Jump to content

Talk:House of Frankenstein (film)/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Kting97 (talk · contribs) 18:46, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Will be reviewing this. Please give me a few days to go over it. All the best, Kting97 (talk) 18:46, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Initial Comments

  • Neutral criteria met.
  • Stable criteria met.
  • Illustrated criteria, one comment: For the photo in text, include that it is a publicity still in the caption since that is the basis of the permission. Suggested caption: "Behind-the-scenes publicity still for House of Frankenstein showing producer Paul Malvern (left) and Glenn Strange (right), in his Frankenstein's Monster make-up."
Right on. Done. Andrzejbanas (talk) 20:49, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Will go through the article in more detail over the next few days to address the other GA criteria.
Kting97 (talk) 19:09, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Writing

Thanks for your patience. Will get to the review now.
  • Plot – I generally liked how this is written. Sounds like a fun film. Just some suggestions below to enhance readability. Also some plot points you could clarify for the lay reader such as myself who has not seen the film and is not too familiar with creature features.
    • "In order to exact revenge on Burgomaster Hussman, who for puting him in prison, Niemann revives Count Dracula."
    Changed. Andrzejbanas (talk) 01:55, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Perhaps you can clarify how Niemann has access to Dracula.
    Sure. Lampini claims to have found the corpse within Dracula's Castle (breaking any continuity with the earlier films, but ah well). Andrzejbanas (talk) 01:55, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • "and kills Hussmann himself."
    Done. Andrzejbanas (talk) 01:55, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • In the same sentence, I suggest splitting it into two. After "Hussmann" full stop. And then "but In a subsequent chase, however, Niemann disposes Dracula's coffin, causing the vampire to perish in the sunlight."
      This part of the plot can be clarified: Is it because Dracula was inside the coffin and then the coffin somehow opened in the sun?
Yeah, the coffin is tossed, Dracula falls out, as he scrambles to get back inside, the sun comes up, and the Dracula part of the story is over. Bye Drac! I've added it to the plot. Andrzejbanas (talk) 01:55, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • After the death of Dracula, perhaps start a new paragraph, since you move on to the next monster to be featured.
Hehe, did that on my own right after. Done. Andrzejbanas (talk) 01:55, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • "the Frankenstein's Monster"
Done. Andrzejbanas (talk) 01:55, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Having not watched the movie, just want to clarify what you mean by "frozen castle". Is it "flooded" or "frozen" or both?
Uhh, it's all near a cliff surrounded by the sea (?). It's in a cavern underneath the castle, but it's not really clear if it's you know, an organic part of the castle. I've tried to clarify it. Andrzejbanas (talk) 01:55, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Maybe add what Talbot's curse is. I assume something like a werewolf curse? Just in case somebody doesn't click on the link to Larry Talbot.
Good idea. Is saying it's a Werewolf curse clear enough? Andrzejbanas (talk) 01:55, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • "the his curse"
Done. Andrzejbanas (talk) 01:55, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Perhaps say Neimann "thaws their bodies" - I personally was a bit confused at first with him wanting to revive the Monster because I first thought thawing them also re-animated both of them, but I assume it just brought Talbot back but the Monster is still dead?
They are both frozen, so he thaws them out of their frozen state yeah. Changed. Andrzejbanas (talk) 01:55, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • "However, Neimann is more interested"
Done. 01:55, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
    • "and whom Daniel falls in love with her;. It is, however, unrequited, however, as Ilonka falls in love with Talbot."
Changed. Andrzejbanas (talk) 01:55, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • "Daniel tells Ilonka that Talbot is a werewolf, but she is undeterred, and promises Talbot that she will help him."
Done. Andrzejbanas (talk) 01:55, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • "Events reach a crisis point" sounds a bit awkward – Perhaps "There is suddenly a crisis when..."
Changed. Andrzejbanas (talk) 01:55, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • "Neimann revives the Monster, and Talbot again turns into a werewolf"
Done. Andrzejbanas (talk) 01:55, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • "The Talbot, as a werewolf, attacks and fatally wounds Ilonka, but she manages to shoot and kill Talbot him with a silver bullet before she dies."
