This kind of cut was often made by British censors. I once saw a print of FRANKENSTEIN in 1963 in a Londonian theater, and during the scene with the Monster menacing Elizabeth in her room, not only the close-ups of Karloff's face were cut off, but also the ones of Mae Clarke screaming! So, I always thought that the still missing shots were probably Karloff's reaction (a close-up?) when he understand that he has killed Maria, and (perhaps) some additional shot of Maria in the water. And another of Karloff falling on his knees, all of them before the shot where he is seen already on his knees, from back. Last Edited By: todmichel Jun 3 12 4:39 AM. Edited 5 times.
Bobtheman		#103	[-]
Jun 3 12 5:31 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	This is about the last frame before the cut and the Monster is standing, and we can see all that splashing in the water. Then suddently he's on his knees, and the splashing has subsided a lot. Monster's reaction here when he realized he has killed Maria. In the original American release, the scene ended with the Monster reaching for Maria, the audience might have gotten the reaction that he had molested little Maria, the above shows that did not happen, and the drowning was accidental. The scene as it stands now with the inclusions puts the Monster in a sympathetic light in my opinion. "some additional shot of Maria in the water" - Yes, the cut is made just as she hits the water. We don't see her in the second half. Here's a link to You Tube video of the drowning scene all by itself http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MA9opHsLACk some of the comments on the thread were, putting this out here for comments of our own how did she die the water was only like a foot high she could of just stood up that's not entirely true. Originally Karloff wanted to play the scene much more gently but Whale wanted him to throw the girl in brutally. What you see here is the result of that direction - and Karloff's back problems - which is why it looks slightly awkward. The movie as a whole isn't really that sympathetic to the monster, in my opinion. The novel, however, is. This just about has to be the best moment in any horror movie. The monster or killer or whatever is understood and loved for once. The real misery of this scene is when the girl dies by his hands, an accident of course, he didn't know what he was doing. Still this scene is touching and I will never forget it. If they made this scene today in any movie it would be awful. The slasher would find a little girl and rip her to pieces rather than play with her. Film today is just plain sad. Wow. Broad can't swim o_o Doesn't look THAT rapid or deep. Oh and keep in mind people that this was deleted until the late 80's because it was considered too horrifying for the time along with the end of Frankenstein's line when he first gave life to his creation. Frankenstein's line was cut by thunder, and this ended with him reaching for her (doesn't make much sense since that gives the impression he meant to hurt her and did far worse things). Still that says alot for this movie. It kinda reminds me of William Frankenstein's murder in the book too. It's an absolute miracle that these scenes survived - Universal was notorious for being the least preservation-oriented of the big studios. They burned many of their silent film negatives in a bonfire for a 1930's film. Although I had watched many movies that contained violence before, I was shocked when I first saw this scene. I would have expected anything, but not that the director goes through with focussing the camera on the killing of the child. I wouldn't have expected this from such an old film. However, from the artistic point of view, it is brilliant, as it comprises the whole drama of the creature in a few minutes. What a bitter story climax... Notice the shift in picture quality when the Monster throws Maria into the water. For many years, that shot was left out of the movie, leaving the audience to wonder exactly what the Monster did to Maria, especially when they saw her father carrying her body through the town later on. I don't know if you agree, but I actually like the "censored" version of this scene better. Maybe it's because I grew up with that version, but I just seems more disturbing to me that it's cut out and left to my imagination. when the second half was cut it created the illusion that the Monster drowned the girl on purprose and enjoyed watching her die seeing the entire thing it's clear it was an accident and you can tell what the Monster's thinking when he throws the girl into the pond "Flowers Pretty, look flowers float, wait flowers pretty girl pretty, pretty things float so girl must float", you can tell from the look on his face at the end he knows he did something bad and he's scared If I'm not mistaken, Karloff had a disagreement with James Whale about this scene. Whale wanted the creature to throw Maria into the water, but Karloff insisted that he gently place her in the water, as throwing her was violent, and the creature was clearly not trying to hurt her. Well, obviously Whale won. (And I