Abbott & Costello Meet Frankenstein
1948, US, Directed by Charles T Barton
Black & White, Running Time: 79 minutes
DVD, Region 2, Universal, Video: 1.33:1, Audio: Mono
Several years after the conclusion to Universal’s domination of the horror genre, and their effective delineation of the very definition it could be argued, they were clearly out of ideas so the merging of two successful franchises seemed like sure success. It had already worked to some extent for one of the very franchises they were now attempting to grant new life to - the amalgamation of several of their famous monsters had prolonged the lifespan of said monsters with such films as Frankenstein Meets The Wolfman and House of Dracula. Despite some general critical dislike of such films I personally really enjoy them, almost as much as their real classics from the previous decade in fact. So, completely unable to inject any imagination into fright films Universal bring in Bud Abbott and Lou Costello to add their renowned comedic touch to drag out the classic monster series just a little bit further. So how did it go? Abbott and Costello play Chick (that’s a man’s name in America apparently) and Wilbur respectively, two bungling baggage clerks who are assigned to personally overseeing the delivery of two crates ostensibly containing the remains of both Frankenstein’s monster and Dracula to a wax museum. Once inside the museum basement Chick assigns Wilbur to various menial tasks while he attends to things nearby, at which point Stoker’s infamous vampire awakens - much to Chick’s discontent. Dracula manages to revive the monster (in a rather silly way, reminding me of the most uninspired scene from Living Dead at Manchester Morgue) before heading off into the dark. Implicated for the loss of the crates’ contents Wilbur and Chick find themselves in jail and under scrutiny in an insurance investigation while Dracula seeks help from a couple of scientists to insert a new brain into the monster for its obedient slavery: ultimate purpose undisclosed.
Wrapped up in the story are a number of characters, all with distinct motivations - a female insurance investigator who woos Wilbur to get to the bottom of the case, a female doctor who woos Wilbur so she can get his docile brain inside the monster, the guy who owns the crates and wants his creatures back, etc.; this labyrinth of activity nicely provides some weight to the overall scenario. A&B’s antics kick off almost immediately with some Laurel and Hardy-like shenanigans and this early scene barely raises a smile. But during the following act where they drop off the crates to the museum’s storage area, the edges of your mouth being to force their way upwards - the repeatedly opening coffin resulting in Wilbur’s hysterical panic can’t help but come across as downright funny. They get so much mileage out of this it’s crazy that it actually works, but it does. The laboratory is on an island by itself and is a truly glorious Universal horror setting, surprisingly invoking some atmosphere and the sort of place it would be cool to have a wander around. What effectively happens is a workable collision between the two aforementioned franchises because it really seems like Abbott and Costello have accidentally sauntered into Universal’s realm of the supernatural, completely at odds with each other but having the intended impact nonetheless. I still don’t like the wolfman’s impotent scenes and Chaney, with his relentlessly doom-laden approach, doesn’t seem to realise his hairy character is being taken the piss out of, but aside from that I found myself having a great time watching this film far more than expected. The big question for fans of the Universal classics - and one I feel qualified to answer - is, does this movie ruin the studios more serious outings in what may appear to be a lack of respect for them? Personally I still feel able to go back and indulge those chillers any time so I don’t think there’s any damage done; possibly the contrary may be true.
…Meet Frankenstein is packaged on DVD with the way inferior …Meet The Mummy, which followed six years later and unsuccessfully attempted to approximate the preceding film’s formula - a largely different team were behind the production (though John Grant returned to take sole credit for writing the screenplay) so it’s no surprise the overall impact differs, specifically being diminished. The later film consists mostly of people running around the sets like fools and rarely looking at things they should be looking at in order to get a rise out of the audience, but it tends not to work. Because it’s bundled with a much better film the buy is not so bad, and both looking pretty good considering age it’s a nice little set to have in one’s collection.
That candle gag you refer to with the coffin - I’m sure I saw the exact same joke in another Abbot and Costello film but as I was only about 10 when I saw them I can’t remember any details!
You’re right that it does have some atmosphere, but I have to admit that I found some of the comedy set-pieces a tad annoying. I really wanted to enjoy this when I saw it last and that may be the reason why it didn’t go down too well with me. Maybe next time I see it, I’ll have lower expectations and enjoy it more.
December 8th, 2007 at 10:14 pm
Thanks for the great review. I bought the now out of print Universal DVD with the Gregory Mank commentary and documentary on A&C versus the monsters. Well worth tracking down. By the way; the onscreen title is “Abbott & Costello Meet Frankenstein”, and the copyright on the print is 1948.
December 8th, 2007 at 10:49 pm
Thanks for the comments, Cal and Rick. I agree with you about the date, Rick - I’ve amended that to 1948; I actually took 1949 from the DVD packaging copyright notice but it is sometimes difficult to give a correct date with movies as they’re often made one year and released the next and things like that. I prefer to go with the date on the film itself more often than not, hence my agreement with your point. As for the title, something in me could have sworn that it was officially known as “Meet…” but had become unofficially acknowledged as “A&B Meet…”, however I’ve scoured through a few reference books and can find no evidence to support that theory, so I must concede defeat and change the title! I honestly don’t like the idea of calling it “A&B Meet…” because they don’t actually play themselves in the film but I give in - I’m amending it!
