A final farewell
Added 1/25/2009
This movie is one hour and seven minute long and was released on December 7, 1945. This movie was the final farewell to Dracula, Wolf Man and the Monster; if one does not count Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein. The movie is set several years in the future where House of Frankenstein ended. Dracula a. k. a. Baron Latos seemed the have escaped his sunlight death from the last movie and seeks a cure for his vampirism. Lawrence Talbot (the Wolf Man) seems immune from silver bullets because he was killed with one in the House of Frankenstein. So right there is a making for a poor script. The good Dr. Edelmann only goes evil when Baron Latos injects him with his blood. Creativity was not used in this movie. When Dr. Edelmann soul is debating between to bring the Monster back to life or destroy it, they are several flashbacks to several different Frankenstein movies. Even at the end, some of the film from the Ghost of Frankenstein was borrowed. If you must see this movie or even own, see if it can be down loaded.
1 out of 1 people found this helpful.
|
Like the previous crossover flicks flawed, but a lot of fun
Added 12/4/2008
Upon my first viewing I didn't really care for House of Dracula, which I even stated in my House of Frankenstein review, but I have to say now I really enjoyed it a lot more than the first time. While very flawed like the previous 2 crossover movies I think House of Dracula might now rate as my favorite of the crossover flicks (excluding Abbott & Costello Meet Frankenstein, which I see as a separate entity of the series). Despite the many flaws of House of Dracula it's also a lot of fun to watch.
The biggest problem with House of Dracula is the same exact problem with House of Frankenstein; you have Dracula, The Wolf Man and Frankenstein's Monster and yet they don't appear on screen together and there were some problems mixing the three together in one film. Edward T. Lowe who wrote House of Frankenstein returns and writes House of Dracula. And his script for House of Frankenstein while good felt sort of like an anthology; the opening act was Dr. Niemann and his story and he remains in the movie. The 2nd act was Dracula; the 3rd act was The Wolf Man and the final act Frankenstein's Monster. It really felt like 4 different movies.
The script for House of Dracula pretty much has the same format, but the plots for Dracula and The Wolf Man work a little better as far as structure goes and it doesn't feel like it's a separate film. But like House of Frankenstein, the Monster again played by Glenn Strange appears around the middle of the movie, but isn't resurrected until the final act and again only gets to move about in the final few minutes. The script though by Edward T. Lowe works well with some really interesting ideas. I would have liked to have seen the Monsters appear together like in Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man, but Lowe isn't as good as a writer as Curt Siodmak was. But overall Lowe's script works well.
Erle C. Kenton returns as director and overall his scenes are mostly well paced, but it does lack in some areas. He never really elevates the movie besides simply being fun, which when all is said and done I suppose is all that really matters. Kenton was an alright director based on what I've seen and what he might lack he does make up for in creating a fun flick.
What makes House of Dracula work so well is it has a very solid cast and the actors make a lot more of the movie than maybe it should have been. John Carradine returns as Dracula and while he's no Lugosi, he's far better than he gets credit for. Onslow Stevens as Dr. Edlemann is the standout and his journey into madness works really well. Stevens gives a terrific performance and I really enjoyed the character. Like House of Frankenstein it's really tough to rate Glenn Strange since he doesn't come alive to the final few minutes. Based on his limited screen time he isn't bad, but obviously he cannot compare to Boris Karloff. No actor that played the Monster comes anywhere near Karloff.
Lon Chaney Jr. again delivers a great performance as Larry Talbot/ the Wolf Man. While like the previous part he's given little to do besides say the same thing over and over, Chaney is just so likeable in the role it works well. Despite being an Icon of the horror genre I can't help but feel Chaney is also slightly underrated. When your father is screen legend Lon Chaney Sr. it's easy to understand the expectations on Jr. but as I've stated before I've always like Jr. more. And I suppose being in an era with Karloff and Lugosi one might be overlooked and while in my opinion Karloff is the king of the genre, Chaney was still great and really did some great work and he deserves more credit than he gets despite being seen as an Icon.
