Dissecting Horror
Dissecting Horror
Dissecting The Angry Black Girl and Her Monster | Spoiler-free
Hello, horrorphiles. In this podcast we dissect "The Angry Black Girl and Her Monster," now playing on Shudder.
"Vicaria is a brilliant teenager who believes death is a disease that can be cured. After the brutal murder of her brother, she embarks on a dangerous journey to bring him back to life.” - The Internet Movie Database.
The Frankenstein Monster Project Trailer: https://youtu.be/hOrRwoOfJpc?si=NpmlqRrtssVjoKB2
Scene from The Frankenstein Monster Project: https://youtu.be/EgpdixyqYmI?si=pyH1H9fcNREcDb8v
This is Dissecting Horror: Examining the anatomy of fear in film, television and literature with Kelsey Zukowski and Steven Aguilera.
We hope you find it in your cold, black, withered hearts to join our Society of Grotesquery and Loathing and keep our podcast suffering onward:
Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/dissectinghorror
PayPal one-time donation of any amount: https://paypal.me/dissectinghorror
YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@dissectinghorror
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/dissectinghorror
Kelsey Zukowski: http://kelseyzukowski.com
Steven Aguilera: https://www.stevenaguilera.com
Photo credit: Slevin Mors
Hello, Horrorphiles.
You're listening to Dissecting Horror:Examining the anatomy of fear and film, television and literature. I'm filmmaker Steven Aguilera. I'm writer and performer Kelsey Zukowski. In this episode, we'll examine The Angry Black Girl and Her Monster now streaming on Shudder. This dissection will be spoiler-free. We are the horror whisperers, your champions of horror and keepers of the fearscape. On this podcast of frightsome delights, if you will. I will. And we hope you will subscribe for more. Won't you? Vicaria is a brilliant teenager who believes death is a disease that can be cured after the brutal murder of her brother. She embarks on a dangerous journey to bring him back to life. According to the Internet movie database, the angry black girl and her monster was written by And is the feature film directorial debut of Bonhomie. Jay Storey, a writer with the last name story. How about that? Meant to be. He directed three short films prior. This film premiered at 2023 South by Southwest Film Festival in March. In June, it was released in select U.S. theaters and hit streaming on Shudder. Quite a fast track there from festival to theaters in just three months. After the opening of this film, about 3 minutes of running time, I already found myself very touched, exhilarated and left in awe and intrigued and what was sure to be an emotional and unique take on the classic Frankenstein story. It immediately captured me and captivated me throughout as its journey unraveled more. I found the film to be powerful, poetic, tragic, fierce, refreshing, spunky, authentic, spirited and profound in different moments, but often simultaneously. Story is always most predominant to me, but I did love this cinematic journey. This film took me on from the color palette to the editing, showcasing a dazzling and enigmatic balance between gritty, real world and fantastical, otherworldly monster marvels, almost with the cosmic horror as color palette. It was exquisite from beginning to end. The visuals fully took me and made me believe this parallel in story, but even more so, it was the captivating and layered story, emotion, creativity and spark that had an intensity deeper than even when the electric bolts that powered the monster. This very well might be my favorite horror film of the year so far and likely one of my favorite films I've seen this year, regardless of genre. He created a gem and I greatly look forward to seeing what he does next. this film felt very independent. Even 1970s lake, which I think was befitting of it, looked like vintage lenses, even very raw and unclean in a good way. It was shot in Charlotte, North Carolina, through co-founder Eli Roth's Crypt TV, which is backed by Jason Blum and Blumhouse Productions. Leah DeLeon Hayes plays the Kariya, our lead character, and she is amazing. the story starts with her as a mad scientist type. Mad in the crazed sense. Not angry. In fact, this title, The Angry Black Girl and her Monster is not exactly accurate. If anything, she is the least angry character in the story who expresses grief more so and is otherwise more logical in her thinking. The acting is stellar all around. Everyone nailing their parts, even those with less screen time all add to the story. Of course it is Hayes who really powers this piece as the determined, brave, witty and infectious believer while still having moments of great heartache, vulnerability, fear and even shortsightedness and irresponsibility. She is a capable and admirable young force to be reckoned with, but still one, figuring out who she is and what her life will hold, especially as she tries to grapple with bigger things like life and death. She knows every emotion, and even at her worst, she is a joy to watch. But what is her plan exactly? She steals the body of her brother who was killed as a result of gang violence so she can bring him back to life. She dissects him quite a bit. He is badly decomposed. She sews him up in a very crude fashion. Does she expect him to just rejoin society in that state? What kind of existence does she expect him to have after that? She's genius enough to bring a person back from the dead. But obvious points such as these are lost on her. I think you really ties into her, Her and in general, when someone's dealing with loss, especially, the film opens up how loss and death just massively affected her, her life in this way that she can't get past. So it's a lot I think, about not maybe thinking totally