The biggest mistake was the tone. These are monsters, not superheroes. A modern reinterpretation of the classic films from the '30s and '40s with the exact tone and atmosphere that those films had has so much potential for something fresh.
Yes. As a horror lover I was interested in the idea. I think Universal should again give it a try ;with of course learning from past mistakes. When superhero gener hasn't stopped making a Batman and Spiderman movie for 100th of time then why should something that so rarely seen be given up? Universal also has money and audience. So no problem in there.
Yeah, probably the best they could have hoped for was to make them all antiheroes of one sort or another. But swapping out the horror for just another version of the MCU or DCU was a doomed venture. Lightning doesn't strike thrice.
Around 2016-2017, I was an Uber driver in La, when I picked up this frazzled client who was on a conference call, explaining how “the film isn’t working”, something about how the director was green, and how “he (or) Tom is running the show now”, causing lots of turmoil on set, especially with the director. Years later, I think back and I can’t help but wonder if they were discussing the doomed production of The Mummy.
@@Bulletsandblockbusters The biggest issue was that they hired Popcorn action writers and producers to helm the dark universe As you said , they put known a listers as the monsters instead of lesser known actors and actresses in them roles and you're right making the monsters superheroes was a bad idea too And the people they got to helm the dark universe aren't really considered good ones in fact they both have been bashed by critics and movie goers for alot of the films they wrote and produced So why would Universal Studios decided to make them helm a horror dark universe? And then "Nick Fury" of any dark universe should of been Abraham Van Helsing , not making horror monsters "sympathetic" you already have the humans who have been killed by these monsters as sympathetic characters and Van Helsing being the protagonists It should of been known famous Indy horror filmmakers to helm the dark universe franchise
@@Chuck_EL Popcorn action writers ain't the problem. BAD writers are a problem, Kurtzman, Goyer and such. A good writer will do his research and will NOT write a bad script no matter how new he is to the material. And yes, unknown and lesser known actors would cut the cost for the studios by 50% at least. Enough with the glorification of a handful of people.
@@Chuck_EL - This is not true. Content is king. The concept, let alone the sole released project, shouldn't have been greenlit without a complete plan and, in the case of the film, script (that had been wholly polished and was known to be golden).
I think they also tried to do too much. If they'd focused on the mummy story and cut out a lot of the Russell Crowe/organization part, it might have worked better. It just felt like they were throwing in all these details and extra characters, which should have been introduced slowly, in separate films - like the MCU did with Nick Fury in post-credit scenes. Mind you, I do agree that Cruise was a mistake. It might have done better with someone younger, more believable as a romantic partner for the younger female lead or the mummy herself, and less 'fixed' in style.
Apparently, an earlier script for The Mummy was really good, where the protagonist was a Navy Seal with a black ops team and the Mummy was buried in Iraq instead of Egypt
I think they should have one set in the 1930s with a manly dude with a woman who is a bookworm and kicks arse with her comic relief brother. I the sequels they could cast an ex wwe wrestler lol
This just reinforces what I have always believed: 1.) The MCU is both one of the BEST and WORST things to happen to cinema, creatively. 2.) A-listers have too much creative control sometimes, and writers, directors, and producers should be able to do what they are paid to do and have been brought on for: to make a successful film. 3.) Studios are out of touch, and more creative minds need to be a part of the producing/studio process, like how James Gunn (a creative) is co-CEO with Peter Safran (an experienced producer) for balance or even John Lasseter (who was an actual animator) back in the day, heading Pixar.
Your third point reminded me of a quote I read from Christopher Nolan earlier this week. He essentially said Taylor Swift's concert movie is going to be a shock to a lot of Hollywood executives that an outsider could make so much money at the boxoffice. The part that stood out to me was that Nolan pointed out Hollywood execs being shocked. That's a key piece of information he felt the need to point out.
I agree 100%. You can cut the cost of these movies by 50% and more, if you get lesser known and unknown actors on board, god knows writers and directors ain't payed nearly as much as some of them are worth, meanwhile you got your Kurtzman's and Goyer's who will F up anything they touch, twist and pervert it, not even understanding they did it.
@4Everlast new and unknown talent is so important for so many reasons in front of and behind the camera. If for no other reason, than just to keep some people from getting comfortable in their patterns. I think some directors are at a point where their name on something is a detriment as much as a positive because half the audience feels like they're getting something they've already had before.
