Editorials
A New World of Gods and Monsters: The Long and Winding Road to ‘Bride of Frankenstein’
Bride of Frankenstein (1935) is among the most iconic films ever made and arguably the greatest horror sequel of all time. Its images are indelible from the Monster’s encounter with the hermit in the woods, to Dr. Pretorius’s little creations in jars, to the Bride’s lightning-streaked Nefertiti hairdo.
It seeks to outdo the first film and succeeds in practically every way, continuing and deepening the story and themes from the first film while infusing itself with humor, subtext, and pathos rarely seen in horror before. But Bride of Frankenstein was, more than once, nearly a very different creature altogether.
Talk of a sequel began almost immediately, thanks to a triumphant preview screening of Frankenstein in October of 1931. The cut shown at this preview ended with the shot of the burning windmill surrounded by villagers, and both the Monster and Henry Frankenstein were presumed dead. The audience response was so positive that an additional scene was shot featuring old Baron Frankenstein making a toast with a group of servants while his son, with Elizabeth at his bedside, convalesces in the background. After the film was a huge box-office success, the fires of sequel ambition only burned hotter.
Unfortunately for Universal, director James Whale had no interest, saying, “I squeezed the idea dry on the original picture and never want to work on it again.” Perhaps hoping to return to the graces of Universal and its production head Carl Laemmle, Jr., Robert Florey wrote a treatment soon after the release of Frankenstein called “The New Adventures of Frankenstein—The Monster Lives!” Florey had been the original director of the 1931 film before being reassigned to Murders in the Rue Morgue (1932) after a debacle over test footage he shot with Bela Lugosi as the Monster.
His short treatment was politely read, rejected, and returned to him in February of 1932. Murders in the Rue Morgue was released soon after and flopped, leading to Florey’s dismissal from Universal. Beyond its title, which sounds more like an Errol Flynn swashbuckler than a horror movie, little is known of this treatment, and it is presumed lost to time along with his notorious test footage for Frankenstein.
The Return of Frankenstein
In mid-1933, Tom Reed, a staff writer and scenarist for Universal, turned in a fifty-one-page treatment called “The Return of Frankenstein” that he subsequently expanded into a screenplay. This version of the story includes several elements that made it to the final film, including beginning at the burning windmill, a female creature, and a version of the hermit sequence, the latter two aspects found in Mary Shelley’s original novel. The treatment also includes Victor Moritz, played by John Boles in the original film, who has a girlfriend named Karen, who also happens to be Elizabeth’s sister.
This is quite a departure from Frankenstein, as Victor clearly has feelings for Elizabeth in the film. Reed’s story also takes place over a greater span of time, as Henry and Elizabeth have gotten married partway through the treatment and have a two-year-old child. The Monster, who encounters Henry by chance, demands that Frankenstein create a female companion for him, but Henry fails. The Monster, in turn, kills Elizabeth to be brought back as his mate, but in the end, he, along with Henry, dies by electrocution, and Victor and Karen take the responsibility of raising the now orphaned child.
The screenplay was approved by Universal and the Production Code Administration. The studio officially announced The Return of Frankenstein in September 1933 with Kurt Neumann attached to direct. Then, in November, the James Whale-helmed The Invisible Man was released to great success, and Junior knew he wanted the director for The Return of Frankenstein. But Whale was still not very interested and absolutely hated the script, telling friends, “They’ve had a script made for a sequel, and it stinks to heaven.”
Verging on desperate to bring Whale on board, Junior dangled several carrots in front of him, including offering Whale a project he wanted called One More River, total creative control of the new Frankenstein film, and, of course, more money. Two new treatments were also ordered for The Return of Frankenstein that ran very far afield of what was eventually filmed while Whale busied himself with directing One More River (1934).
