Part man, part special effect, the fiendish Calibos remains one of Ray Harryhausen’s most ambitious cinematic creations, as well as an unlikely template for many monsters who came after him.

Often regarded as Harryhausen’s masterpiece, ‘Clash of the Titans’ saw the effects wizard retire shortly following its release. Apparently, the father of ‘Super-Dynamation’ wanted to go out with the loudest-possible bang. As such, the film is jam-packed with iconic creations, from Bubo the mechanical owl, to the absolutely magnificent Kraken.

However, even among the movie’s menagerie of marvellous monsters, Calibos stands apart.

You see, Calibos is special, because Calibos is human. At least, he was.

In-story, Calibos is actually a demigod. His mother was Thetis, the great Goddess of the oceans, while his father was (presumably) a king. Thetis intended for Calibos to marry the beautiful princess Andromeda, whereupon he would rule the kingdom of Joppa and, eventually, all Phoenicia.

However, a life of luxury and privilege made the young prince arrogant, cold-hearted, and cruel.

As Zeus explains in the movie, “Calibos had every advantage! You (Thetis) as patron Goddess of the rich city of Joppa, have spoiled and indulged him since birth. You let him rule the Wells of the Moon, and what has he done? Hunted and destroyed every living creature! He’s trapped and killed my sacred herd of flying horses, and now only the stallion Pegasus remains. Your son must therefore be punished!”

In a simple, yet memorable sequence, Zeus then moulds a clay statue representing the dark prince into a new, bestial form, bestowing upon Calibos the monstrous, inhuman visage that will plague him for the remainder of his days.

“He will become abhorrent to human sight”, intones Zeus, “He’ll be shunned, and forced to live as an outcast in the swamps and marshes. He’ll be transformed to a mortal mockery, the shameful mark of his vile cruelty. This is my final judgement”.

With his outer appearance now reflecting the hideousness within, Calibos becomes overtly tyrannical. He proclaims himself king of the swamplands, and commands all manner of supernatural creatures in a nocturnal court that acts as a feral mockery of Joppa’s lavish palaces.

Andromeda then shuns Calibos (as much for his cruelty, and ever-growing insanity as his appearance). Incensed by this perceived betrayal, Thetis curses the princess (and, by extension, the entire kingdom). Since Andromeda refused to marry Calibos, the curse states, no other man may marry Andromeda.

According to the curse, any man may request the hand of Andromeda. However, upon doing so, each suitor is presented with a riddle created by Calibos himself. If/when the suitor proves unable to solve the riddle, he is burned at the stake - a torturous execution that the otherwise-reasonable people of Joppa reluctantly carry out due to their abiding fear of Calibos.

To impart these riddles, Calibos summons Andromeda’s spirit as she sleeps, trapping it in a cage held aloft by a giant vulture (another cool creature).

After losing his hand during an altercation with the hero Perseus (he replaces it with a razor-sharp trident - something that only adds to his innate coolness), Calibos desperately pleads for his mother’s assistance. Thetis cannot strike at Perseus, however, because the hero is under the protection of his father, Zeus. Instead, Thetis has the people of Joppa offer the princess to the dreaded Kraken as a sacrifice.

In his quest to rescue the princess, Perseus must triumph over the Gorgon known as Medusa, as well as 3 giant scorpions summoned by Calibos, and finally Calibos himself. Perseus ultimately defeats the former prince by plunging his sacred sword through the monster’s twisted black heart.

Unlike other elements of ‘Clash of the Titans’, you won’t find Calibos in any Greek myths. The character was created by screenwriter Beverly Cross, then brought to vivid cinematic life via the genius of Ray Harryhausen.

Although Calibos is an original creation, Cross took a lot of inspiration from Shakespeare’s ‘The Tempest’. In this classic play (probably written in 1610, or 1611), a character named Caliban, who is half-human, half-monster (as well as the son of the sea-witch known as Sycorax), is shunned by humans after he attempts to rape Miranda, daughter of Prospero, the exiled Duke of Milan.

This subhuman monster - one of Shakespeare’s greatest creations - shares many similarities with the cold-hearted, bestial figure of Calibos. Both are borne of magical beings associated with the sea, both attempt to force themselves upon beautiful princesses, and both are shunned by society as a result. Furthermore, both are subject to curses (Calibos by Zeus, Caliban by Prospero).

In a manner perhaps befitting the character’s hybrid nature (on both page, and screen) Calibos is something of a visual chimera. Obviously inspired by the satyrs that appear in Greek mythology, the character is also somewhat Devil-like. These Satanic undertones were never prominent enough to incur the ire of conservative 1980s audiences. However, they were probably detectable enough to keep said audiences slightly scared.

