Saw this article on line today:
http://scoop.diamondgalleries.com/public/default.asp?t=1&m=1&c=34&s=264&ai=113373 (http://scoop.diamondgalleries.com/public/default.asp?t=1&m=1&c=34&s=264&ai=113373)
and it brought up something I am unclear on: was Lon Chaney Sr considered for the role of Dracula that Lugosi finally got or not? I remember reading it both ways. Does anyone know definitively the answer to this?
This appears to be the case, and there is a book out which explores this.
http://www.amazon.com/Dracula-Starring-Lon-Chaney-Alternate/dp/1593934785 (http://www.amazon.com/Dracula-Starring-Lon-Chaney-Alternate/dp/1593934785)
Product Description
Late 1929. The Stock market crash. At MGM Studios Irving Thalberg was involved in a power struggle. Lon Chaney's contract was coming up for renewal. Tod Browning, MGM's famed director of the macabre genre for the studio, had left and signed a contract back at his home studio, Universal. Carl Laemmle Jr was made production head of Universal for his father and he wanted to do a film version of Dracula. Carl Sr. agreed, as long as they had Lon Chaney as the star. Early in August of 1930, Carl Junior, still attempting to sign Chaney for the role, ordered a treatment to be authored by Louis Bromfield. By Mid August he was teamed with screenwriter Dudley Murphy and they began work on the script. Then in the middle of the negotiations, Lon Chaney unexpected by everyone in the film industry, died on August 26th. This volume of the Alternate History of Classic Monster Films we present the full first Bromfield treatment, the incomplete first draft screenplay by Bromfield and Murphy. In addition, when Dracula was finally produced, more in the fashion of the popular 1927 play than the Bram Stoker novel, as was intended by Laemmle for Chaney - A silent version of the Lugosi Dracula was prepared for theaters who had not yet converted to sound. We have also included a complete Title list from this version. Also included in this volume is a translated version of F.W. Murnau's shooting script for the first screen version of Dracula - filmed in Germany in 1922 and called NOSFERATU, a symphony of horror. Murnau's hand annotations are included in bold print throughout the script.
"Alternate History of Classic Monster Films"
Doesn't that mean "Made Up History of Classic Monster Films"?
Quote from: Mike Scott on September 30, 2011, 08:31:12 PM
"Alternate History of Classic Monster Films"
Doesn't that mean "Made Up History of Classic Monster Films"?
That's my opinion as well. Some of these Riley books have come under attack. I had heard of this one but had read dubious things about it.
I've heard that. I also heard of other actors, too.
Enthusiastic young Hollywood producer Carl Laemmle, Jr. also saw the box office potential in Stoker's gothic chiller, and he legally acquired the novel's film rights. Initially, he wanted Dracula to be a spectacle on a scale with the lavish silent films The Hunchback of Notre Dame (1923) and The Phantom of the Opera (1925).
Like those films, Laemmle insisted it must star Lon Chaney, despite Chaney being under contract at MGM. Tod Browning was then approached to direct this new Universal epic. Browning had already directed Chaney as a fake vampire in the (lost) 1927 silent London After Midnight. However, a number of factors would limit Laemmle's plans: Firstly, Chaney himself, who had been diagnosed with throat cancer in 1928, had succumbed to his terminal illness. Furthermore, studio financial difficulties, coupled with the onset of the Great Depression, caused a drastic reduction in budget, forcing Laemmle to look at a cheaper alternative, which meant several grand scenes that closely followed the Stoker storyline had to be abandoned.
Decision on casting the title role proved problematic. Initially, Laemmle was not at all interested in Lugosi, in spite of good reviews for his stage portrayal. Laemmle instead considered other actors, including Paul Muni, Chester Morris, Ian Keith, John Wray, Joseph Schildkraut, Arthur Edmund Carewe and William Courtenay. Lugosi had played the role on Broadway, and to his good fortune, happened to be in Los Angeles with a touring company of the play when the film was being cast.[2] Against the tide of studio opinion, Lugosi lobbied hard and ultimately won the executives over, thanks in part to him accepting a paltry $500 per week salary for seven weeks of work, amounting to $3,500.[1][2]
Quote from: Illoman on September 30, 2011, 08:52:43 PM
Some of these Riley books have come under attack.
