Showing posts with label George Lynn. Show all posts
Showing posts with label George Lynn. Show all posts

October 5, 2023

I Was a Teenage Frankenstein.

Review #2098: I Was a Teenage Frankenstein.

Cast: 
Whit Bissell (Professor Frankenstein), Phyllis Coates (Margaret), Robert Burton (Dr. Karlton), Gary Conway (the teenage Frankenstein monster/Bob), George Lynn (Sergeant Burns), John Cliff (Sergeant McAfee), and Marshall Bradford (Dr. Randolph) Directed by Herbert L. Strock.

Review: 
...Well, you already know that Aben Kandel and Herman Cohen wrote the film, because what better way to do a double feature of teenage monsters for the circuit than to have the same writers and director for both films? To be fair to Strock, he had a handful of experience in being efficient with the job required, whether that involved serving in the U.S. Army Ordnance Motion Picture Division or directing television in the 1950s (imagine going from directing Fox Newsreel footage to directing for AIP). How to Make a Monster would be directed by Strock with scripting by Kandel and Cohen that featured the return of the werewolf and Frankenstein makeup that dealt with youth actors (such as Conway) being hypnotized into being tools to kill. Unlike before, we have a film that lessens the teen angst present in the previous two films, because it ventures more into the familiar grounds of eccentric scientists, complete with lines that talk about one having a civil tongue to speak if only because they sewed it themselves and alligator pits. Yes, I am serious. There is a sequence of roughly over a minute in the final moments to show the monster in color after, well, the climax has already happened in a flash. Cohen sure loved his formula of a weary world where teenagers are beaten down in life by adults with cynical motivations of manipulation.

In some ways this serves as the better film of the three teenage monster films, if only because it is too lurid for words in the bold idea of just re-using Bissell in another wonky scientist role that he already did for the aforementioned Werewolf film. Technically speaking, it probably intends just as much interesting sympathy for its begotten teenage monster, mostly because it doesn't have much of a face for all but a fraction of its 74-minute runtime. And yet, the result is the same in another mediocre movie that is not nearly as interesting as it thinks it is when it comes to the horror of monsters in youth because it never passes the line beyond camp to actually generate useful interest for "good" moments. Both Blood of Dracula and this film are rushed, and it shows, but there were other AIP films of past and future that ended up being better than "mediocre" despite being a patch job, so why does this one not pass mustard? Well, I think it is because the film lacks general tension to do anything other than be stuck in one room, and the fact that The Curse of Frankenstein was released by Hammer (in full color!) in the same year this film was released doesn't particularly help its case. At least Bissell is interesting for such a run-over role of trying to sell you on the idea that progress is all that matters when it comes to the human process. Coates is almost amusing in just how much she is devoted to such a flake like Bissell, right up until she meets a dubious end before the climax even gets to happen. Burton wanders in and out and does exactly nothing as an accomplice, go figure. Conway is barely worth mentioning as the monster, mostly because he seems more of a pouting dolt more than anything. I wonder what would have been happened if one had tried to make a film about, say, raising a young Frankenstein with a normal face and weird psychological problems rather than the whole "hiding in the basement" thing. The death scenes in setup are probably the most interesting parts of the film. As a whole, if you've seen Werewolf, you haven't really missed much here besides having more of a goofy scientist rather than the monster. But hey, if you like the AIP circuit, you might find something to go with for a bit.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

October 1, 2019

The Werewolf (1956).


Review #1279: The Werewolf.

Cast: 
Steven Ritch (Duncan Marsh), Don Megowan (Sheriff Jack Haines), Joyce Holden (Amy Standish), Eleanore Tanin (Helen Marsh), Kim Charney (Chris Marsh), Harry Lauter (Deputy Ben Clovey), Larry J. Blake (Hank Durgis), Ken Christy (Dr. Jonas Gilchrist), James Gavin (Mack Fanning), S. John Launer (Dr. Emery Forrest), and George Lynn (Dr. Morgan Chambers) Directed by Fred F. Sears (#255 - The Giant Claw, #265 - Earth vs. the Flying Saucers, and #671 - The Night the World Exploded)

Review: 
The film was certainly helmed by a few pros when it comes to making quick films for entertainment. This is the fourth film I've covered of Sears that was produced by Sam Katzman, who had produced films from 1934 to 1972 that ranged from a variety of genres such as adventure, jukebox musicals, and horror (Robert E. Kent, writer for the film, also wrote for some of Katzman's films), primarily done on the cheap. In a decade where science fiction could certainly mingle with horror on occasion, it shouldn't be surprising that this film tries to mix the two together (after all, this was released as a double bill with Earth vs. the Flying Saucers), with the cause of the lycanthropy this time around being irradiated wolf serum than anything supernatural. Also, he doesn't merely transform in the night-time only, he just turns into a wolf if he is under emotional stress. In any case, this turns out to a be a passably okay movie that does fine with entertainment if one does not have high expectations or just wants to have some sort of horror for the night, unless one could watch something like The Wolf Man (1941), of course. It doesn't have too much in terms of compelling drama, which clearly tries to shake things up with the wolfman actually having a wife and son - for which they share just one scene together. Of the group of actors here, Ritch is likely the highlight, and he proves just fine in showing some anguish, mostly because the rest seem a bit too stock to really make an impact. It moves at a careful pace for 79 minutes while being occasionally hokey, but at least the film looks like it wants to move frights forward. Honestly, if you take out the werewolf part, this could just be a fugitive film, complete without weirdo scientists who like to give people serums and do coverups. Imagine thinking the best way to survive an apocalypse is to give people radiated serum - was their second idea to give them super hemlock? At least the film doesn't skimp out on giving us a shot of the wolf in action (which isn't just only for the dark), which looks okay. It just seems that the wolf should really just be seen in the night, as opposed to a big fur man being seen out in the daylight. The fact that the climax shoots shots of the wolf in day-for-night doesn't really help, either. Naturally, in a film with a weird setup to get a werewolf, of course the creature is taken down by a bunch of bullets by a posse. I'm almost surprised he didn't just faint from exhaustion or something else. Sometimes you really need something weird to make it go. Ultimately, this is a pretty average movie, not quite a winner for my eyes, but it does enough on the horror angle to at least make it seem a worthy curiosity.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.