agree with Whale.) Another example of how censorship backfires- the omission suggests rape rather than accidental drowning She kinda died pretty fast. She wasn't kicking and screaming for help My Note: That's because some footage is missing. I thought I had also read that Whale had wanted Karloff to hold her high over his head when he threw her in the pond, but that Karloff's back trouble which had been strained by Whale insisting on countless reshoots of Karloff having to drag actor Colin Clive around wouldn't allow him to do anything more than toss her into the pond. It would've been far better that way actually, the throwing in the water is what ruins the scene almost. Also some of the dubbing is terrible even for that time In the original release this scene was edited and the part where he throws her into the water was cut. So the scene cut from the monster crouching near the little girl to the scene where her father carries her body into the village. The movie left to the imagination what may have happened. This was an example of censorship that actually wound up making it look like something even worse than being thrown into the water may have happened to the little girl. She couldn't just swim to the shore, the water doesn't look that deep. By CUTTING this scene - TV only causes people to think something far WORSE actually happened I'm guessing she broke her neck on a submerged rock or branch, or something, it's the only way that could've killed her. This scene was more effective when you only saw the monster reaching for the girl and then cutting away to the scene in which her father is carrying her body to the mayor. It's always what you don't see that is truly frightening. I heard of this SCENE long time ago but thought CUTTING and MUTILATION involved...that one evil sick monster... if you didnt want him to drown you, then you shouldnt have lied down in his arms for him to pick you up I don't know if anyone else mentioned this or not. But, why wasn't she afraid of him? She appeared to be initially creeped out at first. But, she quickly decided to make friends with him, which, unfortunately, cost her her life when he threw her into the water. Wait a min she wasn't in that deep she could have easily stood back up
Bobtheman	Little Maria Scenes all by themselves for easy viewing and reference	#104	[-]
Jun 3 12 5:33 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	� �
todmichel		#105	[-]
Jun 3 12 5:48 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	In fact, if the United Kingdom, with its strict censorship, was able to get a complete version of FRANKENSTEIN (they just cut some images here and there, but the little Maria's drowning scene was in their hands, and what remains of it was used to "restore" the movie in the late 80's), you can be certain that other European countries got the same complete version, and I'm not sure if they cut anything. The only possible answer would be the discovery of an old French or Belgian print, for instance. After all, the Cinémathèque Française showed many years ago a composite print, with some reels subtitled in French and Dutch, and the Dr. Waldman's journal, during the autopsy sequence, written in Italian! and, althought it was well before the 1980's restoration, not only the "blasphem" was audible in this version, but even subtitled! ("Dieu? maintenant, je sais ce que c'est qu'être Dieu!") And the syringe in the back of the Monster WAS in this print as well. I'm 100% certain of this, as it was the first time I saw these vignettes, and I was over-familiar with the re-release (cut) version, since 1958. Last Edited By: todmichel Jun 3 12 5:58 AM. Edited 4 times.
Bobtheman		#106	[-]
Jun 3 12 7:10 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Greg Mank's book It's Alive, page 32 "Strangely, at least one renegade print of Frankenstein containing the complete flower sequence has surfaced over the years, but only in theater revivals, never on television. Universal, meanwhile, still insists that stuidi policy has never tolerated the showing of edited sequences tp the public, and refuses to restore the footage, or to confirm if the complete sequence is in the vaults." This is a Karloff quote from Page 32:" My conception of the scene.....Without moving, he would pick her up gently and put her into the water exactly as he had done to the flower - and to his horror, she would sink. Well, Jimmy made me pick her up and do THAT ( motioningly violently) over my head which became a brutal and deliberate act..." When I look at the video, to me, he's doing to the girl what he did to the flower... tossing her into the water. My reaction is that he is not doing anything "violent" with her, nor is he motiontingly violently "over his head". His hands are NOT over his head during this sequence. Mank also writes: Karloff threw Marilyn in the air and she splashed into the lake, screaming " No, you're hurting me.! Daddy!" and obligatorily sank.. the actual line on the film is "No, you're hurting me! No!" Anyone have any information on the renegade print mentioned by Greg Mank? Last Edited By: Bobtheman Jun 3 12 9:30 AM. Edited 1 times.
