El castigo de Frankenstein

This film appeared from no-where. It did not follow from The Revenge of Frankenstein, which had immediately preceded it, and the next film in the series, Frankenstein Created Woman, makes no mention of this film. This is a one-off film in the Hammer Frankenstein saga much in the same way that Scars of dracula is a one-off in the Dracula saga. For once, the story is rather flimsy, and the characters fail to build any pathos with the audience. The acting is good, but has no-where to go. It seems to be a remake of any number of Universal horror films rather than an original Hammer film. The direction is rather flat and the monster is just some monolithic doomsday machine running around, destroying everything. On the plus side, the atmosphere is suitably gothic and the costumes are realistic. It is, however, the least best Frankenstein film featuring peter Cushing.

This was the first Hammer film I ever saw, and I loved it back then on television while growing up. I'm sure the reason was because it was so much in tune with the old Universal monster films I loved, and at that time I hadn't seen any of the other British Frankensteins so I couldn't have been aware that EVIL wasn't really a true "Hammer" film. Well, sometimes ignorance is bliss, I think. Because ever since I caught up with all the other Peter Cushing Frankensteins, I gradually became clued in as to why so many diehards shunned EVIL. But that's a shame, really, as THE EVIL OF FRANKENSTEIN is a fine horror film in its own right and one of the more underrated monster films in fandom. Last night I had a friend at the house who's a Universal Fan, and he wanted to see his first Hammer Frankenstein film. So, what better choice than EVIL? But here's the thing with movies -- sometimes it all depends on your mood and the situation surrounding you when you watch them. The last time I had watched this movie, it didn't do as much for me; but now - while taking it for what it is and enjoying it with a fellow Universal fan - the film really delivered!

Peter Cushing is still great in EVIL. Sure, he's not playing the character exactly the same as in the other films, but it's refreshing to see him more heroic than usual, and it's not as though he's a total saint either (he does take a freshly dead man and cut out his heart, for crying out loud). There are small moments of indifference, too - such as when the mute peasant girl offers bread to Cushing and his assistant, Hans -- while Hans takes the trouble of saying, "thank you... but have you enough for yourself?" Baron Frankenstein takes his half without a word of gratitude and instead merely mutters to Hans, "she can't hear you".

Terence Fisher is a good director, but I think Freddie Francis does a fantastic job too on THE EVIL OF FRANKENSTEIN (and, later, on Dracula HAS RISEN FROM THE GRAVE). The laboratory is the best of all the films, and there are many neat cinematic touches -- like the grim shadowplay when the creature is stalking around town, and the monster's POV shot as he is first being raised up from his slab. The music is striking too, on par with just about any other Hammer classic. It accentuates the events of the movie very well. Kiwi Kingston makes a formidable hulking monster, and there are times when I even pitied him (it's rough to see him getting those migraines and to be abused by that hypnotist).

The only things weak about EVIL for me are some of the moments where we are at the fair, though once Peter Cushing crashes the Burgomaster's home to claim his property ("Be quiet, woman!!" - I love that! - ) we're back into high gear. Another debit for the movie is that its script seems a little perfunctory at times. In summary -- taken on its own without carping on what this isn't and enjoying it for what riches are to be found within it, THE EVIL OF FRANKENSTEIN can be a fun and satisfying experience as a stand-alone Frankenstein Film. *** out of ****

Arguably the weakest entry in the series, "The Evil of Frankenstein" is still a hell of a lot of fun to watch. Peter Cushing, the elder statesman of English horror films, turns in a particularly vigorous performance as the relentlessly demonized Baron Victor Frankenstein, while Peter Woodthorpe is excellent as the sulky, sleazy stage hypnotist who gains control of Frankenstein's resurrected creature (Kiwi Kingston). Sure, there's a heavy reliance on formula, but this is a series of films about a doctor who creates misshapen monsters and animates them with electricity, after all. What is the actual difference between a critically acclaimed movie like "The Revenge of Frankenstein" and a 'bad' movie like this one? Is the distinction as sharp as you've been led to believe?

Ultimately I have to judge films--especially genre pictures--according to whether or not I find them enjoyable, and I've been enjoying this one for decades. When was the last time you saw a horror movie as competent (if unspectacular) as "The Evil of Frankenstein"? The fact that it's regarded as a lesser installment in Hammer's Frankenstein franchise merely underscores the high standard of the studio's output. Forget the critical potshots and allow yourself to be entertained :)

The Evil of Frankenstein is directed by Freddie Francis and written by John Elder. It stars Peter Cushing, Sandor Eles, Peter Woodthorpe and Katy Wild. Music is by Don Banks and cinematography by John Wilcox.

Returning back to Karlstad after a ten year absence, Baron Frankenstein (Cushing) hopes that the town has forgotten his monstrous impact on the town previously. With assistant Hans (Eles) in tow, it's not long before the Baron stumbles upon his monster creation frozen in a glacier of ice...

Anything they don't understand, anything that doesn't conform to their stupid little pattern...they destroy.

With Hammer Films finally getting friendly with Universal Pictures, The Evil of Frankenstein forgets the two previous Hammer Frankenstein movies and goes for what is in all essence a rehash of Karloff's stomping days. That's not necessarily a bad thing if one can judge the film as a standalone movie? But creativity is sparse and it's left to the cast and technical department to create an above average Frankenstein movie.

Yep, it sure does look nice, with impressive costuming and well dressed sets, it's a Hammer movie for sure. Bank's score is also classic Hammer strains. Cushing gives his usual dose of quality, though he is a touch restrained here in terms of committed emotion, and you have to smile at his James Bond moment during one getaway scene while a buxom babe looks on with kinky lustation in her eyes. Elsewhere it's a safe turn of cast performances, with future Dad of Delboy Trotter, Woodthorpe, camping it up as the scheming and revenge fuelled hypnotist Zoltan, Wild isn't asked to do much, and neither is Eles, who seems to be in it for some continental flavour. Francis is no Terence Fisher, but he has a good visual flair and he can construct a very good action sequence, such as the excellent finale here.

There's problems for sure; familiarity of Frankenstein movies in general hurts, the make up for the creature is very poor, one back screen projection sequence is very cheap even by low grade Hammer standards, while some of the Baron's reactions to situations don't bear up to logical scrutiny. It's not hard to understand why it's a very divisive movie amongst the Hammer Horror faithful. Yet its merits hold up well and it never once sags or becomes tiring. Cushing, Wilcox and that finale ensure it's a decent night in by the fire. 6.5/10

I've watched this movie a few times and although Peter Cushing gave his usual great performance this film falls a bit short of the mark in Hammers' Frankenstein cannon. First and foremost, there is no continuity between this film and it's predecessor, the very well done,"The Revenge Of Frankenstein" This has a lot to do with Freddie Francis being Director instead of Terence Fisher. Kiwi Kingston looks like a 3rd rate Boris Karloff, however, being an ex wrestler, and not an actor, also, wearing very bad makeup he does his best with the material handed to him. The supporting cast, Sandor Eles, Peter Woodthorpe, Duncan Lamont, and David Hutcheson, do an OK job, it's just that with the very good "Curse Of Frankanstein" and the excellent "The Revenge Of Frankenstein" i was expecting a lot more. It's still a film worth seeing. Grab that popcorn and enjoy. John R. Tracy