FOR THE FUN OF IT:

 

I SAW FRANKENSTEIN 2025

When I learned of Guillermo del Toro's Frankenstein, I was both hopeful yet wary. Despite the director/writer's evident love for classic monsters, I found his Gill-man update (The Shape of Water) more insolent than inspiring due to its monster-wins-girl novelty and its villainous stereotypes. Nevertheless, I came to understand that the director's Frankenstein would stick to the thematic core of Mary Shelley's novel, and if so, there was a decent shot it would satisfy. 

As it stands, del Toro's Frankenstein, which he scripted, is far from a page-by-page reenactment of the book, but it would have been foolish to think it would be. (For the record, Calvin Floyd's Terror of Frankenstein and Kevin Connor's Frankenstein 2004 are the most faithful film versions, though each tends to be overlooked by the so-called afficionados.) Del Toro's Frankenstein is at least faithful to its Prometheus premise, which suffices, though filtered through such colorful and ornate, 1970s Frankenstein productions as The Rocky Horror Picture Show, Andy Warhol's Flesh for Frankenstein and Frankenstein: The True Story, thanks to Tamara Deverel's elaborate interiors and Dan Laustsen's complementing cinematography. 

The lavish decor dominates the movie's first half, which surrounds Victor, a man who seeks a "ninth configuration" spark (so to speak) to reanimate the deceased, due to the long-ago death of his mother. Things grow grittier (more Universal/Hammer-eque) when the movie switches to the Creature. Either way, these melodramatic bookends play not only off del Toro's deft direction, they're empowered by Alexandre Desplat's sweeping score, which does much to enhance the "operatic" moods, as do the performers and their character interpretations. 

For Victor, we have Oscar Isaac, who fits the scheme, considering the actor reached success as a Frankenstein type in Alex Garland's android epic, Ex Machina. For the super-powerful, regenerating Creature  (designed by the adroit Mike Hill), we get Jacob (The Mortuary Collection/Euphoria) Elordi, a not-so-hideous, green-skinned entity, but it's more his anguish that spins his ugliness (much of which bleeds from jealousy and revenge). His poignant, towering stature also does the emblematic trick. (As the retelling progresses, Victor becomes more the baddie, and the Creature the goodie: a plan explored in Franc Roddam's underrated The Bride and Marcus Nispel's innovative Frankenstein 2024.)  

The captivating Mia Goth plays Lady Elizabeth (as well as Victor's mother, Claire, for the brief time in which her presence lasts). In this case, Elizabeth is betrothed to Felix Kammerer's doomed William Frankenstein. Goth is an apt casting choice, standing as a current-day Hazel Court (Elizabeth in The Curse of Frankenstein), Ingrid Pitt and Barbara Steele, thanks to Goth's roles in Ti West's X/Pearl/MaXXXine. Like Court, Pitt and Steele, Goth is easy on the eyes and delivers this adaptation to a further, ornamental level. I only wish she had more screen time, though her interaction with the Creature is memorable and moving. 

The rest of the cast is equally evocative, entering at varying times at varying lengths. For one, Leopold, Victor's father, is played by Charles (Phantom of the Opera 1990/Alien 3) Dance (costar of Paul McGuinan's Victor Frankenstein, where he plays the father of James McAvoy's titular lead). Dance's character, a revered physician, is essential in establishing a vehement rivalry with his son and as such, perpetuates a Fear Strikes Out dynamic that foreshadows Victor and the Creature's relationship. 

Along with Dance, we're introduced to Christoph Waltz's Heinrich Harlander, an ambitious arms merchant who's Elizabeth's uncle and the financier of Victor's experiments; Lars (Headhunter/The Witcher) Mikkelsen as Captain Anderson (called Walton in the novel, as well as other adaptations); the ever erudite Ralph (The First Omen/Fantastic 4: First Steps) Ineson as Professor Krempe and David (Game of Thrones/Captain America: First Avenger) Bradley as the compassionate, blind man the Creature befriends. 

Even though it's familiar turf, the ingredients do work their Gothic charm, ensuring that Frankenstein 2025 is a solid, gory, atmospheric remake. It distinguishes itself from other Frankenstein adaptations where it can, while recalling others for nostalgic cause, never reinventing the wheel to substitute Shelley's intent with modern, social-demographic cleverness. On this basis, it holds a proper, timeless feel. I can accept it, and as I've done with so many other Frankenstein endeavors, be content to revisit it.

PINUP TIME: VALERIE LEON IS PRINCESS TERA

 

DANIEL TITLEY'S LONDON AFTER MIDNIGHT: THE LOST FILM

I was guided to Daniel Titley's book, London After Midnight: The Lost Film, by director/producer/writer Ansel H. Faraj, after praising his haunting short, "Watching After Midnight" (see early October post), which he cowrote with the former. 

Titley's Keyreads, coffee-table edition is an amazing and impassioned accomplishment, in which the meticulous author tackles multiple aspects of Tod Browning/Lon Chaney Sr.'s missing, MGM silent opus. 

