Frankenstein 1970 (1958) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
52 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
6/10
Frankenstein - 1970 (1958) **1/2
JoeKarlosi2 July 2004
Warning: Spoilers
(possible spoilers)

I'm going to defend this enjoyable if unremarkable monster movie, as it's one of the most maligned and battered 1950s horror flicks, and I've never been able to understand why. There are so many things that are delights for horror fans in this film that I don't know where to start.

Let's start with the most obvious: the welcome return of Boris Karloff in a Frankenstein movie. His performance is always cited by fans and critics as being over the top and hammy, and maybe it is. But I consider it to be a self-parody and actually a good deal of fun. Have you ever considered the similarity to the Karloff puppet character of the Baron from MAD MONSTER PARTY... or the classic imitation of Boris (by Bobby "Boris" Pickett) from the song "Monster Mash"? This is the impression I get by Karloff's spoofing of his image in this film - he's an animated, deranged, eccentric mad doctor stereotype - the 'Uncle Boris' of both "Monster Mash" and MAD MONSTER PARTY - except in FRANKENSTEIN 1970 he's not only a puppet or a voice-only singer on the "Monster Mash" record; he's the real flesh and blood deal.

And what is Boris doing? Like the song says, he's "working in the lab late one night" - and very secretly, deep below the bowels of an ancient Gothic castle in the middle of nowhere. Many, many hidden passageways underneath - in a basement laboratory while unsuspecting guests spend the night in the bedrooms above, totally oblivious to what he's doing. He's creating another living man. Of course, it's always pointed out the "absurd" look of the monster - but I've never seen that as an issue, and certainly not when we consider all the other far more pathetic monsters of this era. The creature has basically been described as a "mummy with a garbage can on its head." But what it really is, under all those bandages, is a perfect rendition of a younger and healthier Boris Karloff, molded in the scientist's own image. It's only that its head is still encased in a large cast, and the creature at the point he escapes in the movie is still a "work in progress," so to speak. So now here's a question: would you rather the bandages and head cast had been removed for the creation, thus exposing what would then be a gentlemanly-looking Boris double smiling and shaking hands cordially with everyone around the castle? Not very monstrous, I would think!

For old-time horror fans, this baby has it in spades - misty swamps, stormy nights, shadows and catacombs. For those who like a little more "spice," when was the last time you saw Karloff massage a still-beating heart or produce a jar of eyeballs?

Then there's the cinematography. It was even filmed in WIDESCREEN (though current VHS editions only have the opening and closing credits this way). The opening sequence is brilliant, and very creepy. Atmosphere is established right off the bat. And to compliment all of this is some very tasty horror soundtrack music.

Well, in the end, this is a moody old fashioned '50s horror movie with all the popular trimmings, and a perfect choice for Halloween viewing. I hope Warner releases a DVD of this one day (the print needs work BTW) and it's my hope that more fans will let loose and enjoy this overlooked flick. It's not at all a "great" film (its biggest liability is that the pacing could have been picked up for one thing), but what more any fan could want from a Boris Karloff chiller - especially of this time - is beyond me. **1/2 out of ****
26 out of 31 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
A little better than you've heard
evilskip14 September 1999
I have a little fondness for this movie. It was on TV quite often when I was a little skippy. It was always on The Ghoul who was a horror host in the Detroit area. Most of the time we were watching to see him but the movies weren't always bad. This one was a little above the rest.

To finance his experiments the last of the Frankensteins (Karloff) allows a film crew to shoot a movie/TV show on the grounds of his estate. Of course the Doc is building a creature down in his secret laboratory. Not only does Frankenstein need cash, he needs a few spare parts for his project as well. The film crew and servants provide him with these - unwillingly of course.

The film crew is really annoying. Seeing them getting bumped off by the bandage-swathed monster is quite fun. Many have complained that Karloff was hamming it up. I disagree as he was dealing with a one-dimensional character.

The ending is kind of predictable. But there are worse ways to spend your time than watching this.
15 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Frankenstein 1970 Not a bad scare
larryandrita24 March 2007
When I was a little guy, my dad and I used to watch creature features on Friday nights and I loved the low budget scares on this show. Now as a middle aged guy who occasionally watches one of these "scary movies" I am amused and amazed at how easily I was scared and fooled. When I saw Frankenstein 1970 was going to be broadcast, I was ready to be disappointed. However I was fooled again.

Is this a great movie, NO. Is it a fun movie YES! Any movie who has as the the hero "Red" Berry is low budget. It does however have the great Karloff. He is wonderful. His monologue for the "movie in the movie" is great. Karloff was starting to show his incredibly painful arthritis at this time of his life and it does pain one to think of the agony he is going through. But he is Karloff and actually portrays a Frankenstein for the first time in his career. He does not disappoint.

If you love 1950 horrors and you like Karloff you will enjoy this movie. The acting is mediocre (except Karloff) and the Monster Hokey but give it a try.
12 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Underrated...simply underrated.
mord392 October 2000
MORD39 RATING: **1/2 (of ****)

As a kid I recall being disappointed when catching FRANKENSTEIN 1970 on TV. I was expecting the 1931 original, and at the age of 8 or 9 I was understandably disappointed. But now as an adult I can appreciate this 1950's monster flick for what it is.

Most fans dismiss this film, but I believe it has much going for it. For one thing, we get Boris Karloff as the Baron. Too many folks have panned his hammy performance, but I think he is deliciously sinister and over-ripe. His character reminds me of the Boris puppet from the MAD MONSTER PARTY film, and I'm surprised that more viewers don't find his performance endearing.

The film boasts a surprise opening and a surprise ending (I won't give them away), and in between that we get to see a gloomy castle filled with an underground secret laboratory and hidden passageways. Boris plays eerie music on his organ, and he's creating a monster that runs around killing people. Is this not what makes a fun horror pic?

