I'm (as most people) familiar with Frankenstein because of the 1931 Horror flick Frankenstein and to my shame I must admit I like it. Shame because this movie also shows that Hollywoods arrogance was already there in 1931 by taking someones story and maim it completely for commercial purposes. Because it's a very simple horror entertainment story i never had the urge to read the book.Then I come across the trailer of this film and I immediately wanted to see the movie, Some people gave this movie very bad remarks. Those are the people that, in my opinion, completely misunderstand the true story of Frankenstein.200 years after the book is written we haven't learned much. People still like to play god, the makers of the atom bomb for instance, and you can only hope that they have suffered in their lives like Victor Frankenstein did. "we never intended to use them". Why make them then??? Did you people really were that stupid that you don't understand that when you have something like an atom-bomb there will be somebody that would use it? (as they did).There are also a lot of people in this world who think (like Frankenstein) they have the right to take lives of other human beings just because they are treated bad in their past. There are also a lot of people in this world (the lefties) who think you should understand a creature like Frankenstein, but don't understand that "people" like Frankenstein will kill them with a smile on their face when they feel like it. Therefore I'm glad that in the film is stated, "does a person who takes innocent lives deserve understanding?" on the other hand, do people have the right to misjudge people just because they are different?These are very good questions and therefore i think this movie should be obligatory on Highschools all over the world and should be discussed afterwards so that also people who don't understand this movie can understand and hopefully are as much impressed with this movie as I was. The world would be a much nicer place to live in.

This movie of Frankenstein matched Mary Shelley's story the best of all movies. The creature was depicted exactly like the novel described and the story is more of a tragedy. Before this movie I thought of a green square headed monster with bolts in its neck, terrible speech and pure evil. After seeing this, my views have changed. The creature was not evil, he was hurt and when he killed Elizabeth and cried afterward showed he wasn't evil. I loved at the end when he got upset because Victor died and asked Walton "who did this?" and then realized what he did was heartbreaking. In my views, I would not run or hurt the creature because honestly he has a human soul. Frankenstein is a terrific movie!

This movie is one fine example of dull storytelling alright. The pace is too slow, the character development is missing and all of the events are told uninteresting. But what else could you expect from a director who mostly works on TV-series and made for TV-movies, like this one.The movie tells the classic story of the Mary Shelley novel Frankenstein. It might be a faithfully adaptation but it certainly isn't a very good one.The movie is set in some kind of weird English costume drama environment. OK the result are some scene's with some impressive scenery but it doesn't really work well for the atmosphere of the story and it kills all the tension. The story never gets exciting or tense, due to the low pace, standard cinematography and weak editing. The characters are poorly development and I couldn't care more or less about them.The fine actors don't have an awful lot to do, with the weak script and directing. A bit of a waste of a great cast. And Luke Goss basically plays his "Blade II" role all over again, including screaming the lines; "Father, father!". His portrayal of the Frankenstein monster was not really convincing, interesting or memorable.Not a complete disaster to watch but most certainly not an interesting or recommendable one. This movie adds nothing new compared to previously made Frankenstein versions.5/10http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/

Valiant effort, but still not quite there. In trying to remain faithful to the book, I felt that this made-for-TV movie hit the key scenes, but failed in connecting them in the in-between moments.I just finished reading the book when I rented this movie, and I was surprised at how faithful it was to the book (except for a few scenes and a few additions). I also was surprised at how far Hollywood has strayed from the source material in all other incarnations of this story.I was very happy to see a faithful translation, but the whole product just didn't hold together very well. Acting was just So-So (from William Hurt's German accent, to Donald Sutherland (I pictured that character much younger in the book) seeming very out of place, to Alec Newman's portrayal of Frankenstein (and finally) to Luke Goss's 'Creature' not feeling like a substantial threat. It just didn't work. I applaud the effort to be faithful to the source material, it's just that something was lost in translation. Given a marginally larger budget and probably a more seasoned director, this could have been really great, but this version just sort of hints at that greatness.