Waste of time

Very good movie overall, highly recommended. Most of the negative reviews don't have any merit and are all pollitically based. Give this movie a chance at least, and it might give you a different perspective.

The best films of this genre always show a path and provide a takeaway for being a better person.

It's a movie as timely as it is provocative and amazingly, for much of its running time, it is weirdly funny.

This, the last time Karloff would play the monster, is the best of the post Bride sequels. Featuring Bela Lugosi in his best role since Dracula, as the embittered Ygor, it has the best, most well thought out story and the best ending.

Sequel to 1935' "The Bride of Frankenstein". Wolf Frankenstein, son of Dr. Henry Frankenstein, decides to move in with his wife and son to the castle where his father had the laboratory where he created the Monster. It is clear that the inhabitants did not warmly welcome him because the stigma of past events still existed, but the police helped calm the moods. Wolf meets Ygor, a hunchback who becomes his assistant in the laboratory and tells him that the Monster has not been destroyed but instead is in a coma. Wolf Frankenstein, also a doctor and scientist, fascinated by his father's experiences, revives the Monster, but this one seems to have a connection with Ygor and only obeys him. Ygor then uses the Monster to take revenge and kill some of the villagers who tried and condemned him years ago.The atmosphere of this film seems minimalist compared to the previous two and does not have the horror impact of the predecessors, although the story is still very interesting and with some memorable performances, especially Inspector Krogh. But the end disappointed me: although in the end Wolf had 'saved the day', he was the main responsible for the chaos because it was he who revived the Monster, but what we get is him leaving with his family in a train and the whole population waving him goodbye cheerfully instead of being judged and blamed for his acts that led to the deaths of some more people. Does one good action erases the bad ones? Otherwise, interesting at least one viewing.

Better than I remember it, but Ygor (Bela Lugosi), in my opinion, is dreadfully bad, or maybe it's just his cheesy beard and make-up? Basil Rathbone plays Wolf Von Frankenstein and Lionel Atwill is the Burgomaster. Surprisingly, the two strike up a kind of truce-friendship and both end up dumping poor Frankie into the electrically-charged sulfur pit churning under the laboratory. End of movie, but of course The Monster returns in just a few years (in "Ghost of Frankenstein".) Different sets, and the lab is in a two-storied outbuilding attached to the castle, filled with secret passageways and bad acting. The Monster has smoother facial features and Boris plays him masterfully, with pathos and tenderness, although he kills several people of insignificant stature, but never the nanny, wife or child. "Bride" remains the best and most fanciful chapter in these first three movies. You will notice quite a few scenes carried into Young Frankenstein, including the wooden arm, the huge knockers (thank you) and the dart match between "Wolf" and the "Burgomaster".

Due to unexpected popularity (which caused round-the-block queues) of the original 'Dracula' and 'Frankenstein' re-screenings, Universal at last lifted their curfew on horror pictures with this hugely budgeted, star-studded sequel to the mighty 'Bride of Frankenstein.' Alongside Basil Rathbone's ambitious Baron Wolf Von Frankenstein, the viewer is literally transported from the real world into a vast, rain-lashed and unforgiving removed reality of horror via a train journey that really does traverse from one to the other very effectively. The town (now also called 'Frankenstein') is populated by those who want nothing to do with the new Baron, his wife, or his mop-headed, curiously Texan-sounding son Peter (played by future voice artist for Bambi, Donnie Dunagan). Understandably, they remember well the chaos brought about by Henry Frankenstein's creation, or more accurately, their own townsfolk's brutal treatment of him.Rathbone is brilliant in this, transforming from impetuous family man to hysterical 'mad doctor' with great skill. Bela Lugosi plays Ygor in one of his greatest performances, a part that was strengthened in order to give Lugosi a greater share of the action. Lionel Atwill, enjoyable in any part, gets probably his best role – that of Inspector Krogh, the wooden armed Police Inspector determined to protect both Wolf's family and the townsfolk.The sets are huge and expressionist, casting great shadows and rising imperiously above the tremendous cast, and the music used here would crop up again and again in future, less well-funded Universal horrors and mysteries.So why does this film seem slightly disappointing to me? Even after all this time, I still cannot answer that. Could it be that Peter, such an integral part, is entrusted to a four year old? Dunagan is a terrific performer for his age, but perhaps if the role was given to someone slightly older, they could invest it with just a hint of gravitas. Could it be that a thicker, jowlier Boris Karloff is given a strange sheepskin vest (presumably by friend Ygor, who upstages him regularly) and given no scenes of sympathy as he was so effectively in earlier films? Could it be that the film is just slightly overlong, and suffered from an unfinished script at the time of filming, which as a result, means that it plods – rather like the monster – in places? I don't know why I'm less than satisfied by this. Maybe it is because it follows what I consider the greatest film of all time? There's no doubt that so many elements are excellent here, and this clearly is one of the last Universal horrors to benefit from a generous budget (indeed it was their final 'A' production for a Frankenstein film).