True, the monster isn't very convincing...but neither are most fifties creatures, so why all the fuss? Besides, the monster only looks as he does due to the fact that the bandages and head cast have not yet been removed.

With foggy swamps, unexplored corridors, and a mad Karloff, fans could do far worse than FRANKENSTEIN 1970.
40 out of 46 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
"Torch, Scorch, Unforch...."
ferbs5412 November 2012
Horror icon Boris Karloff, during the mid-1950s, significantly slowed down his prodigious output of the '30s and '40s. After 1953, fans would have to wait a full four years before his next horror picture, "Voodoo Island," was released, and that one is generally acknowledged as one of Boris' few stinkers. The British actor seemed to rebound a bit in 1958, however, with the releases of "Frankenstein 1970"--a shlocky yet entertaining picture--and the very-well-done British film "Grip of the Strangler." "Frankenstein 1970" was the fifth Frankenstein film that Karloff had participated in, following the classic original in 1931, the eternal glory that is 1935's "Bride of Frankenstein," 1939's excellent "Son of Frankenstein" and 1944's "House of Frankenstein," but--no surprise--the film in question is any number of rungs down the scale, qualitywise, as compared to those great others.

Here, the 70-year-old Karloff plays Victor von Frankenstein, the final descendant of the infamous House. Needing additional funds to purchase the atomic reactor that will enable him to complete his experiments (and at this point, need it even be mentioned what those experiments consist of?), he rents out his ancestral castle near Frankfurt to an American TV production company that is making a movie to celebrate Frankenstein's 240th anniversary. (Never mind that that would make for a birth date of 1730, if the film actually does take place in 1970, and that Mary Shelley's original novel came out in 1818, although admittedly set in "17--." Also, never mind the fact that the film makes no attempt to look as if it's transpiring 12 years in its then future.) But when body parts, such as brains and eyes, are in short supply, what is the good Baron supposed to do, other than use parts from the retainers, film crew and nubile actresses on hand?

"Frankenstein 1970" is a film that I never got to see as a little kid, despite its ubiquitous presence on television back then. When I mentioned to my Psychotronic Guru, Rob, that I had just acquired the DVD to watch, he enthused about the film's opening scene, which he said he'd found terrifying when he saw it in a theater over 50 years ago. Film historian Tom Weaver says the same thing on the DVD's commentary regarding this sequence, in which a claw-taloned maniac pursues a screaming, hysterical blonde through a fog-shrouded landscape and into a swamp, and in truth, that scene IS the best and scariest moment in the film; the only scary moment, as it turns out. For the rest of it, the picture is a tad slow moving, occasionally dull, with many scenes of the Baron puttering around with his creation in his lab, dictating his progress into a running tape recorder. The resultant monster is one of the most ridiculous looking in any Frankenstein film; indeed, swaddled in mummylike wrappings as he is, we never even get a good look at the pathetic thing, until the picture's admittedly startling final moment. A lumbering bundle of bandages, with a head that looks like a giant cardboard box residing under the wrappings, the monster here is an object of laughter, not fright. Eyeball-less as it is, the monster seems to get around just fine, leading the viewer to wonder just why the Baron is so obsessed with procuring orbs for his creation. Besides the monster, the film's laboratory equipment and creation sequence FX pale mightily in comparison to those earlier four Frankenstein films, which all featured stunning-looking lab sets and amazing creation sequences (particularly "Bride"). Still, it must be said that director Howard W. Koch (later, the producer of such classic films as "The Manchurian Candidate," "The President's Analyst," "The Odd Couple" and "Plaza Suite") makes nice use of his CinemaScope frame, that the score by Paul Dunlap is occasionally gripping, and that cinematographer Carl E. Guthrie has provided some moody B&W visuals. The film also offers fans of grisly horror some very mild gross-outs, such as a jar of spilled eyeballs, the massaging of a human heart, Boris' tale of the tongueless commandant, and a corpse-grinding machine (an inspiration for Ted V. Mikels, perhaps?). Basically, however, the film is of interest mainly because of Uncle Boris, who gets to overact deliciously and impress his many fans, once again, with that wonderfully mellifluous voice. As in the 1934 classic "The Black Cat," Boris also gets to play some chilling music on his home organ, always a dismal thrill! Bottom line: Filmed as it was in only eight days (!) in January '58, "Frankenstein 1970," cheezy as it is, remains a surprisingly decent, oddball entertainment. After 1958, fans would have to wait another five years before Karloff's next horror pictures, which he made under director Roger Corman. So this film, and "Grip of the Strangler," had to hold them for a while (in addition to TV's "Thriller," of course, which Boris hosted from 1960-'62). And really, where else can you find a line like "Torch, scorch, unforch"?
9 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
The Last Association
bkoganbing6 February 2012
The last association that Boris Karloff had with the Frankenstein character came in this low budget Allied Artists film that I remember seeing in the theater in 1958. It was not the best of endings.

This time Boris Karloff is playing the last descendant of the Frankenstein clan who's an old man and who in his youth was tortured by the Nazis in an effort to divulge Frankenstein family secrets. It left him quite understandably twisted.

Karloff is putting up with a movie company who is shooting on his castle grounds, no doubt shooting a film like Frankenstein 1970, a low budget thriller. The money they're paying him however is paying for an atomic reactor, something his ancestor didn't have, maybe that's the missing ingredient.

Of course the bodies start falling, four of them to be precise as Karloff searches for what he needs to revive the Frankenstein monster which he has found and preserved.

