Movie Review: FRANKENSTEIN

FRANKENSTEIN

1994
R

Frankenstein is a 1994 dramatic horror film directed by Kenneth Branagh, who also stars as the film's titular character. The film opens on a ship lost at sea as it nears the Arctic Circle. When it strikes an iceberg and runs aground, the ship's crew find a lone figure roaming among the ice. This man claims to be Viktor Frankenstein (Branagh), and he soon recounts the story of his coming to such a place. When he was younger, Viktor suffered the loss of his mother (Cherie Lunghi) and vowed to find a way to keep people alive for eternity. He goes away to school in order to study and develops a working relationship with Professor Waldman (John Cleese) who takes a liking Viktor's enthusiasm. When Waldman is murdered by a passing bum (Robert De Niro), Viktor decides to continue his unfulfilled work of creating life. He steals the corpse of the bum and places Waldman's brain inside of it. Through a sophisticated experiment, Viktor brings the creature to life with dire consequences. He believes it to be dead, but the creature escapes and hides in a countryside cottage. Armed with Viktor's personal journal, the creature learns to read and speak. When it learns that Viktor is responsible for his hideous condition, he vows to exact his revenge.

Branagh's vision of Mary Shelley's novel is not your standard "Frankenstein" fare. I haven't seem much in terms of Branagh's filmography - either acting or directing - but from what I've come to hear, he tends to place his own stamp on the work he adapts. That being said, I'm not quite sure the Frankenstein story was really the best story to try to make his own. For the most part, it sticks with the general story: Frankenstein has a desire to create life; he creates a creature from the parts of corpses; the creature is born and retaliates against its creator. The basic storyline is there. However, one of the biggest parts of the original story is that the creature is accidentally given an abnormal brain, thus leading it to acts of menace and mayhem. In this version, however, the creature is given the mind of an intellectual. Although he seems like nothing more than a brute just after his creation, he quickly learns the ways of men. In a way, Branagh humanizes the creature in very rapid fashion, and I'm not quite sure whether this is a good thing or not. If you look at the original 1931 film, the creature was simply a brute force of nature. It wasn't until the 1935 sequel (Bride of Frankenstein) that the creature began to accumulate a vocabulary and a personality, and the slow progression of character made the transformation more believable. In this version, I just couldn't find a way to believe it. On a separate note, I found the dialogue to be a little mundane and childish, and it's definitely not realistic. I was rolling my eyes at some of the lines.

Because the dialogue was so bad, it's hard to bash the actors entirely. Considering they're working with drivel, you kinda have to give them the benefit of the doubt... to an extent. Branagh hams it up to the best of his ability, delivering a series of over-the-top emotional scenes that really just made me want to laugh at him. That does not bode well for the dramatic lead of any film. Maybe he should've listened to his director's advice a little more often... Wait, nevermind. I forgot. Helena Bonham Carter plays Elizabeth, Viktor's adopted sister and ultimate wife - yes, wife - a relationship that makes for a few awkward scenes of affection. She's probably the most believable character in the film, but even she has a few moments where I was questioning why she chose to act in the way she did. I'd only heard good things about De Niro in the role of the creature, but I couldn't really see just why he'd been given any sort of accolade. He channels Boris Karloff a little bit, but he's nowhere near as good as he was back in the '30s. With the pounds of makeup he had to apply (the film nabbed an Oscar nom for makeup, by the way), there's really no room for De Niro to show any real emotion. It's not his fault. And I couldn't help but hear the De Niro of Scorsese flicks past come out in the creature here and there. I just couldn't get it in my head that De Niro could actually be this monster.

There's also never really a clear sense as to what genre this film actually falls under. You could consider it a dramatic film, but there's also some essences of horror (and the occasional bit of gore). Normally, this wouldn't really pose a problem for me, but with this particular film, I think there needed to be a set direction. They could've gone for the horror - De Niro's creature isn't all that pleasant to look at - and it could have been more effective. Or they could've gone straight drama, making the character development a little more believable. But as it stands now, it's a mix between the two, and Branagh frantically tries to give both genres their equal due within a mere two hours running time. He just throws too much on the screen in too short a time, and it gives the film a very manic and bouncing feel that generates more laughs than concern or fear.

I simply cannot recommend this film and feel okay about telling you to watch it. It's no NetFlix Instant Watch until this Saturday, so if you're lucky enough to have NetFlix and you REALLY want to waste two hours, now would be the time to do so. Otherwise, I'd say you should probably try to avoid this one. I have yet to find anything truly redeeming about it, and I'm not sure whether I'd ever be able to do so.

Movie Review Summary:
Grade: D-
2 Thumbs Down

Movie Review: BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN

BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN

1935
PG

Bride of Frankenstein is a 1935 horror film directed by James Whale that serves as a direct sequel to 1931's Frankenstein. We pick up where the previous story left off, seeing the windmill where the Monster (Boris Karloff) burn to the ground. The townsfolk, thinking that the Monster has been destroyed, take Henry Frankenstein (Colin Clive) back to his home where his soon-to-be-wife Elizabeth (Valerie Hobson) nurses him back to health. During his recovery, he is visited by Doctor Pretorius (Ernest Thesiger) who has taken interest in his ability to create life. The doctor shows Frankenstein his own creations and asks for his help in creating a female partner for the now-on-the-loose Monster. After disregarding the offer, Pretorius finds the Monster and commands him to kidnap Elizabeth in the hopes of blackmailing Frankenstein into helping with his experiment.

