Rate 'Frankenstein' (1931)

8/10

7/10

8/10

The title character in NOSFERATU 1922 doesn’t appear until around the 30-minute mark. That means that director F.W. Murnau knew about the rule of horror cinema where you do that with the monster in order to create suspense. But after you do that, you can focus completely on him. And you know what? That's what should've happened here! COUNT ORLOK has no real personality. He was interesting enough for me to want to see more of him... but he only appears in a total of 9 fucking minutes! The rest of the movie is about the humans who happen to be as boring as ORLOK’s hobbies must be (he's a vampire, after all). That’s why I don’t think the movie is good: The ratio between interesting scenes versus the uninteresting ones. Murnau also knew about how to scare. The shots of ORLOK’s shadow and the way he lurks around are insanely creepy. But, because they’re only a few, it’s not enough to save the movie.

4/10


DRACULA 1931 is a major improvement over NOSFERATU. It gives the title character a bigger role. However, it makes the same mistake: The human characters are boring. Also, the ending is a little anticlimatic. Bela Lugosi's performance is great. I saw the version with the Phillip Glass' music score. It sounds a little too modern (it was composed in the 1990s after all), but it still helps to make the movie scarier than it already was.

7/10


FRANKENSTEIN 1931

7/10


What a cheat! THE BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN's title character only appears at the end! Putting that aside, some of the scenes work (especially one involving THE MONSTER and a blind man), but it doesn't work overall. It's like they came up with those scenes as ideas for the premise and then instead of choosing one they just decided to glue them together (kinda like THE MONSTER was created). The result is a meandering sequel that feels more like an afterthought of the 1st installment. And because those scenes have different themes and tones (horror, comedy, etc.), it's also very uneven. Boris Karloff's performance is as good as before, but Una O'Connor ruins every scene she's in.

4/10


DRACULA'S DAUGHTER

1/10


SON OF FRANKENSTEIN

3/10


The title character in THE WOLFMAN is terrifying. Unfortunately, the plot is a complete rehash of FRANKENSTEIN. I doubt one had to watch this franchise back-to-back (like I did) to realize that.

4/10


THE GHOST OF FRANKENSTEIN

5/10


FRANKENSTEIN MEETS THE WOLFMAN

1/10


SON OF DRACULA

1/10


HOUSE OF FRANKENSTEIN

0/10


HOUSE OF DRACULA

0/10


NOSFERATU 1979 has the same mistakes the original version had, and it doesn’t have any improvements. It’s more stylish, but that doesn’t make it scary. Klaus Kinski's performance is far from bad, but he’s no Max Shreck.

1/10


DRACULA 1992

7/10


VAN HELSING

3/10


Adapting an old novel into a modern setting and adding fantasy elements? No problem… as long as you keep the essence of the novel. I, FRANKENSTEIN doesn’t have the theme of how dangerous it is to play God. I have no problem with making THE MONSTER more human or making him talk normally (the reason why the title of the movie isn’t I AM FRANKENSTEIN is explained at the end), but why add demons? And gargoyles? Actually, the graphic novel this is based on had a lot more monsters, including vampires. It would’ve made more sense to leave the vampires and eliminate the other ones. You know, because of the long-time connection between FRANKENSTEIN and DRACULA. Oh, I see. They wanted to rip-off UNDERWORLD but in not such an obvious way. When I was researching on the graphic novel, which I haven’t read, I came across an interview with Kevin Grevioux, the creator. I was surprised that he talked with so much passion about a story that feels like he must’ve written in 5 minutes. It’s bland and the only creative part is what happens to the demons and the gargoyles when they die. The performances are mostly weak because the actors aren’t having fun with their ridiculous dialogue. Aaron Eckhart's is the worst because he’s not even trying. There’s nothing wrong with the action sequences. I mean, there’s no shaky cam and the slow motion isn’t excessive, which is a compliment considering modern action movies... but that’s not enough. Especially with such terrible visual effects. I can forgive certain clichés as long as they make sense.There are many scenes like that and they show how poorly constructed the movie was.

0/10


DRACULA UNTOLD

0/10
-------------------------------------
You can read comments of other movies in my blog.

Could be rated a number of different ways. If nostalgia is the main criterion, very high rating.
High points for Colin Clive's performance and for the set direction in the laboratory and the lighting.

But if you break the film down in terms of other individual qualities, just a little above average.

Cheap-looking sets at the graveyard, near the lake, in the mountains, and in the cellar.
Acting & direction & dialogue pretty amateurish. Very much like a filmed stage play or radio play, not true-to-life acting. Fritz (the Ygor character) and Baron Frankenstein were especially terrible.
Editing around the scene at the lake was pathetic.

For anyone who says, Well, you have to consider what their capabilities were back in 1930, I say look at a film like The Wizard of Oz, which was made only a few years later.

6.5/10