Here we have yet another Universal Monster crossover, but this one isn't quite as good as previous ones. At this point, things are officially old and predictable, and as a result we'd soon get 'Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein' in a straight up parody. The crossover is pretty much the same as last time, as we get Dracula, The Wolfman and Frankenstein's monster; who has now been well-established as more or less immortal. Beyond that, we get a doctor and his hunchbacked assistant because for whatever reason, assistants have to be hunched. At least this time the original take is that she's a woman. Dracula (John Carradine) comes to the home of a Dr. Franz Edelmann (Onslow Stevens) in the hopes that he can cure him of his vampirism. Agreeing to help, along with his assistants, Milizia (Martha O'Driscoll) and the hunchbacked Nina (Jane Adams) he comes up with something he may think help, involving blood transfusions, using himself as the guinea pig. Meanwhile, Dracula crashes in his basement during the day because he just so happens to have his own coffin down there. Soon, Larry Talbot (Lon Chaney Jr.) comes to the castle seeking help from the doctor to cure his animalistic condition as well. In desperation, he gets himself incarcerated by local police so he can prove that night, by the light of the full moon, that he changes into a werewolf. As per usual, he lives with the fear and torment of basically being taken over by the wolf and killing innocent people. When Edelmann tells Talbot that he'll have to be patient, Talbot attempts suicide by jumping off a nearby cliff. He survives, however, and Edelmann finds him in a cave along with Frankenstein's monster (Glenn Strange) who he brings back to his laboratory basement. While trying to help the two monsters out of their respective curses, however, Edelmann finds that Dracula's blood starts to change him to a man of evil. This adds yet another monster to the bunch; a monster who may very well be willing to resurrect Frankenstein's monster to unleash on the nearby town. I would probably chalk this one up to being a guilty pleasure at best, as it's really just going through the motions. The only thing I find they really do different here is have Dracula seeking a cure for his vampirism, and the resulting effects of the experimentation. Otherwise, the Wolf Man is still the Wolf Man (my favorite, but far more interesting in 'House of Frankenstein') and the Monster has seemingly just become a prop at this point. If I'm honest, I found this one a bit boring for most of it. As I was sitting through it, things just felt sort of old and used, like the film is representative of a hand-me-down t-shirt you know is a good ten years old plus. It's not bad if you're a fan of these movies already, and I admit that it's not without its moments I appreciated. But at this point it just feels like they are looking for reasons to get these creatures together with "what if" scenarios. In this case it's "what if Dracula wanted to be cured?" Then because the Wolf Man always wants to be cured, that can be thrown in for balance, and Frankenstein's Monster should be a part of it too because... Frankenstein? Needless to say, it's not my favorite. The film isn't without some noteworthy factoids, however. The idea of getting an attractive actress to play a hunchback was kind of a big deal for the time, as until then , they were seen mostly as hideous freaks. 'House of Frankenstein' did lighten that up quite a bit, but this really followed through with things seeing it more as a physical flaw than something from a freak show. This is also the final film in Lon Chaney Jr.'s contract for portraying The Wolfman, but it's fun to note that he'd return regardless to make fun of himself in 'Abbott & Costello Meet Frankenstein'. So this isn't terrible, but it still feels like an "old news" thing in a way. It passes, but just for the fun of it being a somewhat fun, albeit silly Universal Monster collective. 3/5
0 Comments
