When it comes to horror, I keep it old school

October has finally arrived.

For many, it will be a month-long celebration of Halloween. For anyone who has spent time in goth culture or who loves the weird and the unexplained, they'll tell you "October 31st is for tourists."

One of the ways people will observe the holiday is by watching horror movies, and channels like TCM are serving up a full and tasty buffet. I know that my students, especially my current ones for whatever reason, certainly devour the contemporary products of the horror genre, but me? I keep it old school. It's Universal Monsters all the way. Here's why...

1. Literary heritage.
Given that the Universal films were written towards the early end of the 20th century, the reservoir of film inspiration that could be drawn from was nil. Instead, writers turned to folklore and literature for sources. In the realm of scary stuff, one could hardly do better than Bram Stoker's Dracula and Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, with that latter text being the true masterpiece of the two. While the film adaptations may at first appear to have little in common with their literary progenitors, I enjoy watching the movies and finding the themes that remain, hiding just beneath the surface like a child under a sheet. In certain respects, the films mimic the synthesis and composition techniques of Stoker. He drew together history and folklore to create his magnum opus. Tod Browning, in directing Dracula, took the best of the stage play adaptations (namely Bela Lugosi) and added the touches of German expressionism as Tchaikovsky's Swan Lake plays in the background.
Stoker might have also had a little help from John Polidori and that perhaps mythical night that birthed Shelley's Frankenstein, but that is probably best left for another post.
The outlier in the "holy trinity" of Universal Monsters is The Wolf Man. It has no "origin text" and relies solely on myth and folklore.

2. Old ones work for it.
As with so many of today's mass market films, screenwriters in the horror genre seem to rely on bombast and jump scares. Everything is bigger and louder, while also being utterly disposable...as is the case with so much of consumer culture. Use once. Then destroy. Then there's the gore factor. "Torture porn" has never appealed to me, because...among other obvious reasons...it's just too easy.
Given the film standards of the time, Universal Monster films needed rely on creating an ambiance. You might not be especially scared watching Frankenstein or Dracula, but it's hard not to come away with getting a creepy vibe. Just take a look at the graveyard scene that opens that former film. Wow. A straight masterpiece. Black and white film only adds to the effect and directors like James Whale and Tod Browning sure knew what the hell they were doing. There is an artistry at work on the screen that looks good enough to eat. That is if your tastes tend towards the gothy and expressionistic.
It takes thought and a creative eye to bring about this milieu...far more work than "crazy guy with a chainsaw."

3. Shared Universe.
Yes, I hear tell that all the Conjuring films and spinoffs are linked together in a single story. Sequels, such as the bazillion Nightmare on Elm Streets and so forth, are one thing. It's quite another to take separate mythologies and weave them together in a way that makes sense. But that's exactly what Universal did. While a few of the entries (Bride of Frankenstein) are better than others (The Mummy's Hand), I appreciate and enjoy how the different stories get drawn together. 
It's a shame that a few of those films are more or less forgotten today. I'm thinking of Son of Frankenstein, which was the basis for the comedy Young Frankenstein. Not only does it feature a strong performance by the inimitable Basil Rathbone, it's meditation on how wrongdoing can taint an entire family, leaving its members unable to get out from under it.
As for my favorite, "everybody and the kitchen sink" Universal film? Probably House of Frankenstein.

4. Comfort.
It sounds completely antithetical, but I like watching the Universal Monsters precisely because they don't scare me. I've often said, "My real life is scary enough. I don't need to add terror to it." Current horror, with its predilection for serial killers and "ripped from today's headlines" storylines, likes to leave viewers with the thought, "This could happen to you." I can understand how this naturally heightens the terror for those who enjoy such a sensation.
I don't need that. Watching entries in the Universal Monsters mythos, I seldom if ever think the scenario could happen to me. Well, I'll admit that at around age 8, I did have the night sweats while wondering if I was adequately prepared to defend myself against an intruding vampire or werewolf, but that was a long time ago. These films let me enjoy the creep factor from quite a safe distance. So safe that they eventually become the cinematic equivalent of a comfort food like mac and cheese. It's no wonder I love watching Svengoolie every Saturday night.

I have a similar fondness for Hammer films, but that's probably best left for another post.

Happy Halloween.   

Follow me on Twitter: @Jntweets