TYTD Reviews

Through October I decided to revisit all 7 of the continuity ‘Childs Play/ Chucky’ movies as it’d been a few years and, I’ve always had a soft spot for the loundmouthed lil stabber.

Well, in 2019, the studio execs decided to see if they could strike out on their own be revitilising the ‘Childs Play’ name and branding and relaunching the franchise with a new entry that was seperate from the current ‘Chucky’ continuity (which span off into a TV series) and tried to reimagine the story in a more contemporary setting. The red letter media guys referred to this as a ‘cover’ and im struggling really to think of a better way to put it really.

Anyway; the film follows Karen and Andy Barkley, a single mother with a tech obsessed child who’ve just moved into a new neighbourhood with the aim of starting life afresh. Around the same time a tech company are launching the ‘Buddi’ doll, a smart home compatible doll that is aimed at being your childs friend, while also acting as a tech butler. they can turn your lights on and off, set off your vaccume, order your groceries…anything your smart home can do, Buddi can do.

And its here where the story really takes shape, as the mass manufacturing plant in Veitnam houses a disgruntled worker who, on finding out he’s being fired, removes all the safety protocols from one rogue Buddi doll before ending his own life. As you can probably piece together THAT Buddi doll (which by chance decides to name itself ‘Chucky’) winds up with the Barkleys.

At first things are fine, but slowly it becomes apparent that, without the safety protocols in place, Chucky doesnt seem to know right from wrong, and doesnt seem to understand the subtlety of the human language. Learning about murder, swearing and deception, without learning that they are in fact, very bad things to do. And..thats it, thats the movie. Andy slowly finding out that ‘Chucky’ has broken programming and has been killing people Andy has a hard time with in order to try and make him happy, and Chucky learning ever increasingly awful stuff that just makes him worse.

And I think the millstone thats hung around this films neck is simply that its called a ‘Childs Play’ movie. the total reimagining of the plot to remove the serial killer and supernatural aspects to this just end up making a sloppily put together production that doesnt seem to really know what it wants to be.

The pacing is BEYOND slow, crawling at times to a finale that, in my opinion was quite underwhelming. The tone dances between dark humour and horror. But the style of dark humour wasnt really for me, and the horror felt a bit forced in places. There are serveral REALLY weird sub plots that dont really develop into anything and feel a bit half baked.

The characters all feel a bit one note and underdeveloped too, they do feel like they belong in the world the film is trying to sell, but they dont really feel fully fleshed out to me.

The whole concept of the Buddi doll going rogue is fun, but its handled a bit haphazardly, by the 3rd act, the dolls just evil for some reason…It stops being about a rogue AI not interpreting human interactions correctly, and just turns into a generic killer doll movie. Not to mention the continuity issues throughout like…If Chucky is LITERALLY just a doll…How does he have the downward pressure to stab anyone. the heaviest dolls are only about as weighty as a couple large bags of sugar…and this things like 2.5 feet tall, so how can it simultaineously be a doll thats light enough for small children to pick up and carry around, but heavy enough to keep a teenager pinned to the floor, and heavy enough to puncture someones ribcage?

Equally, how can a doll that looks like it has 4 points of leg articulation (at most) spend most of the film awkwardly limp/waddling from location to location, but in the last 5 minutes, suddenly gains the agility of Neo from the Matrix?! Its only a movie…I should really just relax…BUT STILL!

Despite the scripting issues, its fairly standard fare for the rest of the picture. the Direction and Cine are to studio quality, though I did feel the edit was a little inconsistent and incoherent at times which really threw me out. I feel like the film either should have been a bit shorter, or quite a bit longer to really flesh out exactly whats happening on screen. but at 90 minutes it feels awkwardly limp. the sequence building is too slowburn for me and, as mentioned, that 3rd act finale really does come out of nowhere.

Almost all of the performances feel phoned in, Aubrey Plaza is probably the best performer here as Karen, but even then she’s playing it a bit stereotyped to the ‘cool mom’ vibe…shes solid here..But theres nothing here that hasnt been seen in two dozen marvel movies up to this point. Brian Tyree Henry is the real star of the show as cop Mike Norris, hitting that sweet spot of charming and charismatic but with a slight stoic edge. I really liked him here honestly.

The child actors, I wont comment much on, other than to say they were kinda sorta fine enough. Not naming names, but this isnt the best ive seen, nor is it the worst.

