User Reviews

Usually the third film in a series shows signs of decline either in quality or inventiveness. Even the third 'Godfather' was significantly less than its predecessors. Universal's 'Frankenstein' series that began in the early 1930's was no exception and showed some wear by the end of the decade when 'Son of Frankenstein' was released. Under the sensitive direction of James Whale, the original 'Frankenstein' was a classic, and, in the first sequel, 'Bride of Frankenstein,' Whale even managed to better it. However, while Whale was not involved with 'Son,' the third installment turned out to be a surprisingly good movie even if it failed to match the two preceding films. Perhaps the major reason for the success of 'Son' was the casting of Basil Rathbone as Wolf Frankenstein, the original Baron's son. Rathbone is a fine strong actor, and his characterization certainly exceeds Colin Clive's somewhat colorless portrayal of his father in the preceding films. Rathbone holds the viewer's attention throughout as he becomes immersed in the legacy of his father and fails to comprehend the consequences of what he is doing. Boris Karloff returns for a third time as the monster. Although he does a fine job, there is less opportunity for the actor to show the range of emotion in this film that he displayed in 'Bride.' Another aspect of 'Son' that raises it above the ordinary is the set and lighting design, which owes a debt to German expressionism. The sets have bold diagonals in their construction, and the cameraman has lit them to cast equally bold shadows against bare walls and create abstract patterns that often recall 'The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari.' The lighting and design of one particular section of a cave under the Frankenstein laboratory could have been blown up and framed as an expressionist photograph. Although it does not reach the heights of the Whale films, 'Son of Frankenstein' is a worthy successor and an engrossing film in its own right.

Baron Wolf von Frankenstein (Basil Rathbone) inherits his family's ancestral castle, the same location where Wolf's father did his experimentation with reviving the dead many years ago. After Wolf and his wife and young son take up residence, they discover that the old castle has another resident, strange cripple Ygor (Bela Lugosi). Ygor had been sentenced to death for grave robbing many years ago, but his hanging was botched and it left him with a crooked neck. Ygor has a secret as well: he found the Monster (Boris Karloff) in a series of caves beneath the castle, and he's nursed him back to health. However, Ygor needs Wolf's medical expertise fully revive the Monster. Also featuring Lionel Atwill, Josephine Hutchinson, Donnie Dunagan, Emma Dunn, Edgar Norton, Lionel Belmore, and Gustav von Seyffertitz.

I've always considered this the beginning of Universal's Phase Two in their monster films, where they started to get progressively sillier, adding lots of additional weird characters, ultimately leading up to the monster mash-ups of the mid-40's. Director Lee brings a lot of style to the proceedings, and the throwback German Expressionism set design is a treat. The performances are good, although Boris is given a lot less to do, and one can see why he tired of the part. Lugosi has one of his more iconic roles as the vengeance-seeking Ygor. Lionel Atwill, as the local police inspector with a prosthetic arm, is also memorable. Rathbone seems to have fun, with a winking performance that is tongue in cheek. Josephine Hutchinson fails to make much of an impression, and whether you find young Donnie Dunagan cute or annoying will depend on your mood.

Basil Rathbone plays Wolf, the son of Frankenstein, returning to his inheritance of castle and lab with wife and child in tow. Along the way he meets his father's old assistant Ygor, who has a broken neck from having been hanged and living, and the creature his father created. The townspeople get excited, a couple die, and mayhem takes over. This movie is above-average for a number of reasons. First and foremost it is a highly stylized movie in the German impressionistic manner. The sets are incredible and director Rowland Lee spares little in showing us his appreciation of movies such as Nosferatu and Caligari. The castle is a huge atmospheric temple and each room is just as big in its own way. This is the film that inspired most of Mel Brook's Young Frankenstein both in look and plot. The plot is good but the acting carries it beyond that. Karloff as always does a great job in his final role as the monster. Rathbone makes a great scientist trying to avenge his father's name. He starts the movie very relaxed and his tension builds and builds. His scenes with Atwill are his best. That brings us to the two great performances of the film...Lionel Atwill and Bela Lugosi. Lugosi as Ygor is perhaps his greatest role after Dracula. His voice, his leers, his manner are all wonderfully played. It is Lugosi that steals every scene he is in. That is not bad because Lionel Atwill steals every scene he is in(the two have no scenes together). Atwill brings life into his role as an inspector with a wooden arm. Atwill has grace and charm, and a generous dose of humour. This is his best role as far as I am concerned. Just listening to him give his speech about his encounter with the monster as a child is at one hand chilling and at the other emotional. Son of Frankenstein deservedly ranks as one of the great Universal horror pictures. It is not as good as The Bride of Frankenstein, but looks better than any of the Universal horror pictures. And that is as great a compliment as any!

