Since Mary Shelley released Frankenstein in 1818, the story has continued to fascinate audiences. We’ve seen it adapted time and again, in many interesting ways. That included the 1935 sequel that put the focus on Frankenstein’s bride.

But was that sequel told the way Shelley would have wanted? That’s a central question at the heart of this new take on the story of The Bride, crafted by writer/director Maggie Gyllenhaal. It supposes that Shelley had more to say about her creation, the world, and the role of women.

The film picks up in the 1930s in Chicago. Frankenstein (Christian Bale) has adopted the name of his long-dead creator. He’s been roaming the Earth, mostly alone, for more than a century. And in that time, he’s become desperately lonely. He seeks a companion that is of his own origin.

So, Frankenstein, or Frank as he’s goes by for short, seeks out Dr. Euphronius (Annette Bening). She is a fan of the original Dr. Frankenstein and his work, and has sought to follow up on it. She’s captivated by meeting his creation but it reticent to help with his request—to find a bride. Eventually his plight wears her down.

Do, Dr. Euphronius and Frankenstein head to the cemetery and exhume a recently murdered woman. They bring her back, but The Bride (Jessie Buckley) has her own complicated history. Though she can’t remember all of her life before, she leads Frankenstein on a journey across the country that leaves a trail of destruction in its wake.

This is a hard film to evaluate. It’s a big, original swing. That is something to be lauded and praised. And there is plenty about this adaptation that thrilled and impressed me. But there is a narrative choice—and a narrative device—employed from the jump. It will either work for you, or it won’t. And that choice, and how it hits you as a viewer, will govern how much you’re drawn to the film as a whole.

Let me start with the good. Gyllenhaal the director has some brilliant strokes here. This is a wild and stylish approach to the world. The look, the costumes, the setting, and the locations all draw you in. There is a big approach here, which includes homages to classic Hollywood films, Bonnie and Clyde, and more. And it’s brilliant at times.

It’s also paired with some incredible performances. Buckley gives her all to a very difficult role. It’s wild and it’s complex, and she’s brilliant. Bale is equal to the task as well. But it’s a great ensemble. I enjoyed Bening, the detectives played by Peter Sarsgaard and Penelope Cruz, and the role by Gyllenhaal’s brother, Jake. All of them commit and at times come together to create something fascinating and brilliant.

But it all comes back to that narrative decision. Ultimately, while I appreciate the creativity and the big swing, it doesn’t work. It makes the story strange and clunky. It makes the message muddled. And, at times, the film loses all its forward momentum and briefly stalls. This is a case where Gyllenhaal the writer failed Gyllenhaal the director.

I usually don’t spend so much time praising a film that doesn’t work. But it’s important to lift up the craft and to praise the effort here. I didn’t like this story. I didn’t like the choice in the narrative structure. But I’m excited to see what kind of film Gyllenhaal gives us next.

The Bride is now playing nationwide.

Matthew Fox is a graduate of the Radio, Television and Film program at Biola University, and a giant nerd. He spends his free time watching movies, TV, and obsessing about football. He is a member of the FSWA. You can find him @knighthawk7734 on Twitter and as co-host of the Fantasy Football Roundtable Podcast.