I would love to be wrong but I think DC giving James Gunn the reins as CEO is a bad idea. Creative people should not be in charge. Creative types need to have someone there to edit their work. The issue with modern studios is they edit too much, taking away the creativity that makes a movie shine. Really that is what makes a movie brilliant. The balance. But given the lunacy of James Gunn's announced DC slate, it is clear people are not stopping him and that will probably result in some truly bad movies.
@@dragonrings14 I do agree, but, there are always exceptions. We'll see, I'm sure the only thing they'll keep him in check with is the budget and the profit.
It definitely had potential, and there were some really cool moments. I just wish it was maybe 30 minutes longer, but that's coming from a massive fan of the historical Dracula.
@@houstonmunoz9862 I think a reviewer at the time said something like "Evans has the ability to recite comic book-level dialogue with Shakespearean gravity", but in terms of visuals, it struck me at the time that he looks like a more handsome version of the historical figure, so spot on with the casting.
@AgentGodzillaRP It has the same issue as Blue Beetle got , two great films but due to both Studios being tone deaf and trying to cash in on the MCU craze they lost that trust and people assume they're still trying to milk the "cinematic phrase" They keep sending mixed signals to us and won't give direct answers so now audiences won't see any films on the universal monsters or any dcu films It's gonna take a few years to get that trust back I said a while ago both studios need to butt out of let great horror and sci-fi minds take the helm
I was thinking the same thing , I personally enjoyed the last voyage of the Demeter and I think it along with Dracula untold and the wolf man (2011) would’ve been a great kick off to the dark universe.
The Dark Universe was always a heartbreaker for me, both for the Pseudo-Superhero direction they took and because it all fell apart so quickly. I often daydream about what might have been. If I had my way, these movies would be dark, gothic and moody. Not gore or jumpscares, but a slowly building dread. The throughline would be Van Helsing researching the cause of all these monster manifesting all of a sudden (Chaos, for lack of a better name). The finale would haven been Monster Squad for adults, with all the monsters returning and Chaos manifesting in the flesh. Van Helsing would have to gather the protagonists of the other films to deal with this final threat. Cheesy idea, I know, but it appeals to me.
@@scottblanco5991 they'd probably make dr frankenstein a longevity guru used by the elites. he'd be a mix between elizabeth bathory, bryan johnson (the fella who spends 2 million per year to reverse aging) and jeffrey epstein. the creepy thing would be that the elites use him but no one knows (like jeffrey epsteins mosad blackmail operation) it's be like 'hostel' meets 'eyes wide shut' meets 'the master' meets 'you were never really here'
Personally, I would have preferred a number of Stand-alone Films that present, at most, *hints* that they are set in a shared Universe. Perhaps a post-credits-scene here and there. If audiences had reacted positively to that, they could have went ahead with their Dark Universe plan *eventually.* Because, in all fairness, it is a cool idea. Ah, and I think there should have been a film centered around Crowes' Jeckyll/Hyde because, without a doubt, he was the best thing about the 2017-Mummy and I would have loved to see more of him.
He definitely needed his own film - his appearance in the Mummy just cluttered it up and broke up the main storyline. Trying to do too much, too soon, in one film, instead of telling a coherent story.
One thing Marvel did really well was loosely tie these stories together with the Tesseract. Pretty much all early Avengers characters had some relationship to it, even if it looked like they didn't, and they used stylistic effects to make it clear. The Arc Reactor and gamma research were based on it, for example. And you can see that in the big explosion at the end of Avengers looking like the sky beam in Captain America. They could've used some kind of immortality elixir, or at least the search for it, to tie these movies together since almost all of them have to do with gaining a stronger, longer lived body.
Agreed. I’m a big horror buff and was pretty excited that all these monsters were getting a reboot/have a chance to have modern effects and gore. It could’ve been an awesome horror franchise and could’ve allowed for some cross overs like Universal did in the 40s and 50s. But the idea of a superhero team is just silly. Makes more sense if they all were portrayed as a team of monsters/super villains albeit with tragic origins. Although now you’d have heroes banding together take down all your stars. Also it kind of just reminds me too much of league of extraordinary gentlemen. I’d still kill for some solid rebooting where the monsters could shine in the lime light again, with much stronger horror tones
My cousin had a pitch for the Dark Universe similar to that. His Mummy movie would've been set during late 1910s-1920s between Egypt and England. Atmospheric and slowburner. His Invisible Man movie would've set during 1950s Cold War, combining noir and horror, but heavier on the former. This one would borrow some convetions from movies during that period, also being black and white. I forgot his pitch on the other monsters though. But the monsters never get to meet. They're only related by worldbuilding, not by plot.