Count Gamula		#107	[-]
Jun 3 12 7:49 AM Burgomaster Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	He's probably referring to the story Forry Ackerman told of seeing a screening of the film somewhere and when he expected it to cut away as the Monster reached for Maria, it kept on going, showing him picking her up and throwing her in the water. Kerry Gammill www.monsterkid.com
Gadfly		#108	[-]
Jun 3 12 9:10 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Bobtheman wrote: ...In the original American release, the scene ended with the Monster reaching for Maria, the audience might have gotten the reaction that he had molested little Maria, the above shows that did not... You know, when I first saw Frankenstein on TV back around 1970/71 when I was 12 or so, and the scenes of the actual tossing/drowning were obviously still cut, I never thought that the Monster had done anything more than accidentally drowning her. It was only years later, when someone noted that without the cut scenes that the audience might think that he had done something more vile, that I thought, "Oh, yeah, I can see where they could get that impression." Maybe it was my youth, or the era, or perhaps I was just naive, but the "worser fate" scenario just didn't cross my mind. Is there anyone else out there who saw the edited film from around the same time period as a youngster who did think that he had done anything more heinous than accidentally drowning her? Gadfly
The Batman of Gotham		#109	[-]
Jun 3 12 9:45 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Gadfly wrote: Bobtheman wrote: ...In the original American release, the scene ended with the Monster reaching for Maria, the audience might have gotten the reaction that he had molested little Maria, the above shows that did not... You know, when I first saw Frankenstein on TV back around 1970/71 when I was 12 or so, and the scenes of the actual tossing/drowning were obviously still cut, I never thought that the Monster had done anything more than accidentally drowning her. It was only years later, when someone noted that without the cut scenes that the audience might think that he had done something more vile, that I thought, "Oh, yeah, I can see where they could get that impression." Maybe it was my youth, or the era, or perhaps I was just naive, but the "worser fate" scenario just didn't cross my mind. Is there anyone else out there who saw the edited film from around the same time period as a youngster who did think that he had done anything more heinous than accidentally drowning her? Gadfly My reaction was the same as yours. I never got the impression that the Monster had done anything heinous. He'd simply drowned the girl accidentally. - GJS
Bobtheman		#110	[-]
Jun 3 12 9:59 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	When I first saw it as a kid , I didn't have a reaction that the Monster had molested her, because I was so young and not exposed or aware of such things like that and they existed in the world. But if I was an adult watching it for the first time, I could tell there was something more to the scene, something that the censors didn't want me to see. If it was just an accidental drowning, and nothing more than that, I would think it would have been left in. So I can see where others might have gotten an impression that a "worser fate" had occurred. I think I have answer to my own question on post 106, which was This is a Karloff quote from Page 32:" My conception of the scene.....Without moving, he would pick her up gently and put her into the water exactly as he had done to the flower - and to his horror, she would sink. Well, Jimmy made me pick her up and do THAT ( motioningly violently) over my head which became a brutal and deliberate act..." If I go back earlier to page 31, it reads " Yet. when the players reherased the episode on the sunny shore of a Hollywood lake, Whale and Karloff came to an extrene difference of opinion...." So that quote of Karloff pertains to how the scene was rehearsed, and could have been changed to have him toss the girl gently into the lake (not violently over his head), which is what video clip shows. In the clip, we see little Maria falling into the water, if it was only a foot deep there, we'd see some of her body when she lands Instead she disappears from sight upon hitting the water.
