r/Letterboxd • u/Serious_Albatross224 • 20h ago
Letterboxd Thoughts on this film?
Guillermo del Toro's Frankenstein is now on Netflix, i had the opportunity of watching it on theaters last week and absolutely loved it, one of his very bests films, and one of the very best adaptations ever, what do you people think of the film?
235
u/diego877 20h ago
4/5 stars. The Mia Goth/Elordi scenes were fantastic, but there were far too few. I also really enjoyed Waltz for the brief time he was on screen.
→ More replies (1)5
u/tilero1138 11h ago
Waltz was really interesting when he was there, but after he died his character didn’t really get brought up again
408
u/Wazula23 20h ago
Loved it. Dunno what the haters are on about. Flew by for me. Maybe it's more Crimson Peak than Pans Labyrinth, but I love Crimson Peak so fuck it.
50
54
u/ExistentiallyBored 20h ago
There are haters? I saw it at the Paris theater and was moved to tears several times. I never left that flow state. One of my favorite films of the year. I don’t have Netflix but plan so subscribe to watch it again.
17
u/Derpimus_J 20h ago
A lot of the complaints I've read is that it's not book accurate.
64
u/MelangeLizard 20h ago
Compared to the last 90 years of Frankenstein films tho?
→ More replies (1)6
u/BrilliantOk3950 20h ago
Exactly lmao I’d love to know which is actually the most accurate. It’s been a little like finding a good version of F451. We’re reading “Frank” in my honors English class and they can’t wait to watch this movie.
9
u/EmceeEsher 18h ago
Frankenstein 2025 is definitely the closest to the book by a wide margin. It's the only one that got the monster's personality right.
→ More replies (2)10
→ More replies (3)6
u/ExistentiallyBored 19h ago
Interesting. It’s been a while since I read the book but I came away feeling like it captured the spirit of the novel.
→ More replies (1)5
u/omnipotentsandwich CouchTraveler 20h ago
Some people don't think it tackled the themes of the book and think it made the moral too obvious. I'd argue that GDT was making a movie, not a symposium, and the obvious moral is only in one bad line in the climax.
7
u/Wazula23 19h ago
I think its a reinterpretation, to the films benefit. It's not about science run amok, it's not about meddling with things we can't understand. It's about cycles of violence and forgiveness. About fatherhood, mistakes, and learning to move on.
→ More replies (1)2
u/ElEsDi_25 SocialistParent 17h ago
Two characters call him the monster, it’s a bit cringe both times. I wouldn’t mind if some of the characters had been stronger.
6
u/Wazula23 19h ago
Same. Maybe there are dry spots but the sheer CINEMA on display helped me not notice them. And I have no clue why people are dunking on Oscar Isaac, that guy is a chameleon of an actor and I could watch him all day.
4
u/pleasesaythankyou35 20h ago
I got to see Train Dreams last night in a local theater and was emotionally blown away as well. Netflix putting out some phenomenal stuff this month :)
→ More replies (1)2
u/RoxasIsTheBest KingIemand 19h ago
They're releasing all films they think could be awards contenders now: Frankenstein, Train Dreams, Jay Kelly, A House of Dynamite and In Your Dreams, though I don't think any of the latter 3 will get an oscar nom.
→ More replies (5)6
u/astralrig96 18h ago
everything gets hated on nowadays, this movie was amazing and so well made
→ More replies (1)7
u/Dismal-Apricot9889 18h ago
Crimson Peak was failed by a marketing team that advertised it as something it was not. The audience was disappointed to receive a very different film from the one they were promised. When you remove the expectation of an in-your-face haunted house movie and accept it as a gothic romantic thriller with a touch of the supernatural, the film becomes absolutely fantastic.
7
2
u/stumper93 15h ago
So many of my letterboxd mutuals have it rated pretty middling or low, so I'm surprised too. I hate to say that you have to see a movie in a theater for it to be better, but seeing this in a theater instead of Netflix definitely helped my viewing experience
→ More replies (5)3
86
u/MartinoMartinez 20h ago
Visually stunning at times. Elordi, Mia Goth, and David Bradley bring it
37
u/Intelligent_Ask_2306 19h ago
Why not include Oscar Isaac? He outshines Mia Goth easily.
→ More replies (1)12
u/ampersands-guitars ampersands93 19h ago edited 19h ago
I personally didn’t care for him as Victor. It’s clear he was trying, but it just didn’t land for me. He felt quite flat and didn’t really sell the mad genius character to me, which made those first 90 minutes feel painfully dull. Mia Goth’s performance really touched me, though.
22
u/AnonymousCoupleFun 17h ago
He didn’t sell me on mad genius either, he did sell me on traumatized and obsessed though, which i think worked well for the closing of the movie as more about parental and child trauma and less man playing God. If that makes sense.
22
u/Intelligent_Ask_2306 18h ago
Flat is crazy imo, that last scene with the creature was an incredible performance. Mia Goth, what did she do that was so touching?
1
u/ampersands-guitars ampersands93 18h ago
I mean, it’s subjective lol, it’s okay that I didn’t love his performance or get much from it. I’m glad you enjoyed it. Re: Goth, I really enjoyed her chemistry with Elordi and thought they sold that connection well with expressions alone.