Marvel built their connected universe from the ground up, with a solid foundation. These other guys just tried to create the whole thing at once with nothing holding it together. I actually liked The Mummy, and I appreciated the fact that nothing in it contradicts the Brendan Frasier movies. In fact, there's an Easter egg suggesting that Cruise's film takes place in the same universe
Yeah, what made the MCU work was how willing Marvel was to building up the story & world over multiple movies, setting things up in the long run & giving fans the opportunity to speculate about what was coming next
@@NoahDaArk honestly it's just weird seeing it fall apart in its current: two flops, four razzie award nominations, two movies with bad RT scores, five of them having a B cinemascore (which is not something you do not want to have for a blockbuster, especially a super hero one) all post phase 3
I remember, and to my surprise, really wanting to see Johnny Depp’s version of The Invisible Man. That was the only casting choice that intrigued me the most for some reason.
Im glad they went the way they did and didnt have an A-list celeb star as the invisible man, it would have gotten the same treatment as the mummy and had a very visible johnny depp for 90 minutes.
If it was me running this universe, I'd just re-tell the stories with today's actors (I love Angelina Jolie as Bride of Frankenstein, by the way) and updated CGI. I'd even go as far as to make standalone movies first like they did in the '30s and '40s and then do the first crossover of Frankenstein Meets The Wolfman. I would also focus on the psychological aspect of the movies which is what these movies are known for and not try to make them into damn superhero movies. I love Marvel and DC movies, but these classic monsters need to be something different.
it crazy that Universal has been trying and failing to launch a monster cinematic universe by having all their monsters meet up when they already accomplished this with Van Helsing almost 20 years ago , I mean you got Dracula, The Wolfman ( two Wolfmen) , Frankenstein's monster , Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde and Dracula Brides all in this one movie, the only ones missing from this movie was Frankenstein's bride, The Invisible Man , The Mummy and the Creature from the Black Lagoon so if they managed to somehow fit these monsters in this movie or put them in a sequel that never happened then they would have had their cinematic universe decades ago
Yea I think the best version of a dark universe would be a series of films with Hugh Jackman’s Van Helsing facing off against one of the iconic monsters in each film
The main problem with The Mummy, though there's many problems with it, was too much setting up the future where the story was put on hold to show easter eggs like Creature From The Black Lagoon's hand in a jar and the scene where Russell Crowe turns into Mr. Hyde
@Bulletsandblockbusters I think what really worked with the original iron man and later phase one movies they primarily remained stand alone until the very end of the film
If anyone's interested in a real "dark universe" series then I highly recommend the series Penny Dreadful. A great gothic series with unique and close to faithfull adaptations of most of the classic Universal monsters. Also I'm referring to the original series with Eva Green as the main character not the "city of angels" reebot; just stay away from that one.
Oh man, I loved so much of Penny Dreadful; the first season was immaculate, and I loved the tone and all the actors. Unfortunately I felt that it really started falling apart in the last half of season 2 and I remember really disliking season 3. I think I'll rewatch it eventually sometime. I had the same issue with Hemlock Grove which I felt very similar about, that show feels very similar in tone, acting, and horror, but couldn't stick the landing. (That being said, I highly agree that Penny Dreadful is a fantastic "dark universe" and it's something I wish we had gotten from universal)
For anyone who’s a fan of TTRPGs like Dungeons & Dragons and wants a “Dark Universe” game more focused on being a monster in modern day I recommend Chronicles of Darkness and it’s gamelines. A modern day horror game where supernatural creatures like Vampires, Werewolves, Mages, Frankensteins, Changelings, monster hunters, geists, mummies, robotic demons, nightmare beasts, mutants and several other monsters hide in the shadows trying to survive a dark supernatural world. Every monster I listed has their own dedicated game and there’s plenty of opportunities for crossovers. If you wanna play an ancient powerful mummy waking up to serve a god, or a Frankenstein creature using its powers to become human this is the series for you.
Interestingly, the film's story can actually be seen as an allegory for Sofia Boutella trying to lead a Hollywood film, only to be undercut & overwhelmed by the veteran, big name actor in Tom Cruise and be regulated back to being a supporting actor in the end. It's truly a "Dark Universe" in Hollywood when the establishment can just shut down newer & smaller names in the industry, all because they have the power to do so.