Mark Hamill as Chucky is *fine*. He’s no Brad Douriff honestly, but he has his own vibe and apart from the issue of him occaisonally drifting into his ‘Joker’ voice. he more or less does what the film needed him to do. I’d be interested in seeing him develop the character/software in a sequel honestly.

The soundtracks probably the best thing this films got, but unfortunately, it wasnt enough to fully win me over.

The 2019 ‘Childs Play’ feels like the bones of a good idea rushed out the door before the meat was even set. its overly slow in places, and doesnt quite seem to know which route it really wants to take, overt references to Star Wars and other Orion pictures productions such as ‘Killer Clowns from Outer Space’ and ‘Robocop’ dont help matters, and even the best of this film is quite ‘Beige’ honestly. I didnt hate it, but I really didnt care for it either. I think i’d likely revisit this one in future to see if I mellow to it a bit. But for now, you aint beating that Mancini/Douriff combo.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/childs-play-2019/

Somewhere in between the overlapping circles of ‘Thriller: A Cruel Picture’, ‘Last House on Dead End Street’ and ‘Bloodsucking Freaks’. We find ourselves in the realm of ‘The Sinful Dwarf’ a…STRANGE film for lack of a better descriptive. I wasnt entirely sure what I was getting into with this one, but when I revved up my severin Bluray copy of this and found that it contained no subtitle OR language options. I knew that what I was about to witness needed only the language of vision to clarify it.

The plots pretty brief. The film follows a couple who are running low on cash and forced to stay at a sleazy run down boarding house while the husband tries to earn them enough money to move them along. What the couple dont realise is that the house is in fact a front for a huge drug smuggling/brothel operation maintained by the titular ‘Sinful Dwarf’ who is the son of the bordinghouse owner.

Essentially, he finds girls on the streets, lures them back to the bording house, where he knocks them out, drugs them up on Heroin to make them dependent on him, before he pimps their drug addled bodies out to anyone willing to pay the price of admission. Naturally the Dwarf takes a liking to the wife of the couple who have just moved in, and when said wife begins hearing the horror filled shrieks of the women being violated in the attic, she begins to investigate….aaaaand you can imagine where this goes from here.

And, I do somewhat feel this films reputation preceeds it. I was led to believe this was a fairly hardcore grubby and seedy little picture. But the elements that MAKE it grubby have all been done in other pictures (like the ones I mentioned in the opening of this review) MUCH more effectively. with that in mind, it kind of makes this film interesting in the sense of it breaking several taboo barriers WELL ahead of its time, but equally a little bit ‘done’ as a result.

The scripts a bit overly basic, once you get the above plot out of the way, it essentially just turns into a rinse and repeat ‘The wife goes to investigate, has to leave before finding out the truth, cue extended rape scene’. It does this 2-3 times before we actually get to the finale, which WAS well handled I felt, but also left me kind of wishing that level of scripting was present across the runtime.

Theres a brief subplot about the couples marriage slowly breaking down as the wife feels neglected and the husband continues to flounder in securing work. But thats never really fully realised and is ultimately cut short for the 3rd act finale.

I watched the ‘European XXX’ cut of this, wanting an ‘authentic’ sinful dwarf experience, but was actually kind of dissapointed to see that the ‘additional footage’ was literally just 3 scenes badly intercut into the wider released version, two of which were incredibly murky hardcore sequences that added nothing to the plot, and one was just an extension of a non hardcore sequence that REALLY added nothing.

The pacing is slow burn, and it feels across the runtime like it might be building to some kind of broader subtext interpretation…But, I honestly dont think it does. I couldnt interpret a message out of this film beyond what was being shown on screen…Not from the elements in play at least. The film opens relatively strong, idles through most of the 2nd act, and ends in a way that I didnt dislike…but I didnt exactly ‘love’ either.

add into this that the tones a bit all over the place, the comedy isnt nearly present enough to act as a contrast to the darker moments, and the darker moments dont really compliment the kitchen sink drama elements much, it all feels a bit ‘addled’ like your part remembering a more coherent movie while slowly falling into a deep sleep. Im not entirely sure how I feel about it, I feel a rewatch may somewhat sharpen things up a bit. But I ultimately came away from it feeling simultaineously like i’d seen it all before, and that I didnt WANT to see anymore.

The characters are all fairly one note, they have their pitch and they stick to it for most of the runtime, I kind of wish there had been more of an exploration of the Dwarfs day to day work, like how he manages his drug deals and how he captures the women. more of an exploration of his thought processes, and in particular a bit more of an investment into his attraction to the wife. Because they hint it a couple of times softly at the beginning of the film, and then just flat out turn him sex nuts in the final act for her. Given the film shows he’s into voyerism, it would have made sense to have really fleshed him out a bit more in that regard.

