Movie Review: Frankenstein (2025)

There’s a separate thread for this movie already, but since my name was invoked, I figured I’d go ahead and put together my own review. There are literally hundreds of depictions Shelley’s story in film and TV, so I guess we can indulge two separate threads in this forum.

I probably don’t really need to tell you the story. Victor Frankenstein is the prototypical mad scientist, playing with forces he can’t truly harness or comprehend. Cast out by polite scientific society, he vows to do what only God has heretofore been capable of, gain dominion over death itself. With the help of a wealthy benefactor, Victor succeeds in accomplishing his blasphemous aims. He reanimates a composite corpse, stitched together from the parts and pieces found on the battlefields of Europe. But Victor is soon confronted with the truth of his achievement, and he and his monster embark on a journey of violence, obsession, and in the end, perhaps forgiveness.

This movie was a labor of love for director Guillermo del Toro, who has shown a long and obvious affinity for outcast creature characters in his previous catalogue. As usual, del Toro brings his own aesthetic to the gothic classic and the film looks very good, although he does reign the visual design in somewhat from his more fantastical works such as Pan’s Labyrinth or Hellboy. Del Toro sticks more closely to the classic story beats than some other versions of this tale have done. However, he did focus on some aspects of the plot that were maybe unnecessary, and made some changes that don’t seem to add much. Given that the movie comes in at about two and a half hours, I’m not sure we needed quite so much of Victor’s childhood. Nor was there any particular reason to complicate Victor’s relationship with Elizabeth, who was simply his fiancee/wife in the book. There are some other changes I won’t mention to avoid spoilers, but suffice it to say, many of the changes del Toro made seem pretty clearly designed to create as wide a gulf as possible between Victor and his monster. Del Toro depicts Victor as completely a villain as possible, while casting the monster as a pure victim. It works fine, but it’s a bit black and white compared to Shelley’s original.

As I mentioned, the visuals are very good, as one would expect from del Toro. The pacing is ok, although such a familiar plot did drag just a bit. The acting is generally good, although for my money, Oscar Isaac is just a bit over the top. And man, I’m tired of the jaunty hat or special leather gloves used as principal indications of the anti-establishment character. The cast is excellent, with parts for Isaac, Charles Dance, Christoph Walz, Mia Goth, and Lars Mikkelsen among others. Jacob Elordi is the standout in the role of the monster. The writing is fine, but a bit stilted at points, and very on-the-nose. One character, with his dying breath, actually tells Victor, “You are the monster.” Of course that’s the message del Toro was going for, and it’s one that has been discussed in every high school and college class discussion about the original novel, but you don’t necessarily have to spoon feed it to the audience.

Overall, Frankenstein is a worthy addition to the extensive list of film depictions of this famous sciences fiction horror tale. I don’t know that it will take a place as the “definitive” version, and I’m not sure del Toro has added much of anything new to the mythology, but it’s a good movie that looks great and puts this director’s particular stamp on the familiar story.

Frankenstein is rated R for gore and violence, although there’s also some brief nudity. There’s a lot of stylized grisly gore, and I would definitely not lump this in with the other versions that might be ok for little kids.

2 Likes

My take on that scene was that it had to be spoon fed to Viktor for him to realize what was plainly obvious everyone but Viktor in the most poignant way possible.

That may have been del Toro’s intent, but if so, it would have been more effective if Viktor actually learned that lesson as a result of the character’s words, instead of disregarding it, engaging in an obsessive global manhunt, and then magically learning his lesson in the last 5mins of the movie.

Several years ago - nevermind how long, precisely - while I was looking for an image of Frankenstein monster for a project, I came upon a thumbnail for an MP3 from a band in Lincoln, Nebraska, of all places

I can’t find the exact image now, but it looked something like this piece by Ryan Callisto

The song was called “Everybody’s Somebody’s Monster” which has kind of stuck with me since — no matter how wonderful you think your are, or even just OK, there’s someone out there who thinks quite the opposite of you

I’m sure that I’m guilty of that, considering the number of women I’ve known, and not every relationship ended … “smoothly,” shall we say?

The creature’s monologue in the final scene addressed that when he talked about both of them losing everything there was to lose and having nothing but anger and loneliness to show for it. I understand that to be turning point. His brother’s final words seemed to be the signal of the beginning of the end.

If you have to spell out the moral of the story in explicit terms directly to the main character (and by extension, the audience), that weakens the storytelling, in my opinion.

Different strokes.

In the accompanying documentary Del Toro said he looked at hundreds of costumes for Victor and this one struck him immediately. He wanted the character to have the swagger of Mick Jagger, for some reason.

I assume the red gloves hinted at (screamed) blood on his hands. Not very subtle.

I’ve been wondering if Elizabeth’s character change was a nod to the author, giving her more significance and dimension than originally written. Perhaps her being his brother’s fiance and not his own was changed as to put more distance and tension between what he had and what he wanted, and to amplify the misery he imposed on the people around him? I don’t know that it was a winning decision given my unfamiliarity with the source material but in the film it made sense in that context.

My impression was that del Toro did everything he could to make it very obvious that Viktor is the villain, including having him carry on a flirtation with his brother’s fiancée. In the book, Elizabeth is mostly there to be the symbolic representation of innocence, and a plot device. She’s mostly a passive character, and serves as a sacrifice. The monster kills her to get revenge on Viktor. Her death serves to demonstrate the consequence of Viktor’s actions, but she’s not a hugely active part of driving the plot forward.

Some of this film’s changes to Elizabeth’s personal character probably aim to serve a more modern audience that prefers to see female characters with stronger motivations and qualities that don’t render them quite so passive to their male counterparts. But the way she fits into the plot seems aimed at presenting another example of how Viktor is a bad guy.

I could see why he would rewrite the part so that Victor accidentally(?) and not the creature intentionally kills her, though. That to me would seem more disjointed with the character arc after having formed a bond with her. As filmed, his desire for connection with her seemed to eclipse his hatred of his creator so killing her to spite him would make him far less sympathetic and more chaotic than they clearly intended.

In the book, Viktor creates a companion for the monster, and then kills that companion before he completes it. That’s why the monster takes revenge. In the movie, those events don’t unfold the same, so the monster’s motivation for revenge is different, and him killing Elizabeth wouldn’t make as much sense.

Again, Viktor killing Elizabeth further cements del Toro’s view of Viktor as the bad guy, contrasted with the monster (and incidentally Elizabeth), who is the innocent victim.

The book did not paint those two characters in quite as black and white.

Like the red gloves and jaunty hat, and the explicit statement of the story’s moral, the dichotomy between Viktor and monster is simplified, less nuanced, and more spoonfed to the audience in del Toro’s version.

1 Like

… On the day she is to marry his brother, who is also killed, leaving Viktor totally alone

Not lost on me was that the sleeves on her wedding dress called out to the bandages on Elsa Lancaster’s “Bride”

Somebody fixed the ending; in a library book, I’m guessing?

1 Like