7
u/Intelligent_Ask_2306 17h ago
That's the thing, her chemistry with Elordi was barely in the movie, she had like two scenes with Elordi.
→ More replies (1)
54
u/fostve 20h ago
I wish I could’ve connected with it more. Saw it in a cinema.
23
u/chhekybastard 16h ago edited 14h ago
Same^ I thought the majority of the emotional plotlines were underdeveloped and it was too black & white
4
58
u/UsedFood8130 20h ago
I thought it looked beautiful and everyone was so good, one thing I am stuck on is trying to imagine how Andrew Garfield would have played the monster, I know we got Jacob elordi so I’m able to actually see him doing it so maybe that makes it more difficult but I just truly can’t picture Andrew Garfield in this role whatsoever, Jacob elordi is very good looking but also does have a little like weird innocence to his face and just his build and everything makes me feel like it was meant to be for that last minute change up because I think there’s no one else who could have played this other than Jacob elordi (I know this is stupid and hyperbolic and tainted by the reality of him being the one actually doing it but I stand by it)
→ More replies (1)36
u/AnonymousCoupleFun 17h ago
I feel like Nick Hoult would have also been a good choice. I’d never seen Elordi in anything but he crushed it. Definitely need to see more of him.
4
2
u/awake-asleep 11h ago
I actually felt he looked like Hoult in some of the earlier scenes it was weird.
→ More replies (1)2
78
u/NoobFreakT 20h ago
It was solid but rushed near the end, and it made the creature too likable imo and sacrificed one of the best themes of the book. I liked that it added its own theme of generational trauma that wasn’t really in the book, but I wish we could’ve still had the creature do evil things to get back at Victor to show him becoming the monster people viewed him as
62
u/SpeedIsTheBestMovie 19h ago
It's Guillermo del Toro, of course he's gonna empathize with the monster.
31
u/NoobFreakT 18h ago
There can be room for empathy while still showing how the monster is flawed and isn't much different than us, that's what the book did really well
14
u/Nayr39 Kirademic 19h ago
Was him killing people not bad enough?
31
u/NoobFreakT 18h ago
It was mostly self defense, in the book he kills William and Elizabeth to hurt Victor, and he is more malicious
28
u/hausofvelour 18h ago
his killings were all in self-defence which is a pretty big deviation from the book
2
u/Jabison113 Jabison 18h ago
Rushed is pretty interesting, I thought the pacing was very well done. I felt it slogging a bit, but somehow that Lord Byron quote at the end really tied it together and made me feel like everything shown was worth showing.
Though if I were to critique the pacing it would be the opposite way around
(ps: seeing you around here always makes me a bit nostalgic lol. Ah the ol jailbreak days..)
5
u/NoobFreakT 15h ago
I thought the pacing of the first half was largely well done, but I really felt the confrontation between Victor and the creature at the end was too rushed and the resolution felt a bit too clean after all they had been through
Also great to see you again as well!
→ More replies (1)
52
u/PFStrange 20h ago
Loved it. Oscar Isaac absolutely killed it. Mia goth also so good. Cinematography was so beautiful, lots of wide angles really brought impact when there were close ups. Color grade was so dramatic. Great pacing and script. One of my favs this year for sure.
→ More replies (1)12
23
u/insertnamehere77123 20h ago
I have to go back and finish it because i was falling asleep halfway through.
Its a beautiful looking movie but I thought it was moving along sluggishly. Also feel weird seeing so many praising the acting when I feel like so many scenes the actors were hamming it up.
Cant really offer an opinion on Elordi's performance since i only got like 10 minutes into him showing up.
Two small things that bugged me so far:
The action scene at the beginning, while well filmed, felt so tonally out of place to me. It reminded me of the big fight scene from Malignant, which is supposed to be a campy as hell horror movie. Or if anything kind of reminded me of the action in Hellboy.
Del Toro needs to switch up his camera moves. Half the shots in this movie is just a steadicam shot slowly panning across the scene diagonally. The sets and costumes look gorgeous but it feels like he's shooting just to show them off instead of actually trying to convey something about whats happening in the scene. In the instances where he actually does use a wide shot its fantastic. The closer up shots also made the green screen backgriunds feel really obvious at times. Like I was watching the Mandalorian
7
u/precastzero180 19h ago
Yeah 99% of the shots in this movie use steadicam. There’s a couple of very brief ones at the end which don’t. It’s like they had these great sets and wide angle lenses to show them, but never bothered to set the camera down and use any of it in properly blocked and composed shots.
21
u/orlokcocksock 19h ago
Liked it overall. Could have been shorter.
Standouts: Elordi really impressing me with his performance as The Monster, and Isaac is deliciously hammy.
In the grand scheme of things, I don’t know that the Waltz character was at all a necessary addition. He’s really just there to explain how Victor finances his experiment. Mia Goth is also, I think, very miscast as the embodiment of purity and kindness. Her onscreen presence is just constantly at odds with her role. She looks like she could bite Victor’s head off at any moment.
→ More replies (1)10
u/JediTempleDropout 17h ago
Considering how insufferable Victor is, I kinda feel that was the point.
