Universal's new Epic Universe theme park opens on My 22nd and is still under construction.

This will be the Universal equivalent of Disney's magic kingdom with five themed "universes" inside it, including the "Dark Universe" themed to the classic Universal monsters all year long instead of relegating them to just Halloween novelties.

Dark Universe will feature a new dark ride / haunted house attraction called Monsters Unchained: The Frankenstein Experiment.

The ride is going feature several animatronics of the classic Universal monsters including the Frankenstein monster (new version, loosely Karloff inspired), Wolf-Man (2010 depiction), Gill Man (Creature from the Black Lagoon, original version but with claws and teeth), and Dracula. Possibly also the Invisible Man but I haven't seen him (Badum tiss). The mummy seems to be conspicuously missing, possibly because of the 2017 film failure.

The intention is that this will be Unviersal's more scary answer to Disney's Haunted Mansion. It will feature music by composer Danny Elfman and new, advanced animatronic monsters.

This article features the first images of the attraction's fascade, which are impressive.

My problem with the new Wolfman

I already disliked the new Wolfman from the trailers. It looked cheap and even like it might rip off The Beast Within (a werewolf movie that came out about six months ago). Warning: There are spoilers below.

The "surprise reveal" about the protagonist's father was no surprise at all. As soon as it was confirmed the father went missing I knew precisely what was to follow. This was no Wolfman. It was closer to The Beast Within merged with the Jack Nicholson movie, Wolf. The protagonist isn't even Lawrence Talbot. Much like Blum House's Invisible Man it has almost no connection to the original story except there's a werewolf just as with Invisible Man there was a man who became invisible- it was closer to Hollow Man merged with a Lifetime original movie, by the way. I know many loved it but it wasn't to my taste. To me the biggest short coming of this Wolfman, besides the limited budget, is that they sucked all the magick from it. The werewolfism of The Wolf Man franchise always spread like a disease from scratch or bite or both, but this one took it too literally with the new annoying body horror of fingernails and teeth falling out, a trend that I find gross and annoying, but not scary. He does become more beast-like but it has no connection to the full moon, nor does he become an actual wolf, and he obviously can't shift back into the form of a man. They made it more like a debilitating virus. The romanticism is gone. The magick is gone. There's no warding off the werewolf or staving off the transformation with a pentacle. There's no fortune telling. There's no use of silver as a mystical protection. They sucked the supernatural from it. It now feels more scifi, like a slightly re-written Cabin Fever. It looks more like an actual diseae. There's no Gothic ambiance. There's something drab, dreary, and tired in the symbolism Blum House chooses for its monsters. They take away atmosphere, mystery, and charm, and replace it with unimaginative, modern, tropes of de-mystifying everything. Can you tell I'm not a Blum House fan? The 2010 Wolfman was far superior and respectful remake of the 1941 classic. At least they had Rick Baker and a sense of atmosphere. Universal, bring back the Gothic ambiance, the period settings, and above all else, let the supernatural be supernatural. Give us back the "only can be killed by silver" and warded off by pentacles, werewolves.

Someone finally asked me the golden question. How would I have handled Universal's Dark Universe.

Disclaimer: If someone sees this and likes my ideas, you may use them for free. No consultation or acknowledgement required. Just do justice to my boo boys.

Well, I would stop so blatantly trying to make it the MCU. It's not the MCU. And don't be afraid of a little camp. These are the classic monsters after all.

Time period. Start in the past and then WORK your way to the present. Don't force all of it to be set in the present from the get go. Let the audience feel and understand these are immortal beings. You can even make it a surreal, timeless, fairy tale-like setting that just resembles the nineteenth century. Most people use generic medieval for fantasy settings but Gaslamp fantasy is a thing.

2. Start with the most well-known of the monsters. Do Dracula. It can be a book faithful adaptation, or something along the lines of Bela Lugosi or Frank Langella. I think general audiences like Dracula to be fierce and predatory but also somewhat romantic, that's why the Mina / Dracula romance has endured even though it deviates heavily from the novel. So let Dracula be romantic but do something unexpected and fresh with it.

Honestly I'd love an adaptation of Fred Saberhagen's The Dracula Tape (Dracula retold from Dracula's point of view). But I know they'd want to stick with the public domain version.

Let Dracula have his literary powers to take wolf, bat, and mist form, and conjure storms. Let him be able to walk by day but not able to shapeshift by day. Bela Lugosi's version didn't actually burn in the sun until the sequels anyway and that was only from mimicking Nosferatu (1922).

