Often, I find myself lamenting across SciFiHistory.Net that the Horror genre doesn’t have any great returning faces any longer.
Oh, I mean no disrespect to various Kane Hodder’s, Tony Todd’s, or any number of veritable Scream Queens that turn up without delay. While a great many actors and actresses have long staked out the territory exploring things that go bump in the night, I’ve also seen as many of them showing up and simply turning out ‘more of the same.’ (This is especially truthful and noteworthy when it comes to Scream Queens.) My point is that rarely do audiences discover a screen presence who shows up over and over again with the measure of variety and versatility that ably demonstrates not only the depth of skill but also the willingness to keep pushing boundaries so that Horrors might become something new. All too often, today’s features – big and small – tend to run on a central idea; and that structure just doesn’t leave enough room for these talented professionals to ‘push the envelope,’ as it were. Even when they do, some producers likely have them ‘dial it back,’ fearing that straying too deeply into uncharted waters might upset fans, so why bother? Personally, I think that’s a disservice to both sides of the aisle as I’d always rather see more than less when I’m choosing my next entertainment meal.
As perhaps an even better example, why is it that we don’t get talents like the late Boris Karloff any more?
I know, I know, I know: the likes of a Karloff and what he brought to any role is decades old, and today’s Thespians seem to be more concerned with avoiding being typecast than they are truly committed to exploring the many faces of Horror moviemaking itself. Hell, I’ve even read that – after a time – Boris never much gave being selected again and again and again for scare audiences silly a second thought, embracing the fact that it kinda/sorta became who he was. When you’re good, then you’re good; and the actor – to this day – remains one of the very best at vamping into whatever role producers desired. Here I am late in my fifth decade of existence, and I’m still discovering what the man could do with a role, even something as curious as he did with 1936’s The Walking Dead from director Michael Curtiz.
Right up front, I think that a name like ‘The Walking Dead’ has been ruined for modern audiences. I suspect that – given the juggernaut of an intellectual property that AMC has made of that Robert Kirkman inspiration – anyone even considered this almost 90-year-old flick might consider it as a quaint zombie feature, but nothing could be further from the truth. In reality, the story from Ewart Anderson, Joseph Fields, Lillie Hayward, Robert Hardy Andrews, and Peter Milne is more of a crime/thriller hybrid with a dash of the supernatural thrown in for good measure … and it works. In fact, it works surprisingly well once you’re really in on what’s transpiring. Granted, it could’ve used a bit more set-up or perhaps an expository scene to clarify everything that’s going on, but even without such an explanation what emerges is a great film carried almost entirely on Karloff’s accomplished shoulders.
Wouldn’t it be great to say the same for other actors and actresses today?
Sigh.
Oh, I mean no disrespect to various Kane Hodder’s, Tony Todd’s, or any number of veritable Scream Queens that turn up without delay. While a great many actors and actresses have long staked out the territory exploring things that go bump in the night, I’ve also seen as many of them showing up and simply turning out ‘more of the same.’ (This is especially truthful and noteworthy when it comes to Scream Queens.) My point is that rarely do audiences discover a screen presence who shows up over and over again with the measure of variety and versatility that ably demonstrates not only the depth of skill but also the willingness to keep pushing boundaries so that Horrors might become something new. All too often, today’s features – big and small – tend to run on a central idea; and that structure just doesn’t leave enough room for these talented professionals to ‘push the envelope,’ as it were. Even when they do, some producers likely have them ‘dial it back,’ fearing that straying too deeply into uncharted waters might upset fans, so why bother? Personally, I think that’s a disservice to both sides of the aisle as I’d always rather see more than less when I’m choosing my next entertainment meal.
As perhaps an even better example, why is it that we don’t get talents like the late Boris Karloff any more?
I know, I know, I know: the likes of a Karloff and what he brought to any role is decades old, and today’s Thespians seem to be more concerned with avoiding being typecast than they are truly committed to exploring the many faces of Horror moviemaking itself. Hell, I’ve even read that – after a time – Boris never much gave being selected again and again and again for scare audiences silly a second thought, embracing the fact that it kinda/sorta became who he was. When you’re good, then you’re good; and the actor – to this day – remains one of the very best at vamping into whatever role producers desired. Here I am late in my fifth decade of existence, and I’m still discovering what the man could do with a role, even something as curious as he did with 1936’s The Walking Dead from director Michael Curtiz.