Oh, the Riley book! Yeh , I heard about this. It's supposed to be a "What If".
It might be fun to do that at the UMA board, but I don't know if I'd wanna buy a book like that?
This is all pretty extensively covered in David J. Skal's book "Hollywood Gothic." If you don't have a copy in your collection ... bad! Bad monster fan! Bad! Now, go get in the corner.
Quote from: Mike Scott on September 30, 2011, 08:31:12 PM
"Alternate History of Classic Monster Films"
Doesn't that mean "Made Up History of Classic Monster Films"?
I think a few words in defense of the Philip J. Riley books are in order.
I own several of them and wish I could afford to buy them all. These are the ones I own:
A Blind Bargain: Gave me a wonderful insight into this lost Chaney classic. Since it is unlikely that a print of this film will surface in my lifetime, I am extremely grateful to have the film recreated through script and still photographs the way this book does. Such recreations are not nearly as good as watching the films themselves, but in the case of a lost film like this one (or a film project that never made it beyond the planning stages), I feel that the author is providing a wonderful service to Monsterkids like me. How else can we experience these films which are unavailable for viewing?
Frankenstein Meets the Wolfman: Rather than a "Made up history of classic monster films", the original shooting script fills in the portions of the film cut out after poor preview showings. Although you don't get to hear Lugosi speak the Monster's lines, you get to read what they were and understand the film's original storyline better. It gave me a real appreciation for the travesty done to Bela Lugosi in having every single line of his dialog excised from the film.
Dracula's Daughter: This book had a script for a sequel to Dracula which had a rather prominent role for Lugosi - as the origin of Dracula is told in flashback sequences. The eventual "Dracula's Daughter" which was made was a totally different story. It was fun to read, but as this story never came close to actually being made, it is more like reading a simple work of fiction than reading a film book like the ones mentioned above. Had this story ever been filmed as conceived, it would have been amazing!
The Mummy's Curse: Reading this book was a depressing experience for me. The script has a lot of additional material which didn't make it into the final film. Unlike "Frankenstien Meets the Wolfman", where material was edited out in a misguided attempt to improve the film before it was released, "The Mummy's Curse" appeared to be cut during filming in an effort to reduce costs. The book gave me an inside look at what Universal monster films had become at the end of the golden era. Final decisions appear to be dictated by the budget more than the artists and directors involved.
The Phantom of the Opera: I've only just begun to read this latest acquisition of mine. From what I've read so far, I've gained great insight into the make-up used by Chaney in the film. I also am learning that the plot isn't quite as preposterous as I had thought before. But rather, much of the background stories for the characters and other things explaining motivations for characters simply aren't part of the copies of this film we have available to us today.
Illoman, if you want an answer to your question and don't mind forking over the price of the book, I'd suggest buying Riley's Chaney-as-Dracula book. It sounds like a great read to me. I suspect those who claim these books are a "Made up history" have never read them.
Quote from: fibbermac on October 01, 2011, 05:20:13 AM
I think a few words in defense of the Philip J. Riley books are in order.
Illoman, if you want an answer to your question and don't mind forking over the price of the book, I'd suggest buying Riley's Chaney-as-Dracula book. It sounds like a great read to me. I suspect those who claim these books are a "Made up history" have never read them.
Fibbermac, I won several of the MagicImage books including a few you mentioned and like them a lot! I didn't mean to cast doubts on Riley's reputation, rather I'm just seeking information. On other boards I'd read some things and I just was just mining the vast knowledge of the UMA folks. I really just wanted an answer to the question if indeed Chaney was supposed to play Dracula for Universal or not, as again I had read it both ways.
I own a couple of Skaal's books and would like to read Hollywood Gothic. Thanks for the suggestion, Count!
Considering Tod Browning was the Director, and Universal decided to make the movie prior to Chaney's demise, the simple answer to the question if Chaney would have played Dracula is yes. if somebody has reasons that Chaney would not have played Dracula, I certainly would love to hear them.
Quote from: Haunted hearse on October 01, 2011, 02:04:40 PM
Considering Tod Browning was the Director, and Universal decided to make the movie prior to Chaney's demise, the simple answer to the question if Chaney would have played Dracula is yes. if somebody has reasons that Chaney would not have played Dracula, I certainly would love to hear them.
Well, I've got Hollywood Gothic on reserve at the library. So as soon as I find out anything I'll post about it.