clearly because you're just so focused on not being able to let go. And coupled with this ambition in of trying to defy odds and don't tell me there's not a way. I'll find a way. So, no, she probably isn't fully thinking through. yeah, I'll be totally like it was before, and we'll just all go back to our happy lives. But I think it's a little bit maybe proving proving that she can or daring to try to figure out if she can bring one of her loved ones back to life. And yeah, I think there's a lot of similarities to, you know, the Victor Frankenstein character, obviously, as there's meant to be, but where it's not fully thought out and there is some lack of responsibility and abandonment, not totally. She's a little bit more of a caring, sympathetic, mad scientist sort of character here, but she also doesn't really do much to nurture or stop what's what's happening as things escalate and carnage happens. The closest goal I can determine is based on her immediately weaponizing him against the gang who took his life and who are also supplying her father's drug habit. The drug dealing gang leader Kanga is played by Denzel Whitaker. And no, he is related to neither. Denzel Washington nor Forest Whitaker. He was my favorite character for some reason and had the most satisfying character arc as I stated the angry black girl and her monster is inspired by the original Mary Shelley's story and operates in a shadow self sort of modern day black experience lens companion to it while still maintaining its own identity and story. First and foremost. For me, that is the most ideal. What I love a direct true remake. That was well done. Absolutely. I always want more of my favorite misunderstood monster, but it is not needed. This story has been perfected, honored and adapted so many times in very lasting ways. It is more impressive, creative and rare to find a version that can really add something new to it and offer a new perspective. Generally, I would always prefer to see art being inspired by other arts honor. What inspired you but put your own artistic flair and life experiences on it to make it art that matters and grounded and at least one person's truth. This film does that. Also, tapping into one of the most powerful brands of horror. To me, horror that is very human and is reflective of the terror and humanity in the world we live in, as well as the relentless fight. And even at times, beauty among the tragedy of it all. It has hinted that her last name is Frankenstein Viktoria Frankenstein, a not so thinly disguised nod to Victor Frankenstein from the original tale. Her last initial is written as if on a folder, and they reference her name as being of European German descent. Her father explains this with disdain as some oversea or probably branding one of her ancestors with their last name. There are a lot of commonalities between this film and the original Frankenstein text, first and foremost by Carrie as our Victor Frankenstein even been nicknamed as the mad scientist by those who don't know the level of the morbid experimentation and desperation that is fueling her in the privacy of her lab. She has a book of her own called The Modern Prometheus. Like Victor, she is blinded by a certain ambition, even if well-intentioned and less career driven than Victor and her inability to let go of those she has lost and how it has seemed to sink her family. There is also the core theme of the original novel of people or society seeing something monstrous, ugly or intimidating and not giving it the chance to be more monsters. Are monsters largely out of perception of fear because someone condemned them to be one? A major theme of the book. There are also a few other small connections, such as the monster peeking through the wall, seemingly praying, but also as a way of learning human speech, which was also consistent with the original source material. I like the fresh take on this classic tale. It's the Frankenstein monster story, but in an urban setting, far from its original, Gothic backdrop so dissimilar from where one would expect to see it. And I appreciate the irony that after she finds a cure for death like a disease, the monster itself goes on to spread death among her community. But without giving anything away, she doesn't exactly learn from that lesson. I tend to love horror that tackles key driving forces of the genre such as fear and death itself as bigger entities, and explores them with a fresh figurative perspective, really exploring the ins and outs of whether one can truly conquer them. The film's perspective of viewing death as the root of the problem, yet more simple and less all powerful than we give it a credit for was interesting. Essentially viewing death as a disease that can be cured like anything else, a challenge to conquer, but not necessarily a true foe. All science fiction and horror especially have the permission to showcase fantastical what ifs that exist far outside our everyday world. Those that resonate most tend to have some basis in reality or science, just as the original Frankenstein story did. This is true here. The Angry black Girl also starts off this point of scientific theories and possibility, if not facts, and showcases a largely very grounded world similar to that we know and then fuels the mad, macabre and fantastical through it with ample emotion and discovery. There is exploration questioning if anyone has the right to play God, especially as once you create a monster, it might be beyond your power to keep it in check. As you mentioned, Steve, in trying to defeat death, she only creates more of it. And perhaps a monstrous keeper is something that no one should have to be. There are lessons learned, but you do have to question whether that victory is doomed to make