La novia del monstruo

This really isn't such a terrible little movie. Sure, it's cheap, the acting is horrible, the sets wobble if sneezed upon and the special effects consist of stock footage and a rubber octopus, but "Bride of the Monster" is much, MUCH better than "Plan 9 From Outer Space."

Mad scientist Vornoff (a sickly Bela Lugosi) has apparently set up shop in the Florida Everglades, kidnapping anyone unwise enough to wander too close to his house (and his pet octopus) and conducting sinister experiments upon them. Vornoff, for some odd reason, is determined to create a race of super giants with incredible strength. We're never really sure exactly WHY he wants to do this, but one can only assume that, if one possesses an army of super strong giants, one could take over the world and rule it and stuff. That seems to be the goal of every other mad scientist in the unruled world, anyway. Into this diabolical plan stumbles loudmouthed newsgirl Loretta King, who is determined to get the story on the Lake Marsh Monster. Whether the title of "Lake Marsh Monster" refers to the octopus, Tor Johnson as the fumbling Lobo or Bela's drug problem, we're never sure. Take your pick. Anyway, Loretta is kept under constant hypnosis by Bela's eyebags and is slated to become The Bride of the Monster! By this point, we're all quite ready to see the annoying Loretta fried to a crisp, but unfortunately, her wimpy boyfriend shows up to save her. The stunning climax is packed full of raging Lobo's, rolling boulders, lightening bolts, gunfire and death by octopus!

The story doesn't make much sense, but were you really expecting it to when you saw Ed Wood's name listed under the title of director? Still and all, it's certainly Wood's most coherent effort and can be entertaining for those of us who stop to look at road accidents.

Ever since The Golden Turkey Awards chose Ed Wood as the world's worst director back in the 80s there have been a lot of people who automatically dismiss all Ed Wood movies as garbage. Even Tim Burton's terrific 'Ed Wood' has encouraged this. My opinion is that there are many, many worse directors out there, because at least Wood's movies were fun and entertaining, unlike many of those made by the likes of Roland Emmerich or Michael Bay, directors who are able to work with budgets a 1000 times bigger than Wood I might add! 'Bride Of The Monster' is one of Wood's most underrated movies. It was his second movie to star horror legend Bela Lugosi, but unlike the first, the truly mind blowing 'Glen Or Glenda', it isn't completely inept. True, some of the acting is terrible, especially the talentless leading lady Loretta King who is (I admit it) lousy, and Wood regular Paul Marco, who has a small supporting role as a cop. But, and this is a BIG but, Lugosi is terrific. Many fans regard this as his best performance. I wouldn't go that far but it's hard not to get choked up at Lugosi's immortal "I have no home" speech. 'Bride Of The Monster' is the first Wood film to feature the amazing Tor Johnson. He plays Lugosi's Tibetan servant/slave Lobo. All the scenes with Lobo are great fun to watch, especially when Lugosi whips him. Apart from Lugosi and Tor this movie is best remembered for the rubber octopus monster. Of course it's a hoot, but the rest of the picture isn't anywhere near as bad as many claim and is comparable to say 'The Devil Bat', which Lugosi starred in back in the 1940s. Both movies suffer from their minuscule budgets, but both are still worth watching to see Lugosi struggle for greatness. I recommend 'Bride Of The Monster' to all horror fans, especially those of Bela Lugosi.

Bride of the Monster (1955)

*** (out of 4)

Cult classic from Edward D. Wood, Jr. about a mad scientist (Bela Lugosi), his over-sized assisstant (Tor Johnson) and their pet rubber octopuss. Only God really knows how many of these "Z" grade films I've seen over the years but there's no doubt in my mind that Wood's movies are the "best" of the bunch. The worst thing that could happen while watching this stuff is that you get bored but with Wood, and especially this film, boredom isn't a possibility since there's countless insane moments happening throughout the 69-minute running time. The film moves by very quickly and while I do enjoy the movie because it's bad, I will go out on the limb and say Lugosi gives his best performance in his later day roles.

This movie is easily Wood's best! Of all the movies Ed Wood has written this one makes 'the most sense', even though the story and concept are still ridiculous of course. Yet the movie works as an horror movie, or like Ed wood would call it; 'a supernatural thriller'.

The acting probably is the only thing that is truly bad about this movie. Lot's of people praise Bela Lugosi for his role in this but I think that's truly offensive to a great actor like him. Lugosi was hundred times better in movies like "Dracula" and "The Black Cat". Bela Lugosi and Tor Johnson are terribly overacting in this!

Also it's too bad about the octopus scene's. It all was terrible fake and the use of archive footage was done horribly.

The dialog and characters are the best Wood has ever written. Even though they are far from supreme, they work very well in the movie. Wood even manages to come up with some memorable quotes.

This movie really doesn't deserve such a low rating and my guess is that more than halve the people who have rated this movie poorly had not even seen this movie but just rated it low because it's an Ed Wood movie. Be fair people! I recognize a bad movie when I see one and this movie most certainly is not bad!

Even if you're not familiar with Wood's work but are a fan of classic horror movie's, you'll appreciate this movie. It really is not bad and works well as an horror movie. The story flows well and the ending is build up very good.

By Wood's standards, an excellent movie!

6/10

http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/

This is a B feature movie (which goes without saying!), but the movie really isn't that bad. As another has commented about the "Bride of the Monster", Lugosi simply had a screen presence and was an watchable actor. Sure, it's a little hammy in parts, but both Wood's dialog and Lugosi's rendition are nowhere near as bad as folks make out (if you want to see badly acted and improbable dialog, attend any student movie season). Generally the dialog flows quite well. Given that this was Wood's second feature, and that he had no real technical apprenticeship for film-making, he did good. If he had been able to make more movies, who knows what the rest would have turned out like. So I savor these early Wood movies as the start of something that could have been even better, and as inspiration for not giving up in the face of no budget; he did have talent.