In the annals of my movie-viewing history, there have only been a few instances where a sequel outperforms the original film. A lot of film buffs claim that The Godfather: Part II is better than its immediate predecessor (I tend to disagree, having enjoyed the first installment much more). I think that Terminator 2: Judgment Day is a huge step up from The Terminator. You could also make the argument that The Empire Strikes Back is better than the first Star Wars movie. However, once you get past these and maybe less than a handful of other examples, you'll have exhausted your evidence. Luckily, I have found one more piece for the argument in Bride of Frankenstein.

I know that I usually start with talk of screenplay, but let's go with acting first this time around. Overall, the acting in this movie is a huge step ahead of the performances put forth in Frankenstein. With Clive and Karloff the only major returning characters - aside from Elizabeth who is played by a different actress this time around - we have a slew of new, albeit supporting, characters on exposé. Ernest Thesiger is sufficiently creepy and maniacal in his role, crafting a very charismatic villain. Early on, you almost want to like the guy, but there's something that constantly chews at the back of your mind that tells you this guy is bad news. I did have a little bit of grief with the character Minnie (Una O'Connor), who was either an extremely nosy concerned citizen or a worker in the Frankenstein mansion. O'Connor played the part a little too over-the-top for my personal tastes, but she does provide a couple of laughs here and there. However, our two returning leads are the real story here. Clive takes his familiar role and makes Frankenstein a more realistic man. He has the ability to tone down the manic energy that drove his character in the original film, crafting a subtly great performance. As good as Clive is, the real props have to go to Boris Karloff who completely humanizes the Monster by the end of the movie. Through a series of events, the Monster quickly learns how to speak in stunted English, but his vocabulary grows throughout the film. We even see some emotion, including a single teardrop running down the cheek! (I'm a sucker for that, folks. You can bawl all you want, but if you can keep it to a single teardrop running down the cheek, you'll completely hook me into the emotion.) Congratulations, Mr. Karloff, for humanizing a re-animated mass of dead tissue.

Now, to the screenplay, which I found to be quite superb. We actually open the film with a prologue in a British loft with two men and a woman who is quickly identified as Mary Shelley (Elsa Lanchester), the author of the novel, Frankenstein. She starts to tell the men the continuation of the story, and that's how we get to the events of this movie. One of the things I liked about this screenplay, in contrast with its predecessor, is the fact that we are given a much more humanized Monster. We see his progression from a mindless brute to a thoughtful and - even if he's still prone to outbursts of anger - caring man. There's one scene that put an emotional stamp on the film. During his wandering around the forest, the Monster stumbles upon an old cottage that housed an old blind man (O.P. Heggie) who graciously welcomes the Monster into his home. He tells the Monster that he has prayed to God to send him a friend, and the two soon develop a close friendship (this is where the Monster starts to learn language, by the way). I don't really know what more to say about it other than the screenplay is definitely a step up from the first film, and I was thoroughly impressed with it. Oh, and the climax of the film is, well, brilliant, to say the least.

Because this movie is a sequel, you may need to see the original Frankenstein before delving into Bride of Frankenstein. I mean, I'm sure you could pick up the storyline pretty easily - they do give a little bit of a re-cap in the prologue - but I think you'll have more of an appreciation for the brilliance of Bride of Frankenstein if you take the time to watch the original first.

Movie Review Summary:

Grade: A-
Current All-Time Rank: Best - #1502 Thumbs Up

Movie Review: FRANKENSTEIN MEETS THE WOLF MAN

FRANKENSTEIN MEETS THE WOLF MAN

1943
Not Rated


You can watch the trailer here

I had never heard of this movie before I popped my copy of The Wolf Man into the DVD player yesterday. Apparently the DVD was a double feature, and the second film was Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man. To be honest, I think I know why I'd never heard of it until now.

The film, which was directed by Roy William Neill, picks up four years after the events of The Wolf Man with a newly resurrected Lawrence Talbot (reprised by Lon Chaney Jr.) who apparently cannot die (this is despite the fact that he was bludgeoned by a silver cane in the previous film, which should have killed him). He breaks out of a hospital and sets on a quest to find a cure for his lycanthropic ailment and runs into the gypsy woman Maleva (reprised by Maria Ouspenskaya) who tells him of a doctor named Frankenstein who may be able to help. The two embark to meet Frankenstein but run into resistance upon reaching his town. They learn of his death, and Talbot runs off, turning into a werewolf again. He unearths the Frankenstein monster (Bela Lugosi) and turns to another doctor to take both of their lives.

Although they started with a relatively interesting premise, the screenplay just doesn't play out as well as the film's predecessor. It lacks any real amount of suspense, and the dialogue is simplistic at best. Chaney Jr. essentially recycles the same three or four lines ("I want to die;" "I turn into a wolf;" etc.) throughout the film, and it gets pretty old pretty fast. Oh, and the ultimate resolution is anti-climactic, and I just felt like it didn't resolve any of the problems posed by the film.

The acting is okay, but there's nothing to rave about. Chaney Jr. and Ouspenskaya are playing the same roles as before, and Lugosi is probably attempting a carbon-copy of Boris Karloff's take on the monster. There just really isn't much to say about the acting for this movie.

If anything, it's a fun to see two horror titans take battle against one another, but you have to wait much too long for much too little. I can definitely see why this film isn't listed among the annals of horror classics.

Movie Review Summary:
Grade: C
Thumb... Slightly Down