The direction too is overly basic and VERY grimey, to the point it looks sickly, theres a slightly off-greenish quality to the film elements, that changes to a harsh blue/purple on the hardcore inserts. The prints scratched, smeared. dust filled. and the film is riddled with dirty early 70s cold looking sets that just make you feel like you need a shower with bleach and a scourer by the halfway point. I’d say that was a triumph on the directors part, but in reality, those kind of locations were so common at that point in time, I dont feel like the credit could really be earned.

Composition is messy, unfocussed. shots seem to be set up for whats practical in the location, rather than what would work for the story, and as mentioned the hardcore inserts have been shot overly dark, meaning when it cuts to the dirty stuff, you have NO idea what your actually looking at. Colour is murky and uninteresting, the sequences constructed bluntly with harsh edits that dont always match or work. it feels like it was cut together by someone who’d never used a bench before. I WILL however give the film credit for its opening title sequence, which was simplistic, but VERY effective.

As for the performances? Well…its basically Torben Bille as the Dwarf who steals the show, and that isnt saying much because most of the time he’s basically locked into ‘swivel eyed loon’ mode and is thrashing about screaming, gurning or hobbling from scene to scene. He’s the best performance in this thing, and It feels laboured. So you can imagine that the rest of the cast range from bored, to genuinely confused as to what they’re shooting.

I REALLY liked the experimental noisecore electronic score that mixed whimsical child like compositions with droning screeching. I felt it really helped give the film a bit more life. But it ultimately wasnt enough to fully sell this thing to me.

I think, if you havent seen ‘The Sinful Dwarf’ and like films that are a bit more controversial such as ‘Thriller’, ‘Salo’, ‘Last house on dead end street’ or similar, you may get your moneys worth…I didnt exactly feel cheated. But I did feel like its infamy had been played up a bit beyond what was actually on screen. I have absolutely seen worse than this. and theres absolutely better controversial films out there.

Definitely one i’ll need to revisit sometime.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/the-sinful-dwarf/

Fresh off the mail truck, its another AGFA trailer show set. This time focussing more broadly on genre cinema trailers and oddities from the intermission dust bin. The team over at AGFA have put their distinctive trippy slant onto what would otherwise largely be skipped over, and I think they’ve largely done a solid job.

Its a little overlong at an hour and sixteen minutes for this kind of thing, but theres a LOT of VERY enjoyable snags in here, stuff i’d never seen or heard of and movies I now REALLY need to try and track down. I think I liked this one more than their previous ‘Horror’ oriented trailer show, and the short films included on the set were equally enjoyable to boot.

I still think their high water mark with this kind of styled presentation is their ‘Its Intermission time!’ supercut and the ‘AGFA Christmas tape’ release they did exclusively through Vimeo (I pray to this day that the latter of that gets a physical release at some point as its a TOTAL vibe and equally highly recommended)

But this? this was fun, its a good time killer, has a firm tongue in cheek sense of humour about itself. I liked it. Worth seeking out if you can find it.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/the-cult-of-agfa-trailer-show/

With Halloween done and dusted, i’m left to sift through the remnants of the post ‘spooky season’ Bluray and DVD hangover pile. and given that this year I decided to revisit my ‘Universal Monsters: Essentials Collection’ set as part of the festivities, I’ve found that, by November 1st, the only film left in the set that I havent actively reviewed on here is their 1943 take on ‘The Phantom of the Opera’…and much like a trick or treaters sack. By the end of the day on November 1st, the good candy is gone, and im left with the unwrapped salt water taffy and a leaking sticky can of V8 from the one house that didnt get any candy in and had to scramble the cupboards to find ANYTHING to give out…I dont like Universals 1943 adaptation of ‘The Phantom of the Opera’

Now, dont get me WRONG. its nothing that this film PERSONALLY does wrong that puts me off it. If anything this is a very lavish production. A rich and sumptuous offering with grand sets, clear and semi creative direction. distinct cine and a stunning turn by Claude Rains as the titular Phantom.

