Skip to main content

You gave me life, and then you left me to die.

Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein
(1994)

(SPOILERS) Or Francis Ford Coppola’s Kenneth Branagh’s Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, to the plebs. Except that Franny was very quick to disassociate himself from the garbage spewed forth by Ireland’s favourite Englishman. For anyone else, this would deservedly have been a career-ending episode. Just look at what happened to another swirling-camera artisan with another crude goth knock-off; Stephen Sommers struggled to catch a break after Van Helsing preposterously failed to be the next The Mummy. But a trained luvvie with boundless self-regard was bound to bounce back. Sir Ken retreated to Shakespeare for a few years (and an equally overblown “definitive” Hamlet) before eventually returning to the mode of mediocre (at best) Hollywood behemoths with the likes of Thor (the Second Unit saved it), Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit, Cinderella and Murder on the Orient Express. All of which proved to any doubters that, as a director, he’s a less than talented hack.

And on the evidence of his performance in Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, he isn’t much of a thesp either. Yes, the then-heralded successor to Sir Larry is really sucky as a Hollywood star. He’d been noticed by Tinseltown, obviously, because of Henry V. Then Dead Again, his first US foray – complete with requisite dodgy Yank accent – did mystifyingly brisk business. Everyone loved Ken, and Ken was going to show them he was hugely loveable. As loveable and desirable as your Costner or your Willis or your Mel or your Tom. Thus, he attacks the material – Frank Darabont’s material – with misplaced narcissistic vigour, turning Mary Shelley’s mad scientist into a shirtless, potbellied homunculus, a Byronic twat with a MOR-rock mullet.

Ken’s face is devoid of character, a doughy pudding attempting to inhabit a deluded scientist. When he sports a beard, he simply looks like he’s trying much too hard. In a ginger kind of way. His self-belief in his own swoony studliness is by far the funniest thing about the movie (that it seemed to work on Helena Bonham-Carter in reality – to Emma Thompson’s cost, or should that be ultimate good fortune? – is, well… She ended up with Burton, didn’t she? Tim, not Richard).

Whether he’s wooing adoptive sister Elizabeth (Bonham-Carter) or writhing around in a risibly homoerotic pool of post, or pre,-Freudian birthing fluid, Ken is abjectly awful (thematically, the latter sequence echoes the absurdly bloody early scene in which Ian Holm, also stripped to the waist, has his hands up wife Cheri Lunghi in an attempt to deliver their baby. He emerges festooned in her innards, tumbling down an absurdly immense and operatic staircase).

Ken at least isn’t alone in his rubbishness. He coaxes some truly terrible turns from his co-stars too. Frankenstein is an embarrassment of shitses. Right from the off, there’s Aidan Quinn (as a ship’s captain) doing his level best to meet Ken amdram overemphasis for amdram overemphasis. Tom Hulce, ten years on from Mozart, was, I feel sure, cast as a measure to make Ken look good, and if it doesn’t work, Hulce does his darnedest (he apparently replaced Christopher Lambert. My suspicion is that Chris was too tall for pint-sized Ken to share the screen with).

Helena is horrifying, reminding you why she was such an objectionable creature during her Merchant Ivory phase. This is also a rare instance where Holm can come up with nothing to remedy matters. Robert Hardy is solid as a tutor denouncing Vic, while Briers does his patent Briers as the blind hermit. The surprise is John Cleese, with different teeth, hair and delivery, who is actually quite decent in a straight role as an influencer of Vic’s unnatural experiments.

And then there’s Bob. De Niro was beginning to enter his parody phase at this point. Even his work with greats this decade (Casino, Heat) delivered films that were much more notable than his now-familiar performances in them. His creature comes very much from the guy who played Max Cady and earlier still Louis Cypher. Bob makes for possibly the most anaemic creature imaginable, so reflecting the makeup, which is good, but neither interesting nor inspired.

Thus, the diligence of Darabont’s adaptation is buried beneath utterly unnuanced performance and delivery. There’s zero connection between beast and creator, even when they’re slopping about in amniotic fluid. And while the lines are there, any sensitivity of poetry is beyond Bob. “Because I am so very ugly and they are so very beautiful” he tells Briars of why he cannot go home, before spinning on a dime and exclaiming “I will have revenge!” as he burns down the hermit’s home. “He never gave me a name” he commiserates with himself at the end, and cries because “He was my father”. Yet the observation is meaningless because no relationship or connection has been established.

This is typical of Ken’s approach: swathes of bloody overkill but absent any emotional resonance. In his own inept way, he seems to be attempting to ape superhero movies; the super-strength toad leads to a super-strength Bob, leaping at Ken in inglorious slo-mo amid the snow. That and his later leering through a skylight are among the Creature’s Batman moments. Then there’s Elizabeth, reduced to the states of a bride and renouncing affections for either suitor before engaging in some OTT overkill as she rampages aflame down a corridor (that bit was Ken’s bright idea). It’s all quite ghastly.

