|
Author
|
Topic: Bride of Frankenstein 200' vs. 400'
|
Marshall Crist
Master Film Handler
Posts: 300
From: San Pedro, CA USA
Registered: Oct 2008
|
posted October 14, 2008 03:22 AM
I understand that the 200' may have only been available initially as a silent reel, and that a sound version was issued later. I recall that the silent version had title cards like a silent movie rather than superimposed subtitles. Presumably these were dropped for the sound version; I wonder if this resulted in a shorter-than-usual digest. I think other early Castle digests had these card titles--IT CAME FROM OUTER SPACE, at any rate.
While BRIDE is not a film I watch that often, I do feel that it is one of Universal's finest moments. The 200' version, however, doesn't do much for me. The feature is FULL of terrific scenes; the 200' doesn't really make any attempt to condense the film. Instead it's two dialogue extracts and the cutdown of the finale. I expected the 400' to be a huge improvement, but based on what little I've heard about it, perhaps not. If anyone can clue me in, I'd be grateful!
| IP: Logged
|
|
Charles Phelps
Junior
Posts: 9
From: McKinney TX USA
Registered: Nov 2008
|
posted November 15, 2008 12:45 PM
Castle made digests for 16mm sound/silent and 8mm silent in the beginning until the advent of 8mm magnetic sound in 1959. Since BRIDE was released in 1960, it may have been available in 8mm sound then. If not, it would've at least been in 16mm sound.
The silent movie type title cards actually replaced potions of the footage so the sound version was the same length more or less. Sometimes, the sound print had extra credits on the end like in the THE MUMMY whereas the silent went straight to the "The End" logo.
The 400' version has Frankenstein arrive in a coach at Dr. Praetorius' where he sees the homunculi in the glass jars. Praetorius suggests that together they create a woman.
Fade out/Fade in: Monster stumbles through forest, scares sheep, sees reflection in pond, scares shepherdess, is shot by hunters, and escapes through woods.
Fade out/Cut: Praetorius goes to crypt with grave-robbers, checks out female corpse ("I hope her bones are fresh!"), sets up a meal on a coffin, entertains the visiting monster, and promises a friend.
Fade out/Cut: In the laboratory, Frankenstein and Praetorius observe that "their" heart is still beating, and prep for creation sequence. Everything from here on is more or less intact with a few minor cuts. The main cuts though are the monster throwing Dwight Frye off the roof, Elizabeth's appearance and Frankenstein's escape. I don't believe that there is any footage in either version that is not in the other.
Some of the scenes, like the one with the homunculi, are allowed to go on too long. A little creative pruning, some tighter editing, and the addition of some dissolves would've allowed the shoe-horning of some other scenes into this. At this point, I suppose that the original Castle editing staff was gone and U-8, like Ken, was just showing scenes together quickly and cheaply. Can you imagine what Castle editors could've done with a full 18 minutes to work with?
But, the way this is edited, it would've required a 2x400 to make a decent digest. Instead, we get this attempt and U-8 does a 2x400 on THE NUDE "frickin" BOMB.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hugh Thompson Scott
Film God
Posts: 3063
From: Gt. Clifton,Cumbria,England
Registered: Jan 2012
|
posted April 30, 2012 03:23 AM
I have this little film and found it thoroughly charming,yes the
print has some unsteadiness but I forgave U8 that, just for the
pleasure of having this gem.Apart from the scenes Charles has
mentioned all the major scenes are intact.There was one scene
in the 200' that was slightly shortened in the 400' and that was
when Pretorious and the grave robbers are opening the girls
sarcophagus in the crypt,it's only a minute or so,but I spliced
it in.On the whole, taking in the films faults, I still think it is a
very entertaining film and I suppose I'm biased because I just
love the old Universal Horrors.Where they did excel was in the
400' "Invisible Man",where the quality was excellent.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hugh Thompson Scott
Film God
Posts: 3063
From: Gt. Clifton,Cumbria,England
Registered: Jan 2012
|
posted December 27, 2012 05:23 AM
Lets not think all Castle edits of 200's were good,as I mentioned
in a previous thread their "High Plains Drifter" was bad, so were
the editions of "House of Frankenstein","House of Dracula" and
"Ghost of Frankenstein", they required a lot of re-editing to make
any coherence with the release of their 2x200' versions.The 200'
"Dracula" was also pointless and a classic case of showing nothing
in particular.One of their best edits was "Man Made Monster" that
told the tale in key scenes, but lets be honest, they were not all
well edited to this degree, and the picture quality was washed
out in some of these releases.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Michael O'Regan
Film God
Posts: 3085
From: Essex, UK
Registered: Oct 2007
|
posted December 30, 2012 03:38 AM
quote:
James Whale didn't have much interest in the project.
Whale initially didn't want to do the film as he felt that, in the first place the "Frankenstein" idea had been adequately covered in his first film, and secondly, following The Old Dark House and The Invisible Man he didn't want to become known only as a director of horror pictures.
However, he used the film to get the directors job on One More River.
Once on board, however, he was indeed fully committed to the film supervising several script revisions and music scores personally.
Though it is hailed as Whale's masterpiece, I haven't seen all of Whale's work so it's not possible for me to judge it on that level. It is, however, a beautiful film to look at - brilliant photography, art direction, lighting all combine to offer a creepy atmosphere. Ernest Thesiger, of course, is marvellous, as always.
My own opinion though is that it's become a little overrated over the years.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Michael O'Regan
Film God
Posts: 3085
From: Essex, UK
Registered: Oct 2007
|
posted December 30, 2012 04:16 AM
One star??? Harsh indeed, Allan. ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
I'd have to give it four out of five stars simply because, overall, it's an excellent film. It's fun, and it pushes all the buttons for me. The one thing that detracts for me is the whole handling of the Bride scene. It's stilted and feels staged. If anything, it's too short. We could've done with some development of the interaction between the Monster and his Bride before he pulls "the lever". Up to this, the film is a character driven piece - Minnie, Henry, Pretorius... then, it seems the whole Bride bit is geared only towards a quick ending.
Coincidentally, I've actually had reason to watch it twice in the past month, the last time being two days ago. Check out the new restoration on Blu Ray, it really does look beautiful.
ps: A historical point of note - in those days, installers of laboratory equipment always included a lever which, when pulled, blows everything up. They included this for free, I believe ![[Wink]](wink.gif)
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