My issue is purely around the pacing, and more importantly, the filling. Im still honestly a little confused as to why they included this film in the ‘Universal monsters essential collection’ set, given that the only real ties it has to the series is that this is a romance/tragedy with some darker elements… and ‘The Mummy’ and ‘Dracula’ are also romance/tragedies with more pronounced horror elements. but thats about it. All the other films in this boxset are presented in B&W, this is the only one presented in colour, while it *could* be said that this has horror elements. I’d really rather disagree, it doesnt have the vibe of any of the other universal horror movies either before or after it. It feels really more like they just wanted to put this film out, knew it probably wouldnt sell well as a standalone release, so they just shoved it onto this Universal monsters boxset because it has a creepy guy in a mask stalking a singer…thats seemingly the only tie…well…other than Claude Rains being in it.

Like I say, Direction? stunning. Cine? rich, colourful, well composed. the soundtrack is distinct the performances, more than suitable. Its the script that puts me off this.

Its not so much the plot, thats fine, the tone is VERY stuffy and overly dry with only a few moments of comedy help progress things, the problem I have is this film clocks in at 91 minutes (easily the longest ‘monster’ movie of this era) and it just seems to go on and on and on and on. WAY too many elongated operatic numbers, WAY too many scenes of people just idely talking in luxurious penthouses.

I lost track of the characters fairly early on because they keep introducing people who maybe get a line or two and then vanish. By the hour mark I was clockwatching. by an hour and a quarter i’d actively given up on thinking this film was going to turn it around, and I rounded up the 90 minutes BEGGING for it to finish sooner.

The characters (outside of Rains performance) are all overly dry and simplistic, the drama isnt nearly enough to hold me as an audience member. its just a slow death march to the inevitability we all know is coming with these characters from about 10 minutes in. And whereas the other universal monster movies have that same problem, the OTHER universal monster movies at least have the fortune of interesting characters, eccentric performances or unique stories to tell to help get the audience to their end point. This had no such luck.

I cant even really say ‘Well, it was in a horror boxset, but im sure if I was in the mood for this kind of film, i’d probably enjoy it more.’ Because films like ‘House of Wax’ or ‘The Mad Magician’ came out roughly around the same time as that (give or take a year or 5) and THEY offer a similar tale, but utilise the time in much more interesting and distinctive ways.

The majority of my score here is going purely on the technical aspects of the production, which for the time are very impressive…But its rare I find a film so against my own interests as a film goer that I feel almost repelled from it. This really wasnt my rodeo. I cant recommend it. There are other films that do this kind of thing significantly better.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/phantom-of-the-opera/

Watched on Thursday October 31, 2024.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/halloween-2018/3/

Watched on Thursday October 31, 2024.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/halloween-iii-season-of-the-witch/5/

Watched on Thursday October 31, 2024.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/criminally-insane/1/

Did the world really need a sequel to 1993’s ‘Hocus Pocus’? Its a question i’ve been wrestling with since the project was announced back in 2020/2021. But! whether I wanted one or not, it happened. and now having actually sat down and seen what 29(ish) years of planning for a sequel to what was a genuinely enjoyable family comedy has produced. I think this was a valuable lesson in ‘Just because an audience demands it, doesnt mean it needs to exist.’

The film picks up 29 years after the events of the first film with a new group of classmates who are heavily interested in the ‘occult’ when one of the gang (Cassie) splits from the trio because the magic stuff is ‘cringe’ and weird. the group feel deflated. However after a VERY ‘special’ birthday gift from the owner of a local witchcraft museum/store, the Sanderson sisters are ressurected and out for vengence against the decendent of a reverend who wronged them some 300 years prior.

And. At it’s heart. this film has the fantastic bones of a story. it has all the elements that would make a sequel to ‘Hocus Pocus’ work present. We have a bit more lore brought in, a plot around friendship, covens and being your authentic self. The original cast for the Sanderson sisters reprising their roles after all this time. and it pains me to say that while all these elements are present (and good!) the end product has sadly been focus grouped and sponsorshipped into a very dry end product that feels like its a tribute act to the first film, rather than something that could stand on its own two feet.

The script at its core is fine, I like the idea of the sisters reignighting a blood feud after centuries and how that line develops, I liked Becca and her group of friends. I thought they were animate and interesting. But the pain of 21st century ‘marvelfication’ of disneys output plagues this film relentlessly. Self aware 4th wall breaking is CHRONIC and way heavier handed than the occasional moments from the first film. the script cant go more than 5 minutes without referencing the events of the first film either directly or in a ‘hey! remember when this happened last time?!’ kind of way.

