Frankenstein

Rating:
Summary: A Memorable Monster; A Magnificient DVD
Review: Although I have seen better prints of the film, this DVD issue of Universal Studio's famous FRANKENSTEIN is a magnificient package that is sure to delight any fan of classic horror. The film itself has been restored for content, and the Skal-hosted documentary--which traces the story from Mary Shelly's famous novel through its numerous film incarnations--is a delight, including numerous interviews with various historians, critics, and Karloff's daughter. The bonus audio track by Rudy Behlmer is also quite interesting, as are the various biographies and notes, and although the short film BOO is a spurious mix of footage from NOSFERATU, DRACULA, THE CAT AND THE CANARY, and FRANKENSTEIN, it is an enjoyable little throw-away. All in all, it doesn't get much better than this.

As for the film itself, the production of FRANKENSTEIN was prompted by the incredible success of the earlier DRACULA--but where DRACULA is a rather problematic and significantly dated film, FRANKENSTEIN was and remains one of the most original horror films to ever emerge from Hollywood. Much of the credit for this goes to director James Whale, who by all accounts was deeply influenced by silent German film and his own traumatic experiences during World War I--and who mixed those elements with occasional flourishes of macabre humor to create a remarkably consistent vision of Mary Shelly's original novel.

Whale was extremely, extremely fortunate in his cast. Colin Clive was a difficult actor, but Whale not only managed to get him through the film but to draw from him his finest screen performance; Mae Clarke is a memorable Elizabeth; and Dwight Frye, so memorable in DRACULA, tops himself as Fritz. But all eyes here are on Boris Karloff as the monster. Karloff had been kicking around Hollywood for a decade, and although he appeared in quite a few films before FRANKENSTEIN he never really registered with the public. But in this role, acting under heavy make-up, weighed down by lead weights in his shoes and struts around his legs, and without a line of intelligible dialogue he offered a performance that transcended the word "monster." This is a suffering being, dangerous mainly through innocence of his own power and the way of the world, goaded from disaster to disaster to disaster. Even some seventy-plus years later, it is difficult to imagine any other actor in the part.

Karloff would play the monster again in two later films, one of them directed by Whale, but although THE BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN is a remarkable film in its own right, this is the original combination of talents and the original vision. Truly a national treasure, to be enjoyed over and over again. Strongly recommended.

Rating:
Summary: Classic tale of Dr. Frankenstein
Review: This is one of the first film adaptations of the Frankenstein novel by Mary Shelly, and one of the best. It portrays a scientist named Henry Frankenstein, isolated and obsessed over his strange experiments. He and his assistant Fritz, dig up dead bodies and use their parts to build a new human body. They end up stealing a criminal brain to use in their creation. Finally they bring it to life, even though Henry's wife, and friends warn this is not an affair humans should be involved with, they say leave creation for God. The monster eventually escaped and terrorizes the village, as they hunt for him. Frankenstein made this monster with his own hands, and now must destroy him.

This film is a classic, and is highly enjoyable. One of the first horror/science fiction films ever made, and has influences many others. The acting is great, and direction superb. The film is very fun to watch, and is quite risque for the time it was made. All film lovers should see this. I had no problems with it at all. 5 stars.

Rating:
Summary: "Frankenstein": Much more than just a classic monster movie
Review: I have come to the conclusion that the 1931 production of "Frankenstein" is one of the ten most important films of the 20th century. The rationale behind this is simply that the film version of the story of Frankenstein has almost completely replaced Mary Shelley's novel in the popular mind. Culturally the novel was important because it represented the paradigm shift away from magic and religion (represented by the Faust myth) to that of science. I have taught "Frankenstein" the novel several times and it was clear to me that the key question of the novel was which was Frankenstein's greater crime: creating the creature or abandoning it? For me the answer had always been the later, that Frankenstein had played god and then abandoned his "Adam." However, in this celebrated film version Dr. Frankenstein (Colin Clive) does not abandon the creature (Boris Karloff), although he does get away and accidentally drowns Little Maria. But escape is not the same thing as being abandoned. Consequently, the question I raised in class is moot and instead of provoking profound philosophical debate the movie codifies the dictum that there are some things man was not made to tamper with. This particular proposition can be traced back at least to the story of the Tower of Babel, but you can also find it in the tragedy of the Titanic. Meanwhile, back in the real world people "play god" all the time; not by reanimating dead tissue but with all sorts of medical and technological advances that should not be abandoned by their creators anymore than the creature. However, the debate, if it exists, is no longer held on a public level and the fault for, dear Brutus, I find in this film. We watch the film for Jack Pierce's stunning make-up job and Karloff's haunting performance, as well as the maniacal exultation of Clive's mad doctor screaming "It's alive! It's alive!" (the most famous line in a horror film ever?). But the film has had a profound cultural impact. It is perhaps not merely ironic but appropriately symbolic that the film ends in fire while the novel ends in ice and that the term Frankenstein is commonly used to mean the creature rather than the doctor, for the lesson of the character and the novel have both been replaced by the face you see on the cover of this videotape.

