Download Our App XoStream

The Horror of Frankenstein

1970

Action / Comedy / Drama / Horror / Sci-Fi

Plot summary


Uploaded by: FREEMAN

Top cast

Jon Finch Photo
Jon Finch as Lt. Henry Becker
David Prowse Photo
David Prowse as The Monster
Veronica Carlson Photo
Veronica Carlson as Elizabeth Heiss
720p.BLU 1080p.BLU
778.87 MB
1204*720
English 2.0
NR
23.976 fps
1 hr 35 min
P/S 0 / 1
1.5 GB
1792*1072
English 2.0
NR
23.976 fps
1 hr 35 min
P/S 1 / 3

Movie Reviews

Reviewed by Bunuel19766 / 10

THE HORROR OF FRANKENSTEIN (Jimmy Sangster, 1970) **1/2

This was top Hammer screenwriter Jimmy Sangster's first directorial effort for the company (incidentally, I watched the other two - LUST FOR A VAMPIRE [1971] and FEAR IN THE NIGHT [1972] - in quick succession). I hadn't picked this up on DVD earlier because of its much-maligned reputation: however, I was extremely surprised to find it quite effective!

Given that it's basically a remake of THE CURSE OF FRANKENSTEIN (1957),Sangster took a radically different approach - treating the events as black comedy; the resulting film is very funny indeed at times (though it almost feels like "Carry On Frankenstein": witness the disembodied hand coming to life to give the two-finger gesture and Ralph Bates' comments at Kate O'Mara's cleavage!). The film features an abrupt, doubly ironic ending - while, as opposed to STRAIGHT ON TILL MORNING (1972),there's plenty of gore here but no nudity. Still, despite being made on the cheap, it all looks pretty decent (a virtue common to most Hammer product, in fact).

Bates (who showed real promise but, essentially, came to Hammer too late) and Dennis Price (as a cheerful body snatcher who likes to have his pregnant wife do the dirty work for him!) are very good; from the rest of the cast - which includes Jon Finch as a dogged police lieutenant who happens to be a former colleague of Frankenstein's - O'Mara as Bates' sexy but conniving housekeeper/lover comes off best (though Veronica Carlson, who's somewhat underused here, also proves undeniable eye-candy).

There are faults, however: Bates's scientist is, ultimately, too glum in comparison to Cushing's animated characterization; the monster itself is an unfortunate creation (pun intended) - Dave Prowse's physique is certainly ideal for the role (in fact, he returned for FRANKENSTEIN AND THE MONSTER FROM HELL [1974] and proved far more successful at it) but, as depicted here, it comes across as a mere killing machine, showing no emotion or curiosity at its surroundings (such as when the monster kills the O'Mara character or when it ventures outside into the countryside).

Essentially, then, the film emerges as an interesting but not entirely successful reinvention of the Frankenstein saga and, actually, a curious attempt on Hammer's part at this particular stage - given that it followed closely on the heels of one of their finest (and bleakest) efforts! That said, having now watched Hammer's entire Frankenstein series, I can safely say that it's superior overall to their Dracula films.

The extras include a 14-minute career overview by Hammer starlet/beauty Carlson - she feels lucky and privileged to have worked three times for the studio and in the company of such talented people as Freddie Francis, Christopher Lee, Terence Fisher, Peter Cushing, Jimmy Sangster and Ralph Bates. Sangster describes in the Audio Commentary how, when he started as a screenwriter, he was careful not to overstep the limitations set by the budget - which he learned from having been a Production Manager for Hammer for the previous several years; as a director, then, he often consulted with his editor to determine whether the latter got all the necessary coverage for any particular scene. He also discusses the rest of his career, going into some detail on the making of such films as TASTE OF FEAR (1961) and THE ANNIVERSARY (1968),and seems baffled - but, at the same time, amused - by the critical about-turn Hammer's output has enjoyed in recent years. With respect to THE HORROR OF FRANKENSTEIN itself, he admits that he was initially averse to the idea of Ralph Bates as Baron Frankenstein - but, eventually, the two became very good friends and, in fact, Bates appeared in all three films Sangster directed! By the way, Travis Crawford's interesting liner notes compare the film's self-mocking attitude to the even more radical 'revisionist' approach to the Mary Shelley tale seen in FLESH FOR FRANKENSTEIN (1973).