The problem with The Mummy was Tom Cruise trying to turn it into a Mission Impossible spin-off and tuning the role into Ethan Hurt to suit him. His character isn't supposed to be the main focus.
Man i really liked dracula untold and im pretty annoyed they didnt do a sequel. It wouldnt even had to be dark universe sequel, just a luke evans dracula movie 😕
The idea of Dr. Jekyll creating a monster-hunting agency is legitimately awesome. And even though The Mummy wasn't great, I didn't think it was THAT bad and was at least curious about where they were going with it. Since Bride of Frankenstein was already so far into pre-production that sets were being built, I think they should've pushed ahead with that one, let it play out and see if there was any potential for upward growth, before panicking and pulling the plug.
"Dark Universe" was one of those franchises where as soon as I heard the concept and saw the publicity photo I though, "this gonna flop". Who the heck wanted to see a superhero horror monster franchise, and what possible direction could it have taken? Weird how studios that want to replicate the MCU missed the part where most of the main actors were either relative unknowns or hadn't been big names in a long time, as well.
Lest we forget films like League of extraordinary gentlemen, perhaps Hellboy? I definitely would love to see a more adult version or the monster squad, spread over a few films respectfully.
@@BigDaddyDiecast The Dark Universe was different from either of them. The problem was a) They wanted an all-star, A-list cast (which would have been VERY expensive in the long term and actually distract from the main story), and b). they wanted the monster characters to be the stars and for said monsters to be reimagined as anti-heroes. A more sensible approach would have been to just remake the old Universal horror movies with a smaller budget and lesser known cast and just bank on the name recognition and story appeal to grab audience attention, and worry about crossovers later. Making Dracula, The Mummy and Dr Jekyll into superheroes was just a misunderstanding of what they had, and wanting big stars just reflected a lack of faith in their own projects from the start.
Such a shame this never happened. One of the most anticipated projects I was interested in. Dracula Untold was a beautiful film that to me was building something so much bigger. Crowe's Jekyll/Hyde was a great tease of things to come. So we can essential blame Cruise for micromanaging this as a failure.
Anytime I hear someone call 2010's Wolfman "abysmal" or "awful" I'm pretty sure they didn't watch it. The Extended/Directors cut of that movie is great.
Three ways the dark universe could have been good. 1)If it had used The Mummy(1999) as its starting point. 2)If it had been a continuation of the original universal monsters continuity from the 30s. 3) If had taken the Avp or freddy vs jason approach. So the monsters get pure horror solo introduction movies and then the crossover movies are horror action extravaganzas. So the dark universe wolfman or mummy movies would end up being scary horror films and then when the audience sees the next film is titled The Wolfman Vs The Mummy they know in advance that its gonna be a bit tongue in cheek and OTT.
@@jgrAnimations23 I enjoyed parts of Dracula Untold and with some tweaks to a follow-up it could have been used as a springboard for a cinematic universe (ditto the wolfman reboot which I also enjoyed) but The Mummy (1999) has a lot more nostalgia and general audience appeal to bring to the table. Some people would have been excited for a dracula untold follow up but I can guarantee there is a large amount of casual movie-goers who would enthusiastically turn out if you told them universal was getting the mummy (1999) cast back for a bunch of movies. Also there's the bonus that they could find ways in the franchise to bring The Rock (Scorpion King), Hugh Jackman (Van Helsing), Jet Li (Dragon Emperor), and Kate Beckinsale (Anna Valerous) into the mix too. Neither Dracula Untold or the wolfman has that many big names apart from the leads that they could rope in to a shared universe.
I would rather rewatch Penny Dreadful than see Universal's Dark Universe come to fruition. PD did a great job combining elements of Dracula, Frankenstein, Bride of Frankenstein, The Wolfman and even The Picture of Dorian Gray. The only negative thing I have say about the show is its truncated final season ended right after introducing the Dr Jekyll character and before we got to see another character's trip to Egypt, which presumably would have introduced elements of The Mummy into the series. The show may have had a definitive ending, but it felt premature and I can only speculate as to why it ended when it did.
I was an Extra in London as one of Russell Crowe's armed agents. I saw Tom Cruise go crazy shouting at the directors & producers on set (similar to his covid mask outburst). In hindsight it's clear to see he was under a lot of pressure to try make this Dark Universe a success. He apparently invested a lot of money into it as well.
