This review is from my series, Comparing with the Critics. If you’d like to learn more about the series, click on the link below.
Introducing my new series, Comparing with the Critics!
The summer of 1985 was a disappointing time for Gene Siskel and Roger Ebert. They were so let down by that particular time of the year, At The Movies dedicated an entire episode to discussing the worst movies of the summer. The Bride, which was released on August 16th, was the first film featured in this episode. It left such a bad impression on Roger and Gene, it also appeared on the ‘Worst of 1985’ episode of the show. In each of these episodes, Roger describes The Bride as “an ambitious film that lost it’s way” and a movie that “shot for the stars and failed miserably”. Because I hadn’t even heard of The Bride before starting my Comparing with the Critics series, I couldn’t agree or disagree with Roger’s sentiments. From the way the movie was described, it seemed to answer the question of what would happen if Victor Frankenstein’s female creation fell in love with him? This is a question that is infrequently asked in Frankenstein related media. As someone who has read Mary Shelley’s source material, I was curious to see how the film’s creative team would answer this question. But now that I have seen The Bride, I’m disappointed by how this question was approached. Unlike Gene and Roger, though, I wouldn’t go so far to say the movie is bad.
After showing a clip from The Bride in At The Movies’ Worst Movies of the Summer episode, Roger claims the film “didn’t know whether it wanted to be a serious movie about the philosophical issues raised by the whole Frankenstein legend or whether it just wanted to be a glamourous, sleek remake”. I personally believe the movie’s creative team knew exactly what they were doing, accomplishing two goals in one picture. Throughout The Bride, there are two parallel stories; the first about Frankenstein and his female creation (Eva) and the second about Frankenstein’s male creation (Viktor) and Rinaldo. These stories show Viktor and Eva learning about the world around them as well as interacting with those they depend on. Every time Rinaldo introduces Viktor, he always refers to Viktor as “his friend”. Meanwhile, Frankenstein calls Eva “his ward”. The stories in The Bride were, in my opinion, intended to take a specific approach to the Nature vs. Nurture debate, presenting how two creations created by the same man could journey to the same outcome.
In Mary Shelley’s original source material, there aren’t really any heroes in that story. That’s because it focuses on the main message of some good intentions possibly leading to bad results. In The Bride, Viktor receives a “hero’s journey”, where he not only gets to fall in love, he also gets to save the day. His name, according to Rinaldo, even means “He will win”. As I mentioned in this review’s introduction, I have read Mary Shelley’s novel. From what I remember, Frankenstein destroys his female creation and his male creation is presented in the story as more of a cautionary tale. With that said, I think this creative liberty added an interesting dynamic to The Bride!
While talking about The Bride’s two parallel stories, Gene says the story of Viktor and Rinaldo “was much more interesting than Frankenstein and the monster”. I find myself agreeing with Gene, especially since this story included a “hero’s journey” and a conflict that needed to be resolved. But another reason why I liked Rinaldo and Viktor’s story is David Rappaport’s portrayal of Rinaldo. When Rinaldo first meets Viktor, he’s surprisingly not intimidated by Viktor’s size. Instead, Rinaldo’s confidence helps Viktor find a sense of belonging as well as build a friendship between himself and Viktor. Rinaldo’s charisma shows the audience his good intentions, always striving to give Viktor a better life than Frankenstein did. As he’s giving Viktor a new shirt, Rinaldo is horrified by the scars on Viktor’s back. The sight immediately brings concern to Rinaldo’s face, his saddened tone of voice concluding how Viktor must have been mistreated. The scene I just described shows how David’s performance gave Rinaldo a genuineness that allowed him to be a likeable character. Though this film is titled The Bride, Rinaldo became this movie’s MVP!
Both Roger and Gene agreed that Viktor and Eva should have spent more screen-time together. Roger proclaims “if we’re gonna have those parallel stories for two hours, let’s have a pay-off at the end”, with Gene adding “a pay-off for half an hour, not for five minutes”. Like I talked about earlier in this review, I believe the creative team’s intention for The Bride was to present a specific approach to the Nature vs. Nurture debate, as well as giving Viktor a “hero’s journey”. However, my biggest criticism with these parallel stories was the editing. The way these stories were sewn together made the movie feel disjointed. This is because some parts of the story were longer than others. One scene shows Eva studying a series of pictures by herself for only a few seconds. The very next scene shows Viktor and Rinaldo on their journey to the circus, with the scene itself lasting several minutes. Frankenstein and Eva receiving shorter screen-time sometimes prevented the audience from seeing interesting interactions between these two characters. This creative decision also gave Eva and Frankenstein’s story less intrigue.
When I was introduced to The Bride, I was given the impression the film was trying to answer the question of what if Victor Frankenstein’s female creation fell in love with him. This made me curious to see how the movie’s creative team would answer this question. But like I said in my review’s introduction, I’m disappointed by how this question was approached. That’s because the film’s creative team didn’t answer or explore the question at all. They bring up an equally interesting and infrequently asked question of what if Frankenstein fell in love with his female creation? However, so much time was spent focusing on Eva learning about the world around her, the aforementioned question was given little time for exploration or discussion. When it came to Frankenstein’s love for Eva, it simply came across as possessive and controlling. As I’ve been saying throughout this review, Viktor was given a “hero’s journey”. This means the story always intended to have Eva fall in love with Viktor, not Frankenstein. Even though I liked the creative decision of Viktor’s “hero’s journey”, I’m still disappointed by the potential questions that were left unanswered.
Toward the beginning of At The Movies’ Worst Movies of the Summer episode, Gene claims the summer of 1985 “happened to be one of the dullest, most juvenile, most homogenized summer movie seasons in recent memory”. Out of the movies that premiered during that time, I’ve only seen six pictures in their entirety, including The Bride. Personally, I didn’t find any of these films to be bad or disappointing. Specifically speaking about The Bride, I thought it was a fine, serviceable, interesting enough title. Though I was disappointed the movie’s creative team didn’t answer the question of what if Victor Frankenstein’s female creation fell in love with him, there were aspects of the film I liked. While the acting was one of the strengths of The Bride, David Rappaport’s portrayal of Rinaldo shined the brightest! Rinaldo was such a likable character, he became my favorite! Another strength of this film was Viktor receiving a “hero’s journey”. Even though it was a creative liberty, it added an interesting dynamic to The Bride’s story. It was also interesting to see the creative team’s approach to the Nature vs. Nurture debate. I apologize for sounding like a broken record, but this is yet another Comparing with the Critics review where I disagreed with Roger and Gene. As I continue with my series, I have to wonder how often this will keep happening?
This review was brought to you by
Sally Silverscreen
18 Cinema Lane 
.jpg){kind=link}