December 9th, 2007 at 2:33 pm
The Universal R1 with commentary did drop out of print for a while, but is now back and readily available.
December 9th, 2007 at 5:11 pm
Well, at the risk of sounding like a smartarse, Abbott and Costello’s CHARACTERS don’t meet Frankenstein either :p .
December 9th, 2007 at 6:47 pm
Stephen Jones insists on using the “Meet Frankenstein” moniker in all of his books. However, it appears onscreen as A&CMF. The A&C prefix acts as both credit and title. I tend to use the onscreen title, and the year of copyright. The only exception that I can think of is the 1932 Mummy. Copyrighted 1933, but first screened to the public in December 1932. I also prefer Matthew Hopkins: Witchfinder General over WG; again based on the captions that appear on screen.
December 9th, 2007 at 7:27 pm
The actual title is Bud Abbott Lou Costello Meet Frankenstein, a bit of a mouthfull! Meet Frankenstein just sucks as a title! And as for the box saying 1949, to make it sillier they credit Charles Bradstreet with playing a mad scientist, where in reality he plays the unknowing assistant to Dracula and the sulty Sandra!
In Abbott And Costello Meet The Mummy, the credits give the two leads different names but in the actual films they are called Abbott and Costello!
I think the balance of comedy and monster action is perfect in this film. I was disapointed with the likes of Abbott And Costello Meet Dr. Jekyll and Mr Hyde, where the comedy is generic slapstick, with none of the great interplay Bud and Lou were renowned for, and the horror is basic monster shennaigans.
December 9th, 2007 at 8:31 pm
Those were my sentiments for the Meet The Mummy film also, James - I can’t remember if I’ve ever actually seen the J&H film. You’re pretty much spot on about the balance achieved with …Meet Frankenstein. (Cal, I think “Bud Abbott and Lou Costello Meet Frankenstein’s Monster” really is going a bit too far!)
“Stephen Jones insists on using the “Meet Frankenstein” moniker in all of his books”
Aha, I knew I’d seen that somewhere, Rick! I have those Stephen Jones books. I was thinking of mentioning the R1 disc, the one which John comments on, as it does have a few worthwhile extras. I do believe, however, that the transfer wasn’t so hot. The UK release is good only for its inclusion of a complete film as there are no extras otherwise.
December 10th, 2007 at 6:55 pm
I actually quite enjoyed The Mummy one. A pity the current DVDs are open matted, which dammages the composition and reveals the wires on some effects shots. And the UK DVD has a digital glitch early on in the film, so it’s best to get the US discs for both …Meet Frankenstein and ,,,Meet The Mummy
I remember the Stephen Jones books being ridicously anal. He counted Moby Dick and Jaws as Dinosaur films, and his Essential Monster Movie Guide was actually a checklist of which films the Classic Hollywood monsters feature in - so Doctor Who (1996) gets a mention beause it has a clip from Frankenstein but Godzilla is only worthy of mention if King Kong is in the film
December 11th, 2007 at 10:16 am
…Meet the Mummy was supposed to be screened widescreen then? I wasn’t aware of that - it was made during the era of general changeover in the cinema industry but it seems hard to imagine this in anything other than Academy ratio.
I didn’t often agree with Stephen Jones’s opinions - he often ditches great films with one and a half ‘bats’ or whatever - but I couldn’t knock his research skills! I mean, his guides were certainly both anal and exhaustive (there’s probably a fine line between the two). I really can’t imagine how he dug up some of the information in his Vampire/Frankenstein/Werewolf/Dinosaur books, particularly as they were written well before the days of Google and Wikipedia’s mass popularity.
December 11th, 2007 at 7:08 pm
However good his books are they dio a disservice to many of the more obscure films. He gives them 1 star if he has not seen them!
December 11th, 2007 at 8:24 pm
Yes, Meet The Mummy is meant to be seen in widescreen. Having said that, the overscan on your typical TV can make it look fairly well composed in full frame.
I really dig Jones’ anthologies such as The Mammoth Book of Zombes but I dislike him as a reviewer. It’s especially irritating in the dinosaur book where he keeps bashing non stop-motion forms of special effects as though stop motion was the be-all and end-all of dinosaurs
December 12th, 2007 at 4:19 am
Luckily I can manipulate the extent of overscan with my new equipment, James - to be honest I’ve always hated it given the surprisingly large amount of information that tends to be cropped from the image.
“However good his books are they dio a disservice to many of the more obscure films. He gives them 1 star if he has not seen them!”
That’s my main problem with many of the reviews, Rick - to even grade something that one has not seen is pretty ridiculous, however I still value the books as reference guides (that is, the facts they contain rather than the opinions).
December 12th, 2007 at 6:43 pm