Boris Karloff and his contemporary Bela Lugosi did both great horror films and a lot of junk. Frankenstein 1970 sad to say falls in the latter category.
14 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Stinker only of interest to Karloff fans
utgard1428 December 2015
Lesser Boris Karloff horror picture, notable for being the first time he played an actual member of the Frankenstein family. In his earlier (better) Frankenstein movies, he played either the monster or a non-Frankenstein scientist. This movie and the later Mad Monster Party are, I believe, the only times he played an actual Frankenstein. The story has Karloff playing Baron Victor von Frankenstein, descendant of the Frankenstein that caused all that trouble way back when. The good Baron, disfigured by Nazis during WWII, is in dire financial straits and needs money to continue his own experiments. Ask what kind of experiments and I'll look at you funny. To make some money the Baron allows a horror movie to be shot at Castle Frankenstein. Soon things are getting a little crazy and members of the film crew are being killed off by the Baron for reasons that should be pretty to predict.

Karloff always stood out in his horror films but here he plays to the rafters, no doubt overcompensating for the talky and dull script. Rudolph Anders is good as his friend and Don "Red" Barry does a decent job as the Carl Denham-esque movie director. There are a couple of pretty ladies around as well. Two of the better scenes are fake-outs that turn out to be scenes for the movie-within-a-movie. Perhaps if this movie had been more like that one it would have been more fun. As it is, it's a pretty dreary affair that drags on and on. The effects are poor and the monster, when it actually does something, is laughable. Basically this movie is a slow death by words. Only recommendable to Karloff completists.
13 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Karloff Made This Film
Rainey-Dawn5 September 2015
This is not a down right awful film... it's actually quite fun to watch. This might not be the best film Karloff has starred in but it's entertaining! It's nice to see Karloff in a role reversal of Frankenstein. He is the scientist who created The Monster in this film.

I have to agree with other reviewers that it is Karloff's presence in the movie that makes this one worth watching over again. Some of the film is laughable - which really creates the "fun" in watching the film.

Love the semi-Gothic atmosphere - and the surprise at the end of it.

All in all this is a good weekend popcorn flick! Worth watching if you like anything Frankenstein and/or Boris Karloff! 7/10
21 out of 24 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
"Somehow, organ music always makes me think of death."
classicsoncall20 April 2017
Warning: Spoilers
I thought it might have been my imagination, but another reviewer on this board confirms what I thought I saw - as the story moves along, the scar on Boris Karloff's face gets progressively worse from scene to scene. Even after I had it figured out, his face still kept changing!

Well there's really only one reason to catch this flick and that's for the presence of the master, Boris Karloff himself. The story itself gets kind of schlocky and the supporting players, who don't come with a background in horror films per se, don't add a lot of tension or menace to the proceedings. There is however a smidgeon of that great pseudo-scientific babble of the Thirties and Forties offered up as part of Baron Victor von Frankenstein's operating procedure, utilizing an atomic reactor!!! to produce rebirth, along with the idea of fusing real and synthetic skin together. That's worth something to horror film fans like myself, always on the lookout for clever and unique ideas to enhance those lab experiments.

If you're going to complain about how hokey the feature creature in this picture looks, do keep one thing in mind. This was an opportunity for Karloff to parlay his reputation as the icon of Universal horror by bringing two of his creations to the screen, The Frankenstein Monster and the Mummy. I don't know if that was on the filmmakers' minds when they put this thing together, but that's what I got out of it. For Karloff fans, that has to be a good thing.
6 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
atmosphere not acting make this movie
john2290020 September 2009
Atmosphere is important in any horror film and this movie has it in spades. Unfortunately, that's all it has. Really very little to recommend here. Karloff is good in this movie but completely wasted in this effort and far too campy and hammy to really chill the audience. The monster itself is also a huge problem. Not so much when we first see the monster but as it progresses in its various stages of creation, it just gets sillier and sillier. The music tries to scare up a few chills whenever the monster appears but it is all really wasted. The best thing about the movie as I previously stated is the atmosphere. I especially like movies that have isolated creepy castles in them that are filled with secret passageways and hidden laboratories from which all those mad scientists conduct their business. The opening sequence of the film is by far the best part of the movie but the surprise ending tries to come close only that it is really telegraphed all throughout the movie and really isn't much of a surprise when you think about it. Although this is by far not the worst Karloff film it is not the best either. It's really too bad that Karloff, if he wanted to spoof the Frankenstein character he played, that he should have offered to play the part in ABBOTT AND COSTELLO MEET FRANKENSTEIN.
9 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Not the type of thing anyone needs to be watching.
13Funbags19 May 2018
This movie is all around bad. Karloff as Dr. Frankenstein is weird but you won't even notice because the story is so stupid and boring. I almost stopped watching when he hypnotized a guy but I had to see how bad it would get. And of course the title doesn't make any sense. 1 star is the lowest rating you can give, I would give -1.
6 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Wow! AIP comes full circle with Universal horror films!
CatTales14 June 2003
Warning: Spoilers
*some spoilers*

This is one of those films where the subtext transcends the film itself. AIP had just made "I was a teenage werewolf," "Teenage Frankenstein," and "How to make a monster," the last of which was a self-referential take on how a make-up artist really does turn 2 actors into a werewolf and Frankenstein monster. "Frankenstein 1970" follows this blurring of reality by following documentary filmmakers interviewing the "real" Baron Frankenstein, necessarily played by Boris Karloff who began the Frankenstein saga at Universal Pictures. We quickly find out his motivation to create a monster is very personal: wartime Nazi torture has left him "less than a man" and prematurely aged him 20 years, thus sexually this Baron really is barren. Boris' make-up here is excellent at suggesting old age and depravity. He's enraged when a female actress he's attracted to shows some attention to his manservant ("you are much endowed with Miss. Lund's attentions!"), his words reflecting his sexual insecurity. Since cloning wasn't yet popular in the 1950's, he must assemble a body to perpetuate himself. "Yes, you CAN be of use" (as organ donors), the Baron laughs like a classic mad scientist, leaving the other characters speechless. Sex is also on the minds of the filmmakers. The director is apparently a Casanova, and Boris especially covets his eyeballs for his monster (the eyes are what smoulder in love). However, there's abit of black humor (like Lovecraft's "Herbert West-reanimator") as the blind monster keeps killing the wrong person and Boris keeps flushing unwanted body parts down his futuristic acid-filled toilet.