To create Calibos, Harryhausen constructed 2 intricately-detailed models. The largest one stood at around 45CM, and was fashioned from re-purposed parts of another Harryhausen monster (the Troglodyte from 1977’s ‘Sinbad & The Eye of The Tiger’). The smaller model was used for long shots, such as the scenes wherein the monster interacts with Pegasus, or begs Thetis to take revenge against Perseus.

In his autobiography ‘Ray Harryhausen: An Animated Life’ (a book I’m lucky enough to own an autographed copy of), the animator recalls the circumstances that led to Calibos’ curious status as half actor, half stop-motion creature.

“Throughout pre-production the character Calibos was to have been dumb. This was to avoid spending vast amounts of time attempting to animate the model to dialogue. However, just before the final shooting script was written, it was decided that he had to communicate, and after much deliberation the problem was solved by using an actor in Calibos makeup for close-ups when dialogue was required”.

This decision, borne of basic necessity, would prove to be the main aspect that made the character so special.

Actor Neil McCarthy was born in Lincolnshire, in 1932. In his youth, he was diagnosed with acromegaly, a condition that causes parts of the body to grow much larger than usual. As a result, McCarthy had a unique look and physiology which he put to good use as an actor, appearing in everything from ‘Doctor Who’ serials, and episodes of ‘The Avengers’, to critically-acclaimed films such as ‘Zulu’, and ‘Where Eagles Dare’.

McCarthy was known for his hard, angular features, as well as his tall, imposing physique. These attributes made him the perfect physical specimen to portray Calibos. Sporting prosthetic make-up created by Nick Maley (who had previously worked on ‘The Empire Strikes Back’), McCarthy’s granite-hewn cheekbones, and heavy brow were made to look all the more severe, and fearsome. The actor would have made a convincing monster had he never uttered a single line.

However, in addition to his unusual physicality, Neil McCarthy was also a versatile, highly-capable character actor. He was therefore able to imbue Calibos, not only with the requisite hateful villainy, but also with a sense of pathos that made the character so much more than just another movie monster.

McCarthy seems to have understood the character rather intimately, unearthing a sense of longing, and an abiding sadness in Calibos that is only hinted at by the script.

Calibos is a wealthy, exceedingly-handsome prince - a literal demigod, who finds in a single moment that everything that was ever promised to him has been snatched away, and given to somebody else. Cursed by the Gods, shunned by his bride-to-be, and exiled by the very people he was raised to lead, Calibos endures indignity after indignity. In the depths of this self-inflicted suffering, Calibos finds not humility (as his Shakespearean predecessor ultimately did) but only further motivation for hubris, hostility, and hatred. It is this, not his monstrous countenance, that makes him a villain.

McCarthy’s pleading eyes, and occasionally plaintive vocal delivery added an entirely new dimension to Calibos. No longer merely a ferocious monster, Calibos was now a wretched, contorted soul obsessed with revenge. Once McCarthy was added to the cast, the 3 elements of script, special effects, and performance dovetailed beautifully to create one of the most memorable movie monsters of all time.

As Harryhausen stated, “As it was the first time a Dynamation character had lines, I was a little apprehensive about whether or not the two extremes of model and actor would work. I needn’t have worried. Neil played the part beyond all expectations, and when seen edited together, Neil and the model blend perfectly.”

Sadly, Neil McCarthy would pass away from motor neurone disease just 4 years after ‘Clash of the Titans’ was released. However, McCarthy’s nuanced, deeply-felt portrayal of Calibos holds up even today. It still feels real, and believable to me, no matter how many times I re-watch the movie.

In 2010, a re-make of ‘Clash of the Titans’ was released. In this (frankly, garbled) retelling, Calibos is depicted as having originally been Acrisius, King of Argos, and (according to the myths) grandfather of Perseus. After he leads a revolt against the Gods, Acrisius is struck by a bolt of lightning from Zeus, whereupon he is deformed, and adopts the more-familiar identity of Calibos. The villainous creature ultimately finds himself in the service of the God Hades, and commits a number of evil deeds before being once again slain by Perseus.

In this version, actor Jason Flemyng performs the role under heavy prosthesis that covers most of his body. The film makes prominent use of CGI effects, but Calibos appears to be rendered via mainly practical means - perhaps a respectful nod in the direction of the original.