Ah ghost movies. I always teeter with tales of the supernatural. I have seen some that I can so easily toss aside because they just go through the motions, but others just plain do their jobs. I think, for me, I can find a ghost movie very cheap. It'll be full of predictable jump scares, stupidity when it comes to dealing with the spirits involved, or a creepy girl with black hair (Netflix's 'Hill House' was the last time this really worked for me, and if you've seen it, you know why it works). But I think after seeing this I've come to realize that what I look for in a good ghost movie may be laying further in the past than I realize. Taking place in 1937, Rick Fitzgerald (Ray Milland) and his sister, Pamela (Ruth Hussey), open the film while a poetic narration takes place. The pair happen upon an abandoned seaside house when their dog chases a squirrel into it. As they explore the house, they fall more and more in love with it, and decide to make the move to try to purchase the property from its owner, Commander Beech (Donald Crisp). They manage to get it for a surprisingly low price, based on stories about its previous owners and potential "hauntings" to which they are both too skeptical to care. Meanwhile, a young lady named Stella Meredith (Gail Russell), granddaughter of Commander Beech, is rather upset at the sale. Windward House (as the house is named) was where she spent her last moments with her now deceased mother who fell to her death from the cliff the house resides on. Rick soon becomes infatuated with Stella, which gains her access to the old place. However when strange noises such as sobbing in the middle of the night occur, accompanied by lovely scents, it becomes obvious that the house is haunted, and further details lead to a connection between the ghosts of the house and Stella. As the mystery continues to unfold, events get creepier and creepier, suggesting that perhaps Stella's mother may not be the obvious ghost. As far as early horror goes, I found that there was something that stood out about this movie among so many others I've seen. It carries an atmosphere with it that's actually almost perfect. Music will chime in the odd time, but all in all, there's an eerily still silence to things here. That blends with the lighting they use, casting long shadows, and often having things by candlelight. For 1944, this was some pretty incredible stuff, and even today there's this genuine creepiness to it. This was nominated for a Best Cinematography Oscar, and let's just say it was well-deserved. They even get a ghostly apparition in there that looks quite good for the time. The film has the distinction of being among the first films to feature ghostly hauntings in a dramatic sense, and its main theme of 'Stella by Starlight' has been adapted many times for its hauntingly beautiful sound. It has been adapted by several artists both instrumentally with people like Miles Davis, and lyrically by people like Frank Sinatra, Ella Fitzgerald and Ray Charles just to name a few. It really is a beautiful and classy tune. You almost feel like you need to open up a bottle of wine while having dinner by candlelight as you listen to it (I think Ella Fitzgerald's is my favorite). In all honestly, despite perhaps some dated and corny acting here and there, this is one of the better haunting movies I think I've seen. For me, a haunting movie should be scary, but not just scary. There needs to be some sort of dramatic effect going on that makes the ghost more intriguing, and most of the time, I think we get that. But there have been duds all the same. This one does just what it needs to do for the effect it wants to deliver. It's eerily creepy but not exactly scary, and it seems to take the chances other ghost films up until this point haven't bothered to (although bear in mind, my knowledge of film back then is like looking at a library with 10 books in it). I still have some more first-time ghost movies to get through, but damn, this was really good! Hell, it even ends with a punchline. 4/5 As I wade through these old films, there's an interesting balance I find in them. Most of these are actual first-time watches, and I think it's safe to say that most of them I have respect for, even if I don't particularly love them myself. But once in a while, there's a real gem I take away from this experience, and I can say with gusto that 'House of Frankenstein' is one of the best - and no, I don't care about its sad sad Rotton Tomato ratings. I'm completely against the grain on this. When Dr. Gustav Niemann (Boris Karloff) and his hunchbacked helper, Daniel (J. Carrol Nash) make a far too easy escape from prison, they murder a travelling showman named Professor Lampini (George Zucco) and steal his travelling horror exhibit. Niemann's plan is one of revenge on Bürgermeister Hussman (Sig Ruman) for putting him in prison in the first place, and some former associates of his who stabbed him in the back. This whole revenge plots results in the resurrection of a handful of classic horror heroes for the time; Dracula, The Wolf Man, and Frankenstein's Monster. Niemann finds and revives Count Dracula (John Carradine), whose role is short-lived here, but it's an interesting take on the character. He's actually a bit of a badass here, and even gets involved in a wagon chase (or car chase, if you like). Eventually Niemann and Daniel head to the flooded ruins