Think of it, Larry Talbot dominates the first forty minutes of a seventy minute film.
The monster only shows up at that moment and remains pretty much in low profile until the the big battle in the end.
This film was really a Wolfman vehicle and the Monsters name was only put in top billing because it was more well-known.
True, but with popularity, I guess Frankenstein got top billing.
For DEMONIC TOYS and updates on Full Moon Films:
www.freewebs.com/demonictoys/
[deleted]
I don't think you understand. Frankenstein is the not the name of the monster.
The title is referring to Baroness Elsa Frankenstein who meets the wolfman.
If it was called "Frankenstein's monster meets the wolf man' then i would agree, but it doesn't.
Well, since she doesn't come into the picture until its nearly half over I still say the Wolfman should have gotten first billing!
shareIt's not about billing. "Frankenstein meets The Wolf Man" simply sounds better.
shareThe OP is right whether Frankenstein is the doctor or the monster. For the average moviegoer, Frankenstein, refers to the monster anyway; just look at the poster. I think Frankenstein gets top billing not because it sounds better but because Frankenstein movies were more popular than the Wolfman's. Isn't that true?
__________________________
www.1up-games.com Last watched: imdb.to/K4tvL9
Pretty much. There were FOUR Frankenstein movies done by this time and only ONE Wolfman movie.
They originally had the idea to have the Wolfman star in a series of films where he would take on the other monsters.
The next one WAS going to be 'Dracula meets the Wolfman' but it got changed to 'House of Frankenstein.'
Yeah except Larry doesn't ever meet Dracula in that.
When the Story Lady tells us about the naughty boy who blew up his goldfish.
[deleted]
[deleted]
thank you... my thought exactly, this should obviously put more focus on the wolf man since frankenstein's monster shows up the last ten minutes, about the following posts, as many other, even referenced in a movie, i think of the monster when i hear "frankenstein", and was the intention for people really to think of the scientist when reading this title on the poster? there could be a documentary titled "the curse of frankenstein" how people confuse or forget to mention "'s monster" afterwards... there also seem to cause some confusion which of the individual monster dvd boxes this is featured in. one of the earliest parts of this is a shot of the moon, that reminds me listening to commentary to one of these universal releases how in one of the earlier werewolf movies they missed making a shot like that. the line about the werewolf tale is delivered once more, i recognise it after seeing house of frankenstein which i suppose it's the flick including most universal monsters in the same movie, this moves much slower though. lon chaney jr gives a fine performance struggling to be believed, as well as the actress playing the gypsy woman coming to his aid, frankenstein's monster didn't need to appear in this i thought, the story of the werewolf and the gypsy woman was much more promising wasn't it as they developed a special relation and she's the only one he can trust, but perhaps that was a repeat of the original wolf man movie, it escapes me as i haven't seen the movie in many years. once frankenstein's monster drives off with talbot it looks like an insane movie.
🐺 🌗 🤖⚡️🏰
far from any church,
ignorant of the word,
struck by power out of this world,
shown the very truth,
if you're in doubt wish i could convince you.
Better yet they should have called it The Wolf Man Returns and keep it a secret that the Frankenstein Monster is in the movie. Then when audiences watched it they would be surprised that the monster is in it. It's still like like that in today's world. Or even the world 15 years ago. Spider-Man 3 comes to mind. "Let's show Eddie Brock become Venom in the trailer even though it doesn't happen til the last 20 minutes of the film."
shareYup. The title of this movie is a plot hole
share