Opening

19% Transcendence Apr 18
53% Heaven Is for Real Apr 16
7% A Haunted House 2 Apr 18
88% Bears Apr 18
58% Fading Gigolo Apr 18

Top Box Office

89% Captain America: The Winter Soldier $41.3M
47% Rio 2 $39.3M
71% Oculus $12.0M
62% Draft Day $9.8M
77% Noah $7.6M
41% Divergent $7.4M
13% God's Not Dead $5.5M
92% The Grand Budapest Hotel $4.1M
79% Muppets Most Wanted $2.3M
78% Mr. Peabody & Sherman $1.9M

Coming Soon

40% The Other Woman Apr 25
—— Brick Mansions Apr 25
72% The Amazing Spider-Man 2 May 02
100% Neighbors May 09
—— Godzilla May 16

Premieres Tonight

100% Orphan Black: Season 2

New Episodes Tonight

100% Da Vinci's Demons: Season 2

Discuss Last Night's Shows

—— Continuum: Season 3
100% Hannibal: Season 2
—— Hart of Dixie: Season 3
—— Last Man Standing: Season 3
—— Unforgettable: Season 3

The Evil of Frankenstein Reviews

Page 1 of 4
flixsterman
flixsterman

Super Reviewer

January 22, 2009
Might be the worst makeup job in the history of horror films.
AJ V

Super Reviewer

September 21, 2011
Just another Frankenstein movie, there's not anything new or different about this one either. It's actually pretty boring. It's not bad, it's just not good or interesting.
cancercapricorn2002
cancercapricorn2002

Super Reviewer

July 4, 2007
To start off here, many fellow Hammer fans seem to dislike Freddy Francis' "The Evil Of Frankenstein" of 1964, and, after watching it again recently, I must say that I do not agree. Sure, this third Frankenstein film from Hammer is also doubtlessly the weakest entry to the cycle. But it is the ingenious Frankenstein cycle I am discussing, and even this weakest entry is still highly entertaining and recommendable. The film may have its faults, but, overall, it maintains the Hammer-typical, delightfully Gothic atmosphere, and the great Peter Cushing is, as always, brilliant.

The film does not logically begin where "The Revenge Of Frankenstein" ended (and neither do the following sequels). Supposedly, some years have passed and Baron Victor Frankenstein is now making experiments somewhere in the woods, assisted by a young scientist named Hans. After their body-snatching activities are discovered by a priest, the Baron and his assistant are forced to flee to Frankenstein's old home, his castle near Karlstadt to which he was never supposed to return? Sure, the film has its weaknesses. This is the first, and only Frankenstein film from Hammer that was not directed by genius Terence Fisher (I am not counting screenwriter Jimmy Sangster's "Horror Of Frankenstein" of 1970, which I have so far refused to watch since it doesn't star Peter Cushing). While Fisher can easily be considered the greatest Hammer director, Freddie Francis, who directed this one, is only mediocre. The only other Hammer flick by Francis is "Dracula Has Risen From The Grave", one of the weaker entries to the great "Dracula" series with Christopher Lee. Francis furthermore directed several worthwhile films for Amicus Productions, such as "Torture Garden" and "Dr. Terror's House Of Horrors". One of the reasons why some fellow Hammer fans dislike this one is arguably the fact that "The Evil Of Frankenstein" brings us the nicest Baron Frankenstein of the series, which is not a weakness in my opinion, as I have always sympathized with the sinister Baron. Frankenstein was not really a villain in the other films, in my opinion, (except for the fifth entry "Frankenstein Must Be Destroyed", in which he was truly evil), as he did the things he did convinced of doing them for the good of mankind. He gradually gets more obsessed throughout the series, however, which is delightful to watch, and he is not as unscrupulous in the achievements of his goals here. The Baron is not as obsessed in this sequel, but, and that I do consider a weakness, he is also less ingenious. The brilliant and dedicated Baron Frankenstein we know is not supposed to endanger his work, only because he is enraged about the theft of a gold ring, and he certainly isn't supposed to be tricked by a drunk hypnotist who is nothing but a sideshow attraction. In spite of this lack of logic, however, the film is still highly entertaining and shouldn't be missed by a Hammer fan. The atmosphere is, as always, great. The brilliant Peter Cushing is, of course, the film's main quality. Cushing, THE gentleman of Horror, truly is one of the greatest Horror icons of all-time, and while he played in many other ingenious films, it is Hammer's Frankenstein cycle that made him the immortal icon he is. Apart from Cushing, the performances are not too good, only Katy Wilde is great in the lovable role of a mute beggar girl. Peter Woodthorpe and Sandor Elès are decent in their roles, but not especially worth mentioning.