Right up front, I think that a name like ‘The Walking Dead’ has been ruined for modern audiences. I suspect that – given the juggernaut of an intellectual property that AMC has made of that Robert Kirkman inspiration – anyone even considered this almost 90-year-old flick might consider it as a quaint zombie feature, but nothing could be further from the truth. In reality, the story from Ewart Anderson, Joseph Fields, Lillie Hayward, Robert Hardy Andrews, and Peter Milne is more of a crime/thriller hybrid with a dash of the supernatural thrown in for good measure … and it works. In fact, it works surprisingly well once you’re really in on what’s transpiring. Granted, it could’ve used a bit more set-up or perhaps an expository scene to clarify everything that’s going on, but even without such an explanation what emerges is a great film carried almost entirely on Karloff’s accomplished shoulders.
Wouldn’t it be great to say the same for other actors and actresses today?
Sigh.
(NOTE: The following review will contain minor spoilers necessary solely for the discussion of plot and/or characters. If you’re the type of reader who prefers a review entirely spoiler-free, then I’d encourage you to skip down to the last few paragraphs for the final assessment. If, however, you’re accepting of a few modest hints at ‘things to come,’ then read on …)
From the film’s IMDB.com page citation:
“After hapless pianist and ex-con John Elman is framed for murder, he is resurrected by a scientist after his execution.”
On the commentary track for 1946’s The Beast With The Five Fingers (the film is reviewed here), I learned that the late movie mogul Jack Warner – once called ‘the meanest man in Hollywood’ – wasn’t a fan of Horror features. While his studio certainly produced a few Horror classics under his leadership, Warner apparently had to be persuaded to allow directors and screenwriters to explore such ideas; and even then there remain suggestions that he had them tone down a scene or two in order to soften the frights so that audiences didn’t turn away and go elsewhere for their escapism.
Perhaps that’s why – to some degree – it’s easy to see how a flick like The Walking Dead actually got made when it did. At first glance, the feature barely looks like a Horror entry – it arguably has no central creatures like the Universal Pictures big hits of the same era had introduced – and what scary scenes it has requires the greater suggestion of violence and bloodshed as opposed to outright showing any nefarious activities. When you have a talent as great as Boris Karloff, however, that might be the only way to effectively pull that screen magic off. This one likely wouldn’t have worked so well in any other actor’s hands.
John Elman (played by Karloff) is a down-on-his-luck ex-convict who can’t seem to get a break no matter where he turns. Having served his days in the big house after what he insists was an accidental murder, this former musician goes from one odd job to the next, scraping out just enough of a living to make ends meet. When he gets word that famed attorney named Nolan (Ricardo Cortez) might have a task he could be suited for, Elman shows up excitedly … only to be turned away into what winds up being little more than a set-up to become a patsy for a criminal fixer known as Trigger Smith (Joe Sawyer).
From the film’s IMDB.com page citation:
“After hapless pianist and ex-con John Elman is framed for murder, he is resurrected by a scientist after his execution.”
On the commentary track for 1946’s The Beast With The Five Fingers (the film is reviewed here), I learned that the late movie mogul Jack Warner – once called ‘the meanest man in Hollywood’ – wasn’t a fan of Horror features. While his studio certainly produced a few Horror classics under his leadership, Warner apparently had to be persuaded to allow directors and screenwriters to explore such ideas; and even then there remain suggestions that he had them tone down a scene or two in order to soften the frights so that audiences didn’t turn away and go elsewhere for their escapism.
Perhaps that’s why – to some degree – it’s easy to see how a flick like The Walking Dead actually got made when it did. At first glance, the feature barely looks like a Horror entry – it arguably has no central creatures like the Universal Pictures big hits of the same era had introduced – and what scary scenes it has requires the greater suggestion of violence and bloodshed as opposed to outright showing any nefarious activities. When you have a talent as great as Boris Karloff, however, that might be the only way to effectively pull that screen magic off. This one likely wouldn’t have worked so well in any other actor’s hands.
John Elman (played by Karloff) is a down-on-his-luck ex-convict who can’t seem to get a break no matter where he turns. Having served his days in the big house after what he insists was an accidental murder, this former musician goes from one odd job to the next, scraping out just enough of a living to make ends meet. When he gets word that famed attorney named Nolan (Ricardo Cortez) might have a task he could be suited for, Elman shows up excitedly … only to be turned away into what winds up being little more than a set-up to become a patsy for a criminal fixer known as Trigger Smith (Joe Sawyer).