Agreed. I found it entertaining. But it came off as Ethan Hunt meets the Bride of The Mummy action flick, more than a true classic horror adaptation of "The Mummy".
personally I thought the Mummy was the best part of that movie, definitely needed more screen time, same with the Wolfman remake the story sucked but the Wolfman was horrifying just like people here are commenting these are monsters , hell that Sony Morbius movie missed that point as well make him a monster
What I still don’t understand is why not just make Tom Cruise a descendent of Van Helsing? Doing that cuts all the unnecessary work and streamlines it all. Say that Cruises character had spent his early life preparing for and getting ready for an invasion of the supernatural into our world, but he never believed in any of the things he was trained to do. He’s a sceptic, and after being the latest in generations of so called monster hunters not hunting or even fighting any monsters, he gave up on his “mission” years ago and is now just using his wealth and training to explore the world. He’s not a clear cut hero, he can be selfish, older even, someone who never settled down to have a family; because why would he need or even want to? He feels like a man born for a purpose that would never come to fruition and so he just does his own thing. If you’re so set on having a superhero figure in the universe, say he’s been like Batman but out of boredom. He wants to care, but doesn’t really know how to. His latest exploits with a gang of grave robbers and tomb raiders has lead him to Egypt where he sees a doomsday cult is abducting people to sacrifice in order to resurrect a mummy. During this Cruises character doesn’t know if what they’re doing will even work, but can’t just let them keep doing this to people. Eventually this mummy is resurrected and he has to use his knowledge of mummy’s and the supernatural to bury her in her tomb before she escapes the pyramid. During the movie he finds a sense of purpose and belief that these monsters are real and they mean serious business if not kept in check. Or more interestingly, at the end of the movie after the mummy is defeated we see that him neglecting his responsibilities for so long has allowed an ancient enemy to slowly regain his strength and is looking to return and now it is up to Cruises Van Helsing character to set the world right before this monster can become unstoppable. This monster is your Thanos of the universe, *DRACULA*
@Drums_of_Liberation Gothic romance doesn't mean monster-loving. It doesn't even mean the protag will pair with anyone. Look up Gothic romance: it's romanticizing the dark and "gothic", NOT a m/f romance set in the gothic period. The monster pairing was unique to shape of water. But I'd still call it a bit of a gothic romance based on the tone, themes, etc. Although it was an unconventional one... i brought it up because of it's similarlies and shared inspiration from the Dark Universe. Crimson peak was Del Toro's example of a traditional gothic romance
I wonder how the Dark Universe would have turned out if they had skipped the “team” part, and just left these monsters as partly evil, partly good anti-heroes. In some movies they could be enemies, in others they could be allies. Each movie could have a bigger focus on plot and stakes instead of just the bland Marvel heroes.
Let's also not forget that there were also the Hotel Transylvania movies. Even though it was for kids and families, the general concept was already there for modernizing the Universal monsters and proved to have been a popular approach rather than still trying to be faithful to their roots. Another factor to this was that all these characters were technically in the public domain, so many other studios were already doing their own spin on these well known monsters. Usually these new interpretations went in completely different routes that weren't necessarily aimed towards horror. Hence why we have a bunch of Halloween decorations depicting cheaper copyright free versions of these characters and see so many references to them in so many TV shows. I heard that we were going to get a Creature From The Black Lagoon remake back in the 2000s but we instead got Guillermo Del Toro's Shape of Water which is essentially that remake and what I consider to be another unofficial instalment to these recent attempts of a shared Dark Universe. With movies like Lisa Frankenstein and Nicolas Cage's Reinfield (which by the way, Cage certainly does look like Bela Lugosi, the 1931 Dracula), I've also heard that another Frankenstein movie is on the way that's starring Oscar Isaac and Andrew Garfield. It seems that there really is no interest in bringing back these characters for a shared universe like how it was back in the 1930s - 1940s and rather it's best to just do standalone funny parodies of these characters, as it has always been the case before the superhero cinematic universe of the 2010s. Curse you Marvel and DC. You destroyed Hollywood!!
Just hearing what could have been the Bride of Frankenstein sounds absolutely perfect. That entire ensemble sounds like a home run! But that’s what Universal gets for running before learning on how to walk.