For Ken, the lack of an iota of artistry means the artifice is evident despite the cost. The ice sequence sets are very obvious sets. DP Roger Pratt, so good for Gilliam, rather combusts under the strain of Ken’s relentlessly roving camera and complete lack of acumen for atmosphere. Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein fails even to work as a melodrama, let alone a horror. Crazy camera “save the baby” freneticism is just the start, and the picture never stops. To the point that, when Victor attempts to dance with monster Elizabeth, we’re “treated” to a flashback medley of dizzying camera swirls (lest you assume Ken has matured or become more stylistically conscious with age, Murder on the Orient Express’ signature shot was a zoom in on Poirot walking on top of the train). And yes, we keep returning to the loooong staircase, the looongest ever.

Darabont was not impressed, quite correctly. Here’s Frank being frank about Frankenstein:

I think Ken Branagh will probably think I'm after him now (laughs). We've all heard stories about their work didn't turn out the way they wanted when it hit the screen. This is my prime example of a movie I wrote going down the shitter. In my opinion, I think Frankenstein was one of the best things I ever wrote. Easily equal to The Green Mile. And that wasn't the movie that Ken Branagh wanted to make. He wanted to make something else. What he made I thought was a dunderheaded, ham-fisted mess. But I wasn't the director on that, so...I felt like he tried to reinvent the wheel every step of the way. It's so dumbed down. It's so bombastic, that I was just flabbergasted. And let's describe Mary Shelley's novel: very understated, very smart, conceptually brilliant. I don't know what happened there. Had I known how it was going to turn out, I never would have done it. My all-time favourite book is Shelley's Frankenstein.

He was being too kind there. Although, his dialogue isn’t always so choice (“It’s not often a man has his wedding night” Ken is told by his right-hand man. This is true. Unless you’re John Cleese). The most interesting part of the movie, from the current perspective, is one I wasn’t expecting, less still recalled. Turns out the monster is an anti-vaxxer. But by implication, science creates anti-vaxers and then creates monsters from them. Not unlike The X-Files, science extolling the benefits of receiving the shot also betrays that those doing so are entirely unscrupulous. Victor proudly announces “You take vaccines for instance. Thirty years ago, the concept of vaccine was unheard of, and now we save lives every day” before waxing lyrical about how, if you have a sick heart, you can be given a healthy one. It’s the pre-monster man (played by De Niro, and much more interesting in this brief turn than his monster manifestation) who objects to the vaccination programme of Cleese’s Professor Waldman (the movie’s own Fauci):

Bob: You’re not sticking that in me. It’s got pox in it, I hear.
Woman: Pox? They given us pox?
Bob: Pox.
Waldman: It’s not pox. It’s a vaccine.
Bob: What’s that?
Waldman: It’s a vaccine that will prevent a plague in this city. It’s a tiny, harmless amount of anti-small pox serum.
Bob: You just said pox!
Waldman: I said it was harmless. It’s a necessary precaution without which this godforsaken city would be immediately put under quarantine.
Bob: You doctors kill people. I don’t care what you say. You’re not sticking that in me.
Waldman: Yes, I am. It’s the law!

Now here, the forced vaccinations unsurprisingly lead to violence (De Niro stabs the doctor in the neck with his syringe). And it turns out that everything the “superstitious” “unscientific” fool says to Waldman is fair comment. The key to the afflictions of the urban environment, of overcrowding, bad air, water, vermin and putrescence are the true elements leading to the realisation “This cholera is an epidemic!” But the scientific vanguard of Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein – the same ones now leading the transhumanist charge – are steeped in early (Pasteurian) virus theory, and their backwardness soon leads to widespread suffering (Briers’ family’s livelihoods are threatened by the quarantine).

Reportedly, Coppola wanted to re-edit the movie when he saw Ken’s cut. I dare say he was minded to bin it entirely. While there’s no doubting his Bram Stoker’s Dracula is riddled with excess and indulgence, it’s also unmistakeably the work of someone with talent to spare. Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, in contrast, is entirely bereft. It is a blighted movie. An abomination.



Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Maybe the dingo ate your baby.

Seinfeld 2.9: The Stranded The Premise George and Elaine are stranded at a party in Long Island, with a disgruntled hostess.

Nanobots aren’t just for Christmas.

No Time to Die (2021) (SPOILERS) You know a Bond movie is in trouble when it resorts to wholesale appropriation of lines and even the theme song from another in order to “boost” its emotional heft. That No Time to Die – which previewed its own title song a year and a half before its release to resoundingly underwhelmed response, Grammys aside – goes there is a damning indictment of its ability to eke out such audience investment in Daniel Craig’s final outing as James (less so as 007). As with Spectre , the first half of No Time to Die is, on the whole, more than decent Bond fare, before it once again gets bogged down in the quest for substance and depth from a character who, regardless of how dapper his gear is, resolutely resists such outfitting.

Twenty dwarves took turns doing handstands on the carpet.

