Universal's NEW Classic Monsters Series

[Tobias]

Considering the 2017 Mummy was another prime example of trying to start a shared universe without understanding how the MCU successfully did it*, a shift to solo filmmaker-driven films is a very welcome decision.

While not everything Blumhouse puts out is good, one can't deny they've put out some gems and more importantly, their usual low budgets has made for a consistent string of profitable films. So if a film turns out to be so-so or a flop, it's not gonna' lead to a embarrassing write off. An with how much they put out, it'll allow them to also take a chance with bigger budget films.

*= Seriously folks, the blueprint is not that hard to follow. You start with a good film of one main character, and do a little tease at the end that there could be more to it. (eg, Iron Man) You then do films focusing on the other characters, maybe introducing a secondary character when appropriate and gradually building the over-arcing universe till you can do a film which brings them all together. It just takes time, and it can't be done in a few films or one. Though that last bit is where everyone else mucks it up as they clearly want it ASAP.

 

[jseal777]

This is almost EXACTLY what I wished for when the Mummy flopped.I REALLY liked Upgrade. I thought it was a better "Venom" movie than Venom. So I couldn't be happier about that guy (forget his name) being attached to this. Also gives me faith that Universal believes in the monsters rather than throwing them away when mummy flopped.

 

[quinnmac000]

It also helps the people who were in charge are no longer in charge of Universal Pictures solely.

 

[Tobias]

Almost forgot to add, I do agree to a extent that some of the properties could still work as a adventure film. An the freedom of tone and whatnot could help them pull that off. The Brendon Frasier Mummy's definitely worked as a adventure film, Dracula Untold...not so much.

As for Van Helsing, I'll admit that's a guilty pleasure of mine. It definitely has it's issues, bad/grating accents and all. On the flipside, there's a good Frankenstein and for me it has one of the best bipedal werewolf designs in film, and it's the best CGI werewolf on top of that. (I know it's not a Wolf-Man design, but personally I'm not big on the Wolf-Man look so I'll take the Van Helsing's werewolves any day.)

None the less, I would like to see Van Helsing redone, there's a good action/horror film with that theme.

 

[belloq87]

On the flipside, there's a good Frankenstein and for me it has one of the best bipedal werewolf designs in film, and it's the best CGI werewolf on top of that. (I know it's not a Wolf-Man design, but personally I'm not big on the Wolf-Man look so I'll take the Van Helsing's werewolves any day.)

The design of the werewolf in VAN HELSING isn't bad, but for me, the CGI ends up looking very cartoony. As all of the CGI in the movie does.

For bipedal werewolves that aren't on the Wolf Man side of the spectrum (i.e. truly a human/wolf blend), I probably opt for the design from THE HOWLING.

One of the great things about the werewolf - and why it's my favorite supernatural creature - is that there is so much variation possible, from your upright Wolf Men (Henry Hull in WEREWOLF OF LONDON, Lon Chaney Jr.'s WOLF MAN, Oliver Reed in CURSE OF THE WEREWOLF), all the way to the four-legged "hound from Hell" in AN AMERICAN WEREWOLF IN LONDON. And all the gradations in between.

It will be interesting to see how Universal chooses to approach the Wolf Man character, assuming they get around to another movie with him. I think the Rick Baker design in the 2010 version is about as perfect an update to the classic design as you could ever hope to see, but I doubt they'll just retread that again.

 

[quinnmac000]

Some clarification from Blum about the new Monster universe

I recently hopped on the phone for a chat with Blumhouse chief Jasom Blum and the producer clarified that he’s not overseeing a new monster universe for Universal for the time being, nor was that the path he wanted to take To the contrary, the studio is taking it one film at a time and, first and foremost, the project came about because Whannell came up with a great pitch.

“I don’t believe in saying “We’re going to do movies about this” and then trying to find a movie about it. So I didn’t believe in going and saying ‘I want to do all these movies’, and then try to find directors to do them. We have a director who… we’ve also done six or seven movies with, pitched us this spectacular idea about Invisible Man. We told him to write it, he wrote it, then we took it to the studio and said ‘We’d love to do this and this is what we would do with it,’ and they said yes. We’re definitely in our zone, I don’t know if it’s going to be strictly five [million]. It’s not going to be more than ten, I don’t think.””

“It was like the Blumhouse version of The Invisible Man, it’s a lower-budget movie. It’s not dependent on special effects, CGI, stunts. It’s super character-driven, it’s really compelling, it’s trilling, it’s edgy, it feels new. Those were all things that felt like they fit with what our company does. And it happened to be an Invisible Man story, so it checked both boxes. And we responded to it because I think Leigh is just an A+ director.”

Jason Blum on The Invisible Man & Making Universal Monster Movies | Collider


And it appears Universal is taking pitches for the Mummy reboot as well:
The Director of PUNISHER: WAR ZONE Just Pitched a New MUMMY Movie to Universal and Shares a Little Info

 

[belloq87]

Apparently Armie Hammer and Alexander Skarsgård are Universal's top contenders for the title INVISIBLE MAN role, with Elisabeth Moss potentially being looked at for the female lead...

