Connect with us

Movie Reviews

“Lisa Frankenstein” is Delightful and Disjointed (Movie Review)

Published

on

“Lisa Frankenstein” is Delightful and Disjointed (Movie Review)
IMG via Michael K. Short

Mary Shelley’s “Frankenstein” is one of the most frequently adapted novels of all time. From James Whale’s monumentally iconic Universal works, “Frankenstein” and “The Bride of Frankenstein” in the early 1930s, to Terence Fisher’s Hammer Films adaptation, “The Curse of Frankenstein” in 1957, to Mel Brooks’ insatiably hysterical yet earnestly authentic take, “Young Frankenstein” in 1974, to Tim Burton’s “Frankenweenie” feature film in the 2010s, all the way up to Yorgos Lanthimos’ Academy Award-nominated 2023 masterpiece “Poor Things,” “Frankenstein” is part and parcel of pop culture. In fact, it’s a story that one can practically learn through cultural osmosis alone at this point, with key beats from the story having become so ubiquitous that every audience is overtly familiar with them.

It is in these unique circumstances that the 2024 film, “Lisa Frankenstein,” enters. Written by Diablo Cody (she of “Juno” fame and “Jennifer’s Body” mastery) and directed by Zelda Williams in her feature directorial debut, “Lisa Frankenstein” takes audiences’ overt familiarity with its source material and twists it in interesting ways. Much in the same way that Frankenstein’s monster was assembled from various odds, ends, and appendages, so too is “Lisa Frankenstein” a love letter to kitschy ’80s teen comedies filtered through an undying affection for camp classics like “The Rocky Horror Picture Show” and with a penchant for bursting into attempts at semi-expressionistic animated interludes. The resulting film does not always work, but it is frequently more charming than it should be.


5. The Female Gaze Strikes Back

Written as part of a contest amongst a close group of friends, including her husband, Mary Shelley’s original “Frankenstein” is and always has been a distinctly potent distillation of the destructive nature of masculinity through the lens of a ruthlessly incisive female gaze. And so, in a great many ways, it is immensely satisfying to see an iteration of this story spearheaded entirely by a female creative team.

What makes this even better are the ways in which both Diablo Cody’s inventive script and Zelda Williams’ direction lean all the way into the feminine elements of the story. The ‘creature’ of the story may be male, but it is Kathryn Newton’s titular Lisa who is grappling with the contradicting conundrum of her own existence here, and the film comes to a delightfully anarchic conclusion on what value she finds in her own existence.

4. Weak Spot: Frankenstein Himself

IMG via Michael K. Short

Let’s address this upfront: I’m a fan of Cole Sprouse. I believe he’s a talented actor. However, I find his portrayal of Frankenstein to be a misfit within the framework of “Lisa Frankenstein.”

Part of the issue lies in the structure and constraints of the film itself. The opening credits attempt to deliver a rapid backstory for Sprouse’s character through somewhat underdeveloped quasi-flash animations. This presents several challenges; not only do these initial visuals fail to leave a favorable impression, but they also inundate the audience with a surplus of information, resulting in a narrative that feels more told than experienced.

Advertisement

Consequently, when Sprouse enters the main storyline, he appears underdeveloped, with neither the film nor Sprouse himself offering substantial resolution to this inadequacy. Many aspects of Sprouse’s performance seem to mimic superior works (such as “Edward Scissorhands” or Doug Jones’ remarkable portrayal in “Hocus Pocus”), leading to a central relationship that feels imbalanced and lacking depth.

3. Kathryn Newton as Lisa Swallows

When it comes to the central relationship, Kathryn Newton shines brilliantly as Lisa, contrasting with the film’s portrayal of Frankenstein.

Newton’s performance in “Lisa Frankenstein” is nothing short of remarkable, showcasing her talent and versatility, as seen in her previous work in Christopher Landon’s “Freaky.” She brings a unique blend of exuberance and nuance to the character of Lisa, effectively portraying her journey of self-discovery and personal growth.

