Within the context of the movie? Wasn't Viktor Frankenstein only ENGAGED to his women? By this sequal he already has TWO kids at the earliest in their 30s!
--
Mirrors: 5/10
Nightmare Man:6.5/10
Brave One:7/10
Infestation:5/10
Rabid Dogs:8/10
Yeah when the Universal films take place is one of their problems (If you actually do the mate, the last Mummy film was set in the 90s).
The 1st 2 films are probably set sometime in the 1800s even thou the audience would have never thought of that, perhaps set at the same time the original Novel was, who knows.
Son and Ghost are a Generation latter, Frankenstein Meets The Wolfman is probably at most a Decade after that since the Baron's Granddaughter is still young enough to be the leading of the film, even thou she was recast.
House of Frankenstein seemed to be the soonest the series entered the 1900s, House Dracula looked almost like they could have caught up to modern times by then.
"It's not about money
It's about sending a Message
Everything Burns!"
In "Ghost of Frankenstein", Ludwig Frankenstein appears to be at least 50 years old, which means it's been at least half a century since "Bride of...", perhaps longer.
It's a bit harder date "Son of..." since we don't know which brother is the older one. I assume that Ludwig is the older of the two brothers because he remembers his father, while Wolf does not. Since Ygor doesn't look like he's aged much between "Son" and "Ghost", I'd guess that "Son" takes place 40-50 years after "Bride".
But The Wolf Man had to take place in current time because in the beginning, Talbot is riding in a car of that same era. So that film took place in 1941. This leaves massive plot holes in the Frankenstein movie timelines
shareYet despite the fact the Wolf Man has a car in it, it's back to horse and buggy times in Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man when Maleva takes Larry to see Dr. Frankenstein.
shareMaleva was a gypsy so she was poor and wouldn't had a car anyways. Cars were considered luxuries at that time. Regardless the timelines in Son of Frankenstein is screwed up because it has to take place at least 25 years after Bride. Probably 30+ years actually.
shareBut the delivery of supplies in Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man is horse and buggy too. Also I meant to mention despite no cars in Frankenstein meets the wolf man, it does feel modern for the time cause of the telephone scenes.
shareI'd say at least about 40 years since Krogh was supposed to be a child when Frankenstein's monster attacked him. He looks to be in his 50's.
http://www.myspace.com/crazyjimfilms
Click here to read my scripts!
Well if the first Frankenstein was set in or after 1899, as someone in another thread or board mentioned due to a grave marking having that year, then it would make sense if Krogh was a boy. Then this film could easily be set in 1939 when it was made. Although it was likely between World War One but before Hitler as there is no mention of any of those major events (Nazis etc.) in the films. If Bride is set around World War One that gives a span of time where elder Frankenstein could have died and his son reach adulthood.
shareHard to answer. Unfortunately the Universal Monsters were not that big on continuity.
sharePersonally I feel this ignores Bride as the Monster's Bride is never mentioned. In fact, the events that are mentioned are not at all like what happened in Bride. It's been a while since I saw this one as I prefer the first 2 and its sequel Ghost of Frankenstein. But if I remember right it's mentioned the Monster was shot or something along those lines. It also doesn't seem plausible for the Monster to have been preserved in a crypt for so long if he were blown to bits with tons of rubble buried on top of him. The time Bride takes place there wasn't things like tractors that Frankenstein could use to clear the rubble off so he could find the monster's body. So my insistence is that Son and Ghost ignore Bride.
Then again it also ignores that Frankenstein's assistant in the first one was named Fritz and that he was hanged by the monster and not the town's people as he says in this movie. But then again, continuity was never done well in these movies. Heck, it's not just with Frankenstein movies. Son of Dracula ignores the original Dracula and has it that Van Helsing and Jonathan Harker chased Dracula and Mina to Transylvania and that he was killed him there. Tying it to the events of the Novel instead of the original movie.
I still enjoy these movies but the writers of Son of Frankenstein seem to have ignored some pretty major things about the first 2 films with how they told the story. I know that there weren't VCRs back then but you'd think they'd at least been given an outline of the first 2 movies before writing this. Oh well.
His lab plans to make new baby phirees or something out of tigers or whatever
share