Invisible Man Reboot: Armie Hammer, Alexander Skarsgård May Star

I like Hammer. He'd be a fine choice.

The bigger story is apparently the revelation of the new pitch for the character: he's "Adrian Griffin, a billionaire (and sociopath) who developed an invisibility suit for the Department of Defense." I don't know how much I love that idea, which seems to veer more towards overt, modern sci-fi than the more classic "mad science" of the original tale, involving serums and potions and the like.

 

[Jamesh22]

Apparently Armie Hammer and Alexander Skarsgård are Universal's top contenders for the title INVISIBLE MAN role, with Elisabeth Moss potentially being looked at for the female lead...

Invisible Man Reboot: Armie Hammer, Alexander Skarsgård May Star

I like Hammer. He'd be a fine choice.

The bigger story is apparently the revelation of the new pitch for the character: he's "Adrian Griffin, a billionaire (and sociopath) who developed an invisibility suit for the Department of Defense." I don't know how much I love that idea, which seems to veer more towards overt, modern sci-fi than the more classic "mad science" of the original tale, involving serums and potions and the like.

Agreed on all points.

I'd add they just need to concentrate on making good movies instead of some Marvel style universe. Get people excited about the classic monsters again and then you can think about some Mo-vengers style team up

 

[Brian G.]

I don't know why ya'll keep thinking Monsters are ripping off the MCU when the Monsters did it first.

 

[belloq87]

I don't know that anybody in here has ever implied otherwise.

 

[AlexanderMBush]

The vibe I get from that bit on the casting, seems to represent slightly what they may be wanting to do.

It seems like it's going to take it's own spin, while making it contemporary with our time.

It makes me think it won't be as..horror based, but slightly political and with a potential tragedy on what happens to Griffin when he first dawns the suit.

 

[Legacy]

I still want Spike Lee or Jordan Peele to direct The Invisible Man...

 

[Clive]

Armie Hammer is a great idea. I'm fine with them going the "invisible suit" route, which has some basis in the very entertaining "Invisible Agent."

Still cautiously optimistic. Leigh's scripts can occasionally suffer from stilted dialogue, but they almost always turn out rock solid when a capable director (i.e., he himself or James Wan) are behind the camera.

 

[Spaulding]

Not sure how controversial this might be, but I thought Hollow Man was a decent take on the Invisible Man as a horror movie idea. I think making it less silly and Kevin Bacon-y and you have the potential for a decent horror.

 

[Andysol]

I still want Spike Lee or Jordan Peele to direct The Invisible Man...

Why those two?

Jordan Peele would be good, but Spike Lee? That’d be a terrible choice.

 

[Brian G.]

I don't know that anybody in here has ever implied otherwise.

Sarcasm, mate.

 

[belloq87]

Armie Hammer is a great idea. I'm fine with them going the "invisible suit" route, which has some basis in the very entertaining "Invisible Agent."

Your point about INVISIBLE AGENT is a good one, though I'd like to see this new version have a foot more firmly in that horror genre than that story.

Not sure how controversial this might be, but I thought Hollow Man was a decent take on the Invisible Man as a horror movie idea. I think making it less silly and Kevin Bacon-y and you have the potential for a decent horror.

HOLLOW MAN is fun. Pretty impressive effects for its time, too.

Why those two?

Jordan Peele would be good, but Spike Lee? That’d be a terrible choice.

I'd happily take Jordan Peele on one of the future Classic Monsters projects. He loves the genre.

I don't know that Spike has ever professed any affinity for horror, though (he does have a ceremonial "Executive Producer" credit on TALES FROM THE HOOD).

 

[JungleSkip]

If Peele ever does one of these, I want him to do Frankenstein or Creature from the Black Lagoon. Both of those really lineup with his storytelling sensibilities.

 

[belloq87]

If Peele ever does one of these, I want him to do Frankenstein or Creature from the Black Lagoon. Both of those really lineup with his storytelling sensibilities.

Tonally, I think he could be great for CREATURE, which is the one I'd envision as slightly more of a horror/adventure fusion with some humor (though erring slightly more towards horror than Brendan Fraser's MUMMY, for example). Based on GET OUT and early word on US, Peele knows how to bring in laughs without undermining the horror stakes.

As for a FRANKENSTEIN adaptation, there's one name I saw thrown out by an online writer that I actually think would be a brilliant choice: Damien Chazelle. All three of his directorial efforts (WHIPLASH, LA LA LAND, and FIRST MAN) focus on very driven and emotionally-complicated men whose work either undermines or serves as an escape from their personal lives. I think that perfectly describes Victor Frankenstein.

Chazelle also wrote the underrated Hitchcockian thriller GRAND PIANO and co-wrote 10 CLOVERFIELD LANE, so he's got genre cred. And WHIPLASH was produced by... Jason Blum.

 

[Clive]

If Peele ever does one of these, I want him to do Frankenstein or Creature from the Black Lagoon. Both of those really lineup with his storytelling sensibilities.

I was about to say the same thing. I'd still be thrilled to see Peter Jackson's take on Creature from the Black Lagoon, but please give me Jordan Peele's Frankenstein. (And spare me Bill Conden's.)