As it turns out, Smith, Cortez, and a handful of other faces actually run the big city crime syndicate; and they need a fall guy they can frame for the death of crusading Judge Roger Shaw (Joe King). Thus, Elman gets easily convicted and sentenced to die in the electric chair; and die he does, even though a late breaking development of witnesses coming forward occurs only seconds too late. This causes the scientist Dr. Evan Beaumont (Edmund Gwenn) to request that Elman’s body be turned over to him so that he can use it as the first subject to reanimate with some cutting-edge discoveries. Eventually, the doomed man is resurrected, and yet – as is often the case when man plays God – he isn’t quite himself any longer.
Essentially, Elman returns to the mortal plane bearing a set of uncharacteristic gifts. First, he has somewhat magical knowledge of the identities of those in the syndicate who were responsible for his demise. Second, he can apparently convince them with little more than a stare for them to throw caution to the wind and grievously harm themselves. And third – while it’s even a bit more nebulous – he can’t be killed again!
Well …
The truth to The Walking Dead is that the honest limits of these powers are never quite sufficiently explained. In short, they are what they are only in so much as our hero Elman needs them in order to exact a measure of vengeance on those who wronged him in the process, so consider this some convenient spectral developments. While I would’ve appreciated a bit more by way of exposition or even the actor’s greater demonstrations, director Curtiz and his screenwriters think they’ve provided just enough to tell the story as is; and who am I to argue with that? Of course, it’s easy to see that Elman’s suggestions of his enemies’ doom is ample, but a bit of extra nuance could’ve easily been slipped in here and made this one even better.
The Walking Dead reminds me greatly of 1983’s The Dead Zone, a stellar adaptation of the Stephen King novel helmed by director David Cronenberg. In that story, Johnny Smith (Christopher Walken) is tragically put into a coma for several years; and – once he emerges – the man comes back with a unique gift of foresight as it pertains to touching others and seeing what Fate itself has in store for them. Naturally, this grants the man the ability to also change the future – when he meets a person destined for a dark turn, he can warn them – and that serves as the foundation for exploring the nature of his somewhat tortured existence. Similarly, Elman has gone to the other side and come back with these curious faculties, but The Walking Dead never quite hammers in if this was meant to be a blessing or a curse. Rather, his gifts simply are what they are, and he uses them solely to see that justice is served for those who did him wrong. While that’s understandably noble, it’s also a bit self-serving, leaving other avenues completely untouched as to whether or not Elman could’ve become a saint to mankind at large. I suspect not; but, again, there’s no explanation provided.
What there is, however, is the suggestion that Elman might know a bit more about life, death, and the wider mystery of the universe.
Essentially, Elman returns to the mortal plane bearing a set of uncharacteristic gifts. First, he has somewhat magical knowledge of the identities of those in the syndicate who were responsible for his demise. Second, he can apparently convince them with little more than a stare for them to throw caution to the wind and grievously harm themselves. And third – while it’s even a bit more nebulous – he can’t be killed again!
Well …
The truth to The Walking Dead is that the honest limits of these powers are never quite sufficiently explained. In short, they are what they are only in so much as our hero Elman needs them in order to exact a measure of vengeance on those who wronged him in the process, so consider this some convenient spectral developments. While I would’ve appreciated a bit more by way of exposition or even the actor’s greater demonstrations, director Curtiz and his screenwriters think they’ve provided just enough to tell the story as is; and who am I to argue with that? Of course, it’s easy to see that Elman’s suggestions of his enemies’ doom is ample, but a bit of extra nuance could’ve easily been slipped in here and made this one even better.
The Walking Dead reminds me greatly of 1983’s The Dead Zone, a stellar adaptation of the Stephen King novel helmed by director David Cronenberg. In that story, Johnny Smith (Christopher Walken) is tragically put into a coma for several years; and – once he emerges – the man comes back with a unique gift of foresight as it pertains to touching others and seeing what Fate itself has in store for them. Naturally, this grants the man the ability to also change the future – when he meets a person destined for a dark turn, he can warn them – and that serves as the foundation for exploring the nature of his somewhat tortured existence. Similarly, Elman has gone to the other side and come back with these curious faculties, but The Walking Dead never quite hammers in if this was meant to be a blessing or a curse. Rather, his gifts simply are what they are, and he uses them solely to see that justice is served for those who did him wrong. While that’s understandably noble, it’s also a bit self-serving, leaving other avenues completely untouched as to whether or not Elman could’ve become a saint to mankind at large. I suspect not; but, again, there’s no explanation provided.
What there is, however, is the suggestion that Elman might know a bit more about life, death, and the wider mystery of the universe.
