Frankenstein Unbound

Review #2534: Frankenstein Unbound.

Cast: 

John Hurt (Joe Buchanan / The Narrator), Raul Julia (Dr. Victor Frankenstein), Bridget Fonda (Mary Shelley), Nick Brimble (Frankenstein's monster), Catherine Rabett (Elizabeth Lavenza), Jason Patric (Lord Byron), Michael Hutchence (Percy Shelley), Catherine Corman (Justine Moritz), Mickey Knox (General Reade), and Terri Treas (The Voice of Computer) 

Directed by Roger Corman (#368 - The Little Shop of Horrors, #684 - It Conquered the World, #852 - The Terror, #931 - Not of This Earth, #1007 - Attack of the Crab Monsters, #1039 - Five Guns West, #1042 - War of the Satellites, #1136 - Gas-s-s-s, #1147 - X: The Man with the X-ray Eyes, #1186 - A Bucket of Blood, #1423 - The Wild Angels, #1425 - The St. Valentine's Day Massacre, #1674 - Machine-Gun Kelly, #1684 - Creature from the Haunted Sea, #1918 - House of Usher, #2030 - The Trip, #2113 - The Undead, #2211 - The Intruder, #2275 - The Wasp Woman, #2295 - The Pit and the Pendulum, #2434 - The Premature Burial)

Review: 

"I don't know how to exactly sum up my career other than to think of myself as a filmmaker. I've done everything, every thing from being a messenger at Twentieth Century Fox to being a truck driver on location to being a writer, producer, director, distributor, and even a sometime-actor. So, I would say that Tm somebody who has worked in all areas of motion pictures. I would hope that I've contributed something to the American film industry and I've had a great time doing it. I'm not sure that I will be remembered in years to come. But, if I am remembered in film history, it will probably be as a medium- to low-budget producer-director who contributed along the way to giving other people opportunities."

Well, better late than never. Honestly, I wanted to do this film last November, but I just didn't have enough time to truly give the film the attention it deserved, even with the occasion of the film turning 35 years ago. Coincidentally, this month was the 100th anniversary of Roger Corman's birth (having been born on the 5th in 1926 in Detroit). Now, you might wonder, what the hell is Frankenstein Unbound? Well, it was the little-seen swansong of Roger Corman as a director. Sure, he had kept busy as a producer, but he had not directed a movie since the chaotic production of Von Richthofen and Brown (1971). Producer Thom Mount approached him with the idea to get back into directing and after a few years of ballooning budgeting (reported to be $11.5 million for a film distributed by 20th Century Fox in the US/Canada and Warner Bros. for the international market), Corman was there, complete with a $1 million fee. The film is loosely based on the 1973 novel of the same name by Brian Aldiss (whose other noted story that was turned into a film being "Supertoys Last All Summer Long", which served as the basis for A.I. Artificial Intelligence [2001]), for which F. X. Feeney, better known as a freelance journalist was tasked to write the adaptation, although Corman wound up being credited as a co-writer with his input on the script; Edward Neumeier (of RoboCop [1987] fame) apparently contributed to the script but was not credited. The movie was not a success with audiences (according to Aldiss, a screening he went to in London had just six people seeing it), managing to go to the video markets by February after being released in November. While Aldiss apparently was interested enough to want to do a "Dracula Unbound" to where he wrote a script, it never came to pass, and Corman stuck to producing all the way up until 2018. 

It almost pulls it off. As pulpy and as ridiculous as it might look, it really does almost work as a movie worth thinking about on the offbeat path when talking about Frankenstein-adjacent films. I imagine those who saw the Corman movies from three decades prior that freely had fun with the works of Edgar Allen Poe will have a bit of curiosity in seeing what Corman has to offer here...and just wish it all clicked more. So, what's the setting: in the future (insert yell here) of 2031, a scientist has made an energy beam weapon that could destroy an object on a molecular level that he thinks could lead to world peace only to have it cause bad weather and rifts in time. He just happens to be in his state-of-the-art talking sports car when he goes to 1817 and finds a scientist that not only exists along with Mary Shelley but also is totally not similar to him in developing a major scientific breakthrough with dangerous consequences. Of the main focuses, Julia seems to be the only one who is really pulling in an invested performance, having a solemn dignity in his delusions about being one above the rest as a creator that can't reckon with the idea of being wrong. this isn't to complain about Hurt, who is tasked to play an American for whatever reason, although Fonda isn't exactly swimming in praise when you consider that Rabett is meant to be the key force to setup the actual climax (to say nothing of the lack of things to really do for Patric or Michel Hutchence, best known as the singer of the underrated band INXS).