of Castle Frankenstein, some time after the events of 'Frankenstein Meets The Wolf Man'. He finds the bodies of both Frankenstein's Monster (Glenn Strange) and Larry Talbot, aka The Wolfman (Lon Chaney Jr.), and takes it upon himself to revive them. Larry is revived first, and explains his whole werewolf situation to Niemann, and how his resurrection is a horrible curse waiting to happen. However, Niemann offers him an experiment that should rid him of his curse, by giving him a new brain. But since Niemann has another revenge plot against a couple of former associates, his interest in reviving the monster takes a bit more of a priority. What more can I say? For the time, this movie seemed to have everything. It's like 'The Avengers' with monsters - like what they tried so hard to do with the Dark Universe concept, failing miserably. I still claim it could work if they just kept things closer to classic, but I digress. This one was a real treat for me, because as luck would have it, the primary focus of a monster is actually The Wolfman. I've come to really like his tragic character, and Lon Chaney Jr. plays the role so incredibly well as both the scared man and the animalistic werewolf. The other most intriguing character here is Daniel, as Nieman promises him a different body, and we get to see the struggles of the hunchback for once. Any other movie just has the hunchbacked assistant as something creepy and somewhat off to the side, but this delves into the idea of this guy being innocent, and just wanting to be attractive - this includes him falling in love with someone kind at first, but he eventually scares her off all the same. I have to say, I really enjoyed that the film dug into that. This is most definitely one of my favorites in this collection I've been going through. I love how the story includes just the right amount of monsters, and every one of them serves the story. They didn't crowbar in The Mummy or The Invisible Man for no reason; it just sticks to these big three (or four if you include the hunchbacked assistant), and everything just fits. It's quite well-constructed. The only time I might have a bit of a beef with these characters is how abrupt Dracula's appearance is. But I can't even be that mad about it, because it just makes room to further the plot which explores the Wolf Man and Daniel quite generously. I really enjoyed this one; it's fun, dramatic, just creepy enough, and it's a high recommendation for a Halloween hit. 5/5 I have to admit that it's actually pretty intriguing to go back to a time before George A. Romero gave us the form of zombies we all know and love now. I covered a little bit of that in my review for 'The Ghost Breakers', but I thought it might be a good idea to delve a little deeper into the origins of what it actually meant to be a zombie at one point. Nowadays, zombies are considered a pretty damn basic concept; flesh-eating, re-animated dead people, often representing society's "zombie-like" ways. They are usually some sort of metaphor; 'Dawn of the Dead' made that concept super famous by having the zombies basically represent having consumerism take us over. But back before this idea became standard, zombies were still very much based in Voodoo, and that's the case here. These "zombies" aren't exactly dead people, they are just mindless, and obey commands at the ready. It all starts when Betsy Connell (Frances Dee), a Canadian nurse, is hired to care for sugar plantation owner, Paul Holland's (Tom Conway) wife, Jessica (Christine Gordon). This leads her to the Caribbean island of Saint Sebastian; home to a small white community and descendants of African slaves. Here, Betsy meets the likes of Wesley Rand (James Ellison), Paul's half brother, and Jessica, but she meets Jessica as a zombie-like character, vacant in expression and quite creepy to look at. Betsy soon learns that Jessica's the victim of spinal cord damage from a serious illness, leaving her with none of her own willpower. As Betsy begins to fall for Paul, she makes it her mission to make him happy by doing anything it takes to cure Jessica. Soon, Betsy is lead down a dark and mysterious road of voodoo, zombies, and the seemingly bizarre culture of the island's locals. She also begins to discover that there's much more than meets the eye when it comes to the Holland family. So, it's not quite as action-filled or dreadful as your commonplace zombie movie today, but it's an interesting look into voodoo culture (at least as it was interpreted in 1943) nonetheless. I bring it up a lot when it comes to this kind of material, but I still think 'The Serpent and the Rainbow' may be the most intriguingly scary look into this stuff. Just