Frankenstein (1931) - Full Reaction
Added 2022-10-14 10:00:07 +0000 UTCHey guys! Here is the first video of our frankie double feature! The second video, and the runner up of our Halloween Comedy Poll, Young Frankenstein, will be up tomorrow (well tonight by the time you're seeing this)! It felt fun to watch this in October! I was a bit confused with the ending, I feel like I'm missing something... maybe you guys can enlighten me! I can only imagine what Mel Brooks has in store for this one... anyway, hope you enjoy!
Direct link in case the above player doesn't work.
Find your own copy to follow a long with.
Comments
You need to come back to the Universal Monster movies. The Bride of Frankenstein is even better. And in The Wolf Man movie, you even get a love story. I love all the classic monster movies, even if they're not Universal. Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde (1931) is considered the first horror movie to win an Academy Award.
Eddie Perkins
2025-01-06 18:55:58 +0000 UTCDon't waste your time doing that. There's a reason why the original has a score of 100%, and the Robert DeNiro one has a score of 42%
Eddie Perkins
2023-09-01 12:19:39 +0000 UTCLove that one! More people need to watch it.
China Andronicus
2023-07-04 01:21:33 +0000 UTCbut that movie sucks
CarSVernon .
2022-10-24 22:39:06 +0000 UTCYou might want to consider the 1994 film "Mary Shelly's Frankenstein" (Kenneth Branagh as the Doctor, Robert DeNiro as the Monster), as it's much closer to the original novel.
Raj K. Dixit
2022-10-18 02:08:48 +0000 UTCThe reason for what amounts to a tacked on “happy ending” is a thought that audiences of the time wouldn’t be content with a purely bleak conclusion. (This is a significant departure from the book, among many.) Ultimately they make it work with the plot of “Bride of Frankenstein” which is one of the great sequels of all time. The Universal Monster cycle would go on to become it’s own interconnected franchise. The first of it’s kind, really. (Imagine a Marvel Cinematic Universe populated by classic horror characters.) They’re all a lot of fun and I recommend the lot of them, although some are crazier than others.
Mr Trick
2022-10-16 17:49:34 +0000 UTCBut they edited the blindness out of Ghost, so Lugosi’s performance is seriously undermined.
Jason Chirevas
2022-10-16 16:19:54 +0000 UTCIt's hard to believe considering how frightening some modern horror movies are, but this movie was supposed to have caused people to faint in the theater. I imagine they would have dropped dead if they were to see a modern horror movie
Richard Maurer
2022-10-16 06:18:52 +0000 UTCOh, man. She will just hate the original ending. 😆
Stick Figure Studios
2022-10-16 02:56:48 +0000 UTCYes. But please make it the regular theatrical ending.
WastedPo
2022-10-15 20:19:34 +0000 UTCYou still have time to do Little Shop of Horrors for Halloween
David Guin
2022-10-15 17:27:50 +0000 UTCcan't wait for YOUNG FRANKENSTEIN. Marty Feldman's finest hour.
Matt Rose
2022-10-15 15:13:42 +0000 UTCYes! It will be up tomorrow, probably between 10am-12pm mdt!
Cassie
2022-10-15 14:35:18 +0000 UTCWe were hoping to watch Christine this weekend. Any chance it's going to get posted today or tomorrow? Thanks
London Davis
2022-10-15 14:23:42 +0000 UTCI wouldn’t say the shorter length of earlier films had any relationship to the Hayes Code. (Many silent features were significantly longer.) I think it had more to do with the fact that when these films were first released to theaters, it was common to show two or even three movies for the price of a single admission. You’d typically get one or two B movies, followed by the A feature. They had to be short by necessity.
Bob Bittner
2022-10-15 12:21:34 +0000 UTCThere is a great Mel Brooks interview on YouTube when he was on the Johnny Carson Tonight Show. It was Mel plugging this movie. But it is hilarious and you get to here some great stories and some out-takes from Young Frankenstein. Mel was a stand-up comedian and then comedy sketch writer on an early TV variety show called "Your Show Of Shows". Also, the laboratory stuff in Mel's movie came from this 1931 movie set. The prop master on the film took it home and put it in his garage. Mel, while doing research for the film found this guy and the props. So some of the laboratory stuff will look familiar. Looking forward to Young Frankenstein.. Some of the notable lines in Young Frankenstein - Frau Bruher.. Horses neigh... You take the blond, I'll take the one with the turban.. there wolf, there castle.. yummy sounds.. SET-A-GIVE!?!?!?!?.. Abby someone... Abby Normal...
