Opiniones de usuarios

The film deals about the Detectives O'Conner(Parker Posey, Superman returns) and Sloan(Adam Goldberg, The Salton sea)are investigating grisly killings by a macabre serial-killer mutilating the victims. Also, a tough policeman(Michael Madsen, Free Willy)named Harker(homage to Jonathan Harker-Dracula) does inquiry on the horrific events. Meantime, she finds a mysterious man named Deucalion(Vincent Perez,Fanfan LaTulipe) who warns her about a megalomaniac Doctor(Thomas Kretschman, The pianist)named Victor Helios. Doctor Helios is actually Dr. Frankestein(originally created by Mary Shelley) still alive along with his sweetheart(Ivana Milicevic).

This television movie displays tension, mystery, thriller and eerie scenes when the murders and tortures take place. The film takes accent as the suspense as the terror. The plot for this TV picture was initially adapted by famous terror novelist Dean Koontz(Demon seed, Watchers, Phantoms) and attempted as a television series. Koontz was hired as writing credits and executive producer along with Martin Scorsese, but economic and plot disputes among Cable Network and Koontz, made both left the project, for that reason the screenplay gets flaws and gaps , furthermore,the movie final conclusion is ¨deja vu¨. The picture contains a creepy musical score fitting to the horror film by Norman Corbeil and Angelo Baladamenti, plus , a gloomy and sinister cinematography with frightening atmosphere by Daniel Pearl. The motion picture is professionally directed by Marcus Nispel, director of the much better ¨The Texas chainsaw massacre¨ and usually video-clips filmmaker and occasionally director, being his last film, ¨The pathfinder¨, also with dark and shady scenarios, as habitual in all his movies.

The cinematography, editing, art direction are all pretty good on this, especially for a TV movie. It is rather one-note, though. Subdued colors, rain, smoke, darkness, grungy sets. Take a bit of the idea of Frankenstein, set it in the modern day, and cross it with a bit of Se7en, and there it is.

The acting I didn't particularly care for. I've liked Posey, Goldberg, and Madsen in other things, but not here. Didn't care for Helios or the Monster either.

As a pilot, this isn't too bad. As a stand-alone movie (since the series was not greenlighted), it doesn't work very well. We don't learn very much about any of the characters. Parker Posey's character has a young autistic brother she has to take care of (or has to have a nanny take care of for her), who serves no purpose whatsoever.

I guess the brother's role would have been fleshed out in the series, but since it wasn't to be, they could have cut him out. Madsen's character has something big going on, but it isn't wrapped up at the end at all. Helios' project(s?) are not wrapped up, and neither are the monster's. The only storyline that has any closure is that of The Surgeon. Perhaps if there is a DVD commentary it will shed some light on in what direction the series would have gone.

I don't think these kinds of movies should be judged by the same standards as others. Compared to a full budgeted, generally more free, Hollywood movie, this movie lacks somewhat. Compared to something like The Langoliers, it's spectacular. Judge it on its own merits and it's certainly not a waste of time, the performances all around are excellent, stand-outs from Adam Goldberg and Micheal Madsen in my opinion, and it's got a plot that doesn't suck as well as some genuine twists. I'd say the production values are the best drawing points though, as this has the appearance of a big-budget, cinematic blockbuster, while most come off as cheesy and campy. There are worse ways to spend a couple of hours.

Let me get this straight to begin with: FRANKENSTEIN is a horrible reinterpretation of the classic Mary Shelley novel, which attempts to modernise the story in a pre-flooding New Orleans. Everything about this production screams cliché: there's a murky, depressing visual style that constantly uses David Fincher's SE7EN as its source material (isn't that so late '90s?) and a storyline that ends up going absolutely nowhere. The reason? This was the ill-conceived pilot of a television series that was never made, so don't go in expecting any kind of plot resolution or tying up of loose ends.

The tired story sees a couple of lame detectives (Parker Posey and Adam Goldberg, possibly the most uninteresting cops I've seen in any movie) going after a killer leaving a string of bizarre deaths in his wake. Along the way, they come across Vincent Perez as a strangely scarred and hooded figure, and there are no prizes for guessing who he's supposed to be. There's also some pointless stuff involving ruthless scientist Victor Helios, played by Thomas Kretschmann. He's Frankenstein, but despite taking up a great deal of screen time he never actually gets involved in the main storyline.

