Frankenstein
October. 05,2004Frankenstein is a 2004 U.S. television miniseries (edited into a film) based on the book Frankenstein by Mary Shelley. It follows the original book more closely than other adaptions. The story is of a scientist who brings life to a creature fashioned from corpses and various body parts.
Similar titles
Reviews
While it doesn't offer any answers, it both thrills and makes you think.
The plot isn't so bad, but the pace of storytelling is too slow which makes people bored. Certain moments are so obvious and unnecessary for the main plot. I would've fast-forwarded those moments if it was an online streaming. The ending looks like implying a sequel, not sure if this movie will get one
Unshakable, witty and deeply felt, the film will be paying emotional dividends for a long, long time.
By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.
This a great movie. It a remake. 6.4 is underrating it. This movie is a must see. It is based on one of the best horror books ever. And it is one of the best horror movies ever. This movie has great story line. It also has great acting. It also has great special effects. It the story of a scientist who takes part from different dead bodies and puts them together. He brings it to life. This movie is scary then The Exorcist. Frankenstein (1931) is scarier. But still this is very scary. If this movie does not scary you then no movie will. 1994 version is better. But still is very good movie. It one of closest versions to the book. This movie is a must see.
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=
My daughter brought home the DVD of this mess the other night for a school assignment. She asked if I could watch with her to help with the assignment. What started out with so much promise (Donald Sutherland) just blathered away into a Jane Austinique exercise in excess. Other than Sutherland and Hurt, the cast was kind of weak, the adaptation of what is supposed to be a classic horror novel was made to look more like a spoof of Mel Brook's "Young Frankenstein". Hey its a spoof of a spoof. While I do understand that first it's a "Hallmark" (as in greeting cards) Production, so right there schmaltz and rubbish and that it was also a "Mini-Series", it seemed as though the producers were looking only to fill time and in a feature package... (DVD) meant for one complete viewing... it came across so God awfully long and boring. Almost as draining as watching a "Pirates of the Caribbean" episode. I started cheering for the monster to kill off everyone so that the stupid film would end already. If you have insomnia, and need some help sleeping - please watch this. If, however, you have better things to do with your 3 some hours, skip this. Blechh!
Spoiler almost a scene for scene remake of Coppola's 1994 Mary Shelley's Frankenstein except Elizabeth being reanimated as the Bride of the Monster like in Coppola's 1994 version. A decade improved the material. Hallmark did a great job with this story. It was way better than the 1994 Mary Shelley's Frankenstein which by the way was close to the original novel but the miscasting of Robert DeNiro as the monster ruined that production. This is the definitive version in my book followed by the 1977 film Viktor Frankenstein known as Terror of Frankenstein in the United States as second choice.Third and fourth the Turner Network Television version with Randy Quaid and the Francis Ford Coppola 1994 version with the miscast Robert DeNiro.The 1984 version with David Warner and the 1973 film with Bo Svenson. Hammer films and Universal films put out good productions but could hardly be considered faithful adaptations of the Frankenstein novel and the 1973 Frankenstein:The True Story with Michael Sarrazin was not the true story but true in spirit in the novel and the story retained most of the novels characters. The Hallmark version is long but worth it definitely get the video because on commercial TV it well to put it crudely SUCKS!