All things considered, this is the weakest entry to the Frankenstein series with Peter Cushing, but it is nonetheless highly entertaining Gothic fun that is not to be missed by a Hammer fan. I do recommend the other films over this one though, my personal favorite is the ingeniously deranged fourth film, "Frankenstein Created Woman" of 1967. The entire series is great however, and even this weakest entry is highly recommended
Stephen M

Super Reviewer

October 21, 2007
Very disappointing third instalment which doesn't follow on from the second film, which ended with the doctor having an emergency head transplant and moving to London. The one interesting idea is that a hypnotist is required to revivify the monster after it is found frozen in ice. Cushing is good, as usual, but otherwise only Katy Wild makes an impression as a deaf and dumb girl, though unfortunately she's given precious little to do. The film is surprisingly unattractive to look at, given the director's past history as a cameraman, and the monster's make-up is very poor.
David S

Super Reviewer

September 15, 2013
A poor addition to the Frankenstein legacy that Hammer enhanced. The film takes ages to get going and seems incredibly padded, even though it only runs at 1.5 hours. The make-up for the monster is terrible and the only redeeming thing about the film is Cushing's committed performance. The film still possesses the classic Hammer sheen that places it above most of their ouvre in the late 60's and 70's but those looking for a good Frankenstein film should check out Hammer's 'Curse of Frankenstein' or 'Frankenstein Created Woman' instead.
April 14, 2008
The Evil of Frankenstein (1964) -- [5.5] -- Hammer's third Frankenstein film (following "Revenge of Frankenstein") is more of a one-off than a sequel, having little to do with the films before or after it. Despite the return of Peter Cushing to the role of Baron Frankenstein and Hammer Films' terrific sets (the laboratory sets are especially good here), the story is too much of a re-tread to stand out in the series. The most original aspects of the film are the involvement of a deaf mute girl (Katy Wild) who seems to have an affinity for Frankenstein's monster (Kiwi Kingston), and a greedy carnival hypnotist (Peter Woodthorpe) who Frankenstein employs to wake the monster's dormant brain. The highlight is a climactic laboratory fire in which Peter Cushing appears to be doing his own stunts.
February 22, 2012
This was a weird Frankenstein movie. In this one, Baron Frankenstein is pissed because the townspeople stole his possessions after driving him from the town. Then he finds his monster trapped in ice. Then he gets a drunken carnival hypotist to hypnotize the monster back to life. But the monster only listens to the drunk. So the Baron has to burn everything down. There is also a redheaded deaf mute that is of some importance. Still. Weirdo movie. Mostly just a retooling of the CABINET OF DR. CALAMARI, but without the - no really it is just a retooling.
KevinRobbins
December 9, 2013
I was charged with assaulting a police officer and crimes against god.

Baron Frankenstein is penniless due to his past fruitless ventures, which has left him homeless and ruined his name, but he will not stop him from continuing his research. Frankenstein works closely with his right-hand man, Hans, to continue developing his monster. He hopes to stimulate brain activity which will make his creature less of a monster and more in-line with his dream creation. Will Frankenstein get it right this time?

"What are you going to do with him now?"
"Cut out his heart."
"Cut out his heart?"
"Why not? He has no use for it."

Freddie Francis, director of Dark Tower, The Ghoul, Tales from the Crypt (1972), Dracula has Risen from the Grave, Son of Dracula, and The Creeping Flesh, delivers The Evil of Frankenstein. The storyline for this picture was just okay and a bit straightforward. I did enjoy the interaction between characters, the script was pretty good and the acting was above average. The cast includes Peter Cushing, Peter Woodthorpe, Duncan Lamont, and Katy Wild.

"What do you want me to do?"
"I want you to stimulate the brain."

I DVR'd this movie off a local channel that was airing a Frankenstein marathon on Thanksgiving night (I know, weird). This was just okay but I did thoroughly enjoy Peter Cushing's character and he did a wonderful job depicting Frankenstein. Overall, this is very average and I would only watch this if you're a die hard Peter Cushing fan (like myself).

"I'm not beaten yet. I will not let them beat me."