remember that Voodoo, in reality, isn't quite what it is in the movies. The film is quite passable, but I have to admit that I found it to drag in certain parts. What does sell this film, however, is the sheer creepiness of it all. Certain lighting techniques, and some creepy acting from certain characters really add to the atmosphere. There's even a particularly spooky looking starway that leads up a tower here that reminds me a lot of the atmosphere I encountered with 'Nosferatu'. So when it came to setting an appropriately creepy mood, they accomplished things quite nicely here. It's also short enough that, though there's a certain drag, it doesn't drag for long until you come to something interesting. While the film isn't particularly fun by any means, it's quite serious in tone, and that adds a whole new twist of horror to what we've seen lately with a lot of the fun Universal monster stuff that's been going on. 'White Zombie' technically predates it, but it does still stand as one of the famous "roots of zombie lore" films out there, and rightfully so. I can't say I consider it a masterpiece, necessarily, but it's certainly solid for its creepy tone, and a lot of the visuals hold up even now as something with the potential to send chills up one's spine. I mean, just look at the zombie dude in the picture. 3/5 A classic, underground B movie just isn't a classic underground B movie until it's the subject of a 'Mystery Science Theater 3000' episode. This one was, and certainly earned its place there for being frankly pretty damn ridiculous. Once again, this presents a half-decent idea for horror, but its execution is so comical that you wonder if the film is at all self-aware. The film opens on the day of a wedding when out of nowhere the bride just drops dead after saying the words "I do". This seems to be one of a series of murders involving young brides, and the bride's corpse "vanishing", as after the undertaker takes them away, the body suddenly seems to disappear in transport. No one can seem to find any hints as to what happens with them, but the audience soon learns that they are being taken by a mad scientist named Dr. Lorenz (Bela Lugosi), drugging them with an orchid whose scent places its victim in a form of suspended animation. So they aren't really dead, they just look it. As one could imagine Dr. Lorenz's intentions with such a plot, the reality is that he's taking them back to his laboratory and stealing their youthful essence in order to inject his aging wife (Elizabeth Russell). Meanwhile, the disappearance of these women sends a young journalist named Patricia Hunter (Luana Walters) under police authorities' noses, looking for answers, herself. One could think of her as a 1940's April O'Neil. She gets more than she bargained for, however, when she finds herself staying at Lorenz's mansion where all of this experimentation is taking place. With the running time of just over an hour, I can honestly recommend this one for a quick, fun watch - just know that any enjoyment you get from the film is because of how very silly it is. Once again, they have a great concept for the early 40s in delivering a horror movie. This was '42, so people were well aware of certain World War II horrors that were going on in reality. Imagine delivering a film about such creepy experimentation. Even thinking about its plot now, one could look at way scarier things that come close. 'The Serpent and the Rainbow', for example, is a very creepy look at a very real drug that makes one look dead, while they simply can't move. While it sounds like I'm praising the film, however, it's execution is pretty funny. It can't seem to decide whether its trying to be in the realm of Universal monsters (there's something very "Dracula" about Lugosi's performance here, including the fact that he sleeps in a coffin) or something of a more real-world horror. It's like it's trying to have its cake and eat it too. The funny thing is, sometimes it feels boring and dragging while other times you can't help but have a giggle at everything going on. Some of the best moments involve a little person named Toby (Angelo Rossitto) and an "Igor" type named Angel (Frank Moran). What happens with these two characters is so low-brow by today's standards it's kind of hilarious. Let's just say this is one hell of a dated movie. Once again, this one was the subject of an 'MST3K' episode, and I must say, one might get more of a kick out of it in that format. But if you get a group of bad movie-loving friends together for about an hour to check this one out, it's just as worth it. My only regret with having this as part of my Classic Horror Review Spectacular is that I didn't have anyone to laugh at it with. For the record, it's easily accessible through 'YouTube' for free from the Horror Movie Archive - so enjoy! 