Speaking of futuristic, why "1970" (the 230th anniversary is no explanation)? Boris doesn't wear long hair and bellbottoms. Probably this was just a way of saying "in the near future" so everyone could still look and act like it's 1958 but the laboratory is futuristic (atomic) and he does have a sink faucet that turns on by photoelectric sensor just like today's modern restrooms.

Aside from sex, the second subtext is the filmmaking itself, which is highlighted approximately in the beginning, middle and end of the movie. First the film seems to be about a monster chasing a girl - the monster is a mysterious chimera - werewolf hands, Frankenstein's big feet, Mummy-like lame leg, but the face is never shown. The girl screams, then we hear "Cut" - we're really watching the documentary filmmakers making a film. Later we're set up again as the Baron explains his family history directly to the camera. We know now that this is probably part of the filmmakers film. As before, a girl screams, we hear "Cut," but the scream was unintentional - the Baron's speech was so riveting it scares an off-stage actress! The scriptgirl mentions the Baron was ad-libbing, so now it is the filmmakers who are being directed/used by their actor. This reversal is made complete in the very curious final scene where the filmmakers enter Baron's laboratory; one turns on a light, another cues up Baron's tape recorder, then plays it (they're unconsciously living their job in the Baron's "studio" - "Lights, camera, action"). They look at each other with the realization they were the Baron's actors. If this isn't strange enough, the Baron's monster is finally revealed. Instead of being ugly, it's the face of the pre-tortured Baron (young, blonde, with a virile-suggesting pencil mustache)! The real "monster" would then be the Baron himself - old, withered, scarred, white-haired, murderous. Over the years audiences often refer to Frankenstein's unnamed monster as "Frankenstein", and it's usually true the mad scientist is worse than his creation. Here this is made explicit by allowing Boris Karloff to play both roles in one film; it also brings everything (the actor, character and story) full circle with it's origins in the Universal films. Mind-blowing in scope.
17 out of 21 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Karloff at his hammiest
rosscinema16 January 2005
Warning: Spoilers
Obviously it helps to be a connoisseur of "B" horror films to enjoy this and I have to admit that I am one of those that can find entertainment in cheesy low budget films especially one like this that has a bit of irony to it. Story takes place in Germany where a film crew is making a movie at the Frankenstein castle where the last descendant of the infamous family needs money so that he can complete his "work". Baron Victor von Frankenstein (Boris Karloff) is badly scarred from the Nazis and he dreams of having his old face back which is part of his work in his hidden laboratory but of course he's also trying to bring to life a monster that he has built himself and to complete this the film crew unknowingly helped him buy an atomic reactor.

*****SPOILER ALERT***** Baron Frankenstein still needs body parts to complete his monster and after his butler Shuter (Norbert Schiller) accidentally stumbles upon the laboratory the Baron uses his brain for his creation. Others in the film crew start to disappear like the script girl and the cameraman and this makes the director Douglas Row (Don "Red" Barry) very nervous to where he notifies the local police who look around the castle and find nothing. The Baron has had his eye (the good one) on the star Carolyn Hayes (Jana Lund) and needs a certain part from her but the monster remembers her kindness and rebels against his orders.

This film is directed by Howard W. Koch who worked primarily as an assistant director and producer but occasionally he did venture over to the directors helm. There are so many things that I noticed as I watched this and the first would be the crew-cut that Karloff wears to remind everyone that they are supposed to be in Germany. Karloff's performance seems to be a gross characterization of roles he's played before and along with the facial scars and a nose worse than Jake LaMotta he badly imitates a limp. Karloff practically drools over actress Lund and then gimps his way into the other room to play organ music and I was reminded of "Mad Monster Party" after viewing this. Lund wears this skintight shirt that makes her bosoms stick out like torpedoes and after she gives the seemingly virginal butler Shuter a scarf and kisses him on the cheek he seems to be in dire need of changing his shorts! I also noticed that at night when Karloff was in his laboratory making a whole lot of noise with his atomic reactor nobody woke up or heard anything! Barry who plays the director wears these "mama boy" pajamas with polo player designs on them as the others are sitting in their rooms getting drunk or trying to sleep. The monster is played by Mike Lane who starred in "The Harder They Fall" with Bogart and his creature is completely wrapped up in bandages which makes him appear more like the mummy. If you read these comments you might think that I didn't enjoy this but your wrong. I found this very entertaining from the low budget atmosphere to the bit of irony that's revealed when they take the bandages off the monsters face and we see an unscarred Karloff. I'm not sure if the writers were trying to be ironic but it seems to be just the right touch considering that Karloff played the role in 1931.
5 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Even Promising Opening Sequence Proved To Be Bogus....hit or miss, uneven.
redryan642 December 2015
Warning: Spoilers
WILLIAM HENRY PRATT had a long and highly prolific career in both the Legitimate Theatre, as well as in Film. His was an immense talent, which was somewhat under-appreciated for his successes in the Horror Film Genre. This is quite unfair, as his on-screen and on-stage characterizations embraced just about every type.

IT IS OF course no secret that the English born thespian changed his professional name while touring Canada in theatrical companies. The chosen moniker was (Drum Roll!!) Boris Karloff. This then was a name that would become synonymous with the fright film and even up to this day, some 75 years after its original release, is so closely identified with the Monster in FRANKENSTEIN & sequels.

UPON COMPLETION AND release of FRANKENSTEIN 1970 in 1958*, it was the veteran actor himself who commented that we have forgotten how to make Horror Movies. Having witnessed an early showing of the movie on WNBQ TV, Channel 5 in Chicago. It was this NBC wholly owned subsidiary and local outlet that screened the picture circa 1962, being a scant 4 years or so after its release. (This is perhaps a testimonial to the level of the movie's content)

IN MUCH THE same manner as the productions of the British company, Hammer Films, the danger and horror of the Monster is given a secondary role to that of a truly evil, very mad scientist. In this case, it's one Victor Frankenstein XXVII, last of the von Frankenstein descendants.