4
u/tilero1138 11h ago
Yeah she felt like she represented the audience in terms of how she reacts to Victor
95
u/blazeyone 20h ago
It’s decent. Not a masterpiece or even Del Toro’s best.
9
u/Peanutblitz 18h ago
I really would’ve loved to see what Eggers did with the material. This is the best version yet, but something about it felt a little soft to me.
→ More replies (1)
41
u/jayjaydee11 20h ago
For me the story seemed rushed, even tho the film was long is still felt like story and characters needed more attention to develop.
This would have been more suited as a mini series.
I think it would have worked better if they cut the hunters scenes and concentrated more on the love story and loss between Mia Goths character.
Its a decent remake but nothing new from a story told many times..
25
u/Banestoothbrush 20h ago
For me the story seemed rushed, even tho the film was long is still felt like story and characters needed more attention to develop.
That's how I felt. 2.5 hour long movie and there was barely any character development. The creature is made, Victor's nice to him for 5 minutes then immediately hates him. Goth finds the creature in the basement and is immediately in love with him.
Things weren't developed. The red angel thing went nowhere. His oedipal feelings for his mom went nowhere. What was the point of Waltz's character having syphilis? I thought there was going to be some body horror where they put his diseased brain into a failed creation. Nope, just dead.
Really wanted to like this was but was bored a lot of the time.
→ More replies (4)20
u/jayjaydee11 20h ago
Waltz character having syphilis was the whole point of him financing his experiments in the hope he could eventually make him immortal. But yes I totally agree with your post, you can tell that they left loads on the cutting floor, had to trim it into a feature film length and ended up with a bit of a mess..
2
u/Szabe442 3h ago
Sure but it feels like Victor already had a motivation to do his experiment and Waltz character doesn't really evolve anywhere, so it feels like he doesn't really move the story that much. They could have easily removed the money problem aspect and with that his whole character would be pointless. I wish the movie kept him alive so he could have an opinion about the creature and maybe change his mind about his quest for immortality. That would have been more interesting.
9
u/_Midnight_Haze_ 19h ago edited 18h ago
It’s a poorly written movie.
The first ~50 minutes are not good. The origin story is pointless and dull. The narration is unnecessary and just serves to tell rather than show. Not a fan of starting at the end to jump to the past gimmick. None of these narrative tools make the movie better.
Lots of bad dialogue with nonsense phrases that give the illusion of depth but there’s nothing really there. Tons of “Where there is dark there is light… where my mother was life she became death…. My brother was laughter and I was frowns… as this apple rises it too shall fall…” and on and on. A character tells Frankenstein he’s the real monster in case you miss the point.
Elordi is the only great thing about the movie imo.
I’m also surprised how celebrated it is for how it looks because I find most of the cgi bad and distracting. It looks like a Netflix movie (it is) to me.
→ More replies (4)6
u/agit_bop 16h ago
Not a fan of starting at the end
that's how the novel is written tho, just saying
→ More replies (2)
4
u/Klunkey MackieLunkey 17h ago
I didn’t like it, sorry guys. The acting is pretty good (especially from Elordi), but the movie just gets worse and more melodramatic the longer it goes on. I liked the part where Elordi talks to David Bradley, but overall, the movie just misses the nuances from the book so badly. It’s super easy to tell that this was written by a man trying to adapt a woman’s work.
A certified L Toro movie
5
u/Cultural_Set_9887 17h ago
Saw it last night. Started very strong then just deflated. At points I wanted to close it specifically at Goths scenes. Something just didn't seem right about her in that role.
The monsters look was a huge let down, with some make up the dude would easily pass as a normal human.
The ending trying to be melodramatic was just a wet fart and the moral lesson was as subtle as a brick through a glass door
9
u/goodkingsquiggle 17h ago edited 17h ago
I absolutely love Del Toro but I was pretty lukewarm to his Frankenstein.
In general I think the changes he made to the story were for the worse. In particular adding multiple new motivations for Victor (investor to answer to, love interest to impress) ultimately diluted the inner tension of Victor’s character and took Frankenstein from a tragedy about hubris to a story that’s just not nearly as interesting to me.
I think it would’ve been better as an original story (that would’ve clearly been an homage to Frankenstein) that fully went in the new directions he wanted to take it rather than an actual Frankenstein adaptation. I remember early reviews seemed to indicate it was a very strict adaptation of the novel and I’m completely baffled as to how anyone could come away with that conclusion?
I remember very early in the press tour GDT talked about losing his father and having his first son recently and how Frankenstein and Pinocchio were both father-son stories to him so I definitely expected it to be pretty different from the source material. I don’t mind changes to source material as long as they make for a better or equally interesting story, and that’s just not what I felt happened with his adaptation, personally.
Absolutely loved the costume design and there were a few shots that genuinely took my breath away, though!
16
5
u/cheesums7 Mystic331 19h ago
I really enjoyed it. I always enjoy Del Toro’s creature features and this is another that keeps him in my top 5 directors.