'Frankenstein' and 'Bride of...' pretty much told a complete story. And the story was fashioned in such a way that the viewer is watching the events as they unfold. As the events unfold, the story shifts from the torment of the creator, Frankenstein, to the torment of the creation, the Monster.

Now in 'Son of...', the emphasis is shifted back to the scientist. And Karloff no longer has a monopoly on the role of the 'Back From the Dead'; he shares that with Lugosi's 'Ygor'. Nor does he have the monopoly on the 'Artificial Human'; he shares that spot with Atwill's one-armed 'Inspector Krogh'. Nor does he possess his personality that was gradually evolving in the first two entries. The Monster has been reduced to a hulking henchman bound to the will of the evil Ygor.

The 'Monster turned pawn' had actually begun in 'Bride of...' as Pretorious used him to force Frankenstein to create the Monster's mate. You could almost say that the Monster was used as a tool for Henry Frankenstein to play God; a tool for Pretorious' dream to create a new race; and a tool for Ygor's desire for revenge on the jurors who condemned him to the hangman's noose. The difference in 'Son of...' is that the Monster no longer evolves and the character is left with no where to go.

But this is still a fascinating film. Director Lee replaces realistic sets and background with surrealism. Details from the first two films are abandoned for light background and twisted, gargantuan shadows. And much of some great action set-pieces have already occurred off screen, before the movie begins. Which means we're left with alot of talk of 'what was' and 'what happened before'. Which kind of fits into the definition of what a legend constitutes. Fortunately, the actors doing the talking are Rathbone, Lugosi and Atwill. Even Rathbone's over the top performance can be forgiven, knowing his next film(?) was his signature (& debut) role as Sherlock Holmes in 'Hound of the Baskervilles', a role he was absolutely brilliant in.

Even though Karloff has a much reduced role, the gigantic sets, dead trees and slanted architecture compels the viewer to be constantly aware of his lurking menace. It is this approach that, standing on its own, makes this a fine film. The viewer is forced to rely on imagination more than the first two movies put together. It is certainly a more polished film than the original. And Lugosi and Atwill's support acting are leagues above the wooden Mae Clarke, John Boles and Valerie Hobson.

Like the Monster; "tis better to have been made, than never to have been made at all". We would have missed out on all that fun.

7 out of 10 ! One of my favorite 'Frankenstein' films.

Definitely the most underrated of the three "Karloff-as-Monster" films. To my mind, it's the one that plays best today. Bela Legosi gives his finest, most understated performance as Ygor. The cinematography is spectacular. Lionel Atwill's performance is my favorite of his (and one of the few times he didn't play a villain). I could go on and on ad infinitum, but I don't see the reason to. The film speaks for itself. It gets one of my highest recommendations.

"Baron Wolf von Frankenstein" (Basil Rathbone) is a decent young man who just wants to start a new life with his beautiful wife, "Elsa von Frankenstein" (Josephine Hutchinson) and son in the castle bequeathed to him upon his father's death. Upon entering the laboratory he encounters a rather unsavory character named "Ygor" (played by none other than Bela Lugosi) who shows him a secret room which contains the crypt of his father and his grandfather. It also contains the live body of the monster known as "Frankenstein" (Boris Karloff) who has been seriously injured. After a thorough examination, and at the urging of Ygor, he decides to bring the monster out of his comatose state. Things begin to spiral quickly out of control after that. Anyway, this is the third film in this series and while it might not be up to the same high standards of "Frankenstein" and "The Bride of Frankenstein", it still packs a decent enough punch. All of the actors did well and the story contains enough suspense and drama to keep things moving along quite nicely. Definitely worth a view for fans of classical horror.

