Movie Reviews

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

Published

2 years ago

February 13, 2024

“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

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.

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.

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.

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.

Related Topics:Lisa Frankenstein movie reviews

Click to comment

Movie Reviews

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

Published

6 hours ago

December 17, 2025

Press Room

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.

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.

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.

The Housemaid

Published

18 hours ago

December 16, 2025

Press Room

Too good to be true? Yep, that’s just what Millie’s new job as a housemaid is—and everyone in the audience knows it. What they might not expect, though, is the amount of nudity, profanity and blood The Housemaid comes with. And this content can’t be scrubbed away.

Movie Reviews

Movie Review – Avatar: Fire and Ash (2025)

Published

1 day ago

December 16, 2025

Press Room

Avatar: Fire and Ash, 2025.

Directed by James Cameron.
Starring Sam Worthington, Zoe Saldaña, Sigourney Weaver, Stephen Lang, Oona Chaplin, Kate Winslet, Cliff Curtis, Joel David Moore, CCH Pounder, Edie Falco, Brendan Cowell, Jemaine Clement, Giovanni Ribisi, David Thewlis, Britain Dalton, Jack Champion, Trinity Jo-Li Bliss, Jamie Flatters, Bailey Bass, Filip Geljo, Duane Evans Jr., Matt Gerald, Dileep Rao, Daniel Lough, Kevin Dorman, Keston John, Alicia Vela-Bailey, and Johnny Alexander.

SYNOPSIS:

Jake and Neytiri’s family grapples with grief after Neteyam’s death, encountering a new, aggressive Na’vi tribe, the Ash People, who are led by the fiery Varang, as the conflict on Pandora escalates and a new moral focus emerges.

At one point during one of the seemingly endless circular encounters in Avatar: Fire and Ash, (especially if director James Cameron sticks to his plans of making five films in this franchise) former soldier turned blue family man (or family Na’vi?) and protector Jake Sully (Sam Worthington) tells his still-in-pursuit-commander-nemesis-transferred-to-a-Na’vi-body Miles Quaritch (Stephen Lang) that the world of Pandora runs deeper than he or anyone imagines, and to open his eyes. It’s part of a plot point in which Jake encourages the villainous Quaritch to change his ways.

More fascinatingly, it comes across as a plea of trust from James Cameron (once again writing the screenplay alongside Rick Jaffa and Amanda Silver) that there is still much untapped lore and stories to tell in this world. If this repetitive The Way of Water retread is anything to go by, more isn’t justified. Even taken as a spectacle, the unmatched and undeniably stunning visuals (not to mention the most expressive motion capture ever put to screen, movie or video game), that aspect is less impactful, being only two years removed from the last installment rather than a decade, which is not to be confused with less impressive. Fortunately for the film and its gargantuan 3+ hour running time, James Cameron still has enough razzle-dazzle to scoot by here on unparalleled marvel alone, even if the narrative and character expansions are bare-bones.

That’s also what makes it disappointing that this third entry, while introducing a new group dubbed the Ash People led by the strikingly conceptualized Varang (Oona Chaplin) – no one creates scenery-chewing, magnetic, and badass-looking villains quite like James Cameron – and their plight with feeling left behind, rebelling against Pandora religion, Avatar: Fire and Ash is stuck in a cycle of Jake endangering his family (and, by extension, everyone around them) with Quaritch hunting him down for vengeance but this time more fixated on his human son living among them, Spider (Jack Champion) who undergoes a physical transformation that makes him a valuable experiment and, for better or worse, the most important living being in this world. Even the corrupt and greedy marine biologists are back hunting the same godlike sea creatures, leading to what essentially feels like a restaging, if slightly different, riff on the climactic action beat that culminated in last time around.

Worse, whereas The Way of Water had a tighter, more graceful flow from storytelling to spectacle, with sequences extended and drawn out in rapturously entertaining ways, the pacing here is clunkier and frustrating, as every time these characters collide and fight, the story resets and doesn’t necessarily progress. For as much exciting action as there is here, the film also frustratingly starts and stops too much. The last thing I ever expected to type about Avatar: Fire and Ash is that, for all the entrancing technical wizardry on display, fantastical world immersion, and imaginative character designs (complete with occasional macho and corny dialogue that fits, namely since the presentation is in a high frame rate consistently playing like the world’s most expensive gaming cut scene), is often dull.

Yes, everything here, from a special-effects standpoint, is painstakingly crafted, with compelling characters that James Cameron clearly loves (something that shows and allows us to take the story seriously). Staggeringly epic action sequences are worth singling out as in a tier of its own (it’s also a modern movie free from the generally garish and washed-out look of others in this generation), but it’s all in service of a film that is not aware of its strengths, but instead committed to not going anywhere. There are a couple of important details here that one could tell someone before they watch the inevitable Avatar 4, and they will be caught up without needing to watch this. If Avatar: The Way of Water was filler (something I wholeheartedly disagree with), then Avatar: Fire and Ash is nothing. And that’s something that hurts to say.

Without spoiling too much, the single best scene in the entire film has nothing to do with epic-scale warring, but a smoldering courting from Quaritch for Varang and her army of Ash People to join forces with his group. In a film that’s over three hours, it would also have been welcome to focus more on the Ash People, their past, and their current inner workings alongside their perception of Pandora. It’s not a shock that James Cameron can invest viewers into a villain without doing so, but the alternative of watching Jake grapple with militarizing the Na’vi and insisting everyone learn how to use “sky people” firearms while coming to terms with whether or not he can actually protect his family isn’t as engaging; the latter half comes across as déjà vu.

The presence of Spider amplifies the target on everyone’s backs, with Jake convinced the boy needs to return to his world. His significant other Neytiri (Zoe Saldaña), with rage building inside her stemming from the family losing a child in the climax of the previous film, encourages a more aggressive approach and is ready to kill Spider if him being a part of the family threatens their remaining children (with one of them once again a 14-year-old motion captured by Sigourney Weaver, which is not as effective a voice performance this time as there are scenes of loud agony and pain where she sounds her age). The children also get to continue their plot arcs, with similarly slim narrative progression.

Not without glimpses of movie-magic charm and emotional moments would one dare say James Cameron is losing his touch. However, Avatar: Fire and Ash is all the proof anyone needs to question whether five of these are required, as it’s beginning to look more and more as if the world and characters aren’t as rich as the filmmaker believes they are. It’s another action-packed technical marvel with sincere, endearing characters, but the cycling nature of those elements is starting to wear thin and yield diminishing returns.

Flickering Myth Rating – Film: ★ ★ / Movie: ★ ★ ★ ★

Robert Kojder

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=embed/playlist