The Bride of Frankenstein

It is a perfect little masterpiece of high camp, not untouched by pity, terror and the desire to satirize boy-girl romances.

Film scholars and queer-theory types will long argue over the intricacies of Whale's Bride as a study of artistic creation and an acidic fable of homoerotic love, but for fans it's simply the most beautiful horror film ever made.

Whale's erudite genius brings it all together. He sculpts every nuance of self-parody, social satire, horror, humour, wit and whimsy into a dazzling whole, keeping every one of his fantastical plates spinning until the tragic, inevitable finale.

Bride is often cited as Whale's masterpiece, and one of the reasons surely is his intentional lacing of humor throughout that never completely undercuts the horror or pathos.

A macabre comedy classic.

Karloff manages to invest the character with some subtleties of emotion that are surprisingly real and touching.

Whale added an element of playful sexuality to this version, casting the proceedings in a bizarre visual framework that makes this film a good deal more surreal than the original.

Hay una frase bastante popularizada que es "las segundas partes nunca son buenas", y aunque en general suele cumplirse, hay excepciones que no solo son buenas, sino que generalmente superan a la primera parte, como es el caso de esta película. Me encanta cómo esta vez, por lo menos en una pequeña parte, el "monstruo" aprende sobre la bondad, lo que es bueno y es malo. Es justo lo que necesitaba: comprensión. Comprensión que intentó buscar en la que iba a ser su novia, pero se dio cuenta de que no lo iba a encontrar ahí. Supongo que al crear el cerebro de cero, no eran tan iguales y en un primer momento no iba a reaccionar como se esperaba. Hay más temas éticos y filosóficos que, aunque no los vaya a desarrollar aquí a profundidad, le añaden profundidad a la película, temas como si el "monstruo" era culpable de los asesinatos o si más bien era el propio Frankenstein. Sin más, grandiosa película.

Classic design and storytelling, seemed weird to me that the bride is barely in it at all but that's ok.

The disappointment has been devastating. Despite the first installment fascinating me, I approached this sequel with the skepticism of someone who knows that follow-ups rarely manage to escape the shadow of their predecessor. They almost never turn out well. And although it has disappointed me quite a bit, its visual aesthetic has once again completely captivated me. It is simply a delight. With an impressive set design that brings back that lingering feeling I get when a film reminds me why I love cinema. It makes me feel that familiar, almost “childlike” fascination with the big screen again—I feel like a kid just enjoying it. I’m mesmerized by the pictorial skies that resemble painted canvases and by its masterful use of light and shadow. There’s that distinctive glow of classic cinema that no longer exists and never will again. That magical texture is extinct. And it’s astonishing how convincingly the special and visual effects hold up from 1935. Whale and John J. Mescall deliver images so powerful and poetic, like those miniature beings trapped in jars—a technical marvel that genuinely surprised me, especially watching this film for the first time in 2026. Elizabeth’s face, here portrayed by Valerie Hobson instead of Mae Clarke, is a success. The luminous white of her presence and that antique radiance so characteristic of the era sit exceptionally well with my critical eye. However, that delicate and luxurious wrapping falls apart with the story. The premise of creating an artificial race under the analogy of Adam and Eve, defying the divine purpose of life’s creation, is an intriguing idea on paper, but in practice it leaves me completely indifferent. And truth be told, I’ve never been particularly interested in Frankenstein’s motivations to defy death—I’ve always felt detached from them. So even though the concept is interesting here, it doesn’t genuinely engage me or invite me to take part in his obsession. What pulls me out the most is the treatment of the male creature. There’s an attempt to humanize the monster, giving him the capacity for friendship, which doesn’t interest me at all. I prefer that nature limited to destruction. I understand the moral and the essence of the story lies in that sensitivity, and while I do sympathize with the blind man who shelters the creature, the monster’s new personality feels unappealing. That particular scene doesn’t win me over—it becomes dense and heavy. It’s frustrating to see how moments that should be emotionally powerful only end up distracting me from the plot. Scenes that should break me or leave a strong impact simply make me think, “alright, next.” I admit that, overall, it has disappointed me more than I expected. Compared to the strength and cohesion of Frankenstein, this sequel feels much weaker, as if its attempt at a greater ambition collapses under a flawed narrative structure. What bothers me the most is feeling misled by its title. I honestly expected a tragic, gothic, and dark romance—a deep and complex development between the two fantastical beings. But the Bride barely appears on screen for a few minutes. Nothing more. A major flaw that undermines the entire proposal and betrays my expectations. The only thing I truly like is the line, “We belong to the world of the dead.” A perfect closing note for a film that, unfortunately, ends up being a tired and less stimulating narrative than it should be.

It's awful, it's boring, it honestly feels like a full-on parody of the original iconic film, but not in a clever or self-aware way, just silly, and not even the fun kind of silly, i kept sitting there wondering how they managed to mishandle almost every single part of the story, nearly everything that could go wrong does go wrong, and it's exhausting to watch. The acting is terrible, one character even tries to recreate an iconic line from the first film, but again, it felt like he's parodying it, there isn't a single memorable moment here, aside from wasting my time, throughout the whole thing, i kept thinking, how on earth they completely tumble this one so hard, i know it's the 30s and it's probably one of the earliest attempt of a sequels, maybe they hadn't quite figured out how to continue a story properly, but even with that context, the result is still a mess. The storytelling is frustrating, the acting is miserable, the pacing is boring, the blind hermit sequence is the only one that i enjoy, outside of that? This is easily one of the worst sequels i've ever watched.

Новые приключения Франкенштейна стали более комедийными чем первая часть, а невесты, со смешной прической, тут всего на минуту. С момента, где старик учит монстра бухать и курить, а тот такой «гууууд!» – ржал в голос. Ещё каких-то непонятных лилипутов в банках приплели.