Frankenstein vs. the Mummy (2015) User Reviews

Bland

[gavin6942 · 4/10 · 13 May 2015]

The mummy of a cursed pharaoh and a reanimated corpse terrorize a medical university. Only an Egyptologist and a college professor, the deranged Dr. Frankenstein, may be able to stop the creatures before it's too late.

First off, I really despised the actor who played Dr. Frankenstein. He seemed like he was supposed to be charming, but he came off as being an ignoramus and a complete tool. Oh, and the poor script of philosophy jibber-jabber. Whoever wrote the "philosophy of medicine" speech is not very knowledgeable on philosophy.

Tal Zimerman dismisses this film as a "clunker", though the makeup of Damien Leone is rightly praised. Zimerman is right. The film is a clunker, bland, and not particularly memorable. The makeup is above average in quality, though, and hopefully someone notices. But the good-looking bad guys are not enough reason to watch this.

Clash of Universal Monsters

[claudio_carvalho · 5/10 · 16 September 2015]

In New York, the professor of the medical university Dr. Victor Frankenstein (Max Rhyser) is buying body parts from the janitor Carter to build a corpse and reanimate it. The Egyptologist Naihla Khalil (Ashton Leigh), from the same university, has just returned from an expedition and brought the Mummy of Usekara (Brandon deSpain), an evil and cruel pharaoh that was cursed, leaving his soul trapped in his mummified corpse. Victor and Naihla have a crush on each other and they date. Meanwhile Professor Walton (Boomer Tibbs), who is chief of department where Naihla works, accidentally releases Usekara's soul and is possessed by him. He kills his assistant Isaac (Robert MacNaughton) and his blood awakes the Mummy. Then Walton lures his student Lenora (Stefanie Merola) and the Mummy eats her heart. Frankenstein's monster (Constantin Tripes) is reanimated and Victor is surprised with his capacity. But soon both monsters want Naihla: Frankenstein's creature to force Victor to transfer his brain to a new body and the Mummy believes she is the sorcerer that trapped his soul and wants Naihla to call off the spell. What will happen to Naihla?

"Frankenstein vs. The Mummy" is an entertaining horror movie that uses the classic Universal monsters. There are good lines, but the limited budget limits the film to few characters. The exotic beauty of Ashton Leigh is impressive and the plot is well resolved. My vote is five.

Title (Brazil): Not available on DVD or Blu-Ray.

Not good, but not soo bad it's good.

[rprince-832-6294 · 5/10 · 22 February 2015]

-Frankenstein Vs. The Mummy (2015) movie review: -Frankenstein Vs. The Mummy is a modern telling of the classic story my Mary Shelley which is just how it sounds. There's Frankenstein's monster. And there's a mummy. And they fight.

-A few problems with this overall Syfy original quality film right off the bat: The monster is not called Frankenstein. The story is not modern. And once you get those two wrong, you have a generic vs movie that makes Freddy Vs. Jason look good.

-The story is poorly adapted to modern times, and therefor lacks any sort of motivation. Things just happen for the sake of happening. And nothing that happens is any sort or believable.

-The pace is sloppy, jumping unevenly between making Frankenstein's monster to awakening a mummy, and then 45 minutes of mummy to 45 minutes of freaking Frankenstein's monster. Also trying to fit a love story between Victor Frankenstein and the girl who knows things about mummies drags the film even more. Also, we get to finally see Frankenstein's monster fight the mummy! Literally 9 minutes before the end INCLUDING credits. And they fight for about as long as the Dinobots from Transformers 4 do, about 2 minutes.

-The acting is meh. They try, with little success, to act.

-The characters are all inconsistent and lack motivation. And Frankenstein's monster should not have a character change to a dislikable jerk when his brain kicks in or whatever, but he does. So nobody in the film is likable or is available to root for.

-The music is all the same and not good.

-I will go ahead and give a shout-out to a few elements that make the film not garbage: The makeup and effect were noticeable. There was not a lot-to-no CGI in the film, meaning everything was makeup and practical effects, which were over-the-top but impressive. -The film had a few moments that I did not expect either. I was like 'Woah!' or 'Oh, I hope it ends like this!' Problem is it literally ruined every good moment with a bad follow-up.