the same mistakes. Or perhaps she was simply one step away from figuring out the true secret to eternal life. There are little things I wouldn't have minded getting more of, such as some of the side characters, even the dad, who is incredibly strong and refreshing in the moments he has, or a bigger focus on the monster itself, who is fairly one dimensional and doesn't have the depth, heart and curiosity. The original Frankenstein's monster had. This is fairly understandable as he is more zombie like and still has moments of confusion and horror within him. Really, though, this is vicarious story and one version of what a morbid, emotional spirited, gothic horror in an urban setting inspired by the original tale can look like. there was this well-established theme that quote, If death is a disease, then there's a cure, unquote. First off, this is a false premise, being that many diseases are in fact incurable death, especially if we were to stretch things so far as to call that a disease at all. Regardless, after she creates the monster, that theme is dropped and not really carried through to the rest of the story or characters I really love the father daughter relationship here. I almost expected them to go a different route to show Viktoria really on her own or misunderstood. Even if a hardworking but largely absent parent. The first real moment when you get to see who her father is, is during a protective, fierce moment of his daughter as he stands up for her against her teacher, who views Viktoria as a problem to get rid of. He celebrates his daughters outside of the box, growing curious mind Later, when Viktoria and her late brother's girlfriend are passionately arguing very different feelings about how to navigate in a world that might only wish to suppress them, he says, you can take in more than one idea. What if both of you are right? I absolutely love this line and the sentiments behind it. It just rang on the importance of opening your mind to a different perspective and actually hearing and understanding those around you without having to sacrifice your truth or what you believe is right for your life. Sure, it can depend on where the other person is coming from too. Some people will come from a place of hate or ignorance, but there is something to be reminded of The importance of understanding community and connecting through several female characters and particular knowledge is really utilized as an instrument of power and enlightenment. While Asia and Victoria have different ideas in how to utilize this, it is something that rings strong and adds truth and substance, especially to break away from barriers they have around them. It wasn't until my second viewing, with considerable focus and repeated playback of certain scenes with subtitles that I was able to do the math on what her familial relationship was with her neighbors too. That makes sense to you right off the bat? Not immediately. It is. It took me a little minute to to piece it together, because there's obviously a family like Bonds. They call each other family. And Aisha, which was her brother's girlfriend. She definitely has older sister sort of mentality and whose and even how Aisha sort of acts towards her her other siblings, a younger brother and sister. At first I was like, wait, is this are these her children, too? But she's just kind of that that fierce, older, older sister. But also she is just very opinionated and just trying to arm everyone with knowledge and defense. But she feels like they need to survive in this world that they're in. So it's no, it's definitely not spelled out. I got it. But it took me a minute. Part of the problem for me was that the audio quality could have been better. I kept straining to understand things, then rewinding to re listen to parts until finally resigning to watching the whole film with subtitles to cope. Did you have any kind of issue there? No, I didn't really have any difficulty understanding my shitty TV Then that's probably the culprit. there was a potential plot hole that confused me that I didn't quite ever resolve. we have the monsters hands. I guess we're supposed to be burning hot since they did burn Victoria's arm initially and they would cause scorch marks wherever he touched the walls, etc. Yet she is also shown holding his hands without being harmed. And later the police put cuffs on him and they aren't burned. His clothing remains perfectly intact and there's no smoke coming off him. And wouldn't his hands have just cooked away since they're made of flesh? So that seemed inconsistent to me. Yeah, that's a fair point. I am not one that, like, really came across my mind. I guess there is, you know, something with things that are fantastical and not, you know, if it's somewhat of the imagination. I give some leeway. Like, for example, it could be that when the monster feels more provoked or enraged or, you know, viewed as this monster, the monster comes more out of him. So maybe there are certain powers or, you know, things I guess you could draw back to, like the the lightning that comes out of him in those moments of defense or like almost this automatic reaction of the body. But that's not really stated clear. So or you could see it as like, that was just a thing of convenience. It was there when they wanted it to be and it wasn't there. So I think either are fair, though, wasn't immediately something that like came up to me as like an issue. But yeah, it would make sense that if he got really upset, he would get like charged up or something. But there instances where he's just by himself and we just see the scorch marks all over the walls like, he's been here because we see all the scorch marks. And it wasn't like an upsetting moment or points where it would have been