Yeah, the film really is that muddled and disjointed: the detectives never catch up with Frankenstein, and we never even learn how he's still alive in the modern day. Talk about a con. Instead, the thrust of the plot eventually turns out to involve Michael Madsen, playing a fellow detective with a few secrets of his own. But there's really nothing to keep you watching: no interesting set-pieces, no special effects to speak of, no drama, no tension, not one bit of suspense. Director Marcus Nispel's work feels adrift and aimless outside of his preferred genre (remakes), and Dean Koontz wisely took his name off the thing. You can hardly blame him.

This tedious made-for-TV disaster has a lot of problems, but the worst two are the fact that they called it FRANKENSTEIN and that they really didn't have enough footage completed to make anything releasable but stuck it all together and put it out on DVD anyway. Parker Posey and Adam Goldberg are two wisecracking cops on the trail of a killer nicknamed 'the surgeon" for his habit of deftly removing various organs from the bodies of his victims. The other part of the plot is about Dr. Victor Helios (really, that's the character's name), a dour 200-year-old mad scientist who has devised some ill-explained method of creating life. His first creation is a guy who resembles popular artists' images of Jesus except that he has a scarred face and prowls about in the long dark overcoat that was de rigueur for dramatic characters in 2004. He was supposedly assembled from parts of dead bodies just like The Monster in Mary Shelley's novel, although he looks more like a guy who lost a knife fight than a being patched together from bits of different donors. Vic's more recent creations are pathologically insane people with two hearts and "bones like cement". The script (based on a concept by Dean Koontz, who asked that his name be removed) tries to have it both ways, vacillating between the brooding mad doctor plot and the boring police procedural. Strangely, it evokes both the literary and cinematic legacies of Dracula by naming supporting characters "Harker" and "Fry". A police psychologist is named Kathleen Burke, after the actress who played Lota The Panther Woman in THE ISLAND OF LOST SOULS in 1932. "The surgeon" is one of the doc's projects gone haywire, a whackjob whose motivation and behavior defy logic, a killer who we're told only wants to die but who clearly enjoys tormenting and mutilating people. The very sloppy, obviously unfinished feature (an unsuccessful series pilot) includes plenty of images worthy of an '80s rock video (a goblet of red wine shattering, false eyelashes floating in a tank of water, and so on) set against the same homely, washed-out greenish-gray look of the director's previous projects (which include the disappointing 2003 TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE remake as well as the pretty good 2009 FRIDAY THE 13TH remake). There are heavy shadows everywhere and many of the shots were very carefully planned and set up, but the weak characterization and schizoid editing make it difficult to care about where the story goes. Which is just as well, because it never goes anywhere. Just when it looks like the plot is finally going to get rolling, the end credits roll instead, leaving everything unresolved and letting you know you've just wasted the time it took to slog through this pretentious and senseless clinker. Truly unfit for release, the way this mishmash turned out is an insult to Frankenstein fans.

Detective Carson O'Conner (Parker Poisey) and her partner Detective Michael Sloane (Adam Goldberg) are investigating murders of a serial-killer that mutilates and removes the internal organs of the victims. When they meet the mysterious and macabre Deucalion (Vincent Perez), they are informed that Dr. Frankenstein is alive with a legion of followers, using the name of Dr. Victor Helios (Thomas Kretschmann).

I liked this contemporary version of the character of Frankenstein. The story recalls "X-Files", having the same style of cinematography and music score. It seems to be a pilot of a TV series, inclusive there is no ending of the story but a great hook for the sequel. Anyway, it is a good entertainment, very underrated in IMDb. My vote is seven.

Title (Brazil): "Frankenstein"

I probably shouldn't get after Frankenstein (2004) too much, since it was a made-for-TV movie that was supposed to be a pilot for a whole series, but that doesn't change the fact that it's just not good. Even without the unsatisfying cliffhanger ending, this Se7en wannabe still has a convoluted story and weak acting. I like Parker Posey, but this role just didn't feel right for her. And Adam Goldberg's constant wisecracks felt forced. It's also strange because this movie is only 88 minutes long, yet it really seemed to drag at times. I'm not surprised that this Frankenstein series didn't get picked up.

I saw the movie and learned that it was dropped after just the one premier. If this was picked up again soon it could still make a good streaming series.