Mike McLaughlin
2022-10-15 07:37:47 +0000 UTCMarilyn Harris, who played the little girl, had fond memories of working with Boris Karloff (the monster) and the director James Whale. She hated being thrown in the water. Whale promised to give her a treat if she continued to do more takes: she apparently didn't want toys or candy, but asked for hard-boiled eggs, which she got as her reward. Karloff really embraced his legacy as playing Frankenstein; he worked consistently for the rest of his life in the horror genre, sometimes happily lampooning himself in comedies. His reputation was one of being a very sweet, professional actor. The second movie is where the monster starts being referred to by name as "Frankenstein," both in the movie and by the studio publicity team. Even though it's the name of the scientist, the movies and pop culture in general refer to the creature as "Frankenstein."
Alex Villarreal
2022-10-15 07:33:33 +0000 UTCVisionary Frankenstein author Mary Shelley’s also pioneered writing sci-fi novels set in the future. Though her efforts are not what modern audiences would expect since the societies she imagines in our time are not much different technologically than when she wrote in the early 1800s. But this is logical because, just as technological development was much the same a few hundred years before, it was logical to assume it would be at about the same level in the 21st century. It is not until years after the industrial revolution that people could properly imagine the amazingly accelerated pace of human technological accomplishment.
Steve Holton
2022-10-15 02:57:42 +0000 UTCWhy do I have the sudden urge to off the Prime Minister of Malaysia?
Mike Lemon
2022-10-15 01:25:34 +0000 UTCIt's such a shame that there are so many great stories that have failed to be properly captured in film. I also feel that there are no truly great film adaptations of Robin Hood or A Christmas Carol.
Nathan Bishop
2022-10-15 00:49:08 +0000 UTCThat is exactly what happened. The originally intended ending was for Dr Frankenstein to die in the mill with his creation, but it was instead released with a hastily re-shot happy ending, wherein he survives (the line "he's alive" that can be heard after he hits the ground is clearly looped) and can presumably marry Elizabeth.
Stick Figure Studios
2022-10-14 23:24:30 +0000 UTCI don't understand the ending any more than Cassie. It seems like justice (and parallelism) would demand that Dr. Frankenstein be killed by his own creation. Instead we just have the perpetuation of this aristocratic family. The ending is so abrupt and unsatisfactory that I feel like someone higher up in the production was worried that Dr. Frankenstein's murder would come across as too "revolutionary" or "Bolshevik". So they threw a "happy" ending together at the last minute. Henry and Elizabeth don't even get speaking roles--did they even have the actors at this point? It's all very suspicious.
Carol_White
2022-10-14 22:49:32 +0000 UTCYoung Frankenstein primarily spoofs This film, 1935’s Bride of Frankenstein, and 1939’s Son of Frankenstein. The movie is funny without seeing those, but you know more of what Brooks and Wilder were aiming at or riffing from after seeing those movies. Bride and Son are a bit more cohesive movies with a bit more complex stories, plus music. Talking films were still relatively new in 1931 and few used music as we are now accustomed. I’d suggest watching those before Young Frankenstein, but time is always a consideration. Most critics consider Bride of Frankenstein the best of the three and the best of the Universal horror movies of the 1930s and 1940s. It’s somewhat closer in several aspects to Mary Shelly’s novel, but there’s no film that truly captures the novel. Not even Kennth Branagh’s version from the 1990s. Victor Frankenstein is perhaps the most derelict father in literature. This movie, based on the stage play, while very different than the novel does depict the monster as an abandoned child very well. It shows the dangers of children growing up with poor or no parenting and the results. Frankenstein created life but left it to fend for itself and the result was a monster. On-target social criticism when Shelly wrote the book nearly two centuries ago and now.
Terry Wood
2022-10-14 21:51:18 +0000 UTCI'm assuming you mean the first "talkie" with its own original music score as a number of "silent" films had original music scores written for them.
Stick Figure Studios
2022-10-14 20:37:26 +0000 UTCI don't have much to add here as most of what I was going to say has already been said by other patrons regarding the films lack of music score, raw (and primarily recorded live) sound design, iconic performance by Boris Karloff, significance in film history and fidelity to its source material. Let me just reiterate how happy I am that you ventured into this bonafide cinematic classic before experiencing Mel Brooks's bonafide cinematic classic send-up of it. It probably wasn't absolutely necessary, but I am certain that it will enhance your experience of the latter. If at some point you're ever interested in checking out it's excellent -- and generally considered superior -- sequel BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN, I highly recommend it.
Stick Figure Studios
2022-10-14 20:31:36 +0000 UTCI thought the same about not needing to watch the original Frankenstein. I knew she was probably going to have some questions after watching Young Frankenstein, and watching Frankenstein (1931) would answer a few questions, but only create even more questions as well. In order to get everything that Young Frankenstein pulls from, you have to watch like 2 or more Frankenstein films as well. I think anyone’s basic knowledge of Frankenstein and his Monster is enough to enjoy Young Frankenstein. That being said, I am glad she ventured into the early thirties to see where it all began, film wise.