upsetting when he was confronted with the cops and they were putting cuffs on him. He didn't burn them then. So it just wasn't consistent. And I didn't I didn't see the logic there of why it was happening sometimes in otherwise not. Yeah, it's very even when he was alone, I could see that as his wife's younger sister kind of becomes a friend and aide to him, but for the most part, he could be in those moments, even of him being alone back in this room. It could be the isolation, not feeling accepted and feeling that he has no choice. You know, the kind of classic like Frankenstein monsters elements could be coming out. another minuscule nit pick, and this isn't really a plot hole, but just more of from a writing standpoint. Her brother, the monster, is named Chris, which when I say that out loud, sounds almost funny that the Frankenstein monster would be named Chris. But one of the drug dealers who gets attacked is named Curtis. Curtis said quickly, like Chris. And it's always best to give characters completely different sounding names, not even sharing The first letter, if possible. That way, it doesn't confuse anyone, not completely paying attention or not fully acquainted yet with all the characters. Name one of them, Chris, but the other Ralph or something. Or else you're just asking for your audience to get things mixed up. But getting back to the story, I think a more prominent question for me is where did this impoverished teenage girl obtain such a mass of equipment, tools and expertise in electronics, mechanics, mathematics, engineering and the medical sciences without any help? How could she even move all this stuff? Never mind all the dead bodies she snatched I mean, her brother alone was probably £250. How did she even get him on the table? quite a suspension of reality. I have no problem going there, though. Well, I. I do in that I mean, I don't know if I needed a scene of her. Like. I mean, she's obviously very intelligent. She isn't afraid to ask questions. She is definitely scientifically savvy. And she mentioned that she's studied all these great scientific minds. So I guess even you can give her some points, I think, towards the knowledge and theory, because any and the original Frankenstein novel, as well as just a lot of a lot of things in in science and history that were at one point, you know, something that no one would dare to question or think or do with takes that one to say, well, what if I did this? And a lot of it's trial and error, I guess. I guess, yeah. Equipment and lugging it there. But I don't know if I really needed like that establishing scene of her, like lugging all of her equipment to establish that it's there but the quantity of equipment this may have been an opportunity to bring in Igor like character. Even the original Frankenstein had some assistant that took care of all the stuff. They could have inserted something like that, but I just couldn't buy that she was it was almost encroaching upon Mary Sue territory that she would just be so learned in anything and everything. As a teenage girl, I, I like the idea of thinking outside the box and it takes a fresh perspective, even child's perspective, to just see what's there and see through all the academia to arrive at some unique solution that that's okay. But yeah, it was a little too grand to the point where I just don't think I'm totally buying that she would do all of that alone, or at least have a mentor or something that would have helped her. But that's just me, I guess. Yeah, I would. I would. I guess I wouldn't have been poster whether it be a mentor or and I go character. But I definitely loved it for what it was so There are a few moments of nice little nods or metaphors that just help make this film more poetic. At one point, Victoria shatters one side of her glasses early on in the scene where she is being detained by security in her school for being disruptive in speaking her mind, questioning and attempting to have an open discussion. It is a focal point throughout. There is no mention of it after or attempts to fix her glasses aside from taping the bridge above her nose, which is not where the key shadowing took place. It really didn't need to be brought up though, as it made sense that she just might not have the means to fix it. and it also could serve as a number of metaphors, those of persevering in a fractured and unfair world, always remaining to have one eye open, demanding clarity and seeing and daring to believe what others would dismiss. I really enjoyed the score here as well. The film, had an incredibly powerful score that hits that at moments is subtle and is adding to that given mood at moments is intense. Feeling like a moving, lurking monster with the life and foreboding power of its own They had an opportunity, as in the original Frankenstein, to perform a brain transplants with an abnormal brain to explain the monster's demented and destructive behavior. His initial death was even caused by a gunshot to the face justifying such a procedure. She's also literally referred to as the body snatcher and so has access to other brains. But I guess I can see why they didn't do that or else it wouldn't be her brother Chris anymore. But to justify why he is so violent, she explains that because they called him a monster, he believed it, so they made him one. Really? That's like. That's right. In tune with the original Frankenstein. Well, I'm wondering this may be giving the writing too much credit, but was him being turned into a monster by the police and society, calling him that a metaphor like blaming the problems in black communities on systemic racism? Yeah, that sounds something like that. Yeah, that sounds right, I think. And I think that's a big point of some of the characters