Rating:
Summary: Classic early talkie
Review: Frankenstein had life before this the second filmed version of Mary Shelley's novel (the first was a lost silent film). Originally Robert Florey was slated to direct and a young screenwriter by the name of John Huston had a hand in the early screenplay. Bela Lugosi was offered the role and it was announced as his follow up to Dracula. All of this, of course, never happened. Lugosi chose not to do the film and Florey moved along with him to his next project.

Stage director James Whale had just made his first feature film and chose Boris Karloff to play the monster. He cast Karloff after making a number of sketches of the actor's face in the role. Two careers were born along with the Monster. John Balderston's adaption plays fast and loose with the source material but it works. Jack Pierce's make up for Karloff was astounding for its time rivaling the best work of Lon Chaney.

The film is a bit stiff and static but then so were many early talkies. The sound cameras were too cumbersome to move around a lot. Still, the photography and Whale's direction are both strong. It's clear, though, that Whale is still a little unsure of himself as a director as the film is packed with dialog (much of it unnecessary). Performances are uniformly excellent with Dwight Frye notable for his scenery chewing as the hunchbacked assistant to Dr. Frankenstein. Colin Clive plays Frankenstein as a jittery, nervous high strung individual (much like Clive himself no doubt).

The extras are great on the DVD. The commentary is always interesting and provides much insight into the era (including the difficulties when the film was reissued. The Hays Commission dictated that the film be edited prior to re-release eliminating the sequence between the Monster and the little girl at the well). Frankenstein isn't Whale or Karloff's best film but clearly one of their most important.

Rating:
Summary: Gothic Classic!
Review: The film is based on the first half of Mary Shelley's gothic novel Frankenstein where Dr. Frankenstein reanimates life. The being that he creates becomes a product of its' environment while continuing to learn through trial and error. Unfortunately, its' errors become magnified by its' physical attributions, which causes unrest among those it comes in contact with through simple attempts at communication. Whale's horror creation was made over 70 years ago; however, one catch phrase, "It's alive!", that terrified audiences in the 30s, still produces chills in audiences today. Therefore, regardless of age, the film still provides a tremendous cinematic experience.

Rating:
Summary: A Classic
Review: Karloff is, of course, tremendous in his role but the other actors also pull of very strong performances. Clive and Frye are excellent.

The other star is James Whale. His direction is brilliant.

Rating:
Summary: An influential yet imperfect horror classic
Review: Although it does not pack the punch today that it did back in 1931, Frankenstein is a true horror classic that any real horror fan will appreciate. It is one of the rare films in this genre to cross the border seamlessly into popular mainstream culture. Of course, much of the credit must go to Mary Shelley, and it is rather unfortunate that the movie that defines Frankenstein to the masses possesses little of the essence of the original story. In the movie, the story is that of the monster first and foremost, and his creator is portrayed as a genius who conducted his experiments in some sort of lunatic phase. The depth of both man and monster and their complex interrelationship is much deeper in the original tale, which revolves around Dr. Frankenstein, for whom the book was named (the monster, as everyone should know already, is never given a name). One can't blame the movie makers for ignoring the human drama of the original story because what sells is Boris Karloff as the grotesque fiend bent on revenge and murder. I am so glad to see the scene with the girl at the lake included here, although it almost seems out of place--it is here (and no where else in the movie) that the monster betrays his humanity, which makes the death of the innocent young girl doubly tragic--had the humanity theme been developed more fully (and there was time for it since the movie only runs 71 minutes), this could have been a much more powerful, even more memorable film. Early audiences did not get to see the lake scene, and I can't imagine the movie without it because it is still a pivotal moment with important repercussions in the movie's concluding moments.

