MovieChat Forums > FilmBuff > Replies
FilmBuff's Replies
That's where it initially seems to be going, as the monster staggers wraith-like out of the ruins. It would have been an improvement, though nearly anything would improve this turkey.
I've watched this film a number of times, and just watched it again today. It doesn't hold up to the first two films at all. It's entirely a one-note film. The monster is alive. He kills some people. He's killed, at least until the next film. It's certainly Karloff's worst outing as the monster, with very little to his portrayal other than menace. Gone is the pathos of the first two films, and the audience is given no reason to sympathize with the monster. Worse, his behavior is inconsistent. One minute he's a lumbering brute, the next capable of undertaking complex missions on Igor's behalf, and quietly breaking into a shop, crouching, pulling down the window shade, and sneaking up on his victim.
The best thing about the film is Lugosi's Igor, which is the most entertaining performance I've seen from him. It isn't as nuanced or as a great as Dracula, but he's animated and amusing here, as well as scary when he needs to be.
Of course I do, and I know all about the Weimer Republic. What I don't know is how you consider its existence proof that all Jews are degenerate anti-Christians. Meanwhile, I have decades of real-life proof that they aren't. so again, enlighten us, and convert us all to your anti-semitic ways.
She had a very droll sense of humor, which appeals to me. And the actress conveyed a lot with her body language, something else I appreciate.
Yeah, what was wrong with Kim? She was cool and funny. Ramona was the most insufferable character in the film.
If I recall, the idea was that the monster survived the explosion, and had been out and about doing monster-y things, at which point he has struck by lightning. I don't know that any of that was explicitly stated, but that was the sense of it I got while watching.
Yes and no. There is a definite continuity between the first two films. Bride of Frankenstein literally picks up where Frankenstein leaves off, with the villagers surrounding the burnt down mill. After that, there was only a loose continuity, but it's clear they were treating this as a single story. Note that Rathbone toasts a painting of Colin Clive as Dr. Frankenstein.
It's worth noting that when these films were being churned out, there was no home video, or really any way to watch these, so the writers, directors, and so forth were relying on memory (if they'd even seen the other films) to keep things straight.
As the series progresses there is definitely less of an effort to keep the stories and characters consistent, but that is also a byproduct of the time. Films then didn't have the same level of realism or consistency that is the norm today. We'd be shocked if Iron Man died at the end of Endgame then showed up alive with no explanation of how in the next film, but audiences at the time wouldn't question that. They'd have paid to see an Iron Man film, and wouldn't need an explanation of how Iron Man survived the last film.
Why don't you offer your summary for us here who aren't as well-versed in racial hatred as you.
Of course it is. That you'd even ask is telling of your ignorance.
It's going to take a LOT of inflation for the 2026 box office total to surpass 2019's, and by 2019 box office was already well into it's current decline.
He's certainly got to be up there. Teddy Roosevelt and Calvin Coolidge are on that list. Love him or hate him, you can't argue that Donald Trump did great things for the country during his term, though most of it was derailed by Covid and the current administration.
If you go back through them all, others on the "best list" would be Cleveland, Hayes, Pierce, Tyler, Van Buren, Madison, Jefferson, and Washington. Maybe Taft sneaks into the list?
What term do you think fits better? You wrote that Jews are degenerate and anti-Christian. If that isn't an anti-semitic remark, then what is it?
What term do you think fits better? You wrote that Jews are degenerate and anti-Christian. If that isn't an anti-semitic remark, then what is it?
When one's position is as indefensible as yours, I guess there isn't much more you can do than type lol.
You really should seek professional help. I say this out of concern and not mockery.
We mostly ate turkey. One year I wanted a Christmas goose, so I roasted a goose in one oven and a turkey in the other. I couldn't believe how much fat rendered off the goose. All things being equal, however, Christmas Eve has always been my preferred meal. We're Sicilian, so it's all seafood.
We always bought a fresh bird, sometimes from a farm where you'd point to a bird and they'd catch it, kill it, and pluck it for you. Other years we'd buy one from a market. I never knew anyone to wash a bird, just like I never saw anyone wash a steak or a pork chop. You want the bird as dry as possible before you roast it so it browns and gets crispy, so washing it seems counterproductive.
What does their knowing about Gastown have to do with anything? They roamed the countryside, robbing anyone they met.
Who cleans a bird before cooking it? Hopefully she seasoned it, and perhaps even stuffed it, but you don't need to give a goose or turkey a bath before you roast it.
What is with the moronic anti-semitism that's all over these days? Take your meds. Get a grip on reality.
Hardy nails the accent.