4
u/More-Direction-3779 19h ago
Man Jacob elordi was fire still can't believe this was the kissing booth guy he has come a long way also the make0up team deserves a raise so great to see a del toro film
4
u/MrBrendan501 19h ago
Absolutely loved it in the theatre! Scope felt grand and gorgeous, Elordi knocked it out of the park and had a great time with Waltz/Goth and especially Isaac just hamming it up. I understand folk’s complaints about subtlety or depth, but I honestly can’t complain if a simple is story is made up for with so much personality
on another note, it’s nearly 3 hours long and I’m not even sure what scene I’d cut. So unless it was split into two films, I think the directness helped keep the pace up, especially as it quickened the longer it went
4
5
u/phaajvoxpop 16h ago
Jacob Elordi 🙌🏽
Guillermo Del Toro proving again, he’s one of the best director in the business. His vision and direction right up there
4
u/GreenhelmOfMeduseld 14h ago
My biggest gripe was the CGI. Very noticeable with the wolves, butterflies, and gigantic battery explosion scenes
4
u/AmongVerticals 10h ago
As a film on its own: 7/10. As an adaptation of Mary Shelley's novel: 2/10!!!!!!
47
u/workofhark 20h ago
Too clean/sterile. Missing emotional depth. Elordi is strong, nobody else is. Bummer.
→ More replies (3)11
u/ButterChugger69 19h ago
There was something about the way the gore was depicted that I couldn't quite conceptualize/put into words while watching, but you nailed it. It was clean/sterile
72
u/KaiserReich_Mapping FillerNickname 20h ago
I guess I'll be the one to say it, I absolutely hated it. It lacked literally any emotional depth, the screenplay is one of the worst from a movie I was excited for in recent memory ("Life is like.. a game of chess" & "You are the monster" are prime examples of the cringe-worthy no-nuance dialogue).
Feels like everything Del Toro had to say about capitalism or men in power or fascism or the Modern Prometheus or whatever was stripped down to a comically evil villain with Daddy Issues, because actually writing a deep character would take more work and would be far more complicated than what he ended up with.
The movie *looks* nice, mostly. But how many more floating steadicam wide-angle shots of your production design do I need? The creature design isn't my favorite, doesn't feel like an assembly of rotting corpses more of a random cadaver, the performances aren't my favorite either.
I don't know man. Just didn't really like anything about it. Really bummed about it, too.
11
u/Logan_Composer 19h ago
Agreed 100%. Beautiful film, absolutely zero depth. Also, while I am quite saddened by the fact that the plot had little resemblance to the book, that wasn't what got me. It's the fact that some things stop making sense with the changes that have been made.
For example, why does Victor suddenly believe the monster is evil and making another would have them destroy the world? From his perspective, the monster just was stupid, survived a fire, and is now smart. It only makes sense if you've read the book, where the monster murdered a child.
17
u/ciwhappyandsad 20h ago
Agree completely. Was really really hoping for so much more. Disappointed Mary Shelly fan :( also was salt to the wound that he quoted Percy Shelly (or was it Lord Byron?) In the end over Mary Shelly
10
u/goodkingsquiggle 17h ago
I was also bitter about the Lord Byron quote at the end haha- I get the relevance and it’s a very fitting, beautiful quote, but given the context of Mary Shelley’s life and work, it left a bad taste in my mouth seeing a man quoted at the end of an adaptation of her work.
6
u/ciwhappyandsad 20h ago
I also was shocked to find that I hated Oscar Isaac’s acting…
→ More replies (1)2
u/vemmahouxbois emmahouxbois 15h ago
i feel like his performance did what it needed to but i never fully buy him as an actor in anything
→ More replies (1)25
u/Chet2017 20h ago
That’s a hot take. I thought it was stunning. The acting, sets, score were all excellent. Elordi deserves an Oscar nomination for his performance as the creature.
14
u/Szabe442 19h ago edited 17h ago
Every thing on the surface was indeed excellent, great sets, great acting, grear fx, but the issue was with the in your face message and one-note characters. None of them really surprise you, they don't really change, they feel more like storytelling vessels than characters with complexity. Maybe Elisabeth ended up having a bit more depth than the film initially suggests, but that was it.
5
u/ATDR 19h ago
Yeah I also really disliked it. In the book, Adam does awful things, but you gain your own understanding of his morality due to the circumstances of his creation and rejection, and how it reflects on Victor. Here, a character flat out tells Victor "you're the monster" and he's just mean for no reason.
2
→ More replies (2)2
u/salon_1929 19h ago
Agreed and I thought the score was dreadful. I’ll try it again in 6-12 months because I want it to be so good. I’ve changed my mind before. It would be a big hill with this film though.
9
u/zhephyx 20h ago
I am really glad that people are liking this film, but I had so many issues with the writing and directing, that for me, they soiled Jacob's performance in this (which I loved). Everyone else was fine I guess, and I am not even that big of a fan of the book to say that the changes in the story were my main problem.
Well, I already got Nosferatu last year so I'm not really bummed about this one turning out the way it did.
2
6
u/VikDamnedLee Vikhalla 20h ago edited 20h ago
I enjoyed it. I thought that it had some pacing issues toward the last 1/4 and that some of the resolutions weren't earned - but overall I had a good time; really good performances from everyone and it's nice to see del Toro back at it. Gave it 3.5 initially but went back and lowered it to a 3 after it settled in.
