Great Film, but…
-
zurabinho — 17 years ago(April 01, 2009 01:02 AM)
I actually thought in Bride of Frankenstein she was used a bit too often, and it made her performance redundant and didn't serve the movie : as great as she was in these two films (absolutely loved her in the Invisible Man), it seems she always plays quite the same way. But I only saw her in these two
-
Knoxvicious — 15 years ago(May 16, 2010 07:42 PM)
I watched the bonus features on this and I remember film historians saying James Whales just LOVED the woman who played the inkeepers wife just BECAUSE she was so annoying and dramatic. But I have to say, it got extremely annoying after a while
www.simplydustinhoffman.com
-#1 site for Dustin Hoffman fans- -
franzkabuki — 14 years ago(July 05, 2011 10:42 AM)
I thought her over-the-top screaming - especially when there was actually no particular reason to scream meaning, most of the time - was totally hilarious. And Im quite sure the director was aware of it as well; lots of funny stuff in the movie.
"facts are stupid things" - Ronald Reagan -
chipe — 14 years ago(November 06, 2011 02:16 PM)
Whether she served a good purpose or not, I agree with Whale she was a delight to watch, very amusing and much of the film was meant to be funny.
While here, I'll add two things about this entertaining movie:
(1) while I liked the innkeeper's wife, too many of the other characters (cops, townspeople)were just like her: funny faced, silly acting boobs. It got tiring (and silly) after a while, too many buffoons.
(2) I wish I had time to document this, but it seemed to me that the movie had lots of director flaws in it! A lot of scenes ended abruptly when there were great opportunities to milk them for more. And Travers (the father of Stuart), who is a great character actor I suppose, seemed very weak here. He delivered his lines without any enthusiasm, as though he were bored!