The first of these treatments, delivered in December 1933 by Philip MacDonald, involves the Monster being revived by the Delta Ray, a death ray invented by Dr. Frankenstein that he intends to sell to the League of Nations. Quite some time has passed since the Monster perished in the windmill, and Henry and Elizabeth have a young son. Victor also returns in this version and declares his love for Elizabeth as she lies in a hospital bed after falling ill. Ultimately, both creator and creation die by death ray, and Elizabeth and Victor end up together.
Another treatment written in late 1933 or early 1934 by L.G. Blochman sees Henry and Elizabeth join a traveling carnival (as puppeteers, no less) to hide out from the Monster who has awakened and begun terrorizing the countryside. Eventually, the Monster finds them and demands that Frankenstein create a mate for him. He does, but the companion does not survive, sending the Monster into a frenzy. In the midst of the havoc he wreaks on the carnival, the Monster is attacked and torn apart by lions. This version differs further in its description of the Monster, which is in no way sympathetic in the treatment, and has more animalistic qualities, including fangs.
James Whale Returns to Direct
After finishing One More River, Whale knew he could no longer avoid the Frankenstein sequel and, unsatisfied with the various treatments and scripts, called upon John L. Balderston to start from scratch. Balderston was a key player in the early Universal monster movies, having adapted the British plays of Dracula and Frankenstein for American audiences, upon which the scripts of the film versions were based, and writing The Mummy (1932) as an original script. By all accounts, Whale had total control over every aspect of what was then still called The Return of Frankenstein and worked with Balderston in shaping the script through four drafts, the last of which was submitted to the Production Code office, where PCA head Joseph I. Breen demanded several changes.
Feeling Balderston was burnt out on the project, Whale passed the script to other writers, including R.C. Sherriff, who had adapted The Invisible Man, William Hurlbut, and Edmund Pearson. According to James Whale’s biographer James Curtis, the final result of this work was mostly an amalgamation of the various Balderston drafts with some polish along the way. In the end, only Balderston and Hurlbut received credit for adaptation, and Hurlbut for screenplay.
With PCA approval of the script, the cast was assembled, including returning leads Colin Clive and Boris Karloff, who had become horror’s biggest star in the years since the release of the original film. He also seems to have become very protective of the role that made him famous and objected to the Monster speaking, indulging in everyday vices like drinking and smoking, and infusing the proceedings with so much humor. Despite his objections, Karloff gave arguably his best performance as the Monster when cameras began rolling in early 1935.
Also joining the cast were Whale favorites Una O’Connor in the comedic role of Minnie, Elsa Lanchester in the dual roles of Mary Shelley and the Bride, and Ernest Thesiger as the film’s new villain, Dr. Pretorius. Claude Rains was originally set to play this role, but was moved to The Mystery of Edwin Drood (1935), and Thesiger was cast in his most memorable role.
Notably missing are John Boles, whose Victor Moritz character was written out of the sequel, and Mae Clarke as Elizabeth. Clarke had worked with Whale in Waterloo Bridge (1931) before reaching icon status when James Cagney shoved a grapefruit in her face in The Public Enemy (1931). But due to very public mental struggles and physical ailments, including injuries sustained in a car accident, Clarke was not asked to return for Bride. She was heartbroken but continued her career in small roles in film and later on television before leaving the industry for good in the early 1970s. Universal ingenue Valerie Hobson stepped into the role of Elizabeth and took the character in a very different direction from Clarke.
The Bride of Frankenstein Walks Down the Aisle in the Greatest Horror Sequel
Proving his total control over the production, Whale shut down filming for ten days when there was nothing else left to shoot to wait for actor O.P. Heggie to finish his commitment on a film at RKO to play the Hermit. After he became available and the iconic scene between Heggie and Karloff was finally in the can, production wrapped on March 7, 1935, ten days over schedule and a little more than $100,000 over budget. Slated for an April 19th release, postproduction began immediately and furiously, including recording Franz Waxman’s score in just one nine-hour session.
