James Mason stars in a very
interesting and well made Frankenstein
television movie. Universal R1 DVD.
The Film
In the
1960s, the last word on Frankenstein came from Hammer films - Curse of Frankenstein
(1957) starring Peter Cushing had been a global sucess, and kick
started a new era of gothic horror, and four sequels followed over the
next few years, with varying quality. However, when the 1970s rolled
around, horror became exploitation and the British studio lagged behind
- after the failure of Horror
of Frankenstein
(1970), which tried to re-start the franchise, it seemed that Hammer's
Frankenstein run was over (although they would shoot a last
film, Frankenstein
and the Monster from Hell
in 1974). Aiming to appeal to the gothic horror fans, who didn't just
want exploitation, but enjoyed a well written story, Universal
Television comissioned Frankenstein:
The True Story for American television broadcast - it
would also be shown theatrically in Europe.
The
story opens (after a short introduction by actor James Mason), with
Victor Frankenstein and Elizabeth Fanschawe relaxing by a lake - an
accident occurs, and Victor's brother William drowns. Storming out of
the funeral, he expresses his annoyance that any man can take away
life, but he cannot create it. Returning to his studies at a hospital,
he meets Dr. Henry Clerval, a man, it emerges, engaged in
trying
to do just that - his miniature experiments, sucessfully returning
insects to life. However, he needs help to complete a full project and
employs Victor's help. Together they construct a laboratory, and create
a man from body parts - unfortunately, Clerval discovers that his
apparatus is not set-up properly and that the effects are slowly
reversing in the existing project - but he dies of a heart attack
before he can tell Victor. Nonplussed, Victor transplants Clerval's
head into the body and sucessfully brings him to life. Taking the new
man home, Victor teaches him how to talk and read, and trains him to
become a member of society. Unfortunately, the reversing effect takes
hold, and the creature starts to worsen in appearance until Victor
begins to reject him and the creature flees.
Finding
himself
lost, the creature finds a friend in a blind old man, but flees when
his granddaughter, and her boyfriend arrive. When they do see him,
there is some violent confusion, and Agatha (Jane Seymore) is
killed by a passing coach. The creature takes the body back to the
laboratory where he was created, only to find that the
mysterious Dr.
John
Polidori (James Mason) (who has been spying on the project since its
inception) has taken it over, and replaced it with his own alchemist
lab. He contacts Victor, on his wedding day, and re-introduces him to
the creature he thought dead, and they force Victor to come back and
work for them, to create a superior female creature...
The
intial reaction most viewers will have to this film is disappointment -
despite the titular promise of an accurate rendition of Mary Shelley's
story, we instead get an incredibly altered version, which tied in with
some very poor characterisation make for a rather dull opening 45
minutes that might lead many viewers to switch off. The alterations to
Shelley's book are so numerous it seems that the writer was
deliberately trying to leave no detail unchanged - from the
bizarre opening with his adult brother William drowning to death,
the curious British setting, the fact that Victor is an orphan being
looked after by Elizabeth's family and the idea of Henry Cerval being
more Frankenstein
than the
man himself. More serious to those who don't know the novel so well, is
the characterisation, Victor just appears and spouts his notions of
wanted to create life within the first moments, no background is
provided, as most adaptations do, to his childhood or motivations.
Equally, Henry Cerval seems to trust Victor from the start and lets him
in on secret information without knowing whether or not he can trust
him.
Fortunately,
the film really picks up at the 45 minute mark after the creature is
brought to life sucessfully and Victor begins to look after and teach
him. It becomes clear here that any links to Shelley's novel have been
completely thrown out of the window, and instead a completely original
story begins that is very unpredictable (especially for Frankenstein
fans) and highly enjoyable -
character is finally created and we begin to actually care about what
is happening. This means that the second half of the story has a lot
more tension and suspence than the first, with some very exciting
twists - building up to a fitting and effective finalé that
works a lot better than Shelley's original would have done for this
particular adaptation. Despite the three hour run-time, the pacing is
very brisk, and we have to assume in several cases that much more time
has passed than is indicated (most notably in the case of the
creature's observation of the blind man and his family which seems to
take place over the course of a single day).
The Frankenstein: True Story script
contains a lot of interesting themes and takes full advantage of its
three hour run-time to develop them (compared to a lot of film
adaptations that seem to rush through the story to emphasise on the
horror aspects). Often considered to be the main theme of the original
novel is that of parenthood and rejection - Shelley's Victor is the father
of his creation and rejects him at his birth, leaving him wandering and
cursed by his appearance to be alone. In contrast, Victor here actually
cares for his creation for a while, teaching him and introducing him
into society. Unfortunately, the flaws of the creation process lead to
him slowly disfiguring and Victor eventually finds himself saddled with
a brutish son
who seems to be
trapping him, a similar idea to that of a lone parent looking after a
disabled child - at the conclusion of the first half of the film we see
Victor weighing up whether or not to kill the creature, torn between
love/pity and claustrophobia. Equally, emphasising another of Shelley's
themes, it
is emphasised that
Victor only comes to reject the creature when he is disfigured - the
creature still retains the same mental faculties and physical
abilities, but Victor loaths him because of his terrible
appearance - leading to the feeling of rejection and general hatred
that permeates him for the rest of the story. The mysterious Dr.
