Which one does it for you the most?

Frankenstein by a mile. Dracula and Bride of Frankenstein may be iconic and memorable, but I found them to be pretty miserable movies. Dracula in particular has a screenplay that wouldn't get a passing grade in a high school filmmaking course. The Wolf Man, too, I could never get into.

But hey, I liked Dracula 2000, so what the hell do I know?

I agree that Dracula, iconism aside, is a terrible film. And The Wolf Man cracked my "Bottom 10" of the year I watched it.

But you're selling "Bride" short, man. It beats the original

I don't have a problem with making a comedy sequel to a serious film, but the "humor" in Bride is like nails on a chalkboard to me. Old ladies screaming, the shenanigans of Professor Pretorious and his miniature courtesans, the monster smoking a cigar, all with "wacky" music to play in the background since I guess we're all too stupid to know that we're supposed to be laughing. I agree with this critic:



As far as I can see, all Dracula has going for it is Dwight Frye and some good cinematography. The script is such a mess that I'm amazed they even considered using it, and most of the actors are simply awful. Lugosi seems threatening only when he's silent; the moment he speaks, I want to laugh. As for The Wolf Man, Chaney is good but I was bored to tears. Maybe I would have liked it more if I found werewolves interesting at all, but I don't.

Again, keep in mind that I actually liked Dracula 2000, so I'm not claiming to be a paragon of good taste here. Feel free to dismiss anything and everything I say. In fact, it's probably a pretty good idea.

BUMP.

Vote on monsters, fuckers

I just watched the original Mummy (1932). Not a big fan. Bride of Frankenstein still remains the gold standard for me.

Fine, assbutt.

Frankenstein it is.

Though, now that I look at the quiz, it seems I voted for The Invisible Man. Which is also pretty awesome