-It is not so bad it is good, it is just bad, and the modern update kills any chances of it being entertainingly cheesy. So without any further adieu, Frankenstein Vs. The Mummy is not worth seeing. Ever.

Misleading Title (2 min fight)

[BklynBryanCM · 1/10 · 14 February 2015]

Frankenstein vs. The Mummy is an extremely low budget horror film. It is not scary at all just silly/ cheap gore and effects. The 2 monsters have a very brief fight at the end. Overall terrible D movie (not even B or C). I expected there to be at least 3 or 4 confrontations between Frankenstein & The Mummy. Avoid this movie like the plague!!! Terrible dialogue and script written by a 2nd or 3rd grader! Save your money!! The mummy effects and Frankenstein mask didn't look good. This mockbuster is nothing more than a desperate cash grab attempt. I suggest watching The Mummy trilogy, I,Frankenstein or a Universal Studios monster movie!

Bryan

How can I give this a negative 9?

[saddexter · 1/10 · 11 February 2015]

I never, ever write reviews, but this was a train wreck of acting, storyline, (what story line ...?) execution, delivery, I can't even find the words to explain what I just watched. There was no sense of a plausible story behind this. Why did one woman become the obsessive desire of two monsters and on the same night no less! And why did she go from complete disgust to undying love towards her one night stand? What dredges did the creators of this "movie" drag it up from? Someone apparently owed someone a big favor. I can't imagine someone actually thought was presentable for viewing to the public. You can't even make a drinking game out of this! It is non-redeemable and utter crap and a waste of my good time that I can never get back, do not waste your time on this.

I'll bet the lead actress was thinking...

[JoeB131 · 4/10 · 14 March 2015]

"That Bella chick gets shiny vampires and hunky werewolves, and I get a couple of reanimated corpses? What is up with that." The lead actress, by the way, is the only thing worth watching in this film. She's easy on the eyes.

The film starts with the university with the most lax research rules, ever. While Doctor Victor F. is on one side of the campus reanimating corpses and paying the janitor for body parts, his whacky Egyptologist girlfriend brings back a cursed mummy from Egypt. after 140 minutes of plodding dialog, gory special effects and more contrivances than you can shake a test tube at, we get the fight between the two titular monsters.

I give the actor credit for trying. The special effects artists also did a good job given what must have been a low budget. The direction and writing are the problems here.

Monster clash...or is it?

[TheLittleSongbird · 2/10 · 12 August 2018]

Was drawn into seeing 'Frankenstein vs. The Mummy' with a cool poster/cover, a very intriguing if not creative premise and as someone with a general appreciation for horror. That it was low-budget, which from frequent personal experience is rarely a good sign due to that there are so many poor ones out there, made me though apprehensive.

From the title, one would understandably think that 'Frankenstein vs. The Mummy' would be an affectionate homage to the Universal and Hammer House of Horror films, have a lot of fondness for them mostly and there are a lot of classics. That cannot be said for 'Frankenstein vs. The Mummy' and an affectionate homage or a well-made and well-put-together film it is not. As has been said already, the title is very misleading, the two monsters are mostly apart and their one "battle", or one scene together, is far too brief and neither creepy or exciting. It's actually treated rather indifferently.

It's not an appealing film to look at. The limitations in budget shows throughout in almost every area, it all looks drab and hastily put together in particularly the editing and effects look like they were constructed on the small remains of the small budget having been neglected. The two monsters, especially the lumbering Frankenstein monster, are not that creepy and their scenes individually are not suspenseful or that atmospheric at all.

None of the rest of the characters engage or endear, with the lead character frustratingly characterised as a complete idiot. The acting is weak at best, with Max Rhyser and Ashton Leigh lacking charisma, Boomer Tibbs reduced to pantomime and Brandon deSpain and Constantin Tripes failing to bring menace to the titular characters. Stefanie Merola comes off least badly, at least having some allure and spots of charm.