Actors in 21st century movies are regularly fused with special effects. Today, it’s a cinematic sight common enough that most audiences barely acknowledge it. However, whenever I see hybrid effects such as these being employed, I often think back to the marvellously inventive work of Ray Harryhausen, and specifically to the character of Calibos. In many ways, Calibos was a pioneer among movie monsters, and it’s doubtful that any number of later filmic creations could have existed without his trailblazing example.

Yes, Calibos was a monster, but he was also a man. He was a stop-motion effect, but he was also an actor imbuing a character with his own heart and soul. Ultimately, Calibos is as much a villainous tyrant as he is a cautionary tale. Drawing upon everything from Greek mythology, to Shakespeare, and even Satan, Calibos tugged at some deeply-buried cultural roots and, as such, got under our collective skin in a way that few villains have been able to do before or since.

© Chris Messenger. All rights reserved.

This article is FREE. Go ahead and enjoy it. If you like what we’re up to here, and you want to see more of The Spoook House, a subscription costs just £3.50 a month.

Subscribe now

Alternatively, you can visit Ko-fi.com/chrismessengercreations and leave me a small one-off tip of £3. All donations gratefully received.

If you were a kid in the 1990s, the chances are good that at some point you collected, swapped, and/or played with ‘Monster In My Pocket’ toys.

For the uninitiated, the ‘Monster In My Pocket’ toy line consisted mainly of small (‘pocket sized’) rubber figures depicting stylised versions of classic monsters from pop culture, horror movies, mythology, and more. If you ever wanted to play out a battle between, say, a werewolf, and a T. Rex, a cockatrice, and a manticore, a vampire and, um, a revered Hindu deity (the line featured more than one) these were the toys to (bug your Mum) to buy.

‘Monster(s) In My Pocket’ were available in multiple colours, a fact which reduced the number of duplicates you were likely to get. If you had The Mummy in, say, green (as I do), and then you got him in yellow, you had the option to swap one away for a monster you didn’t have, or team them up, or fight them to see which was stronger.

Even better was the fact that each monster came complete with a ‘strength score’ that was based on the creature’s intelligence, strength, weaknesses, speed, and range. So, these little ‘Pocket Monsters’ (oops, no. I shouldn’t say that. More on why later!) could battle each other in a ‘Top Trumps’ style game. The monster with the highest score won. It was really that simple. What more could any kid want?

…And don’t you dare say ‘an Xbox’, because those didn’t exist yet! It might sound adorably quaint to younger readers, but ‘Monster In My Pocket’ was state-of-the-art stuff , back in 1992.

As with so many classic toy lines, the story of ‘Monster In My Pocket’ begins in Japan. In the previous decade, Japanese kids had gone ‘banzai’ for a line of collectable erasers depicting characters from the manga and anime series ‘Kinnikuman’. Created by Bandai, these erasers proved popular enough that Mattel soon purchased the rights to sell the product overseas. The company fashioned hard plastic versions of the Kinnikuman erasers, gave them a vastly different backstory, and re-christened them ‘M.U.S.C.L.E Men’.

For a brief time, the ‘M.U.S.C.L.E Men’ line proved just as popular with kids in the West as it had in Japan. However, before too long, sales had started to slip. Was it the weird ‘off-pink’ colour they all were? Was it the hard plastic? I don’t know. I do know that, while I really liked M.U.S.C.L.E Men as a kid (and still have a precious few left over from childhood), I didn’t like them nearly as much as ‘Monster In My Pocket’ (hard to imagine, given what I now do for a job).

2 senior executives at Mattel (having had considerable involvement with the development of M.U.S.C.L.E Men) were Joe Morrison, and John Weems. In 1987, Morrison survived a freak rafting accident that tragically claimed the lives of several of his colleagues. This appears to have been the catalyst for Morrison to leave Mattel, and start ‘Morrison Entertainment Group’ (MEG). Weems went with him.

The first order of business was to try to create a toy line based on ‘Godzilla’. However, Morrison and Weems could not conceive of a way to make Godzilla seem big without making, y’know, a massive (and therefore massively expensive) toy monster. It was during this creative kerfuffle that Weems had a stroke of inspiration, why not make pocket-sized monsters?

Ultimately released by Matchbox (in partnership with MEG), the first ‘Monster In My Pocket’ series was released in 1990, and consisted of 48 brightly-coloured, highly-detailed figures. Characters included a vampire, a ghost, Frankenstein’s Monster, The Phantom Of the Opera, Charon the Ferryman, The Spring-Heeled Jack, a Witch, The Invisible Man, a harpy, a hobgoblin, Bigfoot, and oh-so-many more. Some of these could even glow in the dark!