These monsters don't scare us anymore; I don't think horror is the right angle with them, either. I'd take it into gothic romance :) Bram Stoker's Dracula (1992) is my favorite old monster movie because it DOES swing more romantic. And the mummy movies with Brendon Frasier were also built on a similar tone, though with more humor. The romance is the heart of both films and stands as a motivation. I would have hired Guillermo Del Toro to re-imagine each monster. He already started with the Shape of Water and knocked it out of the park!
I think that The Monster Squad was the last version we saw of the horror ensemble! I'd love an updated dark universe, just get the writer/director Leigh Whannell who did Upgrade and Invisible Man to plan it all out. Or, if Del Toro to do it, if he's already done the Creature from the Black Lagoon (in Shape of Water) and is making Frankenstein.
It was flawed but I've always loved 2010's The Wolfman; specifically the Unrated edition. Aside from the sequel tease at the end, it felt like it's own story and nothing more. And the practical effects still look amazing!
I hate that the MonsterVerse didn't work. The 1930's monsters are still some of my favorite movies of all time. The Wolfman, Frankenstein, Creature from the Black Lagoon, Dracula, Invisible Man, Mummy, Dr Jeckel and Mr Hyde, Phantomof the Opra, and others i missed. I loved those movies.
Shame that they didn't either stick with the Mummy franchise a cornerstone of a shared universe or just embrace the monster concept and ignore walking step-in-step in Marvel's shadow. I especially would've loved seeing Gary Oldman's Dracula in the mix.
Dracula untold was so good it was basically just castlevania lords of shadow and forget the monster universe, I would love to see a Dracula untold sequel.
The monster hero idea reminds me of the League of Extraordinary Gentlemen. Hiring Kurtzman is always a mistake. He has no clue how to tell a story. A well-designed horror universe with Universal's monsters would be very appealing.
Not only was the Dark Universe dead on arrival, but the fact that 2017’s Mummy started out with the words, Dark Universe, proved that it was desperate to start a franchise. That, and having Tom Cruise as the lead was not the best choice. At least the MonsterVerse started out solid then branched out, even though G’14 left no implications of any sequels. And, when it was at its peak, the MCU was fantastic with few duds. Just a shame that even the greats have fallen. Really, only the MonsterVerse has kept my attention as I am a fan of creature features. If the Dark Universe were to have any senses of fear and dread like the old Universal films, then look no further than Invisble Man and Last Voyage of the Demeter. No misunderstood monsters, no monster heroes, just monsters being monsters with themes and messages.
So if there were a crossover/team up what would happen? Would Van Helsing assemble, The Frankenstein monster, The mummy, The Black lagoon creature, The werewolf and the invisible man so they could fight Dracula and an army of bat people as they try to invade New-Yor- I mean uhh... Transylvania?
It really sucks that this big project died out so fast, makes you think what would have happened if they focused on these individual stories first before trying to intertwine a full universe, not to mention moving away from the traditional horror that each of these monster movies were so iconic for establishing. I do hope that Universal and Blumhouse are able to reignite this concept with the same vision they had in mind with “The Invisible Man”, especially with the reinvigoration of popular horror in the current film space, it would be awesome to see Universal’s Classic Monsters finally get a modern reimagining that pays real homage to their classic roots.
Really felt bad for Alex Kurtzman, he became the side director in his own movie.Felt like he was really sad cause universal almost promised him a universe and he failed at his first movie. Now i understand why marvel adds jokes in their movie cause the person who is watching it for the first time can't get bored.Dark Universe could have been the best francise because it was meant for the adults,and seeing the casting choice it would have been great.
The version of the trailer with incorrect audio was a masterpiece. The movie sucked, but that trailer, that was transcendent. They also made a weirdly decent contra clone based off the movie.
Ngl that wolfman transformation was always awesome for me. Movie wasn’t great but that transformation was fire. And the one at the end when he was frighting his pops.
@@revol2933 I have yet to meet anyone that has seen that movie and didn't like it. I honestly don't understand what went wrong with its release and reception.
@@Future_Imperfect from what I heard, people who didn't like it complain about the movie portraying Dracula as a "superhero" instead of a "real monster". Well, in my opinion this movie achieved perfect consensus between a protagonist who you can root for & fearsome force you wouldn't want to mess with
@@revol2933 That's interesting since it came out after Twilight, Interview with a Vampire and a literal superheroes Vampire Blade, with all of those being wildly successful.