Throughout the film, Newton’s ability to convey complex character arcs through subtle details is truly impressive and adds depth to the narrative. As the film progresses, she becomes the heart and soul of the story, captivating the audience with her charm and charisma.

By the film’s conclusion, Newton’s portrayal of Lisa has endeared her character to the audience, making the climactic tanning bed scene feel both earned and emotionally resonant. Her performance elevates “Lisa Frankenstein” and contributes significantly to its charm and appeal.

Advertisement


2. Williams’ Ambition

Zelda Williams’ direction plays a crucial role in the charisma and charm of “Lisa Frankenstein.” Teaming up with cinematographer Paula Huidobro, Williams creates a visual aesthetic steeped in fluorescent neon and absurdist elements. While the film may not always hit the mark, when it does, it’s a delightful experience. Williams demonstrates a clear vision and isn’t afraid to take bold creative risks to bring it to life, imbuing the film with a visceral sense of authenticity.

For a debut feature, Williams showcases impressive talent. From inventive visual sequences that depict Lisa’s inner turmoil externalizing into her surroundings, to subtle nods to classic films like “Bride of Frankenstein” and Georges Méliès’ “A Trip to the Moon,” Williams demonstrates a deep appreciation for cinematic history while infusing her own distinct style into the narrative. Overall, her work on “Lisa Frankenstein” is commendable and indicative of promising future endeavors in filmmaking.

1. Weak Spot: The Editing

The editing in “Lisa Frankenstein” emerges as a singularly detrimental element to the overall viewing experience. At times, the film feels more akin to a rough or assembly cut rather than a polished, professionally edited release.

The absence of internal rhythm and pacing renders the film a slog, with comedy, in particular, suffering due to the lack of effective editing. Well-written and staged gags fall flat as the editing fails to punctuate them effectively, robbing them of their comedic impact. Moreover, excessive padding contributes to the film’s bloated runtime, with extended moments of dead air deflating any sense of momentum or tension.

Advertisement

The film’s conclusion compounds these issues, featuring multiple alternate endings that contradict each other both narratively and thematically. This decision leaves the film feeling unfinished and undermines the impact of its stronger elements. Overall, the unrefined editing of “Lisa Frankenstein” detracts significantly from its potential and hampers the enjoyment of its comedic and thematic content.


(C-)

Overall, I enjoyed “Lisa Frankenstein.” It had a fun and charming quality to it, although I found it frustrating how the film often undermined itself just when it seemed to be hitting its stride.

I can envision it gaining a cult following in the coming years, as it has the potential to be a campy delight. Personally, I hope that a director’s cut or some form of re-editing is pursued in the future to tighten up the film substantially. Despite its flaws, I believe there’s something special within “Lisa Frankenstein” that just needs the right adjustments to fully come to life.


Movie Reviews

Movie Review: Paul Feig’s ‘The Housemaid’ is a twisty horror-thriller with nudity and empowerment – Sentinel Colorado

Published

on

Movie Review: Paul Feig’s ‘The Housemaid’ is a twisty horror-thriller with nudity and empowerment – Sentinel Colorado

Santa left us a present this holiday season and it is exactly what we didn’t know we needed: A twisty, psychological horror-thriller with nudity that’s all wrapped up in an empowerment message.

“The Housemaid” is Paul Feig’s delicious, satirical look at the secret depravity of the ultra-rich, but it’s so well constructed that’s it’s not clear who’s naughty or nice. Halfway through, the movie zigs and everything you expected zags.

It’s almost impossible to thread the line between self-winking campy — “That’s a lot of bacon. Are you trying to kill us?” — and carving someone’s stomach with a broken piece of fine china, yet Feig and screenwriter Rebecca Sonnenshine do.

Sydney Sweeney stars as a down-on-her luck Millie Calloway, a gal with a troubled past living out of her car who answers an ad for a live-in housekeeper in a tony suburb of New York City. Her resume is fraudulent, as are her references.

