Count Alucard (read his name backwards) finds his way from Budapest to the swamps of the Deep South; his four nemeses are a medical doctor, a university professor, a jilted fiancé and the woman he loves.
Lon Chaney Jr.,
Framed for the murder of his brother, Geoffrey Radcliffe is scheduled to hang. After a visit from his friend Dr. Frank Griffin, he vanishes mysteriously from prison. Police inspector Sampson realizes that Griffin is the brother of the original Invisible Man and has given Geoffrey the formula to aid his escape. Can Geoffrey elude the police dragnet and track down the real murderer? More importantly, can Griffin discover an antidote before the invisibility formula drives Geoffrey insane? Written by
Different than the original in many ways, but still a dandy film
In general, it seems that sequels seldom live up to the originals. There are just too many examples I can think of when this was the case. In addition, sequels that take an entirely different approach to the original subject matter often are abysmal failures as well (such as the wonderful VILLAGE OF THE DAMNED and it's incredibly awful and saccharine CHILDREN OF THE DAMNED). In light of this, I was very pleasantly surprised to this see that this film, while quite different from the fantastic original, is still an exceptional film.
Much of the reason for the film being so good was that the film was made by Universal Studios during a very productive period for their horror films. They just knew how to put the whole package together to make a dandy film. Additionally, the cast really helped as well, as Vincent Price (mostly just his voice, as he IS invisible through almost all the film), Cedric Hartwicke, Cecil Kellaway and many others worked together to quite nicely. The writing, also, is a big standout, as the film COULD have easily been just another "hack" sequel. Using bits of humor here and there throughout the film and providing a great ending really made this film worth while.
5 of 7 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?