Strong and Moving!

One of my all time favorites.

When a movie has you begging for it to end not even half way through it's pure crap. We've all seen this movie and this characters millions of times, nothing new in it. Don't waste your time.

All of these films share one commonality, that being a kind of emotional center that humanizes a cast of monsters.

I want to be honest with this one. I was attracted by the movie's concept (it's a sort a romantic drama with some sci-fi horror features). "The brain that wouldn't die" (or "The head that wouldn't die"?) tells the story of a brilliant mad doctor which desperately tries to save his girlfriend's life after she looses her head during a car incident. The doctor keeps his girlfirend's head alive witha bizzare machine and starts his quest to find a new body for her. But his girlfriend doesn't want to allow him to do so since the doctor has to kill a girl in ordre to acquire a new body for her. The first 30 minutes are good, I mean, the script stands up pretty well then it becomes trashy. After 30 minutes the movie becomes ridicolous, awkwardly directed and unintentionally funny. It's such a shame since the movie could turn in a really good one. It's a missed opportunity. Thankfully there's another movie "Eyes without a face" which shares some of "The brain that wouldn't die" good elements but without the trash. I think this movie deserves a remake or a second chance because I'm sure it has the potential for a great horror.Final verdict 5/10 (mediocre)The concept was good, some elements were good, the first 30 minutes are good. "The brain that wouldn't die" is a missed opportunity. I think you have to watch it without too many expectations in order to enjoy it.

and this one is even below Z if there were more letters in the English alphabet that i could use!OK, agreed the story is certainly good, maybe very good and Virginia Leith is such a beaut' indeed ... the cast acceptable but the acting terrible!to be fair though, either the copy i saw was edited and missed some small yet important parts, or if it was the whole movie in its entirety, then it's lacking a lot in the plot as well as in the execution of that plot ...maybe since the budget was too low or something but this could have been a much better movie even with that low budget if made and acted in a more proper way ...fine for seeing once to see a little failed piece of cinema history but not more than that ... i'd be certainly interested in watching the new version of the same story that's reportedly a comedy and due coming out in 2018 though ...'til then ...

Okay, so this movie has all the hallmarks of "B" scifi from the 1960s and 1950s. Cheap sets, bad acting, utterly laughable dialog ("I'll handle the brain area").In spite of all these things, the movie is underpinned by a great story line, no matter how poorly executed. So just like the classic 1960s Star Trek TV series (also plagued by cheap sets and bad acting), remember... STORY FIRST.And that saves it.The moral conundrum of when it is okay to tamper, experiment or try to save human life. The inner struggle that a doctor or surgeon must wrestle with between only doing what *should* be done to save people, vs veering over the line and trying to "improve" or "reconstruct" them. The clash between trying everything possible to save a person's life vs deciding that it is in their best interests to let them die (Is it ever? Can they make that decision if they are dying?) I'm the first to admit that I enjoy this film largely for its laughability, its sleazy dialog and background music, the tawdry story line of a surgeon trying to save his fiancée's head by not just saving her, but trying to "trade up" and graft her head onto a stripper's body. But unlike a lot of other schlocky horror/scifi movies, this one has a nugget of something better.

A doctor (Jason Evers) experimenting with transplant techniques keeps his girlfriend (Virginia Leith)'s head alive when she is decapitated in a car crash, then goes hunting for a new body.This film was made in 1959, but floated around a bit until picked up (and re-cut) by American International and Sam Arkoff. Over the years, and due largely to its falling into public domain, it has become a late-night staple. Many people -- and all horror fans -- have probably seen this film in some form.Worth pointing out is that the monster in the closet is played by Eddie Carmel in his first "cinematic role". Carmel was a well-known Israeli-born circus performer who worked under the name "The Jewish Giant". Those who want to see him in action again ought to track down a copy of "50,000 B.C. (Before Clothing)" (1963). Interestingly, author Tony Sasso believes the monster in the closet is symbolic of repressed homosexuality. It is an interesting interpretation, and one he makes a big deal out of, but I certainly have my doubts on its veracity: the "closet" metaphor did not really take root until the 1960s, so there is no way the writers could have referenced it.On the whole, this film is pretty decent, with some great ideas and concepts. In an age when transplants were still in their infancy, it makes sense to use them for a horror or science fiction jumping off point. And it is clear to see how this might have influenced other pictures. Some have said "Jan in the Pan" is a precursor to the head in "Re-Animator". Whether or not this has been confirmed, the resemblance is there.What the film lacks is some realism. Early on a brain is exposed inside a head, apparently without a skull. Huh? And later, a woman's head is lifted from a car crash without being cut or forcibly removed. It was just lying there. Maybe that is possible, but it seems rather silly.The film also drags a bit because it is weighted down by dialogue. Dialogue can be a very good thing, and create exposition or add character depth. Here, however, it just seems repetitive. Jan says variations of the same line multiple times. And even in the opening scene, the elder doctor makes a point of arguing against "playing God" multiple times. We get it. The film would be much stronger at 60 minutes than it currently is in the longer form.For those who prefer longer, however, Synapse Films has graciously released an uncut edition running closer to 85 minutes with more cat-fight goodness, and a picture that is vastly improved from the awful public domain prints floating around. Whether or not you want to pay more when you can get a cheap version for free is up to you.Still not good enough? Scream Factory has jumped into the game. They say their 1080p uncut edition, scanned from the negative, is "new" (suggesting it is even better than the Synapse print. That may or may not be true. But regardless, they have definitely brought out the superior disc because they have added commentary from film historian (and king of the commentary) Steve Haberman and Tony Sasso, who literally wrote the book on this movie. What really makes the Scream disc the must-have version is that it also includes the full episode of "Mystery Science Theater 3000" where the film is riffed. Well done, Scream. They previously released "Squirm" in two versions: the MST3K version and a new collector's edition. All features should have been on one disc. So perhaps they are learning...