creativitex Warm up the slab for what may be the worst entry in the Universal Monsters cinematic universe: 1945's "House of Dracula." While the previous entries ("Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man," "House of Frankenstein") had been at least suitably mediocre, "House of Dracula" somehow manages to give both Dracula and the Wolf Man more screen time while giving them less to actually do. (In the entire 68-minute movie, there may be about three minutes of actual monster mayhem.) Dracula (John Carradine) turns into a bat a couple of times for no reason, and spends most of his time receiving blood transfusions. Wolf Man basically just mugs for the camera and begs to die. And fans may be particularly enraged by the short shrift given to Frankenstein's monster. Not only does he have the least screen time, but also he has the dubious honor of having the least coherent plot thread in a film that struggles to attain coherence in the first place. In fact, to say this movie has a plot is an act of generosity that would cause even the most prolific humanitarian to stop and think. It seems to center around a doctor who promises to cure Dracula, promises to cure the Wolf Man, and stumbles upon the body of the Frankenstein monster for... reasons? There's one nurse with whom Dracula is obsessed, with no payoff, and another nurse with a hump on her back, again, without payoff. John Carradine is perfectly suave as the titular bloodsucker. Lon Chaney Jr. is game enough as the werewolf, but neither of them has sufficient charm to beat out the fundamental weaknesses in the script. It's watchable only if you're a die-hard fan, but you'll still be disappointed.

jacobjohntaylor1 This is a sequel to the House of Frankenstein. House of Frankenstein is about Frankenstein Dracula and the wolf man. This movie is also about Dracula Frankenstein and the wolf man. Dracula come to a scientist who he think can make him human again. The wolf man come to the same scientist looking for a cure. The Frankenstein is discovered to still be alive. He stats out slow but give it time. It is really one of the scariest movie ever made. This movie is scarier then Frankenstein (1931). This movie is scarier then The bride of Frankenstein. It is very intense. If you like really scary movie then you need to see this movie.

Nigel P Universal films' second run of horror films (kick-started by 1939's 'Son of Frankenstein' – itself commissioned due to the success of repeat showings of the original 'Dracula' and 'Frankenstein' films) fizzled out with this final serious monster-mash. It's not difficult to see why. Whereas the early films were master-crafts of the macabre, with careful courting of actors and directors alike, the series had by this time become mere monster-rallies. Films for the kids to enjoy. Cosy. Familiar. Popcorn. Not that there is anything wrong with this approach, but once you've thrown three of the best known monsters together for no reason other than to bolster sales, artistically, there is nowhere left to go except a meeting with Abbott and Costello.If anything, the story is perhaps a little tighter than the preceding team-up. John Carradine's Dracula appears to be searching for a cure for his nocturnal habits, as does Lon Chaney Jr's forlorn Larry Talbot. Whilst the Wolf Man is sincere, The Count seems to have ulterior motives, given away by secretly keeping his coffin in the cellar of Doctor Edleman, the man who he has come to for salvation.This is really Edlemann's story. He becomes a strange Mr Hyde character as a result of Dracula's machinations, and Talbot struggles with his conscience after he sees Edleman up to no good – after all, here is the man who appears to have cured him.It's a good run-around but nothing more. It features Lionel Atwill in one of his last appearances (he died the following year) – in the scene when the police are searching the premises, you can hear Atwill hacking in the background. Also featured briefly is the wonderfully named Skelton Knaggs, a Universal regular, turning in a truly laughable performance.And what of the third named monster, Frankenstein's lumbering creation? Once more played by the impressive Glenn Strange, he is utterly wasted, lying comatose throughout, only coming to life at the end to wreck the laboratory and bring the film to a close. Strange's brief screen-time is cut down further – the Monster's finale is actually the climax to 1942's 'Ghost of Frankenstein' replayed, featuring Lon Chaney Jr in the role. A slipshod ending to a classic range of terrors.

AaronCapenBanner Erle C. Kenton returns to direct this final entry in the "Frankenstein" & "Wolf Man" sagas(not counting the farcical "Abbott & Costello Meet Frankenstein") Here, through an unfortunate case of lazy & indifferent writing, both Dracula(again played by John Carradine) & The Wolf Man(played by Lon Chaney Jr.) are alive again without explanation, seeking the aid of Dr. Edelmann(played by Onslow Stevens) to finally cure them of their maladies, though Dracula is insincere, and will once again be destroyed by sunlight. Larry Talbot and Dr. Edelmann also come across the Frankenstein monster in a cave(with the skeleton of Dr. Niemann) that harbors a plant that will enable Talbot to be finally cured of his curse. Sadly, Dracula poisons the good doctor with his blood, causing him to become a killer, forcing a most tragic end for him and his hunchbacked assistant Nina(played by Jane Adams).Poorly written and paced film is a most disappointing end to the series, though it was nice to see Larry Talbot finally cured, the lack of explanations here is annoying, and the plot incredibly contrived and coincidence driven, leading to a rushed and abrupt ending. A shame.