Mary Shelley's “Frankenstein; or, The Modern Prometheus” (1818) is one of the most acclaimed classic books and has faced no shortage of adaptations since its release, particularly film adaptions. Whether they be in the form of the most well-known “Frankenstein”(1931), “Bride of Frankenstein” (1935) or “Young Frankenstein” (1974), most adaptations stray away from the novel’s roots in expressing the mortality of The Creature, instead going all in on the horror aspect of the story.
Academy Award winner Guillermo del Toro has aimed to adapt a more faithful adaptation of the story to film for upward of thirty years, continually pushing the project back to allow for proper funding and resources. Del Toro’s “Frankenstein” was officially announced to be picked up by Netflix in 2023, to be released on the platform on Nov. 7.
A theatrical release occurred in select cinemas beginning Oct. 17, which included Athens’ own Athena Cinema. After much anticipation and a desire for a Shelley-accurate interpretation of the story, the film ultimately left much to be desired, especially in tandem with its distinctly Netflix feel.
Del Toro’s “Frankenstein” attempts to present a novel-accurate version of the story, including many of its divisive elements, such as side characters William Frankenstein (Felix Kammerer), Elizabeth Lavenza (Mia Goth) and the De Lacey family.
However, the film ultimately skimps out on a lot of the buildup and climax that made the initial novel so compelling, and in turn causes the film to feel quite bloated.
The film skips over much of Victor Frankenstein’s young adult life, instead focusing on his childhood before jumping to him as an adult professor. This is followed by a string of events introducing the aforementioned side characters, whose resolutions were gutted from the del Toro reimagining.
In the 1818 original, William, Elizabeth and Frankenstein’s father (Charles Dance) all served as those Victor loved, which The Creature used as leverage to get what he wanted out of his maker.
In the 2025 version, all three of these characters are instead obstacles to Victor, and are similar in name only. William is now an adult instead of a young boy, Elizabeth is his love interest, but now with no returning feelings, and Victor’s father is merely a symbol of familial issues and is killed off before the actual plot is set in motion.
While similar on the surface due to these characters’ appearance, other elements were kept intact, such as the Arctic, Victor and The Creature both narrating their lives, but more baffling changes make the film fall flat as a “true-to-novel” adaptation.
The Creature’s story is kept painfully short and underbaked, and he does not spend nearly as much time chasing down Victor, demanding he make a companion creature and ruining his life by harming those he loves.
The film instead chooses to focus on random onslaughts of violence toward random wolves on occasion, where the admittedly creative violence brought on by The Creature makes these segments feel completely out of place.
The ethical concern Victor had in making another creature was an extremely compelling part of Shelley’s work, completely shelved (apart from a throwaway line) in favor of a Creature-Elizabeth romance that goes virtually nowhere.
The ending of the film also significantly differs from the source material, with the Creature bafflingly forgiving his maker and helping the Arctic crew on their mission. This is instead of the more grim but impactful ending of the original, where Victor dies and The Creature follows, with his purpose having been fulfilled. The change in ending comes across as more disingenuous than creative, especially given how much the film seems to lean into being novel-accurate.
The film falls flat in distracting from technical aspects, which become hard to forget once they are initially noticed; the most distracting element is the perpetually moving camera. Many of the beautifully crafted and well-acted scenes would have had much more impact had the camera not been constantly moving.
Nearly every shot in the film contains noticeable and jarring movement, where its Netflix roots become apparent, as if the film’s entirety was shot to hold attention and pique someone’s interest in the app’s autoplay function.
Additionally, the film contains dozens of obvious continuity errors that make it feel hasty. These two aspects ultimately made the film feel like a movie being watched on a screen, not an experience to become engrossed in.
Perhaps most insulting is the lack of subtext utilized in the screenplay, as a character sits down next to Victor to tell him to his face, “maybe you’re the real monster,” as if the audience were not bright enough to come to this conclusion on their own.
The film’s failures take away from the excellent production, design and performances, particularly the set and costume designs, along with the performances of Oscar Isaac as Victor Frankenstein and Jacob Elordi as The Creature.
The novel-accurate goal of 2025’s “Frankenstein” was ultimately lost in translation to the small screen as so many elements of the film leave much to be desired, especially for fans of Mary Shelley’s beloved original. Her story will continue to stand as a literary classic as del Toro’s reimagining will blend into Netflix’s ever-growing catalog.
Rating: 3/10
@loganlabbauer