I can't say it is a compromised movie in producer interference, but it just seems to be out of step with really delivering on what it believes it wants to show in the perils of trying to play God in the guise of science. It just feels like a movie out of date despite its strange moments of charm that prove too fleeting for something that meanders far too many times to not earn its runtime (85 minutes). It has a few charming moments, at least; simply put, even goofy schlock is better than self-important slop. Nothing feels all that surprising or particularly involving besides the occasional splotches of gore (to say nothing of the curiously stretched makeup of the monster, which goes better than the lack of material for Brimble to chew on). After a climax of transporting people back to time and killing people off as swiftly as possible, it ends with a bunch of lasers going around to somehow deal with the monster, who then voices the last lines of the film about being "unbound" for whatever reason. And that's the last you see of Corman as a director, a...voice of the unbound as a guy goes to a crappy future looking for a city (speaking of premises that might have been better).  As a whole, Frankenstein Unbound begs to really cut loose in being a film besides the usual trappings of a Frankenstein movie that isn't bound enough in motivations or in energy to really rise to the occasion for entertainment. If you like to see curious last efforts or films that might be a hidden gem in the rough, this might just be up your alley.

 

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

Song of the day!

*I really did want to watch and review it for November 7 to close out 7 Days of The Week After Halloween (2025), but I instead went with the doubleheader Mayhem and Suitable Flesh. So it goes.

Army of Darkness.

Review #2141: Army of Darkness.

Cast: 

Bruce Campbell (Ash Williams / "Evil Ash"), Embeth Davidtz (Sheila), Marcus Gilbert (Lord Arthur), Ian Abercrombie (Wise Man), Richard Grove (Duke Henry the Red), Timothy Patrick Quill (Blacksmith), Michael Earl Reid (Gold Tooth), Bridget Fonda (Linda), Bill Moseley (Deadite captain), Patricia Tallman (Possessed witch), and Ted Raimi (Cowardly warrior/Second supportive villager/Anthony, the S-Mart clerk/Skeleton voices) Directed by Sam Raimi (#611 - Spider-Man, #1296 - The Evil Dead, #1483 - Evil Dead II, #1495 - Darkman, #1695 - Spider-Man 2, and #1779 - Spider-Man 3, and #1840 - Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness)

Review: 

Sure, it is easy to say that the third film of a series just can't compare to the first two films. And you would be right in a variety of those scenarios, even with something as curious as the Evil Dead series, which retained the same director in Sam Raimi and lead presence in Bruce Campbell for each of them that had a sense of evolution from film to film. The gory mayhem of the original film (1981) that was shot for a low budget in a cabin in Tennessee, combined with the efforts of producer Irvin Shapiro, resulted in a cult classic. Six years later, Evil Dead II, basically a "re-quel", came under the hands of Dino De Laurentiis to a cult hit that may or may not be better than the previous film within its comedy-horror aspects. Now, in 1992, here we have a medieval-themed film that actually was proposed and rejected for the second film due to cost. There were various influences that came into the script as done by Sam and Ivan Raimi, such as A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court and Jason and the Argonauts. The film was made in a deal that saw De Laurentiis fund the film while Universal Pictures serve as distributor.  This is the kind of film that somehow has more than two versions: the original theatrical cut runs at 81 minutes (those studio yokels actually thought they could get a cut for PG-13 and failed anyway), while Raimi's preferred version, with the original intended ending, runs at 96. Other versions were done to go with International audiences and television viewers that each went 88 minutes. The four-disc Blu-ray I purchased included three of these versions, but I went with the director's cut for the sole reason that edits are no fun. A "re-imagining" feature of the series that shared the name of the original came out in 2013 before a continuation series of the third film came out with Ash vs. Evil Dead in 2015.

Sure, it's easy to say that the first two films shine more than this one when it comes to horror. But so what? I actually found this one to be a pretty good movie on its own goal of injecting action comedy into the mix to make a distinct venture that is quite entertaining. We are talking about a film following the lead of the last one in a lead character who had a chainsaw for a right hand, nothing surprises me here. Why would I be mad that the film goes in its own direction with Ash when it is evident the filmmakers want to go this way? (okay, maybe the theatrical cut might not have been coherently focused but screw the editor). This is basically the Return of the Jedi of the series, are you surprised by this? Of course, it's such a funny time with this oddball lead character that has to run the gamut of growth as a hero even when confronting the horrors of being stuck in the Dark Ages (with Deadites and other odd things, no less). When it comes to quips and goofy humor, I think Campbell handles it with good gusto that is interesting for those who like some slapstick humor. The lines of parody and spectacle are enjoyable in his hands because, well, that is what I am here for, particularly with the little Ashes sequence. Having to do cues and fight beings that would be added in as stop motion is no small feat. The other actors play it mostly to form (you've got some Deadite goofiness, of course), but again, the films are lifted mostly with Campbell up there first. If one is to go out with a bang, going out with stop motion and gusto is ideal. Personally, I'm fine with either ending of the film (after checking the obvious choice of the director's cut, I looked over the other disc for a moment). You either get a darkly amusing punchline or a heroically amusing punchline, it really is up to you. As a whole, the last two Evil Dead films are like sides of the same coin in horror misery that would've made it hard for any follow-up to top, but Army of Darkness, now with the passage of time and the availability of a director's cut, proves that even a third-best effort can still be a really good time anyway.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

