Bride of Frankenstein
Review #2
The 1935 version of the Bride of Frankenstein is the sequel to Frankenstein. The Bride of Frankenstein was directed by James Whale. This became a movie by a story told by Mary Shelly about a monster that is portrait as a beast that no one in the town understands. The only friend that the monster has is the blind man and he teaches the monster how to speak. The creator of the monster is Dr. Frankenstein. He is bullied by Dr. Pretourius a “mad” scientist who comes to Dr. Frankenstein’s home and basically tells him that he has no choice to help Dr. Pretourius create a mate for the monster so he is not lonely. At first Dr. Frankenstein refuses, but in a cowardly act the monster kidnaps Dr. Frankenstein’s wife. When the bride was created she wanted to have nothing to do with the monster.
The first thing I want to talk about is the lighting and effects. I have to admit for a 1935 film the lighting and effects were top of the line for that era. The lighting on the face of Dr. Pretorius makes him look like a villain or “mad” because the lighting effect used to light up his face is from a low angle underneath him. Also, the lighting effect used on his face and a few others of the characters is the hatchet lighting effect. There were also a lot of shadows and the monster coming from shadows to show the mood of suspense.
There was also a lot of studio lighting used in the movie, even though the shots and lighting were supposed to make scenes look like it is outdoors. The lighting used in the blind mans fire place could not convince me that there was a real fire because when there is a real fire there are shadows that hit the wall and have a twinkle to it.
Sunday, January 17, 2010
Thursday, January 7, 2010
Bride of Frankenstein
Bride of Frankenstein Review
The lighting in the 1935 version of the Bride of Frankenstein was successful because of the way lighting was used to shape and mold the characters into the scary and dark figures that was intended for the audience. First I would like to start with the lighting on a close-up. On Elizabeth’s close-up shots the lighting has a glow and also a fuzzy feel to the lighting effect. The lighting on Elizabeth’s face has even light.
The lighting on the face of Dr. Pretorius makes him look like a villain or “mad” because the lighting effect used to light up his face is from a low angle underneath him. Also, the lighting effect used on his face and a few others of the characters is the hatchet lighting effect. On the faces of the “evil” or “mad” characters the lighting made the eyes have really dark shadows. The lighting used on Dr. Pretorius was chiaroscuro lighting which had a fast fall off. The lighting effect used on Frankenstein looked to be a star lighting effect to him because the lighting on his face was even and his face was hotter or brighter than other characters.
There was also a lot of studio lighting used in the movie, even though the shots and lighting were supposed to make scenes look like it is outdoors. The lighting used in the blind mans fire place could not convince me that there was a real fire because when there is a real fire there are shadows that hit the wall and have a twinkle to it.
Overall I thought the lighting and effects were pretty good for a 1935 Horror film. The way the lighting was used got the point across to make the characters look “mad” or look like the star.
The camera work in the movie has a few shaky moments in it. Especially when a scene calls for a truck shot. There is definitely a lot of movement. There were some camera angles that had interest to them. The first angle that I would like to talk about is when the camera turned to a tilted horizon when Dr. Frankenstein and Dr. Pretorius were in the lab and the camera had a tilted horizon to make the scene look unsettled or have a feel of confusion to give the scene a dynamic mood.
The lighting in the 1935 version of the Bride of Frankenstein was successful because of the way lighting was used to shape and mold the characters into the scary and dark figures that was intended for the audience. First I would like to start with the lighting on a close-up. On Elizabeth’s close-up shots the lighting has a glow and also a fuzzy feel to the lighting effect. The lighting on Elizabeth’s face has even light.
The lighting on the face of Dr. Pretorius makes him look like a villain or “mad” because the lighting effect used to light up his face is from a low angle underneath him. Also, the lighting effect used on his face and a few others of the characters is the hatchet lighting effect. On the faces of the “evil” or “mad” characters the lighting made the eyes have really dark shadows. The lighting used on Dr. Pretorius was chiaroscuro lighting which had a fast fall off. The lighting effect used on Frankenstein looked to be a star lighting effect to him because the lighting on his face was even and his face was hotter or brighter than other characters.
There was also a lot of studio lighting used in the movie, even though the shots and lighting were supposed to make scenes look like it is outdoors. The lighting used in the blind mans fire place could not convince me that there was a real fire because when there is a real fire there are shadows that hit the wall and have a twinkle to it.
Overall I thought the lighting and effects were pretty good for a 1935 Horror film. The way the lighting was used got the point across to make the characters look “mad” or look like the star.
The camera work in the movie has a few shaky moments in it. Especially when a scene calls for a truck shot. There is definitely a lot of movement. There were some camera angles that had interest to them. The first angle that I would like to talk about is when the camera turned to a tilted horizon when Dr. Frankenstein and Dr. Pretorius were in the lab and the camera had a tilted horizon to make the scene look unsettled or have a feel of confusion to give the scene a dynamic mood.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)