Larry Darrell
2022-10-14 19:59:15 +0000 UTCFun fact the shambling arms out walk did not occur until Frankenstein meets The Wolf Man, where Bela Lugosi plays the creature as blind. The creature went blind in the previous film The Ghost of Frankenstein.
Rob Galloway
2022-10-14 19:51:56 +0000 UTCThis is one case where I don't think you needed to watch the original first (though I'm glad you've gotten in that habit - remember that when you get to Star Trek 😉😂). I doubt many of the people watching Young Frankenstein in 1974 had seen this since they were kids. It's not like they could just check it out on home video. But it's so absorbed into pop culture they didn't need to. It's an interesting film though isn't it? I find it so weird how about half of it feels totally familiar, even if you've never seen it before, because it's been endlessly copied in subsequent media. And then the other half is just totally out of left field. The dad? Wtf? The hunchbacked assistant... Fritz? (Igor was invented later) The brutalist castle design is so cool and not at all what later movies have copied. And yes, as others have mentioned, it was made in a weird transitionary period between silents and talkies, so there is no score. The original Dracula is the same way, in fact even more noticable as it has more primitive sound design than Frankenstein, so there are awkward stretches that are almost complete silence (which could be said to make it creepier, but to my ears just sounds unfinished). It can't be understated how influential this movie was on the Frankenstein story and especially on the design of the monster itself. Kenneth Branagh made a version in the 90s that was supposed to be faithful to the original book - it's even called "Mary Shelley's Frankenstein" - and even that version depicts the monster as a reanimated corpse, just as he is here and in every adaptation right down to Frankenweenie (in the book the good doctor makes his monster from scratch - there is no grave-robbing). Btw the novel, in addition to being a classic of horror literature, is generally considered one of the very first works of science fiction.
Robin T
2022-10-14 19:12:14 +0000 UTCI'm trying to promote it too. I think this movie would be within Carly's scary-but-not-too-scary threshold. 😉
Gábor Árki
2022-10-14 17:46:13 +0000 UTCThese old films used to play on TV on Saturday nights when I was a little kid and my grandmother, who loved them as much as I did, would sit up and watch them with me. She was a big fan of Young Frankenstein too. I last watched this one in the late 1990s when they released the remastered version. Great to see it again with someone who has never seen it. I read Jack Pierce's book, the guy who was the makeup artist, and he said by half way through production everyone was already spontaneously referring to "The Monster" as "Frankenstein". No explanation for it really.
BRT
2022-10-14 17:16:33 +0000 UTCI guess sound in movies was still a new thing in 1931,I would have loved to see Elizabeth's stunning wedding dress and her beautiful bridesmaids in color, Tell me you are going to react to Bride of Frankenstein 1935? Fun fact.."King Kong" 1933 would be the first movie with its own original film music score..
Celeste McAllister
2022-10-14 17:09:03 +0000 UTCBride is a more enjoyable film I think
BRT
2022-10-14 17:02:24 +0000 UTCPre-code movies were mostly very short, about 60-70 minutes. This is very much a product of its time, dated by our standards. This was the movie that gave us the “Frankenstein” creature look: green-looking dude, bolts in the neck, etc. The classic book mostly only describes an ugly creature with a rotted corpse. Audiences found this terrifying back in the day (what else did they have back then to compare to, right?) Mel Brooks saw this as a boy and it gave him nightmares. His movie is going to be fun.
Alex Villarreal
2022-10-14 16:34:44 +0000 UTCThe monster was never intended to be green. In the book, the monster's skin was yellowish. Green makeup was used on Karloff to create a pale look, and it stuck that way in pop culture.
David Patterson
2022-10-14 15:50:12 +0000 UTCCassie: I really, really think you should watch THE MUMMY (1999). It's more akin to RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK than it is to a 'Mummy' or Universal Monsters movie. It has some creepy elements to it but it's much more of an adventure romp than it is a monster/horror film. It's an incredible amount of fun. Based on you reactions to the Indiana Jones films, I really think you'd have a blast with it.
Matt Rose
2022-10-14 15:44:50 +0000 UTCOne could look at Frankenstein and say this is a really old movie with outdated film techniques, but really this film looks old even by the standards of the 1930's. There is a tremendous gulf in quality and story telling techniques and even acting styles between movies of the early thirties and the late thirties. Compare this 1931 movie to the 1939 Gone With The Wind, or even to the 1938 The Adventures of Robin Hood we just watched here. An enourmous difference in film making styles. You could even say, the difference, ahem, is black and white. Ha ha, I'll let my self out now. Ha ha, I just can't stop laughing.ha ha
MikeLL
2022-10-14 14:56:46 +0000 UTCI LOVE Frankenstein! You definitely should read the book, the movie changed many aspects. Also, and I know I won't be the only one to say this, but the sequel, The Bride of Frankenstein, is considered by many critics to be the best Frankenstein movie. I hope you check it out some day.