With the runaway success of the re-issue on a double bill of both "Dracula" and "Frankenstein" in the late nineteen thirties, Universal Studios decided it was time to resurrect their most lucrative property, the Frankenstein Monster, if the studio was to have any chance of surviving the fiscal year. True to form they originally intended to produce nothing more than a quick cheapie to cash in on the public's renewed interest in horror films. Director Rowland V. Lee had other ideas. He envisioned the film as a modern fairy tale with Frankenstein's Monster as the traditional giant ogre stalking a primordial landscape, and to be sure it is in this film that he first enters the realm of myth. To help achieve this goal he set Jack Otterson to create the most expressionistic sets of any horror film since "The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari". The universe of "Son" is a world of perpetual night and fog; rain swept castles and blasted heaths; terrifying flashes of lightening; shadowy corridors where giants lurk; hidden passage ways leading to underground crypts, where time, dust and the worm aren't the only things that move among the dead. "Son of Frankenstein" is the most visually impressive of all of Universal's horror films and George Robinson's gorgeous black and white cinematography captures every shadow, every out-sized distortion beautifully.

This would also be the last time a Frankenstein film would have a script worthy of the subject. Willis Cooper fashioned a contemporary Grimm's fairy tale in which the journey of the film's "outsiders", Wolf, Elsa, and Peter will become progressively more nightmarish the deeper they descend; where even breakfast in the morning will be overseen by a pair of monstrous gargoyles. They're journeying by train to inherit the Frankenstein estate, unknown to them a house literally at the edge of Hell, and these opening shots are the most "normal" in the entire film. They think of themselves as "explorers" and "exploring something so foreign we can't even imagine what its like." They speak of the castle being "haunted", while outside the window we see through the wind and the rain a gray expanse of desolation and dead trees. "What a strange country!" Elsa exclaims. Their passage into the subterranean netherworld of mad doctors, murderous hunchbacks and monsters has begun and will climax in a necrophilic family reunion, ("We're all dead here.") in the Frankenstein crypt, in which both grandfather and father are dead, but the step-brother, the monster and family black sheep is very much alive. "Do you mean to imply that is my brother?" Wolf asks. Igor, the true Frankenstein family retainer replies, "Only his mother was the lightening." And it is Wolf's voyage from arrogance and ignorance, ("Why should we fear anything!") to humility and wisdom, ("Never in my life have I known cold fear until that moment I felt his hand on my shoulder!") which is central to the film.

While the film is a follow up to "Bride of Frankenstein", it very much stands on its own. Gone are any references to the Bride and Dr, Praetorious, both presumably "blown to atoms" at the climax of that film. Also the monster doesn't speak. All traces of speech, at Karloff's insistence were eliminated. The portrait of Colin Clive as Henry Frankenstein dominates the castle's study, and recalls the earlier films. In the scenes on the train Wolf refers to the, "Blunder of a stupid assistant who gave his father's creation the brain of a killer instead of a normal one." This is of course, a direct reference to the first film. Karloff's return to his greatest role completes the linking of the three films. And consistent with the impressive visuals, the Monster is given his most striking look. Gone is the distinctly twentieth century black garb so beloved of the Universal Frankenstein films. Instead the Monster is clothed in a crude sheepskin jersey, with heavy shirt and trousers stitched together with strips of leather. Indeed, his whole appearance has become that of a giant, an ogre out of Grimm or Perrault. He even gets the traditional giant's club in the form of Krogh's wooden arm at the film's climax. As if to underscore this, Peter gives the Monster a present-a storybook of fairy tales!