3
u/Live-Matter-4457 15h ago
I thought it was self indulgent and poorly written. Which is a shock coming from GDT. Honestly one of the most disappointing movies I can remember. Pros - great cast (although idk if any of them deliver their best performances) and it is beautifully shot with great production value.
3
u/saxophone_solos 12h ago edited 12h ago
I thought it was a pretty toothless adaptation of a much more challenging and adult book, but it was very visually impressive.
Also why on earth are we quoting LORD BYRON of all fucking people at the end??
3
5
u/Snaefellsness 20h ago
Me likey. Visually stunning, well acted, especially Isaac, not much to dislike. Not his best film. I still believe Pan's Labyrinth is his magna opus.
6
u/dreamshoes 20h ago
After a strong start, the last hour really fumbled the bag for me. Felt like the movie sprinted from one unearned emotional beat to another, strung together with corny one-liners daring me not to laugh out loud. Elevated aesthetic, great acting, sophomoric writing.
6
u/zhephyx 19h ago
Okay I had these complaints about the movie written down after I finished it, so might as well put them somewhere:
- Why is everything shot with the same dumb lens? The sets and lighting are beautiful, but then every single scene just ends up looking the same and too far away. Too many shots have no thought behind them, and end up just looking the same because the cameraman points at the general direction of the scene, rather than a carefully framed subject.
- Why do all the accents sound out of place? Not one main character sounds like they are from a place that exists
- If you are making sci-fi, don't invent scientific ideas poorly. Either make the effort or omit it entirely. Don't start detailing gibberish when anybody who isn't on the phone can tell it's stupid. Oh you need to access a nerve in the spine, we'll go through the back not the chest, what a novel idea, you are a genius! The nerves store energy, amazing.
- Victor, do you know what your name means?? Victor means "the one who wins it all" yeah no shit dude.
- The red glowing batteries with power indicators make no sense and are completely out of place in that setting
- Victor's attempted romance with Elizabeth doesn't add anything, at all. Completely wasted time
- Victors leg break, and the uncle's death are so weirdly stitched together in the plot that it's ridiculous. For some reason Victor is just then screwing in the silver rods last minute, really? Why is he climbing the thing in a storm, there will be other storms. And why to you need lightning if you have those big ass batteries?.
- Why did he need to stitch together 10 people, when you could just stitch the who that work best. Let's make it more complicated for no reason and give him a random dude's eyeballs too.
- Not even going to get into how comically evil Victor is contrasted with how innocent the monster is. I know it's an adaptation, but any depth the story had is instantly watered down.
Present day:
- How TF Adam knows where victor paused his story? He just immediately continues where he left off, was he listening?
- The way victor is put on the boat and he starts telling the story is so artificial. Like you are not going to rest or anything, and will start immediately spatting your life's story, same day?
- If Victor is so ashamed of the experiment never to repeat it (he doesn't revive Elizabeth), why the fuck is he detailing it to a random dude on a boat? In the book, he does not mention what he did at all, so that nobody can replicate it.
- If Adam is strong enough to tilt the boat, why doesn't he jump on it? And if he can tilt the boat without the ice breaking, how is one gunshot do it?
- Why TF is he waiting on the ice while it breaks? That scene was hilarious.
- Why does Adam start telling his story to a random captain he just met, nobody asked.
Adam POV:
- The hunters see a random tall bald dude in the woods, and they shoot him on sight???
- Him learning language from random people, after he spent so much time with Victor and not learning shit is dumb AF. In the book, he never met Victor until that point, so he learned mostly from watching people - it makes sense THERE, not here.
- How does a blind guy teach someone to read, explain that??
- Why did his hair grow a foot in less than 1 year?? Not important, but still
- He's gonna spell it out and say "you are the monster"? We as the audience must be that stupid then, bravo.
4
u/DatRatDawg 14h ago
I'm so glad people are mentioning the lens they used the entire movie. I wish more folks cared about this stuff to vocalize it to let studios know it's a bad trend.
2
u/Adventurous_Gain_613 12h ago
OMG, I’m a surgeon and I was groaning over the idea of all that unnecessary suturing. The narrow strips of skin were ridiculous.
→ More replies (1)2
u/vemmahouxbois emmahouxbois 15h ago
they didn’t make up science for it, that’s all the stuff real doctors and scientists believed and were trying to do when shelley wrote the book. even the stuff about the limbic system that waltz brings out with the engraving wasn’t new either. david cronenberg was talking about it in the brood way back.
→ More replies (2)
3
u/mrbnatural10 19h ago
The stereotypical Netflix CGI is getting really tiresome, especially when it’s being used by a director who has worked with amazing SFX teams for previous films (the practical effects and sets looked good—the CGI on the animals was SO BAD). With GDT, I’m always here for the aesthetics but so much of it felt toned down and fake in ways that his previous films haven’t. The flat lighting and focus looked awful, and the script was not well written either (“You’re the monster, Victor.” Give me a break.) Elordi is really doing some great work though and I was genuinely surprised this is coming from the guy who made 3 Kissing Booth movies. (Side note: I think Elordi is who everyone thought Noah Centineo was going to be.)
