Frankenstein Created Woman (1967)

Well, like in many horror movies--new or old--there is no attempt made to explain how Baron Frankenstein survived the ending of "The Evil of Frankenstein." I guess the only explanation necessary was that these films were popular and the public wanted more. So, this time, we see the Baron revived after being dead in an icy coffin for an hour--his soul never leaving his body.This gives the great doctor the idea of trapping the human soul & possibly putting it into a new body--which, of course, he does. This time, a female body--hence the title of this movie. Not quite as great to me as all the previous Frankenstein entries that I've seen--of course, I thought "Evil of Frankenstein" was a masterpiece, so anything following that might be a bit of a letdown.Still, this is a very good movie--you can hardly go wrong with Cushing as the Baron and Susan Denberg as his latest creation--the face of an angel and the soul of a killer. If you like "Hammer Horror," then this movie shouldn't disappoint. The print of the VHS release by Anchor Bay is excellent too. 4 1/2 stars....

A strange addition to the Frankenstein cycle, and indeed the Hammer output, this film slotted neatly between 1964's THE EVIL OF FRANKENSTEIN and 1969's FRANKENSTEIN MUST BE DESTROYED. The film is uncharacteristic of Hammer's other work in that it does not have the same Gothic atmosphere we are so used to seeing; instead, melodrama and romance take centre stage even to the Baron's antics.However, although the film is not one of Hammer's best, there are still numerous reasons one might find it enjoyable. Peter Cushing stars in one of his best roles, and is indeed great as the scientist obsessed with discovering the secrets of life...and death. Unfortunately he does not appear that much in this film, and when he does it is as a father figure to Susan Denberg, with his intentions and personality not being clearly studied.Cushing is unusually on the side of good in this film and displays little of the cold violence we are used to seeing in his Frankenstein character. Thorley Walter is always good value and brings a touch of comic relief to the story. Susan Denberg and Robert Morris are successfully tragic as the doomed lovers, but kudos also goes to the trio of actors playing the bounders and cads who are the cause of all the violence in the first place. These fellows are totally obnoxious and yet believable. If you look closely you'll see a young Derek Fowlds in an early role too! The film's main disappoint is the lack of Frankenstein, but the story about the lovers holds the attention. Other disappointments are the way in which the main characters are murdered, all deaths are routinely staged and the censors are more to blame for this than anyone else. Also the main creation scene is also sadly missing from the finished print, let's face it we all love the bits where electricity sparks and lightning strikes and the monster comes to life, and it feels strangely left out here. The ending of the film is also anti-climatic. However, there is a good moment where Denberg talks to the severed head of her executed lover (which she carries around in her handbag!) and the actors more than make up for the rather actionless story. Indeed all of the actors and actresses come out of this film looking good and it comes off as a nicely polished, well-rounded story which ties up neatly at the end and even achieves a kind of 'fairytale' ambiance.Overall, an average-to-good film from Hammer, with good acting all round, but with a little refinement here and there it could have been so much more. It's worth watching for the moment where the human soul is displayed, captured finally by Cushing - it's a big white glowing ball! A lot of fun and with many things to hold your interest, FRANKENSTEIN CREATED WOMAN is not the best but still entertaining in a classy way.

This film is marginally better than its lacklustre predecessor "The Evil of Frankenstein" but still not great. It's a bit of an odd one. It's more of a Hammer thriller than a Hammer horror film, really. Thorley Walters is very good as Professor Hertz and Peter Blythe, Barry Warren and Derek Fowlds are all suitably vile and obnoxious as Anton, Karl and Johann but, as the de facto leading man for the first half of the film, Robert Morris falls far short. It's hard to gauge Susan Denberg's performance as Christina since she was dubbed but I wasn't too impressed with Nikki Van der Zyl's emotionless voice over performance. The rest of the supporting cast was solid. Duncan Lamont, the only actor besides Peter Cushing to appear in both this and the previous film, was far more impressive in his brief scene as Han's father than as the Chief of Police in "The Evil of Frankenstein".It's a little unclear where this film takes place in the series' chronology, though the fact that Frankenstein's hands are badly injured would suggest that he burnt them in the fire at the end of "The Evil of Frankenstein". The fact that Frankenstein, while somewhat darker than in that film, is nowhere near as villainous as in "The Curse of Frankenstein" and "The Revenge of Frankenstein" would tend to suggest that it takes place in the series' second continuity rather than in its first. In contrast to those two films, Frankenstein is essentially the hero, albeit not a terribly sympathetic one, and comes across as a poor man's version of Van Helsing rather than as the utterly vile yet extremely compelling original version of Frankenstein. Overall, the plot was rather silly and not in a good way. I liked the metaphysical aspects of the film but they deserved a better treatment than the script provided them with.

This movie had everything that Hammer and Corman are famous for the technical aspects.The color or tone and shading was a plus The locations were superb. The fact that the film was uninterrupted by svengoolie. In the early days of horror flicks the voices were always just a bit off like the old kungfoo films i really like that. today the horror film producers seem to think that blood and gore is what the audience craves.What about the story we have not had a good story in years for example jekyll and hyde,moby dick,Dracula,sure we have had adaptations of these classic films but no new idea's that takes the viewer's into a what if this did happen frame of mind.I will say that harry potter came close in the first film anything after that was just cashing in on the first one.I know we have the writer's .I believe the studio's the corporations wont give new idea's a chance .they have ruined it just as they have the music business.long story short IS WHATS OLD IS ACTUALLY NEW.