The film may have the greatest horror film cast ever. There is Karloff dominating as the Monster. Given less screen time than in the previous film, his scenes are still among his most powerful. To cite just two examples, the scene where he rises like Lucifer out of the pit is like an image from Dante's Inferno while his primal howl of grief upon discovering the dead Igor is one of the Monster's greatest moments from any of the Frankenstein films. Bela Lugosi easily has his best role after Dracula as the broken neck, hunchback, Igor. Creepy, roguish, even pitiable, one is reminded of what a fine actor he could be with a role worthy of his talent. Lionel Atwill with his beautifully clipped vocal delivery and sardonic sense of humor has his definitive screen role as the one arm Inspector Krogh; he doesn't miss any opportunity for scene stealing bits of business with that wooden arm. And there is Basil Rathbone as Wolf. He doesn't have Karloff's make-up or Lugosi's broken neck or Atwill's wooden arm, but he gives a full-blooded commanding performance that refuses to get lost in this who's who of cinematic ghouls. William K. Everson once said that only a truly great actor can get away with a little deliberate ham now and then, and if Rathbone is a little over the top, it is ham well seasoned and served and adds enormously to the enjoyment of the film. Finally Frank Skinner's incredible film score would set the standard for Universal's horror films for the next decade.

Series note: I strongly recommend that you watch the Frankenstein films to this point in order. Each builds on the events of the previous entry and will have much more meaning and significance if watched in order. The first film is Frankenstein (1931), and the second is Bride of Frankenstein (1935).

The third film in Universal's Frankenstein series, Son of Frankenstein is set after the first two film's Henry Frankenstein has passed away. Baron Wolf von Frankenstein (Basil Rathbone), Henry's son, is on his way to claim his inheritance from his father, and receives a not-too-warm welcome from the small German town that has been frightened out of its wits by Henry's doings with monsters. While staying at the family castle, Wolf opens a box containing his father's research records and a note from his father encouraging him to follow in the same footsteps. He initially believes he's not worthy of such encouragement, but becoming a "mad doctor" may be easier than he thinks.

In both the overall tone of the film and in the tone of Boris Karloff's last turn as "The Monster", Son of Frankenstein is much more closely allied with James Whale's first Frankenstein film, rather than the camp-fest that was Bride of Frankenstein. New series director Rowland V. Lee has everything played various seriously, even Bela Lugosi's Ygor, which could have easily become funny, intentionally so or not.

Adding to the atmosphere are the sets, which are just as grand in their own way as anything in either of Whale's two Frankenstein films. This time around the expressionist influence is at its strongest, but it is combined with a prescient minimalism. While the first two films had strong surrealist visual touches combined with their expressionism, Son of Frankenstein dispenses altogether with any concerns of approaching realism or naturalism. The idea here instead is to create starkness and shadows, often with a maximum of intentional artificiality. It's an appropriate approach that both pays homage to the earlier films and reflects the plot of the present film--shadows are an offspring of their parent objects, and the monster is an artificial man. The production and set design of the film is even more remarkable when one realizes that art directors of the era routinely worked on many films at once. Son of Frankenstein's Art Director Jack Otterson, for example, worked on over 50 films in 1942 alone!

It's a rare treat to have three genre icons the caliber of Rathbone, Karloff and Lugosi together in one film. They mesh exquisitely, managing to enhance each other's performances with no one upstaging anyone else. Lionel Atwill, as Inspector Krogh, easily holds his own with the trio (although any fan of Mel Brooks' Young Frankenstein (1974) is sure to laugh at occasional moments involving Krogh, since he is so perfectly spoofed in Brooks' film), as does the beautiful Josephine Hutchinson as Frankenstein's wife Elsa (named after the woman who played The Bride in the previous film, Elsa Lanchester) and Donnie Dunagan as their son Peter.

Lugosi's Ygor was supposedly improvised then written into the film--Lugosi was originally slated to play a policeman. This is remarkable in that his shepherd character and relationship to The Monster are so well integrated. The Monster symbolically wears a heavy woolen vest/smock, and has a deeply symbiotic relationship with Ygor that is the core of the film. Ygor is also "undead" in his own way.

While Son of Frankenstein is not nearly as epic as the first two films, it should not be. Its aim is to unfold more like a stage play, with highly abstract, symbolic sets and finely integrated performances from a skilled cast. As such, it is every bit as good as the first two films in the series.