The movie actually begins with a dapper fellow warning audience members that what they are about to see may shock and horrify them; I love that introduction, even though it seems quaint by today's standards. Colin Clive is terrific as young Dr. Frankenstein, particularly in the scene in which the monster is brought to life before the horrified eyes of the doctor's fiancée, mentor, and friend. Who hasn't seen clips of the "It's alive! It's alive!" scene at some point in their lives? Boris Karloff is fantastic as well, even though all he has to do is stumble around and make growling noises every so often; truth be told, it is costume designer Jack Pierce even more so than Karloff who really brings the archetypal Frankenstein's monster to life . It is Frederick Kerr as Baron Frankenstein, Dr. Frankenstein's father, however, who steals the show in my eyes. I found him to be delightful and hilarious, complaining much of the time about his son's behavior and the bother of being the most important man in the village. His trip to his son's laboratory, particularly his climb up the staircase, is extremely funny.

Along with Dracula, this movie is one of the most famous horror movies ever made, but I would not call it one of the genre's greatest. Had Boris Karloff not played the monster (and thank heavens Bela Lugosi declined the role originally), it may not have been nearly as successful. Those unfamiliar with Shelley's novel probably enjoy Frankenstein more than I do. The whole "playing God" theme is minimized in the movie, as is the treatment of the monster as a victim rather than a mere brute. One can't argue too much with success, however. Nor can Frankenstein's seminal influence be doubted; from the early grave-robbing scene to the later shots of torch-bearing villagers pursuing the monster, Frankenstein has served as a veritable horror movie template for countless films through the years.

Rating:
Summary: Junkenstein
Review: Hi! I'm your Movie Review Girl! Are you tired of real drama, good actors, and deep dialogue? Do you poop out at movie parties? Is your good taste unpopular? The answer to all your problems is in this little movie. Yes, Frankenstein. Frankenstein contains staged drama, stiff actors, parroted dialogue and lots of growling by an emotionless monster. With Frankenstein you can earn your status as a classy movie viewer. All you do is take five minutes after every Hitchcock movie. It's so tasteless, too. Just like dryer lint! So why don't you join the thousands of bright, misled people and buy a great big DVD of Frankenstein tomorrow? Remember that name! That's Frank-en-stein.

Rating:
Summary: Are the viewers of this film equipped with abnormal brains?
Review: I can't believe this movie gets a rating of 5 stars!! Honestly I think this movie is silly, ridiculous, badly acted, and a waste of time. Now I do know this was made long ago, and so I understand that back then they didn't do movies as well, but still I think there was lots of room for improvement in this movie. The plot was so shallow and undeveloped and disjointed. The actors, for the most part sounded like schoolchildren do;just reciting lines with no realness or emotion behind it. Though Henry Frankenstein at times did convince me he was a lunatic. The monster was ugly, yes, but I didn't find him very good, all he did was go around growling. You never got to understand what he was like as a character and what exactly he wanted in life. I am not trying to upset anyone, but again I say this movie was a waste of time and was quite laughable throughout. I am 39 years old and I believe this is the first time I have seen this, though I may have seen it when I was a young child. I would never spend money on buying this film. Just borrowed it from the library.

This was counted as one of America's top 100 movies???WHY??? I recommend it only as an example of deplorable movie making that for some reason has survived because of it's campy-ness or because of media hype.

Rating:
Summary: The Standard!
Review: This is, without question, the definitive gothic horror classic that set the standard. My grandmother once told me when she went to see this movie that upon first sight of Karloff, two women literally fled the theatre. We've heard the stories of the studio sending plants to theatres to do this, but this was in rural Kentucky. Frankenstein explores the deep recesses of our minds, like what it would be like to have control over life and death, in essence to have the control as God. When you couple the questions and topics this film brought out with the stellar performances given by Karloff, Colin Clive, Dwight Frye and the rest of the cast, you end up with a film for the ages. Frankenstein stands as one of the greatest horror movies of all time today, and it will still be standing tall a hundred years from now.