Quote from: fibbermac on October 01, 2011, 05:20:13 AM
I suspect those who claim these books are a "Made up history" have never read them.
"Alternate History", by definition, can't be true, otherwise you'd just call it "History".
This isn't one of the "Universal Filmscript Series" books, it's a "what if". Nothing wrong with it, if you like that kind of thing.
Quote from: Illoman on October 01, 2011, 08:25:13 AM
Fibbermac, I won several of the MagicImage books including a few you mentioned and like them a lot! I didn't mean to cast doubts on Riley's reputation, rather I'm just seeking information. On other boards I'd read some things and I just was just mining the vast knowledge of the UMA folks. I really just wanted an answer to the question if indeed Chaney was supposed to play Dracula for Universal or not, as again I had read it both ways.
I own a couple of Skaal's books and would like to read Hollywood Gothic. Thanks for the suggestion, Count!
Illoman, Hollywood Gothic is a really, really interesting book and I highly reccommend it. As for the Chaney as Dracula book, I have it, and I've never understood what all the fuss was about as far as it being "fake" or whatever. It's a collection of some telegraphs from when Universal was trying to recruit Chaney, and some other ones that I can't remember specifically, then it reprints a shooting script of Dracula and Nosferatu. At the end it has a rare autobiographical article by Chaney from an old movie mag, which for me makes the book worthwhile right there. But yeah, it's mostly a reprint of an old Dracula and Nosferatu script, so I personally don't have any reason to believe that it's not genuine, it's not like the script lists who plays Dracula. From what I understand Chaney was never 100% attached to the project at all so I guess maybe the title of the book could be misleading, but all in all I like the book and I'm glad I have it.
Also to answer your original question yes Chaney was definitely considered and sought after for the role, and Lugosi, which you will discover when you read Skaal's book, was so far down the line it's actually pretty shocking.
Quote from: Bonomo on October 01, 2011, 11:30:07 PM
Also to answer your original question yes Chaney was definitely considered and sought after for the role, and Lugosi, which you will discover when you read Skaal's book, was so far down the line it's actually pretty shocking.
Bonomo, thanks for the info. Yeah, I recall reading about how Lugosi actually had to lobby for the part since he was so far down on the list. It's a shame. I also just found out Helen Chandler really didn't want to play Mina, but wanted to get the lead role in a film version of Alice in Wonderland. She was basically told to play Mina so she did.
Quote from: Illoman on October 02, 2011, 07:15:59 AM
Bonomo, thanks for the info. Yeah, I recall reading about how Lugosi actually had to lobby for the part since he was so far down on the list. It's a shame. I also just found out Helen Chandler really didn't want to play Mina, but wanted to get the lead role in a film version of Alice in Wonderland. She was basically told to play Mina so she did.
Studio contracts really made some actors miserable. Gloria Holden didn't want to play "Dracula's Daughter," but the studio made her do it. Many attribute her cold, detached portrayal of the character to her dislike of the material. Oddly enough, it worked for the part!
It's been speculated that losing the lead in "Alice in Wonderland" hastened Chandler's decline into alcoholism. Such a tragic, beautiful woman.
Quote from: Count_Zirock on October 02, 2011, 08:48:45 AM
Studio contracts really made some actors miserable. Gloria Holden didn't want to play "Dracula's Daughter," but the studio made her do it. Many attribute her cold, detached portrayal of the character to her dislike of the material. Oddly enough, it worked for the part!
It's been speculated that losing the lead in "Alice in Wonderland" hastened Chandler's decline into alcoholism. Such a tragic, beautiful woman.
Is she the one that died from her bed getting set on fire? Or are my facts all mixed up?
Quote from: Bonomo on October 02, 2011, 09:53:56 AM
Is she the one that died from her bed getting set on fire? Or are my facts all mixed up?
She did fall asleep while smoking and was disfigured but survived the fire. I believe she was undergoing an operation for something else and suffered cardiac arrest and died during the operation. She was cremated and her ashes were never claimed. Very tragic...
Gloria Holden did amazing as her character.
Quote from: Bonomo on October 01, 2011, 11:25:22 PM
It's a collection of some telegraphs from when Universal was trying to recruit Chaney, and some other ones that I can't remember specifically, then it reprints a shooting script of Dracula and Nosferatu.
