JinRoz For all the hype it got I was expecting a lot more!

Dotbankey A lot of fun.

Voxitype Good films always raise compelling questions, whether the format is fiction or documentary fact.

Brendon Jones It’s fine. It's literally the definition of a fine movie. You’ve seen it before, you know every beat and outcome before the characters even do. Only question is how much escapism you’re looking for.

Hitchcoc Lon Chaney, Jr. was able to reprise his Wolf Man character here and he does it very well. Once again, he is cursed to live and continue to do destruction. It must have been hard on the people in the village where Frankenstein was brought to life, because, like a flood plain, they were constantly faced with the results of Dr. Frankenstein's experiments. Bela Lugosi plays the monster and is quite convincing. He sports the same make-up and dress as Karloff did. As Larry Talbot (the wolf man) tries his best to put an end to his pain, he meets up with a descendant of Dr. Frankenstein and soon encounters the monster. What follows is a titanic struggle between the too. This could well lead to another sequel. Who knows?

Nigel P In a celebrated opening scene, two grave-robbers scamper over an impressive night-time cemetery scene, into the tomb of the Talbots. They plan to steal valuables from the corpse of Laurence Talbot (Lon Chaney Jr), four years dead – and see the plaque bearing the rhyme: 'Even a man who's pure of heart, and says his prayers at night, may become a wolf when the wolfs bane blooms, and the moon is full and bright.'As the camera reveals, that night boasts a full moon. Not only that, but removing the wolfs bane appears to bring Talbot back to life.It doesn't matter that Talbot's left hand reaches out of the tomb for one of the grave robbers, Freddy (Cyril Delevanti), and yet the hand that grabs him is revealed to be his right. It doesn't matter that the Welsh village of Llanwelly is peopled with Scots, cockneys and Americans, but no Welsh. It doesn't even matter that Talbot, in his white nightwear, changes into a black shirt and trousers-sporting Wolfman and then back again. Because, despite the first two Universal Frankenstein films being my favourite movies ever, this is the most 'fun' of all the entries. And yet, the finished picture could have been so much different.As at the end of the previous 'Ghost of Frankenstein (1942)', The Monster has Ygor's (Bela Lugosi) brain in his head, and speaks with his voice. After considering using Chaney to play both Wolfman and Monster (both roles he had played before), it was decided subsequently to use Lugosi. Scriptwriter Curt Siodmak wrote dialogue for the Monster ("Help me to get up ... Once I had the strength of a hundred men … it's gone ... I'm sick …"), but at a premier, studio executives found a talking Monster hilarious (displaying a lack of memory and imagination, it seems) and all dialogue, and scenes including it, was cut. There's a POV that says the Monster's dialogue was removed because it sounded too much like the rantings of Hitler. Siodmak says Lugosi's accent made the words too 'Hungarian funny'. A little ungenerous of him. Also cut were references to the Monster's blindness, and the restoration of sight and strength at the film's climax.Lugosi, who was over 60, suffered from exhaustion during filming, and reportedly collapsed on set at one point. This is the main reason extensive use was made of stuntmen to double for him. His opening scene, with The Monster trapped in ice, features a close-up of stuntman Gil Perkins instead, despite the scene featuring Lugosi in a promotional photograph. Understandably, the rigours of the climactic fight between the two titans of terror featured Perkins and Edwin Parker in long shots, with close-ups featuring the billed actors (there have been suggestions that close-ups of Lugosi were spliced in from an earlier scene, where the Monster escapes his bonds on the slab, which were subsequently substituted for similar actions from Chaney's Wolfman).So, does Frankenstein actually meet the Wolf Man? Yes, she does. Ilona Massey, lovely as Baroness Elsa Frankenstein, is visited by Talbot, who is desperate to find her father's books, believing they can help rid him of his lycanthropic curse. Talbot is a morose, moody figure, a far cry from the buoyant flirt from his first outing. Lugosi's much criticised Monster, is a spitting, snarling thing. His uncertain stretch-armed stiffness seems over-the-top with all explanation for his blind groping removed – none of which is Lugosi's fault. He is the wrong shape for the Monster, and Jack Pierce's make-up (a make-up designed for more slender features) but is performance does not deserve the criticism it gets; he breathes life into the creature, more so than Chaney did in the previous instalment.Lon Chaney is excellent as Talbot, in what is essentially his film (with the Monster's role sadly reduced). He is intense and brought low by his predicament, and Chaney does a good job of some exposition-heavy lines.Maleva the gypsy woman, who had appeared in 'The Wolfman (1940)' was due to carriage-ride off into the night following the destruction of the laboratory, but Maria Ouspenskaya proved unavailable due to an accident which lead to temporary hospitalisation. This meant that Maleva disappears without mention.The rest of the cast comprise of stalwarts Lionel Atwill, Dwight Frye and Patric Knowles as all-rounder Doctor Mannering. Beginning the picture as the doctor tending to Talbot, he then becomes an investigator who follows him to Vaseria and finally, for no particular reason, the mad scientist who cannot resist bringing the Monster to full strength before the tremendous and hugely entertaining final battle.