The first cut of Bride of Frankenstein, a title Whale insisted upon over The Return of Frankenstein, clocked in at 90 minutes, but naturally, the Hays Office demanded cuts, especially to the film’s violence. Whale acquiesced on at least one aspect, agreeing to cut a sequence involving Dwight Frye’s character Karl in which he kills his uncle and blames it on the Monster. Whale made several more cuts of his own accord, including a comedic scene with the Burgomaster and lines of dialogue to quicken the pace.
Days before the film’s premiere, Whale changed the ending as well. In the preview cut, Henry and Elizabeth perished along with Pretorius, the Monster, and the Bride, but it apparently did not feel right to Whale. He brought Karloff, Clive, and Hobson back for an additional day of shooting to make the change and give the film a partial happy ending. The film was a rousing success, and even the critical notices were positive, though often offered with a caveat along the lines of “great—for this type of film,” reiterating the lack of respect afforded the horror genre in certain critical circles.
To characterize Bride of Frankenstein as a success is an understatement. It is a towering achievement that redefined the horror genre and entered the cultural lexicon in a way that few films have. That it is not only still watched but endlessly discussed, analyzed, homaged, remade, merchandised, and affectionately parodied over 90 years after its release is a remarkable rarity in our era of “here today, forgotten tomorrow” content-based media.
Though a film like Bride feels inevitable as we have lived with it for so long, it is helpful to remember the blood, sweat, and tears that go into creating great art. Though Bride of Frankenstein travelled a long and winding road, or aisle as it may be, after over 90 years, she remains Queen of the Monsters.
Long may she reign.
On July 13th, 2026, the world lost one of its brightest stars.
Beloved New Zealand actor Sam Neill passed away from pneumonia after a long battle with stage 3 lymphoma. The multifaceted movie star will be remembered by mainstream audiences for his iconic role as Dr. Alan Grant in Steven Spielberg’s 1993 masterpiece Jurassic Park, as well as powerful turns in A Cry in the Dark (1988), The Piano (1993), and Hunt for the Wilderpeople (2016), and prestige TV series The Tudors and Peaky Blinders. But horror fans know him as one of the genre’s most surprising Scream Kings.
Through a handful of memorable starring roles, Neill spent the 80s and 90s bringing life to a wide variety of characters and finding humanity in the most unusual leading roles, regardless of how heroic or villainous.
The Final Conflict (1981)
After a decade on the stage and screen in New Zealand and Australia, Neill made his international debut as Damien Thorn in Graham Baker’s The Final Conflict, the third installment of The Omen franchise. Now a 36-year-old businessman, Damien is fully aware of his devilish parentage and hell-bent on world domination. But rather than a hooved and horned monstrosity, Neill’s Antichrist is a suave businessman who leads his followers in an expensive suit and seeks to bring about the apocalypse through deceptive altruism rather than grand proclamation.
Despite his austere demeanor, the man’s true evil knows no bounds. When a prophecy foretells the second coming of Christ, known in the film as “the Nazarene,” Damien commands his followers to commit widespread infanticide, murdering all baby boys born on a specific date. He seduces a high-profile reporter while transforming her teenage son into a bloodthirsty disciple, then uses the child as a human shield. This tricky role allows Neill to demonstrate his trademark versatility, easily charming the outside world while dropping his suave mask of normalcy behind closed doors. Though certain aspects of The Final Conflict are admittedly dated, Neill’s performance feels eerily prescient. He’s mastered the heinous portrayal of a politician willing to sell his soul for power that will ultimately bring about the end of the world.
Possession (1981)
Though Andrzej Żuławski’s Possession is often remembered for Isabelle Adjani’s stunning depiction of a woman on the edge, Neill delivers an equally unhinged performance as Mark, a spy returning home from a lengthy assignment in divided Berlin. Upon discovering that his wife Anna (Adjani) wants a divorce, Mark desperately tries to hold his family together even at the expense of her sanity. Filmed the same year as The Final Conflict, Neill dives headfirst into this visceral role, managing to evoke sympathy for the distraught father who becomes ever more desperate to regain control. Inspired by his own divorce, Żuławski resists blaming either party for the separation, instead showing the chaos and heartache that comes in the wake of a family’s dissolution.