Grade: C
November 25, 2013
I only kept watching because Svengoolie hosted it and made it entertaining! Most of this was all build-up for the last exciting 30 minutes.
February 2, 2013
On the run, as always, Baron Frankenstein returns to his chateau in Karlstaad with his trusty assistant Hans to gather funds by selling his previous belongings, only to discover that the Burgomaster has taken them for himself! Frankenstein is run out of town once again when he confronts the corrupt official, where he finds his monstrous creation frozen but intact within a mountain cave. With the help of a local gypsy, Frankenstein revives the creature, but with disastrous results! After stealthfully avoiding copyright infringement by modifying the look of The Monster in previous films, Hammer was finally able to shape the creature after the original Jack Pierce designs with Universal International signed on as distributor, but the mangled results are far from stellar. The lavish set designs, on the other hand, never fail to impress in this third outing. Cushing, as Frankenstein, surprisingly assumes the role of the victim, a man of science who is surrounded by simpletons that only look to destroy his life's work. Director Freddie Francis distances his film from Fisher's earlier entries, making this a stand-alone sequel with no continuity to either of the ones that came before it. If anything, it is more likely to resemble many of the lower-budget sequels from the Universal FRANKENSTEIN films. THE EVIL OF FRANKENSTEIN is competently acted and directed, but one of the more forgettable entries in the series.

-Carl Manes
I Like Horror Movies
Whitsbrain
March 29, 2012
Peter Cushing is awesome. He brings so much to the roles that he plays in the Hammer films. He's got such a presence on-screen. He brings an intelligence to the roles he plays as Dr. Frankenstein. His character is also charming, calculating, and athletic. He plays Frankenstein with a very short fuse and a great deal of victimization. Throughout this movie, I wasn't sure if I was supposed to pull for him or dislike him but either way, his Frankenstein is the best representation of the questionably intentioned doctor that's been done by any studio.
"The Evil of Frankenstein" doesn't work for me quite as well as Hammer Horror's "The Revenge of Frankenstein". TEoF starts out with a great scene of Cushing's Dr. F'Stein cutting the heart out of a still warm cadaver. This dissection is performed during the opening credits. We see Cushing grunting and pulling at the corpse, trying to remove the heart from its chest. This opening scene is so effective because Cushing is so good. It's definitely a gruesome scene, but there is absolutely no gore to be found. We don't see the results of Frankenstein's autopsy until he drops the heart into a tub of liquid. This is another great example of how well these old movies incite a horrific reaction without the mindless gore.
This movie actually has a monster, but I was underwhelmed with it. Mostly because the makeup job was so bad. The monster was a sympathetic enough character and I liked that this took a different direction with Cushing actually losing control of the situation and the monster itself. The castle and the town of Karlsbaad were satisfying creations and they brought a feel of authenticity to the whole affair.
The ending is all too abrupt, which seems to be the norm for Hammer. The ending wasn't bad, it was just too sudden.
October 6, 2011
its OK, But!!! the monster looks like crap. Overall Its not nearly as good as Frankenstein(1931) and Curse of Frankenstein(1957), but much better then Frankenstein Unbound(1990) and Horror of Frankenstein(1970-1971?)
The Necropunk
July 7, 2011
A vaguely okay film that doesn't offer a lot to entertain or even scare its audience.
Taste-of-Pain
July 1, 2005
This is considered by some to be the weak link in the Frankenstein series. I can understand that sentiment, but all it takes to get around the flaws here is a little imagination. After all no one seems to have a problem ignoring the fact that in Revenge Of Frankenstein the baron was said to have been executed for creating a man that became a monster, whereas in The Curse Of Frankenstein he was actually convicted of the murders committed by the creature because no one living had seen the creature and therefore did not believe that it existed.
Everyone says that the Hans assisting Frankenstein is the same Hans from the last film, but is it? There's no solid proof. The same first name and a similar looking actor, but those points are rather insignificant. It is also assumed that the flashback is a rewriting of the events of the first film, severely altering the story and rendering the first film irrelevant. Possibly. Or maybe this is an adventure of the baron's that we had not previously seen. There were three years between the events of the first film and when he met Hans in the second film, assuming this is the same Hans. That's time enough for that story to have taken place. If I'm right in my belief that this is a different Hans, then we have no idea when they met or how long they've been together.
I have to say though, the monster sucks. Supposedly this is meant to look like the Universal monster, but rather than a simple flat head, it has a head shaped like a cube. Also, the black makeup around the eyes draws attention to the fact that this is exactly just that; makeup.
The story is interesting enough to watch all the way through, but ultimately just too simple. There's not a lot at stake, and in the end, nothing has been accomplished.
Page 1 of 4
Find us on:                 
Help | About | Jobs | Critics Submission | Press | API | Licensing | Mobile