If there is any significance at all in the third chapter of the long-running Frankenstein movie series, it is that it brought together the two most iconic and famous vintage horror movie stars and one of the greatest hero actors to oppose them. The movie stars Basil Rathbone (Sherlock Holmes) as the—like the title suggests—the son of Dr. Frankenstein, who was played by Colin Clive in the first two movies. The son of Frankenstein, while investigating the decimated ruins of his father's old laboratory, comes upon the comatose remains of the Frankenstein monster still played by Boris Karloff. In addition, the living corpse of Ygor, played by Bela Lugosi (Dracula) keeps a close eye on his half-living, half-dead companion and uses the new Dr. Frankenstein to return life to the green-skinned creature.
"Son of Frankenstein" is not a very significant horror movie and is not in the same league as the first two movies of the series, but in comparison to a great many of the sequels that followed, it does stand out as one of the few passable entries. I enjoyed this twice as much as I did the 1994 adaptation of Mary Shelley's novel "Frankenstein"; Rathbone, Karloff, and Lugosi are all very good in this film. I also liked Lionel Atwill as the one-armed, mustached inspector trying to find out what's going on. I also liked the touch of how the villagers have prejudicially turned on Baron Wolf Frankenstein on account of what his father created before him.
Now what I did not like, and what cost the movie what was potentially a higher rating, was the long moments of dead space in between the monster sequences. Karloff does not have very much to do in this film; he mostly just lies around or stands around. I also did not find the self-destruction approach of Basil Rathbone's character like I did the one with Colin Clive in the first two Frankenstein pictures. The most interesting thing in the movie is Lugosi as Ygor and it does rival his performance in "Dracula" (1931). It's just a shame his performance here wasn't in a better, more significant film.
Nevertheless, on the whole, I did enjoy "Son of Frankenstein" and found it a lot more pleasing than a lot of the absurdly ridiculous follow-ups that came after it. No, it's not in the same league as the original "Frankenstein" (1931) or the surprisingly wonderful "Bride of Frankenstein" (1935), but very few horror movies are. But it is at the same time a missed opportunity and will probably only work for the fans. I recommend it for three things: Rathbone, Karloff, and Lugosi.
"Son of Frankenstein" is not a very significant horror movie and is not in the same league as the first two movies of the series, but in comparison to a great many of the sequels that followed, it does stand out as one of the few passable entries. I enjoyed this twice as much as I did the 1994 adaptation of Mary Shelley's novel "Frankenstein"; Rathbone, Karloff, and Lugosi are all very good in this film. I also liked Lionel Atwill as the one-armed, mustached inspector trying to find out what's going on. I also liked the touch of how the villagers have prejudicially turned on Baron Wolf Frankenstein on account of what his father created before him.
Now what I did not like, and what cost the movie what was potentially a higher rating, was the long moments of dead space in between the monster sequences. Karloff does not have very much to do in this film; he mostly just lies around or stands around. I also did not find the self-destruction approach of Basil Rathbone's character like I did the one with Colin Clive in the first two Frankenstein pictures. The most interesting thing in the movie is Lugosi as Ygor and it does rival his performance in "Dracula" (1931). It's just a shame his performance here wasn't in a better, more significant film.
Nevertheless, on the whole, I did enjoy "Son of Frankenstein" and found it a lot more pleasing than a lot of the absurdly ridiculous follow-ups that came after it. No, it's not in the same league as the original "Frankenstein" (1931) or the surprisingly wonderful "Bride of Frankenstein" (1935), but very few horror movies are. But it is at the same time a missed opportunity and will probably only work for the fans. I recommend it for three things: Rathbone, Karloff, and Lugosi.