Review #2584: The Monster.
Cast:
Lon Chaney (Dr. Gustave Ziska), Johnny Arthur (Johnny Goodlittle, amateur detective), Gertrude Olmstead (Betty Watson), Hallam Cooley (Amos Rugg), Charles Sellon (Russ Mason, a constable), Walter James (Caliban), Knute Erickson (Daffy Dan), and George Austin (Rigo) Produced and Directed by Roland West.
Review:
I did consider doing this movie a few years ago, because why not cover a movie that was on the cusp of turning a century old? Billed in some ways as a "mystery thriller / love adventure" and sort of falling into the lines of comedy-horror, it was based on a 1922 play of the same name by Crane Wilbur (likely best known as the male lead in The Perils of Pauline that dabbled in writing/directing until the early 1960s), with Willard Mack and Albert Kenyon serving as the writers and C. Gardner Sullivan writing the titles. You get a few things that sound interesting, mainly with the "old dark house" and a few spooky things that, well, maybe would've impressed someone who didn't know anything about movies beyond The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari (1920) or even early stuff like Frankenstein (1910). West had a brief run of movies of note, whether that was his adaptations of The Bat (silent in 1926, sound with The Bat Whispers in 1930), the Academy Award-nominated Alibi (1929) or Corsair (1931). For whatever reason (divorce or the possible involvement in the death of actress/mistress Thelma Todd*), he didn't make a movie again after 1931 prior to his death in 1952 at the age of 67. The movie, while receiving a few mixed reviews, was a decent little hit upon release. As is the case with all surviving 1925 movies, it is readily available in the public domain.
You aren't going to get much in the way of, say, horror or anything other than "blithering house comedy", that's for sure. Older movie fans will find better satisfaction with Waxworks (1924) or The Cat and the Canary (1927), that's for sure. It isn't terrible, mainly because it at least has some interesting moments within its housebound elements in a dark place with odd stuff happening (such as an opening capture of someone via car wreck) that at least suggest the idea of atmosphere. It just so happens to be in a movie that constantly reminds you (with the power of "ingenuity") that it has to be "funny" and goes on and on with its "young boob wishes to make good" story that probably would've made Harold Lloyd gag. Sure, some folks will find it amusing with Arthur's antics, and some might anticipate Chaney going for the oddball scientist looking for the chuckle, but I just throw up my hands and go "whatever". Besides, Chaney doesn't pop in until the 30-minute mark, and you only really still spend time going along with the bumbling trio of Arthur-Olmstead-Cooley (for whatever reason, there are certain angles where it looks like Olmstead is looking at the camera differently), with just a few flashes of other people (no comment on the makeup used on "Caliban"). This was the kind of movie one could make when "correspondence schools" were still a thing to make random stuff up (in one instance a character gets gifted a diploma and also a gun). Eventually, through enough dilly-dallying, you get to hear about a mad scientist for more than a few seconds, complete with a hare-brained scheme about doing an experiment at last on a woman (no, not to have sex with her but to somehow transfer a dude's soul into said body). So yes, it's an absurd-sounding movie that maneuvers for 86 minutes with a hit-or-miss quality in the aims for chuckles with the tension of wondering just what lies beneath a big spooky house when the mystery wasn't something to call a cliche just yet. As a whole, if you like to go around checking out old movies with at least one familiar face and have time to kill in imagination and like to watch creaky stuff in the dark, this may or may not be up your alley. I couldn't get into its hokum, but your milage may vary.
Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.
Next up: October looms for spooky season.
*Well, it's not like you could find proof of it or no proof nowadays.
I would be silly to not mention a different take on the movie and, well, why not share links every now and then - The Monster (1925) A Silent Film Review – Movies Silently