Series 2 arrived in 1992, adding 24 new monsters, as well as a few extra colours. The second series boasted a dragon, a warlock, a Ymir, a swamp beast, and even the Loch Ness Monster.

Series 3 (also released in ’92) only featured 9 new monsters. Moreover, these were only available in participating ‘Big Boy’ restaurants, and as free gifts in special packs of cereal. Theese were never released in the UK, which makes Series 3 monsters highly sought-after among British collectors. As an aside, although we Brits did get ‘Monster In My Pocket’ figures in our cereal (I distinctly remember getting Elbow Witch, and Bloody Bones - two of my absolute favourites that I still have today), these were re-purposed Series 2 figures, not Series 3.

Like all good stories, the story of ‘Monster In My Pocket’ also contains a bit of mystery. From the beginning, each ‘Monster In My Pocket’ character was numbered (not unlike Pokémon other children’s properties of the time). So, Series 1 to 3 contained 81 figures in total. However, when Series 4 was released later that same year, it started from number 97. Numbers 82 - 96 are entirely missing from the series. To this day, no one knows which monsters they were going to be, although speculation among fans remains rife.

Demand from completists proved high enough that a Kickstarter campaign was launched in 2018 to allow now-adult collectors the chance to complete their sets. The project even involved sculptor Richard Rowland, who had worked on the original figures. However, the campaign failed to meet the overall goal, and had to be scrapped, frustrating fans yet again.

Series 4 contained 24 new creatures, and proved to be a departure from the rest of series. These figures were larger, multi-coloured, and far stronger (in terms of point score) than their predecessors. In many ways, these ‘Super Scary’ monsters proved to be the last hurrah of the original ‘Monster In My Pocket’ line. However, the series was far from exhausted.

Also controversial around this time was the inclusion of more Hindu Gods! People of the Hindu faith had bristled at the inclusion of the Goddess Kali in Series 1, they had protested (and gotten removed) the God Ganesh from Series 2, and they were therefore understandably quite pissed off when Series 4 included the God Hanuman! Yeesh, get the message, guys!

Series 5 focussed its attention entirely on bugs, while series 6 (which ruled, by the way) featured dinosaurs (as well as a mammoth, a sabre-toothed cat, and one very cool cave man). These figures were fashioned from harder plastic, featured brighter colours, and some even boasted a ‘Secret Skeleton’ mode that unveiled the dinosaur’s bones when the figure was wet.

Not to be outdone, Series 7 was centred around space aliens!

Series 8, in turn, re-branded the line as ‘Wrestlers In My Pocket’. Taking its cue from the popularity of the WWF and WCW wrestling promotions, this series saw the release of 45 new figures, each one with a cool, wrestling-meets-horror gimmick. These, too, were available in special packs of cereal. There was even a ‘Tony The Tiger’ figure.

Next, there was the ‘Sports Stars’ series, then ‘Ninja Warriors’, and so on.

Considering that these were unarticulated rubber figures (which weren’t even painted at first), it’s amazing that the line proved to be as profitable as it was, succeeding even alongside the all-time classic toy lines of the 1980s, and 90s.

In its heyday, ‘Monster In My Pocket’ was popular enough to produce a trading card game (not unlike another property I could mention), a Hanna-Barbera-produced TV animated movie, an album, an NES game, a comic book tie-in series (published by Harvey Comics, and created by the sterling team of Dwayne McDuffie and Gil Kane - I know, right?), as well as the absolutely magnificent ‘Monster Mountain’ display case.

But wait, the story isn’t finished yet! The brand once-again made headlines in the year 2000, when MEG sued Nintendo for copyright infringement. It seems that the company felt that ‘Pokémon’ (or, to give it its original Japanese title, ‘Pocket Monsters’), a game about carrying monsters around in your pocket, complete with numbered characters, strength scores (of a sort), miniature figures, and an attached card game, was too similar to the ‘Monster In My Pocket’ concept. They lost.

The decision was upheld in 2003, and that pretty much ended that. Speaking as someone who is old enough (and was therefore once young enough) to have loved both brands in their respective heydays, I never even noticed the similarities until conducting research for this article.

Since the lawsuit, there have been various attempts to return ‘Monster In My Pocket’ to prominence in the children’s market, none of which have been particularly successful. A CGI TV show was mooted in 2005, but ultimately wasn’t produced. This concept was revisited (even announced) in 2019, but seems to have since been scrapped.