Dean Koontz's Frankenstein is an abandoned TV pilot that was deftly edited into a feature, and marketed thus. It absolutely kills me that the networks never picked it up, because it's a super imaginative, stylish beast of a story with an unbelievable ensemble of genre players and the direction of Marcus Nispel, a veteran of slick horror and fantasy. Oh well. If you can wrestle up a DVD like I did, or catch it on cable, it's good watching. It takes place nearly two hundred years after Mary Shelley's story, and we see that time has radically changed Dr. Frankenstein and his monster. The Dr., now called Victor Helios (the excellently moody Thomas Kretschmann) has preserved his youth through dark science, as well as that of his wife Erika (the stunning Ivana Milicivec), whom he has more twisted plans for, never giving his need for bizarre experimentation a rest. Meanwhile his creature, now a roaming Demi-human named Deucalion (Vincent Perez), hunts the good Doctor down, for revenge and possibly more. Their presence catches the attention of Detective Carson O'Connor (Parker Posey, demonstrating how well she fits into pretty much any genre), and her partner (Adam Goldberg). Meanwhile another, less idealistic detective named Harker (Michael Madsen oozes sinister malice) enters the fold with his own sick intentions. The plot takes care and attention or you will be lost; this isn't classic Frankenstein, it's dark and esoteric new spin with its own ideas, some of which are delightfully surreal and akin to artists like David Cronenberg and Guillermo Del Toro. It's got a distinct, ambient lighting scheme as well that sets the tone just south of conventional and gives it an eerie atmosphere almost like The Crow or Dark City. It's really a shame that no one saw the potential with this one to allow it to blossom into either a show or a franchise. At least this one got made though, and it's really worth checking out.

One of the worst versions of the story. The acting is stiff and monotone. It wasn't made into the intended tv show so it just ends. There is no resolution. No pay off for the time wasted on this ridiculous "drama"? Multiple side stories that go nowhere and have no input on the plot. Not that there really is one. One character smacks gum so loudly it blocks out some of the dialogue. Actually...that's a good thing. FRANKENSTEIN is my favorite story and I will watch any adaptation. Save for the name and a few scenes, there was little that made this movie worthy of the title. MAYbe if it had become a series the stories would have become interesting. But, we will never know.

In a dark New Orleans atmosphere, witty detectives Parker Posey (Carson) and Adam Goldberg are hunting a killer who rips organs from the victims. Their investigation starts in the public library where a security guard has had his heart ripped out. The investigation leads Carson down a grim road where she learns that the victims are all abnormal creations of Dr. Victor Helios, an uber-creepy doctor with a penchant for "perfection."

Evidently, Helios improved on the physical stamina and endurance of humans (his creations can survive great falls, have bigger hearts, and more calcium in the bones making them "cement-like"). However, Helios fails to perfect the mental stability of these persons. It turns out, nearly half the people we meet are his "children."

As we learn just how crazy everyone is and as one particularly charitable Helios-man throws Carson clue after clue, we find out who the killer is and spend 30 minutes chasing him around. In the meanwhile, Helios drowns the wife he created (an inexplicable method for a physician - one can only presume demonstrating the depth of his insanity) -- only to reinvigorate her with new life and a new personality. The big climax of the film is when the Helios-man-serial-killer faces off with the Helios-man-clue-giver. Of course, the latter wins.

The film scores well on visuals, displaying much of the sculpture, old mansions, and architecture for which New Orleans is known for. It also has the usual good performances by Goldberg and Posey. Unfortunately, everyone else simply acts overtly spooky with little personality beyond general creepiness. For horror movie fans, this will disappoint. Even more damning, the film has a cliff-hanger ending leaving huge room for a sequel - but why?

5/10

This movie is for the over 8 but under 25 crowd. It works for sleepovers and slumber parties. The acting for this SciFi thriller/horror is okay, but not memorable. It has a poor storyline and is grossly predictable from the start. It is also supposed to be a horror flick, but I was not at all scared. The lighting is too dark for most of the movie and turns me off. The plot is disjointed. There is too much scene jumping. It is hard to get into the plot with all the scene jumping. The movie is slow. It is work to follow the progress of the movie and understand the significance of the scenery and progression within the flick. OK for the die hard SciFi fan to watch once. Otherwise, almost a waste of time to see.

The detectives, judges, doctors, (you name them), they are all getting younger each year. Hollywood is getting more unbelievable all the time. It's a shame. What we have here is a teenage looking female detective on the hunt for one of Frankenstein's monsters. The usual here-and-there pursuit takes place; all done in the usual low budget nowhere places. Helios (Frankenstein) has a beautiful wife who he tries to make better when he gets the urge, or needs to do so. Then the first creation/monster of Helios arrives, but he is wanting to help the detectives get the man who created him; but the original creation, unfortunately, is not used enough. All in all, this movie was not worthy of making, unless betters actors as detectives were chosen.

