Add a Review

  • The sequel to the iconic horror classic Frankenstein is an oddball one. That's part of its charm. The Bride of Frankenstein sounds like a piece of parody rather than a sincere followup, and in a way it's awareness of its sometimes satirical nature makes it stronger than its straighter predecessor. However, its finest facets are its ahead-of-its-time technical aspects. The stark cinematography is astonishing and the precision of its sharp editing is unprecedented, let alone the reliably impressive production design. It's a much more entertaining and enduring experience than other films of the 30s. James Whale got much better conviction out of his actors this time around and it deals with the moral consequences of their actions rather than leaving it to loud anguish. While the film is a bit of retread of the first film as Frankenstein's monster is chased from place to place, it adds development and essential sensitivity to his character leading its tragic end to be much more meaningful in its destruction. This was a very pleasant surprise, ominously horrific and slyly comic, without the two clashing.

    8/10
  • Bride of Frankenstein is definitely one of the more memorable sequels of all time. The first Frankenstein film was a truly memorable exploration of horror and was extremely advanced for its time; dealing with issues of modernity when the doctor starts talking of space travel and also pushing censorship to levels it hadn't been pushed to before; having characters exclaim they 'knew what God felt like' and also including images of dead bodies and murder. With Bride of Frankenstein, certain elements of surprise have been lost but the film delves deeper into its characters and explores different things to make it more of an 'entertaining' film.

    The film doesn't hang around and cleverly introduces the story through the original author Mary Shelley (Elsa Lanchester) dictating what it is that happens next. For a film in 1935 to use such a technique and manage to include elements of heartbreak when we assume Dr. Frankenstein is dead, horror when The Monster re-emerges AND murder when someone mistakenly crosses him all in the first ten minutes or so, is extremely impressive and is only the result of fantastic direction through great, inventive ideas.

    Then, the film uses the character of The Monster as a sort of MacGuffin. It is reduced to a wondering, babbling, hulking thing getting into mischief as it makes its way through the forests nearby but this isn't a bad thing. What we see is the first example of the characters in this, so far, series of two films develop. The Monster starts to develop emotions of pity when it sees someone in the forest in trouble and attempts to rescue them as well as intelligence because it manages to get itself out of trouble when danger threatens it – there is no excuse for this development of ideas and intelligence but it's interesting to see anyway.

    What's more, this wondering and random character is a great excuse for it to cause havoc and/or get into adventures of its own and this it does to a basic level. Apart from stumbling across a picnic of some description when everyone assumes its safe since when last they heard, he'd been captured; The Monster gets involved with a seemingly lonely man who lives in a log cabin in the woods. The curse here to me is that I'd seen Kenneth Branagh's 1994 Frankenstein before this so I knew what was up and how things would develop.

    As a result, it was predictable to me but to fresh eyes what follows between The Monster and this man is an education and a friendship that truly supports evidence that this film really is all about developing characters such as The Monster further away from the 'dead' tag and closer to the 'human' tag. Not only this but Dr. Frankenstein himself is leaning more and more towards a 'normal' life away from insane experiments; tempted back only by blackmail. About half way through, Frankenstein's creation manages to get himself into a bit of trouble and is caught but escapes so soon afterwards, the sequence passes off without too much suspense or interest which was disappointing; also, the character of Minnie is so obviously an attempt at comic relief that she becomes annoying quite quickly although I suppose they had to include this character to stop the film appearing too dark.

    If Frankenstein from 1931 was an out and out horror shock–fest for the time, Bride of Frankenstein remains a character piece full of 'what would happen if.....' a mindless, homicidal lab creation was loose in rural Europe. Some of the later scenes still made me squirm a little when the 'mate' is being created and if you can look past the rushed ending; you'll see a sequel to a film miles ahead of its time, ahead of its time.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    One problem with film criticism is to over analysis a film and read things in to its subtext which just aren't there . THE BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN is a very good example of this . Once someone points out the fact that director James Whale was a homosexual it opens the floodgates for people reading the film in a way no one originally envisaged . We're shown an opening scene where Lord Byron describes himself as " England's greatest sinner " and as the film progresses we're introduced to nods and winks to a sin of that dare not be explicitly referred to . Instead we see Doctor Pretoruis , a sort of precursor to Quintan Crisp who is described as " queer looking " drinks gin , makes a queen and suggests that he becomes a partner of Baron Frankenstein . Oh purleese . Do you honestly think Whale made this film as a type of gay manifesto ? I'll say one thing about movie directors and that is they have kept a lot of pretentious pseudo intellectuals in a job

    As a form of entertainment ( Yes films are produced as a form of entertainment and to make money for studio investments ) THE BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN is very impressive . There is an irony showing the character of Mary Shelley because our thoughts of FRANKENSTEIN owe more to James Whale and Universal studios than they do to Shelley . I doubt if very many people have read the original text but we're all aware of the image of Boris Karloff staggering around a studio interior forest growling . The studio forest depicted in this film are obviously stage sets but are very impressive

    What Whale has done is to mix pathos with a grotesque sense of humour . I thought after seeing YOUNG FRANKENSTEIN I could never take the scene of the monster turning up at the blind hermit's cottage seriously ever again but after seen the movie it remains a touching , poignant segment of the film and Karloff elicits great sympathy from the audience . There's also a surreal image of Doctor Pretorious feasting in a crypt and while there's absolutely no logic for this scene ( Unless he is clairvoyant and knew the monster was going to turn up ) it remains a striking and morbid image

    James Whale directs at a very good and brisk pace and with his " midget people " he brings a sense of wonder that would have had audiences gasping " How did he do that ? " but I don't think it's his masterwork , that would almost certainly THE INVISIBLE MAN from two years earlier , a film slightly more enjoyable due to its insane , dark humour along with jaw dropping special effects . The narrative itself is rather episodic and plot less and the mix of different accents grate slightly with Una O' Connor playing an irritating comic character but it's still an impressive film though over the year's has become over analyzed by people who should know better
  • I love the first Frankenstein, it was shocking and enthralling despite the complaints of it being dated and slow. Maybe so but I still love it. The Bride of Frankenstein is a wonderful sequel to an already wonderful film, and surpasses it technically I feel. Even if the acting is a little forced in the beginning scene, with the exception of Elsa Lanchester, that is such a minor flaw compared to how good and enjoyable this film was. If you ask me Bride of Frankenstein is one of the greatest achievements in the history of horrordom.