Well, if that's what the book is about, it sure has a strange title. (Ineed to look up a review of this thing.)
Hopefully everyone understands, I wasn't trying to start a flap or anything here. It just seemed to me that the thread was turning into a thumbs down critique of Riley's books and I wanted to express a differing opinion. Since we fans of these old horror films are such a small, niche market, I'm thrilled that Mr. Riley is putting out these volumes that feed my unhealthy interest in the subject. ;D
Looks like there's a new one coming out about "The Invisible Man".
Frankenstein Meets the Wolfman: Rather than a "Made up history of classic monster films", the original shooting script fills in the portions of the film cut out after poor preview showings. Although you don't get to hear Lugosi speak the Monster's lines, you get to read what they were and understand the film's original storyline better. It gave me a real appreciation for the travesty done to Bela Lugosi in having every single line of his dialog excised from the film.>>>>>>>>>
That, I would like to read.
I looked up this series of books and they're not "Alternate History", they're real history, just history of proposed versions of movies that never got made. (Alternate history is what might have happened if Lee Harvey Oswald got in an auto accident that morning, not an early draft of "Profiles in Courage".)
In that case, there's a couple of those I wanna pick up.
Quote from: Mike Scott on October 02, 2011, 07:14:21 PM
I looked up this series of books and they're not "Alternate History", they're real history, just history of proposed versions of movies that never got made. (Alternate history is what might have happened if Lee Harvey Oswald got in an auto accident that morning, not an early draft of "Profiles in Courage".)
A few hours ago I wrote about specifically what the book was as I was looking at it, but every now and then a post I make will just instantly disappear on here for some reason, and that one did :'(
Anyway, yeah you're right, it's just a marketing thing. The Dracula script in the Chaney as Dracula book is actually the first treatment of Dracula from 1930, when the studio was heavily pushing for Chaney, so that's the angle Riley used. Regardless, it's a cool book.
Quote from: Bonomo on October 02, 2011, 08:59:29 PM
A few hours ago I wrote about specifically what the book was as I was looking at it, but every now and then a post I make will just instantly disappear on here for some reason, and that one did :'(
Anyway, yeah you're right, it's just a marketing thing. The Dracula script in the Chaney as Dracula book is actually the first treatment of Dracula from 1930, when the studio was heavily pushing for Chaney, so that's the angle Riley used. Regardless, it's a cool book.
I just checked one of Michael Blake's books on Chaney, and perhaps some of the confusion, at least for me, was over the speculation that Chaney would play Dracula or not. I think it's a fact that he was wanted by the studio, but doubtful that he could do it as he was under contract to a different studio at the time. Regardless, it's an interesting story.
I liked Lon Chaney's version of Count Dracula. He had authority and seemed to control every scene.
The Riley alternate history books are really cool, and they aren't actual alternate history as was pointed out. They are unmade filmsthat were planned but fell through for whatever reason-things like the Chaney Dracula, Karloff's Cagliostro, james Whale's version of Drac's Daughter and Dracula vs the Wolfman which was supposed to be in color and star Lugosi and Chaney jr.All of our favorite studios have unmade projects that sound cool-Hammer had such films as The Unholy Thrist of Dracula, Zepplins vs Pterodactyls,more Dennis Wheatley adaptations and the co-production with Toho-Nessie,Toho themselves had projects like Frankenstein vs Godzilla, King Kong vs Frankenstein, Godzilla vs RedMoon,Mothra vs Bagan and even Batman vs Godzilla from the early 60s(Batman was popular in japan at the time with his own Japanese drawn comic).
Quote from: Illoman on October 02, 2011, 09:18:41 PMI think it's a fact that he was wanted by the studio, but doubtful that he could do it as he was under contract to a different studio at the time.
But, Chaney's contract with MGM was getting set to expire, freeing him up to do "Dracula." Issue #1 of Mad Monster Magazine had an interesting article where photos of Chaney were doctored to show what he might've looked like as Dracula, Frankenstein's Monster, and Sir John Talbot opposite his son, Lon Jr., in "The Wolf Man."(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-1wjBxs9DD6o/TbneXI0zaCI/AAAAAAAAABg/0vkQxxsrSGk/s1600/Lon%20Frank.jpg)
I remember reading an issue of Famous Monsters of Filmland back in the 70's where this was addressed. If I remember correctly, Chaney was to play Dracula and there was talk about him playing in the movie Frankenstein, as both the monster and doctor. No, I do not remember the issue number, but if I ever find it again I'll post it.
