Jeez, I love this one. The cast, all those monsters. It's decently mounted, too. Great score. The apogee of Universal monsterdom. Yes, it's 'bad', but it sure does move; is it really only 70 min. long? And it's really quite an innocent film despite all the morbidness. Almost a kind of swashbuckling feel to it at times (the chases and the gypsies, I guess). A true paradigm of a good, fun, old-fashioned 30's-40's B&W Horror flick. Anyone else feel that way?
shareY'know, "House of Frankenstein" has always been one of my faves of the series. I think of it more as a guilty pleasure than schlock -- sounds nicer! A great cast; Karloff, Chaney, Carradine and Naish are all very good, with great cameos by George Zucco and Lionel Atwill. The story is trite, and the direction so-so, but the beautiful set design, photography, and (especially) the music make it better than it ought to be.
As for Glenn Strange, the script (the film's weakest link by far) doesn't serve him very well, but he looks good as the monster and the set piece where he hobbles into the quicksand with Karloff may be dopey but it lingered in my mind long after I saw it as a kid. I remember eating it up, even as I noticed Boris sucking in his breath just before he disappears into that bog.
It may not be high art, but I'll always think fondly of "House of Frankenstein".
House of Frankenstein is one of my all-time favorite movies, and I don't feel the least bit guilty about it.
With all due respect to Tod Browning, James Whale, George Waggner and such masterworks as Dracula (1931), Frankenstein (1931), Bride of Frankenstein (1935) and The Wolf Man (1941), the all-star monster shows of the 1940's -- Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man (1943), House of Frankenstein (1944) and House of Dracula (1945) -- are my personal favorites of the classic Universal Dracula/Frankenstein/Wolf Man series. To me, they're the most purely fun and entertaining. I love the shadowy visual style and the goofy Gothic fantasy world they take place in.
It comes from loving these films in childhood. Art was of no concern then. What mattered was that these were the ones that had all the monsters!
Doctor_Mabuse
P.S. I agree about the score. Hans J. Salter outdid himself on House of Frankenstein. Notice that the music in this particular film is mostly original rather than a mere compilation of cues from earlier movies. Much of the score turns up again in Boris Karloff's The Black Castle (1952).
I too really like this movie, it brings back memories of seeing it at the Loma theater in Burbank when I was about 10 or 11. It was scary! I still remember how creepy Boris Karloff was. Incidentally, Saturday afternoon matinees at the time cost 9 cents for three movies plus cartoons plus serials!
shareThis is one of my favorite movies, but I wish the ending was happier. It was very sad when the Wolfman killed Ilonka. Other than that, the film is a good and fun movie to watch. It was fun to see different monsters in the same movie.
shareI saw this movie on the late show when I was about eleven years old, and was completely captivated by it. I loved the scene where Karloff and Naish discover the Monster and the Wolf Man frozen in the castle ruins, and the whole sequence where Dracula is brought back to life and tries to seduce the beautiful young bride. The ending was just stunning to me, when the gypsy girl died in Talbot's arms. To me at that age, it might as well have been from Romeo and Juliet, or Hamlet. I spent most of the next day wishing the two lovers could have had a happier fate. I just believed totally in this movie, and really cared about every character in it, with the kind of innocent enthusiasm only a kid could have, for what an adult would chuckle at as hokey.
And when he crossed the bridge, the phantoms came to meet him
I know this thread is old now, but what the heck! This was one of my favorites as a kid and adult. I like all the classic horror movies of the 40s. I think John Carradines Dracula representation in both House movies was good! I always like the bat transformations! Karloff good as always! Glad to see him outside the monster role! Always thought Glenn Strange made the best looking monster next to Karloff! Never liked Chaney as the monster! Nash did his part well! Music score seemed better and less choppy then H of Dracula! This is one of my favorites
Where the Rivers End in Virginia!