    First of all, it is extravagantly produced. The sets are really imaginative, the cinematography is beautiful and the costumes are extravagant. Along the way I noticed two improvements compared to the first film. One is that Bride of Frankenstein is faster in pace, and two the music score is more haunting and melancholic here, Franz Waxman was the perfect choice for composer. Bride of Frankenstein also has some really effective scenes, the ending was very well done as was the unveiling of the bride to the sound of wedding bells and the miniature people in the bell jars, but I found the scene between the monster and the blind hermit especially touching. James Whale's direction is innovative just like in the first film, and the script is also very good and adds to the atmosphere. The acting is excellent, Colin Clive is very good once again as the eccentric Henry Frankenstein, and Ernest Thesiger gives a genius turn as Doctor Pretorious. Valerie Hobson is alluring and sympathetic as Elizabeth, occasionally overdoing it with the hysteria but she was fine overall, while Elsa Lanchester is good as Mary Shelley but electrifyingly beautiful as the bride. Once again though, Boris Karloff gives the finest performance, his towering presence and frightening look ensures for some scares, but he is very poignant as well, as his monster only wants to fit in and is rejected by everybody.

    Overall, a wonderful sequel, and not to be missed! 10/10 Bethany Cox
  • This review also refers to FRANKENSTEIN (1931).

    The epitome of the Universal horror classics made by one the greatest practitioners of the genre, James Whale. He always wanted to be an A-list director and used to have mixed feelings about his horror work. Reluctant to make a sequel, he managed to assure himself of complete creative control over the project, putting together a unique blend of horror, suspense and tongue-in-cheek comedy that was quite unlike anything made before and has rarely been equaled ever since.

    It has been noted, but the original 1931 FRANKENSTEIN should be seen first, as this one picks up the storyline where FRANKENSTEIN left off. Considering the combined running time of about 140 min, both films can easily be watched back to back.

    The story sets off with a clever prologue between Mary Shelly (a short but great performance by Elsa Lanchester who also plays The Bride) and Lord Byron, who asks her to continue the tale of Dr. Frankenstein. Still recovering in his castle after the escape of the Monster, he is visited by the even more insane Dr. Pretorius (Ernest Thesinger). He is also experimenting with creating life (the miniature humans) and tries to persuade Frankenstein to join forces in order to create a female companion for the Monster (Boris Karloff), that is still at large wreaking havoc in the surrounding countryside.

    Although both films are justly hailed as classics, in my opinion BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN holds up much better to modern audiences than the original. Basically two things stand out: a great music score is added, which make everything seem much more alive and fast moving than in the original film. Secondly, the black humor and it's sense of self-parody, spoofing the genre and even underpinning Whale's earlier films greatly adds to the fun, compared to the much more basic and primitive FRANKENSTEIN. Admittedly, this is partly due to a larger budget, but combined with the fabulous production values, splendid sets, stunning photography and absolutely striking special effects, that still look pretty amazing, even by today's standards. I was stunned by the scene in which Dr. Pretorius shows off his miniature people, that he keeps in the glass jars. Even modern-day special effects specialists couldn't figure out how they did it. I don't know anything that comes even close until computer-generated effects took over.

    The eccentric Ernest Thesinger plays the role of his life and almost walks away with the film with his wonderful portrayal of the menacing Dr. Pretorius, who delivers one classic line after another. But the rest of the cast is just as good with particularly outstanding roles for - off course - Boris Karloff as the Monster, Elsa Lanchester in a dual role as The Bride (billed as "?") and Mary Shelley, and Una O'Connor as Minnie, Frankenstein's servant. I think it's one the very few films that can be enjoyed at almost any level, equally fun for (older) children and lovers of classic horror. This film proves that horror can be funny and intelligent and can be combined with splendid cinematic virtues. Not just Whale's best, this is one of the all-time great films.

    Camera Obscura --- 10/10
  • Their are few sequels that are superior to their predecessors, however, Bride of Frankenstein not only equals it's masterful original prototype Frankenstein (1931), but infinitely surpasses it in every way. Despite the first films reputation as a classic, it's honestly not quite as witty and is much too straightforward when being compared to much more satirical, Bride of Frankenstein. Not to mention, it lacks much of the sophistication in the effects and eccentricities that the immortal sequel possesses. Needless to say, both films are justly hailed as classics, but it's the immortal sequel where James Whale's combining of horror and wicked humour (and "hidden" inflammatory work) is expressed more clearly and more prominently.

    After initially refusing to do a sequel to Frankenstein, director James Whale would eventually falter when Universal agreed to let him have complete artistic freedom. Production was much-publicised as early as 1933, however, Whale, who was following his towering success with Frankenstein, The Invisible Man, and The Old Dark House, wouldn't begin working on a sequel until late 1934, which was originally entitled The Return of Frankenstein. The film was adapted by William Hurlbut and John Balderston from an incident from the Mary Shelly novel Frankenstein, in which the monster demands a mate. However, in the novel, Dr. Frankenstein creates the Bride, but instead of bringing the monster to life, he decides to destroy it, greatly differing the film adaptation from the novel.

    Most of the original cast remained, as the film reunited Colin Clive (as Dr. Frankenstein) with Boris Karloff (as the Monster), but Mae Clarke, a blonde, who was dropped from Universal was replaced by then seventeen year old Valerie Hobson, a brunette (as Elizabeth). Clark was acceptable in the role as Elizabeth in the first film, however, Hobson excels when in comes to chewing up scenery; therefore handles the role much better in the sequel. Both Marilyn Harris (Little Maria from Frankenstein) and Dwight Frye (Fritz from Frankenstein) would return as well, but as different characters - Harris appearing uncredited and Frye appearing in another memorable role as Karl. Also, new characters were brought to the forefront: Ernest Thesiger (as Dr. Pretorius) with Una O'Connor (as Minnie) and Elsa Lanchester having a dual role (as both Mary Shelley and The Bride).

    Unfortunately, Clive had suffered from a broken leg during most of the filming - a result from a horseback riding accident - and most of his scenes were shot sitting or laying down. However, once again, Clive did an absolutely incredible job portraying Dr. Henry Frankenstein and proved to be a perfect choice yet again. Though, for much of the film, he takes a backseat to the fine and unique acting of Thesiger, who gives an unforgettable performance as the "mad scientist" named Dr. Septimus Pretorius, who much of the film revolves around. There is a sexual uncertainty to Pretorius' character and many suggestions of homosexuality. With the films masterful blend of horror and black comedy, it's Thesiger who shines best and in many ways the film is stolen by him when he's seen on screen; the equally charismatic O'Connor works best when playing directly opposite of Thesiger.

    Bride of Frankenstein is also presented with the same terrific German expressionist camera-work by cinematographer John J. Mescall, although reportedly drunk through much of the production, uses brilliantly effective camera movements and angles that added eminently to the creation of the Bride scene. Mescall also composed a number of bizarre and inventive angles that intensified Thesiger's skeleton-like frame and vivid characteristics aiding his already superb performance. Although for Karloff, the four hour makeup job done by Jack P. Pierce, which was blue-green in colour, gave Mescall nothing but problems. The film is also accompanied by a fascinating score composed by Franz Waxman, which is nothing less than a masterpiece of excitement and melody. Though it wouldn't be Waxman's most mature work, it most certainly remains one of his most famous and probably his most influential.