Reviewed by mark.waltz5 / 10

I never realized how sexy the monster could be!

When you first see David Prowse as Frankenstein's creation, the first thing you may think of is how true Inga's description of what the monster would look like in "Young Frankenstein". He may be violent and scary, but oh what a stud! Ralph Bates gets to be funny and arrogance as the Baron von Frankenstein, but one thing that I didn't accept so easily was how him standing up to authority figures easily got him to get what he wanted. A scene in his class has him basically avoiding slaps on the wrist by putting the professor down by telling him that he's ill and all of a sudden, the professor does indeed admit that he's sick and dismisses the class. It's as easy as that, and he does it later in a scene with his own father.

So we are supposed to believe that Victor is a sensational manipulator, and thus able to get away with the scientific experiments that creates this monster. The setting and costumes and scenery are perfect for the time it is set in and thus the film is attractive to look at. You also have two beautiful ladies, Kate O'Mara and Veronica Carlson, providing additional eye candy along with Bates and prows. Veteran British actor Dennis Price is also along for the ride, as is Jon Finch as a law enforcement officer.

This of course lacks the subtlety a previous Frankenstein films because of the use of violence and absolutely no tact as one victim confronted by the monster gets a horrifying death with the sound of a neck snapping. But the colorful photography and fast pacing does make it interesting even though other elements make you long for earlier versions even some of the silly sequels to the 1931 James Whale/Boris Karloff classic. Bates does a credible job of creating a magnetic Baron Von Frankenstein with many fascinating elements that shows his progression to madness.

Reviewed by TheLittleSongbird5 / 10

The weakest Hammer Frankenstein and one of Hammer's weakest overall, but not that bad a film

The Horror of Frankenstein definitely could have been much better and is rather disappointing compared to how good most Hammer horrors are and the standard of most of the previous Frankenstein entries. But to me it was not as bad as was led to believe.

The Horror of Frankenstein does have some things going for it. It's very atmospherically photographed and has equally sumptuous costume and set design and nice shadowy lighting. Malcolm Williamson's haunting score compliments the film's mood most effectively and there are some good performances here. Ralph Bates is particularly notable, okay he's nowhere near as good as Peter Cushing in the role(who I consider the definitive Frankenstein)- but that's a big ask- and he overplays just a little in places but it was interesting to see a Frankenstein with no redeeming qualities; Bates does a great job commanding the screen and attacks the role with gusto. Kate O'Mara and Bernard Archard are equally great and Veronica Carlson is truly entrancing in a very eye-candy-like role but Carlson does give more than that despite not been given as much as she ought to have done. Dennis Price is a lot of cheery fun as a grave robber.

The Horror of Frankenstein has a lot of problems though, the two big problems for me being the script and the Monster. The film is very heavy on dialogue but also lacking in action, there are a couple of nice scenes here and there but a lot of the film has some pedestrian storytelling that lacked suspense and freshness. It's not a bad thing if a film takes time to set things up, but The Horror of Frankenstein spends too long a time doing so. Things could have been better explained too, like why Frankenstein needed so many body parts for one body. The script sadly doesn't work, it is peppered with humour but it's humour that verges on juvenile and often misplaced while the rest of the script could have with some trimming down, there's a fair bit of froth that adds little. Credit is due for not being contradictory or continuity-error-ridden like The Evil of Frankenstein was, but that film at least had Peter Cushing and a better ending. It is a further shame that the Monster here is a joke. The make-up is the cheapest-looking of all the Frankenstein outings, its only distinction being the square head, while David Prowse's performance is disappointingly feeble in a role he should have been perfect for(disappointingly because he went on to play Darth Vader, one of cinema's most iconic villains) being completely lacking in menace and it's difficult to feel a shred of sympathy towards him. Instead he comes across as like the most robotic of robots. Sangster's direction is plodding in a way most of his scripts for Hammer are anything but(the nuances and wit his script have don't translate in his direction),the killings in execution are more unintentionally silly than thrilling and the ending is one big anti-climax.

Overall, an underwhelming Frankenstein film and one of Hammer's weakest but not that bad. 5/10 Bethany Cox

Read more IMDb reviews