GusF To be honest, I enjoyed it more than any of the solo "Frankenstein" sequels, though that is mainly because that I thought that the Larry Talbot part of the film was very good. Bela Lugosi makes a rather weak Frankenstein's Monster in comparison to Boris Karloff and Lon Chaney, Jr. and is nowhere near as effective as he had been as either Count Dracula or Ygor. It's not the only problem with his performance but it isn't helped by the fact that he was a much slighter man than either of his predecessors, making him far less intimidating physically. His screen time is far too limited for the Monster to be as interesting as he had been in some of the previous films. On the other hand, Chaney is again very good as the Wolf Man, though he isn't as effective when playing his alter ego Larry Talbot. Originally, the plan was for him to play both the Wolf Man and the Monster but that was abandoned as it would have been a logistical nightmare, which is a shame. The rest of the cast is very strong, including the enchanting Ilona Massey, Patric Knowles, Lionel Atwill (playing his third character in as many "Frankenstein" films) and Maria Ouspenskaya. The editing, however, is rather poor. In many scenes (including the Monster's first appearance!), it is a little too obvious that it is a stunt double rather than Lugosi.

TheRedDeath30 King Kong vs Godzilla, Alien vs Predator, Freddy vs Jason...essentially this is the movie that spawned every monster mash-up in history.I am a giant Universal Monster geek and my favorite of them all is THE WOLF MAN, so I am most likely a little bit biased when it comes to an impartial opinion on this movie. Of the six major Universal monsters created in the "talking era", Wolfie is the only one who never received a direct sequel. Instead, the sequel to THE WOLF MAN was melded together with the sequel to GHOST OF FRANKENSTEIN to create this classic. As other reviewers have stated, it almost feels like two separate movies, at times. The first half of the movie is very much a sequel to THE WOLF MAN, beginning with one of the eeriest scenes in Universal history, as two grave robbers break into the Talbot family crypt looking for riches and instead uncover death by moonlight. This scene reminds me of the EC Comics that would come a decade later and is one of the best parts of this movie. From there, Larry Talbot begins a quest to free himself from his affliction, which eventually brings him to the castle of Frankenstein. You can see the basis of what would have made a spectacular sequel to WOLF had it been allowed to develop. That's not to say the end result is not, also, spectacular because rather than continuing Larry's quest, we begin our second half of the movie, picking up after the events in GHOST OF FRANK and culminating in a fight (sort of) between our two titular monsters.Like all Universal sequels, this one requires quite a bit of suspension of belief, along with a short memory in terms of what has come before in the two series. As has been mentioned many times, there were numerous problems with Bela Lugosi as the monster, ending up with no explanation for why is is blind and mute. The end result is a shambling, stiff creature who is the basis of every bad Frankenstein impression to come. There are confusing references to who created the monster and how much the Baroness' father had to do with it. Had the viewer not seen the previous installments, it would be very hard to figure out who the Baroness is and who created the monster. While we're on the topic of the Baroness, herself, her character had been played by Evelyn Ankers in GHOST OF FRANK, but as she also played Larry Talbot's love interest in WOLF MAN, Uni felt that would be confusing, so Ilona Massey takes over the role and, somehow, between the movies the character picks up a thick Hungarian accent. Adding more cloud to the continuity is the fact that Castle Frankenstein was destroyed at the end of GHOST yet somehow remains in place in this movie.All those things can be forgiven, though. What horror franchise hasn't played a little loose with continuity to keep events moving? I love this movie for the dark feel of the first half and the focus on a great character in Larry Talbot. I love this movie for the thrill it gave me, as a kid, in seeing two monsters in one movie. I love it for being a sequel two Universal movies in one. It's fun and thrilling and a monster kid can't ask for much more than that.