like Aisha being so proponent of educating themselves and, you know, having the power and knowledge to not fall victim or succumb to these same things. But I think there is a little bit of an element of being boxed in or what society lets people in black communities be and trying to bridge out of that. So I think there is a little bit definitely of like a human rights metaphor there and yeah, through through other characters kind of, I think even with like the setting and the gang violence and things like that, that there's a line of like we're out here killing each other because seemingly people aren't given many other choices. So this is all that they have to, you know, to fall in and fight against each other. So I think that all kind of like wraps in there. And even, you know, earlier you said the title make a lot of sense to you. I think a little bit plays off certain stereotypes of someone's, you know, opinionated and standing up. She's the angry black girl. But I think it's also a little bit of in any sort of having an identity or standing up for, who you are in your community and everything and what you want to be that there's a little bit of you do have to get angry and fight and speak up and sometimes find different ways and not be allowed yourself to be boxed in by the possibilities before you. And I think that's a lot about not whether she thought, you know, Chris could really be a high functioning person of society, but just they say, I can't do this. So let me let me just try and see if there is a different way sort of a thing. I think that's really the core premise and spirit about the film is going after her before even watching the film, just seeing the title and poster, I predicted certain messaging, demonizing police and society, and especially white people. And I wasn't wrong. But I will say, if that story is important to you and you feel the need to tell it, by all means. EXPRESS What's important and what motivates you As a filmmaker? I do strongly encourage your freedom of speech, So don't come at me. But this is where I get canceled and drag you down with me. Background actors aside, literally every single white person in this film is blatantly racist or violent against blacks. This only showed negative depictions of white people and has a very strong anti-police sentiment. If nothing else, from a storytelling standpoint, this feels a bit predictable and was blatantly on the nose about it. using no subtlety or subtext to convey it. I suspect the final draft of the script was written during the George Floyd riots. When hating on and defunding the police was all the rage. And for many, still is. I dare you to say something. All right. Yeah. I think with any you know, with anything that makes making a point like, you know, it can be in revenge films or feminist driven films out there, it can be important to have one decent human being character that is that that party of that that you're critiquing. So, yes, would have welcomed there being one very positive or a supportive white character in it. I mean, definitely the cops aren't there to help them and are against them. I really again, I'm not like all cops are evil or anything like that. But I don't I don't mind the critique of police at all just for the simple fact that a lot of them do abuse their power and get so focused on having that power that they let it corrupt them. And I didn't really feel like it was a huge focus. Like, yeah, there was obviously they're trying, their bodies are missing and police are coming after them and there is even that one scene where the cops are knocking on the door when they're having this nice family dinner and it becomes sort of like a high stress, very defensive thing. But then you also have to think of things like the Breonna Taylor incident where again, it's a different mentality. Like if if you're not black or, you know, if you're white, like we are, if the cops knock on your door. I mean, I would be defensive because I'm not super trusting of cops in general, but it's not I wouldn't think I'm about to be shot. You know, the second a cop enters my door. And I think that fear is much more alive and prevalent, even in very recent history, sadly. So I think it is again, it's authentic to the filmmakers experience and probably a lot of other people. It is a little bit a little bit of a social commentary and statement piece. So some of it is more representing these different forces against them. Not necessarily saying every cop is out to get us, but these are some of the fears for for you know them that they have to live with and are more on guard than the average person might be. Early on, the police had gunned down a little black kid for, no apparent reason whatsoever. They they later pounded the door, as you say, as the family is having dinner, turning the doorknob and barging in so they can question all the tenants about a crime. Was very Nazi, tyrannical like levels of oppression. And I'm sure it's happened to someone somewhere. But obviously without a warrant or probable cause, the police just aren't going to do that. Anything obtained would be worthless. So there's no point. I felt it was just way too exaggerated. It felt so contrived and such a stretch that the black population would be living under that level of constant oppression by the police, who, despite being in a predominantly black area, were always white, murderous and evil. Not that most of the black population are portrayed as particularly delightful, either in all fairness yeah. I suppose just for, I guess the representation they could have had, whether it be a black police officer or different minorities, they could have had one or two of those on the police force. If yeah, that community is heavily, is heavily black in