The script is a cheesy, awkward and limp mess and the story takes too long to get going and never properly comes to life. Suspense and creepiness are nowhere in sight and some of it is insultingly ridiculous.

Only one other thing, the other being Merola's allure, redeems the film from an irredeemable film to a very bad one and that is the make-up. It looked as though a lot of effort went into it, looking like most of the budget was dedicated to it in fact, and provides some eeriness. Sad that it deserved a much better film.

All in all, very bad with a misleading title. 2/10 Bethany Cox

An admirable attempt at capturing the glory days of the Universal and Hammer monster movies

[ersinkdotcom · 5/10 · 16 March 2015]

I love the classic Universal and Hammer horror and monster films. The Universal pictures of the 1930s and 1940s capture my fancy because of their black-and-white shadowing, atmosphere, and theatrical acting. The Hammer movies feed my appetite for Technicolor gore, Gothic settings, and even more dramatic turns from two of my favorite genre actors – Peter Cushing and Christopher Lee. Writer / Director Damien Leone's "Frankenstein vs. The Mummy" puts a modern spin on and combines both the tales of Mary Shelley and the story for Boris Karloff's 1932 original conceived by Nina Wilcox Putnam and Richard Schayer.

In "Frankenstein vs. The Mummy," Dr. Victor Frankenstein (Max Rhyser) and Egyptologist Naihla Khalil (Ashton Leigh) are both professors at a leading medical university. Victor's latest grisly "experiment" is the re-animated corpse (Constantin Tripes) of a sadistic madman and Naihla's most recent find is the cursed mummy (Brandon deSpain) of an evil pharaoh. When the two monsters face-off in an epic showdown, no one is safe from the slaughter. Can the murderous rampage be stopped and the carnage contained before it's too late?

Writer / Director Damien Leone does his best at paying tribute to the classic monster mashups of Universal's heydays of horror. We got to see Frankenstein's monster go up against the Wolf-Man and team up with Dracula on a few occasions. For anyone who grew up watching these movies, it only makes sense that you'd want to see "Frankenstein vs. The Mummy." Who in their right mind wouldn't? Unfortunately, Leone's ingenious way of marrying the two tales together ends up leading to a rather lackluster battle between the two iconic creatures that will leave audiences feeling unfulfilled.

"Frankenstein vs. The Mummy" is not rated, but if it were would probably be a hard R or NC-17 because of the amount of graphic gore. It also includes adult situations and sensuality, violence, profanity, smoking, and frightening and intense scenes. The sensuality and adult situations revolve around an unnecessary sex scene that adds nothing to the story and a couple of attempted rape scenes with the monster assaulting Naihlia.

"Frankenstein vs. The Mummy" is an admirable attempt at capturing the glory days of the Universal and Hammer monster movies. Weak acting and lulls in action work against the film as a whole. I do have to give credit to Writer / Director Damien Leone for trying to build up the story and character motivations, but here it only serves to slow down and put off what everyone watches the movie for in the first place. We want to see the big showdown between Frankenstein's Monster and the Mummy, which is way too short when it finally arrives. In the movie's defense, there are some great gory practical effects and a few bloodcurdling scenes that made me cringe.

An entertainingly brutal monster mash!

[gojiseb · 7/10 · 25 February 2015]

Frankenstein vs. The Mummy is far from being as great as it could have been, but it still manages to be one hell of a fun way to kill a Friday night!

Victor Frankenstein is attempting to create life, but ends up using the brain of his evil assistant Carter, creating a violent psychopathic monster. Meanwhile, a young Egyptology professor discovers an ancient Mummy that is soon walking around, leaving a bloody trail in it's path.

Those expecting a non-stop monster brawl will be disappointed, as the two titular creatures don't face-off till the film's finale. However, the journey there is refreshingly well-made, acted and written! The make-up for the monsters is top-notch and we really do get to feel for our human protagonists. If I have any complaints, it's that I find the film overly long and it drags a fair bit during the first act. Also, Frankenstein's monster was WAY too unsympathetic.

Nonetheless, I totally recommend this flick to any monster fans who need a bit more of Frankenstein's patchwork experiments or mummified ghouls in their lives.