    Much of the film concerns itself mostly with the Monster (Karloff) trying to find a place in the world and his growth; much of his character is seen as a humanely being craving for the company and acceptance of others but is mostly rejected. He fails to seek friendship with the young shepherdess (Ann Darling); with the Monsters experience in the first film with Little Maria, he knows that he must save her from drowning. Of course, everyone finds him too frightening, however, in one of the many incredible scenes the film provides, the Monster is eventually provided with sympathy and encouragement when he encounters the old blind hermit (O.P. Heggie), who becomes the Monsters first true friend. Karloff's performance is truly remarkable, as it was in Frankenstein. Although, he opposed that the Monster speak, his character benefits greatly from this, as he finds room to expand on his already brilliant craft.

    The memorable sequence of bringing the Monster's Bride (Lanchester) to life is unequaled - even the original scene in Frankenstein pales in comparison. The presentation of the birth of the Bride is stunningly as well, as Clive exclaims: "She's alive! ALIVE!" Lanchester who only stood 5'4" tall was placed on stilts that made her 7'0" tall, as well as, her unforgettable shock hairstyle which stood up and hinted that the electricity had shocked her to life was held by a wired horsehair cage. Also, her darting swan-like movements were inspired by the angry swans in London's Regent Park. Although, the Bride's appearance is extremely brief, it's most certainly worth it, especially when she finally encounters the Monsters.

    The macabre, satirical Bride of Frankenstein is a key film to the horror genre (perhaps the best) and one of the genuinely great films of any genre. It's one of the most wonderfully crafted films in cinema history and is easily lauded as Whale's finest screen hour. This one has rightfully deserved it's ranking amongst the best of what Hollywood has to offer.
  • When Ernest Thesiger points and says, "The bride of Frankenstein," rolling his r's, he creates one of the greatest scenes in cinematic history. I do consider the second film superior to the first (though I love them both) because of the complexity of the characters and, more specifically, the monster. In Shelley's book the monster is lonely but articulate. He seeks out a bride. Frankenstein creates one but then destroys her, making his creature furious and vengeful. This monster actually has a kind part to him. For him to be blunt force thug can only go so far. It works in the first film but how much more growling and stomping could there be? The scenes of him wandering in the countryside, meeting the lonely old blind man in the house in the woods, and being shown kindness by him is very touching. The monster is allowed some humanity; some privacy. We know this can't last because his creator has doomed him. We often see Victor as some kind of hero, but, in reality, he has committed an incredible sin against another being. He wants a companion, but she turns on him and destroys his hope.

    The setup, with Elsa Lanchester as Mary Shelley, talking with the foremost romantic poets of the time, Percy Shelley and Lord Byron (who also rolls his r's), is a great lead in as she brags about writing a story that will make your skin crawl. She must have been something in that male dominated society. Of course, her mother was one of the first to demand rights for women. When she reappears as the Bride, it is awesome. And who came up with the hair. It is one of those things like the monster's neck bolts, that has become such an icon for our culture.

    These early Universal films deserve to be judged as major movies. Just because the subject is horror, doesn't mean they should be dismissed. James Whale was a great director with an amazing vision.
  • Forget the likes of "The Godfather II" and "The Empire Strikes Back" - "Bride of Frankenstein" is THE greatest example of a sequel completely surpassing the original in terms of sheer brilliance. Coming four years after the original 'Frankenstein' in 1931, director James Whale was originally reluctant to make a sequel but changed his mind after being allowed to make the film more on his own terms. No other director has ever managed to blend horror, comedy and pathos as successfully Whale. The film features some of the most memorable scenes in cinema history, notably the monster's encounter with a lonely hermit and the introduction of 'The Bride'. The film has it all: superb casting, tremendous sets and make up, memorable dialogue ("To a new world of Gods and monsters") and a brilliant score by Franz Waxman. Boris Karloff must surely be one of the greatest actors to ever appear on film. He manages to improve on his initial characterisation of the Monster, due mainly to the addition of dialogue ("Friends, good!"), and, unlike in the first movie, actually makes us feel total empathy for the Monster. Colin Clive returns as the reluctant Doctor F, Una O'Connor makes a wonderful addition as the twittering and hysterical Minnie, but it is Ernest Thesiger who steals the film with his hilarious performance ("Have a cigar. They are my only weakness") as the sinister Dr. Pretorious. Although Elsa Lanchester appears as the Bride for only about 2 minutes at the film's finale, it will be the role for which she is forever associated. The film is regarded as the high point of the Universal horror series and stands as a testament to the genius of James Whale.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    This review contains potential spoilers.

    It has often been said that Bride of Frankenstein broke the golden rule of Hollywood that says sequels are never better than the original.

    I'm afraid I have to disagree -- the first Frankenstein film was head and shoulders above this sequel that turns the Frankenstein Monster from a frightening, yet oddly sympathetic creature, into a joke.

    Part of the problem was the decision to make the Monster talk with a "Me Tarzan, you Jane" vocabulary. Boris Karloff was reportedly against the idea, and rightfully so. It renders scenes that could be seen a true pathos into jokes - no less than Saturday Night Live would lampoon Bride of Frankenstein thanks to the late Phil Hartman's "Fire bad!" parody of the talking Monster.

    There are also elements of this film that have no business being in there -- the idea of Dr. Frankenstein becoming a patsy to the Faust-like Dr. Pretorius, for example. The previous film gave us this trailblazing if misguided scientist bringing life to the dead ... only to find out Pretorius got there first, and in miniature. The scene with the miniature people in bottles is amusing, and for 1935 a marvel of special effects, but it took me right out of the film.

    The script is just awful for much of the film. It's as if someone mainlined Shakespeare and tried to regurgitate it back as a Frankenstein movie. Although Colin Clive's Dr. Frankenstein actually comes off quite well, as does the Blind Man, everyone else comes off sounding like idiots.

    And speaking of idiots - James Whale might have been a great director and an icon, but he should have been shot for allowing the shrill, cackling character of Minnie to exist in this movie. More than once I was tempted to turn the DVD off because I couldn't take her caterwauling. If The Monster had killed her at some point it might not have been so bad, but to let her live is cruel and inhuman punishment for the viewer.

    The performances range from excellent to campy. Karloff, as usual, does a terrific job, and his charisma lessens the blow of the silly dialogue he is forced to utter. Elsa Lanchester, in a dual role as Mary Shelley and The Bride, is magical to watch, but it is to film lovers' eternal regret that she didn't get more screen time as The Bride.

