Going into this film I wasn't expecting much considering the fact that most sequels are made for the sole purpose of the almighty dollar bill, but I couldn't help but be a little excited. On numerous occasions I've heard that this film was a classic and seen it top plenty of top fifty lists stating it's quality. Unfortunately i couldn't agree.
The film starts off with a "previously on Frankenstein" as if you hadn't seen the original or happened to forget everything that had happened. This is all narrated by the original book's author played by Elsa Lanchester commenting that "it wasn't the end of the story", yet by the end of the film you wish it would have been.
After the brief recap it starts exactly where the first one ended. We find out that the monster (played by Boris Karloff who's acting abilities were wasted in this one) didn't die and that Dr. Frankenstein (the always great Colin Clive) isn't dead either. After settling in the story Dr. Pretorius shows up and throws out the option of creating another of the undead. This happens only hours after the first town wreckage, so the doctor thinks creating a new one couldn't happen soon enough. Pretorius kidnaps Dr. Frankenstein's love (Valerie Hobson) and soon the doctor has no choice yet to help Pretorius do the unthinkable so he can once again be with his one and only.
The film is directed by James Whale who does a great job of what he has to work with. The sets look outstanding and there are plenty of nice shots. What really needed to be worked on here was the unsatisfying script that tried to have the impact of the first, yet came off weak. When we watch the first one the pace is perfect and everything we see is shocking or exciting because we're intrigued. There was nothing in this film's plot that stuck out to me saying "I need to see this". Perhaps if the pace was picked up and something besides making the same mistake again was changed in the script, it might of picked up a few more fans including myself. To me it came off if anything like one of the endless yet entertaining Friday the Thirteenth films.
Also, plenty of people will say there are loads of underlying homosexual meanings, which makes sense when watching the film. There is also talk of who the "real bride" is supposed to be. (There's plenty of information on the net if you want to find out more on the clever hidden meanings.) Although you shouldn't have to depend on finding a hidden meaning to enjoy a film. You should be able to watch a film for what it's worth and just be entertained. I'm not saying a mindless shoot em up film is better than this, but not everything has to be so deep all the time.
Overall it wasn't the best film I've ever seen and it wasn't the worst. While it was entertaining I wish they would have let this one go and concentrated on a little more on other Universal Monsters. Frankenstein was a classic stand alone film and in no way did it need a continuation.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I enjoyed your revised review, which is really an improved version of the already good first one. I liked how you removed the ending of the film out of your description to avoid spoiling it for the readers who have not yet seen the film. All and all this is a great review again. My only suggestion is to take out the paragraph mentioning the hidden meanings. Why bother mentioning if you don’t feel they are even important. The review is great without needing to acknowledge them.
ReplyDeleteI'm going to go ahead and agree with almost everything David commented on, especially the part about the paragraph of hidden meanings. It just feels tacked on. I would have also liked more "description" as evidence for your analysis and interpretation.
ReplyDeleteWell written, and while I do not agree with your assessment, I feel you've started a good discussion with some evidence to back up your claims.