HE SAID WATER!

[nogodnomasters · 5/10 · 18 January 2019]

Naihla Khalil (Ashton Leigh) is a popular professor loved by all...the Mummy (Brandon deSpain), Frankenstein's monster (Constantin Tripes), and a horny college professor (Max Rhyser). A cursed mummy is brought to the same university that Victor Frankenstein is performing re-animation experiments using body parts brought to him by the sinister janitor, no questions asked. You can guess from the title what pretty much happens.

It is not the worst film imaginable from the title. They did spend some money on special effects. Then again , I would say it was less entertaining than "Cowboy vs. Alien." Okay as Redbox rental.

The winner of this film will take on the winner of Edward vs. Jacob

Guide: F-bomb. Sex. No nudity.

Monster Mash Up.

[parry_na · 12 July 2015]

Ever since Universal were unable to resist matching two of their biggest horror names in 'Frankenstein meets the Wolfman (1942)', there has been a periodic fascination with uniting well-known monsters over the years. And in many of these meetings, the battle we are all waiting to see is saved until the last ten minutes. Such is the case here. Sadly, when it comes, the battle is little more than a punch-up in a darkened room.

Monster mash-ups like this are usually designed not to be taken too seriously. The problem with this is that, at six minutes shy of two hours, 'Frankenstein vs The Mummy' is just too long. The actors are competent, but the characters are underwritten and impossible to be concerned about. Instead of personalities, their function is to react to the alleged horror around them. The possible exception is Doctor Walton, played by a marvellously idiosyncratic actor with the wonderful name Boomer Tibbs.

The horror, sadly, is fairly negligible, despite some impressive effects. The music – a hugely underrated way of sustaining an atmosphere, in my view – is stock 'shock' stings and exactly the same kind of forgettable arrangement featured in many other films of this nature.

The two monsters are fairly effective, and a welcome relief from the CGI that mars so many bigger budgeted pictures. The Frankenstein monster is very close to imagery described in Mary Shelly's original story, and played with a snarling evil, completely devoid of pathos. Perhaps unsurprisingly, given the nature of the criminal's brain he has (once more) inherited, he lacks the eloquence of the original creation and utters some typically coarse expletives during the course of his brief conversations.

too bad more people dont like this one .... its solid

[godinamachine · 8/10 · 12 May 2022]

HEY EVERYBODY ITS ME (4) and today we review .......a frankenstein movie that doesnt suck ????

Wait is that possible ? Yes ...yes it is ...........

now before you grab your torches and pitch forks ........let make one thing clear ...JUST because the old black and white frankenstein film was a "classic" and it was the first of its kind etc ...doesnt mean it was great ......FOR its time it was king of the hill 100% ......and it does indeed deserve a place for recognition in MANY ways BUT honestly .......... the costuming on the monster was a bit ..... MEH at best ...lol.... looked like he fell out of a crate full of that shredded packing paper stuff glued to him all over ....... so NO, not impressed ......NOW here we have a legit frankenstein monster HOLY CRAP ........honestly one of the best ive seen, and i wish this film would have been an entire film just about the DR vs monster struggle .... the mummy was REALLY out of place ........ you could have cut all the mummy scenes out and had one of the best short franken films ever made .......it was cool to see them battle at the end BUT the monster, and how he became this straight up murderous bad guy , knowing who he was before and going back to those ways was solid and worth watching just for that story alone .........the mummy just hung out in a room all day and waited around ... like .... okay ? Felt like, he didnt do anything until the last 5 minutes ...sure he kills people BUT he literally lays there , they walk over to him , surprise and dead ........wow ........ no depth to him, even though they REALLY tried to tell a story for him ... it was "old and boring" just like the mummy .........

FX were great ,..... the acting was WAY better than usual ...........this film is well above average and gives a new look at the monster and even the mummy in some aspects ....... the story was solid over all .... i mean the mummy side was generic as its the same old "im cursed release me you reincarnated soul " ....BUT again the redeemer here .... the monster ..... MAN i wish it was just a film about THIS version of frankensteins monster ... i cant stress enough how much i never liked frankenstein movies but this one is tight ........sure its a bit cheesy with the fight scene thing BUT thats not enough to detour from the films greater parts ........

one of the best designs for the monster ever, he actually looks like a corpse , not just a guy with some stiches on his face .......

sadly i do think the cover art kind of makes the film look "less" than it is , i remember staying away from this film in the rental store (when those were a thing lol) but glad i watched it now ...... worth the watch for sure .....

8/10.

Frankenstein v the mummy.

[jeffreyc-32567 · 7/10 · 10 May 2020]

Hi I kinda liked this movie, so can't understand all the negative reviews I see here. The story context was interesting and the actors all played their parts very well. There was a lot of gore and kills that kept me interested so I gave a score of seven. I believe you watch a film from beginning to the end, then decide if you enjoyed or not. Jacey says peace out.

The epic non-battle

[FryHigh · 2/10 · 20 February 2015]

If we were reviewing college movies, I would give this a solid 5, and B for the movie making class.

But since this is a real movie, it's just barf. To be fair, I took one look at the terrible post production, flat acting, and fast forwarded right through it at 20x. I caught maybe one action scene. They get an extra point for decent makeup.

Some of the issues might be fixed by a re-edit and better post production. It needs to be really tightened up. I'm surprised no one stopped the director and asked them, what they were doing.

This is MST:3k material.

Well, at least it had potential...

[paul_haakonsen · 4/10 · 14 May 2019]

I stumbled upon "Frankenstein vs The Mummy" in 2019, and hadn't even heard about it up until now. Granted with a title such as this, I can't really claim to have held any hopes up particularly high for the chance of being in for a grand movie experience here. But still, the movie does have two very iconic horror characters in it, and that was more than sufficient to make me give the movie a chance.

The script and storyline in "Frankenstein vs The Mummy" was straight forward, which at least counted for something. But at the same time it was so horribly simplified that it offered nothing for the audience, it didn't require the audience to do any thinking or participation of any kind. You just shut down, sit back and watch the movie as it unfolds on the screen.

The effects in the movie were adequate and actually were on the better end of the mediocre movie special effects scale - if there is such a thing. By that I mean that there are monster movies out there with far, far worse special effects than what was present on the screen in "Frankenstein vs The Mummy". The mummy was actually quite decent to look at, whereas the Frankenstein golem was sort of not all that great, especially because his torso and arms were ordinary skin colored, whereas his face had a sick yellow hue, it just didn't look natural and looked so askew that it stole focus from everything else. That was just bad in terms of monster make-up.

Now, as for the acting, well let's just say that you will not be in for any award winning performances here. But given the concept of the movie, then you know aforehand what you are getting yourself into. Mind you, I am not saying that the actors and actresses here were bad; I am merely saying that it was adequate performances taking into consideration the script and material they had to work with.

Take heed, as the movie is branded as 'horror'. Well, it might rightfully be so by default because of the mummy and Frankenstein's golem, but the movie wasn't particularly scary. It felt more like a movie that tried to embrace multiple genres all at once but failing to do so with grace and good execution. Don't sit down to watch this movie if you expect a proper horror movie.

I sat through the entire movie, and found it to be adequate entertainment for sure. However, it is hardly a movie that will find its way back to my movie system for a second viewing, because the movie just doesn't have the contents to support multiple viewings.

Not totally bad but could have been a lot better

[abisio · 4/10 · 26 October 2015]

There is a certain ambition in this movie in joining two classic monsters originally played by the legendary Boris Karloff but sadly; things are far from fulfilled. The movie was made with a minimum budget and it seems between friends. Acting is not that bad and some gore effects are OK; but it takes too long to start; with many long explanations about medicine and religion that become boring after a while. When the two monsters collide; it last for about a minute or two and it is not a particularly interesting fight; plus both monster are so hideous that you do not really care who wins or lose. It is pity writers and directors did not considered the original movies or novels and gave more interesting personality to the creatures.

In brief; do not lose your time.

Another mummy movie

[dy38493 · 3/10 · 20 August 2020]

Good movie to watch especially the scenes were shot in new York city but movie is not promising all characters look dump.

Very very bad

[axel335 · 2/10 · 25 June 2019]

Very, very bad

I bought this movie in Stockholm for 10 Swedish krowns (1 USD). I don't know if it was worth it.

I expect to see a bad movie and yeah I got it. This movie is bad in several ways: First of all it's way too long. Its 1,46 and could easily have been cut down to 1,25 which would have been much better.

The beginning of the movie is too slow. We see a lot of non-interesting conversations which the main characters are too bad to deliver. Some of the scenes are "so bad it's funny" but not enough to make this movie that kind of movie.

After a long boring time the monsters show up and they look silly. Especially "Frankenstein" looks really silly. I mean; Is that the best you can come up with?

The dialogue are worthless, the actors are poor. Sure, the girl is pretty but that doesn't help this movie out. The only thing that makes this movie avoid a number 1 in rating is that this movie has a decent photo, sound and music.

Another annoying thing is that it says stuff on the back of the DVD box that isn't in the movie.

All in all this movies sucks hard time. The only person who should watch this are guys like me who like "so bad it's fun" movies. For the rest of you guys out there: stay away !!

Better than Dracula vs. Frankenstein

[rstef1 · 6/10 · 21 October 2019]

Perfectly acceptable throwback of a picture with more traditional Universal inspired monsters. The film has a good script, good acting for the most part, and does wonders in the set design, makeup and gore effects for a low budget feature.

Damien Leone shows he's capable as a director, though the film could have benefitted from some tighter editing. It's too long at almost 2 hours, and could have been a topnotch, better paced movie at 90 minutes. Also, with the budget restraints we don't get enough wide shots, which gives the film a bit of a claustrophobic feel. Still, I'm going to check out the director's other films.

Had the potential to be something more

[Woodyanders · 6/10 · 29 April 2020]

College professor Dr. Victor Frankenstein (a solid and likeable performance by Max Rhyser) brings a corpse (Constantin Tripes in gnarly make-up) back to life. Meanwhile, the lethel mummy (Brandon deSpain in equally funky make-up) of an evil pharoah returns to life and goes after Victor's Egyptologist girlfriend Naihla Khalil (a perky and appealing portrayal by Ashton Leigh).

While writer/director Damien Leone treats the nifty premise with admirable sincerity and delivers a satisfying serving of graphic bloody gore, he alas lets the meandering narrative unfold at an often sluggish pace and pads out the running time to an overly bloated 115 minutes, which in turn keeps both tension and momentum to a minimum. Fortunately, the two leads are quite personable, plus their are sturdy supporting contributions from Boomer Tibbs as the possessed Professor Walton and John Pickett as creepy jerk Carter. However, despite the cool-looking monsters and a big climatic confrontation between the two titular beasts that's staged with appropriately savage gusto, it's a genuine pity that this movie nonetheless takes a bit too long to get to the good stuff. A strictly middling diversion at best.

Like a breeze of fresh air

[nanton-35268 · 6/10 · 23 April 2023]

If you are fan of monster movies with practical effects this will be a treat. Damien Leone understands his work. Both in directing and the effects. FYI: the mummy make-up took 6hours.

Yes, some actors are a bit all over the place and unfortunately Max Rhyser can't handle the character as a carrying figure. But Ashton Leigh on the other hand does a great job.

I'd say if you like the old Hammer movies and if you can handle the gore in this one (nothing too bad but definitely worth mentioning) and forgive some actors this movie will not let you down. It is kind of a modern take on those old movies with very limited budget but it does the best of it.

Low-budget monster mash movie at it's best.

[Kdosda_Hegen · 7/10 · 26 September 2020]

This film was dope. It's very low budget, but it has a heart. The story is the best it could have been considering it's about 2 unconnected monsters fighting each other. This movie does the hype very well, the whole film is about slowly setting up and hyping up the meeting between the monsters and only at the very end they finally meet. The action which this movie has very little and only at the very end is very awesome, you get a short very hyped up badass fight. It was very well done for such a low budget film. I loved the experience.