Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man

1943

Fantasy / Horror

0
IMDb Rating 6.6

Synopsis


Downloaded 856 times
12/12/2018 6:33:08 PM

1080p
1.41G
Normal
English
/
74 min
P/S 3 / 3

Movie Reviews

Reviewed by simeon_flake 8

One must pity the Wolf Man. Marked not only with the pentagram, but marked to never have a sequel that was all his own. A real shame, considering that even the likes of the Mummy got &#39;four&#39; sequels. Universal begins their monster-mash rallies of the 1940s here, as Wolfie must share his sandbox with the &quot;undying monster&quot; &amp; the two get along well for the most part, but eventually, even the best of friends will have their disputes....<br/><br/>The film begins on a very high note, with one of the most chilling and atmospheric openings in any horror movie. The potential was certainly here for a great &#39;Wolf Man&#39; sequel that could&#39;ve surpassed the original. Too bad the monster has to rear his ugly, stitched up head. <br/><br/>Speaking of that monster, &quot;Poor Bela&quot; always get the blame dumped on him for why this film had to be chopped up in post-production, the story always being that the monster with his voice was simply too &quot;Hungarian funny&quot;, yet this film was produced by the same Universal that a year earlier made &quot;Ghost of Frankenstein&quot; which featured the monster with Bela&#39;s voice. It didn&#39;t bother anyone then, so what was the problem now? There has to be more to the story than &quot;it was all Lugosi&#39;s fault&quot;. Would it be considered out of the realm of possibility to speculate that perhaps the great Curt Siodmak (the screenwriter) wrote some seriously crappy dialogue for the creature to recite that would&#39;ve produced titters no matter who spoke it?<br/><br/>Also marring the proceedings a bit is some shaky continuity in regards to the monster&#39;s portion of the story if you&#39;re familiar with the previous &#39;Ghost&#39; movie. How is it, that there&#39;s suddenly a Frankenstein castle in Vasaria (or is it Vi·Saria), when in the previous film, the villagers in the town called &quot;Frankenstein&quot; blew it up. And there are many instances where the screenwriter doesn&#39;t seem to know the difference between Ludwig Frankenstein &amp; his father Henry who made the monster, as Talbot, the villagers, even Baroness Frankenstein speak as if Ludwig actually created the monster.<br/><br/>And yet, in spite of its inconsistencies (not to mention the heavy editing done to it), the whole of &#39;FMTWM&#39; still turns out very good, and the ending clash of the monsters is very entertaining. While Frankenstein fans may be disappointed, this picture definitely works as a great &#39;Wolf Man&#39; sequel &amp; one of the top Universal romps from the 1940s. After this picture, Dracula and a few other fiends would get invited to the monster party.<br/><br/>8/10

Read More
Reviewed by jluis1984 7

Of all of the later Frankenstein movies made by Universal, this one seems to be overlooked when compared to the previous &quot;Ghost of Frankenstein&quot; or the campy fun of &quot;House of Frankenstein&quot;. Nevertheless, &quot;Frankenstein Meets the Wolfman&quot; is probably the best of the bunch.<br/><br/>A direct sequel to both &quot;The Wolf Man&quot; and &quot;Ghost of Frankenstein&quot;, the plot follows Larry Talbot (played again by Lon Chaney Jr.), the werewolf, who realizes that he can&#39;t die. In order to find inner peace he is on a quest for death, and Maleva, the gypsy, takes him to Vasaria, in order to fin Dr. Frankenstein. When they realize that Frankenstein is dead, Talbot finds the Creature (Bela Lugosi), now with Ygor&#39;s brain but severely damaged. When a doctor teams up with Talbot in order to help him, the Wolf Man won&#39;t be happy to discover the doctor&#39;s true intentions.<br/><br/>This movie is carried by Chaney Jr. who is totally inside the character of the Wolf Man. It is probably Chaney&#39;s best performance as beast, and he steals every scene he is in. As Talbot, he shows the horrible trauma of being an unwilling murderer, giving the character a greater presence that fills the screen with charm.<br/><br/>Bela Lugosi, as the creature, has more troubles to be satisfying, but it is important to note that most of his scenes were changed as the previous subplot of Ygor&#39;s brain was abandoned. Bad choice since the first scenes with the monster show him confused and blind without giving any explanation. The poor editing is responsible of Lugosi&#39;s apparent bad performance.<br/><br/>The rest of the cast is surprisingly good, with old friends like Lionel Atwill and Dwight Frye in small supporting roles. Beautiful Ilona Massey plays Elsa Frankenstein who in an odd change appears as a cold smart businesswoman vastly different from the character&#39;s traits in &quot;Ghost of Frankenstein&quot;. Nevertheless, Massey plays the role with grace and her beauty shines in the screen.<br/><br/>Director Roy William Neill, known for his Sherlock Holmes movies, does a superior work than predecessor Erle C. Kenton and makes the most of his actors. Depsite the plot holes of the story and the awful changes the studio made to the original script, the movie flows with a good pace.<br/><br/>The whole atmosphere is an improvement that while it never reaches the levels of &quot;Bride&quot; or &quot;Son&quot;, works very well and give the film a distinctive look.<br/><br/>Overall, a worthy addition to the Frankenstein saga, that even when it certainly could have been better, it is an enjoyable underrated movie. 7/10

Read More
Reviewed by stew100 7

It&#39;s true that this is a better sequel to &quot;The Wolf Man&quot; (in fact I like the first twenty-five minutes of this movie more that &quot;The Wolf Man.&quot;), but it&#39;s a better Frankenstein film than &quot;House of Frankenstein&quot; or &quot;House of Dracula&quot; because the Monster has more to do here, and it&#39;s better than &quot;Ghost of Frankenstein&quot; just because it&#39;s more fun. Poor Bela Lugosi gets ripped all the time for what a terrible job he did as the Monster in this one, but in fairness his role was severely edited. The monster originally could talk and was blind, but the producers felt Lugosi&#39;s voice coming from the Monster was more funny than frightening, and his dialogue wasn&#39;t all that great anyway, so out it all went. It&#39;s for this reason that the monster acts so strangely in the final cut, and the Monster was supposed to be sick anyway. It was a mistake to cast the too old Lugosi as the Monster, but don&#39;t blame Bela -- he probably did the best he could, but we&#39;ll never know. I also think it was a mistake to cast Lon Chaney Jr. as the Monster in &quot;Ghost.&quot; Both he and Lugosi were too round-faced to take over from Karloff. And the ending of &quot;Ghost&quot; was one of the biggest blunders in the entire series. But this film manages to survive all the mistakes and still be very entertaining. I&#39;ve probably seen it fifty times in my life, and I can always watch it again.

Read More
Read more IMDb reviews