Bride of Re-Animator

After interns West and Cain nearly destroyed the hospital by re-animating the dead in the original Re-Animator, they have now been rewarded for their efforts by promotion to the status of full doctors in the same Miskatonic Hospital, and they're still up to their old tricks.

Meanwhile, if you remember, Dr Hill was nothing but a disembodied head, and Herbert West treated him with contempt. "You're a head. Get a job in a sideshow". Well, Hill got that sideshow job, and he eventually managed to talk a doctor into grafting wings on his ears so he can fly around. And he is pissed at Herbert.

NUDITY REPORT

Fabiana Udenio shows her left breast in a love scene

(Kathleen Kinmont appears to be topless as the reanimated woman, but the DVD special features reveal that to be a body suit.)

DVD info from Amazon

Four versions: unrated or rated, full screen or widescreen 1.85
Full-length director, cast, and crew commentary
one deleted scene and two behind-the-scenes presentations of other scenes
more drawings, still photos, and make-up explanations

This time our boys are not going to bring full bodies back to life. Instead, they're going to steal body parts and sew them together, Frankenstein style. West keeps the less enthusiastic Cain in the game by promising him that the net result will be to bring Cain's girlfriend's spirit back by using her heart as the basis for the new creation.

If you liked the first Re-Animator or Frankenhooker, this is pretty much of a hybrid of the two. Jeffrey Coombs is back again as one of the screen's memorable characters: genius, madman, complete loser, total geek, and yet somehow loveable.

Those two guys have some good comic timing, and there are some good one-liners, but the last 30 minutes of the film are an over-the-top gore-fest of half-assembled living grotesqueries battling against the two docs and their friend from Peru.

Strange and silly stuff, obviously for genre nuts only.

TUNA's THOUGHTS

Bride of Re-Animator (1990) is listed at IMDB as comedy/horror. Comedy/gore might be more appropriate. This sequel is totally tongue and cheek. The same two doctors from the original are trying to recreate a woman using her heart, and assorted body parts they lifted from women who no longer needed them. The creation, and the woman who ended up providing the head, was played by Kathleen Kinmont, who showed breasts while the doctors were still trying to save her life.

In the process of experimenting, they create a dog with a human hand replacing one leg, an arm and hand creature, and a flying head. The only bit that was subtle enough for me to chuckle at was that, even though they were injecting a serum to reanimate, their re-animation of Kinmont was accompanied by thunder and lightning.

The Critics Vote

Maltin 2/4

Rotten Tomatoes summary. Ten articles on file

The People Vote ...

With their votes ... IMDB summary: IMDb voters score it 5.2

With their dollars ... budgeted at $2.9 million, a healthy budget for a film premiered on Cinemax.

IMDb guideline: 7.5 usually indicates a level of excellence, about like three and a half stars from the critics. 6.0 usually indicates lukewarm watchability, about like two and a half stars from the critics. The fives are generally not worthwhile unless they are really your kind of material, about like two stars from the critics. Films under five are generally awful even if you like that kind of film, equivalent to about one and a half stars from the critics or less, depending on just how far below five the rating is.

My own guideline: A means the movie is so good it will appeal to you even if you hate the genre. B means the movie is not good enough to win you over if you hate the genre, but is good enough to do so if you have an open mind about this type of film. C means it will only appeal to genre addicts, and has no crossover appeal. D means you'll hate it even if you like the genre. E means that you'll hate it even if you love the genre. F means that the film is not only unappealing across-the-board, but technically inept as well.

Based on this description, Scoop says., "this film is a C. OK horror/comedy/gore". Tuna says, "This is decidedly not my sort of film, and I found nothing to enjoy. C-."