My Pet Monster: Now With Actual Pets

We probably won't see another year in which we get two Tim Burton films, so I'd be a fool to pass them both up. So, after Dark Shadows, we now have Frankenweenie, based on the short film he did back in '84. 

Victor Frankenstein (Charlie Tahan) is an introverted young man, with his only friend being his faithful dog, Sparky. One day, Sparky is hit by a car and Victor is distraught. He soon hits upon the idea of bringing Sparky back to life through lightning, and soon enough, his canine companion is back from the dead. Word soon gets out, and Victor's classmates determine what to do with this newfound information...

The better of the two Burton films (but remember, I didn't hate Dark Shadows and I will happily buy it on DVD one day). That being said, there are quite a few flaws.

First off, the film's setting. The film is in black-and-white and invoked a 50's suburbia setting, which is fine. The problem is, some pieces of dialogue indicate it takes place in modern times, like the use of the term “computer simulation” and someone brings up Pluto's demotion. It's a bit off-putting, the mix of nostalgia for the old days and throwaway references to the modern times. I'd have preferred it to stay on the side of the 50's, it would seem more convincing.

This universe actually brings up a question I have for the movie: do the events of this movie mean that Mary Shelley's Frankenstein doesn't exist? Is this like the universe of Sherlock, in which he and Watson are in the modern day, with no stories within the universe written by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle? What of Dracula and all the other creatures?

My other problems with the film involve the ending, and while it's probably easy to predict how this will all play out, I'll put the spoiler tag here now. So, spoilers.

The ending moral message is a poor choice. At one point, after Sparky's resurrection has been revealed to Victor's parents, his father (Martin Short) is concerned that Victor has tampered with the natural order. Towards the end, however, after Sparky has died again (this time sacrificing his life to defeat a monster cat-bat), Victor's father offers to help bring him back to life again, even though this time Victor was ready to accept Sparky's death.

So... what kind of message does that send to the younger crowd? “Hey kids, when someone you love dies, keep using electricity to bring them back! Doesn't matter if you come to accept their death, or even if they want to stay dead, just zap them!”
Also, they're going to have to keep doing this every time he dies. Does it work regardless of method of death? If he eats something foul and keels over, will electricity still work the same? Actually, CAN he die via that method? I mean, he's technically a zombie dog...

Also, said ending is very abrupt. When Sparky comes back to life yet again, he runs up to the dog he's sweet on (who now sports a Bride Of Frankenstein style 'do, thanks to an earlier encounter with Sparky. It's a cute little reference) and they play and make cute faces at each other... and that's it. Movie's over, nothing left to see here folks! What was the point of bringing him back to life, and imprinting the moral message mentioned above, only to pull the curtain?

And one last gripe, a minor one: the movie keeps hinting at Victor having a crush on his neighbour, Elsa (Winona Ryder), and her vice versa, but they don't really do anything with it. It's just kinda... there. And that's another reason the abrupt ending doesn't help, makes all the development for naught. And the movie's barely 90 minutes long, including credits!

Despite all that, there are things to love about the film:

The stop-motion work is as impressive as always, but some of the creature designs especially impress, like the giant turtle and the cat-bat I mentioned above. Now I want to see a stop-motion old fashioned monster movie. Or... Godzilla in stop-motion! That'd be neat!

The voice cast is splendid, particularly Catherine O'Hara and Martin Short in their roles (and they each have multiple roles, though for O'Hara, her stand out is the gym teacher, and for Short, Victor's father), and the aforementioned Charlie Tahan and Winona Ryder.

The stand-out, however, is Martin Landau as Mr. Rzykruski, Victor's science teacher. It's easy to guess who he's modeled on (and whoever did the work on him, you deserve a raise or something because that's some excellent work), and he's a veritable barrel of excitement. Not so much the character, but the feeling he invokes in not only the students, but the audience. He's pretty much the only adult with a brain in this movie, and his talking down to the adults in one scene is the best part of the movie. He openly insults their intelligence, and the whole thing reads like a criticism for people who mistrust science or learning in general. The guy's a hoot, so it's a pity the character is dropped halfway through the film.

And overall, the relationship between Victor and Sparky is really sweet, especially since he's a nice kid. And the dog is just ever so playful. So it really does resonate with the audience, what the two of them go through.

I could go over more aspects of the film (like how confusing it is that the other kids can bring back their dead animals and they go evil, bar one, even though they did nothing different to Victor. So, just because Victor did what he did out of love, that makes it OK? He still messed with forces behind his comphrension, and acted out of a somewhat selfish desire) but what you need to know is it's a nice film, with Burton doing what Burton does best: combining the mundane and the fantastical with good natured humor and a good heart. 3.5/5

OK, eight more films to review before I've reached fifty. Time to go through my DVD's for six of those and await the last two to arrive at the cinema.