My guess is that Bill Condon badly wanted to make a film about James Whale - and that's as far as he got. This isn't actually BAD, but I don't think I've ever seen a film so slight.
It's not much of a biopic, since we see, roughly, two WEEKS of Whale's life. Apparently (although Condon tells us that some of the events are fictitious, and gives us no means of working out which ones), towards the end of his life Whale suffered from a kind of brain damage that meant he was plagued by vivid images, stray thoughts, and the like, which accounts for all the flashbacks. The film is a bit slow to tell us about the brain condition, though, which means that the flashbacks come across as a forced, ham-fisted device. The impression persists. Condon tries very hard indeed to draw links between Frankenstein's monster and Whale, the invisible man and Whale, between Whale's films and his experiences in the Great War. These links come across as forced, too.
The thing is, nothing much happens in the two weeks of Whale's life we see - nothing to constitute a story. Yet Condon's attempts to drag in earlier events and make THEM part of the story don't work either. We see the filming of `Bride of Frankenstein'. What does THIS have to do with anything? Yes, Whale is having visions, but that's no reason why we should. Anyway, Whale himself is sick to death of being associated with Frankenstein, and would rather people thought of him as the director of `Show Boat'.
The surprisingly good press this film has generated is almost entirely due to Ian McKellen and Brendan Fraser. Normally I wouldn't watch a film for the performances alone, but this one is probably worth it.
It's not much of a biopic, since we see, roughly, two WEEKS of Whale's life. Apparently (although Condon tells us that some of the events are fictitious, and gives us no means of working out which ones), towards the end of his life Whale suffered from a kind of brain damage that meant he was plagued by vivid images, stray thoughts, and the like, which accounts for all the flashbacks. The film is a bit slow to tell us about the brain condition, though, which means that the flashbacks come across as a forced, ham-fisted device. The impression persists. Condon tries very hard indeed to draw links between Frankenstein's monster and Whale, the invisible man and Whale, between Whale's films and his experiences in the Great War. These links come across as forced, too.
The thing is, nothing much happens in the two weeks of Whale's life we see - nothing to constitute a story. Yet Condon's attempts to drag in earlier events and make THEM part of the story don't work either. We see the filming of `Bride of Frankenstein'. What does THIS have to do with anything? Yes, Whale is having visions, but that's no reason why we should. Anyway, Whale himself is sick to death of being associated with Frankenstein, and would rather people thought of him as the director of `Show Boat'.
The surprisingly good press this film has generated is almost entirely due to Ian McKellen and Brendan Fraser. Normally I wouldn't watch a film for the performances alone, but this one is probably worth it.