For the last time on the big screen Boris Karloff got on the heavy makeup and elevator shoes to play the Frankenstein monster in Son Of Frankenstein. The title role is reserved for Basil Rathbone who has returned with his wife Josephine Hutchinson and and son Donnie Dunnagan to reclaim title to the castle that has the laboratory where his father conducted those experiments that had such an impact on those around the area.

For which reason the local villagers aren't really thrilled to have a Frankenstein family member back in town. Rathbone is as much the scientist as his old man and would dearly love to clear his family's reputation. He gets that chance when the hunchbacked Igor leads him to the monster.

The two roles that are unforgettable in Son Of Frankenstein are Bela Lugosi as Igor and Lionel Atwill as the one armed inspector Krogh. Both certainly were lampooned in Mel Brooks's Young Frankenstein, but they are played straight and real here. Lugosi was a graverobber who used to unearth dead bodies for Rathbone's father to experiment on. He was hanged for it and unfortunately for all around it didn't take, just left him with a crooked shape and a thirst for revenge.

As for Atwill as a child his right arm was ripped from its socket and he makes do with what probably was a state of the art prosthetic arm for its time. He's got the biggest score of all to settle with the monster and he bides his time knowing that Rathbone's scientific curiosity will get him experimenting again in the family tradition.

Son Of Frankenstein takes its place in the pantheon of the Universal horror collection. With a cast well versed in the genre even after seventy years, the film still has the capacity to frighten.

When Baron Wolf von Frankenstein (Basil Rathbone) arrives to take over his father's estate, the locals immediately begin to fear for the worst. Wolf's father created a monster that terrorized the community and the townsfolk want no more of that. Wolf assures everyone that he has no intentions of creating a monster. But when Wolf finds Ygor (Bela Lugosi) living in the ruins of his father's laboratory, he is soon headed down the same path of destruction that claimed his father.

Over the years, there have been volumes written on the Universal classic horror movies. Realizing that it would be foolish of me to attempt to improve or add much to the writings of these scholars, I'll instead focus on a couple of areas that make Son of Frankenstein so special to me.

1. The Acting. Son of Frankenstein features a Who's Who of the best of the classic horror actors. Joining Rathbone and Lugosi in the cast are Boris Karloff and Lionel Atwill. While each gives a noteworthy performance in their own right, Lugosi's performance is generally held up as the best of his career. And while I agree, Rathbone makes Son of Frankenstein a joy for me to watch. There are very few actors that I can think of who could have played Wolf with the same type of intelligent energy that Rathbone exhibits. He's wonderful. As for Karloff, I'm glad he decided to make Son of Frankenstein his last as the monster. By the time of the second sequel, Karloff's monster became little more that a prop for Lugosi, Rathbone, and Atwill to fight over.

2. The Sets. I'm not exaggerating when I say that the sets in Son of Frankenstein are among the best I've ever seen. The sets are amazing with their bizarre angles and shadows. Two that immediately come to mind are the dining table set and the staircase set at the beginning of the movie. They are in a class of their own.

Every fan of horror, or just good classic movies in general, owes it to themselves to see Son of Frankenstein. It may not be as well known among the casual fan as either Frankenstein or Bride of Frankenstein, but it many ways it's the equal of those two films (if not better).

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.

I went on a binge, watching all four of the first Universal Frankenstein movies. I know that many believe "Metropolis" to be the first mad scientist movie. But that wasn't about science or scientists, but about repressive society. The "science" there was actually technology and had as much to do with things as the devices in "1984."

This, this, I think is the first movie series where the whole point was that science was inerrently evil in its tendencies. Its different than a Faust story, where powers were conveyed for selfish ends; here the ends are discovery. Its no mistake that there's the heavy hand of religion in the village context that surrounds the man and his work.

So when I watch these, I pay attention to two things. One is how science is portrayed. Its radically different in all four. And the second is how the cinematic grammar is used to present that notion. Its a sort of hobby of mine to compare sequels and remakes.

+++

In this third one, we go even further away from the notion of science than before. That last one had a folded wrapper, an enclosing narrative. This one has a much simpler wrapper, a train ride in and out, using what seems different lens and film stock.