Either leave out the reincarnated wife concept all together or let the reincarnation be someone other than Mina. Dr. Van Helsing (a male or female version) or even Jonathan Harker could make for an interesting twist. Lots of depictions of Dracula are bisexual now and this would be something fresh for the universal version.

3. When doing Frankenstein stop trying to recreate the Karloff version "for modern audiences." Let's try the literary version for a change. Long black hair, no neck-bolts or green skin, let him be articulate. And don't go for "steampunk action figure. " (I'm looking at you, Van Helsing.)

Let each classic monster have their own setting and time period. Dracula gets 1891 since that's when his novel takes place, unless you do a fifteenth century origin or fifteenth century flashbacks in the nineteenth century. Frankenstein is late eighteenth century or very early nineteenth century.

You can get more free with the concept if you do a Frankenstein sequel. Think 1985's The Bride but the male creature is intelligent and articulate too.

4. With Wolfman go old school. Practical effects in the style of Rick Baker. Get Guerrero del Toro involved with these somehow. That man knows how to handle classic monsters. Remember the rules, and acknowledge that he's mostly immortal and can regenerate. Everyone forgets this.

5. Have Danny Elfman do the music. I know he's already doing the Dark Universe park music but let him do ALL the music. Trust the man. Have you heard his score to Sleepy Hollow? Just let him do his thing.

6. Don't treat each film like a commercial for the next or hinted team up. Just let the films be able to stand on their own at first. That's how the Uniersal Monster movies started originally. You can let one or two characters turn up in multiple films but don't be ham fisted about it like with some of what was in 2017's The Mummy.

7. When you finally do allow the team up go watch the Asylum's Monster Mash (2024) first.

I'm serious. Hell, buy the movie from The Asylum to do a high budget remake but add about twenty minutes to it so The Creature from the Black Lagoon can be added too. It's cheesy but its fun. Let them be dysfunctional would-be heroes. Let have What we do in the Shadows-like moments without being too cynical and insulting and mocking the very idea.

By this point you already made the monsters scary but with some potential for redemption, compassion, and tenderness. Let them organically evolve from brooding villains and anti-heroes to surprisingly competent heroes but let it happen organically.

You can even get organic diversity. The mummy is from Egypt (North Africa), the witch is Roma (and possibly a previous lover of Dracula's daughter), The Creature from the Black Lagoon is from South America, etc. Again, get Guillermo del Toro involved. The Shape of Water was pretty much Creature from the Black Lagoon with a happy ending for The Creature anyway. An Abe Sapien-esque version of The Creature from the Black Lagoon would be great.

I forgot to say who the main antagonist would be in my version of The Dark Universe. Possibly a mad scientist like Doctor Moreau, Doctor Pretorius, or a faction of vampires who want to dethrone Dracula from his self-appointed title as king of the vampires. There's nothing in Stoker's novel or the Universal movies that claim he's the first vampire but he's commonly depicted as king of the vampires simply because no one had thought to unite and lead all of them until him.

The Universal Monsters Shared Universe

Recently I have seen the very ill-informed argument that The Universal Monster movies do not have a shared Universe.

The universal Monster movies were most assuredly a shared universe.  Yes, on occasion they changed actors but the continuity was there.  You see if you watch them in chronological order.  

The events of Frankenstein meet the Wolfman are supposed to be after the events of Ghost of Frankenstein (fourth Frankenstein movie) and The Wolfman.  Lawrence is still played by Lon Caney Jr.  And Maleva the gypsy is played by her original actress too.  

Yes, the Frankenstein Monster's actor was changed but for an in-story reason.  At that point it wasn't the Karloff creature anymore anyway.  The brain was swapped with Ygor (Bela Lugosi) at the end of Ghost of Frankenstein, making it a whole new creature.  In fact the brain transplant was supposed to have blinded The Creature, that's why his arms were always out stretched in that movie (the first time The Frankenstein monster does this).

Marvel didn't even explain how Edward Norton became Marc Ruffalo yet Marvel DOES count the 2008 Incredible Hulk movie as canon to the current shared Marvel universe.  You see Robert Downey Jr. as Tony Stark at the end of it.  So using the argument of "Doesn't count because different actors" is kind of invalid.  

Universal's Monster movies tried to use the original actors whenever possible.   Lon Chaney Jr. was the Wolfman five times, Maleva the gypsy was the same actress twice.   The same Frankenstein and his creature twice.  And the only reason they wrote around Henry Frankenstein (It's Victor in the original novel) was because the original actor died painfully of Tuberculosis. Even Dracula's Daughter begins exactly where the 1931 Dracula ends with poor Professor Van Helsing accused of murder after Renfield's body is found at the bottom of the stairs.   Same Professor Van Helsing as well.

