1930s Hall of Fame

Tools    





Bride of Frankenstein (1935) r

In hindsight I shouldn't have watched Frankenstein before this because then the terrible continuity errors wouldn't have bugged so much.



So the monster survived the fire, there's a new doctor in town who creates mini-people from nothing and wants Frankenstein's help to create a full-sized mate for the monster. Frankenstein is reluctant but Pretorius has the monster kidnap his wife to force his hand. In the end there's no happily ever after for the monster but at least Frankenstein is redeemed in its eyes.

This being a direct sequel for the Frankenstein the start is quite confusing. So the old baron is suddenly dead, burgomaster has transformed into Frederick Kerr wannabe and the staff of Frankenstein household has vanished and been replaced by Minnie. And this all has happened during the first film's end sequence. Couldn't they even try?

Another issue is the overuse of (bad) comedy. First had some comedic scenes but it tried to be a suspense film. The sequel doesn't know what it wants to be (just like its writers didn't bother to check what happened in the first). It's a shame because some of the more serious parts are actually pretty good and the whole idea of the bride isn't bad (as proved by the series Penny Dreadful).

Visually Bride is much better and more consistent than the first film. Lightning and shadows are used to much better effect. Directing is also tighter. Acting is pretty bad at times (especially in the intro and early discussions with Dr. Frankenstein and Elizabeth), Karloff is decent as a monster but little uneven.

Overall this is little weaker than the first even though the good parts are actually better than anything in it. Too much comedy, continuity issues with the first film and few details that just didn't fit (like those mini-people) keep the popcorn at rather low levels.




Women will be your undoing, Pépé
With Ed's review we now have 8 total movies reviewed. And Ed's done 3 of them! Way to go guys
And now I feel like a slacker, haha.
don't worry, this rate won't last long
__________________
What I actually said to win MovieGal's heart:
- I might not be a real King of Kinkiness, but I make good pancakes
~Mr Minio



Warning: Potential spoilers for Penny Dreadful below.
It's a shame because some of the more serious parts are actually pretty good and the whole idea of the bride isn't bad (as proved by the series Penny Dreadful).
Is this in reference to Billie Piper's character? It didn't click right away with me, since I didn't find her compelling at all. I did not like Piper's performance, so by extension her storyline kind of irritated me. Maybe I would've found it more interesting if the character had been played by a different actress.



Warning: Potential spoilers for Penny Dreadful below.

Is this in reference to Billie Piper's character? It didn't click right away with me, since I didn't find her compelling at all. I did not like Piper's performance, so by extension her storyline kind of irritated me. Maybe I would've found it more interesting if the character had been played by a different actress.
Yes, I'm talking about Billie Piper. I agree that the series didn't use her to full potential but I liked the character.



Gunga Din (1939) N

Three Stooges fighting Thuggees in British India with some help from faithful noble savage.



At least I now know where the plot for Temple of Doom came from. In essence it's the same movie where Indy @ Co. is replaced by three army officers and one water bearer. Murderous cult is rearing its ugly head but the mighty Englishmen are there to save the day.

The film focuses way too much on the three leads twisting their faces and attempting to look so damn funny. All the comedic elements felt completely forced and I don't think I snickered even once. The story itself could have worked with less (or at least better) humor and more investment to the actual plot.

The big fight at the end looks good considering the age of the film. Otherwise it's quite uninspired in every way. Kinda like modern Hollywood spectacle but form the 1930s (wait... it is exactly that). It looks and feels like professional work but it lacks something that would bring it to life.

Old adventure / action films also suffer from really bad fight scenes. I guess it's unfair to compare them to modern fully choreographed fights but those old fisticuffs make me shake my head (especially when heroes are superhuman manhandling bad guys like an adult fighting a bunch of children). But action is a big part of these films so I can't just ignore it.

I found Gunga Din pretty boring and would much rather watch Mola Ram and Indy butt heads.






Bride of Frankenstein (1935)
Director: James Whale
Starring: Colin Clive, Ernest Thesiger, Boris Karloff

Since it had been nearly two decades since I last saw Bride of Frankenstein in its entirety, I was looking forward to revisiting it, especially since my understanding and perception of film has changed so much since I was a child. I was mostly curious to find out if I had blurred parts of the 1931 Frankenstein into this sequel, and whether or not films like Young Frankenstein might have coloured my perception of certain sequences.

The biggest surprise for me was how much of the comedy in Bride was actually intentional. While I do think the humour worked well overall, there were some moments when it felt oddly out of place. For example, an early scene where the villagers had to be forced away from watching the fire made me feel like I was watching a Monty Python sketch, perhaps due to Una O'Connor's shrill voice and quirky mannerisms. On that note, there were far too many shrieks and sudden screams for my delicate ears to handle, and I found myself adjusting the volume more often than I would've liked.

One thing that did not change was my fondness for Pretorius. Ernest Thesiger always commanded my attention whenever he was on screen, and he stole every scene he was in. I would've loved to see more interaction between him and Frankenstein, since I found their scenes to be infinitely more engaging than the Monster's interactions with a world he can never belong to. The Monster's “outsider” story didn't resonate with me as strongly as it should have, but that may just be a consequence of having seen those same themes in countless films since this was made.