@@Future_ImperfectYea. That's why honestly this whole "superhero" argument doesn't make any sense. Dracula Untold is just a great movie, with great story, acting and visuals.
I think they should do a legacy sequel to brendan frasers the mummy but now add Dracula and Frankenstein to the mix. Everywhere they go there are more monsters to fight!
I don't know if the whole "monsters teaming up as antiheroes" thing would have worked out as well as they hoped, but at least it would have been interesting compared to "Mission Impossible with a walking corpse"
As iconic and popular as Dracula is, I've always been a fan of Frankenstein's monster and have always been a bit disappointed how few films do him justice. While the monster started out as nothing more than a brainless brute, he eventually gained intelligence and cunning, coming to his father to make him a companion and hunts him to the ends of the earth when he is denied. It is a shame that one of his most faithful adaptations was from the Van Helsing movie mentioned in this video; I would love to see a version of Frankenstein being hunted by his creation.
Thanks for this. What a great explanation of the shenanigans around this subject. I'm looking forward to the Universal Monsters area at the new Florida adventure land. But I'm thinking they'll even mess this up and not use the screen characters of Karloff, Lugosi and Chaney Jr. If they go for their usual cartoony/stylized modern brand of monster design I'll be passing big time. I just hope at some point they decide to do the right thing and hire a writer that can shine love on these stories. I live in hope....
They should have borrowed from Alan Moore's League of Extraordinary Gentlemen and kept the story in the19th century, but where the characters take more time to establish before they finally meet. Moore included the Invisible Man, Hyde, Mina Harker from the Dracula novel, Captain Nemo and Alan Quartermaine.
I'm tired of everything being a "shared universe", but I think the Universal Monsters lend themselves to these for the reasons you list. I'd like to see them take another (better) bite at the apple.
Those Frankenstein & Bride of Frankenstein movies sound like an interesting modernisation that could have been genuinely great, especially with that cast
Dark Universe might have worked better if it just made standalone movies, with each 1 being about a separate monster with tiny allusions to show a universe connection, instead of having an overarching story over several films
Very cool story. I liked this movie a lot but I have heard how many people were disappointed by it and it’s true that it tried to do a lot of stuff really fast but it still had some good potential in my opinion. The dark monsters world is certainly one that I hope makes a comeback in the future. I feel that there’s still a lot of untapped potential here. Also I need to see Dracula untold for sure. It sounds awesome but I haven’t seen that one yet but great story though and once again it’s amazing to hear about another unfinished project!
These are our parents horror creatures, I'd rather see our Freddie, Jason, Michael Myers, Chucky, Tiffany, Leprechaun, Candyman, Leatherface, Pumpkinhead, Jeepers, Pinhead, The Tall Man, and every puppets from the Puppet Master franchise picking up from where Freddy vs Jason left off with Chucky and Michael Myers joining them after being summoned by Pinhead but without knowing their agendas, others will make the appearances throughout the franchise.
Universal Blumhouse's Monsterverse is the new Universal's Dark Universe! In fact, the 2020 film called The Invisible Man started the new franchise of Universal Blumhouse's Monsterverse
Dracula Untold should've been the beginning of the Dark universe they should've started slow with a trilogy. Then they would've built up a universe slowly.
As someone who loves the original Universal Horror movies, I would love to see them do a new universe as faithful as possible to the classic era. Now I know that a lot of things have to change in order to properly adapt these stories to modern day, but I would love if they stayed as horror films instead of action
I feel like a lot of these studios have never heard if it's not broken don't fix it they all seem to want to fix things that aren't broken and in the process then break Em
Stephen Somers nailed the 1999 Mummy reboot so hard that the nails came out the other side. Instead of trying to use big names and make super heroes, people are thirsty for unique, talented, and fresh. Universal has had so many opportunities to do this right, but they keep knocking themselves down.