Done. Andrzejbanas (talk) 01:55, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • "Daniel blames Niemann for Ilonka's death"
Done. Andrzejbanas (talk) 01:55, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Cast – Looks good. However, just want to suggest being consistent with the Plot and Cast, so perhaps in the Plot use "Prof. Bruno Lampini" when he is first mentioned so it is consistent with the cast list.
    Without access to the source, is the character written in the credits as "Prof. Bruno Lampini" or "Professor Lampini"?
Just double checked and the source states "Prof. Bruno Lampini". I've added that to the plot. Andrzejbanas (talk) 02:07, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Production
    • Background and pre-production
      • "Prior to the announcement of House of Frankenstein" is unnecessary since you already are saying this is the Background of the film.
Fair, re-phrased this to correspond to this and the below comment. Andrzejbanas (talk) 02:26, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      • What exactly was "announced" by The Hollywood Reporter? Should it be "Production for a film titled Chamber of Horrors was announced"
Update per above. Andrzejbanas (talk) 02:26, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      • "George Zucco, and James Barton, as well as including the characters with characters such as the Invisible Man, the Mad Ghoul, the Mummy, and "other assorted monsters"."
Updated. Andrzejbanas (talk) 02:26, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      • "Chamber of Horrors never went into production." – Just want to clarify, is it that this film completely never went into production or is Chamber of Horrors merely the pre-production name of House of Frankenstein? And need to clarify was Siodmak linked to Chamber or House? Just a little confused with the timeline of when pre-production became House of Frankenstein.
The source doesn't really go into details as all the information there is about Chamber of Horrors is that it was announced...and then nothing. Suddenly, House of Frankenstein goes into development (under the shooting title The Devil's Brood) a month later. It's basically just here to show that Universal was toying with a film that brought all the monsters together. As it says later in production, "preperations" (it's not clear what is meant by this, but that's what the source says) were made for the month later. I just try and seperate them here to not suggest that Chamber of Horrors was House of Frankenstein, but i mean, it could have been, it's just information that's lost to history it seems. Andrzejbanas (talk) 02:26, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      • Are the "mummy Kharis" and "the Mummy" the same creature? Perhaps that can be indicated somehow.
Again possibly? "The Mummy" is just commonly called "the mummy" in a lot of the films the early Universal Mummy series is complicated. In the original film, the mummy is Ardeth Bey/Imhotep. In it's "sequels" the mummy is now a different one named Kharis. It's probably Kharis, but as all there is on that Chamber of Horrors article is that Hollywood Reporter note, it's not clear. Sorry, wish I had more!Andrzejbanas (talk) 02:26, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      • Either keep the quote of Siodmak or the last sentence in the first paragraph, since it repeats the same information.
Haha, you are correct. I've removed the later statement. Andrzejbanas (talk) 02:26, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      • "The cast would not be was officially assembled until in February 1944."
Updated. Andrzejbanas (talk) 02:26, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      • "Prior to Strange's casting, Lane Chandler was tested for the role."
Done. Andrzejbanas (talk) 02:26, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      • "Strange was unaware that a new actor was being called to play the Monster and only found out when he was reported to Jack Pierce's make-up studio to have a scar applied to him. After which, Pierce phoned producer Paul Malvern stating they had found their new Monster." – I am a bit confused as to what this sentence means. Strange did not know he was being cast as the Monster? Should it be "Strange was unaware that he was being called to play the Monster"?
Yes. I've updated this. Andrzejbanas (talk)
  • Release
    • "Despite filming being completed in May, the film had several months before premiering. In this time, the film's title was changed to House of Frankenstein." – Arguably this belongs in the Production section, perhaps make it Filming and post-production
      Moved. Andrzejbanas (talk) 03:14, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • "House of Frankenstein was shown showed [or premiered] at the 594-seat Rialto Theatre in New York City on December 15, 1944."
      I'm anxious to use the term "premiere". These films often just have earlier screenings around the world in seemingly minute areas before their release in the United States. (see Son of Dracula which was screened in Mexico and Canada before it was first screened in the United States. I'll change it to screened for now.) Andrzejbanas (talk) 03:14, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Was it just "shown" there or did it "premiere" there?
