Empire UK

A Brief

History

Of Igor

THE EVOLUTION OF THE

HORROR GENRE’S

UBIQUITOUS ASSISTANT

MARY SHELLEY’S FRANKENSTEIN

worked on his own. Adaptations

beginning with the first stage

version have given him a minion

to handle grave-robbery chain-

hauling and switch-throwing. And

to make some Frankensteins more

sympathetic some of said minions

have undercut their efforts by

supplying the abnormal brain or

tormenting the creature to the

point it becomes murderous.

In James Whale’s Frankenstein

(1931) dwarf assistant Fritz is

played by Dwight Frye who carried

over the cringing and cackling from

his star-making turn as Renfield in

Tod Browning’s Dracula. Frye was

back as another minion in Bride Of

Frankenstein. Then Bela Lugosi

took over as broken-necked (not

hump-backed) shepherd Ygor in

1939’s Son Of Frankenstein. One of

Lugosi’s best roles Ygor is a sly

sinister manipulative character

rather than a pathetic foil.

The name Igor first arose in

Mystery Of The Wax Museum

(1933) where Lionel Atwill plays

mad sculptor Professor Igor but the

notion that most minions are called

Igor comes from the remake of

House Of Wax (1953) which sees

Charles Bronson play Vincent Price’s

mute sidekick Igor. Marty Feldman

parodied the role to perfection as

the Igorwith the changeable hump

in YoungFrankenstein (1974). Other

Igors feature in Dr Goldfoot And

The Bikini Machine (1965) 1995’s

Monster Mash: The Movie and the

2008 ’toon pic Igor.

Like Victor Frankenstein The

Hunchback Of The Morgue (1973)

starring Spanish horror icon Paul

Naschy as Gotho is a rare horror

film told from the point of view of

its ‘Igor’ character — the abused

minion of a callous mad doctor.

KIM NEWMAN H

BRIEFING

VICTOR

FRANKENSTEIN

RELEASED:December 4

DIRECTOR:Paul

McGuigan

STARRING:James

McAvoy Daniel

Radcliffe Andrew Scott

Guillaume Delaunay

STORY:Not Mary

Shelley’s Frankenstein

but Igor’s Frankenstein:

the story of the Doctor

(McAvoy) as told from

the perspective of his

troubled assistant

(Radcliffe).

WHAT HUMP?Precisely.

If Radcliffe is looking

a bit straight-backed

there’s a good reason:

his pal Victor de-humps

him early on in the story.

Radcliff e: You don’t often get that
chance. Paul was very good at making
sure we got that time ’cause we were
all in New York together fortuitously.
You never normally get that on fi lms
particularly for some reason fi lms of
this size. Which makes no sense as how
a little bit of rehearsal wouldn’t help
everybody get on the same page...
McAvoy: And we really did we managed
to get on the same page in terms of the
intent of the piece so that when we did
come together — or when were apart
more importantly — in the movie we
sort of knew what kind of tone and
tempo we were carrying.

Do you both really miss that from the
stage when you’re doing fi lm work?
McAvoy: Yeah defi nitely. I don’t know
how you feel Daniel but — to get wanky
about it — you’re still unlocking the
mysteries of the play even in the last
performance 150 shows in you know?
Radcliff e: Right. You get the chance
to refi ne and go back over a moment
whereas once something ’s done on
fi lm it’s done.

You’ve both returned to play

the same character on screen: how

does that change as you go along?

Radcliff e: Well for me it was defi nitely a

diff erent thing ’cause I was just growing

up and had not really played a huge

amount of other characters. And I was

also very lucky in that because every

book was a year in the future the

character did naturally change as I was

changing. There was never a point where

I felt like I was outgrowing it or vice

versa. It certainly didn’t feel weird it

just felt like the most natural thing in the

world to keep coming back and doing it.

McAvoy: I think it’s gotten easier for

me. One of the things Simon Kinberg

who writes and produces for us says

which makes me feel good about what

we’re doing is that nobody understands

the characters like we all do. And it’s

kind of true you look at the work that

Jen (Lawrence) and Nick (Hoult) and

Michael (Fassbender) do and they’re

so comfortable in the skins of those

characters. And I feel like that within the

skin of my character as well now. Even

though he’s quite a diff erent person from

the fi rst movie to the second movie and

defi nitely to this movie he’s still the

same guy. And that repetition of the

man you’re playing and the same story

running through the whole thing in

those three movies is a pleasure and

something I’ve never had the experience

of doing in movies. It’s good.

Here you’re taking iconic characters

and remixing them in a way — how

did that work?

Radcliff e: We know that in making

a Frankenstein movie there are certain

things you have to pay homage to and

there are certain things you have to

include. With Igor I didn’t feel like I had

to give him a silly accent and voice even

though I know that’s one of the things

that comes to mind. I think for a whole

fi lm that’s not a comedy that might not

be sustainable. But with the physicality

I know that is something people think

about. And I really like the fact the script

fi nds a way to include that fi nds a way of

having its cake and eating it by having

me be hump-backed at the beginning

and then having James correct that.

McAvoy: With Victor you’re dealing with

somebody who is utterly obsessed. So

he’s on the edge at all times. The movie

starts at a circus and I feel like that sort

of aesthetic even though it’s only for the

fi rst fi ve or ten minutes is carried on

through the whole movie — a little bit of

freakishness has gone through the whole

movie in terms of design. Looking at