2006 saw an attempt to re-release the toy line, with 48 new figures, most of which were detailed new sculpts of old favourites. While this new iteration did little to arouse the interest of today’s kids, older collectors happily purchased them, and they appear to be traded quite frequently online. The more things change, eh?

Today, MEG clearly still values the ‘Monster In My Pocket’ brand. However, the ‘In My Pocket’ concept has since been expanded to kitties, puppies, and, um, a jungle.

Sadly, Joe Morrison passed away in May 2025. However, ‘Monster In My Pocket’ will live on as an indelible part of 1990s popular culture, as well as one of the simplest, but most-effective big-selling toy lines of all time.

For those of us kids who had a taste for the darker side of things, had wildly overactive imaginations, loved comic books, monster movies, mythology and more - and would grow up to create horror-themed websites (or am I being too specific with that one?) ‘Monster In My Pocket’ proved to be our introduction to creatures like the dreaded catoblepas, the fearsome manticore, or the horrible haniver. For that, as well as a multitude of happy memories, I will forever be grateful.

Monster In My Pocket: They’re classic. They were awesome, and yes, they’re still squishy.

© Chris Messenger. All rights reserved.

Some images are mine, others were taken from an ‘Ecosia’ search. If you are the owner of one or more of these images, and don’t wish for them to be used, please let me know, and I will remove them.

This article is a free sample of the ‘My Favourite Monster’ series. If you like what you’ve seen, and wish to read more in the series, a subscription costs just £3.50 a month, and makes all Spoook House content available.

Subscribe now

Alternatively, you can visit Ko-fi.com/chrismessengercreations and leave me a small one-off tip of £3. All donations gratefully received.

“So, after nightfall, Grendel set out

For the lofty house, to see how the Ring-Danes

Were settling into it after their drink,

And there he came upon them, a company of the best

Asleep from their feasting, insensible to pain

And human sorrow. Suddenly then

The God-cursed brute was creating havoc:

Greedy and grim, he grabbed thirty men

From their resting places and rushed to his lair,

Flushed up and inflamed from the rain,

Blundering back with butchered corpses.”

- From ‘Beowulf’ (Seamus Heaney translation).

One of the oldest, and most important, works in Old English literature (not to mention my all-time favourite story), the epic poem ‘Beowulf’ tells the story of the titular hero, and his battles against 3 evil creatures. The first, and best, of these, is the monster known as Grendel.

We first meet Beowulf as a young warrior of the Geats (a Germanic tribe who lived in what is now Sweden). Beowulf is preternaturally strong, and eager to prove himself in battle. To this end, the would-be hero comes to the aid of Hrothgar, King of the Danes.

Hrothgar has erected a banquet hall, Heorot, which also serves as his seat of government. Heorot is the site of much feasting and rejoicing, until a monster named Grendel - who despises music and dancing - rises from a nearby swamp, and begins slaughtering (and devouring) Hrothgar’s men on a nightly basis, usually killing them in their sleep.

Grendel does this for 12 long years, until the great hall lies all-but abandoned. Upon Beowulf’s arrival, Hrothgar holds a feast in the young champion’s honour.

Grendel is once again drawn to the sounds of merriment, and attacks the hall under cover of night.

Although he is able to kill and eat one of Beowulf’s company, the hero himself proves too much for the monster. As they wrestle, Beowulf tears off Grendel’s arm.

Defeated, and bleeding to death, the accursed creature returns to his swamp to die.

In the second part of the story, Grendel’s mother rises from the waters, and seeks revenge for the death of her son. She too comes to a sticky end at the hands of Beowulf.

This epic (originally untitled) adventure story was written down somewhere between 700 - 1000AD, although it was probably originally recited orally before that. It comes to us from a manuscript known as The Nowell Codex. The events in the poem take place in the early 6th century - a theory given credence by the presence (or mentions) of contemporary historical (or quasi-historical) figures of that time, including Hrothgar.

Grendel is not given a detailed physical description by the poet(s). This has led to much scholarly debate, as well as numerous fanciful depictions of him, over the years. However, it seems fairly obvious that Grendel is intended to be very large (perhaps even a giant), as he is capable of snatching, and eating as many as 30 men in one sitting. He is also quite capable of smashing his way into Heorot using only his fists. After his death, we’re told. it takes 4 men to carry his severed head.

Grendel’s arms are said to be covered in iron-hard growths, welts, and spikes, and at least part of him is described as being scaly.

There are many different theories as to what type of creature Grendel was intended to be. The poem refers to him as an ‘eoten’ - an Old English term that has the same meaning as the Old Norse ‘Jötunn’, an elemental being, usually depicted as a giant, from Norse mythology.

