MovieChat Forums > The Bride of Frankenstein (1935) Discussion > Son of Frankenstein was better

Son of Frankenstein was better

posted 6 years ago by [deleted]
10 replies | jump to latest

much better

[–] FilmBuff (7360) 5 years ago

wuut

It lots of interesting angles... crazy architecture. But was it better?

[–] HorrorMetal (869) 5 years ago

I respectfully disagree.

[–] GreenGoblinsOck8 (7818) 4 years ago

I disagree. The first and 2nd Frankenstein movies are best. I am in the minority preferring Ghost of Frankenstein to Son of Frankenstein. I honestly find Son to be less interesting. Partially because of how little focus the Monster gets.

[–] millsey72 (10667) 3 years ago

House of Dracula was the best Frankenstein movie out of the Universal classics

[–] GreenGoblinsOck8 (7818) 3 years ago

LOL! That's ridiculous! The Monster was barely in House of Dracula!

[–] millsey72 (10667) 3 years ago

Most of my posts are ridiculous

[–] Gubbio (3893) 3 years ago

We know... We know... 🙄

[–] kwestmo (4385) 3 years ago

Abbott and Costello meet Frankenstein is better.

[–] millsey72 (10667) 3 years ago

Yea, the plot in that movie was so much better than either of the House of movies. At least Dracula was in control here and the monsters were so much more tied together in Abbott and Costello

[–] liscarkat (19031) a year ago

"Son of Frankenstein" is my favorite of the first three starring Karloff.