While being less Mary Shelley's and James Whale and more Guy Ritichie's Sherlock, Victor Frankenstein is an entertaining take on the classic tale, albeit one in which the actual Frankenstein activity is somewhat rushed. While essentially a Gothic action movie, the chemistry between Daniel Radcliffe and James McAvoy is good, but the film steadily comes apart at the seams (poor stitching?) due to the increasing number of characters that progressively appear, such as the dogged police detective, a romantic love interest, and a hastily tacked on villain with a rather undeveloped motive. As such, the narrative is never fully complete and feels undeveloped in terms of plot. This is especially evident in the finale in which Victor strangely seems to bring his creation to life within a Bond villain's secret lair (that indeed pretty much ends up exploding). Further, the hurried nature of the final act may be due to reedits as Mark Gatiss suddenly appears from nowhere, and has but one brief line, which seems odd if you are going to recruit one of the famed League of Gentleman, so I suspect his role was initially more substantial. However, the reanimated creature gets a little bit of 'Hulk smash!" action, and actually looks pretty good. So, a enjoyable enough film, but In the end even Victor Frankenstein could not fully animate all of the disparate parts and make them come to life, and like the monster chimp that runs amok in said film, it all just kind of runs out of energy.

Not really a retelling but an imaginative prequel to the original 1931 Frankenstein film which itself was a major deviation from the book.Some people may think this is a retelling, but by the end of the film it's clear that it is a prequel, though the hints are there all along.The film has much to commend it, including the acting of James McAvoy (Frankenstein), Andrew Scott (Detective Turpin), and Jessica Findlay (Igor's love interest). The music and photography are excellent and the set and costume people create an excellent picture of Victorian London.I particularly liked the idea of the film being told from the POV of Igor.On the negative side, Daniel Radcliffe's performance added very little and the film was a tad too long.There is nothing to match the 1931 original nor the 1935 Bride of Frankenstein, but otherwise this film holds up well against the hundreds of other Frankenstein films. OK. I'm not counting the Abbott and Costello version, which is great.

We all know the story of Frankenstein. Or at least we think that we do. I've read the novel, and seen a number of movie versions (some faithful to the novel, some not). Paul McGuigan's "Victor Frankenstein" branches the story out, telling it from Igor's point of view. It's odd, since there was no assistant in Mary Shelley's original novel, least of all a hunchbacked one. But here we get Igor's backstory and how he came to know the doctor whose name is synonymous with bad science, and how they set about animating a dead body.Unfortunately, much of the movie is sort of silly. Although I liked how the depicted the police inspector as a hardcore Christian fanatic who considers science a form of witchcraft - sounds like a lot of Christians today, doesn't it?* - the movie goes too far on CGI. This isn't something of which Daniel Radcliffe and James McAvoy should be proud. It's not a bad movie, but it shouldn't be your first choice. "Young Frankenstein" is the best adaptation ever.*A strange irony is that so many of the religious people who denounce science as witchcraft or something similar have no problem using all of life's modern conveniences, all of them based on science.

The opening statements to "Victor Frankenstein" is "you know the story..." and indeed we all know from the pages of Mary Shelley's classic horror novel from 1818 and to the numerous adaptations that gave graced the silver screens. Here we have another take from the classic story that's an added addition towards the other previous adaptations. Director Paul McGuigan collaborated with scriptwriter Max Landis gives us an original take of the movie seen for once through the eyes of Dr. Frankenstein's humble assistant Igor Strausman (Daniel Radcliffe). We first meet Igor as a nameless hunchbacked circus clown who had to encounter a lot of physical abuse all for the sake of entertainment. When not pleasing the crowd, Igor also serves as a physician to the other acts. When an incident involving a trapeze artist goes awry, Igor is introduced to Dr. Frankenstein (James McAvoy).Feeling that his gifts are being wasted, Frankenstein frees Igor from this uncompromising lifestyle to come work with him. Their escape wasn't easy because a strong man, a knife thrower and several performers were on their tails. The estate Dr. Frankenstein calls home resembles a posh and resourceful science laboratory. After removing a cyst, and replacing a back brace concealer on him, Dr. Frankenstein adopts him the name of Igor Strausman. It seems the Frankenstein and Igor were once roommates who was once involved in taking part in recreational drugs who's been MIA for a while. With a hired assistant, Frankenstein can now propose his latest creation that will make him famous.Set in the murky and dreary 19th century London, the movie takes in the effort of going for a new approach to the lore of Frankenstein by narrating the story seen through the eyes of Igor for a change. However, it still doesn't seem to stand up to the other adaptations based on Shelley's novel. It looks like its teetering towards an origin tale, but it never goes to deeper scrutiny as to how Dr. Frankenstein got the notion of bringing the deceased back to life. There's a few snippets of Victor's childhood involving his father's visitation (Charles Dance, but it offers very little insight.Thrown in the thick of things is Inspector Turpin (Andrew Scott) who's called to the scene to investigate on stolen animal parts missing from the London Zoo and the Royal Veterinary College and murder at the scene of the circus. Turpin suspects Victor and Igor are up to something as his investigation leads toward their path. Turpin tries to challenge Victor's progressive points of view with Turpin's having more religious way of thinking. The whole science vs. religion conflict is handled subtle but to the point along with the contrasting wardrobes the two rivals wear. Victor is seen wearing flashy colourful clothing while Turpin's choice of clothing is mundane and in grey.As we get to know Victor and Igor, their friendship is stronger to the point of bordering towards homosexuality. But that theory gets put to rest once Igor develops an infatuation with trapeze artist Lorelai (Jessica Brown Findlay). Like Igor she left the circus and has lived a life of freedom. Lorelai catches onto Victor and Igor's creation and it's this scene plus the unveiling of their creation that make up for the rather mundane dialogue throughout most of the film. Sure we may see the sci-fi genre come alive here, but it's only very sporadic when more could have been added on to hold your interest.Radcliffe tries to make us forget about Harry Potter and succeeds in making a morally inclined character in Igor as he clings onto his new life by staying loyal to his master while questioning if playing God is good or bad. McAvoy clearly is the star here as he plays Frankenstein with dimensions ranging from a delusional lunatic to a lighter funny side with his interactions with Igor. There's some great chemistry between McAvoy and Radcliffe, if only they had a more competent direction of where they were going with the story they'd be better.So while it is mildly enthralling to watch, and the special effects are quite eye-catching, with some light humour and good action to keep one intrigued. It's a good watch for a rainy afternoon, just don't expect any drastic impact compared to the other interpretations from the other adaptations from the classic Mary Shelley novel.