IMDb RATING
5.3/10
487
YOUR RATING
When strange murders stump detective Coyle, he gets a break after his werewolf girlfriend is kidnapped by a vampire.When strange murders stump detective Coyle, he gets a break after his werewolf girlfriend is kidnapped by a vampire.When strange murders stump detective Coyle, he gets a break after his werewolf girlfriend is kidnapped by a vampire.
- Nominated for 1 Primetime Emmy
- 4 nominations total
Browse episodes
J.A. Preston
• 1997
Steve Rankin
• 1997
Nicholas Cascone
• 1997
Elaine Kagan
• 1997
Arthur Rosenberg
• 1997
Featured reviews
This film was a great multi-monster film! For once, it doesn't have Dracula being the main vampire-or just one main werewolf. Peter Crombie does a great portrayal of Frankenstein's monster-this is probably the one of the best films portraying the monsters in modern times. The plot is unique, and the effects are refreshing. It carries the traditional love triangle well, and it lives up to the monster being an intelligent multi-dimensional character rather than a strangling figure who can't speak or barely think. It's an interesting movie that can entertain and keep you on the edge of your seat. It's occasionally played on the Sci-Fi channel if you ever want to watch it (that's the only channel I've seen it on after it first premiered).
Sincerely, Exchronos
Sincerely, Exchronos
If fiction's three deadliest predators of man (Frankenstein's Monster, vampires, and werewolves) were loosed upon modern L.A., what would happen? This well-done miniseries attempts to answer that question. The results are a pretty lively horror film, with excellent special effects, good makesup, and a terrific cast. I'm surprised they didn't send this one to the theaters...all three and a half hours of it. Hey....it could have passed as a horror film's "Titanic."
What really makes it work it the fact that they don't resurrect the traditional monsters of the old Universal films, but the actual literary beasts. The Frankensten Monster is straight from the book, against both humans and vampires in an effort to meet his own deadly agenda. The werewolves and vampires also closly follow their incarnations from ancient folklore, representing evil incarnate. Together, these three kings of Undead manage to make an exceptional made-for-TV effort. Just one question: Where was the Mummy's Curse?
*** out of ****
What really makes it work it the fact that they don't resurrect the traditional monsters of the old Universal films, but the actual literary beasts. The Frankensten Monster is straight from the book, against both humans and vampires in an effort to meet his own deadly agenda. The werewolves and vampires also closly follow their incarnations from ancient folklore, representing evil incarnate. Together, these three kings of Undead manage to make an exceptional made-for-TV effort. Just one question: Where was the Mummy's Curse?
*** out of ****
Yeah people are disappointed that the House of Frankenstein is a bar. But i always liked Frankie and the vampire was tolerable but oh sexhunk and a half Carsten Norgaard as the werewolf. It was on NBC and my aunt taped it in 1997. Then it was taped over. Can't find it on disc anywhere. I'd lvoe to watch it again. I liked the music, could have done without the chicks but hey that's me. I liked it.
When this two part mini-series was first advertised, I didn't know what to expect. Most made for TV horror movies are poorly written, and have cheap special effects. While the special effects left something to be desired, the writing, and performance of the actors in this movie were very good. There were a lot of parts that I felt weren't needed, but overall, it was good enough to keep my attention. I felt that the unnecessary parts (way too much time on the frankenstein monster) could have been cut out, and it would have been a great TV movie. Cut out the unnecessary (notice I didn't say bad) parts and give it a bigger budget, and it would have been a great movie for theaters.
Overall, it was a good, solid movie, that I would watch again.
Overall, it was a good, solid movie, that I would watch again.
While the sum of this admittedly comes out to about average, it is not without aspects worth noting. I haven't seen the original classics based on the books, nor the film called the same as this. A pretty good job is done of basing the characters on the novels, from what I know of them. The three creatures/types get a fairly decent amount of screen-time as well as development each. Some of the design is interesting, though there are definitely also areas of it where they cut corners. Lighting isn't bad. The effects vary, but some are well-done, remarkably so in several cases. I'm not sure if there are multiple versions of this, but for me, it lasted about two hours and forty minutes sans commercials, so about an hour and twenty per part. There is relatively well-done suspense in this. There is a lot of cheese and corn herein, as well, but hey, they can both be found in a nutritious meal, and some insist on some of either or both in their diet. The humor certainly has its moments, and it's mostly natural, seldom forced. The script is hit and miss, and it may break a rule or more. It does a reasonable job of updating the myths and such. The plot is fine. The pacing is, as well. The acting is a mixed bag. The cinematography and editing feature some inspired bits. This is genuinely scary at times. There is moderate violence and gore, but I didn't hear any language. I recommend this to fans of horror, and those into the monsters. Just be aware of what to expect. 5/10
Did you know
- ConnectionsReferenced in Tell It Animated: The Evolution of Frankenstein's Monster (2024)
- How many seasons does House of Frankenstein have?Powered by Alexa
Details
- Release date
- Country of origin
- Language
- Also known as
- House of Frankenstein
- Filming locations
- Production companies
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content
Top Gap
By what name was L'Antre de Frankenstein (1997) officially released in India in English?
Answer