There are several moments that make no sense in this sequel, because either the Sandersons wouldnt have been alive to experience the events theyre referencing, or they contradict the events of the first film. Am I supposed to believe that the Sandersons, without ANY prompting or foreshadowing created the song ‘One way or another’ totally independently from Blondie, off the cuff? If I am, then I fear its a bridge too far for me to suspend my disbelief.

Thats another thing, the HEAVY leaning into elements that were kind of inpromptu in the first film. The ‘put a spell on you’ scene from the first film was organically grown into the film, Winifred goes to a party where the host band are playing a rocky version of the track, she listens into it and likes the vibe, and then later in that scene, she uses the song she just heard, incorporates it into one of her spells and transfixes the audience.

Other than that scene and Sarah Sanderson singing to capture children (Which is established here as being just a thing witches do and not something Sarah is particularly unique for), the Sandersons wernt ‘Known’ for enjoying singing and dancing…This film however pretty much opens by saying ‘OH YEH! THE SANDERSONS WERE A GODDAMN CHORUS LINE.’ and then, because the audience want them singing and dancing, theres 3-4 singing and dancing numbers that are forced in, dont make sense and dont really do anything for the plot.

There are moments like that all through the film where its clear someone in a ‘think tank’ session just said ‘Hey! I liked this bit’ and so they do it a dozen times in this film, but with non of the charm of warmth.

And thats not to mention the extended advertisements within the film itself…I dont want to get hocked ads for ‘Wallgreens’ (a store I cant even go to) and Siri in the middle of my family movie, at best its distracting and at worst its insideous.

The dialogue takes a hit too, with most scenes amounting to something KER-RAZY happening, followed immediately by one character saying ‘Well…THAT just happened!’ in a sarcastic tone, on repeat, for near enough the full runtime.

The pacing is lopsided, it opens slow, builds up fairly well in the 2nd act when the Sandersons actually make it to town, and then slows to a crawl as the in references, 4th wall breaks and gurning smother the 3rd act to within an inch of its life, before the film just kind of, abruptly ends with a hair pin character turn that genuinely left me feeling like i’d been short changed of the last hour and a half.

The humour here was hit and miss, I enjoyed a lot of the jokes here, and I think Midler, Parker and Najimy are a fantastic trio that play on the traditions of Stoogery and the marx bros well…When they landed a joke, I’d say it was on par with the quality of the original. But when they miss (and they miss a lot) ts groan worthy, or at worst it left me stoney faced. Again, I cant help but feel like somewhere a focus group had a lot of say in what jokes ‘worked’ and what ‘didnt’ and I feel like thats ultimately harmed the film more than helped it.

The direction is fine, this is a Disney movie…I had no doubt it wouldnt at least be passable, theres an overeliance on CGI here which I thought was a bit of a shame, and I dont think this does anything particularly ground breaking. But its a passible studio film. Or rather, to me? there was nothing glaring that made me wince.

Same goes for the cine, I feel like this one was a bit murkier than I personally would have liked. The colour is there, but the scourge of mainstream 21st century colour correction to keep everything looking sleek and cool over colourful and vibrant (unless your a kids film) strikes again. the edits fine enough, but honestly, that 3rd act needed a LOT of tidying up and I think had this been cut down to sub 90 minutes it would have easily gained another half star if not more.

Performances are fine, the Sandersons are animate, lively and havent lost any of the charisma from the first film, I do feel like Sarah and Mary have been somewhat ‘Fladerized’ in the scripting. they had a bit more nuance in the first film, but here Sarah only speaks when she’s being airheaded and Mary…if anything, ends up being a bit creepier than last time…and I didnt much care for that.

Our heros for the film (Whitney Peak, Belissa Escobedo, Lilia Buckingham) are fine, as mentioned, I dont feel the script does them any favours, but they work with the lines they’re given, they really bring a level of animation to their performances that is missing from mainstream YA features. I thought they were inoffensive, they did good with a mixed hand to me.

And the score is NOT as good as the original. the whimsy is gone and instead it sounds like dollar store Danny Elfman. its a real shame, and I feel in places its not really best implemented either.

Despite my protestation, ‘Hocus Pocus 2’ did have moments that I quite enjoyed. I liked the plot (broadly) The comedy was fun, the direction and performances were on the level and It was nice enough to revisit this world as I felt like after the first film there was still opportunity for unmined exploration.