House of Dracula is a flawed flick, but it moves at a quick pace and is only 67-minutes so even with the slow moments they don't last long. This is just as good as House of Frankenstein and maybe slightly better due to the fact this one runs at a shorter running time. House of Frankenstein was very enjoyable, but even though it was only 74-minutes it could have been chopped down a bit. House of Dracula had the perfect running time. There aren't many slow moments and again at 67-minutes it moves quickly. House of Dracula is far from great, but it's a lot of fun like the other crossover flicks.
1 out of 1 people found this helpful.
|
Universal's Monster Finale
Added 5/19/2008
Erle C. Kenton directed this superior follow-up to "House of Frankenstein" and closed the lid on Universal's monster franchise. "House of Dracula" (1945) remains among the studio's better sequels, with effective gothic atmosphere and taut pacing. Onslow Stevens' sympathetic performance as the dedicated yet doomed Dr. Edelman holds the film together - memorably assisted by John Carradine's Dracula, Lon Chaney Jr.'s Wolf Man and (all too briefly) Glenn Strange's Frankenstein Monster. Due to budgetary shortcuts, the disappointing climax is mostly comprised of stock footage from 1942's "The Ghost of Frankenstein."
1 out of 1 people found this helpful.
|
THE LAST OFFICIAL FRANKENSTEIN SEQUEL.........NOT!
Added 9/27/2007
I know my rating for this film is higher than most would allow, but it does have it's charm and it is a film I hold dear to my heart. Growing up in the 60's you could not help but be a monster kid. The toy shelves, comic books, Saturday morning/late night TV horror shows and everywhere you looked seemed to be filled with images of my favorite monsters! Dracula, Frankenstein's monster,The Mummy, The Wolfman and The Creature from the Black Lagoon. 'House Of Frankenstein' is the last sequel in the Frankenstien series, but it really isn't! 'Abbott & Costello Meet Frankenstein' would come soon after. Why not count it as the last?.....it has all the same stars playing their definitive monsters and it actually reunites Bela Lugosi with the role that made him famous...Dracula! I believe this that is the last film in the series because the monster's all play it straight(They don't know it's a comedy). Another unoffical member of this series is 'The Wolfman' which shares 'Frankenstein meets the Wolfman' as it's sequel with 'Ghost of Frankenstein' It would only make sense to watch 'The Wolfman' before you watch 'Frankenstein meets the Wolfman'. That brings the total Frankentstein series to 9 films. It is a great series over all even though they stray far from the first two. Never the less my chilhood would not have been the same without them! I had to put this review on the VHS as this film never made it to DVD until it was released in the Dracula Legact set. The transfer is very good. Halloween is just around the corner.
6 out of 8 people found this helpful.
|
House of Dracula
Added 10/29/2006
This film is a great film for Dracula fans! John Carradine played a great Count Dracula even though he is not seen as often as the other characters.
I am not sure why the The Wolfman was put in the film? The Frankenstein monster should have had a longer role because he was only shown for about 3 minutes. Overall this is very good film.
0 out of 2 people found this helpful.
|
A final farewell
Added 1/25/2009
This movie is one hour and seven minute long and was released on December 7, 1945. This movie was the final farewell to Dracula, Wolf Man and the Monster; if one does not count Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein. The movie is set several years in the future where House of Frankenstein ended. Dracula a. k. a. Baron Latos seemed the have escaped his sunlight death from the last movie and seeks a cure for his vampirism. Lawrence Talbot (the Wolf Man) seems immune from silver bullets because he was killed with one in the House of Frankenstein. So right there is a making for a poor script. The good Dr. Edelmann only goes evil when Baron Latos injects him with his blood. Creativity was not used in this movie. When Dr. Edelmann soul is debating between to bring the Monster back to life or destroy it, they are several flashbacks to several different Frankenstein movies. Even at the end, some of the film from the Ghost of Frankenstein was borrowed. If you must see this movie or even own, see if it can be down loaded.