	Remove this ad
Bobtheman	Confirmation of what is missing from Maria's drowning	#111	[-]
Jun 3 12 9:22 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	http://monsterkidclassichorrorforum.yuku.com/topic/28397/Two-FRANKENSTEIN-1931-Rumors-Fact-Or-Fiction?page=2 post 38 PhantomXCI The original prologue, with the funeral procession walking up the hill, apparently WAS included in the 1931 release, as it exists in the cutting continuity script submitted to the NY censors. Although bits of it pop up in BRIDE, much of the scene was later cut for some unknown reason (probably for the 1938 rerelease). The NY script also indicates that one shot is still missing from the drowning scene: a brief closeup of Maria as she sinks beneath the water. Contrary to the claims of the IMDb, the drowning scene was cut in 1931, not 1937, and documentation exists in the NY records to prove this. Amusingly, the scene was not cut from the British print. They chose to instead eliminate the scene where the Monster breaks into Elizabeth's bedroom. Apparently, implied rape was worse than murder! http://monsterkidclassichorrorforum.yuku.com/topic/28397/Two-FRANKENSTEIN-1931-Rumors-Fact-Or-Fiction?page=3 posy 45 PhantomXCI How did the little Maria drowning scene escape the British censors???? It didn't. The BBFC didn't consider the scene as offensive as did the US censors, so (with the exception of one closeup of Maria sinking) they didn't delete it. For the most part, the BBFC made different cuts from the ones made by the US censors. The "uncut" print discovered by Universal in the mid-'80s was a British release print from vaults of the BFI. All of the scenes missing from the US release were included in that print.
The Batman of Gotham		#112	[-]
Jun 3 12 11:45 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Amusingly, the scene was not cut from the British print. They chose to instead eliminate the scene where the Monster breaks into Elizabeth's bedroom. Apparently, implied rape was worse than murder! Well, it was considered murder by the villagers in the film, of course, but, I think most audience members would have considered it unintentional manslaughter. - GJS
todmichel		#113	[-]
Jun 4 12 12:04 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	The Batman of Gotham wrote: Amusingly, the scene was not cut from the British print. They chose to instead eliminate the scene where the Monster breaks into Elizabeth's bedroom. Apparently, implied rape was worse than murder! Well, it was considered murder by the villagers in the film, of course, but, I think most audience members would have considered it unintentional manslaughter. - GJS The bedroom scene wasn't really eliminated, they only cut off the close-ups of the Monster and Elizabeth (four shots, if I remember well).
DonM435		#114	[-]
Jun 4 12 7:34 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Sometimes I wish I'd kept he old, censored version I had on early VHS. It would have been useful for comparison.
marbpl2.ozclubforums		#115	[-]
Jun 5 12 2:26 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	The original prologue, with the funeral procession walking up the hill, apparently WAS included in the 1931 release, as it exists in the cutting continuity script submitted to the NY censors. Although bits of it pop up in BRIDE, much of the scene was later cut for some unknown reason (probably for the 1938 rerelease). So why wasn't it restored with the rest of the deleted footage?
Bobtheman		#116	[-]
Jun 13 12 8:54 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	After the Monster has thrown Dr. Frankenstein from the windmill, and he is still outside, and there are flames, is that Karloff's voice shrieking in terror?
MonsterGuy95		#117	[-]
Jun 13 12 9:02 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	You know what we need? A complete ultimate DVD/Blu Ray of this film. Everything included.
Bobtheman		#118	[-]
Jun 13 12 9:31 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	"Sometimes I wish I'd kept he old, censored version I had on early VHS. It would have been useful for comparison. " DonM435, the restored version came out on VHS around 1986. Now, the one everyone will want to see will be released years from now... "Frankenstein... The Censored Version" because noone will have it. I have it off television and I think it's the cesored one, but my VHS player doesn't work and they don't make VHS recorders anymore.
Wich2		#119	[-]
Jun 13 12 2:01 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	>After the Monster has thrown Dr. Frankenstein from the windmill, and he is still outside, and there are flames, is that Karloff's voice shrieking in terror?< Sure sounds like it. And that would make sense, yes?
jamesenstein31		#120	[-]
Jun 13 12 6:07 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	I have the censored version on tape. I picked it up when I was a kid. It has the poster art for the cover. I also have the first release of the "restored" version with teh same cover, but with a blurb that indicates it's the restored version.
	Remove this ad

<< Previous Topic Next Topic >>

Add Reply

Yuku free message boards

FRANKENSTEIN (1931)