    • "The film was so popular at the theatre, that it ran the film all night on December 15. The film and then played at the theatre for three weeks."
      Updated. Andrzejbanas (talk) 03:14, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • "On February 20, the film had a week-long run at Los Angeles's 2,200-seat Orpheum Theatre"
      Updated. Andrzejbanas (talk) 03:14, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • "This It was not among the highest grossing films for Universal that year, which included Can't Help Singing (1944) and Ali Baba and the Forty Thieves (1944), as well as the studio's other horror outings with The Climax (1944), all of which both grossed over $500,000. However, it managed it managed to outgross other similar Universal, horror-related"
      Updated. I tweaked this a bit as well. Andrzejbanas (talk) 03:14, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Only if the source actually says all films grossed over $500,000. If not, which two does "both" refer to?
      Probably best to limit what these films grossed acutally, the main point is that they did better financially than House of. Andrzejbanas (talk) 03:14, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • "The first news of a follow-up to House of Frankenstein (1944) appeared in Hollywood trade papers in April 1944 with a film titled Wolf Man vs. Dracula, the script of which differed greatly from that for House of Dracula. This sequel would become House of Dracula, albeit with a different script."
      Done. Andrzejbanas (talk) 03:14, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • "May 19, 1944"
      Done. Andrzejbanas (talk) 03:14, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • "Repeated actors include John Carradine as Count Dracula, Glen Strange as Frankenstein's monster, and Chaney Jr. as The Wolf Man. Actors John Carradine, Glen Strange, and Lon Chaney Jr. reprise their roles as Count Dracula, Frankenstein's Monster, and the Wolf Man, respectively."
      Yeah, that's much better! Done. Andrzejbanas (talk) 03:14, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Ref [24] is from 1989, but is used in a sentence talking about 1992 home release.
      I double checked it, the 1989 source is just saying that Universal had not ever officially released the film on home video yet. The next source actually has release information. Andrzejbanas (talk) 03:14, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reception
    • ""noting that audiences should "be sure and check your [their] credulity outside"."
      As i'm quoting the source, the source does say "your" not their. so I feel this should stay as it is. Andrzejbanas (talk) 04:13, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • The Harrison's Reports review is still somewhat negative so I suggest moving it to the first paragraph with the other negative reviews, so the single mildly positive review is separated from the rest.
      Sure. Harrison's Reports is also New York based, so that's fine by me. I've moved it. Andrzejbanas (talk) 04:13, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Perhaps the view of the actors can all be put together, including what you have in Production from Anne Gwynne and Karloff, as it was kind of random/awkward there.
      Sure. I think the ones involving the production can stay within the production (i.e: Strange's Frankenstein experience), but i've moved the one about Gwynne. Andrzejbanas (talk) 04:13, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • What is the Monster Rally?
      Tried to clarify it. Is that enough? Andrzejbanas (talk) 04:13, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Perhaps move up Kim Newman's review after Carlos's since they both talk about Monster Rally (is this the series?) and both are less negative than the other reviews.
      MOved. Andrzejbanas (talk) 04:13, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again for your patience. Will check out the sources another day, and will go over the text again. I have yet to go through the lead section as well. Kting97 (talk) 19:56, 11 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Will get back to the review in a bit, but did some slight edits to the Plot, feel free to revert what you don't agree with. Kting97 (talk) 03:31, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. This has been really thorough! So I appreciate you taking this all seriously. Feel free to ask me any questions as most things above could easily be fixed, but a few might be up to you on if they are up to standard. Andrzejbanas (talk) 04:13, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I love reading about movies, even if I wouldn't watch it (not usually a fan of watching this genre), and this was a really fun read. I will do a few more copy edits but overall looks good and you clarified all the main points I think. Will go over to sources review below. Kting97 (talk) 10:26, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