2/5 Remember when The Avengers first assembled and it was all the rage? To think of a Marvel crossover universe at the time was such a big deal, it was considered unprecedented, and a giant leap forward in the was comic book movies were handled. But the idea of the crossover film in general dates all the way back to 1953, with this particular title, technically making this the first "team-up" movie (it isn't 'Frankenstein vs The Wolfman') The film opens about four years after the events of 'The Wolfman' and 'The Ghost of Frankenstein'. Since I never reviewed 'Ghost', here's a Wiki link for all the details. Two unknown men break into the Talbot family crypt, where they find Larry Talbot's (Lon Cheney) body, and a ring they seem to be after. The full moon shines through the crypt, and brings the Wolfman back to life. Larry is found the next day, and brought in for a head wound (sustained in 'The Wolfman') to be treated by Dr. Mannering (Patric Knowles). During the next night, Larry transforms again, kills, and begins reliving his curse all over again. Larry eventually seeks out the Gypsy woman, Maleva (Maria Ouspenskaya) for help. Being the only one who could possibly understand what Larry is going through, Maleva leads him to the village of Dr. Ludwig Frankenstein, and given the history of the village, the townsfolk aren't too keep on helping. The goal is to find the doctor's notes, and end his life through scientific means, since he's immortally cursed. The problem is, the good doctor is now dead. After another attack, Larry finds himself fleeing from an angry mob and into the ruins of Frankenstein's castle where he finds the Monster, frozen in ice. The Monster, funnily enough, was portrayed by Lon Chaney Jr. in 'Ghost', but here is portrayed by the legendary Bela Lugosi who actually played Ygor in 'Ghost'. So there's this interesting swap-out that happens here based on a sort of limit of go-to horror actors. Imagine such a thing nowadays. Anyway, he befriends the Monster, and soon seeks out the help of Baroness Elsa Frankenstein (Ilona Massey), daughter of Ludwig as well. It all leads up to the whole mad scientist thing yet again. Dr. Mannering eventually helps with the experiment that will potentially allow Larry to rest, which involves using the Monster. But he gets a bit of that "big red button" syndrome, wanting to see the Monster at full potential. This all takes place during another full moon (they get a lot of them around those parts somehow), and soon the movie finally sees the Monster and the Wolfman duke it out for just a few minutes before the end of the film. Waiting for it is a bit like waiting for New York to appear in 'Jason Takes Manhattan', but surprisingly worse. The film is very representative of the time in which the Universal Monster films started to become parodies of themselves. It's basically the 'Scream' for its time, for just as 'Scream' ultimately farces the slasher genre that it belongs to, this seems to be a playful experiment as opposed to a solid story in which the monster in question represents something internal. This is where they finally said "this is just fun now". Although it's not the best of them, I can't deny that I had fun with it, and it's interesting to see that Universal seemed to just have a set of specific actors for these monstrous roles. It shows a very different time My only real criticisms about it are that it ends too abruptly, and I very much prefer Boris Karloff as the Monster. Bela doesn't really sell me on it, but he's still an awesome Dracula and Ygor. Lon Cheney Jr. and Maria Ouspenskaya are just as great here as they were in 'The Wolfman', but I got way more out of that than this. I can still, however, give it up to the film's attempt at taking a stab at trying something very new, and unprecedented for its own time. Further to that, this is at least pretty fun to watch nowadays, and a decent Halloween watch. I don't think I can quite dig at this as much as other critics have in the past though, because at worst, I just see it as a failed first attempt. I'm not sure I would have expected it to be anything amazing at the time. But will these crossovers improve? We'll find out soon enough. 