    Valerie Hobson is gorgeous as Elizabeth, but betrays her acting inexperience in a few scenes (it's hard to believe she was only 17 at the time). Colin Clive, despite being given more theatrical, less realistic dialogue than in the first film, does his usual good job. Ernest Thesinger is embarrasing as the mad Dr. Pretorius. I'm told he was James Whale's drama instructor or something like that -- it shows. It's always hard to direct your teachers.

    And Una O'Connor's performance as Minnie is worthy of the worst Ed Wood film, and not much else.

    There is also sloppy continuity with the first film. Aside from changes of actors -- which is fair enough -- there are errors that should have been caught, such as giving a different name to the character whose daughter was killed by The Monster in the first film.

    Despite my criticisms, Bride of Frankenstein isn't a terrible film on its own merits. Karloff steals the show, as usual, and Elsa Lanchester is electrifying (pun intended). But to this Frankenstein fan, it utterly pales in comparison with the first film.
  • Without a doubt, this is one of the greatest horror movies of all time and the highlight of James Whale's career. The atmosphere evoked from the sets is near perfect, and although actually filmed on the Universal back-lot, you can believe that you are being led through a 19th century Bavaria. Although Karloff portrayed the monster only 3 times, this was undoubtedly the pinnacle of his career, and the film that most fans will remember him for. Mention should also be made of the excellent performance given by Ernest Thesiger as Doctor Pretorious. I've been interested in movies since I was 4 years old and have "Bride of Frankenstein" to thank for that. Superb.
  • Boris Karloff reprises his role as the monster but this time developing a liking for the pleasures enjoyed by others while finding a voice. Previously it was the Baron filling the ridiculous and out of context character role, now that pleasure goes to Minnie, a construction so irritatingly misplaced you could easily halt proceedings and turn your attention to something else entirely, although the characterisations are generally pretty poor all round. It has its place in history and you can take context from that but as a piece of entertainment, which is what it ultimately is, it has become the monster it seeks to deploy.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    When I first saw Frankenstein (1931), I was amazed. It was one of the greatest stories I ever saw and it impressed me on so many levels. I honestly didn't think I would ever see such a great phenomenon again. Well, I should reconsider that. The sequel is even more magical, more impressive and more perfect. The bride of Frankenstein can easily be considered as the best horror movie ever made and it even ranks high it the list of best movies in general ever made. The atmosphere, the locations, the acting and direction...really nothing at all can be criticized. Compared to what everybody thought, both the Monster and Dr. Frankenstein survived the incident at the windmill at the end of the original Frankenstein. While the Monster flees to freedom, Dr. Frankenstein is approached by Dr. Pretorius. A wicked scientist who created life himself, but he needs the genius of Dr. Frankenstein to complete his project. Although he swore to his girl Elizabeth he would stop playing God, Frankenstein is intrigued by the the project of Dr. Pretorius and joins his research. Meanwhile, the Monster is feeling terrible. He realizes he scares everybody away and only found friendship with a blind man. During this absolutely beautiful and magical scene he learns to talk and express his emotions. When he's hunted down again he meets Dr. Pretorius and demands him to make him a friend. Because of this, Dr. Pretorius can force Frankenstein to create life again. If he doesn't, Elizabeth shall die... This movie gives a completely other meaning to the word "sequel". When this word is heard, people usually think about an inferior product which was made to make more money. This certainly isn't the case for The Bride of Frankenstein. Hard to believe, but this movie, in fact, ADDS a lot of great things to the saga of Frankenstein. It handles even more about the human emotions and contains some very important lessons. We also see a lot more about the personalities of the characters. The Monster of course, but also Dr. Frankenstein and his girl. And a few great new characters are introduced. The blind man to begin with...An adorable man who is as lonely as the creature. He doesn't judge on what he sees ( well, he can't of course ) and searches for deeper feelings. The character of Dr. Pretorius is fantastic also. A wicked and obsessed man, who doesn't care about normal life. He's rude and emotionless and terrific as the bad guy in the story.

    The story opens with Mary Shelley telling the complete story. This immediately sets the perfect atmosphere which is held during the whole movie. No doubt about this...one of the greatest masterpieces ever seen. If you haven't seen it yet, do whatever it takes to get a copy !!! I gave the original Frankenstein a rating 10 out of 10, so I guess there isn't a rating that is high enough to praise The Bride of Frankenstein. Just as good as cinema can get !!!
  • BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN is one of my favorites. But unlike most film buffs, I don't think it lives up to Whale's original, or even to THE OLD DARK HOUSE (1932). In BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN comic relief featuring the usually marvelous Una O'Connor and E.E. Clive is much too broad, and the monster's meeting with the blind hermit is maudlin. Mel Brooks did not have to add too much to get laughs from scenes that were already unintentionally funny.

    Also a giant continuity gap opens when Elizabeth, Dr. Frankenstein's actual bride, who was being held captive in a cave, suddenly and with no explanation appears at the door of the laboratory pleading for Dr. Frankenstein to escape with her. In John L. Balderston's original treatment they all die. And a sub plot about murders committed by Dr. Pretorius' assistant Karl played by Dwight Frye (who bears some resemblance to "M" star Peter Lorre) was edited out of the original release along with a scene showing the body of a child being carried away. These were changes the studio demanded because of negative public reaction during previews, and they point to a much darker story.

    Whale may not have wanted to make another monster movie, but when he began work he did try to deal seriously with themes he explored in FRANKENSTEIN. Only after Whale's homosexuality became the subject of legend did critics motivated by cultural politics re-interpret the film as a dark comedy of sexual identity.

    Having said that, I do think Ernest Thesiger's Doctor Pretorius is deliciously wicked. But his character is not obviously homosexual, and I can only surmise that such a reading is a retrospective interpretation based on Thesiger's openly Gay lifestyle. Pretorius' character seems to have been suggested by the villainous alchemist Oliver Haddo in Somerset Maugham's THE MAGICIAN, a book that was filmed by Rex Ingram in 1926, starring Paul Wegener of THE GOLEM.

    Whale may have seen Ingram's film. He may have read the book. The thing that made the best directors of the '20s, '30s, '40s, and '50s better than the best directors of today is they created the art of cinematic storytelling by reading literature, not by viewing film. Details from Maugham's novel - Haddo's celibacy and his obsession with creating homunculi (little people) - are elements of Dr. Pretorius' character that could only have come from the literary source because Ingram never used them in his film.

    Negative comments aside, the film is a masterpiece of art direction (Whale's and Charles D. Hall's), cinematography (John J. Mescall's), and music (Franz Waxman's). And there is the brilliantly edited set piece of the bride's creation, and Elsa Lanchester's performance as the bride that bookends the story with the wonderful prologue where she plays FRANKENSTEIN author Mary Shelley.
  • The only thing odder than director James Whale making "Bride Of Frankenstein" after "Frankenstein" would have been if George Lucas had made "The Empire Strikes Back" as a musical.

    Whereas "Frankenstein" presented a serious-as-death horror flick, "Bride" presents us with over-the-top comedy. The continuity is off, with some characters like Victor and the Baron disappearing. Others reappear played by different actors. Most seriously, the most important role, and one played by the same character, goes from being a mute walking corpse to a chatty dancing machine, albeit still with homicidal tendencies.

    Okay, the Monster (Boris Karloff) doesn't dance so much as bob his shoulders in time to violin music, and his chattiness is mostly monosyllabic. Though last seen pinned under a burning rafter, he emerges in "Bride" none the worse for wear. Soon he is loose in the countryside again, while Dr. Frankenstein (Colin Clive) is approached by the mad, amoral Dr. Pretorius (Ernest Thesiger). Pretorius demands Dr. Frankenstein take responsibility for his creation and replicate his "success" by building another beast.

    The comedy of "Bride" would be more welcome if it worked within the context of horror. Instead, it feels absurd for the sake of absurdity, like Una O'Connor playing the hysterical servant Minnie or the tiny people Pretorius keeps in jars. "Frankenstein" works as an exercise in existential bleakness. "Bride" plays itself off as a nihilistic joke, less a true horror film than a Monty Python bit with lamer humor.

    What does work in the film is Karloff as the Monster. Despite the miscue of letting him speak this time, Karloff does bring empathy to his role. It's enough to almost allow for Whale's unsure handling of his character. Half the time the creature is a mad killer, and the other half of the time, merely misunderstood. At least with Karloff at the controls, you know the Monster will give the right amount of chills, and he does.

    Also good is Dwight Frye, returning from "Frankenstein" this time in the role of another henchman figure, just as compellingly creepy. Thesiger is also compelling that way, a lively figure amid an otherwise sleepy cast. "You and I have gone too far to stop, nor can it be stopped so easily," he tells Frankenstein. To the Monster's comment "I love dead...hate living", Pretorius deadpans: "You're wise in your generation." He's a bit problematic in his arch drollery, but at least he adds to the proceedings, even if he distracts from the film's menace.

    Whale doesn't do nearly so well with the other actors. Even Clive seems miscast playing the role he established so effectively four years before. The story goes off in weird, unresolved tangents like the strange fate of the Neumanns that never are properly explained. None is weirder than the opening, where we see Frankenstein's creator, Mary Shelley, with her lover Percy Shelley and their friend Lord Byron. I should say "Lorrrrrd Byrrrrron" for the way the guy rolls his R's. (I enjoyed "haygraphs" bright comment from March 2004 about how the prologue has the characters "looking back" on events taking place a century hence.)

    Whale may be celebrated today as an early gay director, but his penchant for jump cuts, awkward close-ups, and florid overacting should have stayed in the closet. "Bride" may have a certain camp sensibility its enthusiasts enjoy, but as a horror film it is neither scary nor successful.
  • James Whale's 'Frankenstein' was a landmark movie (released in 1931, a year of two other landmark movies, Todd Browning's 'Dracula' and Fritz Lang's 'M'), and one of the most important and influential movies ever made. 'Bride Of Frankenstein' is a very rare beast, a sequel which not only equals, but surpasses the original! In my mind it is the greatest sequel in the history of motion pictures, and a strong contender for the greatest horror movie of all time. It's certainly one of the most original, stylish and entertaining ones, that's for sure. Horror legend Boris Karloff reprises his role as The Monster and manages to top his brilliant original performance, and give his character even more depth and emotion. Colin Clive reappears as Dr. Frankenstein, and legendary character actor Dwight Frye (Fritz in the first movie and Renfield in 'Dracula') plays another memorable supporting role as Karl. The beautiful Valerie Hobson replaces Mae Clarke as Elizabeth (a smart move!), and the eagle eyed with spot future stars John Carradine and Walter Brennan in bit parts, but the best thing about the movie apart from Karloff, is the addition of Elsa Lanchester as The Monster's "bride", and the wonderfully eccentric Ernest Thesiger as the nutty and sinister Dr. Pretorious. Karloff, Thesiger and Lanchester between them are responsible for some of the most memorable scenes in cinema history, particularly the "I...love....dead....Hate....living" exchange, the sequence with the blind hermit (absolutely heartbreaking!), and of course, the totally unforgettable meeting between The Monster and his mate! This is still an astonishing movie experience almost seventy years after it was made. Every single time I watch it I marvel at it. 'Bride Of Frankenstein' is one of the best movies I have ever seen, horror or otherwise. This movie comes with my highest possible recommendation!
  • Interestingly, Whale did not want to make a sequel to his incredibly successful 1931 FRANKENSTEIN, and bowed to studio pressure only when he received assurance of absolute control. The result is perhaps his most personal film--a strange collage of Gothic horror, black humor, religious motifs, and sexual innuendo--and one of the great classics of the genre.

    The plot elaborates an idea contained in the Mary Shelly novel: Frankenstein is pressured to create a mate for the monster. In Shelly's novel, the doctor eventually balks; in the film, however, he sees the experiment through due to a mix of his own obsession and the manipulations of a new character, Dr. Pretorious, and the two create the only truly iconographic female monster in the film pantheon of the 1930s horror film: "The Bride," brilliantly played by Elsa Lanchester.

    The cast is excellent throughout, with Colin Clive and Boris Karloff repeating their roles and Frankenstein and the monster, and Valerie Hobson an able replacement for Mae Clarke in the role of Elizabeth; Ernest Thesiger and Una O'Connor also give incredibly memorable performances as the truly strange Pretorius and the constantly hysterical maid Minnie. The art design is remarkable, and the Waxman score is justly famous. But the genius of the film lies not so much in these new and bizarre characters, in the familiar ones, or in the production values: it is in the way in which Whales delicately balances his elements and then subverts them.

    FRANKENSTEIN owes much of its power to its directness--it has a raw energy that is difficult to resist, still more difficult to describe. But THE BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN owes its power to its complexity. Nothing here is quite what it appears to be, and throughout the film we constantly receive mixed messages about the characters and implications of their situations. While Thesiger's Dr. Pretorius is justly celebrated as a covert gay icon of the darkest possible variety, and while many people quickly grasp Whale's often subversive use of Christian imagery, the film has many, many layers that do not reveal themselves upon a single viewing.

