Rescued out in the middle of a blizzard, a scientist recounts for the crew of his saviours how his past experiments on instilling life to the dead resulted in the creation of a being made from dead body parts hounded him and his family and forcing him to stop it.Overall this one was quite the troublesome and incredibly problematic mini-series that isn't all that enjoyable. The biggest problem here is the fact of it being so obviously and utterly intent on following the original novel, which in turn results in a pace that it just mind-numbingly bland and flat-out boring. Continuously spouting off completely banal methods for scientific processes and bland religious debates that end before they start are featured so prominently in the first half leaves this one will such a dull, lagging pace that it stumbles over itself before even starting by getting a pace so bland and impossible to rile up any kind of interest here that regardless of how well it sets up the ill- mannered nature of his obsession the lack of interest is such that it doesn't really offer much of a chance to get going until he brings the creature to life so late in the first half. This here is mainly due to how closely this one manages to follow the storyline of the book and getting everything set-up so intently that there's almost no horror at all in this one, even during the second half when the creature escapes out into the wild, and as those are all about him as the sympathetic force in an unknown landscape there's little about it that generates any kind of fear or suspense at his actions with it spending the majority of the time doing little of any interest.with this one so fascinated with the bland story lines about his obsession and the search throughout the woods. While this indeed holds back the first half with some overly-long scenes that just go nowhere, the second half does manage to go for a few more enjoyable bits of action namely from his confrontation at the church ruins and the confrontation at his cabin in the woods. Even beyond these points, there's still a lot wrong with the second half that's even more egregious than the first, with the sympathetic wailing of the monster inspiring derision more than any kind of actual fear, the consequences of his actions against the creature unleashing nothing but shallow melodrama and once against filled with an incredibly long and bland section which doesn't have any interest in anything with it not feeling at all like a horror film for much of this section. With an underwhelming and completely uninspiring finale also making this quite a downbeat effort, this overall isn't all that impressive a miniseries.Rated Unrated/R: Violence, some Language, strong violence against animals and intense themes of death.

I watched this for the first time on Encore. Since I don't normally watch Hallmark, I never saw the movie until Encore showed it probably for the umpteenth time this week, and that was only because I was channel surfing. Fortunately I came in during the first fifteen minutes of the first part. I actually enjoyed this version better than any other because it truly follows Mary Shelley's novel. This is the true Frankenstein. Not a horror story, but, as one poster said, a tragedy.For younger viewers and anyone not familiar with the novel, it may be viewed as slow and probably even boring. Those who read the original material, however, will enjoy this film better than any of the past versions. Kenneth Branagh's take was close, but Kevin Connor truly followed Shelley's work.I haven't read the novel since I was a teen but have always remembered how it differed from all the movies except Branagh's. I saw Boris Karloff's original film long before I read the book, and I was completely surprised when I learned how much they differed. The Hammer Films were based more on Universal's film. When Branagh's film hit the screen, I thought it was the closest version to the novel. This one, however, along with its cinematography is truly faithful to the original source material. That is something rare in movies. It probably would never have made its way to the theaters due to its length and lack of real action until the latter stage.I must add viewing this movie 11 years after its release has made me realize what I've missed on the Hallmark Channel. I need to start reviewing what's being shown on that network more often. No telling what other classic adaptations I've missed. Thank you, Encore, for showing it in full without commercials.=0=

Frankenstein Review (2004) This movie is about a young man named Victor Frankenstein who lived in Switzerland and went to college in Germany. One of his professors taught him a lot, however the longer he was at college the more interested he became in trying to make human life.The first part of the movie starts off talking about his family as well as his friends. Than when he gets older it shows him making a person. They call the person that he makes "the Monster." It turns out that his creation turns against him and everyone else in the village because no one accepts him. He hurts a lot of people and Victor does the best he can to put an end to his creatures destruction.The setting took place in Switzerland and in Germany. I thought that the clothes of the actors fit the time and the setting in which this story took place (late 1700's). I thought that the acting was very good. I was quite impressed with Victor; he played his part very well. I thought that the rest of the acting was good as well.I thought that the dialogue in this movie was good as well it definitely fit the time period in which they lived. At certain points in this movie I thought that I was actually a part of the conversation that was taking place. The action sequences were so much better than other versions of Frankenstein. I thought that they seemed a lot more realistic as well as more intense than the other movies. At times you could really feel the emotion of the characters in the movie.I've personally never really been a fan of Frankenstein, however even though I didn't think the story is very good, the acting in this movie kept my attention. If you like the story of Frankenstein this is definitely something that you want to watch at least once.

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/