"Young Frankenstein" - 05/25/03 - 05/31/03

[Morticia]

This is a thread to discuss the technical and/or thematic merits of "Young Frankenstein".

The purpose being to foster intelligent discussion of films without resorting to "It's a piece of crap." or "It's the greatest film ever." (And so that we all can gain a bit of a film education from everyone.)

We'll discuss a new film each week. Either slade or I will post the film in this forum in advance, and lock the topic until the first day of discussion.

Thanks everyone. We are open to any ideas about running this forum.

****SPOILER WARNING**** of course this entire thread is going to be full of spoilers.

[aintnosin]

Now here is a film that I can practically quote backwards and forwards. It is, to my mind, Mel Brooks best film. It's his best because it's his most stylistically disciplined. He actually sticks to and respects the traditions of the genre his satirizing.

More importantly, he was genuinely satirizing the '30s Universal films, not just lampooning a genre like in his later movies (Spaceballs and later).

If anyone has the (non-anamorphic ) DVD of this film and has seen the deleted scenes, you'll realize the other big advantage of this Mel Brooks over the later Mel Brooks. The deleted scenes have that forced hit-and-miss feel that characterized films like Men In Tights. When he was making Young Frankenstien, he knew how to edit. By the late '80s, he was slinging any shit he could think of against the wall and hoping some of it stuck.

----

"Dr. Frankenstein?"

"It's Fronkensteen."

"You're putting me on."

"No. It's always been pronounced Fronkensteen."

"Do you also say Froderick?"

"No, it's Frederick."

"Why isn't it Froderick Fronkensteen?"

"It's not. It's Frederick Fronkensteen. You must be Igor."

"Actually, it's pronounced Eye-gor."

"They told me it was Igor."

"Well, they were wrong, then. Weren't they? My grandfather used to work for your grandfather."

"I see."

"Of course, the rates have gone up."

[Morticia]

Cool aintnosin. This is one of the most quoted movies in my collection.

But I have a question (or 2) for everybody:

This was filmed in B&W. Yes, the Universal 30s horror movies were done in B&W, but many successful horror movies were done in color (see Hammer's revival in the late 50s/60s).

1. Would this film be less funny in color?
2. Would this film be funny if it were satirizing the Hammer movies or say, the Jason/Freddy movies, and why or why not? (I realize it's patterned after the 30s movies, I'm asking if a satirization of the other movies would actually work.)

Just a thought...

Unpleasant dreams.

[aintnosin]

Originally posted by Morticia
This was filmed in B&W. Yes, the Universal 30s horror movies were done in B&W, but many successful horror movies were done in color (see Hammer's revival in the late 50s/60s).

1. Would this film be less funny in color?

Hmmm, maybe not less funny, but less enjoyable. I don't think any of the jokes depended on it being in B&W but the look of the film is still part of its appeal because the cinematography was so well done.

Originally posted by Morticia
2. Would this film be funny if it were satirizing the Hammer movies or say, the Jason/Freddy movies, and why or why not? (I realize it's patterned after the 30s movies, I'm asking if a satirization of the other movies would actually work.)

The Hammer films might work because the film had an identifiable over-the-top style. The problem is that these films are a lot less well-known these days than the original 30s versions. If you satirized the Hammer films, at lot of the audience might not get the joke. Back when Young Frankenstein was made, it might have been a different story. The Hammer films were much more popular then.

Satirize Freddy and Jason movies? Hmmm, I think it did work and it was called Scream.

[EM3]

Ok I love this movie and I think it is eithe Cinemax or HBO has been showing this one to death. I loved the fact that some of the props came from the original Frankenstein movie if I wasn't mistaken. To shoot this film in color would be a crime in my eyes. The movie has a more complete feel with it being in black and white. I do some photography and last year at a Civil War Reenactment I used only black and white film. Just because I knew the pictures would look more true to the period. The same is true of Hollywood portrits from the 20's to the 50's. Not to mention Madonnas "Vogue" video I think that black and white only add to the feeling of being complete. Boy I hope that made sense. Just my 2 cents. I like these forums but I rarely contribute because I am afraid I don't know a lot about the technical aspects.

[Morticia]

Originally posted by aintnosin
Satirize Freddy and Jason movies? Hmmm, I think it did work and it was called Scream.

Nice one! Sometimes I throw those in just to see if you're paying attention.

[Savagecreek]

I want to let you all know that this movie was filmed in color. in 1975 stationed in Okinawa Marine Corps Base, at the base movie house I saw this movie in color, to my suprise when I returned to the US you can not find it no where except in B&W, which to me is just wrong. What was the Monster's makeup for if only b&w? You know green in b&w cant be seen. I have been searching for a color verison of this film if anyone has a better connection to find it please let me know. IT DOES EXIST!!