Bugsy (1991) (SPOILERS) Bugsy is very much a Warren Beatty vanity project (aren’t they all, even the ones that don’t seem that way on the surface?), to the extent of his playing a title character a decade and a half younger than him. As such, it makes sense that producer Warren’s choice of director wouldn’t be inclined to overshadow star Warren, but the effect is to end up with a movie that, for all its considerable merits (including a script from James Toback chock full of incident), never really feels quite focussed, that it’s destined to lead anywhere, even if we know where it’s going.

Just a little whiplash is all.

Duel (1971) (SPOILERS) I don’t know if it’s just me, but Spielberg’s ’70s efforts seem, perversely, much more mature, or “adult” at any rate, than his subsequent phase – from the mid-’80s onwards – of straining tremulously for critical acceptance. Perhaps because there’s less thrall to sentiment on display, or indulgence in character exploration that veered into unswerving melodrama. Duel , famously made for TV but more than good enough to garner a European cinema release the following year after the raves came flooding in, is the starkest, most undiluted example of the director as a purveyor of pure technical expertise, honed as it is to essentials in terms of narrative and plotting. Consequently, that’s both Duel ’s strength and weakness.

These are not soda cans you asked me to get for you.

The Devil’s Own (1997) (SPOILERS) Naturally, a Hollywood movie taking the Troubles as a backdrop is sure to encounter difficulties. It’s the push-pull of wanting to make a big meaningful statement about something weighty, sobering and significant in the real world and bottling it when it comes to the messy intricacies of the same. So inevitably, the results invariably tend to the facile and trite. I’m entirely sure The Devil’s Own would have floundered even if Harrison Ford hadn’t come on board and demanded rewrites, but as it is, the finished movie packs a lot of talent to largely redundant end.

Ours is the richest banking house in Europe, and we’re still being kicked.

The House of Rothschild (1934) (SPOILERS) Fox’s Rothschild family propaganda pic does a pretty good job presenting the clan as poor, maligned, oppressed Jews who fought back in the only way available to them: making money, lots of lovely money! Indeed, it occurred to me watching The House of Rothschild , that for all its inclusion of a rotter of a Nazi stand-in (played by Boris Karloff), Hitler must have just loved the movie, as it’s essentially paying the family the compliment of being very very good at doing their very best to make money from everyone left, right and centre. It’s thus unsurprising to learn that a scene was used in the anti-Semitic (you might guess as much from the title) The Eternal Jew .

You are not brought upon this world to get it!

John Carpenter  Ranked For anyone’s formative film viewing experience during the 1980s, certain directors held undeniable, persuasive genre (SF/fantasy/horror genre) cachet. James Cameron. Ridley Scott ( when he was tackling genre). Joe Dante. David Cronenberg. John Carpenter. Thanks to Halloween , Carpenter’s name became synonymous with horror, but he made relatively few undiluted movies in that vein (the aforementioned, The Fog , Christine , Prince of Darkness (although it has an SF/fantasy streak), In the Mouth of Madness , The Ward ). Certainly, the pictures that cemented my appreciation for his work – Dark Star , The Thing – had only a foot or not at all in that mode.

Sleep well, my friend, and forget us. Tomorrow you will wake up a new man.

The Prisoner 13. Do Not Forsake Me Oh My Darling We want information. In an effort to locate Professor Seltzman, a scientist who has perfected a means of transferring one person’s mind to another person’s body, Number Two has Number Six’s mind installed in the body of the Colonel (a loyal servant of the Powers that Be). Six was the last person to have contact with Seltzman and, if he is to stand any chance of being returned to his own body, he must find him (the Village possesses only the means to make the switch, they cannot reverse the process). Awaking in London, Six encounters old acquaintances including his fiancée and her father Sir Charles Portland (Six’s superior and shown in the teaser sequence fretting over how to find Seltzman). Six discovers Seltzman’s hideout by decoding a series of photographs, and sets off to find him in Austria. He achieves this, but both men are captured and returned to the Village. Restoring Six and the Colonel to their respective bodie

Isn’t sugar better than vinegar?

Femme Fatale (2002) (SPOILERS) Some have attempted to rescue Femme Fatale from the dumpster of critical rejection and audience indifference with the claim that it’s De Palma’s last great movie. It isn’t that by a long shot, but it might rank as the last truly unfettered display of his obsessions and sensibilities, complete with a ludicrous twist – so ludicrous, it’s either a stroke of genius or mile-long pile up.

He tasks me. He tasks me, and I shall have him.

Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan (1982) (SPOILERS) I don’t love Star Trek , but I do love Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan . That probably isn’t just me, but a common refrain of many a non-devotee of the series. Although, it used to apply to The Voyage Home (the funny one, with the whales, the Star Trek even the target audience for Three Men and a Baby could enjoy). Unfortunately, its high regard has also become the desperate, self-destructive, song-and-verse, be-all-and-end-all of the overlords of the franchise itself, in whichever iteration, it seems. This is understandable to an extent, as Khan is that rare movie sequel made to transcendent effect on almost every level, and one that stands the test of time every bit as well (better, even) as when it was first unveiled.