This ends Halloween The Week After, Year Five. Over the course of October 1 to today, a grand total of 48 horror films (and one other exception) were covered by Movie Night. It only seemed funny to close November 7th the same way that I ended the first of the Week Afters with an Evil Dead film, much in the same way that a Ring film has been there the last three years. There were a handful of films that just missed the cut for timing or other reasons, such as: I Know What You Did Last Summer, The Return of the Vampire, Trog, The Old Dark House (1963), Color Out of Space, The Student of Prague (1926), The Monster, Quartermass 2, Frankenstein 1970, Misery, Beau is Afraid, The Fog, The Fly II, you get the idea. Next year probably won't be all-out like this year, but one never knows where the Month of Horror takes you. Now then, onto other things.

Jackie Brown.

Review #1307: Jackie Brown.

Cast: 
Pam Grier (Jackie Brown), Samuel L. Jackson (Ordell Robbie), Robert Forster (Max Cherry), Bridget Fonda (Melanie Ralston), Michael Keaton (Ray Nicolette), Robert De Niro (Louis Gara), Michael Bowen (Det. Mark Dargus), Chris Tucker (Beaumont Livingston), LisaGay Hamilton (Sheronda), Tom "Tiny" Lister Jr (Winston), Hattie Winston (Simone), and Sid Haig (Judge) Written and Directed by Quentin Tarantino (#638 - Kill Bill: Volume 1, #639 - Kill Bill: Volume 2, #1180 - Reservoir Dogs, #1218 - Pulp Fiction, and #1251 - Once Upon a Time in Hollywood)

Review: 
For a crime film, a well-detailed story can go a long way to make an experience worth remembering. Quentin Tarantino certainly had plenty of films to showcase interesting people and the environments they inhabit, and Jackie Brown proves no different, showing plenty of wit and charm through a 154 minute leisure that has a solid cast and pretty good execution that leaves one fairly satisfied. This happens to be the only Tarantino film where he adapted a previous work, with the source material being Rum Punch by Elmore Leonard (which Tarantino did over adapting Freaky Deaky or Killshot after re-reading), for which there were a few changes made involving its title character alongside her race that Leonard approved of, reportedly saying that this was the best screenplay he had ever read. For his third directorial effort, Tarantino uses a little less violence and a bit more chronology when it comes to telling his story, which works pretty well within some casual confines, featuring six distinct players in something reminiscent of blaxploitation films (having Grier helps in that regard) without losing itself too much in clear style. The main group of actors do pretty well in that regard, starting with its main lead. Grier, already a trail blazer for female action heroes in the 1970s, proves just as capable in sinking her teeth into a towering presence, capable of holding her own with whoever is on screen without even having to use a gun all too much. Jackson exudes ruthless confidence to a tee here, capable of sticking any kind of line involving unseemly things (such as trying to get someone in a trunk as a favor) without too much reluctance. Forster seems completely in his element here, a world weary straight-laced player with complete professionalism and subtle chemistry with Grier that makes for a well-deserved comeback for the character actor that ended up with an Academy Award nomination for Best Supporting Actor - the film's only Oscar nomination. Fonda and De Niro also provide welcome players, casual and raw for the moments that need to happen, which all comes full circle with the parking lot sequence in terms of emotion and payoff (sometimes you just need to see it all play out to make it really count). Keaton doesn't have as much time, but it sure is nice to see him and the rest of the supporting cast in those little moments to surround the environment of the plot. It has its choices when it comes to music or homages, doing so with careful ambition that extends to a plot that plays by the book in gathering these characters to the moments that matter without shortchanging them with cheap gags or rushes. The film has its amusing moments, but it knows when to drive itself with sharp senses of focus with characters who all seem to have been around the block a few times and seem weary for it. It's a nice movie that drags itself with daring regard for plenty to see with its characters and its sudden turns that make it all feel worth it. Sure, it isn't his best film, but it does prove a worthy one to view once if not twice to see how the run plays out.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.