However; I feel like the focus and purpose of this film has gotten lost along the way. nice little moments from the first film like the Sandersons invading a house owned by an old man dressed as the devil believing he IS the actual dark lord are totally absent in this film (and dearly missed) It feels too safe, to keen to retread old ground and its worst crime, is it feels like its ‘trying’ too hard to be ‘cool’. Which bizarrely goes against the ACTUAL message the films trying to put across.

In short, I didnt dislike this film. But its a FAR cry from the original. I’ll happily rewatch this one again, because like I say, it has its moments and its inoffensive on the technical level. But I cant recommend this one honestly, its a background film, something you have on while doing something else. and I feel like if they want to do a ‘Hocus Pocus 3’ in future. they REALLY need to let the writers and directors shape the production, rather than a committee.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/hocus-pocus-2/

Arguably the crown jewel of the ‘Universal Monster’ series, I’ve found there is VERY little to complain about when it comes to ‘Bride of Frankenstein’ a damn near perfect sequel that introduces OODLES of pathos and comedy to what was originally a fairly straightfoward horror film of man messing in gods domain.

The sequel picks up immediately after the events of ‘Frankenstein’ with a frankly bizarre introduction to the film in which Lord Byron and Mary Shelly discuss the film adapatation of ‘Frankenstein’ (notably NOT the novel) before Mary pauses and essentially says ‘…You know…the story didnt end there…’ at which point we’re flung into what can only be described as a fever dream plotline in which Frankensteins monster survived the windmill burning at the end of the last movie and goes on a back woods fleeing spree while periodically being chased by hunters.

Meanwhile; Henry SOMEHOW managed to survive being thrown off the windmill at the end of the last movie also, and is recovering at his castle, when a new Doctor ‘Dr. Pretorious’ appears and desperately tries to get Henry to recommence his work in reanimation. revealing that he himself has also been working on reanimation, but has struggled to do so with a full size specimin.

The two decide to work together in creating a female iteration of ‘The Creature’ and when the two plotlines overlap, its decided this new creature shall be Frankensteins friend/wife/mate…

And literally, the only criticism I have of this film is that the titular ‘Bride’ is in the film for less than 5 minutes RIGHT at the very end in an, admittedly VERY well handled twist.but it did rather leave me longing for much more.

Outside of that, I honestly have no notes for this film. The scripts punchy, tight, has enough complexity to the plot to keep it interesting, but not too much that you lose focus. The tone is damn near perfect with wonderfully silly moments like a blind hermit teaching Frankenstein to smoke being married up to genuinely heavy hitting emotional scenes (‘We belong dead’) The characters are all a little more manic and bizarre, they’re more complex without feeling laboured. the fact this is a sequel is largely waved away with the opening 5 minute recap and then it just gets into the action, delivering blow after blow of A+ cinema.

The direction is probably the greatest feat of the ‘Universal Monster’ franchise, and VERY likely to be the most revolutionary picture that Universal has ever produced in its history. the sets and special effects in a film of this age are frankly bordering on witch craft, its an astounding feat of technical wizardry and I shudder to think of the combined lack of sleep the crew had making this. Its paid off though, as this is genuinely an astounding creative vision.

The cine is also amazing for the time, with a clear mastery of lighting, tones, shades and an open page to experiment with lighting and shot setup techniques. The results are a film that feel 10 years ahead of its time and is breathtaking to say the least.

The performances? Karloff and Lancaster are astounding. I sincerely believe this may be Karloffs greatest single performance. Earnest Thesinger however is probably the out and out low key highlight of this film as Dr. Protorius. campy, clearly insane and absolutely DOMINATING any scene he’s in. its a masterful performance showcasing that you dont have to be loud and act big to pull of ‘crazy’ a quiet word and subtlety goes a long way.

Special shoutout to Una O’Connor as well as ‘Minnie’ bringing her shrill and shrieking performance from ‘The Invisible Man’ back with avengence. shes amazing.

Its got a killer orchestral soundtrack that used damn near perfectly. Im gonna level with you, this things pretty incredible. Incredible for the time, and incredible even today. If you’ve see ‘Frankenstein’ this is absolutely a no brainer…GO WATCH THIS. People coming to this without having seen the first film, I fear may lose a little bit of enjoyment on the viewing experience. But id say if you dont have an hour and 10 to catch ‘Frankenstein’ before jumping into this one, its still more than worth seeking out.

Between this and ‘The Invisible Man’ i’d say we have some of the finest mainstream cinema the 30s had to offer. and I do NOT say that lightly.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/bride-of-frankenstein/

Watched on Thursday October 31, 2024.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/garfields-halloween-adventure/3/