THE MOVIE TRULY misses those excellent pseudo-scientific electrical instruments of Kenneth Strickfadden, which added so much to the original Universal FRANKENSTEIN pictures. The were reprised in Mel Brooks' YOUNG FRANKENSTEIN (1974).

AS TO THE supporting cast, we have Don "Red" Barry, Jana Lund, Charlotte Austin, Rudolph Anders and Tom Duggan.** Pro Wrestler, Mike Lane, is seen in a dual-role as both servant/victim Hans Himmler and as the Monster, not that one could tell; as he wore some super-gauze wrap mummy type costume that looks much like a huge tampon.***

THE OVERALL LOOK of the production is that of a 1930's "B" Picture; for which it was perfectly situated. It was an Allied Artists Productoion, which had formerly been poverty row studio, Monogram. Its main tenet about the Dr. Frankenstein wanting to continue his family's image is an element that would be at home in an old, 1930's detective story or an "Old Dark House" type of potboiler.

SHOT IN A SORT of retro-futuristic motif, the story is and was disappointing to us, even as kids in the early 1960's. But it did have its moments of even a flirtation with being worthwhile.

AT LEAST OUR buddy Schultz and myself saw it that way. "Was you there, Charlie?"

NOTE * This makes it one of those movies & TV series where the seemingly long in the future date looses its appeal with the passing of time. Consider if you will: ROLLERBALL, 2001: A SPACE ODYSEY, 1984, SPACE 1999, etc. (No Schultz, not THE JETSONS!)

NOTE ** Tom Duggan had been a crusading newsman in Chicago, who had built up a great following in that City (including our Dad, Clem Ryan, 1914-74). He had relocated to the West Coast and took jobs like this as a means of earning extra $$$$.

NOTE *** Big Mike Lane, ex Footballer & Pro Grappler was fresh from his great role as Boxer Toro Moreno in THE HARDER THEY FALL (Columbia, 1956); which was Bogart's last picture.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Taken for what it is, this B-Grade 50's horror schlock-fest ain't too bad!
uds317 June 2002
Nostalgic for me in many ways. I managed to sneak into the theater in my home-town in '58 (it was an "X" certificate then) to watch it. Karloff was an old "relic" even then!!! I remember thinking just how futuristic 1970 seemed. Believe it or not, people were talking planetary COLONISATION by the 70's, back in those days. (Actually, what the hell HAS happened the last three decades?)

Anyway back to the plot - there ISN'T one! Karloff shambles around his old shadowy and fog-machine driven castle occasionally doing the Dr Phibes bit on his organ. The monster is a cack-fest and everyone should be having a good time.

Ok Ok, sad in a way to see Karloff basically sending up his own classic role, but hey its STILL Boris Karloff!

In MY mind though, I still see a 13 year old boy staring up in wonder at a big screen with an evil monster on the loose. It was fun, it was THEN......best tribute you can pay it now is to just enjoy it for what it is/was.
23 out of 30 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
The Grinch stole the script.
DeepFriedJello12 June 2022
Evidently the Grinch stole the script and left them with nothing to work with. What an oddly disjointed and bizarre film. The monster just minimally is revealed at the end. It is fun watching Boris Karloff though.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
The Eyes Have It
mark.waltz17 June 2012
Warning: Spoilers
all except for the monster who has none, yet somehow manages to find its victim even though Dr. Frankenstein (Boris Karloff) dropped the jar of the eyes from his previous victim, which he kept in his refrigerator, right next to the pickles. Indeed, it looks like he has a treasure trove of foreign beers in that refrigerator for celebrating once his experiment is complete.

Almost 20 years since he played this Dr. Frankenstein's ancestor's monster, Karloff now gets to collect the body parts for this pathetic creature which has laid in slumber in the family crypt for over a hundred years. Now some Hollywood film crew is on the estate and Karloff, desperate for money, gets the itch of his ancestors when he suddenly begins playing the organ in a terrifying manor. Karloff manages to hypnotize his family retainer into becoming the first victim to provide the monster with necessary body parts (which they must have run out of at the local Piggly Wiggly) by simply waving his scalpel at the dumbbell.

You will hoot, you will howl at the idiotic dialog, not only of Karloff who explains everything he is doing into a reel-to-reel tape-recorder (remember those?) so the audience doesn't have to suspend its belief as to what he is doing. And with times having changed since the days of the original Frankenstein (minus Frau Brucher---she comes later), the doctor has the advantage of some modern appliances to help him with his nefarious experiments. Add on some stupid Hollywood types to provide the drive-in audiences with moments of time to do things other than watch the movie. This is the type of film that screams for Elvira or the two robots from Mystery Science Theater.
5 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
"Freshly transplanted organs remain alive & healthy." Dull horror.
poolandrews2 January 2006
Warning: Spoilers
Frankenstein 1970 starts deep in some German woods with Carolyn Hayes (Jana Lund) desperately running from a monster intent on killing her... Film director Douglas Row (Don 'Red' Barry) shouts cut & the scene is in the can. Baron Victor von Frankenstein (Boris Karloff) has hit hard times & is skint, he has let a film-crew consisting of Row, cameraman Morgan Haley (John Dennis), writer Judy Stevens (Charlotte Austin), assistant director Mike Shaw (Tom Duggan) & actress Hayes make a film in & around his castle & estates about his ancestor's. As one would expect the current, & last, Frankenstein is continuing the family tradition of trying to re-animate a stitched together body (Mike Lane). His latest patchwork creation is missing several vital ingredient's, a heart, a brain, a face & a couple of eye's. His nosey servant Shuter (Norbert Schiller) provides the brain & heart, however while handling the eye's Frankenstein drops them. He re-animates his monster so it can go & find a suitable pair, meanwhile all the missing people are starting to make everyone become suspicious of Frankenstein & what his real intentions are...