References

Will start with a few references I can access, and then will ask about a couple random references to ensure no copyvio and then should be good to go.
  • [15] - Noted on your reply above.
  • [19] - Comments:
  • Unable to find The Climax, Ghost Catchers, and The Invisible Man's Revenge in the source. I might have just missed it but could you perhaps describe which column I would find them in?
  • They are on that oddball sideways page in the second column (I had to save an image of the page and rotate it manually to spot it!) . Ghost Catchers is in B column where it says "UNIV 102", same with Invisible Man's Revenge "UNIV 107". The Climax is hangover in the headline All features released in 1944" in column A on the second page. Andrzejbanas (talk) 21:27, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • [22] - I don't think a timetable can be used to support a line talking about the film being "released" on that date just because it was being shown and since you already have a source for this quote I would suggest removing the timetable.
Sure. Will remove after so it doesn't mix up the number flow of the current citations. :) Andrzejbanas (talk) 21:27, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • [24] - Unable to access but as mentioned am not convinced that this should be here given that the source is from 1989. Although you mention that it just says Universal never officially released the film on home video. Does [25] mention that it is the first home video release of the film? Can you link online or quote it here? Thanks.
Double checking and linked, this is in. The source is from 1989 just saying it has not been released on home video yet. The next source just finally announces it's release. I'm happy to re-arrange this if you think it's a bit too much. Andrzejbanas (talk) 21:27, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • [27] - Checked.
  • [29] - Checked.
  • [30] - Checked.
Worth mentioning I was able to find this source through Internet Archive, which you may want to link: https://archive.org/details/harrisonsreports26harr/page/206/mode/2up?q=frankenstein
Nice find! Linked up. Andrzejbanas (talk) 21:27, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • [31] & [32] – No access but perhaps you can consolidate it into one source since it is from the same book but just two different pages. Also just the following edits.
Will do once I've updated these not to lose number spacing. Good idea. Andrzejbanas (talk) 21:27, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"A reviewer in for The Motion Picture Herald deemed the picture as an "excellent horror film", complimenting the acting, makeup, clever photography, lighting and score, also noting that at their screening at the Rialto Theatre in New York, the "matinee audience was more than satisfied"."
Updated. Andrzejbanas (talk) 21:27, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • [34] - Checked.
Again worth mentioning a link you can include: https://archive.org/details/illustratedhist100clar/page/102/mode/2up
Wasn't sure if that works and I'm afraid it doesn't. Can't link to an article (which the book has one of) and to an external link. Perhaps it would better to link to the book on archive.org via the Wikipage for the book. Andrzejbanas (talk) 21:27, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"wrote about the Universal's character cross-over films, also known as the Monster Rally films, in his"
Rephrased. Andrzejbanas (talk) 21:27, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • [36] – I don't have access, but just to bring up an edit:
Italicize "Monster Rally" for consistency. Also suggest not re-using "summarized" two sentences in a row, perhaps "Kim Newman discussed the Monster Rally films"
Done. Andrzejbanas (talk) 21:27, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • [37] - Checked.
"A review in Phil Hardy's book Science Fiction (1984) declared that "the film's cheap-skate opportunity verges on surrealism at times as it moves from monster to monster with bewildering rapidity." while finding the film less ludicrous than its follow-up, House of Dracula."
  • Remove the period after "rapidity".
Done. Andrzejbanas (talk)
I don't have access to the following so will just ask for a couple of places, could you quote to source to confirm there is no copyright violation in the text. Thanks!
  • "On set, Carradine treated his company to recitations of Shakespeare's work and Chaney would occasionally prepare lavish lunches for his dressing room co-stars."
  • "Strange noted the Monster-make up was uncomfortable on set, making him feel like he had water on the brain and that he was not allowed into the studio commissary, having to eat a sack lunch away from others, leading to Strange to recall "I guess they didn't want me to turn the stomachs of stars and starlets."
  • "Most of the music in the film was written specifically for House of Frankenstein, as opposed to the usual collection of musical cues dating back to 1938 that were in other films of the period."
  • Yeah, I looked at it, it's a bit too close so I've re-phrased it a bit.
  • "The first news of a follow-up to House of Frankenstein appeared in Hollywood trade papers in April 1944 with the announcement of a film titled Wolf Man vs. Dracula."
Quote: "The first hint that yet another monster rally was in the offing came via the April 1944 Hollywood Trade papers, while House of Frankenstein was still in production. The announcement was that the title of this new film would be The Wolf Man vs. Dracula, and that Ford Beebe had been assigned to produce and direct." I don't think this is very close, but it should be THE opposed to just Wolf Man vs. Dracula. Andrzejbanas (talk) 22:02, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Writing