This time, the science is changed again. Now the scientific notion is back on discovery, but its not about life from the human perspective. Now it is more cosmic, more celestial and yes, even godly. The son — who is smarter than his dad — knows that what his dad thought was the power in lightning was REALLY cosmic rays. They are the source of all life. So it isn't merely a matter of humanity, it is a matter of understanding god.

Note that even though the filmmaker and support are less talented, they strike out in a radically new direction cinematically. Now we do get German influence. We get a Prussian inspector who is seeking in precisely the same manner the doctor is. We get German fairy tales. The sets are theatrical in themselves, not supportive. They are simpler and starker. We have boiling pit of sulfur in the lab, not mentioned before. We have the charming intrusion of music folding in. Gone are the violins of previous films, now substituted by reeds, particularly an oboe that is mirrored by Igor.

Its a different twist on the science, possibly the one least twisted of the four in this respect.

Ted's Evaluation -- 3 of 3: Worth watching.

Though it is nowhere near as good as the first 2 Universal Frankenstein films, this is still a fairly enjoyable outing.

The plot is straightforward, yet still interesting. As the title would suggest, it centers around the son of Henry Frankenstein, who originally created the "monster". He returns to the village where his father lived and worked, only to be met with hatred by the townsfolk. He soon comes across Ygor, who has been protecting the "monster" after the explosion that supposedly destroyed him. I would say more...but that, my friends, would be spoiling it for you.

Basil Rathbone does a very good job as the titular character, and Bela Lugosi's Ygor is quite possibly his greatest post-Dracula role. Karloff, playing the "monster" once again, isn't as good as in the previous installments. Lionel Atwill was one of the highlights of the film, playing the local detective whose arm had been ripped off my the "monster". Perhaps it would have been better if I had seen this prior to Young Frankenstein, because I found myself chuckling every time he moved his fake arm. The rest of the cast is pretty typical for supporting casts of the time period, AKA not very good.

One thing that really stood out were the sets and their design. It almost seemed influenced by Dr. Caligari, which I found very interesting.

This isn't one of the best Universal monster flicks, but it's still worth a watch. It's very slow, but still enjoyable.

6.5/10

Some years after the death of Frankenstein, his son Wolf returns to the castle with his wife to claim the family property. He also finds his father's writings, explaining how his research was conducted and how to generate life.

Exactly when this takes place is sort of curious. The last film is 1935, and this film is 1939, a mere four years. Yet, Wolf is full grown with a child of his own, despite not even having been both yet in the last film. That puts the two at about a twenty-five year difference, maybe thirty years.

Basil Rathbone, who had been known to dislike horror films, is the perfect choice for Baron Wolf von Frankenstein. Distinguished and a fine actor. Allegedly, Claude Rains and Peter Lorre had tried out for the part. Lorre is a bizarre consideration, maybe Rains could have done it, but Rathbone is perfect. He has the look to replace Colin Clive. (Clive had unfortunately died at in 1937 from tuberculosis.)

Boris Karloff is The Monster. How he survived the last film, where he seems to commit suicide, is unclear. But a monster played by anyone but Karloff is not the same.

Bela Lugosi is an exceptional Ygor, the demented man with the broken neck. Some consider this Lugosi's best role, despite his being more well known for playing Dracula. Lugosi has been known to dip into camp, but this is not camp and it is a great makeup job, as well.

Lionel Atwill is Krogh, the local cop. Howard Maxford says that this film is sometimes unintentionally funny due to Mel Brooks, and I presume that the character of Krogh is what he has in mind when he says that.

Mike Mayo correctly says "the acting carries the film", with Lugosi "seldom better", Karloff "excellent", and Rathbone and Atwill "never upstaged." This film is widely considered to be the last good Universal Frankenstein film, before following "the sad path to the Abbott and Costello travesty", to quote Ivan Butler. (I, for one, do not mind those films.)

The last Boris Karloff Frankenstein. The Baron's son Wolf (Basil Rathbone) comes to move to his late father's estate--a big beautiful castle. Inside he meets Ygor (Bela Lugosi) a crippled madman who wants to revive the Monster (Karloff). Naturally everything goes wrong.