This black and white potboiler was directed by Howard W. Koch & there is very little to recommend in Frankenstein 1970, & that's another thing what's with the 1970 in the title? No mention of the fact it is set in the year 1970 is made & the film was made in 1958. Anyway, I am amazed that the script by Richard H. Landau, Charles A. Moses, Aubrey Schenck & George Worthing Yates took four people to write it. Four people?! Didn't at least one of them stand up & say 'look guys this is total crap & the audience deserves better', obviously not it would appear. It's slow, boring, uneventful & is basically Frankenstein trying to create a monster using spare parts from various unwilling donors just like most other cheap Frankenstein films. He doesn't even get an assistant this time. The only original part of Frankenstein 1970 is the presence of the film-crew but it's never used to forward the story or try to take things in a different direction other than one would expect. The ending is abrupt but there is a certain degree of fun to be had watching this man with a bucket on his head wrapped in bandages running around trying to act scary & menacing, totally failing of course.

Director Koch does nothing to distinguish the film & it's bland throughout from the awfully dated lab to the flat castle interiors. The lab itself features some of the worst looking scientific equipment ever, massive computer panels with huge dials & knobs to all the stupid flashing lights & a control panel that wobbles whenever Frankenstein touches it. The monster starts off looking OK as it lies on an bed with no skin on it's face & just it's skull exposed but once it gets re-animated it looks awful, it's completely wrapped from head to toe in bandages (which makes it look more like a Mummy) & the shape & size of it's head resembles a large bucket! One more thing, when the monster is looking for some eye's for itself how can it see where it's going or who it's kidnapping & why are there eye holes cut into the bandage's around the bucket, erm sorry head, so it can 'see'?

With a budget of about $110,000 Frankenstein 1970 looks cheap throughout & considering Hammer's Curse of Frankenstein (1957) looked better & was made a year previous there really is no excuse, it's just bad film-making. The acting is poor & Karloff is obviously living on past glories here, in this he has a weird haircut, a stupid exaggerated limp & scar on his face.

There really is very little to recommend Frankenstein 1970 by, I can't really think of anything other than the fact that I have seen worse films. Not one of Karloff's finer moments although I'm sure fans of his will lap it up. Not worth bothering with.
3 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Cheesy adaptation, but still watchable
kannibalcorpsegrinder17 September 2012
While allowing a film crew to make a movie at his castle, the Baron decides to use the opportunity to finish his ancestor's brain-swapping experiments and begins using the crew to help complete them before he lets the hulking creation loose upon the unsuspecting filmmakers.

This wasn't all that bad of an entry. This one has its moments and features some good stuff from time to time, and a lot of this comes from the overall setup found here. That is namely at the beginning where the film-crew twist makes the action-packed chase through the swamplands or his monologue down in the crypt a bit jolting, and the constant scenes of action being interrupted by the filmmaking process give the film a great angle at first. The location works nicely as well, being the kind of grand Gothic design that manages to have all it's usual theatrics played up rather nicely such as the chase through the forest features them running through the fog-enshrouded swamplands while the big scenes in the castle showcase the grand layout of the facility while down below this features all the technological machinery which gives a nice contrast to the old-school atmosphere, especially in the times spent in the lab trying to reanimate the body which is pure old-school sci-fi goodness. These scenes featuring the creature protecting his lair from the film's crew-members who come stumbling upon the area which results in a somewhat enjoyable final half to this one where the series of confrontations down in the lab manages to generate some enjoyable action with a rousing finish. These here do raise it although it does have a few rather big issues here. Its main issue is that it's just marred by a criminal lack of energy and enthusiasm when it's not dealing with the baron's antics, as the film-crew aren't that interesting and hardly ever do anything. These here make the film such a drag that it grinds to a halt during the non-film-shoot scenes, and that isn't helped at all by the other troublesome nature featured here in the endless discussions which center around the use of the machinery and his family heritage. These discussions go nowhere and all they end up doing is highlight how much filler they do seem to be, as there's little of interest here that isn't recapped from other entries involving the adaptation. That also leads into the other rather big flaw here, the overall cheapness which is featured throughout here. From the cramped-in feeling of the castle, the type of film that's being shot there and the execution of the special effects as the monster looks like a joke in concept and remains incredibly laughable which proves to be a big downfall. The other big problem is the finale as the entire thing is over so quickly it's impossible to realize what had happened until the credits start to roll. These issues make this one a real missed opportunity since this one could've been decent.

Today's Rating: Unrated/PG: Mild Violence.
3 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
FRANKENSTEIN 1970 (Howard W. Koch, 1958) *1/2
Bunuel197618 April 2006
This film has only ever been shown once in my neck of the woods and on a minor Sicilian TV channel at that so, despite its negative reputation, I've always wanted to see it. After all, it does have Boris Karloff playing the Baron for once…even if, for some strange reason, he is named Victor here while his notorious ancestor is called Richard!!