Once considered to replace Roger Moore as the next James Bond, Neill has fun with the international spy persona as Żuławski’s plot grows increasingly bizarre. But the skilled actor never lets us forget that Mark is a flawed human being struggling to keep his life from falling apart. A second character emerges in the film’s mesmerizing climax, allowing Neill to lean into full villainy with a glassy-eyed stare that chills to the bone. Now a cult classic, Adjani and Neill bounce off each other’s seething rage, creating one of the most effective cinematic duets in the history of horror.
Jurassic Park (1993)
When Steven Spielberg’s creature feature first hit theaters, Neill was by no means a household name and hardly a traditional leading man. Without the swashbuckling swagger of Harrison Ford, the mega-watt smile of Tom Cruise, or the chiselled jaw of Brad Pitt — all famous action stars of the era — Neill felt like an unconventional choice for this massive role. But he perfectly captures the essence of Grant, an aloof academic who prefers dig sites to fancy fundraisers and social events. Despite an aversion to children, the dinosaur expert finds himself tasked with saving the theme park’s youngest survivors who gradually break down his emotional walls. Grant’s transformation into a courageous caretaker is a landmark deconstruction of traditional gender norms wrapped in the guise of a rugged outdoorsman.
Neill proves to be the perfect action star, effortlessly navigating Spielberg’s stunning set pieces without losing the character’s relatable hook. But perhaps the film’s most touching moment is Neill’s childlike wonder at seeing a dinosaur for the first time. Stunned to speechlessness, he channels the audience’s wondrous joy when Grant first spies a real, live Brachiosaurus. But he seamlessly weaves this infectious awe into serious concerns about the creature’s existence, amplifying the story’s prophetic messaging. Jeff Goldblum may utter the film’s iconic warning, but the duality of Grant’s performance perfectly illustrates the scientific imperative, reminding us that just because we can doesn’t mean we should.
Neill would go on to lead Joe Johnston’s 2001 sequel Jurassic Park III, in which Grant is again tasked with saving a child. In 2022, he would appear in Colin Trevorrow’s legacy sequel Jurassic World Dominion, which merges the franchise’s two distinct eras while bringing the carnage onto mainland shores. Despite turning in strong performances, neither film is able to top the magic of Spielberg’s original or Neill’s captivating performance as the stoic leading man. But his nuanced depiction of Alan Grant inspired a generation of would-be paleontologists and quiet kids who could now see themselves as courageous academics capable of surprising strength.
In the Mouth of Madness (1994)
After catapulting to worldwide fame, Neill returned to horror proper to lead John Carpenter’s mind-bending In the Mouth of Madness. We first meet John Trent (Neill) as he’s dragged, kicking and screaming, into a padded cell. An unknown stretch of time later, he recounts an unbelievable story while covered in protective crosses scrawled into his skin — and the cell’s walls — with black crayon. A private investigator, Trent has been tasked with locating Sutter Cane (Jürgen Prochnow), a world-famous yet elusive genre author whose work has been driving his ravenous readers to disturbing acts of random violence.
A love letter to fans of horror fiction, we delight in watching Trent explore literary easter eggs that lead him down jarring rabbit holes. A late-night road trip takes Trent and Linda Styles (Julie Carmen), an editor for Cane’s publishing house, to a tiny New England hamlet teeming with darkness. While investigating an ominous cathedral on the outskirts of town, Trent realizes that he’s somehow been transported into the author’s interdimensional story and become its unwitting protagonist.