On more than one occasion, Dr. Beaumont implores the recovering musician to share with him what he either saw or experienced when he crossed over into death. Was Heaven real? Was there a long dark tunnel that ended with a blaze of light? Did he meet God or the Devil? (I’m inserting some of these ideas and not pulling any of this from the script verbatim, mind you.) Clearly, everyone involved in the creation and expansion of this idea recognized the importance of such an achievement; and the script touches on these possibilities in a few spots. Sadly, they just get dangling like carrots, never really giving Elman the chance to respond at any great length (he does say something, but I’ll leave that unspoiled); and I think, too, the picture could’ve been strengthened by giving us just a wee bit more than what they did.
As for how a Horror like this could’ve been made under Warner’s watchful eyes?
As I said above, The Walking Dead appears to be much more of a crime story in roughly its first half. The concentration is on the syndicate and their shadow business; it isn’t even until the second half that Elman finds himself railroaded behind bars and facing his ultimate demise. Given that the spectral hints are handled fairly lightly, I wonder if Warner was even paying close enough attention to realize what frightening or magical goodness he truly had on his hands.
The Walking Dead (1936) was produced by Warner Bros. Pictures. DVD distribution (for this particular release) has been handled by the fine folks at Warner Archive. As for the technical specifications? While I’m no trained video expert, I found the provided sights-and-sounds to this nifty little thriller/chiller to be exceptional across the board; director Curtiz and cinematographer Hal Mohr occasionally get high marks for utilizing some wonderful production design in key sequences, and I wish they’d done a bit more of that in the quieter moments. Lastly, if you’re looking for special features? Along with a few cartoons from the era, the disc boasts a documentary on Curtiz and not one but two excellent commentary tracks from film historians. This was a surprisingly good collection, especially considering the film’s age and relative anonymity.
Strongly Recommended.
While The Walking Dead (1936) doesn’t quite go far enough to explain the limits of the spectral powers that Karloff’s character inherits from his trip to the afterlife and back, the narrative sufficiently fills in the blanks well enough that audiences should readily grasp what’s going on. (Pardon me if I prefer a bit more specificity!) Karloff’s work is quite good – rarely have I seen him demonstrate this measure of sympathy – as are the faces of the criminal syndicate he matches wits against. Director Curtiz keeps this one moving at a crisp pace, making exceptional use of a lean and mean 66 minutes run time. If you like older flicks, then this one is definitely worth discovering, despite the fact that you’ll likely suspect it’s not as horrific as are a great many others in Karloff’s catalogue.
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at Warner Archive provided me with a complimentary Blu-ray of The Walking Dead (1936) by request for the expressed purpose of completing this review. Their contribution to me in no way, shape, or form influenced my opinion of it.
-- EZ
As for how a Horror like this could’ve been made under Warner’s watchful eyes?
As I said above, The Walking Dead appears to be much more of a crime story in roughly its first half. The concentration is on the syndicate and their shadow business; it isn’t even until the second half that Elman finds himself railroaded behind bars and facing his ultimate demise. Given that the spectral hints are handled fairly lightly, I wonder if Warner was even paying close enough attention to realize what frightening or magical goodness he truly had on his hands.
The Walking Dead (1936) was produced by Warner Bros. Pictures. DVD distribution (for this particular release) has been handled by the fine folks at Warner Archive. As for the technical specifications? While I’m no trained video expert, I found the provided sights-and-sounds to this nifty little thriller/chiller to be exceptional across the board; director Curtiz and cinematographer Hal Mohr occasionally get high marks for utilizing some wonderful production design in key sequences, and I wish they’d done a bit more of that in the quieter moments. Lastly, if you’re looking for special features? Along with a few cartoons from the era, the disc boasts a documentary on Curtiz and not one but two excellent commentary tracks from film historians. This was a surprisingly good collection, especially considering the film’s age and relative anonymity.
Strongly Recommended.
While The Walking Dead (1936) doesn’t quite go far enough to explain the limits of the spectral powers that Karloff’s character inherits from his trip to the afterlife and back, the narrative sufficiently fills in the blanks well enough that audiences should readily grasp what’s going on. (Pardon me if I prefer a bit more specificity!) Karloff’s work is quite good – rarely have I seen him demonstrate this measure of sympathy – as are the faces of the criminal syndicate he matches wits against. Director Curtiz keeps this one moving at a crisp pace, making exceptional use of a lean and mean 66 minutes run time. If you like older flicks, then this one is definitely worth discovering, despite the fact that you’ll likely suspect it’s not as horrific as are a great many others in Karloff’s catalogue.
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at Warner Archive provided me with a complimentary Blu-ray of The Walking Dead (1936) by request for the expressed purpose of completing this review. Their contribution to me in no way, shape, or form influenced my opinion of it.
-- EZ
RSS Feed