    The single most startling sequence, at least to my mind, is the famous scene in which the Monster stumbles into the lonely cottage of the blind hermit, a role beautifully played by O.P. Heggie. On the surface, the sequence would seem to be about how cruelly we judge people by appearances, and how true kindness can lift the fallen. It was not until I had seen the film several times that it dawned upon me that Whale has essentially endowed the a scene with a host of covertly homosexual overtones--and then tied them to a series of Christian elements for good measure. It is startling, to say the least.

    The current Universal DVD release is exceptional, and the film is supported with an interesting documentary and a still more interesting audio commentary track. Critics and fans continue to battle of whether FRANKENSTEIN or THE BRIDE is the better film--but I say they are so completely different that the question simply doesn't arise. Whatever the case, if you are a fan of 1930s horror and James Whale in particular, this is a must own see, must own.

    Gary F. Taylor, aka GFT, Amazon Reviewer
  • Reactions to this, James Whale's ageless masterpiece, are varied; some say it just could be the Greatest Horror Film Ever Made, some think it's just an overblown tongue-in-cheek comedy sham. Probably Whale himself would have been the first to label his picture a "farce", but count me among those who think it's a brilliant piece of work, well in consideration as one of the undisputed top-tier horror classics of any decade. It qualifies as horror, but mostly plays along more like a child's twisted storybook fantasy. It's renowned as one of the few movie sequels which may be considered even better than its original (in this case, that would be James Whale's 1931 FRANKENSTEIN). While I think both films are excellent, with the first being more serious in tone than its follow-up, I'd give the hair's edge to BRIDE.

    Boris Karloff returned to portray the Frankenstein Monster, and he gives what is easily one of his finest performances. Here, the scarred creature emerges from the charred windmill he was burned in, and falls into the unscrupulous hands of the demented Dr. Pretorius (Ernest Thesiger, note-perfect in a part he seems born to play). Pretorius was once a colleague of Henry Frankenstein, the monster's creator (Colin Clive), and now connives his way back into the disinterested Frankenstein's life just as he's about to wed his fiancé, Elizabeth (Valerie Hobson). This time, the idea is to fashion a female for the creature, and Pretorius enlists the hulking Monster as an anxious partner into his scheme.

    Karloff gets to talk as the Monster in this film, and while the actor himself believed it was a mistake to give the creature speech, I must respectfully disagree; it made him even more pitiable and human. The film's most wonderful sequence features the wandering creation stumbling awkwardly into the hut of a lonely blind hermit, who cannot see and therefore is unable to judge the Monster strictly from his unnerving physical appearance. Instead, he offers the creature food, water, and a place to sleep, while teaching him the most basic forms of communication. It is a truly great cinematic moment.

    There is very little to quibble about within this film (Valerie Hobson's hysterical Elizabeth comes the closest at achieving that), and Whale's passion for lightweight comic relief in his horror films works perfectly. Aside from Thesiger's Pretorius, much of that comes courtesy of Una O'Connor, who is a delight as Frankenstein's sniveling maid. Elsa Lanchester immortalized herself forever with her electrified hairdo as the Monster's intended Mate, and she is also seen early on in a dual performance prologue as the more dainty Mary Shelley, the author who "penned the nightmare". Franz Waxman's glorious score punctuates the wondrous proceedings. **** out of ****
  • BrandtSponseller5 February 2005
    Series note: Although not imperative, it is strongly suggested that viewers take time to watch Frankenstein prior to Bride of Frankenstein. This is a linear continuation of the story of the first film, and the characters and motivations will have more meaning if you watch the series in order.

    Despite appearances to the contrary at the end of the first film, Frankenstein (1931), the monster has survived. The quickly recuperating Dr. Henry Frankenstein (Colin Clive) is paid a visit by Dr. Pretorius (Ernest Thesiger), who has been engaging in similar research into the creation and restoration of life. Although Frankenstein wants to quit the business after the atrocities documented in the first film, Pretorius tries to persuade him to continue, while at the same time, the monster starts to become more sophisticated.

    Although many fans prefer Bride of Frankenstein to Frankenstein, they are both 10s to me. Given tastes and typical comments about modern horror films, it is surprising that this film is the usual preference, as it is even more rooted in surrealist/absurdist fantasy and it is loaded with a wicked, campy humor--at times the film is more of a spoof of the first than a sequel.

    But at that, I love it. I love fantasy, surrealism and absurdism and I like my horror to be campy and humorous as much as I like it to be serious. Director James Whale had acquired more "Hollywood clout" in the four years since making the original film, and said that he wanted to treat Bride as a "hoot"--he found the premise to be "highly amusing". And that it is. Whale gives us whimsical elements from minor characters, such as Minnie (Una O'Connor), who provides a healthy dose of comic relief during the monster's "resurrection", to major characters' mannerisms, such as the Karloff's portrayal of the monster's newfound abilities and subtlety. Pretorius has a flamboyantly questionable sexuality (the film is permeated with all manner of complex sexual metaphors) and his creations are as bizarrely goofy as say, Jar Jar Binks (from Star Wars Episode 1 (1999)), although they do not dominate the film in the same way.

    Often noted as a standout element are the sets, and rightly so. Like the first film, the gorgeous sets show a heavy influence from German expressionist films, but here they are even more grand in scale and they are also more numerous and varied. The cinematography is as crisp as can be, and just as atmospheric (occasionally more so) as the first film. The presence of a score this time around works well, although the first film is just as notable for its ability to be just as dramatic without a score.

    The story in Bride of Frankenstein is much more sprawling and epic than in the first film. That fact neither makes it better or worse, but pleasantly different compared to Frankenstein's relatively tight, almost claustrophobic plot (which is appropriate for the subject matter). While Karloff's zombie-like muteness from Frankenstein was perfect in that context, it makes sense to have him mature here, and provides for some fantastic scenes, such as his interaction with the blind hermit (O.P. Heggie). Whale also chose to be much more literal and straightforward with the ethical and religious subtexts of the plot, and this film is notable for the large amount of verbal and visual references to God and Christianity--the visual references include the monster being hoisted on a "pole" as if being crucified, the monster descending into a grave with a crucifix looming over him, and a crucifix over a bed upon which the camera lingers.

    I actually prefer to think of Frankenstein and Bride of Frankenstein as two halves or a single film, and given their short running times, they can be viewed back to back in about two and a half hours. If you haven't seen either one yet, you owe it to yourself to watch them at least once.
  • Everything went right; from the opening,where Lanchester plays Mary Wollstonecraft Shelley with a gleam in her eye, and overly sweet sarcasm, to the beginning of the sequel, where Karloff is thought dead, to Lanchesters Nefertiti hair near the end , her priceless reactions.

