Brief finishing touch - Universal House films

By the time of this Universal sequel, Talbot is tiring

Zucco is utterly wasted as Showman, Lampini

Dr Niemann eyes the ruins of Frankenstein castle

Dracula gets a chapter, Niemann's tool of revenge

The Monster gets Niemann's attention, Daniel is not happy

Just a few last words on the supposed “Monster Mashup” that really wasn’t. What missed opportunities, I say. Sadly, with each passing viewing, “House of Frankenstein” (1944) slides further and further in my liking of it. Too many continuity and character logic deficiencies that just come off the screen and slap you, and I think a lot of that is the seemingly slapdash screenplay. Its two chapters—the first with Dracula, second with the Wolfman, tied together by Frankenstein-disciple, Dr. Niemann (Boris Karloff, moving on to perhaps the best part of his career when he made three really solid films for Val Lewton) and his soft-voiced, voluntarily murderous hunchback assistant, Daniel (the excellent Naish, earning sympathy despite murdering or injuring several innocent people for Niemann just to get a better body) who uses their assistance when needed—keep the characters we want to see on screen together apart (and the other “House of Dracula” (1945) also fails to give us the matchup). Dracula putting himself in jeopardy for another bride is nothing we hadn’t seen before even as Niemann uses him to bump off an old rival who helped send him to prison for Frankenstein experiments. This film has Dracula’s suit vanish for whatever reason when he deteriorates to skeleton…understandable budget constraints but it still looks corny. And the less said about Ilonka, the better. She basically rejects Daniel (she didn’t know about those he had killed or would harm) for being a hunchback despite liking him initially when she couldn’t see his body, later falling for Talbot once he’s freed from ice under Frankenstein’s castle ruins (from “Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man” (1943)) by Niemann. I can’t fucking stand her. And her death at the end is not well orchestrated as Wolfman bites her on a very specific part of the throat, but as she grabs for Talbot’s dead body (after shooting him with a silver bullet) you can see no marks or any blood. Whenever you hear folks mention the murders of villagers, the throat is always described as mangled. When Daniel picks up Ilonka’s dead body in his arms, the neck is revealed too openly as untouched. It is just a badly directed scene that isn’t at all creatively avoiding what should have been rips to the throat. Talbot, despite his obviously unfortunate condition, just wants to die and never seems able. Except at the end. And yet he returns a-okay in the other “House of Dracula” I also watched Saturday evening. As does Dracula, also not at all worse for wear despite dying in “House of Frankenstein”. But, sure enough, “House of Dracula” does reference Dr. Niemann and the Frankenstein Monster (once again, Glenn Strange in a wasted, misbegotten character) when Dr. Edelmann finds them in a cavern at the bottom of the cliff overlooking the ocean while rescuing Talbot (still in werewolf form, coming out of it in the nick of time before he can kill the doctor) still covered in quicksand. Funnily enough, Visaria of “House of Frankenstein” doesn’t ever mention a cliff overlooking an ocean. Both films do have Carradine’s Dracula trying to use his influential “compelling” on Anne Gwynne of “House of Frankenstein” and Martha O’Driscoll in “House of Dracula”, using his eyes of “enchantment” calling them to a dark place he considers “beautiful, beautiful”. Both times interrupted before he can truly claim them for his brides, Dracula is denied. Except in “House of Dracula”, Dracula taints Dr. Edelmann’s blood with his before his death. Hunchbacks sure don’t fare well in Kenton’s Universal House films…poor Jane Adams never gets her surgically repaired body, and unlike Daniel she never hurt a soul. These screenplays can be quite cruel, too. Edelmann never did anyone harm; a benevolent scientist and physician, Edelmann only wanted to help Dracula, and was turned into Hyde during the night, suffering accordingly. In either House film, the Frankenstein Monster is but a “creature prop”, a far cry from what we once saw as a vital part of the Universal Studios horror brand. Sadly, much like “House of Frankenstein”, “House of Dracula” is another missed opportunity, failing to feature the Wolf Man and Dracula together despite the option to do so. One single scene has Talbot entering Miliza’s (O’Driscoll) room before Dracula can carry her off (doing so, ignorantly as the sun was about to rise, endangering himself yet again).

*In “House of Frankenstein”, how does Dr. Niemann know about Dr. Mannering from “Frankenstein Meets the Wolfman”?

**Why does Talbot seem to react as if he never knew Dr. Niemann despite how integral the evil scientist was in his not receiving medical attention when Dr. Edelmann talks about the end of “House of Frankenstein” in “House of Dracula”?

***Despite an excellent Jekyll/Hyde interpretation from Onslow Stevens (he’s way down the credits but is the central actor in the film), why would Dracula’s blood turn him into a demented maniac instead of a cold-blooded, very meticulous killer?

****I still celebrate the one time Talbot got a happy ending in "House of Dracula". Miliza is a lot more palatable a love interest for Talbot than oft-vicious Ilonka, who went off on Daniel just because he told her the truth.

*****When the Monster tosses Daniel out the window, it is quite violent, as is when Daniel chokes and breaks the back of Dr. Niemann. But nothing is more tragic and cruel than Nina being strangled and dumped like yesterday's trash.
******I do want to finish by saying that in House of Frankenstein you get lots of crumbling structural damage, by lightning storm or just by stepping in the wrong spot. Those sets are always impressive