Elaborate sequel to the series--the last really good one that Universal spent money on. The sets are huge and incredibly bizarre (note the huge wooden stairs going to the second floor). Also they're shot using weird camera angles and making very good use of light and darkness. There's ALWAYS something to look at in this movie. The script is intelligent and literate with almost uniformly good performances. Basil Rathbone chews the scenery as Wolf. Josephine Hutchinson is given nothing to do as his wife--but she does it beautifully. Lionel Atwill (already typecast as a policeman) is good and very amusing with his wooden hand. Lugosi is really creepy as Ygor. Best of all is Karloff--he uses pantomime throughout the whole picture (even though in the previous "Bride of..." he had learned to speak) and gets every meaning across. He doesn't even really start going until an hour in but he makes up for it!

The only debit is Frankenstein's son played by an annoying child actor named Donnie Dunagan. His acting is laughable (even for a child) and he speaks with a distinct Southern accent!!! Then again he WAS from Texas.

Still, a really good, spooky, elaborate horror film. Highly recommended.

What a delightful sight, seeing Basil Rathbone, Boris Karloff and Bela Lugosi all together in this movie. Seeing the three of them in one shot gave me a special feeling, these three guys are among the biggest screen legends of all time.

Basil Rathbone is always a big pleasure to watch in a movie, he was a true great 'classic' actor. Bela Lugosi was almost unrecognizable in his role as Ygor and he played his character with lots of passion. Unfortunately the age was showing for Karloff. He was well over 50 years old when he played the Frankenstein monster for the last time in this movie. His 'old' age is truly notable, even through his make-up. I think it was a good thing that he never played the famous classic horror character again after this movie.

The story is still interesting enough to make this movie original, even though the depth and emotions of the previous two Frankenstein movies is missing.

It's a bit strange that the first two Frankenstein movies with Karloff are very well known but this movie is not. This movie is truly excellent and should deserve so more recognition and appreciation. The atmosphere is just as good as from the previous two movies and the monster is still one powerful horror character, even though his role is rather limited compared to the first two movies. This time the real main part is Baron Wolf von Frankenstein played by Basil Rathbone. Some people might be disappointed by this but being a fan of Rathbone I'm not complaining about this.

The movie has enough originality and the story is surely interesting enough to call this movie a worthy addition to the Frankenstein movie legacy. But what made this movie truly interesting and amazing to me, were the three main actors of the movie Rathbone, Karloff and Lugosi.

9/10

http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/

The son of Dr. Henry Frankenstein moves with his family to the family castle. Now it is Dr. Wolf von Frankenstein(Basil Rathbone) laboring at bringing new life to the Frankenstein monster.

Rathbone is over shadowed by a great cast. Boris Karloff is perfect in his third role as the monster. Bela Lugosi is menacing as Ygor. Lionel Atwill is outstanding as the Inspector.

While this is probably the best of the first three Frankenstein movies, there is virtually no continuity. They completely ignore what happened in the first two movies and just make up a new story about the past. So in the fours years since Bride Of Frankenstein, Dr. Frankenstein has moved to America, had a son, died and his son is a married adult with a child of his own. He decides to go back to the old family mansion, thinking he can make the locals love him and restore the name of Frankenstein. When he gets there his servants from America are already there and have prepared the house. Finding out his butler's name is Benson was hilarious to me and I couldn't stop thinking about it. He decides to repair his dad's laboratory which has a hole in the roof from when he killed the monster. Even though he never had a laboratory(he worked in an old windmill that was destroyed) and the monster destroyed himself and Dr. Pretorius' lab at the same time. Although they completely changed the back story, it's still better than the first two. Did I mention that Wolf Frankenstein's son is possibly the worst child actor to have ever been caught on film? Plus he has a ridiculous perm and an accent that makes him almost impossible to understand. Sometimes it sounds Cajun but I'm not really sure. This is the first time ever I would recommend not seeing the earlier movies first. If you haven't seen them already, start here.