    Karloff is excellent as a monster wanting a mate. Una O'Connor is a scream as Minnie, the old biddy who is screeching to see the Monster killed, then shrieks when she spots the Monster. She is told to shut up at least five times in the film. Ernest Thesiger as Dr. Pretorius is a great mix of horror and humor; he robs graves, and also swigs gin out of laboratory beakers, has supper on top of a coffin, gets the Monster to have cigars with him.

    Franz Waxmans' playful score, the cinematography and set design that are both reminiscent of "The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari" (1919), Everything works. The perfect mix of horror and humor.
  • Though it differs considerably from Mary Shelley's original novel, Universal's 1931 monster movie 'Frankenstein' is an absolute classic whose cultural importance can't be overstated. To my embarrassment it took me a long time to get around to watching it; I've certainly never seen any of its sequels, including 'The bride of Frankenstein,' but I recognize how paramount this is, too, in cinema history. I love the concept, borrowing slightly again from Shelley, and further smaller moments beyond the central idea that of course carried greater weight in the author's tome. It's also pleasing that Boris Karloff and especially Colin Clive return. Like its predecessor, the production design and art direction are terrific, altogether impeccable; all contributions from those behind the scenes, emphatically including costume design and hair and makeup work, are vibrant and memorable. In my opinion 'Bride' falls well short compared to the first movie, but it's still solid enough, and I can understand why it, too, is broadly held in such high esteem.

    I admit I have a harder time with this sequel just on the basis of the major tonal shift. The characterization of the monster has notably changed from just a few years prior, not least as it is ham-handedly incorporated into the comedic edge that doesn't comport with the straightforward sci-fi/horror vibes of the prior picture. More than that, the tone distinctly varies from one scene to the next - even within the few minutes of the climactic sequence! - to the point of feeling confused about itself. In fairness, maybe I wouldn't take quite as harsh a view if I could separate the two titles more in my mind. But one is made to take the monster less seriously; the shrill character of Minnie is unnecessary, and though portrayed well by Una O'Connor, I'd rather they weren't here at all. Dr. Pretorius' collection is a fine demonstration of capable visual effects, but are gauche in excess of what I can bear. Even the deliberate injection of religious symbolism into the feature feels downright extraneous, and forced.

    That 'Bride' jukes to the right, diverging from the feel of 'Frankenstein,' is unfortunate, for if there were more consistency then the revisiting of other notions from Shelley would have surely come off better, too. Yet this arguably isn't even the worst issue here, as the central plot is sidelined for a significant portion of the length without enough substance to claim its place. The character after whom the film is named doesn't even appear on-screen until the very last minutes; this would be more forgivable if the rest of the movie were up to the task, but I don't think that it is. Why, Clive is given decidedly less to do here; Ernest Thesiger takes more prominence as Dr. Pretorius and outshines the returning star. When all is said and done - where 'Frankenstein' is an earnest classic of the genre, this feels more like an easily distracted cheesy 50s B-movie, only with better production values.

    I hate to even say it, but I feel a bit disappointed. It's regrettable that so iconic a character as the Bride is relegated to so little time in so modest a feature. Elsa Lanchester at least does a fine job of making an impression with the few minutes she has; would that she had more. Even with other flaws on hand, all that would have been necessary for 'The bride of Frankenstein' to come off better would have been for it to maintain the same approach to storytelling as the producers had achieved for its antecedent. That it goes a different way is subjectively disagreeable; that it can't find a singular voice in and of itself is outright tawdry. I'd love to say that I like this more than I do, but I just don't think the storytelling is very strong, and in my mind there's nothing more important. For the place it holds in cinematic and cultural history 'The bride of Frankenstein' is still very much worth checking out, with the caveat that it's a sorry few steps down from what it could have been. Come for the bride, stay for the bride - but mind the interval.
  • Universal Studio in the height of the Hollywood Studio System was famous for three things that kept it in the black besides those famous studio tours that survive to this day. The Deanna Durbin musicals, the Abbott&Costello comedies and those great Gothic horror films with Dracula, The Wolfman, The Mummy and most of all Mary Shelley's Frankenstein. Those sets were used over and over again, you can recognize them if you're a real student of the genre.

    Although some have criticized it, I rather like the beginning of Bride of Frankenstein in a Regency drawing room where the creative minds of Lord Byron, Percy Shelley, and Mary Shelley are meeting. Of course the subject gets around to how she would continue the story, it just can't end right there. So while Gavin Gordon as Byron and Douglas Walton as Percy Shelley listen, Elsa Lanchester as Mary Shelley starts to tell about the further doings of her characters.

    Of course Colin Clive as Victor Frankenstein thought dead when he was brought out of the ruin, turns out to be alive, but in need of medical attention. The monster is also not dead, he's been put together even stronger than an ordinary human. As is first two victims he kills the parents of the little girl he killed in the original Frankenstein film.

    While Clive is recuperating at home under the care of his wife played here by Valerie Hobson, Clive receives a visit from his former teacher and mentor who originally aroused his interest in experiments along this line. Ernest Thesiger is Doctor Praetorious, a scientist whose reputation is more dubious than that of Frankenstein. He's been experimenting with bringing people back to life and he shows his little creations to Frankenstein. What he describes sounds a lot like cloning Mini Mes as Doctor Evil did. But DNA was not heard of back in the early 19th century.

    He thinks they ought to combine there efforts and create a female back from the dead to be a mate for the Frankenstein monster. Who knows if the big guy gets a little something something at home, maybe he won't have quite such a bad attitude. When the monster after wreaking havoc again on the countryside is finally back in the Frankenstein laboratory, he insists on a 'friend' for himself. It's a real mess that Clive has gotten himself in again.

    Bride Of Frankenstein with that incredible climax when the monster tries to court his bride will still give you frights for weeks on watching it. The Gothic horror atmosphere that James Whale created on the Universal sets is still capable of creeping one out.

    Boris Karloff did not repeat his monster role after this and Colin Clive died in 1937 before the next Frankenstein film was made. Still the cycle may have been the most successful of all the Universal monster franchises. It certainly my favorite of all of them.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    Everything expands. Following a pretty terrible prologue involving the Shelley's and Lord Byron during a storm as an excuse to "In Our Previous Episode" the movie, James Whale returns to the expressionistic sound stages of his iconic Frankenstein universe, where true to sequel form the main players manage to escape the death defined for them in the previous installment, the body count rises, and the world is opened up to more possibilities. Herein is the blind violinist so expertly parodied in Young Frankenstein, the Bride so iconic that despite her maybe two minutes of screen-time manages to seer herself into the viewers mind, and Dr. Pretorius, the guy who, less Dr. Frankenstein's previous salvation be a tad sentimental to the audience, enjoys being pure evil incarnate. The production values go up, too, as in general acting, editing, and sound improve against an already striking set.