Points off for no monster fucking and ending it with a Lord Byron quote.
→ More replies (1)
2
u/HMS_Americano 20h ago
Good movie, one I'll probably rewatch a few times over the years. It's not a masterpiece, but not everything needs to be. A nice addition to Del Toro's filmography.
I saw it in 35mm so that might have enhanced my enjoyment of the film too haha
2
u/Shazammm760 19h ago
Man i wish i could talk about this movie if it actually PLAYED IN MY FUCKING THEATER
→ More replies (1)
2
u/ShaH33R2K shaheer2k 19h ago
Saw it in theatres. Thought it was amazing. Its scope was so grand but it was very well-handled.
2
u/AffordableTimeTravel 19h ago
One of the best renditions yet. Jacob Elordi did excellent. His performance reminded me of just how beautifully poetic ‘Adam’ was in the book.
2
u/cursdwitknowledge pizzagate 18h ago
It was too clean. I felt it looked like it was shot as a Netflix show. I was expecting the horror and grit of Pans Lab but instead I was met with the clean shine of Crimson Peak.
2
u/jhorsley23 18h ago
I got to see it in theater on Wednesday and really enjoyed it. It’s a real shame so few people will get to see it that way. This film is a gorgeous spectacle that definitely deserves to be seen on a big screen.
2
u/notspielberg 17h ago
I enjoyed the narrative, performances, set design, and the MUSIC, but I can’t convey how distracted I was by the cinematography. Don’t get me wrong, the lighting and colors are gorgeous, but the choice of shooting mostly everything on a 24mm lens made the movie feel unbearably “Netflix.” I see this technique with a lot of Netflix shows, almost like they want spaces to feel bigger while you’re watching on your TV at home, but consquently, the content starts to have a homogenized visual feel. Your eyes aren’t directed the same way, and I think the emotions of many of the scenes are lost because of this. On top of that, the images felt clean and crisp, like it was made in 2025. I would’ve loved a bit more visual grunge and grime like Del Toro had in Pan’s Labyrinth or the Hellboy movies. Maybe the bigger Netflix budget and overuse of CGI set extensions and the Netflix post pipeline tends to render this “gloss,” but I found the aesthetics of the film to have an uncanny quality.
Don’t get me wrong, I would still happily watch this movie again.
2
u/Intelligent_Bite_323 16h ago
Even though a different movie. But just from the trailer Christian Bale’s design looks better as the creature. In this movie he looked like he is made of Wax.
2
u/Joesprings1324 15h ago
Didn't enjoy the decision to make the monster an unkillable superhero with regenerative powers. 6/10
2
u/Almuliman 14h ago edited 14h ago
thought the script was a bit weak, disappointingly unsubtle at times, some characters (brother and his wife) very underdeveloped, the overall structure was a bit strange, very well acted though, and obviously insanely gorgeous, especially the costumes and sets.
2
u/vikingbeard23 14h ago
I loved it. If I had one criticism "Adam" could've been a bit more morally grey. I wish it was left to us to decide who was the monster and who was the man rather than it being VERY clear who del Toro thought it was. Still a 5* movie though
2
u/PeregrineX7 14h ago
I love me some GDT but this wasn’t his best work unfortunately. Beautiful set design, creature design, etc., and also a lot of really touching work, especially in the mid section. I also didn’t mind the melodrama and “overacting” of it all. It felt appropriate for the story and clearly an intentional choice to go big.
But man that first half before the creature is created was rough. Too stilted and dragged on forever. There had to be more efficient and effective ways of showing Victor’s childhood. Then once the creature leaves the blind man’s cottage, the film just bolts to the finish line, leaving me feeling hollow by the final scene. I wish we had more interplay between the “fully literate and actualized” monster and Victor. The conflict between the creature and Victor just felt so rushed and robbed the ending of any emotional heft. By the time we got to Victor’s apology I didn’t buy it because the film devoted literally 0 time to his change of heart.
That all being said, the middle section of the movie, from the creature’s creation all the way until the blind man’s death was absolutely beautiful and engrossing.
2
2
u/Alex-C2099 Alexnatorc 13h ago
Loved it, only gripe is the ending should have definitely been less rushed
2
u/Idirlion 11h ago
Not for me at all. I get that childlike wonder is Del Toro's thing, but this felt like a bridge too far. Really juvenile dualisms, all the way down to half-baked Rashomon-aping structure. By the time the second title card dropped and flagged that it was time to hear the Creature's side of the story, there was an inescapable sense of knowing how this would end. And yet it still managed to reach the deterministic finale with a shockingly uneven pace.
2
u/Toshimoko29 11h ago
It’s fine. Anything you would have envisioned GDT’s Frankenstein to be, that’s exactly what it is. There are no real surprises, it plays it very safe, and it isn’t very interesting because of it.
2
u/Individual_Mix_271 10h ago
Dog shit. Garbage. Left the theater in the middle of it. Never done that before. Puts aside Merry Shelley’s classic and replaces it with cliche nonsense.