While I always liked the climactic finale in the laboratory, my memories did not do it justice. The camerawork and cinematography become more Expressionist than in the previous scenes, with angles and contrast that almost make it seem like another film entirely. It was absolutely beautiful. The Bride does not appear on screen for very long, but she leaves quite the impression in her wake. Bride of Frankenstein definitely ends on a much stronger note than it starts, and I honestly don't understand why the opening with Mary Shelley wasn't cut. It's inclusion only seems to service giving Elsa Lanchester more screen time. As lovely as she is, that unfortunately isn't enough justification for me.


Attachments
Click image for larger version

Name:	Frankenstein.jpg
Views:	383
Size:	171.8 KB
ID:	45718  



Before I forget, did anyone else notice that Boris Karloff is just referred to as "Karloff" in the opening credits? For some reason I found that highly amusing haha.

I wonder what the earliest example is, of an actor not needing to be credited by their full name for audiences to still recognize them. (Also: is there an easier way to structure this sentence? haha)





Gunga Din
(1939)

Director: George Stevens
Starring: Victor McLaglen, Cary Grant, Douglas Fairbanks Jr.

While it is difficult not to cringe at the abundant use of “brown face” throughout Gunga Din, the film is simply a product of its time and not overtly or actively racist in its presentation. It was fortunately not the uncomfortable relic of a bygone era I feared it might be when I nominated it. As such, I was able to enjoy the film as the comedic action-adventure flick it was, with just the occasional shake of my head or eye-roll.

The sets and outdoor locations throughout the film were beautiful, particularly those in and around the temple. The cinematography was a pleasure to watch, though no one specific moment jumps to mind. The film has its own sense of humour, as well as some unintentional laughs. I found the visible strings attached to the snakes in the temple's pit so hilarious that I had to pause the film to show my room mates. It was just a lot of fun.

Most of the runtime focuses on McLaglen. Grant, and Fairbanks, who luckily have a great deal of chemistry together. I vastly prefer Cary Grant's comedic roles to his more serious ones, but his performance sometimes felt a bit odd here. His accent constantly slid on a moving scale between Cockney and the Transatlantic accent he is known for, then back again – sometimes in the same sentence. While definitely distracting, he was still entertaining.

I love adventure films, and Indiana Jones in particular. So despite a few problems, Gunga Din is exactly the type of film I like to indulge in. I really wish I had more to say about it. It's not going to be to everyone's taste, but it's a piece of cinematic history that I think is worth watching at least once.


Attachments
Click image for larger version

Name:	Gunga.jpg
Views:	420
Size:	164.0 KB
ID:	45726  



Bachelor Mother (1939)

I knew absolutely zero going into this. I appreciate the relative obscurity, had a quick look and this has just over 3000 ratings on IMDB.

If I had to describe it:

Ginger Rogers finds herself haplessly thrown/pushed/cajoled/threatened into motherhood in this dark tale of societal pressure and sexism. Oh, and it's a comedy.

Ultimately, it worked out ok for me, mainly down to the contrast that's made between male/female pressure and rich/poor experience. Whether that was the director's intention or not is questionable but I found it interesting looking at it from a 30s context. The character of Polly Parish moves through this story like a puppet on a string. Just a sign of the times. The comedy was more charming than funny which suits the plot to a degree. However, there isn't anything out of the ordinary here in terms of dialogue or camerawork for this time frame.

Rodgers and Niven are both good but I don't think they mesh that well together barring a couple of scenes. Niven's butler played by EE Clive (Who is a part of the cast of Bride of Frankenstein) actually had me laughing a couple of times with his stand out facial expressions. This was an enjoyable, brisk 82 minutes.



Bachelor Mother (1939)

....Ultimately, it worked out ok for me, mainly down to the contrast that's made between male/female pressure and rich/poor experience. Whether that was the director's intention or not is questionable but I found it interesting looking at it from a 30s context. The character of Polly Parish moves through this story like a puppet on a string. Just a sign of the times...
Thanks for your review. If you check the 1st post, I've added links for all the member's reviews. And I've added your's too

So now everyone is on the board yahoo!




Women will be your undoing, Pépé
Yes, I'm talking about Billie Piper. I agree that the series didn't use her to full potential but I liked the character.
Going in,^^I also figured that I had blurred Frankenstein and Bride of.
So, what was irritating about her, Cosmic?

I enjoyed her as well, and, at first, I had a hard time getting used to the path her character, which did make sense.
WARNING: "It did seem a little too much of a wrap up" spoilers below
on how her and her "followers" were all taken out, though. Perhaps they saw it has a little TOO big a subplot to allow to go any further than it had.



Women will be your undoing, Pépé
Before I forget, did anyone else notice that Boris Karloff is just referred to as "Karloff" in the opening credits? For some reason I found that highly amusing haha.

I wonder what the earliest example is, of an actor not needing to be credited by their full name for audiences to still recognize them. (Also: is there an easier way to structure this sentence? haha)
I did notice it as it seemed like a point was made to emphasize it. I read why but I forget now.
I think it may had to do with how it was a "?" in Frankenstein and to play on that, they simply left it as his last name only. (this is PURELY a guess and no actual fact to back it up)
Which, I think, going by that guess they did the same "?" with The Bride.

And yeah, seriously found myself doing comparisons with Young Frankenstein and seeing which scenes were a source of inspiration.