Even Abbott and Costello are part of the shared Universal Monster movie universe continuity. There are specific references to previous in-story events such as Lawrence getting cured of his werewolfism in one of "the House of" movies only to be infected with werewolfism yet again.  

If you watch the Universal Monsters Legacy Collection box set in chronological order you do see the coherent continuity narrative which is actually much more well established than some of Marvel.

The Universal monster movies most assuredly did have a shared universe and if you watch them in order there is a continued coherent continuity.  If you aren't familiar with it. Do. Not. Lie.

Even before The Universal Monster movies there were experiments with shared universes with Penny Dreadfuls and literary authors such as the creator of Lupin by Maurice Leblanc who desperately wanted to do a cross over with Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's Sherlock Holmes but was never allowed.

Universal Monsters = First shared film universe.

First shared comic book universe was technically Marvel though DC comes very close.

First shared literary universe - Certain pre-twentieth century Penny Dreadfuls.

First desired shared literary universe - Lupin and Sherlock Holmes.  

And if you REALLY want to get into it Greek / Roman mythology had the first shared continuity with several interconnecting plots and characters and cross-overs- the events of the Persephone and Hades story effect the Cupid and Psyche story and Prometheus' story affects Pandora.   The Norse myths did the same with it's heroes and monsters.  Events from one story carry over into another and characters from different stories would meet, this is not as new a concept as you think.

- Sincerely,  

    Someone who has actually watched / read the classics.

What I want from m Monsters

I want Guilleermo delo Toro to make a faithful adaptation of Frankenstein with an intelligent version of The Creatures sans flat or bald head with neck bolts.  Make him well spoken, not inarticulate or sounding like a stroke victim.  The creature was intelligent in the book and I want that version to properly enter the cultural collective, not just the odd one out in things like Penny Dreadful.  Let Mary Shelley's version live.

I'm nervous. I don't think the current heads of Universal respect or appreciate the classics or their original atmosphere and ambiance. In example look at the 2004 Van Helsing or more recently NBC's God-awful Dracula and the upcoming Syfy Van Helsing series (Syfy is owned by NBC / Universal). They just want to cash in on an old film trend rekindled by the Marvel franchise and they are even now fixating on the concept of "Goth action" indicating that they learned nothing from the 2004 Van Helsing movie.

And there’s also the dread that they have such little faith in these characters standing on their own merit they will all “coincidentally” all have October “seasonal” releases as Dracula Untold did. Never mind the best Dracula films were released in November (Bram Stoker’s Dracula), July (Frank Langella Dracula), and February (1931 Dracula)

The problem is when a horror film is released in October you're essentially giving it an orange and black crutch. It's indicating that without Halloween people might not be interested in seeing it. When a horror film gets a November or especially a summer release that shows confidence in it as being more than a seasonal novelty. This was the mistake they made with Crimson Peak. It could have held it's own as a June release but no one trusted it and it became a victim of Halloween horror market over saturation.

http://www.ign.com/articles/2015/11/17/universal-monsters-reboot-to-explore-family-identity?+hub+page+%28front+page%29&utm_content=6

The Return of the Universal monsters

I'm nervous.  I don't think the current heads of Universal respect or appreciate the classics or their original atmosphere and ambiance.  In example look at the 2004 Van Helsing or more recently NBC's God-awful Dracula and the upcoming Syfy Van Helsing series (Syfy is owned by NBC / Universal).   They just want to cash in on an old film trend rekindled by the Marvel franchise and they are even now fixating on the concept of "Goth action" indicating that they learned nothing from the 2004 Van Helsing movie.

http://variety.com/2015/film/news/universal-monster-movies-mummy-dracula-frakenstein-1201642140/

Van Van Helsing?!  Seriously!?

I like the idea of Abraham Van Helsing having a daughter, that's fine to me.   But to set it five years after vampires have taken over the world and the daughter being named Vanessa...  Come on!  "Van Van Helsing."    This reeks of cheese.   And not necessarily the fun kind.

Also why is there a picture of Gabriel Van Helsing on this article when she's the daughter of ABRHAM Van Helsing.  Research, folks.  Research is your friend.

 http://bloody-disgusting.com/news/3368477/syfy-is-going-monster-hunting-with-van-helsing-and-his-daughter-vanessa/