The film's pre-credit sequence, in which a German fraulein is being pursued through the forest by a barely-glimpsed fiend is promising enough but, as it turns out, it's also the best sequence in the whole film…which ought to give you an idea about the worthiness of the whole enterprise. However, even from this first sequence, one is made aware of the sheer ineptness of the direction: it not only cuts away from one character to another with a boring regularity but the sequence is framed in such a way as to cut the creature's head off! This factor cannot be attributed to watching a pan-and-scan version because, surprisingly enough, the film was being shown in the correct widescreen ratio. This is exacerbated as the film goes along by the director's apparent refusal (in some sequences, at least) to move the camera in any way; I don't know if this was an attempt on his part to satirize the TV medium (given that it is, after all, a TV crew which impounds on the Baron's home ground) but I'd be surprised if the thought had occurred to the director in the first place. Coming hot on the heels of Hammer's full-blooded color version, it would have been a daunting task for anyone I presume…

Of course, it goes without saying that Karloff gives it his all (particularly during a rehearsal for the upcoming TV show in which he narrates straight to the camera his ancestor's diabolical deeds) and sometimes it's hard to watch him simply walking around the castle as the evident strain this is having on his legs is palpable and there were a couple of times where I could have sworn he lost his footing! Even so, apparently this does not detain him from creating the monster and installing the all-important atomic reactor (which is barely glimpsed in the film anyhow) single-handedly. It's incredible to note that, despite his failing health, some of Karloff's best work - Roger Corman's THE RAVEN (1963), Mario Bava's BLACK SABBATH (1963) and Peter Bogdanovich's TARGETS (1968) - was yet ahead of him! Still, even here - with the haphazard appearance of the Baron, whose misshapen face apparently gets "lifted" every once in a while! – the film's limitations make themselves felt. And why is it that every mad scientist out there has to be an accomplished pianist as well? Why not try your hand at an electric guitar, Herr Baron…after all, we're in the age of Chuck Berry here, aren't we? Er…no - make that 1970: "Monster making is for me, like…you know…outta sight, man"!! And how about that deadening monotone music during the laboratory sequences? Also, the less said about the goofy mummy…er…monster, the better! To top it all, there's an execrable attempt at an echo but the dialogue spoken in the cavern (the site of the Doc's lab) is totally all over the place and overlaps ad infinitum!

I know Joe Karlosi (if he's still around, that is) won't be too pleased with my review of this one as I know this is one of his guilty pleasures…but I have to say that my negative impressions were certainly amplified by the abysmal state (correct aspect ratio notwithstanding) of the print I watched which was replete with print damage and missing frames which not only managed to shorten the film to around 70 minutes (against the official 83!!) but also made the parts of the narrative and the revelatory climax particularly incoherent! Recently, there's been some talk of an upcoming Warners DVD of this one and, strange as it may sound, I hope it does materialize as I wouldn't put it past me to give this clunker another chance under more ideal circumstances. For the moment, however, I suppose even LADY FRANKENSTEIN (1971) is preferable…!
3 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
On its own terms not a bad film.
dbborroughs12 October 2008
Warning: Spoilers
Boris Karloff as a descendant of the mad doctor who is trying to bring the creature back to life with atomic energy.To get the money he opens his castle to a movie crew and mayhem results.

Uneven horror film is very good in the Karloff monster scenes and rather poor in the soapy movie crew scenes. I don't think I'd ever really seen the whole film until Monsters HD has put it into the current rotation. I like the movie in a nostalgic sort of way and think its perfect for a dark and stormy night when a creaky black and white film (more silly then scary) is on the menu. Just keep in mind its a film from a bygone time and you'll enjoy it
2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Uses Karloff's name to draw one in and then disappoints
mhorg201817 August 2018
As usual, Karloff gives it his all. Sadly this film lets him down. As the last of the Frankenstein's, he needs money to continue his experiments to continue his notorious ancestors experiments. While this isn't that good, it's still better than nearly anything on the SyFy channel.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Meta Frankenstein
Cineanalyst25 August 2018
I enjoyed "Frankenstein 1970," but I admit there would seem to be plenty of reasons why I ordinarily wouldn't have. It's a B-horror production, for sure, with used sets, but the castle interiors look quite good and shadows are cast everywhere, especially in the cellar crypt, and, if outside, there's plenty of fog. Moreover, it's delicious that there's a hidden laboratory within one of the tombs, and what a lab! Much of the acting isn't great, and the dialogue doesn't do the actors any favors, but Boris Karloff is so wonderfully hammy he lifts the entire project. Additionally, the entire premise of the film is absurd--generally failing at being futuristic and veering from self-referentiality into self-parody. Yet, like Frankenstein's monster, these various parts ranging in quality from good to defective are assembled into an effective, if monstrous, whole.

Supposedly set in a future 1970, almost everything in this film is very 1950s, which has only become more apparent to today's audience since 1970 is now in the past. Nothing, except for changing the timeline of the supposed 230th anniversary of the Frankenstein monster (Mary Shelley's novel was set in unspecified dates of the 18th century), would need to be altered for the film to have been, instead, set in the present late-1950s. All of Dr. Frankenstein's laboratory equipment could be explained, as most of it already is, by him being a scientific genius. Anyways, the film follows a TV crew in the making of a Frankenstein program, which apparently is part fiction and part non-fiction. They begin by staging a hilariously-bad scene of a slow modern Frankenstein monster chasing a damsel-in-distress who stupidly stops running away from him. Next, they film a scene of the last descendant of the Frankenstein family in the crypt of his inherited German castle, as he tells his family's history. For whatever reason, Karloff's character is named Victor, that designated to Shelley's protagonist, whereas his 18th-century ancestor who created the original monster is renamed "Richard Freiherr von Frankenstein."

Ironically, Victor uses the TV crew, who rent his castle, to purchase an atomic reactor for his own reanimation experiment, and then he unleashes his creature upon the crew. The apple never falls far from the tree with these Frankensteins. Taking after Peter Cushing's eponymous part in the prior year's "The Curse of Frankenstein," Karloff's doctor is a murderous character quite unlike Shelley's sympathetic and tragic figure. As it turns out, the real monster is also more ludicrous than the one portrayed in the movie-within-the-movie. For most of the film, he's more like a mummy than the kind of Frankenstein creatures audiences had already seen in the Universal and early Hammer films. Mixing up the monster movies even more so, this Victor plays an organ like he were the Phantom of the Opera, he hypnotizes his victims like he were Dracula, and he has physical deformities, including the ever-changing damage to his eye, more akin to the hunchbacked characters that populate many of the classic monster movies.