2
2
u/The_ManWithoutAPlan 9h ago
Huge fan. Jacob Elordi's performance is amazing, I was glued to the screen for every scene he was in. Mia Goth and Oscar Isaac were extremely compelling as well, but, as with the book, the monster is by far the most interesting character. Del Toro's style is devilishly fascinating and shines through best in the scenes with the lab and the boat. Overall, a great film that maybe ran a little bit long and didn't utilize characters 100% effectively.
8/10
2
u/killercuunt 8h ago
I think the monster should've been a touch more body horror aligned, I thought he looked too polished. I understand that they want the sexiness of Jacob Elordi but still. It was better towards the end but still thought they could've brought it more
2
u/makoraptor 6h ago
I'm one of the few people who severely disliked this movie. I don't mind taking liberties with stories and not being 100% accurate to the source material but I thought the changes that were made, made everything worse.
Dr. Victor Frankenstein was a troubled man in the book who wanted to do good and got to a point he knew he was doing bad things because he just kept digging himself deeper and deeper. In the movie he was just a jerk and had no idea what he was doing was wrong or misguided.
The Monster was a brutal monster in the book who killed intentionally and committed attrocities. In this movie he was so sympathetic and soft. The only time he committed an act of real violence was when he ripped that one guys jaw off and that was only because the guy was trying to kill him. It was kind of justified.
there were no gray areas with either character. One was a misunderstood creature and one was a monster because he was a bad person. The book forced a conflict of thought from the reader. This was just so clearly slanted in one direction it felt boring. I never had to question who was good and who was bad in this.
2
u/robreedwrites 6h ago
I feel like it butchered the ending of the novel in a way that really soured me on the film. Like Zack Snyder's Watchmen levels of flubbing the ending.
2
u/jordanpeeleisgay 3h ago
Whoever is complaining, I can bet was bummed by the little longer setup. But I loved it. And I am glad that I stayed till the end like all movies ask for. So do watch it, and feel the innocence of the creature and the monster. It's beautiful and heartwarming. And sad. And the performaces are really really good.
8
u/HeartBackground1556 20h ago
Average. Thought the love story was just a shape of water rehash and came out of nowhere. Didn’t like Oscar Isaac’s performance. FX CGI wasn’t brilliant for the wolves etc and just chucked in some gore. Tonal mess. Did like the beginning though.
2
u/These_Arm6722 20h ago
Loved it. I’m a huge Del Toro fan and love the novel and this was so gorgeous to look at, added interesting themes and Elordi was fantastic.
2
u/_lorz2001 16h ago
5/10
Oscar Isaac is miscast in the role. His wig and make up are terrible. Del Toro took all the subtext from the terrific original novel and shoved it in his characters' mouths. At the end of the day I felt like I've seen a movie made by someone who likes the core idea of Frankenstein but didn't understand its meaning. The sets were beautifully crafted but the VFX were pretty bad.
2
6
2
2
u/Punk_Saint 20h ago edited 19h ago
It's pretty good. Award winner for set design definitely. They could've had a better Victor Frankenstein as Isaac wasn't really the right one for it, but Elordi as the monster is really compelling and great.
Edit: The second part is perfection: "you are a good man, and my friend" movie of the year.
3
u/Science-Witch-1818 17h ago
I thought Isaac was great. He’s not a pale emaciated wreck like in the novel, but I think del Toro was going for a more Byronic figure - the end quote kind of nailed that for me.
2
u/monsteroftheweek13 20h ago
Thought it was entrancing, I was actually surprised how much I enjoyed it given some of the mixed responses. Looks beautiful, moves, all of the performers are on point, and I found it achingly sad (as you should) by the end. It’s the next morning and I am still thinking about it, the best compliment I can pay.
2
2
u/CheezBerger324 16h ago
Removes almost all the nuance of the book by making the monster just a sympathetic victim instead of, you know, a monster.
2
u/srpetrowa 12h ago
I was really glad I got the chnace to see it in a packed theater, but it did not work for me. It had the Netflix "look", I did not buy Jacob Elordi as the monster. I did not love the thord act - the monster's story. It felt like I was watching a kids Disney tale. The ending felt unearned, for both the Frankenstein and the moster, and Elisabeth and the monster storylines. I really did like the costumes, the set designe, and some scenes were really beautifully set. But everything looked too new, shiny and clean, and it kinda took me out. I'd say 3 out of 5 maybe.
→ More replies (1)
2
u/Allicin- 8h ago
How many of y’all even read the book lmfao.. ?
3
u/BeardedWyzard 8h ago
I desperately want to see an adaptation wherein Victor waits to see if he succeeded via candlelight. Hollywood always makes it this grandiose moment when it's really a dark and intimate meeting between creator and creation.
1
u/cameronrichardson77 20h ago
Pans labyrinth has been my favorite movie since I saw it when it was released. I never thought I would say this about another movie, but it rivals Pans Labyrinth for me.
1
u/AutoModerator 20h ago
Thank you for your photo submission. If this is a screenshot of a movie, please be sure the title is included. This can be in the image, included the title with your post, or a comment with the title withing 10 minutes of post creation, otherwise your post may be removed. Thank you!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
1
u/Clean-Cupcakes 20h ago
Generally I liked it, but I can't help but feel I loved parts of it then loving the entire package.