The poem also refers to Grendel as a ‘pyrs’ (AKA ‘þurs’, or ‘thurs’), which would make him something akin to a troll. In Norse mythology, trolls were said to live in pairs, usually father and daughter, or mother and son (which could explain the presence of Grendel’s mother in the story). They were also sometimes said to dwell in bodies of water - just as the monster and his mother do.

The poem also hints at an origin of sorts for Grendel, describing him as “a descendant of Cain”. In the Bible (Genesis 4:1 - 16), Cain murders his brother Abel, lies about it to God, and is subsequently cursed, being ‘marked’ for his crimes. Descendants of Cain are all likewise cursed.

Scholars hold differing views as to the presence of Christianity in what is, essentially, a Pagan story. The likeliest explanation is that the Christian elements (such as Beowulf praying to God, receiving divine protection, and Grendel’s Biblical origins) are later additions, probably edited in by the monk(s) who wrote down the story. Although this may be vexing to modern readers (and Pagans!), it’s worth remembering that, if Christian monks had not preserved the story, it is entirely possible we would know nothing of it today - and an important foundation stone of English literature, and language would have been lost.

In addition, the Bible’s origins are manyfold. The weaving of these anglicised versions of Middle Eastern scriptures (themselves serving as links to other, older cultures) with similarly-anglicised Norse mythology represents a meeting of disparate cultures that’s at least as compelling as the story of Beowulf.

When I was first told the story as a child, I imagined Grendel to look a little bit like the Rancor from ‘Return of the Jedi’, albeit with shaggy fur. Another image that greatly informed my impression of the creature was painted by artist David Jefferis for the 1977 Usbourne book ‘All About Monsters’ (a childhood favourite). It’s by far my favourite image of Grendel, to the extent that I have used it as the cover image for this feature.

Grendel has menaced us in many different incarnations over the centuries (too many to list completely). In a 1999 film version of ‘Beowulf’, a post-apocalyptic interpretation of Grendel is said to be the son of Hrothgar, and can render himself invisible in a ‘Predator’-like fashion. A 2005 film, ‘Beowulf & Grendel’ seemed to suggest that Grendel was a wild man, not unlike a Woodwose, or perhaps a relict Neanderthal. In 2007, yet another ‘Beowulf’ movie depicted Grendel as once again the son of Hrothgar. In this version, the misshapen, deformed Grendel is born with an oversized, external eardrum, which is used to explain why he hates noise so much.

Various comic books have also used Grendel as a character. In writer/artist Matt Wagner’s series ‘Grendel’, author-turned-assassin Hunter Rose adopts the name of this fearsome creature to ply his deadly trade.

Marvel Comics features 2 versions of Grendel (that I know of). The first, ‘Grendell’ is the same character as the one featured in the poem, albeit with an expanded story that sees him survive the amputation of his arm, and (quite fittingly) become an enemy of Marvel’s Thor. Introduced in 2018, a different Grendel (this one with the conventional spelling), is an alien symbiote (of the same variety as Venom et al) that is dragon-like, and extremely powerful.

Not to be outdone, DC Comics have also featured 2 versions of Grendel (again, that I know of). The first appeared in a 1970s series called ‘Beowulf: Dragon Slayer’, while the second, introduced in 2009 (and again spelled ‘Grendell’) was the spawn of the immortal villain Vandal Savage. This version was later killed by Wonder Woman.

Even the Ghostbusters got in on the act, as ‘The Grendel’ battled Janine Melnitz in the IDW Comic book series. A parasitic creature that corrupts children, and was called ‘The Grundel’ also appeared in ‘The Real Ghostbusters’ cartoon series.

The ‘Final Fantasy’ video game series features ‘Grendels’ as a species of monster that the player must defeat in order to gain experience points.

The story of Beowulf is among the best known in human history. However, it is said that a hero is only as good as their villain. The fearsome figure of Grendel, then, must easily qualify as one of the greatest antagonists of all time. May he loom large in our collective imagination for untold centuries to come.

© Chris Messenger. All rights reserved.

Illustration Credit: David Jeffris, 1977.

This article is a free sample of the ‘My Favourite Monster’ series. If you like what you’ve seen, and wish to read more in the series, a subscription costs just £3.50 a month, and makes all Spoook House content available.

Subscribe now

Alternatively, you can visit Ko-fi.com/chrismessengercreations and leave me a small one-off tip of £3. All donations gratefully received.

