..ruined the serious horror movies
"Shortly before his death, Chaney complained in an interview that the serious horror film genre had been ruined by Abbott and Costello"
Welp.....the reason why this doesn't make any sense is because the "serious" horror movies were already in a serious state of decline around the time of 'The House of Dracula' was released in 1945. And the word "serious" is used quite liberally. As much as I love the classic Universal horror movies, they were certainly done with a little tongue-in-cheek. Particularly as the series went further and further along.
After 'Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein' - I agree it pretty much killed any chances of going back and doing another "serious" horror film. Audiences already equated the characters with slapstick comedy. However, how much of a chance did they really have in continuing the series anyway?
I think looking back, 'Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein' is a satisfying "bow-out" for the franchise/characters - rather than just fading into obscurity. Hell, it even gave us the one and only opportunity to see Bela Lugosi return as Dracula. For whatever he may have said, I'm glad Lon Chaney agreed to do it because he obviously is the one and only Wolf Man and this film has an important part in the Universal horror legacy.
They may have even gone overboard with the Abbott and Costello films after the success of this one, but this one will always be a classic.
I don't know how this film affected things much really.
Anyway, there was another series of Frankenstein films with Peter Cushing that alone suggests there was some life yet in traditional horror films.
[deleted]
'Hell, it even gave us the one and only opportunity to see Bela Lugosi return as Dracula. For whatever he may have said, I'm glad Lon Chaney agreed to do it because he obviously is the one and only Wolf Man and this film has an important part in the Universal horror legacy.'
This is very true.
[deleted]