Review of Mary Shelley's Frankenstein (1994) by Matt M — 13 Feb 2013
People say this is the closest rendition there is to the book. I guess it's closer with the characters and locations than other adaptations, but the events, and more importantly the themes, are way off.
This should have been called "Kenneth Branagh's Frankenstein". With a head swollen with ego and guts of steel, he raped the novel and made his own abomination (in that way, I guess he really did make a "Frankenstein").
On its own, I guess it's a good cookie cutter Hollywood horror movie; it has all the trappings: it's overly dramatic, full of over the top acting, and tries add a lot more action, blood, and romance to a classic novel that doesn't need altering.
People who say this is accurate to the book haven't read it in a while. It's about as accurate as Spielberg's War of the Worlds or the '90s Bram Stoker's Dracula. That doesn't mean they're bad on their own, but it doesn't mean they're good adaptations to their respective books.
Stick to Shakespeare, Branagh, that's what you're good at.
This review of Mary Shelley's Frankenstein (1994) was written by Matt M on 13 Feb 2013.
Mary Shelley's Frankenstein has generally received mixed reviews.
Was this review helpful?