“They are strapped into electric chairs and on their heads are metal electrocution caps with live, sparking electrical wires still attached. Twenty-five hundred volts of electricity shoot though their bodies as they start to break free of the leather restraints, trying to get at the judge” - Original description of the Scoleri brothers from the ‘Ghostbusters II’ screenplay by Harold Ramis & Dan Ackroyd.

In one of ‘Ghostbusters II’s most memorable scenes, the furious judge Wexler is sentencing our heroes to prison when his rage-filled diatribe is interrupted by the appearance of the ghosts of the Scoleri brothers - sibling murderers whom Wexler had sentenced to the electric chair years earlier.

As the script dictates, these two grotesque spectres (one morbidly obese, the other rakishly thin) are initially confined to their electric chairs. They soon break free from their restraints, however, and begin wreaking havoc in the courtroom. The terrified Judge has no choice but to drop the charges against the Ghostbusters in exchange for their saving his life from these undead fiends.

After being trapped by the Ghostbusters following a thrilling action sequence, the Scoleri brothers are not seen again for the duration of the movie. However, this pair of gruesome ghouls has remained popular with fans of the franchise ever since, making sporadic appearances in related media, and never straying far from the thoughts of those who saw ‘Ghostbusters II’ as children.

Originally conceived by Harold Ramis and Dan Ackroyd, the Scoleri brothers - canonically their names are Nunzio (fat), and Tony (thin) - were named for, and possibly based on, a pair of real-life criminals who assaulted Ramis’ father (at the time a Chicago storekeeper) decades earlier.

The real-life Scoleris of Ramis’ memory were possibly the same duo as Anthony ‘Tough Tony’ and Joseph ‘Eddie’ Scoleri, thuggish brothers who committed a number of armed robberies across America during the 1940s and 50s. Like their cinematic counterparts, the pair were also murderers, and were finally convicted of killing a store owner in Philadelphia, in the 1960s.

Industrial Light & Magic’s Tim Lawrence (who would go on to portray Nunzio in the film), originally based his designs for the Scoleris on The Blues Brothers. These initial ‘Blues Bothers’-esque designs were then revised by artist extraordinaire Hank Mayo (whose credits include designs for ‘Men In Black’, ‘The Mummy’, ‘Predator 2’, and ‘Dune’ among many others), with considerable input from Producer Michael C. Gross. It is here that the characters really began to take shape.

The Scoleri brothers left the page via costume designer Camilla Henneman, who created a fat suit for Lawrence to wear, taking influence from the music video for ‘Weird Al’ Yankovic’s Michael Jackson parody ‘Fat’. Nunzio’s bulbous arms were fashioned by Bill Foertsch. The finished suit weighed close to 36KG (80lbs).

Lawrence originally wanted Tony to be a puppet, to make him thinner than any human actor could conceivably be. However, when this proved unworkable due to time constraints, actor Jim Fye was asked to step into the role. Fye was already contracted to portray the Statue of Liberty in the film, and would also play the jogging ghost in the Central Park scene.

Tony’s skeletal torso was created by Bob Cooper, while Buzz Neidig added additional details to both costumes, including their jagged teeth, and surreal tongues.

Both characters were a mixture of actors in latex suits, and high tech puppetry. The brothers’ heads and faces were animatronic, while their bodies were moved by Lawrence, and Fye.

Separately, the actors were hooked to rigs, and hoisted above a sound stage, whereupon they were filmed in front of a blue screen.

The performances were then rephotographed on a rear-projection screen, which was reflected onto mylar that was then manipulated using motion-controlled rods. This enabled the characters to interact with the courtroom environment, as well as to stretch, and bulge unnaturally once they were fully integrated into the live action courtroom scene.

Although few details about the Scoleri brothers are given in the movie, later stories in other media have developed their backstory somewhat. In 2017, IDW Comics published a ‘Ghostbusters’ annual, in which we are informed by Winston that the Scoleris’ mother (known as ‘Mama Scoleri’) was “the brains behind a criminal organisation in Albany”. After her boys were executed, she is said to have died by suicide.

During the same courtroom scene described above, the comic book reveals that the ghost of Mama Scoleri manifested outside the courtroom, using telekinesis to attack two police officers who had berated Winston. In the story, Winston taunts her into attacking him, then traps her.

In a 2014 comic book series (which celebrated the 30th anniversary of the franchise), the ghostly brothers are seen alongside a number of other tormented spirits on Hart Island, after being once-again raised by Vigo of Carpathia.

Although they occasionally make sporadic appearances in other media, the Scoleri brothers are best remembered for their brief, but impressive, appearance in ‘Ghostbusters II’. They are not only a cool visual, and concept (electric chair ghosts having electric powers is unassailably awesome), they are also a triumph of practical special effects, as well as a testament to the ingenuity of ILM.