Neill serves as a skeptical everyman and the audience’s conduit through this bizarre tale of literary monsters that find a way to burst through the page. An often overlooked Carpenter film, In the Mouth of Madness spirals into insanity, but Neill keeps us grounded throughout each outlandish twist. A shocking conclusion leaves us gaping at our screens and contemplating our own relationship with horror fiction. After all, does free will truly exist? Or, like Trent, are we merely pawns in someone else’s monstrous creation?
Event Horizon (1997)
One of the scariest movies ever set in space, Paul W.S. Anderson’s Event Horizon builds upon the heroic image Neill established for himself in Jurassic Park. Dr. William Weir (Neill) is a physicist temporarily joining the crew of the Lewis and Clark to assist in their latest rescue mission. Seven years after vanishing without a trace, a spaceship called the Event Horizon has suddenly reappeared near Neptune’s orbit. As the creator of a top-secret gravity drive designed to facilitate faster-than-light travel, Dr. Weir has been sent to explore the ship and find out what happened to its missing crew.
Still haunted by his late wife’s suicide, Dr. Weir is a sympathetic figure, particularly in comparison to the harsh Captain Miller (Laurence Fishburne) who commands the crew of the Lewis and Clark. But Weir’s desperation to return to the infamous ship hides a sinister secret that leads his fellow astronauts to the threshold of hell. Neill’s talent for playing the everyman pays off in spades as the formerly sympathetic widower transforms into a disciple of this frightening dimension. Resembling a long-lost cenobite, Weir claws out his own eyes and prepares to drag the crew into a world consumed with sadistic pain.
Daybreakers (2009)
Neill returns to his Omen roots in Michael and Peter Spierig’s action-packed film as a secretly sinister businessman. But rather than the Antichrist, Charles Bromley (Neill) is a proud vampire convinced of the species’ superiority. With human blood in short supply, Bromley Marks Corp. is working on a synthetic substitute to prevent the human race from impending extinction. While hematologists perfect the formula, Bromley oversees disturbing fields of humans chained to massive machines that systematically harvest their blood.
Neill chills in this sinister role with vampiric yellow eyes, a pale complexion, and subtle fangs. But more upsetting is the fact that he honestly doesn’t believe he’s wrong. Once diagnosed with cancer, Bromley was delighted to find that vampirism would totally reverse his illness and grant him the gift of eternal life. He begged his daughter Alison (Isabel Lucas) to turn alongside him, but she has rejected her father’s controversial choice and is now hunted by his bloodthirsty goons. In a heartbreaking moment of clarity, Bromley brings his daughter to the brink of death, then turns away in disgust when she will not embrace his undead lifestyle.
Daybreakers is a surprisingly thrilling exploration of survival and sustainability. Similar to a plot Damien Thorn would hatch, Bromley’s ultimate plan is to placate the vampire population with synthetic blood while allowing the human population to replenish itself. With a larger stock, he plans to sell authentic humans at a premium, hunting these poor souls to season the meat. Bromley rejects a cure that would reverse the vampiric disease, choosing to enrich himself over saving the world. The strangely captivating villain’s end is a cathartic nightmare and fitting punishment for a wealthy man who places himself above everyone else.
In the Mouth of Madness
While the world may remember Neill for his signature role as a gruff but compassionate paleontologist going head to head with a raging T-Rex, horror fans may picture the versatile actor maniacally rocking back and forth in a filthy Berlin apartment, commanding a boardroom of corporate vampires, disappearing into the darkness of a haunted spaceship, sermonizing to satanists, or giggling over popcorn in a deserted movie theater. Or perhaps you have another favorite role in the beloved actor’s stellar career. But whether he was playing a hero or villain, Neill brought undeniable humanity to every role, redefining our idea of masculinity and the very nature of goodness vs. evil. By bringing such disparate characters to life, Neill challenged audiences with a variety of complex roles, asking us to examine the humanity of each character no matter how flawed or virtuous.
You must be logged in to post a comment.