list http://www.spout.com/ Recent community activity around The Horror of Frankenstein on Spout Copyright 2005-9 Spout, LLC Spout RSS http://www.spout.com/images/SpoutLogoRSS.jpg http://www.spout.com/ 136 30 http://www.spout.com/films/The_Horror_of_Frankenstein/15908/default.aspx Title: The Horror of Frankenstein
Year: 1970
Director: Jimmy Sangster
Plot: Victor Frankenstein (Ralph Bates) is the son of the Count who plans his father's demise. He inherits the castle and the comely housekeeper (Kate O'Mara) who doubles as his mistress. Soon Victor is busy murdering people to build his monster (David Prowse). His victims include his neighbor, his housekeeper, a gravedigger, a professor and his best friend. He patches the various body parts together to make his horrible creation in this horror story with a good dose of comedy. ~ Dan Pavlides, All Movie Guide
Times Tagged: 1
Number of Lists: 1
Number of blog posts: 1
SpoutRating: 3
]]>Thu, 23 Apr 2009 09:12:03 GMTThe Horror of Frankenstein1970Jimmy SangsterVictor Frankenstein (<a href="/players/P_____4538/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Ralph Bates</a>) is the son of the Count who plans his father's demise. He inherits the castle and the comely housekeeper (Kate O'Mara) who doubles as his mistress. Soon Victor is busy murdering people to build his monster (<a href="/players/P____57960/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>David Prowse</a>). His victims include his neighbor, his housekeeper, a gravedigger, a professor and his best friend. He patches the various body parts together to make his horrible creation in this horror story with a good dose of comedy. ~ Dan Pavlides, All Movie Guide1Slightly Tagged (1-5)113http://www.spout.com/ProductImages/t11796jtb18.jpghttp://www.spout.com/films/The_Horror_of_Frankenstein/15908/default.aspxFilm http://www.spout.com/blogs/cinemarian/archive/2009/4/23/41701.aspx Post By: CinemaRian
Post To: CinemaRian Blog
Post Date: 4/23/2009 5:12:03 AM
Body: The Horror of Frankenstein(1970) I’ve never responded to Frankenstein movies in the same way I have to Dracula films. The reason is, I think, that there are near endless variations on the plot and themes to Dracula, whereas with Frankenstein you are pretty much stuck aquasi-mad doctor either bringing a dead creature to life or doing something else with one that he brought to life in the previous film. There are many great Hammer Dracula pictures, but only one great Frankenstein film, the second, The Revenge of Frankenstein (1958) which took every ridiculous plot point and played as if it could actually happen, and in doing so made us feel a little sorry for the tragedy of the good doctor. Perhaps sensing their Frankenstein series was not as strong as their Dracula films (or many of their standalone titles) Hammer in 1970 to reboot the pictures instead of doing another sequel. They were eager for screenwriter the screenwriterof the first film, Jimmy Sangster, to write the re-launch, so they offered himboth the producer’s reins and director’s chair as well. Sangster probably had more control over this picture than any director ever did at Hammer (well, except for Michael Carreras on The Curse of the Mummy’s Tomb). Although a lot of Hammer fans are not fond of this picture (perhaps due to the absence of Peter Cushing), I rather liked it, and I appreciated Sangster’s choice to make the film as a black comedy instead of another unsuccessful attempt at horror (was Frankenstein ever that scary, anyway?). The picture follows the usual Frankenstein outline (boy dreams of monster, boy creates monster, monster kills people, boy tries to hide monster), but Sangster has fun with the usual cliché’s. I was afraid that I would miss Cushing in the lead role, but Ralph Bates (who bears a stunning resemblance to The Kink’s Ray Daves) is really exceptional in the part and is quite funny. He’s endearingly evil in the Richard III sense, and unlike Cushing’s interpretation, not the least bit mad. At least this sociopath admits he’s one. The supporting cast (which also includes Graham James, who strangely looks just like The Moody Blue’s Justin Hayward) is mostly spot on, impressive for a first time director. The movie also looks good, but nearly all the Hammer films do, despite their budget. If it can be said to have a flaw, it would be in the portrayal of the creature (David Prowse). It’s not Prowse’s fault, but his character is given little motivation as to why he so loyal to Frankenstein when he otherwise so violent). Perhaps it was supposed to parody why the doctor always fails at his attempts to create a good person, but wake-up-and-kill approach the character has doesn't work. This is not a major cinematic landmark, but it is a fun movie that manages to present a couple compelling characters while still being mostly funny. If there is one thing that all the Hammer director’s had in common, it was the fact that theynever played the material for laughs, which is usually suicide in speculativefiction. Here’s the only to my knowledge that Hammer did it, and amazingly, it worked.
]]>Thu, 23 Apr 2009 09:12:03 GMTCinemaRianCinemaRian Blog4/23/2009 5:12:03 AMThe Horror of Frankenstein(1970) I&rsquo;ve never responded to Frankenstein movies in the same way I have to Dracula films. The reason is, I think, that there are near endless variations on the plot and themes to Dracula, whereas with Frankenstein you are pretty much stuck aquasi-mad doctor either bringing a dead creature to life or doing something else with one that he brought to life in the previous film. There are many great Hammer Dracula pictures, but only one great Frankenstein film, the second, The Revenge of Frankenstein (1958) which took every ridiculous plot point and played as if it could actually happen, and in doing so made us feel a little sorry for the tragedy of the good doctor. Perhaps sensing their Frankenstein series was not as strong as their Dracula films (or many of their standalone titles) Hammer in 1970 to reboot the pictures instead of doing another sequel. They were eager for screenwriter the screenwriterof the first film, Jimmy Sangster, to write the re-launch, so they offered himboth the producer&rsquo;s reins and director&rsquo;s chair as well. Sangster probably had more control over this picture than any director ever did at Hammer (well, except for Michael Carreras on The Curse of the Mummy&rsquo;s Tomb). Although a lot of Hammer fans are not fond of this picture (perhaps due to the absence of Peter Cushing), I rather liked it, and I appreciated Sangster&rsquo;s choice to make the film as a black comedy instead of another unsuccessful attempt at horror (was Frankenstein ever that scary, anyway?). The picture follows the usual Frankenstein outline (boy dreams of monster, boy creates monster, monster kills people, boy tries to hide monster), but Sangster has fun with the usual clich&eacute;&rsquo;s. I was afraid that I would miss Cushing in the lead role, but Ralph Bates (who bears a stunning resemblance to The Kink&rsquo;s Ray Daves) is really exceptional in the part and is quite funny. He&rsquo;s endearingly evil in the Richard III sense, and unlike Cushing&rsquo;s interpretation, not the least bit mad. At least this sociopath admits he&rsquo;s one. The supporting cast (which also includes Graham James, who strangely looks just like The Moody Blue&rsquo;s Justin Hayward) is mostly spot on, impressive for a first time director. The movie also looks good, but nearly all the Hammer films do, despite their budget. If it can be said to have a flaw, it would be in the portrayal of the creature (David Prowse). It&rsquo;s not Prowse&rsquo;s fault, but his character is given little motivation as to why he so loyal to Frankenstein when he otherwise so violent). Perhaps it was supposed to parody why the doctor always fails at his attempts to create a good person, but wake-up-and-kill approach the character has doesn't work. This is not a major cinematic landmark, but it is a fun movie that manages to present a couple compelling characters while still being mostly funny. If there is one thing that all the Hammer director&rsquo;s had in common, it was the fact that theynever played the material for laughs, which is usually suicide in speculativefiction. Here&rsquo;s the only to my knowledge that Hammer did it, and amazingly, it worked. http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/monster/MemberTagFilms.aspxmonster
Number of films tagged: 1143