One of my favorite parts of Frankenstein films, and a major reason I enjoyed this one, are the set designs for the laboratories and their depictions of science. In addition to the Gothic horror designation, Shelley's book was also science fiction, after all. Shelley glossed over the actual creation of the monster, but many of the movies, including this one, dwell on it. Many of them have also been content to largely imitate the landmark design of the 1931 film, but not this one. Appropriately, since it's set in modern, or rather, futuristic times, the Galvanism, bubbling beakers and lightning are out, although it does retain some of the flashing gizmos from the '31 picture. Instead, there's modern home electricity plus the atomic stuff that preoccupied many horror and sci-fi pictures of the era. Frankenstein creates the monster in what looks like a CT scan machine, and he employs what look like old-fashioned giant computers, a medical imagining device, a refrigerator for body parts, synthetic skin and tape recorders. From his lab, he also listens to audio surveillance on his guests above. The only unintentionally-funny part of the lab, methinks, is the sound given to his disposal system for his victims or their belongings, which sounds like a toilet flushing.

This is also the only Frankenstein film I've seen to self-reflexively feature its own filming; although, in this case, TV. While written decades before film's invention, Shelley's creation myth works quite well as an analogy for live-action filmmaking, which like the monster involves a process of being animate, inanimate and reanimate--or life, death and rebirth. That is, live-action films of animate beings, like people, involves making them inanimate objects in the form of still photographs, which are reanimated when the film is projected. Furthermore, the assemblage of cadavers becomes the equivalent of editing. The 1931 film works quite well in this regard, but it doesn't feature a mise-en-abyme as this one does. Overall, this is a well-realized and reflexive atomic-age Frankenstein.
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Frankenstein-1970
Scarecrow-887 June 2007
Warning: Spoilers
Baron Victor von Frankenstein(Boris Karloff playing him mostly devious and wickedly amoral..he adheres to no one's needs but his own)is the last in the family line donning a scar on one side of his face(drooping the eyelid)and plagued with a lurch due to his torture at the hands of the Nazis. He wishes to carry out his great-great grandfather's legacy of giving re-birth to a preserved man-monster in his secret laboratory hidden within what seems to be a mausoleum. He has sold his family's expensive paintings to finance his machines and equipment, but in the desire to acquire an atomic reactor(!)he must allow a film crew to shoot in and around his castle, quietly detesting them with every aching bone left in his body. In this film the film crew director, an energetic, unflappable Douglas Roe(Don Barry)will be delivering the atomic reactor himself as a promise for utilizing Baron's castle for atmospheric purposes. Now, how a film director can acquire an atomic reactor is anybody's guess. But, a minor squabble. Baron needs vital parts to bring his monster to life and gets jump-started when his butler Schutter(a very hammy Norbert Schiller)goes nosing around eventually finding out about the laboratory experiments and the secret location. Schutter's brain will be used(as well as his heart among other parts), but Baron drops the jar with liquid-doused eyes splashing on the floor. He'll need a correct pair of eyes and focuses on taking Roe's. But, his eyeless monster will often kill members of the film crew causing Baron much strife in having to find avenues of escape regarding where the missing people have went off to. His cunning will eventually fail as his monster, often obeying Baron's voice, begins to operate on his own with the predictable results.

To me, the film's main strength is Karloff's Baron..an emotionally scarred wreck, having grown quite mad with an unstoppable demented desire to bring his monster to life by any means necessary. But, it was agonizing for me, being such a lover(..and fan) of Karloff's work to see him in such frail shape obviously trying his best to mask the agony that is apparent when he attempts to just walk. Many are critical of Karloff here deeming him merely as hammy, but I reveled at seeing him playing Herr Baron concocting his schemes, playing his eerie organ, & working so passionately in his laboratory preparing for his creation's birth. Seeing him guiding the monster was entertaining as well because it brought back memories of the Universal classics with mad scientists ordering their monsters to collect victims for their experiments. Those that portray the film crew are not very interesting and aren't given much to do for the exception of being fodder for Frankenstein. But, sadly, the film is slowly paced and often dull..it lacks the energy and enthusiasm of the films it is trying to emulate. The whole show is Boris..his dialogue around a sheeted corpse doting aloud of his Frankenstein family is the highlight in my opinion.
2 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
In his image
sol-kay3 July 2011
Warning: Spoilers
***SPOILERS*** Desperate for money with the Frankenstein Family fortune almost completely depleted in his attempt to to finish what his decedents from his great great grandfather Henry Frankenstein on up tried to create, life out of dead matter, Baron Victor Von Frankenstein Boris Karloff, goes along with allowing the Frankenstein Mansion to be uses for a TV special called "The Frankenstein Variety Hour" on cable-remember this is in the future not 1958 when the movie was released-TV.

The Baron who was brutalized by the Nazis for refusing to help them create a super Aryn master race that would win them the war is now on track to create man in his own image but he needs money in him obtaining an atomic reactor to do it. It's the TV network who'll provide the Baron with the much needed cash but he's so hung up in creating his masterpiece that he ends up murdering a number of the crew as well as his both good friend from Nazi Germany days Wihelm Gottfried, Rudolph Anders, and his simple minded butler Sluter, Nobert Schiller, to do it!

It's non other that the TV director of the Frankenstein TV special Douglas Row, Don "Red" Barry, who gets whiff of what the Baron is up to and attempts to stop him before he ends up murdering the entire TV crew together with Row in order to get spare human parts to create his new and improved Frankenstein Monster.

**SPOILERS**** As things turn out the monster that the Baron created despite having the feeble minded Sluter's brain implanted into his skull had a mind of his own and didn't go along with the Baron's insane and murderous plans and took matters into his own hands! As the movie ends we as well as Row and the police who arrived at the scene find out that the Baron did indeed finish what he started to do! The only drawback in his crazed and insane master-plan was that the Baron didn't live long enough to see it!
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed