Leofwine_draca Coming in at just under half an hour, this is the pilot for a '50s horror television series that was never picked up by a network. It's the result of a collaboration between two studios, Universal and Hammer, and it's worth a look for fans who were wondering what a cross between the two styles of films would look like. The director is Curt Siodmak, a chap who made a living writing and directing creature flicks, and he brings an enthusiasm to the project that enlivens it a whole lot.Of course, as the running time is so short, things are incredibly fast paced. Within the first five minutes, Frankenstein has already brought his creation to life, as well as having a fight with it and electrocuting it! The story, which was written by famed sci-fi husband-and-wife writing team Henry Kuttner and C. L. Moore, involves a dying man whose wife wishes Frankenstein to sustain him. The baron does, but not in the way they imagined; after some grave-robbing shenanigans later, the monster's back, although this time it inevitably goes after the woman. The climax is action-packed and involves a nice set-piece in a graveyard.The short running time is also this film's curse. There just isn't enough time to flesh out any of the characters, so they're all as two-dimensional as the creature. I loved the look of the flick, with its spooky props and moonlit settings, but there's a conspicuous absence of gore or surgery – instead the focus is very much on Universal-style creature frolics, with a particular emphasis on the Baron grappling with his creation. As Frankenstein, Anton Diffring is an inspired choice; being German, he's probably the only actor in the role who actually SOUNDS authentic. Diffring had already had quite a career by the time he starred in this, and he makes a good fist of it. If the inspiration behind Diffring's character is clearly Peter Cushing – the two are made up to look the same – then the inspiration for the monster is definitely Boris Karloff. Sadly, the make-up job here is fairly rubbish, as bad as that in THE EVIL OF FRANKENSTEIN, and Don Megowan is never more than a cheap imitator, worse than Glenn Strange! Still, Helen Westcott adds a pretty face and the atmospheric black-and-white cinematography outstrips its television origins, adding a layer of professionalism to the short. There's nothing to hate about TALES OF FRANKENSTEIN, and indeed I was left wanting more. As a one-off oddity, it's worth a look to see what happened when the Universal and Hammer styles collided.

winner55 Yes, this pilot failed to sell a show to American TV. Nevermind; it is the first in the series of Hammer Frankenstein films that ran well into the '70s. Everything is here - the homage to universal, the darker characterization of Doctor Frankenstein, the decision to place the series in a 19th century setting.... The ending of this short film would be rewritten as the end of "The Curse of Frankenstein." Okay, it's not really much more than a neat little B-movie short; but what else would one want from a Hammer horror film? And the hiring of Universal horror films writer Curt Siodmak to write the script is a nice touch of linking with the 'grand tradition' of Frankenstein films. Besides, it must be noted that the budget here is really far beyond any American TV programming of the day; nice sets, nice photography, excellent acting.(What probably killed off this series was the follow up - there was actually a second episode produced - I've seen it, but can't remember the title - but it was pretty typical generic suspense fair for the time - well produced but unnecessary.) This wins high marks as a point of historical origin and thus very important. And a well done B-movie horror short in any event.

gavin6942 Frankenstein's reputation has done well for him. He has created another "monster", but needs a mind to control it. When a terminally ill subject enters his lab, he sees an opportunity to create the perfect being -- not having to rely on dead or criminal brains.Anton Diffring ("Beast Must Die") stars as Baron Frankenstein and does a fine job. So does everyone else. For a television show, I'm uncertain ho this would have fared, particularly in the 1950s. And what would the story be? Would Frankenstein try a new brain each week? That would get old... or I've heard rumor it as to feature a different monster. That has some merit, but how many monsters are there? Dracula would make a much better ongoing character...Luckily for us this pilot survived as a short film, and a decent one at that. Perhaps not a memorable one, but a strong piece of the Frankenstein story from a director ho knows the man and the monster ("Frankenstein Meets the Wolfman", for example).This one crossed my desk through a box set. I'm not sure ho easily available it is, but if you get a chance to check it out, do so. It's only 27 minutes long, so you'd hardly be "wasting" time on this better-than-average attempt at a good horror story. "Tales From the Crypt" has done worse.

Boba_Fett1138 This is an unsold TV-pilot for a TV-series based on the Frankenstein franchise and is a collaboration between the Hammer Studios and Universal (through Revue Studios). It sounds like the most perfect combination; The Universal Frankstein creature and movies are of course among the best and most famous out of movie history and the Hammer Studios were of course at their prime and at the top of the horror genre in the '50's. They also had already made a couple of Frankenstein movies, starring Peter Cushing in the role of the good old baron. In that regard "Tales of Frankenstein" is a disappointing collaboration.For its time, the pilot looks terribly old fashioned and also is directed in that way. Guess it was done on purpose, to try to recapture the mood and atmosphere of the '30's Frankenstein movies and horror in general. But to me the main problem with "Tales of Frankenstein" was its incredibly simple and also formulaic story. It's of course mostly set up so it can introduces the characters and set out the main outline for the potential series. The events and dialog feel rather bland and make a weak impression, which is also really due to the very simplistic and weak directing. Director Curt Siodmak had more success and also talent as a writer.Anton Diffring really wasn't the most perfect choice for the role of the baron. Now maybe if only Peter Cushing had played the role...Don Megowan however makes a good impression as the monster, though his make-up effects are certainly lacking.Still of course I wouldn't had mind seeing this pilot expanding into a TV-series. It showed some interesting potential, though I can also understand why this pilot was never picked up by any TV station. It's worth a look for the '30's- and/or Hammer Studio horror fans.5/10http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/