Matialth Good concept, poorly executed.

BroadcastChic Excellent, a Must See

Stellead Don't listen to the Hype. It's awful

SeeQuant Blending excellent reporting and strong storytelling, this is a disturbing film truly stranger than fiction

Rin Hoshigumo Initially, I found this adaptation rather slow-paced for my tastes, but having got through it, I reckon it mustbe the best adaptation; not because I've read the book, but because, for the first time, I'm inspired to. I never before thought that The Creature could have been beautiful. Oh, there was the film with Michael Sarandon as the initially gorgeous Creature, but that was an entirely different sort of beauty. Goss' Creature was beautiful, but in an eldritch way. It wasn't a reassuring beauty. It was a beauty that was all wrong, that should never have come into being and had all the hallmarks of its cadaverous inception. At times, Goss' sensitive portrayal of The Creature's anguish was almost too painful to watch. Scenes of The Creature's suffering juxtaposed with those of Victor's oblivion to it made me hate Victor in a way I never had before, to the point that when this suffering actually encroached on Victor's own life, I actually felt gratified. There was an understatement to the whole piece that made it all the more nightmarish. It clearly showed how people need to find a scapegoat and the dangers of playing God when one is not prepared to accept the responsibility of being God. The sad thing about this story is that it didn't have to be this way. Each character made his own choices and did not have to respond to his circumstances in the way that he chose to. It's even sadder that they were blind to this fact till it was too late.

ccmiller1492 Yes, this is the truest version to the original novel but as entertainment it is far less satisfying than the previous miniseries adaptation by Christopher Isherwood. It is overlong and tediously embroiders and elaborates on family and courtship that have little to do with the story. Admittedly it is well acted, but Goss is less repulsive than Alice Cooper, Kiss and others of that ilk and so doesn't seem to justify the horror he inspires on sight. Would an entire village beat and chase a creepy looking lamed man just for filching a loaf of bread because he's hungry? Does outsize height, pallor, orange peel skin and Gothic make-up terrorize to that degree? And why are dead corpses constantly lying around in a cemetery unburied,uncovered and apparently ripe for the picking?Some judicious cutting would improve this product immensely. Henry and Elizabeth, for example could be almost deleted for a major improvement alone. Much of Hurt's pedantic professor turns likewise. At least it's good to know that jumper cables were invented in the mid 1800's, even though there were no autos to use them on. Perhaps that's why they began to be used by doctors when hearts stopped?

Lollipop4598 While it is true that this film is a lot like the book, it just does not make cinematic sense( or any other sort of sense either. It is painful to watch. The creature is just not that ugly. ve seen people look worse after a weekend bender. WHY exactly does everyone fear him as though he was shedding his skin? And the genius Viktor is so totally stupid that he just can't help pissing off the murderous creature and then putting his loved ones conveniently in its path and running off somewhere so that it can have an easy uninterrupted go of it. The creature isn't that convincing. Its only real argument is that it had to kill people no matter how harmless because he was angry at other people. It never explains just why it never harmed anyone that actually mocked it, just people that did absolutely nothing to it whatsoever. The most silly part is where Viktor runs after a beggar(even though the beggar is half of the creatures size and obviously human)can conveniently walk through a door and kill her without breaking a sweat. It is also inexplicable why Viktor could simply make sure that the creatures mate was unable to reproduce instead of torching her in front of the monster. Its rather predictable what would happen next. Viktor even conveniently screams NOOOOOOOOOO instead of shooting at it so that it could run away and seek vengeance. Please do not watch without a barf bag handy.

meatcamp Valiant effort, but still not quite there. In trying to remain faithful to the book, I felt that this made-for-TV movie hit the key scenes, but failed in connecting them in the in-between moments.I just finished reading the book when I rented this movie, and I was surprised at how faithful it was to the book (except for a few scenes and a few additions). I also was surprised at how far Hollywood has strayed from the source material in all other incarnations of this story.I was very happy to see a faithful translation, but the whole product just didn't hold together very well. Acting was just So-So (from William Hurt's German accent, to Donald Sutherland (I pictured that character much younger in the book) seeming very out of place, to Alec Newman's portrayal of Frankenstein (and finally) to Luke Goss's 'Creature' not feeling like a substantial threat. It just didn't work. I applaud the effort to be faithful to the source material, it's just that something was lost in translation. Given a marginally larger budget and probably a more seasoned director, this could have been really great, but this version just sort of hints at that greatness.