pretty entertaining little flick. i dug karloff's performance. i still don't know how i feel about john carradine (who i like, as well as his sons) as dracula, it was weird how he was only in the middle of that film. the film isn't exactly on the same level as the tod browning and james whale films to say the least but it wasn't boring and it was a short. lon chaney jr's wolf man performance remains good no matter how silly the film is.
shareAll of these Universal films are entertaining, if not innacurate, especially for the younger viewers, as I was way back when. House of Frankenstein was always a favorite of mine, probably due to the fact that I loved Karloff and it was great to see him as a character out of heavy monster makeup. But what has always bothered me in this film is the scene where the police are chasing Dracula, who is driving a horse-drawn stage. Just ahead of him is another wagon with Karloff, the hunchback AND Dracula's coffin. Daniel the hunchback throws Dracula's coffin out of the fast-moving wagon, and even though Dracula sees this AND appears to travel a decent distance more, (remember, the coffin was dropped "Back there" someplace), when he FINALLY crashes off the road, RIGHT THERE is that darned coffin! In reality, it would have been 1/2 mile back! Why the director/editor etc didn't notice this FLUB is anyone's guess!
shareIts a plot hole, good job
shareThis one has just got EVERYTHING one could possibly ask for in a Universal monster flick: Karloff, Chaney, Carradine, Lionel Atwill, George Zucco, the village mob with torches, the deformed/hunchback assistant... The only ones missing are Edward Van Sloan, Dwight Frye and Evelyn Ankers. I still prefer 'Frankenstein Meets the Wolfman', but HOF is definitely one of the most entertaining of the 40's Universal monster films.
My DVDs http://squid-vicious.dvdaf.com/owned?rc=1
i thought that it was pretty good,, cept for Dracula,, could have had LUgosi play that part ,, but other than that,, it was great.
are you going to bark all day little doggie,, or are you going to bite
I have a soft spot for this movie because I saw my favorite Universal monster for the very first time - the Wolf Man! I was six years old when I first saw this on WOR's "Thriller Theater" and he scared the heck out of me. He's still the scariest out of all the classic monsters, IMO.
No blah, blah, blah!
It's okay but the second half just barely beats 'Ghost Of'. The first half is rather weak since the plot point with Dracula is rather slow paced and doesn't really add anything to the film, just that and the fact that the lack of Lugosi is a shame.
Another thing is, it's not really a Frankenstein movie to begin with... the Monster doesn't appear til halfway through, and doesn't awake 'til the last 7 minutes.
But the second half with the Wolfman is better with some good ol' misunderstood-monster tragedy. Best end of the series, too!
(2.5/5)
Astro's gallery of nonsense comics at: http://astrolupine.deviantart.com
[deleted]
It's really good fun. Karloff, Naish, Carradine, Chaney, and the too briefly seen George Zucco and Lionel Atwill are all in fine form.
What do you think this is, a signature? It's a way of life!
I loved this movie from the very first time i saw it on AMC many years ago & schlock is definitely not a word I would use to describe it. Hell, now that I think about it I would rank this one near the top with The Wolf Man and Bride of Frankenstein as far as my all-time favorites go.
Just thinking about one of my favorite visuals from this film; the half thawed out Wolf Man with his paws sticking out of the ice he's encased in. A little touch that just adds to a great movie.
I love both House Of films....there's an atmosphere in these two that is not present in any of the other Drac/Frank films...it's not as good a film, per se, as the originals, Bride, or Son OfFrankenstein, but there's the sense that the film makers were having a lot of fun, not taking it too seriousl, which I think comes through in the pictures...it adds a new dimension to the series' which I'm glad exists!
"I wrote a poem on a dog biscuit;
And your dog refused to look at it..."
Not quite a great movie, but well worth the watch, I do think its more a Wolfman movie rather than a Frankenstein movie, and in the collection I have I don't have the previous movie, but I do think its a very good movie as well, and the pacing might make it more fun for a younger- not having the attention span- audience.
www.7poundbag.com