3/5 When you consider the classic Universal Monsters, I've covered most of them up until this point. But for so many, The Wolf Man really springs to mind, and I personally find it pretty interesting that this character wouldn't join their ranks until the 1950s, while names like Dracula, Frankenstein, The Mummy and The Invisible Man have all been products of the 30s. I might compare it presently to something like when Jigsaw joined the ranks of Freddy, Jason, etc, but he came along pretty late in the game (pun 100% intended). One Larry Talbot (Lon Chaney Jr.) learns of the death of his brother, and returns home to Llanwelly, Wales to reconcile with his father, Sir John Talbot (Claude Rains) whom he hasn't spoken to in ages. During his visit, Larry gets interested in a local antique shop owner named Gwen Conliffe (Evelyn Ankers). He soon pickes up a silver-headed cane from her; the head in the shape of a wolf. She tells him of the folklore surrounding werewolves, and the symbolism of the myth representing man's more animalistic and violent side. Later on, Larry finds a wolf attacking Gwen's friend, Jenny, and he uses the silver-headed cane to beat the wolf to death (poor wolf). It's too late for Jenny, but Larry survives things with a bite to his chest. They later discover the dead body of the "wolf" to be a human Gypsy known as Bela (Bela Lugosi); son to a more elderly Gypsy fortuneteller named Maleva (Maria Ouspenskaya). Confused by the events of the evening, Larry finds himself losing his mind, stuck with a potential curse that no one could possibly believe, including himself. I think the most interesting thing about this movie is that it's very direct with its 'Jekyll and Hyde'-like symbolism. They even discuss the idea of the werewolf and the thought of a man able to believe he has the potential to be something just as dangerous, therefore seeing himself as "the wolf". It's a neat, very literal take on the folklore. But with that said, this gladly isn't a movie that's all talk, and drags on. I don't get from this what I got from 'Dracula's Daughter'. On the contrary, this one's actually a hell of a lot of fun, and has such a Halloween-ish atmosphere that it fits right in with the classic Monsters of the 30s. I think my favorite thing about this is that they don't hold back on making the Wolf Man one vicious son of a bitch. When he transforms, it's pretty clear than no one is safe. If he sees you, he's just gonna attack. I may consider the Wolf Man to be the Freddy Krueger of that era; the difference being that Larry has a good side as a human being. On top of that, it's really cool to see some big-name crossover while they aren't playing their respective horror icons - Claude Rains and Bela Lugosi, namely. There's really nothing much to criticize about this one. It doesn't drag, it suits the mood for Halloween, it's lots of fun, even at times funny (there's a scene here they use as stock footage for 'The Sandlot', which adds a dose of humor to it, looking back) and everyone performs very well here. I'm pretty partial to The Invisible Man when it comes to the monsters I have a really good time watching, but The Wolf Man is pretty much a solid coin-flip for "favorite Universal monster" - that's right, they both outdo the ever-famous Dracula and Frankenstein's Monster in my books, plus several others. I'm proud to say I had a blast with this title. 5/5 If you've been following along with these reviews, you may be wondering what happened to 'The Invisible Man Returns'. Well, funnily enough, I simply couldn't find it - invisible, indeed. It's actually one of the more difficult films to track down, unless you live in America and may be able to rent it through Amazon. But it didn't take me long to find a replacement with an early horror comedy starring Bob Hope called 'The Ghost Breakers'. As a 'Ghostbusters' fan, I had to jump on it. There's a whole long story behind the film's namesake and some legal rights, but the fact that this film existed sort of helped put 'Ghostbusters' on the map. If nothing else, it helped inspire the film to get made, as Aykroyd's idea was to modernize some of these old horror spoofs. But I digress. We're here to talk about 'The Ghost Breakers', featuring the one and only Bob Hope, and a bunch of old, dated humor that might make one cringe today. It's very much a product of its time when it comes to a few racial jokes, but there's also a balance. It's sort of like going back to some old school Mel Brooks - there's something dated and uncomfortable there, but so much of the rest of the film is worth it anyway. The film follows Mary Carter (Paulette Goddard) who inherits a mansion on Black Island, somewhere near the Cuban coast. The island may or may not be fictional, as in doing a bit of homework, the closest you get is an island in The Bahamas. Anyway, the mansion is said to be haunted. She is warned with a phone call from a stranger (Anthony Quinn) to keep away from the place, but Mary carries on with her plan to claim the property and sets sail towards the island. During all of this, a