Frankenstein vs. Dracula



Frankenstein > Dracula. Cool match-up...

The two giants of Universal Horror. Frankenstein is a better film even though Dracula may be the better character.

Bela Lagosi's Dracula is just too overacted for modern audiences, but Boris Karloff constructed a timeless character that had never been beat by any other actor (in my opinion). Also I think the cinematography of Frankenstein is beautiful, while Dracula doesn’t have the same horrifying German Expression feel. In the beginning of the film in the cemetery there are a number of shots that are just wonderful, and the bizarre castle where Frankenstein does his work also amazing.. Dracula touches on a lot of these same characteristics, but it just doesn’t compare in the beauty of Frankenstein.

The Dracula film was based directly on a stage play whereas the first two Frankenstein films were produced people with theater experience but who also combined it with the best techniques of the cinema of its day. Dracula good, Frankenstein better, Bride of Frankenstein the best.

I have to disagree and say that DRACULA is more cinematic, and Frankenstein makes the Monster much less sophisticated than he was in the book. DRACULA actually gives the titular character more scenes and more personality. Both great movies, but I'm just a little more a fan of Todd Browning than James Whale. DRACULA is so atmospheric and stylish. Still, I think that Browning's FREAKS tops any of the more famous monster movies.

Without Lugosi there would be no Dracula...

Tod Browning's "Dracula" is too stoic; even though the cast is good (and Legosi iconic), it's never really an engaging picture to watch. James Whale's "Frankenstein," on the other hand, is a standout of cinema in nearly every regard.

I guess I'm in the minority.I thought Dracula was the better film.Frankenstein is a great film,but at times it feels more like a play than a movie.Maybe it's the way it was shot in some scenes.Both great films though.

Dracula >Frankenstein, but Bride of Frankenstein > Dracula.

Listen to them. Children of the night! What music they make. <3

I'm with nicklby on this one.

Frankensein had a better story, but Dracula was more entertaining.


Tedious and incoherent, Dracula is just a mess of a film. Frankenstein is by far the better movie.

Frankenstein all the way. I wasn't completely satisfied by it, I loved the storytelling, the pacing and characters though it really lacked much tension. Dracula, I was completely bored by it.

1931's Frankenstein And 1931's Dracula Are Both Better Movies.

While Bela Lugosi's Dracula has more charisma and presence than Boris Karloff's Monster, ultimately I have to go with "Frankenstein" because the story has better pacing and flow overall.

Both seminal horror movies the started the craze both Karloff and Lugosi are perfect I live some of the dialog in Dracula and the gothic setting but overall Frankenstein is a smarter and more provoking film!

Both are pretty good. I'll take Frankenstein.

They're pretty equal, I'll go with Dracula because I like the story more and the Dracula character is so damn great.


Frankenstein, by miles upon miles upon miles. Dracula is a cobbled together mess, and while Frankenstein hasn't aged well either, at least that still works as a horror film. Dracula is just frustratingly stupid in comparison.


Both are horror classics. Ah Halloween, my favorite holiday of them all. Just time to re-watch these both.

Unlike many, I actually love Dracula. Maybe it’s because I tend to watch the version with the Phillip Glass score added. Some purists don’t like it, but I love it. As for this matchup, these are the two most iconic horror films of all time. Frankenstein is a better crafted film though. Having said that, I’m not sure which one is higher on my chart. I guess I’m about to find out...

There are long stretches of both of these films that are absolutely wearisome to me--notably, any time the "heroes" are sitting around deliberating. At least Frankenstein is marginally less talky. Dracula lost me as soon as the Transylvanian innkeeper started explaining what vampires were to Renfield, completely undercutting the sense of mystery the film should have maintained leading up to Dracula's appearance. In contrast, Frankenstein's opening, with the doctor and his henchman robbing graves, is one of the film's strongest sequences, along with the reanimation scene. Whale's sure hand in these moments gives it the win for me here, although I think both movies have been surpassed in years since, including by Bride of Frankenstein.

Frankenstein just didn't really do much for me, but I was suitably impressed by what Browning did with Dracula. Quite atmospheric, though the ending did seem a bit rushed.


Karrrloff? That limey cocksucker does not deserve to smell my shit!

Absolutely going with Frankenstein...


I really, really like Dracula and Bela Lugosi, but its rushed ending never clicks with me. It's pretty good until there. As for Frankenstein, I do think it should've been a little longer but everytime I watch it again it grows on me. Karloff is also my favourite actor from the Universal Monsters era.

I really love both films with all my heart. Both are extremely important horror movies and true classics all the way. But Frankenstein wins as it still brings a tear to my eye. Plus Boris Karloff.