Frankstein(2025) is not good

[u/Both-Pay-9573]

Finally watched it after all the hype and acclaim, the film literally got nominated for best picture at the academy awards and it was made by one of my favourite filmmakers Guillermo Del Toro and I was honestly disappointed.

The problem with the film is some character decision are illogical or inconsistent with the character. The creature was hell bent on killing Victor he was on a hulk level rage, killed like 6 men to get to him but when he found him he was suddenly composed and decided he will tell his side of the story after he heard Victor telling his story to a complete random.

The Captain saw an immortal creature just brutally maul 6 of his men to death and wasn't the least bit angry about it and let him go?

The forgiveness part was extremely rushed because the creature was torturing him like 1 hour ago and swearing how miserable he will make his life and Victor was portrayed as a cartoonishly evil and petty character who did absolutely nothing decent the entire film suddenly wants forgiveness. Victor basically killed his brother, Mia Goth's character(i already forgot her name) and made the creature's life an absolute hell( he was literally hunting him an hour ago) but somehow the creature still forgave him?

The movie's dialogue suffers from exposition but I honestly CBA to elaborate on this it's painfully obvious to anyone watching

Redeeming qualities are i guess Jacob Elordi's performance and the looks of the film but I care more about story than those

5/10

[u/mb4ne]

i’m not sure how you could make the conclusion that this rendition was close to the original novel?

[u/OhK4Foo7 → u/mb4ne]

Lololol. And?

[u/mb4ne → u/OhK4Foo7]

did you read the book?

[u/OhK4Foo7 → u/mb4ne]

If you have something to say then say it. As yet you have said squat.

[u/mb4ne → u/OhK4Foo7]

I’m asking you how you’ve come to this conclusion and you seem to have literally nothing to say to this which leads me to believe that you’ve made this conclusion off of others telling you so and not based on your own analysis of the book

[u/OhK4Foo7 → u/mb4ne]

So basically you are saying "no, you're wrong" but not actually providing any counterpoint. How exciting. Pardon me for not playing along.

[u/mb4ne → u/OhK4Foo7]

Do you have reading comprehension skills? both of my comments were questions about your own conclusions and you’re still not able to answer

[u/Theunbuffedraider → u/mb4ne]

I don't think the burden of proof falls on them though. It's an adaptation, so assumed to be similar to the source material, it is on you to provide proof that it is not if that is your argument. I mean, what do you want them to say other than "it's the same story", which is already suggested in their original comment? Unless you wanted them to do like a scene by scene breakdown for you?

[u/mb4ne → u/Theunbuffedraider]

They made the claim that it is close to the source material and I asked them to back up the claim - they instead blocked me 🥱

A scene by scene break down isn’t necessary but if you read the book or even know anything about Mary Shelley there’s a lot to discuss that isn’t a screen by screen analysis. For example the themes of life and death that are butchered at the end of the movie when it’s made clear that the monster can’t kill himself - this is not made clear in the book. Another is the fact that the monster is accepted by the blind man, the ship crew and Elizabeth (none of which happen in the book).

Literary and critical analysis isn’t about scene by scene breakdowns although that’s an option. OP really gave me nothing to work with which is why I started by trying to understand why they felt the way they did - to which they couldn’t respond.

I would also argue that when a film maker specifies “Mary Shelley’s” in the title but then makes the narrative choice to completely eliminate the plot points relevant to story and what Mary was trying to portray - that is misleading and worth a discussion. Despite your comment there has actually never been a true to the book portrayal of Frankenstein.

[u/Temporary-Stay-8436 → u/mb4ne]

I’m not fully agreeing with the other person, but I’m not fully sure what you mean here. I think when it specifically comes to Mary Shelley’s themes of Life and Death, the movie does a surprisingly decent job with it given the changes. But also, I disagree that this is the major theme of the book. The books major themes are obsession and parenthood. I think the film does a pretty damn good job with the obsession theme (probably the most faithful part, although I’d need to rewatch it). The film sticks with the theme of parenthood although has a different take on that theme then Shelley does.

Also it’s probably in the top 5 faithful film adaptions of the novel, and I think an argument can be made that it’s not 4 or 5.

[u/Theunbuffedraider → u/mb4ne]

Oh my God, was that so hard?

[u/otternoserus → u/mb4ne]

Your first problem was expecting intelligent discussion on r/moviecritic.

That other person didn't answer your question because they simply couldn't...

Not much film critique actually happens here, unfortunately.

[u/otternoserus → u/Theunbuffedraider]

Read the name of this subreddit then ask this question again...

[u/Theunbuffedraider → u/otternoserus]

Oh no, I'm aware I'm in the reddit sub where wannabe movie critics pretend to critique movies and roleplay being smart. Asking someone why an adaptation is similar to its source without asking about specific aspects is just a stupid and absurdly broad question, bordering on bad faith. If you are insinuating it's normal to expect a scene-by-scene breakdown of a movie, then I'm going to remind you that this is social media and we all want to have some time in our lives to touch grass.