1 out of 1 people found this helpful.
|
Like the previous crossover flicks flawed, but a lot of fun
Added 12/4/2008
Upon my first viewing I didn't really care for House of Dracula, which I even stated in my House of Frankenstein review, but I have to say now I really enjoyed it a lot more than the first time. While very flawed like the previous 2 crossover movies I think House of Dracula might now rate as my favorite of the crossover flicks (excluding Abbott & Costello Meet Frankenstein, which I see as a separate entity of the series). Despite the many flaws of House of Dracula it's also a lot of fun to watch.
The biggest problem with House of Dracula is the same exact problem with House of Frankenstein; you have Dracula, The Wolf Man and Frankenstein's Monster and yet they don't appear on screen together and there were some problems mixing the three together in one film. Edward T. Lowe who wrote House of Frankenstein returns and writes House of Dracula. And his script for House of Frankenstein while good felt sort of like an anthology; the opening act was Dr. Niemann and his story and he remains in the movie. The 2nd act was Dracula; the 3rd act was The Wolf Man and the final act Frankenstein's Monster. It really felt like 4 different movies.
The script for House of Dracula pretty much has the same format, but the plots for Dracula and The Wolf Man work a little better as far as structure goes and it doesn't feel like it's a separate film. But like House of Frankenstein, the Monster again played by Glenn Strange appears around the middle of the movie, but isn't resurrected until the final act and again only gets to move about in the final few minutes. The script though by Edward T. Lowe works well with some really interesting ideas. I would have liked to have seen the Monsters appear together like in Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man, but Lowe isn't as good as a writer as Curt Siodmak was. But overall Lowe's script works well.
Erle C. Kenton returns as director and overall his scenes are mostly well paced, but it does lack in some areas. He never really elevates the movie besides simply being fun, which when all is said and done I suppose is all that really matters. Kenton was an alright director based on what I've seen and what he might lack he does make up for in creating a fun flick.
What makes House of Dracula work so well is it has a very solid cast and the actors make a lot more of the movie than maybe it should have been. John Carradine returns as Dracula and while he's no Lugosi, he's far better than he gets credit for. Onslow Stevens as Dr. Edlemann is the standout and his journey into madness works really well. Stevens gives a terrific performance and I really enjoyed the character. Like House of Frankenstein it's really tough to rate Glenn Strange since he doesn't come alive to the final few minutes. Based on his limited screen time he isn't bad, but obviously he cannot compare to Boris Karloff. No actor that played the Monster comes anywhere near Karloff.
Lon Chaney Jr. again delivers a great performance as Larry Talbot/ the Wolf Man. While like the previous part he's given little to do besides say the same thing over and over, Chaney is just so likeable in the role it works well. Despite being an Icon of the horror genre I can't help but feel Chaney is also slightly underrated. When your father is screen legend Lon Chaney Sr. it's easy to understand the expectations on Jr. but as I've stated before I've always like Jr. more. And I suppose being in an era with Karloff and Lugosi one might be overlooked and while in my opinion Karloff is the king of the genre, Chaney was still great and really did some great work and he deserves more credit than he gets despite being seen as an Icon.
House of Dracula is a flawed flick, but it moves at a quick pace and is only 67-minutes so even with the slow moments they don't last long. This is just as good as House of Frankenstein and maybe slightly better due to the fact this one runs at a shorter running time. House of Frankenstein was very enjoyable, but even though it was only 74-minutes it could have been chopped down a bit. House of Dracula had the perfect running time. There aren't many slow moments and again at 67-minutes it moves quickly. House of Dracula is far from great, but it's a lot of fun like the other crossover flicks.
1 out of 1 people found this helpful.
|
Universal's Monster Finale
Added 5/19/2008
Erle C. Kenton directed this superior follow-up to "House of Frankenstein" and closed the lid on Universal's monster franchise. "House of Dracula" (1945) remains among the studio's better sequels, with effective gothic atmosphere and taut pacing. Onslow Stevens' sympathetic performance as the dedicated yet doomed Dr. Edelman holds the film together - memorably assisted by John Carradine's Dracula, Lon Chaney Jr.'s Wolf Man and (all too briefly) Glenn Strange's Frankenstein Monster. Due to budgetary shortcuts, the disappointing climax is mostly comprised of stock footage from 1942's "The Ghost of Frankenstein."
1 out of 1 people found this helpful.
|