radio announcer named Larry Lawrence (Hope) lets some information slip over the radio about some members of the local underworld, headed by crime boss, Frenchy Duval (Paul Fix). This leads to a shoot-off, and Larry believing he shot one of Duvall's henchmen, which puts Larry on the run for his life. Coincidentally, he finds Mary (who he knows, and is living in the same hotel as Duval) and hides in one of her trunks, ready to head to Black Island with her. On the ship, he refers to himself as a "ghost breaker" - one who looks into, and gets rid of ghosts of the past. Little does he know just how literal he'll have to take his made up job. Along the way, Larry is aided by his valet, Alex (Willie Best), and this is where some of that dated humor comes into play. You sort of have to take it for what it was in 1940, and it's just funny enough to shake your head at it and question how much of it they'd ever get away with nowadays. Alex is very much the comedy relief in this; while Bob Hope has plenty of humorous lines and moments, Alex is that cowardly Scooby-Doo-like character who is so cartoonish that there's a point in the film he's so scared that he turns from black to white. So it teeters with some of its humor. But again, so much of it comes from Bob Hope, himself, who kinda keeps you on your toes with his delivery. Perhaps the most fascinating thing about the film, however, is that this is one of the first visual representations of what is called, in the film, a zombie. Zombies became a thing with 'White Zombie' back in '32, but they'd never become what they are today until 'Night of the Living Dead' in 1968. Up until then, there wasn't much more to them than being Mummy of Frankenstein-like, and it was more of a hypnosis thing than anything to do with the walking dead (at least as far as I know). The zombie is also impressively creepy looking for its time, portrayed by Noble Johnson, who often played extra roles as opposed to anything major. 'Ghost Breakers' is an interesting film, to say the least. Despite some of the dated humor, it's overall a pretty cool idea for the time, and one of the earliest examples of horror comedy. The super famous 'Abbot and Costello Meet Frankenstein' wouldn't be for another eight years, and one of the only horror comedies predating it is 'The Cat and the Canary'. It's always a lot of fun for me to go back in time and see what inspired my favorite subgenre of film, and I look forward to first-timing some more of these as I go. 4/5 The third entry into the 'Frankenstein' franchise continues the tale with Baron Wolf von Frankenstein (Basil Rathbone), the son of Henry Frankenstein; creator of the Monster and co-creator of the Bride. Since the events of 'Bride of Frankenstein', the family castle has been abandoned. But Wolf, his wife, Elsa (Josephine Hutchinson), and their fearless young son, Peter (Donnie Dunagen) relocate to the castle, as Wolf wants to restore the Frankenstein name. Such an attempt is rather futile, however, when we learn how the villagers see any Frankenstein as someone not to be trusted. After all, Wolf's own father was the one who created the monster who wreaked havoc on the town, twice before. The local police inspector, Krogh (Lionel Atwill) becomes Wolf's only friend in all of this, ironically after he claims the monster ripped his arm off, and it was replaced with a false one - parodied in 'Young Frankenstein' by Inspector Kemp. While exploring the castle, Wolf meets the Ygor (Bela Lugosi)... okay, so a brief history, this is the first association with the name Ygor to Frankenstein. Technically speaking, the hunchbacked assistant from the first film is named "Fritz", but as far as I can tell, it's supposed to be the same guy. 'Bride' had no lab assistant of that kind. Anyway, here, he's not a hunchback, but someone whos neck broke during a hanging, and he's permanently messed up because of it, plus legally declared dead. There's a court room scene involving this matter, and I couldn't help but laugh at it, but I really don't think I was supposed to. Anyway, Ygor (some might wanna spell it "Igor", but this is how its credited) leads Wolf down into crypt where both his grandfather and father were buried - his father's reading "Heinrich von Frankenstein: Maker of Monsters". Alongside these tombs are the monster, laying on a slab, alive and well but comatose. Wolf sees his opportunity to prove that his father wasn't a madman, and may have been on to something. The results, however, have the monster obeying commands from Ygor, and we get more of Mr. friendly monster misunderstanding what life is, and why he exists. This time around he's back to the classic grunts and growls as opposed to having