Frankenstein
1994 Directed by Kenneth Branagh
Synopsis
Based on Mary Shelley's novel, "Frankenstein" tells the story of Victor Frankenstein, a promising young doctor who, devastated by the death of his mother during childbirth, becomes obsessed with bringing the dead back to life. His experiments lead to the creation of a monster, which Frankenstein has put together with the remains of corpses. It's not long before Frankenstein regrets his actions.
Cast
Studios
Genres
Popular reviews
More-
A very ambitious film, at times, maybe a tad too ambitious for its own good. It has its ups and downs.
-
Mary Shelley's novel 'Frankenstein' is constantly vying with Yevgeny Zamyatin's anti-utopian story 'We' for the crown of 'my favourite book'. However, up until recently, I still hadn't seen Branagh's interpretation of the Modern Prometheus.
A couple of reasons why, I guess. Firstly, I expected it to be awful. It has Bobby De Niro as the monster, an actor who I like but just couldn't see in this role at all, and Kenneth Branagh directs and stars in it. I don't have a problem with Branagh generally, but still a bit odd isn't it? Co-produce and direct a film where you've given yourself the title character? Hmm.
But it was a fairly faithful adaptation of the novel that only changed the…
-
Granted there are some really cool moments and some pretty good acting, but it's just too ridiculously over the top and melodramatic to take seriously. It takes itself way too seriously and in turn, the tone is ridiciculous and at times, it's just laughable. On my second watch, it somehow feels even more ridiculously over the top. Like I said there are some great moments to be had. The story is still a great and complex story even if it is poorly executed and pretty cheesy. While much of the cast goes too over the top, there are some very good performances from the likes of Kenneth Branagh, Helena Bonham Carter and Robert De Niro. De Niro isn't as great as he usually is, but I think he is believable and does a good job with what he's given. This is pretty flawed, but it's not a terrible film and I appreciate how faithful it is to the classic novel.
-
I’m not alone here, legendary critic Mark Kermode is a fan of this attempt at bringing Shelley’s creation to life and rightly so. Initially snorted at as a vanity project upon release (lots of focus on a sweaty, topless Branagh) a small contingent now appreciate it as a cautionary tale on the nature of vanity itself. De Niro’s monster is as brutal as he is tragic and from his first appearance onward the film really hits its stride, intermittently tugging on your heart strings before punching you in the gut-or through the chest.
-
Dull adaptation, with the strange choice of making Robert De Niro the Monster. Stick to the James Whale classics.
Recent reviews
More-
I haven't seen this again since watching it in the theatre in 1994, but I remember being extremely pissed off by what Kenneth Branagh did to my all-time favourite book.
-
The dialogue is poorly stitched together -- if you'll pardon the pun -- and the actors tend to overdo it a lot. All in all, it's a very disappointing adaptation from some highly talented people. Read full review.
-
Voy a respetar su memoria porque en su momento, en el cine, me pareció buena. No una gran película pero si buena. El revisionado ha sido nefasto para mi recuerdo de ella. La historia sigue siendo bastante aceptable pero es demasiado larga.
El prota siempre sin camisa (no me quejo) con su amigo gay armariado, su novia loca (Helena siempre lo es), Bilbo Bolsón y Deniro que no se quiere poner vacunas. ! La que lía por no vacunarse!
Frankenstein nunca ha sido un personaje de terror, aunque siempre esté envuelto en el género. Hacen un buen rol de Padre-Criatura.
-
A very ambitious film, at times, maybe a tad too ambitious for its own good. It has its ups and downs.
-
Despite the criticisms of a topless Branagh massaging his ego with an overly theatrical performance - it is, after all, an adaptation of a work of fiction that has been made into many theatrical productions and Branagh has a long association with the medium - this is a fairly faithful and entertaining adaptation. The stunt casting of De Niro as the creature is the weakest element, as he does slip into 'You talkin' to me?' mode on a couple of occasions but it doesn't detract too much from the Gothic atmosphere.
-
In enjoy Branagh's over the top aesthetics and his sense for melodrama, but his Frankenstein has some big problems.
It sledgehammers in its philosophical point, having characters state things in dialogue that should have remained subtextual. Besides, it's a point that's been made by millions of horror and science fiction stories -playing God is wrong- and Branagh does not add much to it (see Cronenberg's The Fly for a much more interesting, modern take on Frankenstein).
Most importantly, it just doesn't work as a horror movie. DeNiro does great with what he's been given, but his creature is never frightening to look at, and his behavior is too human for him to ever work as a monster. He's neither as grotesque nor as tragic as Karloff.
There is one effective horror scene: the one with the reanimated Bride, in which Frankenstein himself, not his creations, is the scariest figure. If only there was more of that inspired madness.
-
fuck those 90`s so called horror movies so bloddy lame
-
It was very pretty for the first half. But the melodrama doesn't let up all throughout and towards the end it just got really ridiculous.
-
This version is pretty decent but a little too over the top with the melodrama.
My review: www.stopthepota.com/2009/08/mary-shelleys-frankenstein-1994-kenneth.html