This was to be the first episode of a Dean Koontz-written series which, unfortunately, never was made and instead became a series of novels. Having owned a copy of the novel, I think it was a pity the series never happened. AS scripted, it's more a police procedural than a horror story, with tendrils of horror. This time, Frankenstein is called Helios and he's still searching for the perfect creature but now has a network of his creations, some living almost normal lives but still tied to him. The arrival in New Orleans of his original creation, now called Deucalion, and a series of gruesome murders bring together the creature and the police detective investigating. The tone is dark but compelling, the characters equally so. Helios is handsome, cold, and prepared to sacrifice even the wife he loves (and created) when she proves imperfect.

The acting is good, the premise intriguing. Unfortunately, it stops just when things gets really interesting and the promise of answers to questions in the form of the next movie never materializes. It's too bad the series never was made because if it held to the precepts of the pilot and the novel, it would've been great.

This movie was viewed as a rental DVD and no remuneration was involved in the writing of this review.

A security guard turns up dead and an autopsy finds he has two hearts, bones like concrete and other abnormalities that would essentially make him live forever. More murders happen, and soon the police believe that not only do more men like the security guard exist but that they were, in fact, created by another man rather than born as such.

Director Marcus Nispel is good at one thing in particular: making his films look like rich oil paintings. His take on "Texas Chainsaw Massacre" was beautiful (even if the film itself sputtered) and "Pathfinder" is more visual than cerebral in every respect. A great choice for the new film "Alice", I think Nispel honed his skills on "Frankenstein". It comes across as the more grim and artistic interpretation of "Seven", which I mean in every possible good way.

The movie's failings are something I cannot really place on the shoulders of the director or the cast. Because by far the biggest flaw was the truncation of what could have been a television series (and was supposed to be) into a movie. Questions are answered too quickly killing a good mystery, more questions are raised but never addressed (in fact, hundreds) and this comes together with an ending that begs for a few sequels or an ongoing series (but, of course, I cannot say what that ending is).

Adam Goldberg does a surprisingly decent job here. I am not a fan of his, and do not think he is strong outside the realm of comedy (his best film remains "The Hebrew Hammer"). Here, he comes across as a lovable and able detective who has the necessary failings of a man who falls in love with his partner (at work). He played it straight and I think this was one of his better performances.

Michael Madsen is an actor who cult film fans and horror fans just love (probably more because of "Reservoir Dogs" and less because of "Free Willy"). I, also, love this man. And I do not think his fans will be let down here... while his part is small at first, he becomes more prominent as the movie progresses and those things we love about Madsen begin to shine. This may rank as one of his better better roles, possibly his best outside of a Tarantino film.

If you see this movie, give it the benefit of the doubt. Some flaws exist, but as I said I think these are more on the part of the network and less due to the creative forces involved. The acting is good, the story is very original and highly interesting and I cannot stress enough just how beautiful the film comes across. Possibly the best interpretation of "Frankenstein" I have seen yet.

Recommendation: read Dean Koontz's novels. While I have not, on my second viewing I watched the film with someone who did, and it made a big difference. There is a lot going on behind the scenes and a good deal that had to be left out -- I really wish they had made a sequel or a series, but the novels will have to suffice.

This film, while having impressive production credits and a decent cast, lacks in several key areas. With a staff such as this I was expecting at least slightly more than I got. I noticed several amateurish audio glitches that would not exist in a film with higher production values. The main characters were given passable characterization, but then other characters (Parker's brother comes to mind) were simply glossed over and seemed to show that the story had potential and lots of ideas but for whatever reason did not make the final cut. I question the utilization of Michael Madsen in a role he did not seem suited for, nor did he seem particularly excited to be playing. The poor pacing of the "climactic" chase and the "ending" itself play out amateurishly as well. Everything in the last 20 minutes reeked of either an extended series pilot or foreshadowing of a sequel. I also see that before the film even played on USA that a number of people voted it up to 10. These folks must be huge fans of Parker Posey (which I am) or simply have no concept of mediocre. I rate this film a 3/10. If Frankenstein was not in the public domain after all these years this film would have no business existing. It completely lacks subtlety and interest, but it does have blood, which apparently excites people who must have been weaned on television dramas their whole lives. If that is you, give this one a whirl, it may be your cup of tea. I, on the other hand, was disappointed. I give this one slightly more credit than the absolute butchered and dumbed-down remake of Texas Chainsaw Massacre the director also put his name on. Personally I would of credited both to Alan Smithee or his counterpart and been done with them.