Sorry, just a couple of writing points I noticed upon reading again.
  • Lead
    • "The film was directed by Erle C. Kenton Based on a story by Curt Siodmak, it is directed by Erle C.Kenton and produced by Universal Pictures. The film" – This is also so you don't start two sentences with "The film"
    • Suggest shortening the brief description of the film: "The film is about Dr. Gustav Niemann, who escapes from prison and promises to create a new body for his assistant Daniel. Over the course of the film, they encounter and revive several horror creatures: Count Dracula, Larry Talbot, the Wolf Man, and Frankenstein's Monster."
      I'm going to slightly re-phrase that. Dracula is kind of weird as a monster as he can blend in with society and isn't immediately met with screams like a character like the Wolf Man or Frankenstein's monster is. Same with The Wolf Man, when he is Larry Talbot, he's just a normal person otherwise. Andrzejbanas (talk) 23:28, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If you want to keep the original – "The film is about Dr. Gustav Niemann who escapes from prison and promises to create a new body for his assistant Daniel. The two murder Professor Bruno Lampini a traveling showman and take over his sideshow, which that involves the corpse of Count Dracula. After disposing of the Count, the two move on to the ruins of Castle Frankenstein where they find the body preserved bodies of Frankenstein's Monster and The Wolf Man Larry Talbot, the Wolf Man preserved in the castle. Niemann thaws them and promises to cure Talbot of his werewolf curse, but secretly plots to revive Frankenstein's Monster instead."
I think yours is fine. This is kind of a film in search of a plot anyways. ;) Andrzejbanas (talk) 23:28, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • "The film began Production began with the intention to write of a story make a film involving several Universal horror properties."
Done. Andrzejbanas (talk) 23:28, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • "Filming began on April 4, 1944 with highest budget originally set for a Universal Frankenstein film at that time. Filming ended in early May while the film with screenings starting in New York on December 15, 1944."
    • "On Upon its original release in New York, film historian Gregory W. Mank noted that the declared that, on the film's premiere in New York City, critics "made mincemeat" out of it.[4] Later Retrospective reviews focused on the absurdity of connecting the monsters together and the lack of scares in the film. A sequel, titled House of Dracula that involved much of the same cast and crew titled House of Dracula was released in 1945."
Done. Andrzejbanas (talk) 23:28, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Production
    • "One June 7, 1943,a film production"
Done. Andrzejbanas (talk) 23:28, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Could you clarify – Where you talk about the screenplay Lowe worked on, which was based on Siodmak's story, is it already House or was it still Chamber? I know you mentioned that the source does not really clarify the timeline but perhaps you could say something about how what Siodmak/Lowe worked on was some monster pic for Universal.
There is very little about the writing process as Edward T. Lowe isn't really considered any prolific writer, mostly churning out mystery stories and horror stories which wasn't the most respectable of things during the period. I've tried expanding his own page but the information just doesn't seem to be out there. Even authors of bigger works like Dracula, I could only scrap together very little biographical information or writing style about Garrett Fort. I think only Curt Siodmak has a lot of retrospective interviews in his lifetime. :/ Andrzejbanas (talk) 23:28, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • "On discussions with the cast," – Was Gwynne in a discussion with the cast or "Discussing the cast in an interview with Michael Fitzgerald, Anne Gwynne confided" Also do you have a year for this interview?
    • "Despite filming was being completed in May, the film had several months before premiering. In this time, After filming was completed in May and prior to its premiere, the film's title was changed to House of Frankenstein."
Done. Andrzejbanas (talk) 23:28, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Release
    • "at the 1,100-seat Hawaii Theatre"
Done. Andrzejbanas (talk) 23:28, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • "nationally on February 16, 1945, following "
Done Andrzejbanas (talk) 23:28, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think that's all. Thanks! Kting97 (talk) 10:26, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Excellent. I think i've covered most of your responses? Please give me a heads up if I've skipped anything. Andrzejbanas (talk) 23:28, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]


Thanks for the link to Mank's book. Some last (I swear) comments.

  • "Carradine treated his company to recitations of Shakespeare's work" sounds a bit too close to the text. What about "Carradine treated those on set to recitations from the works of Shakespeare"
Sure. Andrzejbanas (talk) 20:03, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Those are generally my final comments, plus please address the aforementioned:

  • Ref [22] about the timetable, don't think it's a great source for release.
Thought I removed that. Thanks for catching it. Andrzejbanas (talk) 20:03, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ref [24] if you could re-arrange it so that the source is by what it is saying exactly.
I've just removed about the beforehand thing, as it's ultimately not that important. A release happened in 1992, so that's clarification enough for me. Andrzejbanas (talk) 20:03, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

After that, all good! Thanks, was a fascinating read. Kting97 (talk) 11:38, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Okay! Thank you for all your work, I'm glad you found the article a fun read. Up to you now @Kting97:. Andrzejbanas (talk) 20:03, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:House_of_Frankenstein_(film)/GA1&oldid=1149847039"