Number of people who tagged: 41

Number of times used: 95

]]>Thu, 24 Sep 2009 00:22:02 GMT11434195Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/son/MemberTagFilms.aspxson
Number of films tagged: 2321

Number of people who tagged: 40

Number of times used: 111

]]>Mon, 12 Oct 2009 04:48:06 GMT232140111Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/frankenstein/MemberTagFilms.aspxfrankenstein
Number of films tagged: 104

Number of people who tagged: 19

Number of times used: 20

]]>Tue, 24 Feb 2009 19:37:28 GMT1041920Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/castle/MemberTagFilms.aspxcastle
Number of films tagged: 448

Number of people who tagged: 10

Number of times used: 20

]]>Wed, 16 Sep 2009 23:55:15 GMT4481020Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/housekeeper/MemberTagFilms.aspxhousekeeper
Number of films tagged: 136

Number of people who tagged: 7

Number of times used: 11

]]>Tue, 21 Jul 2009 13:14:49 GMT136711Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/creation/MemberTagFilms.aspxcreation
Number of films tagged: 55

Number of people who tagged: 4

Number of times used: 5

]]>Wed, 21 Jan 2009 04:48:45 GMT5545Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/patches/MemberTagFilms.aspxpatches
Number of films tagged: 50

Number of people who tagged: 3

Number of times used: 52

]]>Wed, 14 Jun 2006 04:26:18 GMT50352Tag