Advertisement

Somehow, the madam of the mansion, Nina Winchester played with frosty excellence by Amanda Seyfried in pearls and creamy knits, takes a shine to this young soul. “I have a really good feeling about this, Millie,” she says in that perky, slightly crazed clipped way that Seyfried always slays with. “This is going to be fun, Millie.”

Maybe not for Millie, but definitely for us. The young housekeeper gets her own room in the attic — weird that it closes with a deadbolt from the outside, but no matter — and we’re off. Mille gets a smartphone with the family’s credit card preloaded and a key for that deadbolt. “What kind of monsters are we?” asks Nina. Indeed.

The next day, the house is a mess when the housekeeper comes down and Seyfried is in a wide-eyed, crashing-plates, full-on psychotic rage. The sweet, supportive woman we met the day before is gone. But her hunky husband (Brandon Sklenar) is helpful and apologetic. And smoldering. Uh-oh. Did we mention he’s hunky?

If at first we understand that the housekeeper is being a little manipulative — lying to get the job, for instance, or wearing glasses to seem more serious — we soon realize that all kinds of gaslighting games are being played behind these gates, and they’re much more impactful.

Based on Freida McFadden’s novel, “The Housemaid” rides waves of manipulation and then turns the tables on what we think we’ve just seen, looking at male-female power structures and how privilege can trap people without it.

Advertisement

The film is as good looking as the actors, with nifty touches like having the main house spare, well-lit and bright, while the husband’s private screening room in the basement is done in a hellish red. There are little jokes throughout, like the husband and the housemaid bonding over old episodes of “Family Feud,” with the name saying it all.

Feig and his team also have fun with horror movie conventions, like having a silent, foreboding groundskeeper, adding a creepy dollhouse and placing lightning and thunder during a pivotal scene. They surround the mansion with fussy, aristocratic PTA moms who have tea parties and say things like “You know what yoga means to me.”

Feig’s fascinating combination of gore, torture and hot sex ends happily, capped off with Taylor Swift’s perfectly conjured “I Did Something Bad” playing over the end credits. Not at all: This naughty movie is definitely on the nice list.

“The Housemaid,” a Lionsgate release that’s in theaters Friday, is rated R by the Motion Picture Association for strong bloody violence, gore, language, sexuality/nudity and drug use. Running time: 131 minutes. Three and a half stars out of four.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Movie Reviews

‘The Spongebob Movie: Search for Squarepants’ Review: Adventure Romp Soaks up a Good Time for SpongeBob Fans of All Ages

Published

on

‘The Spongebob Movie: Search for Squarepants’ Review: Adventure Romp Soaks up a Good Time for SpongeBob Fans of All Ages

I’m convinced that each SpongeBob movie released on the big screen serves as a testament to the current state of the series. The 2004 film was a send-off for the early series run. Sponge Out of Water symbolized the Paul Tibbitt era, and Sponge on the Run served as a major transitional period between soft reboot and spin-off setup. The team responsible for Search for SquarePants, which consists of current showrunners Marc Ceccarelli and Vince Waller, as well as the seasoned Kaz, is showcasing their comedic and absurdist abilities. The sole purpose of the film is to elicit laughter with its distinctively silly and irreverent, whimsical humor. More so than its predecessor, it creates a mindless romp. Granted, there are far too many butt-related jokes, to a weird degree.

Truthfully, I am apprehensive about the insistence of each SpongeBob movie being CG-animated. However, Drymon, who directed the final Hotel Transylvania film, Transformania, brings the series’ quirky, outrageous 2D-influenced poses and expressive style into a 3D space. Its CG execution, done by Texas-based Reel FX (Book of Life, Rumble, Scoob), is far superior to Mikros Animation’s Sponge on the Run, which, despite its polish, has experimental frame rate issues with the comic timing and is influenced by The Spider-Verse. FX encapsulates the same fast, frenetic pace in its absurdist humor, which enables a significant number of the jokes to be effective and feel like classic SpongeBob.