Neill Shaughness
2022-10-14 13:34:34 +0000 UTCAs great as this film is, BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN is the masterpiece.
Matt Rose
2022-10-14 13:13:35 +0000 UTCCassie, according to a quick Wikipedia count, Frankenstein's (Frankensteen?) Monster is 'featured' in just under 100 movies. (This includes stuff like Scooby Doo movies) but it goes to show what an enduring character he is, and what a rich story it is, of course, from the mind of Mary Shelley...
Jon Johns
2022-10-14 12:18:04 +0000 UTCBoris Karloff (the monster) is the voice of the narrator/Grinch in the original cartoon.
David Patterson
2022-10-14 12:04:26 +0000 UTC[Edit] First time watch and I thought it was excellent, though I need to know how the book ended. I'm glad I finally watched this classic. If the topic of classic horror movies comes up again, we should not leave out Vincent Price. "House of Wax" (1953) "The Fly" (1958) "House on Haunted Hill" (1959)
Prof. Writhms
2022-10-14 12:04:05 +0000 UTCWatching "Bride of Frankenstein" at some point will help your enjoyment of "Young Frankenstein" retroactively. The Brooks movie is based on both the original and the sequel.
Ben Livingstone
2022-10-14 11:19:39 +0000 UTCClaude Rains I love in everything he is in. I do love his version of Phantom of the Opera, myself
GamerGal8684
2022-10-14 11:11:50 +0000 UTCWhat a lovely reaction to a hugely important movie. Not just in terms of horror but I think for Hollywood and stylistically what movies could be. I really hope Cassie does the novel in her book club. It is an incredible book. Mary Shelley basically invented the modern gothic horror novel (and arguable Science Fiction too) in that book and she was 22 when she wrote it. It's staggering! Karloff's performance though is what utterly utterly nails it. He is perfect to the point that he became an icon. Ask a kid to impersonate a monster and they will "do Karloff" almost instinctively. He is at once both horrific, tragic, brutal and gentle, and all without real dialogue. Colin Clive (who died tragically young) is also brilliant and worth a shout out too. It's a wonderful movie if, *very* 1930s and not without the faults of a medium still trying to find its feat. It will set up "Young Frankenstein" nicely too. And then we can do "Bride of Frankenstein", which is even better (is Elsa Lanchester the most beautiful woman who ever lived? Discuss) and some more classic horror next year! Personally I'm a Claude Rains in "The Invisible Man" Fanboy. To answer some of Cassie's questions; What's the deal with the creepy skeleton in the graveyard? Old Europe is full of stuff like that. Take a walk around any graveyard with some history in the UK or Mainland Europe and you'll find stuff like that. Memento Mori. A skeletal death with a hood and a scythe was basically the Ronald McDonald for the internment industry for centuries. :-) Why does everyone call that shambling arms out walk "Frankenstein"? Because they're idiots ;-) Frankenstein is the Doctor, not the creature. But I think you can make a real argument that he is the real monster given what he did. The creature is the victim here I think. Later movie versions of this story really emphasise this a lot more. The creature is a product of Frankenstein's mania, obsession, evil and disregard for humanity. Why is there no musical score? In 1931 sound in movies was still less than 5 years old. People were still getting used to it and what it could do. Scores would be quick to come in from this point. The sequel "Bride Of Frankenstein" is fully (and beautifully) scored and that came just 4 years later. Is the little girl ok? No. No she isn't. That scene was *incredibly* controversial in 1931, and is still shocking today. For a long long time it was edited out of subsequent re-runs of the movie.
Dryfesands
2022-10-14 10:31:32 +0000 UTCThanks for recognizing the need to watch the older movies, to get the references of newer movies.
Allen Bond
2022-10-14 10:30:40 +0000 UTCBoris Karloff as Frankenstein, timeless classic.
Danny (Icarus)
2022-10-14 10:06:04 +0000 UTCFilm was a very different medium back then, runtimes were much shorter on average as the art form was still finding footing.
Dustin Nelson
2022-10-14 10:05:47 +0000 UTCFrankenstein. In the movies. I guess you can say, Frankie goes to Hollywood. So RELAX. Sit back and enjoy.
Brian McGovern
2022-10-14 10:04:57 +0000 UTCThe universal monsters are interesting pieces to evaluate. Nearly 100 years old they're the source of many tropes yet still somehow seem fresh. It's impressive how well a lot of them actually hold up despite their sheer simplicity.
Dustin Nelson
2022-10-14 10:04:19 +0000 UTCWow. It is a short movie. Only 74 minutes long.
Brian McGovern
2022-10-14 10:02:53 +0000 UTC
