It gave me nightmares as a kid only now, I know why. The graininess of the picture, the shrill sound effects and James Whale's unusual cutting style of deliberate jump-cuts (especially in the scene when the Creature makes his big entrance and, moments later, reaches longingly for the sunlight)contribute to the realness of the story and the film. Frankenstein did his evil deed! I'm not saying that "Frankenstein" seems primitive in a bad way-unlike '31's "Dracula" with it's "point the camera at the stage because we can't move the camera" lack of technique.
"Frankenstein" feels like this is an actual record of exactly how it looked and felt the day Dr. Browse our collection of television shows and TV series, including new releases and classics, sortable by date, format, genre and rating - all available from Universal Pictures Home Entertainment. The lack of a score and less showy camerawork give it almost a documentary quality, not unlike the famous Hindenberg newsreel footage. The major technical improvements during the short years between the original and sequel have made "Frankenstein" seem perhaps older than it is. The unarguable "improvements" in the sequel are often, for me, the very things that makes the original so special. It certainly benefits from a more deeply thought-out script and an adequately bankrolled sense of delight in the macabre. I have no complaints at all about "Bride".
But since they both involve the same director and primary cast, I consider them as two parts of the same movie. Few will disagree that "Bride of Frankenstein" is in so many ways a better picture than the original.
0 kommentar(er)
