I'd probably best start by saying that I love the writing of Mel Brooks, but I detest the acting style of Gene Wilder - so my views on this are somewhat mixed. It is a spoof - and James Whale ought to be writ large in the credits, as should Glenn Miller and a host of others who have inadvertently contributed to the wonderfully paced script that rarely draws breath. Wilder - the grandson of the eponymous, famously mad scientist - decides to visit Transylvania where he stumbles upon a formula that might just bring the dead back to life. In my view, the acting plaudits go to Marty Feldman, who is great as henchman "Igor" trying desperately to foil the over-the-top antics of the star - who just seems to play each role he takes on in the same, super-hammy, fashion with big eyes and loud, grand gestures that I find most unfunny. Coupled with Brooks, they are, however, on cracking writing form and as parodies go this sets up the whole genre - sometimes overtly and sometimes subtly, but regardless - when you listen to the dialogue you can't help but laugh. For me, it could have done with a less annoying star - but the writing has stood the test of time well and is still very much worth a watch.

**One of the great comic films of the 70s.** Mel Brooks is one of those names in comic cinema that I haven't explored much yet, and that I know more from his fame than from having seen his work. I decided to change that a little by watching this satirical film, which he directed, and in which a grandson of the infamous German doctor and nobleman Dr. Frankenstein, after years denying his name and any association with his grandfather, is called to the family castle for... what? In fact, the script badly explains this decision, but it is important for the film that he returns and that is what he will do. There, he contacts the locals and decides to further explore his grandfather's attempts to reanimate human corpses. As already understood from these lines, the script is not this film's strong point, with a weak story and many problems with a lack of logic. The film needs the characters to make certain decisions, and they will make them without worrying that this corresponds to a logical and understandable attitude. Of course, being a comedy, this is unimportant, and the nonsense also adds to the film's joke, but there are one or two moments where I missed this logic. Brooks' direction is inspired and well done. On a technical level, the black-and-white cinematography stands out, clearly designed to emulate the visual aspect of the great Frankenstein films from the 30s, with Boris Karloff. The lighting work also deserves a positive note, as does the design of the sets, costumes and props. The dialogues, sometimes improvised, work wonderfully and the jokes are excellent, even those that are a little more naughty. As for the cast, the highlight goes entirely to Gene Wilder's inspired performance, in one of the most memorable comic roles he left us. We will always remember him as Willie Wonka, that's for sure, but this film is not far behind and deserves an honorable highlight in the actor's filmography. Alongside him, we also have Marty Feldman, in his most iconic film and in an incredible performance. Peter Boyle and Cloris Leachman also deserve a note of praise.

This movie is the reason I have issues with *Schindler's List*. Take a few hours and watch them both, *Young Frankenstein* has the lighting, the contrast, and the exposure down, it's perfect... it's also a comedy with a lower budget. *Schindler's List* is a AAA film, it's Speilberg, it has a budget through the roof, and it doesn't seem to know how to light a B&W film. And I don't really want to trash *Schindler's List*, but if you are going to do Black and White... take your lessons from Mel Brooks here, it's done incredibly well, and much better than bigger movies with bigger budgets that take themselves more seriously. It's commendable and something that I feel should be noted in every review. Mel Brooks did better than Steven Spielberg, let that sink in for as long as you need it to. Not many directors can say they did better than Spielberg. Beyond that, it's hard not to be bias. I love Mel Brooks and *Young Frankenstein* is my favorite of his films. I know I sound like absolutely everyone else here but Marty Feldman killed it, he stole every scene, he was hysterical. But then the entire movie is pretty hysterical, he's just the stand out actor, the stand out laughs, everyone's favorite part of the movie, and he deserves credit as much as Mel deserves a freaking Oscar for how he put the film together. It's rare that I laugh out loud watching comedies, but Mel always seems to get me to and he did it more in *Young Frankenstein* than any of his other movies... or Marty did... or they both did, the entire cast did. And again, it's Mel Brooks. When Mel has a agendas, the first is always to make you laugh, that seems to be what he cares most about, everything else seems to come second. *Young Frankenstein*, the first agenda was making the audience laugh, as usual with Mel, but everything else was done so well that he managed to make a B&W film better than Spielberg did with a bigger budget.