I really wanted to see this come to life. But unfortunately it never came and probably never will which is unfortunately. Honeslty it should’ve never be another superhero universe, I think the superhero genre has expanded to the point where it has ruined other franchises. Honestly the Dark Universe which I think should been called the “Universal Monster Universe” could’ve been successful and they should try again with it but keeping the Gothic horror or Sci-fi horror like The Invisible Man from 2020. I think there are many directors and writers that would be perfect like Jordan Peele with Nope, Us, & Get Out, John Krasinski with A Quiet Place 1 & 2, Parker Finn with Smile, Leigh Whannel with Saw & The Invisible Man, James DeMonaco with the Purge franchise, Kevin Greutert with Saw X, Anthony Scott with Come True, Aneesh Chaganty & Sev Ohanian with Run. from 2020, Sam Raimi with the Evil Dead Trilogy & Dragging to Hell, Andres Muschietti with It & It: Chapter 2, Alex Hirsch with Gravity Falls, Lee Cronin with Evil Dead Rise, Tim Burton with Beetlejuice & Corpse Bride, Henry Selick with Nightmare before Christmas, Neil Gaiman with Coraline, & more. I don’t know about James Wan tho, he’s sort of been falling a bit. But I hope someday they try again #UniversalMonsterUniverse
The problem as I see it, with the Dark Universe, is that they were aiming for A-Listers. That was their biggest failing by far. I mean, they had a LOT of failings, but that, to me, was their biggest. Brendan Fraser wasn't near an A-Lister when The Mummy came out. Was he known? Sure. Was he A-Lister? Hardly. Weisz? Nope. Known, yes, but not A-List talent. Step One - They need to start at the bottom. Who to cast. DO NOT cast A-Listers. Casting them means that you have next to no faith in your team's ability to write something compelling, and then make it to film. Don't do that. When you write it, already have cast choices in mind for your leads. People who are just on the cusp of really breaking out. That way, they can be cast for multiple films at a lower rate. Take advantage of that. There's always a lot of up and coming talent available to choose from so choose wisely. Start there. Step Two - DO NOT WOKE UP YOUR FILM WITH YOUR CASTING CHOICES. Cast accordingly, not by using some ESG chart of checkboxes. STICK WITH WHAT WORKS. There's no need to reinvent the wheel. If you cast to check off boxes there's no need to proceed to step three because your film is gonna suck ass out loud. Step Three - Build a story around the casting choices you made. ONE story. Do NOT try and jam three or four narratives in one film. ONE story featuring ONE character. Easter Eggs? Sure. But entire narratives to build up a future movie or character? NO. DO NOT DO THIS. Tell ONE compelling story instead of trying to set up four mediocre narratives. Building an interconnected universe takes TIME. Look what happened to the DCEU. Failure. They tried to get their universe in 3 films. DO NOT BE THEM. ONE compelling story at a time. ONE character at a time. Step Four - DO NOT let your actors direct or write. Writers write. Directors direct. Actors act. Keep it that way. Find or build a great screenplay. Pick a character to lead the charge and stick with it. Plan the next 4 stories at least, with each story telling about ONE character. Your lead film will be one of the most important so you have to get it right. Pick your monster and run with them. Step Five - DO NOT pick a director/writer/actor who isn't a fan, no matter how much you may want to. The ONLY creds they really need is to be fans of the monsters themselves and know enough about the lore to be dangerous. TEST THEM. Don't take their word for it. If you hire a fan of the monsters to direct your crew, with a story written by someone who loves the monsters as well, you'll be looking at a golden opportunity. Anyone who isn't a fan of the monsters shouldn't be anywhere near your project in any way, shape, or form. They WILL poison your well. Find fans and you'll find success. Plan out the first 5 films, all one-offs that will ONLY HINT at future characters or stories. Give them only just enough connective tissue so that the audience knows that they will be part of a bigger body of work LATER ON. Much later on. Your sixth film should be an ensemble film. All the characters so far introduced together in one film and maybe introduction of one not yet seen. Remember that these are monsters...not heroes. They are the bad guys. Make them stay that way. People don't want to see a good guy Wolfman, or Frankenstein's monster. People don't want to see Dracula saving someone. These are MONSTERS. Treat them as such. If you want them to be tragic monsters, fine, but keep them monsters nonetheless. Who do we have: Van Helsing Dracula Wolfman Frankenstein's monster The Bride The Creature The Mummy Dr. Jekyll & Mr. Hyde The Invisible Man The Phantom Plenty of stories to tell. Plenty of characters to use. Plenty of worlds to build. There is no way that a universe can't be made. They only need to keep things rooted and grounded and stick to what works. Don't retell it. Don't "modernize" it. Don't "update" it. Stick with what works. These characters are beloved because their stories are timeless. As long as you don't allow all the cooks in the kitchen, there's no way this can't work. The reason it didn't the first two times they tried is because they had too many cooks in the kitchen and not one of them knew how to cook. Keep it simple. Keep it true. Keep it faithful. That's all your audience wants.