Have we seen the last of the Scoleri brothers? Personally, I very much doubt it. With new ‘Ghostbusters’ movies being once-again released, and the original cast only getting older (and deader - R.I.P Harold Ramis), producers are sure to eagerly grab at any/all recognisable characters from the first movie, as well as its less-popular sequel. In my view, this means that the Scoleris are sure to strike again at some point.

© Chris Messenger. All rights reserved.

For more, visit the Ghostbusters Wiki at Fandom.com. It’s an excellent resource, and really helped me put this piece together.

This article is a free sample of the ‘My Favourite Monster’ series. If you like what you’ve seen, and wish to read more in the series, a subscription costs just £3.50 a month.

Subscribe now

Alternatively, you can visit Ko-fi.com/chrismessengercreations and leave me a small one-off tip of £3. All donations gratefully received.

*** This ‘My Favourite Monsters’ Feature Comes With a Trigger Warning ***

Rarely does a movie monster instantly join the ranks of classic cinematic grotesqueries such as Frankenstein, The Wolf Man, and The Creature From The Black Lagoon. Freddy Krueger; fire-scarred bastard son of a hundred maniacs, is one such monster.

The undisputed star of the popular ‘Nightmare on Elm Street’ franchise, Freddy Krueger is a bogeyman with a difference: he invades your dreams to kill you.

This novel concept originated from the fertile mind of ‘Nightmare on Elm Street’ writer, director, (and horror legend) Wes Craven. Initially inspired by a series of LA Times articles detailing the mysterious deaths of young men who had passed away during nightmares, Craven would also look to his own memories to wrap these fears around a single human form.

As a child, Craven had found himself unable to sleep one night. Becoming aware of a low mumbling outside his window, the boy eventually plucked up the courage to peer out onto the streets below. There, he saw an odd-looking man, who stared up at him menacingly. Craven jumped back into bed, waiting for the man to go away.

After some time had passed, he looked outside again, whereupon the man (who had been patiently waiting for Craven) cruelly glared up at the boy, flashing him the whites of his eyes before ambling away. The delight this nasty old man appeared to take in terrifying a child would stay with Craven, teetering on the edge of his memories, before finding release in the person of Freddy Krueger (who was visually based upon the man Craven had once seen).

Craven was also mercilessly tormented by a boy named Freddy while at school. Now the monster had a name.

Read more

Easily one of the most recognisable monsters from fiction, folklore, or fantasy, Dracula is the most famous vampire of them all; a synonym for terror, and an iconic stand-in for all things horrible.

Dracula was the creation of Irish writer Bram Stoker, who introduced the character in his 1897 novel of same name. Dracula’s initial introduction is a masterclass in slow-burning horror. We first meet The Count after he traps young solicitor Jonathan Harker in his Carpathian castle, before leaving for England. While in transit, The Count mercilessly slaughters the entire crew of a ship called The Demeter, before casting his lurid gaze upon Harker’s fiancee, Mina.

Dracula sprang fully-formed from the pages of Stoker’s novel, leaping into the public imagination in a way that few characters had done before. Almost everything we associate with Dracula was present from that very first outing. He kills people and drinks their blood, lustfully stalks (then enslaves) women, shape-shifts into animal forms - and leaves a trail of corruption, death, and degradation wherever he goes.

Stoker’s inspirations for the character can be found at the intersection of history, and folklore. The name ‘Dracula’ (meaning ‘Son of the Dragon’) is drawn from real life. Vlad Dracula, who was later known as ‘Vlad Tepes’ (or, ‘Vlad The Impaler’) was a 15th-century Wallachian prince who cultivated a particularly fearsome reputation by impaling his enemies on spikes.

Presiding over a land-locked territory in the 15th century was a risky business. The threat of invasion was ever-present. Evidently, the Prince decided that having a reputation for being a murderous psychopath was as good a form of defence as any (either that, or he was just a murderous psychopath with means, motive, and opportunity). In any instance, Vlad Dracula became known for, among other things, boiling people alive, disemboweling them, and, according to some sources, even drinking their blood.

Stoker is also believed to have taken influence from the Irish legend of Abhartach, a Dwarf-King who possessed magical powers, and was tyrannical towards his subjects. After being slain (in some versions by Fionn Mac Cumhail), Abhartach is said to have risen from the grave, and become more bloodthirsty than ever. According to the legend, the mad dwarf-king was killed three times before finally staying dead.

Read more