John
Polidori, who appears extensively in the second half of the film, seems
to be based on Dr. Pretorius from the classic Bride of
Frankenstein
(1935), embodying the same alchemist style approach to the creation of
life, compared to Victor's scientific attempts, and as per Pretorius,
later encourages and
helps Victor to create a female creature. There is a lot of symbolism
on
display, much of it religious - Elizabeth in her horror, uses a bible
to squash a restored butterfly that earlier had been pressed and in a
display cabinet, although unfortunately this science versus religion plot strand
is not much further developed.
Probably unintentionally, the film plays out much more like one of Hammer's Frankenstein
sequels, than an original Frankenstein production, and it would be
interesting to picture Peter Cushing's in place of James Mason
with the
movie's Frankenstein character being converted into another disciple,
as per Frankenstein and
the Monster from Hell (1974). The
look and feel of the film is obviously inspired by the Hammer Horror
productions that were still being filmed in the early 1970s - so bright
colours, generic period atmosphere and a fair bit of blood are all
here, although television regulations mean that sex and nudity is still
rather taboo. Compared to similar BBC productions from the
era, which were often very small scale, and shot on video, Frankenstein:
The Ture Story
looks very impressive with some large ballroom scenes and a very
impressive laboratory (which soon finds itself ablaze in a very
cinematic set-piece), as well as some good looking English locations.
Director Jack Smight does a very good job building up the
tension, and a lot of the film's shock moments come without any of the
usual filmic tricks, that give away what is about to happen. Television
composer Gil Melle provides the orchestral soundtrack, very much in
keeping with the Hammer tone of the film, while the 'creature'
make-up was provided by Roy Ashton, the original Hammer make-up man
(responsible for turning Oliver Reed into a wolf in Curse of the
Werewolf (1961)), and it looks amazingly effective and realistic.
Although not exactly an all star
cast, the film boasts a good collection of British actors. Leonard
Whiting is very wooden as Victor, and David McCallum (the blond one in Man from
Uncle)
not very impressive as Henry, but Canadian actor Michael Sarrazin gives
a very strong performance as the creature, conveying the loneliness and
desperation of his character. James Mason gives the best performance as
the menacing Dr. Polidori, remaning suitably enigmatic during
the
opening half, before developing into the most interesting
character. The stunningly beautiful Jane Seymour looks perfect
as
Polidori's crowning creation, while the equally attractive Nicola
Pagett gives a good performance as the jealous and strong Elizabeth. A
variety of familiar British faces crop up in the rest of the cast,
including the 'soon to be Doctor Who' Tom Baker as a sea captain, 'Last
of the Summer Wine' star Peter Sallis as a vicar, alongside John
Gielgud and Ralph Richardson (not to be confused with George Zucco!).
Frankenstein: The True Story
starts off poorly, let down by its titular promise and rather
indifferent opening quarter. Fortunately from the 45 minute point, it
evolves into a very interesting and well written twist on the
Frankenstein mythos. Boosted by a cinematic appearance and big budget,
that help to lift it above the cheap-looking curse of television
movies,
it resembles a lost Hammer series sequel, and should certainly prove of
interest to Hammer and Frankenstein fans (who will find the
considerably altered storyline to throw up a few interesting twists on
Shelley's tale, and pose the question - what if the experiment had been sucessful?). Recommended.
In
Brief
Anyone
famous in it?
James Mason - the
British born actor, best known as Phillip Vandamm in North by Northwest
(1959)
Directed by anyone
interesting?
Jack Smight - an
American director, best known for his duo of films with Charlton Heston
in the mid-1970s, Airport
1975 (1974) and Midway (1976).
Is
it scary?
A few
jump scares, and some surprisingly shocking gory shots for a television
movie.
Any violence/gore?
Some
violence and blood.
Any sex?
None.
Who is it for?
Recommended
to Frankenstein and Hammer fans and of interest to all horror fans.
The
DVD
Visuals
1.33:1
fullscreen. Original aspect ratio. Colour The
print is of an acceptable quality, noticably grainy, there is some
print damage throughout, far from unwatchable, and a lot better than
most public domain DVDs, but certainly not as good looking as most film
prints from the era. The digital transfer
is strong though with no noticable artifacting.
Audio
English mono -
sounds fine, but is very quiet.
Subtitles
English HOH.
Extras
None.
Region
Region 1
(USA, North America) - NTSC
Other versions
available?
None
known.
Cuts?
None
known - this is the original American television version of the film
including the spoiler filled James Mason proluge and 'end of part 1'
titles, there was a theatrical version that played in Europe which was
much shorter, but contained gorier versions of some scenes.
Additional notes:
Although
not usally something that viewers will notice or care about,
the chapter markings on this disc are very annoying. The film begins,
as per the original television broadcast, with a piece-to-camera by
James Mason in London talking about Mary Shelley, and this includes
some very spoiler filled clips from the film. Unfortunately there is no
way to simply skip this, the next chapter stop being several minutes
into the film (it would also have been very easy to make this an extra
feature, or an optional 'watch before the film' setting). Combined with
the lack of bonus features (despite
the fact that most of the cast are still alive), it suggests a very
lazily produced DVD.
Summary
An
interesting and
surprisingly film that doesn't quite live up to its title, but is very
enjoyable after a slow start. Recommended.
An
acceptable DVD release at best. A rather beaten up print, combined with
a complete lack of extras, and annoyingly lazy production, only
recommendable considering that the film is not available on DVD
elsewhere.