particular, I guess that would have been slightly more realistic. And I know I'm really tempting fate here encroaching upon this conversation too. But I have noticed innocently enough that most black filmmakers often seem to hold race as their central theme. Jordan Peele, Spike Lee, Tyler Perry As examples. You can certainly make a movie about inner city life and gang violence and police brutality. All good. It's your freedom. But if you're gay, for example, your movie is than likely to showcase gay issues. Or if you're a woman, it's got feminist girl bosses in man bashing. why can't you just be a black, gay, fat, disabled trans woman and make a movie about robots or something? Why is one forever bound to mainly generating content dedicated to that marginalized group you're a part of? I mean, you can you can make a film about whatever you want, and I'm sure many of those people then do. But again, most most people say, write what you know and writing filmmaking, any type of art can be very therapeutic, and especially if you know, maybe when some of these filmmakers were younger, they felt like they didn't have enough representation of that or enough stories that reflected their experience. It's not crazy to think that they would want to make a film that represented what their reality and what their truth was, especially, you know, if they're saying if they're, you know, even in the past couple of years alone, it's not like many of these issues are have, you know, totally been resolved. It's still it's still things that are a part of their identity and spirit and experience, and they want to explore through storytelling. So I think that's great. And why shouldn't they? But they can also make a film that's, you know, about any any number of things without societal or identity politics or undertones. But yeah, they can make whatever story that they want, but it is a part of who they am and their experience. So it makes sense to me. Yes, and I agree with that, except if for example, let's say we have in this film, we get in the middle of some random scene, a shoehorned in discussion about systemic racism or other racial issues that have nothing to do with the movie, one of which describes how real history can be found in Malcolm X. While Columbus was just a human trafficking rapist. Like what the hell does that have to do with this story? Again, from a proper filmmaking standpoint, I think my issue more than anything is, is when it's not really aligning with the theme or the story, but it's more you and your activism. taking advantage of what you're doing to get on your soapbox and decry things which are not relevant what I really would like to keep politics out of our podcast. So but here I go. I mean, I can see how it might feel like a departure from just a girl dealing with death and loss who's experimenting with, you know, this macabre coming to life monster and then spiraling and affecting. And I could see how personal politics isn't necessarily needed, but it was sparse throughout. But for me, I didn't feel like it was it wasn't like every scene. They were just kind of going over and over again, which they did. That's fine. think this was just true to their lives. And, you know, there's there's kids out on the street getting shot and even just like the the gang and how that ends up being something that affects most people in this community one way or another. And just the difficulty and kind of rising above and finding their own path. I think those points could have been more artfully woven into the story through metaphor or something that wasn't just so on the nose. And that's fair. I feel like if your message is that all police are evil or if there are some other societal points you want to make this isn't necessarily going to resolve anything if you're introducing this message to make a statement vilifying the police or white people or whatever, it doesn't bring the two sides together. it's more divisive. It demonstrates the police as being villains that are encouraged to be mocked or fought against, which doesn't bring peace to anything. So it seems like kind of a a backwards message if you do have some sort of a point to make If anything, it seems more harmful to the black community. By fostering further hostilities. What is your goal? Like what do you What do you think this accomplishes? I mean, that's probably true. Like, I don't think this film is going to garner peace or hospitality between between people that things like this are happening to and and cops. I think it was more just to illustrate just the reality of this community and what their lives were like and the hardships that they they were under and then why they go these these other extreme rounds. Kelsey and I, in fact, first met on a feature called the Frankenstein Monster Project, which I finished just before the pandemic, which One day I'll get around to finding distribution for I cast her as the Bride of Frankenstein. It did do a festival run last year and garnered some nominations and even a Best Actor award for one of our leads, Jeff Dujardin. The Frankenstein Monster Project is basically the Blair Witch Project about a hundred years earlier, and with the Frankenstein monster instead a link the trailer and a full scene in the description. Anyways, the original and ultimate zombie. To me, the Frankenstein monster is death brought back to life. But it's more than that. This of taking body parts from different persons piecing them together to make a whole new individual. The questions that raises who is this now? is it composite of all those different personalities or has it become a new individual or just a soulless life form? This aspect is what fires my imagination most yet really isn't explored in the angry black girl and her