    Technically, this movie is somewhat closer to Shelley's book than the first film. The monster learns language, and the arranged marriage works as well as any modern arranged marriage would (i.e., it doesn't). This is not really a significant factor in the movie, however, since the Universal Monster's Frankenstein Monster Universe is far removed from Shelley's original prose, so this sequel of course operates better as a further fleshing out of Whale's created world as opposed to a mimic of Shelley's. Pretorius and his two Igors instead of one is a strange demon to appear on Frankenstein's shoulder, but it does lead to some fantastic set-ups, including a chilling and out-of-nowhere reveal of doll-sized people grown from Pretorius'...*Ahem*....seed.

    Definitely a kooky and campy outing, I can see why people tend to like this better than the original. Certainly the macabre humor hits a lot of high notes.

    --PolarisDiB
  • Warning: Spoilers
    "The Bride of Frankenstein" is so hypnotic in its eeriness, so intelligent in daringness and capable in wackiness that it had me puzzled for a while, caught in a long brainstorming in order to decide whether it was better than the original, as it's often said to be, or not.

    To put it simply, it's better because it's not just brilliant but brilliant in the way it doesn't prepare you to its own brilliance. After the first fifteen minutes, I thought James Whale was parodying himself, I couldn't think of Una O'Connor as a comic relief but rather a symptomatic attempt to deconstruct in the most over-the-top way all the established notions of the predecessor. And when Doctor Pretorius (Ernest Thesiger) showed his little squeaking 'homunculi', there was no doubt anymore, something was too outrageous about "The Bride" not to be intentional, and it took me some time to appreciate it.

    Then the story slowly and confidently unfolds its most wicked twists with a score and a photography so penetrative we're immediately lured into it. The Monster saves a woman from drowning as to make up for his previous crime, he tries to make friends, making an actual friend out of a blind hermit in a touching and satisfying emotional interlude, then the Monster learns how to speak, longing for a mate and domesticating his own terror of fire, mirroring our own rooting process. And finally, twenty minutes before its conclusion, action rises up to an ultimate spellbinding ride, reminding us that the film was after all about "The Bride of Frankenstein", in case we forgot... I think I almost did. In fact, the film was so visually and narratively dense that it makes you easily forget how little screen-time the Bride has.

    And yet she's still what makes the greatest impression of all, which says a lot about the movie and its status in the ghostly Pantheon. The image of the Bride, played by (but not credited as) Elsa Lanchester, with the towering hair and the trademark streaks, her robotic movements as if she was still infused with electric power and her unforgettable scream when her eyes meet Frankensteins', all these moments rival with the iconic "It's alive!" scene from the first. It goes even further than that, I mentioned in my review that the 'alive' scene was perhaps the most climactic non-climax scene ever, but here it's played for the climax and you can tell James Whale made the process even more heart-pounding with the apparatus and the lightning effects on the two professors' faces playing like Morse-like flashy allegories of the rhythm of our own hearts. As far as our ears and eyes were concerned, what a sequence!

    Indeed, when you watch "The Bride of Frankenstein", you have the feeling nothing was left to chance and James Whale knew he had to outdo the original in every single department... and he miraculously did. We don't get the original disclaimer from Van Sloane but a surrealist discussion between Lord Byron and Mary Shelley played by a pretty and natural-looking Elsa Lanchester, the introduction uses flashbacks from the original film but the cast of Lanchester is a masterstroke in the way it points out that even the loveliest creature can have a monstruous counterpart. Van Sloane who played a rather bland tutor is replaced by Thesiger who, no pun intended, steals Clive's thunder and becomes a fascinating and unforgettable mad scientist figure, indulging to a few hammy and over the top dialogues, but indispensable as the foils to Frankenstein's retrieved sanity.

    And Frankenstein, of course, played by Boris Karloff (credited as Karloff), like Garbo, finally talks and while it doesn't deprive him from his sensitive side, it highlights a new tragic dimension as he can put words in his needs but doesn't have them fulfilled for all that, and finally concludes the film with a line that represents his only possible existential impulse sealing his fate as a tragic movie figure... and only getting from his Bride a hiss magnificently ad-libbed by Lanchester like Hopkins would do a few years later to make the 'chianti' line even more memorable, some remember "We belong dead", I'll remember that hiss. And yes, she's only there for a few minutes but she marked horror movies forever, becoming the first female monster of cinema... created by two men, doesn't that ring a bell?

    In "Interview With the Vampire", a male vampire sucked the blood out of a little girl's neck and his companion provided the taste of blood that would save her life albeit turning her to a vampire. While the homoerotic subtext between Louis and Lestat couldn't even escape from a numb attention span, the move was even more daring as it featured a conception of life from two men, as if only in the movies, the miracle could ever happen... and be plausible in its realm of fiction. If not directly based on Mary Shelley's book, "The Bride of Frankenstein", sixty years later, proved to be of similar boldness and it is a mystery whether James Whale intended it as a wink to his own sexuality.

    But while in my first review, I insisted on the sexual innuendo more than the religious undertones, the sequel creates a fascinating parallel between Frankenstein and Adam with the two men creating an Eve-like figure. The religious aspect of Frankenstein is even more apparent in scenes where the Bible is mentioned in a disdainful way as if there was no difference between Mary Shelley's fiction, the one she's about to tell in the opening and the story of Frankenstein, making the whole film an even more revolutionary for its time, so daring and so magnificent in terms of special effects.

    "The Bride of Frankenstein" is a landmark of the horror genre, fascinating to deconstruct but works even better as an entertaining flick.
  • This is a pretty solid movie, one of the few old-time horror films that still stands up to today's standards. The cinematography is excellent with many fascinating shadow-like shots, particularly with facial closeups.

    A surprise is that the actual "bride" of Frankenstein is only created and then seen in the final minutes of the film. The title can be misleading as we expect most of the story to be about her. Instead, most of the movie is simply a sequel to the original Frankenstein, picking up where that film left off with the monster somehow surviving his fiery doom.

    I would like to have seen more of the "bride," who was fascinating to view. Elsa Lanchester, who played that character, also played Mary Shelley in the beginning of the film.

    The most interesting character, I thought, was the devil-like Dr. Praetorious, played by Ernest Thesiger. Now this guy had a true face of a "mad scientist!"

    Most films need to be trimmed 10-15 minutes but here is an exception. This movie needed another 10 to 15 minutes tacked on, so we could see more of the "bride." It's still considered one of the best horror films of all time and, at just 74 minutes, would certainly be worth your time to check it out if you've seen it.
  • Bored_Dragon17 November 2018
    Overrated

    AMC Filmsite placed this 1935 horror flick amongst the top 100 best movies of all time. I realize that there are as many different tastes as there are people on Earth, but still - WTF?! Even for its time, this is average at best.

    5/10
An error has occured. Please try again.