Awesome image Count_Zirock! The Sr. Frankenstein monster is really creepy.
Quote from: jerod on May 12, 2012, 08:36:08 PM
Awesome image Count_Zirock! The Sr. Frankenstein monster is really creepy.
The Chaney-as-Dracula shots aren't online, and my scanner's not working right now.
OK. Thanks for the clarification. Still a great image.
There's talk of this topic in a doc on The Dracula Legacy collection for anyone that owns it.
I'd posted this on another site to mixed reviews. I tried to show Sr. in two versions. One is based on the Stoker description and the other on the Lugosi stage version from the same era:
(http://i1209.photobucket.com/albums/cc385/jerod26/Odds%20n%20ends/LonChaneyDracula2.jpg)
Quote from: jerod on May 13, 2012, 11:31:57 AM
I'd posted this on another site to mixed reviews. I tried to show Sr. in two versions. One is based on the Stoker description and the other on the Lugosi stage version from the same era:
(http://i1209.photobucket.com/albums/cc385/jerod26/Odds%20n%20ends/LonChaneyDracula2.jpg)
I'm fine with the Chaney version based on the stage play, except the pointed ears. We'll I'd have a problem with the pointed ears, as far as shots where people who see Dracula, don't realize he's not a regular human being. The shot of Chaney as the Literary Dracula, is excellent.
The images from MMP assume that, with Chaney as its star, Carl Laemmle Sr would've kept it the big-budget, faithful adaptation that was originally intended. So, his early scenes show an elderly, white haired, moustached monster with pointed ears and fangs. A later scene, showing the youthful Count confronting Van Helsing, still has the long hair (covering the eartips) and moustache. Really wish my scanner was working!
Haven't had a chance to scan in the images, but here are some cellphone snaps from Mad Monster Party #1 of Lon Chaney as Count Dracula.
(http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y272/dancziraky/Mobile%20Uploads/Image0197.jpg)
(http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y272/dancziraky/Mobile%20Uploads/Image0198.jpg)
(http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y272/dancziraky/Mobile%20Uploads/Image0199.jpg)
Count Z- Those are creepy! I like how they incorporate the moustache like would have been in the novel. Seems like a plasusible option for a pre-Lugosi Dracula.
Unfortunately, they didn't credit whoever did the Chaney photomanips. Probably a staffer.Quote from: jerod on June 13, 2012, 06:04:00 PM
Count Z- Those are creepy! I like how they incoporate the moustache like would have been in the novel. Seems like a plasusible option for a pre-Lugosi Dracula.
Well, had Chaney lived to play Dracula, the film would've been much closer to the book. It probably would've stayed set in Victorian times, and we'd have had Arthur Holmwood and Quincy Morris added to the mix. Dr. Seward wouldn't have been Mina's father, either-- that was a change made for the play. It would've been a much more epic film, like "Hunchback" and "Phantom."
What's this Mad Monster Party #1 book?
Is this DRacula's Daughter script mentioned the James Whale version?
Chaney Sr. may have made a great Dracula but I felt his son was a TERRIBLE one.
Quote from: Wizard_Of_Ed on June 17, 2012, 12:30:27 AMWhat's this Mad Monster Party #1 book?
It's a magazine, actually.
http://www.madmonster.com (http://www.madmonster.com)Quote from: Wizard_Of_Ed on June 17, 2012, 12:30:27 AM
Is this DRacula's Daughter script mentioned the James Whale version?
Supposedly. At least, an early draft, from what I understand.
Quote from: Wizard_Of_Ed on June 17, 2012, 12:38:31 AM
Chaney Sr. may have made a great Dracula but I felt his son was a TERRIBLE one.
Of course now that Johnny Depp has played a Vampire, I am gainning new appreciation for Count Alucard.
Quote from: Haunted hearse on June 19, 2012, 07:22:51 PM
Of course now that Johnny Depp has played a Vampire, I am gainning new appreciation for Count Alucard.
Also, I'd have much preferred being serviced by Louise Allbritton than Helena Bonham Carter in a Bozo wig.