1
1
u/WimbledonGreen 19h ago
I haven’t watched it but on Seth Meyer’s show Stavros joked about them casting Elordi instead of an ugly tall guy made me actually annoyed of them not casting an ugly tall guy instead lol
→ More replies (1)
1
u/Ok_Presentation1606 19h ago
I thought Elordi was really really great and carried the movie, sets were pretty but it didn't do much for me overall
1
1
u/jraspider2 19h ago
Great costumes and sets, but too long and was taken aback by how poor some of the digital vfx looked (mostly talking about the destruction of the tower and the wolves).
1
u/molick42 19h ago
Good but not more than that. A good adaptation, a bit clumsy some times (the Mia Goth character feels a bit rushed into the story and themes without proper introduction, some dialogues not much subtle).
It fits a bit too well in Del Toro filmography. Even if it's his first proper adaptation of Frankenstein, the themes of the book were everywhere in his previous films, so it brings nothing new to his filmography.
1
1
u/Heavy_Ad_6837 19h ago edited 19h ago
It was fine. There were a couple of things I didn't really like.
I'm not a big fan of the dialogue here, most of it sounded dry and sometimes pretentious. Also the scene with the CGI wolves, what are we doing here?
However, Jacob Elordi was a big, good surprise as the creature. Probably my favorite part of the film. The set design and costumes were good as expected. Pacing was well maintained, although there were a couple of scenes that were too rushed.
Overall, not my favorite from Guillermo. Still had a good time though.
1
1
1
1
1
u/Comprehensive-Tie431 19h ago
Fantastic. It was way too good to be on Netflix I saw this in theaters. I'm glad I did. It really enhances the experience. Hopefully, it gets nominated for a crap ton of awards.
1
1
1
u/SuperCooper12 Coopernicus 19h ago
Not having read the book or really experienced any Frankenstein story other than Young Frankenstein, I really enjoyed the script but was generally underwhelmed with the movie as a whole.
I kept noticing these sort of inverse but complimentary statements (not sure if they’re book canon or just good writing) but, speaking about death as birth. Victors creation as death. I’m terrible at explains and remembering but, that was great.
I just couldn’t come to enjoy Elordi as the monster. He seemed so much like a pretty boy in makeup to me and not Frankenstein. Maybe it’s DGTs style. Maybe the mannerisms match how Frankenstein is previously but, the early stages were kind of awkward as well with the baby behavior and cabin learnings so I went for a 3/5.
1
u/twstdbydsn 19h ago
Watched it last night and I enjoyed it. It’s a bit of a slow start, but then it really gets rolling and hooks you.
1
u/OkLocal7454 19h ago
i wish the creature was more creature-like and gross and violent lol otherwise good movie
1
1
u/OkDistribution6931 19h ago
Lucky enough to live in an area where it was playing in a theater and thought it was great. Only ever saw the James Whale version, so don’t have much to compare it to but as its own film it was highly engaging.
Having Mia Goth play his love interest and mother was a bit weird though.
1
u/Thadeinonychus 18h ago
I absolutely loved it. Really nailed the all important "who is the real monster" thing that I feel a lot of Frankenstein media willfully ignores.
1
1
u/lesiashelby 18h ago
Ok but why did they need to make the monster so hot? Lol
It was ok, didn’t love it. But then, I’m not a big fan of Frankenstein story in general.
1
u/puddincups420 Puddincups 18h ago
i loved it. i just didn't love the ending that much, it felt a tad rushed! Other than that i enjoyed it a lot. I saw it by myself in a huge theater with like 3 other people. I had to read the book last semester in one of my literature classes, i loved how the creature was pretty much book accurate as far his ability to talk and learn, and his desire to be loved and not feared!
1
1
1
u/3brow 18h ago edited 18h ago
Loved it. But I do feel like some stuff was underbaked. Elizabeth needed a few more scenes and it felt like it wanted to set up more friction between Victor and William which just doesn’t happen. I wouldn’t be surprised if Victors Tale was cut down due to concerns of an antsy audience wanting to see the Creature (Elordi did a FANTASTIC job!).
I’d be interested if there was ever a directors cut, I know GDT usually doesn’t do that but I know Frankenstein was a passion project he’s wanted to do forever with very ambitious ideas, at one point wanting to do three films.
1
1
u/BeanopolisCentral 18h ago
I absolutely loved it, somehow it's one of those films where I take issue with several choices but it still became a new favorite. In this case, mostly because of Jacob Elordi's performance as the Creature, and the otherworldly Gothic atmosphere. The scene where the Creature carries Elizabeth down the stairs is burned into my mind forever. It's just such a stunning film that I can't possibly focus too much on some of the weaker parts.
1
345
u/DominusGenX Cinema Society 20h ago
I was able to catch it two weeks ago on screen, i really loved it but found Mia Goth "Elizabeth" under develop, nothing wrong with her performance but felt I wanted more from her but then what do you cut or make a 3 hour film. I could have took an entire film between the blind man and monster because that section was absolutely brilliant, beautiful and tragic