monster. I mean, it is. Of course, Mary Shelley's Frankenstein is just such a iconic, riveting, profound story and is amazing how how long it is and will surely continue to really connect and effects people the sure the the aspect of I think the limitations and you know just again that one mad bold idea what if what if I did this and things like dead bodies which are very taboo and experimenting with that and see if you can kind of like reverse this process? So that element is here, but I think also one of the things that was really great about the original text I think is probably at the time the unexpected sort of mind and heart of the monster. I feel like he has over time lived up to be one of the most definitely beloved monsters in in some ways. And for that element of being misunderstood, but also, you he does kind of become what what people choose to make him or think that he is. What was the quote? If I cannot inspire love, I will cause fear or something like that. yeah, I think also just that his again, it's like a little bit of the tragedy of a victor creating something essentially to being the the father to this creature and then just immediately abating it and just leaving it in isolation and and bewilderment and then the monsters kind of hunger, not not just for, you know, his victims, but even more so just nurturing and acceptance and knowledge and so many just marvels of the world around him that he starts to when he isn't getting that from the one that's meant to love and protect you. Then he goes and finds that from, you know, a family that he kind of picks on in the door. And I think there are some some mirrors to that. Again, I think that would probably be my one thing I would have liked to see more of like that, that side of the monster here to sort of dig in and establish more you know, who it is as this new entity or what elements of of Chris is still there. And you there's a little moments of that bewilderment and maybe slight moments of that, like a subtle heart that he kind of feels like he knows these people and feels like you should be connected. But it's the moments with him are fairly aside from attacking are are fairly minimal. So that's probably the one thing I would have liked more to really dig into him more as a character and to to get us to love and understand his whole process and what he is piecing through and trying to understand and hungering for in many ways. But again, again, this was really more of a curious story. And I think in many ways she at least for me, maybe you didn't like her as much, but at least for me, I found her to be a lot more caring and infectious and bold and in some ways very flawed in some ways very inspiring. So I it was enjoyable enough just to see it through through her eyes and what she needed this to be. I was a little bit confused as to why he needed to learn how to read or why the little girl had to teach him. Didn't he already have some education? Was was everything just reset after he was brought back to life to the point where, I mean, if he was that messed up, how can he just learn a new language if he was starting from zero anyway in the state he was in, I was not sure why they needed to even introduce that at all. He still had his old brain and so forth Yeah, I think it was pretty much reset or something close to it. I don't think he was a fully I don't think he had all the same memories and is for in his same rational thinking mind that he had before. He seemed very zombie like, like just trying to piece through things and go through the motions. So it seemed kind of like, yeah, it was kind of like a reset into this new being that he might have had. There's probably some memories because there's like, there's a moment with his father, for example, where you can tell he knows who it is, you know, So it might have been a little bit of a combination, but there is like a line later on with that. You the the younger H's younger sister taught him to speak. But also you see him peeking through the wall a lot which again there was that was a pretty like significant moment in the original novel where he just observing these other people and learns speech and language and language through that way. So I'm it seemed like that was like an intentional sort of subtle, subtle nod to the original too. But there are things unexplained there, like, yeah, they could have gone into how much of Chris is still there, How much does he know? And remember, is he a more man than monster? Which yes, probably more monster than man at this point. But yeah, that is something they kind of explored and touched on more of the the exact intricacies on Rotten Tomatoes this film has an 84% critic score and 90% audience score. It has four out of five skulls on Shudder. Overall, I thought it was all right. There was much to admire, but I think it had potential for reaching a much higher level for its story and characters. Their motivations didn't quite gel for me. It leaned way too much into the predictable tropes of inner city life and was too heavy handed with its social messaging. It had some powerful moments of tragedy, which, along with the acting, saved this movie for me over. The pacing was too slow for my taste and the visual effects weren't too great, to put it mildly. Still Have to admire anyone can complete a feature film and get it out there. Just writing a script alone can be a Herculean feat. if you would like to join our society of Grotesquerie and Loathing, subscribe now and give this podcast a like. And be sure to comment your wretched thoughts below. Keep our podcast suffering on by finding it in your cold, black, withered hearts to support us on Patreon. A link to our PayPal is also below for one time donations of any amount. It was nice knowing you
