Why was the Monster's Bride so much better looking?

[breckjensen]

Hello,


I always wondered that. Aside from the strange hairdo and some scars under her chin and ears, she was practically perfect, if a bit tall. A beautiful female with striking features, good skin and figure (from what we saw of it.) Meanwhile, her intended "partner" was a hodgepodge of badly stitched together, mismatched rotting flesh.



How did they end up so different? Were "fresher" materials used in her creation? Did Dr. Pretorius have better surgical aesthetic and attention to detail? Did they use any alternate methods for creating the tissue needed based on Pretorius' early experiment with growing little people? Or did Frankenstein have more time to perfect his craft and learn from his previous mistakes?



I don't know why, but this question has been tearing me up from the inside ever since I first saw The Bride of Frankenstein!


Please Help.


Thanks !


I didn't find the right solution from the internet.


References:
www.tapatalk.com/groups/monsterkidclassichorrorforum/why-was-the-monster-s-bride-so-much-better-looking-t68232.html

Branding Motion Graphics Examples