Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 9, 2017 15:39:40 GMT
How do you rate/rank these two? Have owned the Universal boxset for years. Not once did I ever give 'Bride' a chance despite numerous recommendations from posters on the old IMDB. I expected some 'ripoff' of Frankenstein involving a woman monster with a cameo or two by Frankenstein's Monster. I really missed out and am glad I finally gave it a watch after owning it all of these years. Tremendous - never knew 'The Bride' was only in it for a total of about 3 minutes tops. More about the monster's quest to overcome 'loneliness' and try to fit in in society and find a friend. We actually get to hear him talk and you can't help but have a sense of compassion for the Monster (yeah - I know - I'm late to the party). I give them both 9/10 beers Anybody else rate 'Bride' as 'Frankenstein's' equal or even rate it slightly higher?
|
|
|
Post by darkreviewer2013 on Sept 9, 2017 22:40:24 GMT
Been years since I saw them, but much preferred the 1931 original. The horror element seemed more to the fore than in some of the other Universal classics. In fact, I'd consider it the best of them all. Boris Karloff did a fine job too.
I prefer the Mary Shelley novel over all film adaptations though.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 9, 2017 23:08:40 GMT
Been years since I saw them, but much preferred the 1931 original. The horror element seemed more to the fore than in some of the other Universal classics. In fact, I'd consider it the best of them all. Boris Karloff did a fine job too. I prefer the Mary Shelley novel over all film adaptations though. It's fantastic. Beginning scenes at the burial in the cemetery and the hanging dead man are fantastic. I agree about more of a 'horror element'. I don't believe 'The Monster' uttered a word (correct me if I'm wrong) - he was much more 'humanized' in a sense and a more sympathetic character in 'Bride'. Need to dig up my 'The Wolf Man' Boxset - 'Wolf Man Meets Frankenstein' is a pleasant surprise. Love this time of year (I know I'm early but I typically get Halloween going a little earlier than some - as soon as August is winding down and it starts to get cooler in my area - football starts - kids go back to school)
|
|
|
Post by darkreviewer2013 on Sept 10, 2017 23:27:26 GMT
Been years since I saw them, but much preferred the 1931 original. The horror element seemed more to the fore than in some of the other Universal classics. In fact, I'd consider it the best of them all. Boris Karloff did a fine job too. I prefer the Mary Shelley novel over all film adaptations though. It's fantastic. Beginning scenes at the burial in the cemetery and the hanging dead man are fantastic. I agree about more of a 'horror element'. I don't believe 'The Monster' uttered a word (correct me if I'm wrong) - he was much more 'humanized' in a sense and a more sympathetic character in 'Bride'. Need to dig up my 'The Wolf Man' Boxset - 'Wolf Man Meets Frankenstein' is a pleasant surprise. Love this time of year (I know I'm early but I typically get Halloween going a little earlier than some - as soon as August is winding down and it starts to get cooler in my area - football starts - kids go back to school) Not seen Wolf Man Meets Frankenstein, but fond of the 1941 Wolf Man movie. And yeah - totally getting into Halloween mode now myself. Planning on commencing my Horrorthon on 22 Sept.
|
|
|
Post by fangirl1975 on Sept 11, 2017 1:43:19 GMT
I rate them equally.
|
|
|
Post by Nicko's Nose on Sept 11, 2017 2:52:27 GMT
Bride has Una O'Connor therefore it just can't be as good as the original.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2017 0:04:13 GMT
Bride has Una O'Connor therefore it just can't be as good as the original. was she the old crazy broad that they 'tried' to draw up a bit of a comedic character? it just fell flat if that was her. none the less - it's a great movie - really shows the 'Monsters' struggle IMO more than the first - although I do agree with Dark Reviewer above that 'Frankenstein' had more of a 'horror' element to it. great flicks - will watch them both again before Halloween. Son of Frankenstein wasn't half bad either......
|
|
needysboy
Sophomore
@needysboy
Posts: 347
Likes: 129
|
Post by needysboy on Sept 16, 2017 0:46:27 GMT
Elsa was hot!
|
|
|
Post by FridayOnElmStreet on Sept 16, 2017 8:36:04 GMT
I always thought Bride was far better.
|
|
|
Post by jonesjxd on Oct 14, 2017 22:37:05 GMT
They are my co-favorite movie of all time, I never watch one without the other and could never choose between the two.
|
|
|
Post by Nalkarj on Oct 15, 2017 18:11:24 GMT
@screamingtreefrogs
Bride has actually long been considered superior to Frankenstein, believe it or not--certainly, Sarris (in The American Cinema, '68) and Everson (in Classics of the Horror Film, '74) far preferred it. In light of that nigh-universal praise, I'm a bit more critical of it, especially as I don't find it to have the eeriness or internal cohesion of Frankenstein or Son. (There are huge editorial mishaps in it--not Jimmy Whale's, or his editor's, fault, but the studio's, if I'm remembering correctly). I still rate it very highly, but I'm now a bit more inclined to temper that praise.
James Whale, who directed both Frankenstein and Bride, is one of my favorite directors of them all; The Old Dark House and The Man in the Iron Mask are particularly good. He was not, however, particularly interested in horror (ironic, as it was the genre in which he'd have the largest influence), and I think that shows inasmuch as Bride is far more a comedy than a horror picture.
|
|
|
Post by poelzig on Oct 16, 2017 5:13:44 GMT
Since you love the Universal monsters I'm surprised it took you so long to watch Bride. It's an awesome movie that is equal to Frankenstein.
|
|
|
Post by NewtJorden on Oct 17, 2017 2:12:29 GMT
I always thought Bride was far better. My opinion as well.
|
|
|
Post by lostinlimbo on Sept 16, 2018 23:19:19 GMT
I would have said “Frankenstein”, but after rewatching it last year my vote swings back to “Bride of Frankenstein”.
|
|
|
Post by them1ghtyhumph on Sept 16, 2018 23:40:45 GMT
Bride of Frankenstein is better. I ususally watch it and Dracula together
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Sept 18, 2018 22:28:04 GMT
Both are excellent. I do rate BoF higher than the original movie though. It's got a great villain (with a helluva name-Septimus Pretorious?!?!), wonderfully dark humor, and a more ambitious plot. Karoff is terrific in this.
|
|
|
Post by PreachCaleb on Sept 19, 2018 22:48:27 GMT
I'd say Frankenstein has the better atmosphere, but Bride has the better character arcs.
|
|
|
Post by moviebuffbrad on Sept 20, 2018 0:23:31 GMT
Bride has Una O'Connor therefore it just can't be as good as the original. was she the old crazy broad that they 'tried' to draw up a bit of a comedic character? it just fell flat if that was her. none the less - it's a great movie - really shows the 'Monsters' struggle IMO more than the first - although I do agree with Dark Reviewer above that 'Frankenstein' had more of a 'horror' element to it. great flicks - will watch them both again before Halloween. Son of Frankenstein wasn't half bad either...... Yeah. She also brought her brand of "comedy" to The Invisible Man. Nevertheless, I'm probably with you on enjoying Bride more in spite of that. That scene with the blind man alone is my favorite scene between the two. These movies are so anti-science and God fearing that I was kind of put off when I saw them.
|
|
|
Post by PreachCaleb on Sept 20, 2018 18:31:02 GMT
I never really had an issue with that. It seemed they were more anti-unethical science than anything.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 20, 2018 18:54:52 GMT
I prefer the one where he throws the kid in the water. Cracks me up everytime.
And the bit in the blind geezer's house was good.
|
|