learned English somehow. Sadly, this would be Boris Karloff's final appearance as The Monster, but it's a pretty solid sendoff to such a creature. It brings together Karloff and Lugosi together in a great way, both playing rather iconic characters (although it took Ygor some time to develop into a real thing). Of the three films, I consider this one probably to be the most fun. While the original and 'Bride' are the more memorable classics, this one starts to have a bit more fun with things, and it's kinda sad that it's more under the radar. When you think to name any two 'Frankenstein' titles, your mind will most likely jump to those first two. On a final note, I just wanna clarify something about the Monster, himself. During the opening, while the family is headed to the castle, we hear Wolf speaking to his wife about his father's good name, and the fact that some of the villagers have taken to naming the monster "Frankenstein". It's not 100% on the nose, but it's absolutely implied. So based on this technicality, you will never again hear me correct anyone like a smartass about the Monster's name. Anyway, the movie is fun, and it'd be worth a marathon of the three main films as you approach Halloween. They are all something the family can watch, deemed classics in the eyes of movie-lovers, and its a monster kids can maybe relate too a bit more than other, scarier monsters of the Universal collection. 4/5 It just goes to show how detached I am from Universal's monster lineup when I had no idea until recently that this movie existed. Not only that, but this s THE sequel to 'Dracula', as it picks up where the original movie left off. Dracula has just been killed by Professor Von (not Van) Helsing (Edward Van Sloan), and he's arrested by to police officers and sent to Scotland Yard. There, he explains the situation to Sir Basil Humphry (Gilbert Emery). Von Helsing fully confesses with the greatest of ease and simplicity that he killed Count Dracula, but he's also already been dead for 500 years. Things are passed off as mere folklore and tales at first, and it leads Von Helsing to stand alone on his case, enlisting the aid of one of his star students; a psychiatrist named Dr. Jeffery Garth (Otto Kruger). His case is that since Dracula has been dead for 500 years, what he did can't be considered murder, and he was also doing the town a favor by ridding it of the king of the bloodsuckers. In an interesting take on vampirism, we are introduced to the film's namesake; the Countess Marya Zaleska (Gloria Holden). She remains alive, despite her father's demise, and she discovers that her thirst for blood doesn't wane, because apparently she wants it to. She tries to free herself from all of this vampire stuff several times, and in constantly failing, she turns to Dr. Garth for help, only to find that she has the desire to turn him over to the dark side of vampirism as well. Sooo, pretty basic stuff if you ask me, but I can't deny that it's interesting to see what may be a first attempt at giving a vampire that much of a human side. Sure, Dracula had a bit of a human side too, but he embraces his curse whereas Marya wants to be free from it. All in all, I feel that the general metaphor here may be something along the lines of addiction. Marya wants out of that vampiric curse of hers in her own way, but she can't help but have those cravings. She lays the hypnotic eyes on at least a couple of people here, and we all know Dracula for that. But in this case, it almost looks like she's the one who's hypnotized by these humans. It's as though you see that inner struggle of needing something as opposed to just wanting something, and whether it be cigarettes, alcohol, caffeine, sugar, or drugs in general, we've all experienced that inner struggle - perhaps most of us have experienced it when trying to diet and/or lose weight. It's a neat take on things, but I have to confess that all in all, I found the film rather boring altogether. There was a lot of talk, and you didn't get that underlying sense of dread you got from Dracula with Marya. With Dracula, you saw his victims as a sort of fly in a spider's web. Here, it's like the spider wants to capture her victim, but sit down and have a nice chat over tea before moving in for the kill. Even when it comes to any kills, it's all pretty well offscreen, and theres just no sense of fear to anything at all. But then there's the comedic aspect. I can certainly give it credit for a few funny moments of dialogue, but it's not quite enough to pull me in. For me, the only reason to watch this is to see what happened next as a sort of epilogue - not so much to be quite as fully entertained as you were with 'Dracula'. 2/5 |