I, like so many who've yearned to view the 1927 submission, have only experienced the TCM still-compilation/restoration of what-may-have-been, as well as Browning's classic, MGM 1935 remake, Mark of the Vampire (starring Bela Lugosi and Lionel Barrymore), but as appreciated and helpful as the productions are, they're not the veritable, Browning/Chaney creation.  

Titley acknowledges this, and in so doing, paints a painstaking perspective on what existed, looking back to such inspirations as Browning's short story, "The Hypnotist" (presented in whole), as well as the drafts that shaped the film's final form (with genuine content shared). 

Along the way, Titley reveals authentic, London After Midnight, nitrate clips and examples of the film's prolific promotion, the results of which can be enjoyed through archival posters, lobby cards, stills, reviews and newspaper advertisements.

The author also caters to London After Midnight's social impact. For the latter, Titley includes a section on a famous, Hyde Park case, in which a chap named Robert Williams murdered a housemaid-waitress, Julia Mangan, and then blamed Chaney's "vampiric" Man in the Beaver Hat for spurring the deed. Titley's scholarly detailing of the event is as enthralling as any quality, murder-mystery novel, and if I may be so bold, a film or play adaptation based on the case would be worth pursuing.

In addition, Titley delves into the 1965 MGM, Culver City fire that destroyed the movie's alleged, only print: an account that's as heartbreaking as it's informative, regarding not only London After Midnight, but other lost gems. 

Even if a print of London After Midnight should someday surface, Titley's 452-page exploration would remain relevant, for its pages brim of the fervor and lament that one might associate with unrequited love. It is, therefore, an emotional work of art in its own valid right. 

For any Browning, Chaney or general, cinema buff, London After Midnight: The Lost Film is an essential, encyclopedic triumph that must be owned and to which one will return time and again. 

Titley's towering achievement can be purchased in hardback and paperback at

https://www.amazon.com/dp/1399942549?ref=ppx_yo2ov_dt_b_fed_asin_title

TERRIFIC TEAM-UP IMAGE: KARLOFF MARATHON

 

I SAW GEN V: SEASON 2

The problem with series these days is the huge gaps in their continuity: case in point, Amazon's Gen V.

The second (eight-episode) season would have held more impact for me if the wait hadn't been as long. As it stands, Gen V: Season 2 may just as well have been the start of a new show with tenuous ties to The Boys and all its satirical, almighty Vought "miracles."

The season's focus fell on Godolkin University's Dean Cipher (Thomas Link Later) nurturing the bucking-the-system, parent-slaying, blood-tugging Marie Moreau (Jaz Sinclair). The shifty, push-and-pull dynamic (the reason why he wished to amplify her super-duper supe powers) was interesting enough due to its Project Odessa rigamarole (plus the sultry "encouragement" of Susan Heyward's cerebral Sister Sage prodding it along). However, did we really need a full season to tease the plan and then (as we screeched toward the end) unveil a puppet decoy? I mean, talk about going on and on and on to reveal the obvious. 

Most of the in-betweens could have been dropped or tightened, with the exception of Erin Moriarty/Starlight's welcomed strand, which should have been explored further throughout. Thanks to its padding, Gen V falls short of its goal by daring to tie itself inside-out (and every which way but loose) to its emanating source (and for that matter, X-Men, stemming from its blatant, Professor X-vs-Magneto allusions). As a result, it feels too much like, well, what it is: a secondary venture to cash in on The Boys' popularity. (For the record, The Boys' animated experiment, Diabolical, seems better suited to carry the insolent torch than this cluttered counterpart, but then there's this Vought Rising deal brewing and so ...)  

As with The Boys, I hold a love/hate relationship for Gen V. With the former, I watch with morbid fascination, though I never fail to get riled by its juxtaposing, socio-political setups (too often biased, misinformed and propagandized) or whenever the content goes out on a limp to smear DC and Marvel's characters for being too righteous (like that's somehow a bad thing). 

With Gen V, it's nowhere near as derisive, and so I've dived in with an obligatory impulse to catch its marginal details. With that said, aren't marginal details meant to be supplemental and therefore expendable in regard to the whole? They're never meant to be the main course, right? (Now, if the ultimate, main course had been between Ethan Slater's at-long-last, uncloaked/healed Thomas Godolkin and Anthony Starr's dogged yet insecure Homelander, that might have be a worth-while payoff.) 

I presumed Gen V: Season 2 would distort and mock Teen Titans and/or The New Mutants, but for better or worse, it never quite did. Even so, it was still miles more captivating than HBO Max's ponderous Dune: Prophesy or SyFy's long dead Krypton, but like those sideline shows, its link to its impertinent franchise isn't so significant in the long run. That, for me, is a snag I'm unable to accept, let alone overcome, considering the time I've invested.   

HAPPY BACK TO THE FUTURE DAY 2025 (10/21)