With lovely touches like gorgeous 2D artwork in flashback scenes and mosaic backgrounds during multiple action shots, Drymon and co expand the cinematic scope, enhancing its theatrical space. Taking on a darker, if not more obscene, tone in the main underworld setting, the film’s purple- and green-infused visual palette adds a unique shine that sets it apart from other Sponge-features. Its strong visual aesthetic preserves the SpongeBob identity while capturing the spirit of swashbuckling and satisfying a Pirates of the Caribbean void in the heart.

The film’s slapstick energy is evident throughout, as it’s purposefully played as a romp. The animators’ hilarious antics, which make the most of each set piece to a comical degree, feel like the ideal old-fashioned love letter to the new adults who grew up with SpongeBob and are now introducing it to their kids. This is a perfect bridge. There’s a “Twelfth Street Rag” needle drop in a standout montage sequence that will have older viewers astral projecting with joy. 

Search for SquarePants retreads water but with a charming swashbuckling freshness.

Continue Reading

Movie Reviews

Movie Review: ‘The SpongeBob Movie: Search for SquarePants’ – Catholic Review

Published

on

Movie Review: ‘The SpongeBob Movie: Search for SquarePants’ – Catholic Review

NEW YORK (OSV News) – Cartoon characters can devolve into dullards over time. But some are more enduringly appealing than others, as the adventure “The SpongeBob Movie: Search for SquarePants” (Paramount) proves.

Yellow, absorbent and porous on the outside, unflaggingly upbeat SpongeBob (voice of Tom Kenny) is childlike and anxious to please within. He also displays the kind of eagerness for grown-up experiences that is often found in real-life youngsters but that gets him into trouble in this fourth big-screen outing for his character.

Initially, his yearning for maturity takes a relatively harmless form. Having learned that he is now exactly 36 clams tall, the requisite height to ride the immense roller coaster at Captain Booty Beard’s Fun Park, he determines to do so.

Predictably, perhaps, he finds the ride too scary for him. This prompts Mr. Krabs (voice of Clancy Brown), the owner of the Krusty Krab — the fast-food restaurant where SpongeBob works as a cook — to inform his chef that he is still an immature bubble-blowing boy who needs to be tested as a swashbuckling adventurer.

The opportunity for such a trial soon arises with the appearance of the ghostly green Flying Dutchman (voice of Mark Hamill), a pirate whose elaborately spooky lair, the Underworld, is adjacent to SpongeBob’s friendly neighborhood, Bikini Bottom. Subject to a curse, the Dutchman longs to lift it and return to human status.

Advertisement

To do so, he needs to find someone both innocent and gullible to whom he can transfer the spell. SpongeBob, of course, fits the bill.

So the buccaneer lures SpongeBob, accompanied by his naive starfish pal Patrick (voice of Bill Fagerbakke), into a series of challenges designed to prove that the lad has what it takes. Mr. Krabs, the restaurateur’s ill-tempered other employee, Squidward (voice of Rodger Bumpass), and SpongeBob’s pet snail, Gary, all follow in pursuit.

Along the way, SpongeBob and Patrick’s ingenuity and love of carefree play usually succeed in thwarting the Dutchman’s plans.

As with most episodes of the TV series, which premiered on Nickelodeon in 1999, there are sight gags intended either for adults or savvy older children. This time out, though, director Derek Drymon and screenwriters Pam Brady and Matt Lieberman produce mostly misfires.

These include an elaborate gag about Davy Jones’ legendary locker — which, after much buildup, turns out to be an ordinary gym locker. Additionally, in moments of high stress, SpongeBob expels what he calls “my lucky brick.” As euphemistic poop gags go, it’s more peculiar than naughty.

Advertisement

True to form, SpongeBob emerges from his latest escapades smarter, wiser, pleased with his newly acquired skills and with increased loyalty to his friends. So, although the script’s humor may often fall short, the franchise’s beguiling charm remains.

The film contains characters in cartoonish peril and occasional scatological humor. The OSV News classification is A-I – general patronage. The Motion Picture Association rating is PG — parental guidance suggested. Some material may not be suitable for children.

Read More Movie & TV Reviews

Copyright © 2025 OSV News

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending