User reviews

What a stunning piece of art!

This film is like an operatic symphony.

It's both beautiful and tragic. Breathtaking and challenging. This is what movies are all about. James Whale would be proud.

I saw this in Japan and because the audience is so respectful I couldn't tell if I was the only one silently weeping in the darkness.

Thank you Guillermo.

The film succeeds best when it remains close to Mary Shelley's original such as in its storytelling approach and varying perspectives, as well as the dialogue and references that echo the novel. I wish there had been more of this. The book is rich in philosophy, psychology and tragedy.

Del Toro doesn't fail, but I think he misses the mark at those moments where he changes the story, revising the characters' awareness and motivations. Walz's Harlander is invented and unnecessary, Isaac's Frankenstein is frenzied rather than haunted. It is Jacob Elordi's monster / creature that redeems the film, in addition to its beautiful gothic style and fine pacing (the runtime is long, but suitable). Overall, a great addition to the lore and worth seeing on the big screen.

Holy s***. Finally, after a bunch of okay, mediocre and awful adaptations tackling Mary Shelley's gothic science fiction horror epic, Guillermo del Toro gets to have his vision fully realized in what's easily one of the most faithful adaptations ever made while still being his own film.

The visuals are phenomenal, the acting is outstanding all around (although Isaac and Elordi are the standouts), Guillermo's writing and direction are steadfast and intimately visceral, the music is haunting, and the cinematography is some of the best of the year. I will be seeing this again in theaters, but I hope Netflix sits down and let's this epic go to IMAX. That would be one hell of an experience.

Experienced Del Toro's latest on the big screen in 35mm print and was left speechless. The film is far from being compact in length but managed to present some of the best cinema of 2025, an expertly crafted culmination of multiple decades of experience from Del Toro.

Visually, the film is nothing short of a masterpiece. The set design, costumes, and cinematography are stunning, and every frame is a joy to look at. The visual effects (admirably, mostly practical effects) are spot on, and Desplat's score, albeit a little bit overly dramatic at times, is hauntingly beautiful and elevates the experience to a whole other level.

I will admit this is the first film adaptation of Mary Shelley's classic tale that I watched, but I am familiar with some of the artistic liberties Del Toro took in his adaptation, and I think the vast majority of them are beautiful and help breathe life into the tale at modern times, while also helping differentiate it from other adaptations and giving Del Toro's unique spin to it. Similarly to his work on Pinocchio (2022), you can see his admiration and respect for the source material while you can also see his personal footprint and soul poured all over the project.

Oscar Isaac is brilliant in his role as Dr. Frankenstein, and Jacob Elordi shines in a career-pivoting role. Goth and Waltz are great as well, and the film features some other pleasantly familiar faces, like Game of Thrones alums Charles Dance and David Bradley. An all-around great performance from the amazing cast completes the craft of the film as another career highlight in Del Toro's magical filmography.

I will say the movie is a little bit too long while ironically the plot also takes some shortcuts and contrivances to push things forward; but that's not as dire as it sounds, and the film is enjoyable from start to finish, with great writing and directing from Del Toro.

A poetic tale that mourns and dazzles, Del Toro's adaptation of "Frankenstein" is one of the most beautiful and well-crafted films of the year. While preserving the heart of the original tale and taking brave liberties to unify it as Guillermo's personal work, Frankenstein works on every level and manages to serve as 150 minutes of pure cinema and breathtaking entertainment.

I'm a massive fan of Guillermo's work. He's one of the only directors working in the film industry today that creates visual gothic feasts reminiscent of the movies I cherish from past decades. The colors, the lightning, the angles... he has it all.

When Frankenstein was announced as his next movie project, I was elated. This man could finally create a truly faithful adaptation of Mary Shelley's classic with the stylized visual flare to back it up. With Netflix's endless funds and a stellar cast, this would've (should have) been a slam dunk.

Sadly, I was more than a bit disappointed. The movie looks fantastic (as it should), and the writing is as good as one would expect from a feature of this magnitude... but the story really let me down. It strays way too far from the source material, and just like past adaptations, the things Del Toro decided to alter from the book lesson the emotional impact of the overall arc and themes.

No spoilers, but many of the humanistic undertones touched on by Shelley are completely lost because of some massive character and beat changes made here.

Don't get me wrong, the movie is far from terrible... I honestly don't think that Guillermo could make an awful film if he tried... but I was hoping for the definitive Frankenstein adaptation of our age and what I got was more of the same overly creative license that Hollywood has taken with every other Frankenstein that came before it.

Sad. 6/10 for the visuals.

Finally someone came very close to capturing the original story. Del Toro has done an excellent job. Perhaps not for everyone, but I was enthralled. I wish it was playing in main theaters but I imagine they are worried the general superhero and monster movie crowd won't get it. Personally, this was very worth my time.

With so many people praising this movie, allow me to offer this contrary opinion.

I used to like G. Del Toro; I loved Pan's Labyrinth and Pacific Rim. The Shape of Water wasn't bad either. But I think del Toro is one of those directors who made a name for themselves with their unique style, but who end up trapped by their own gimmick. Names like Tim Burton, Peter Jackson, Zack Snyder, and James Gunn, just to name a few. I had high hopes for this Frankenstein. So what's wrong with it?

First, let's forget about anticipating its unveiling, since it's present from head to toe from the very first scene. We then see that it's 100% indestructible and has the strength of Superman, who also manages to free a ship stuck in the ice in Batman v Superman. It's only just begun, and we're already wondering if we're watching a monster movie or a new Marvel superhero. Still in the prelude, Oscar Isaac chooses to ignore the danger and starts recounting his life to the captain. Why? Is this something he does every time he meets a stranger, like Forest Gump sitting on a bus bench?

His childhood is a series of clichés, then comes the moment when he reveals his discoveries at the Royal College of Surgeons. The animated torso is no more convincing than Ash's in the old 1979 Alien. But where I really lost interest was when he created Frankenstein. The montage sequence is dynamic and very well done, but the bad choice of music that accompanies the scene made me realized that this movie was not going to be a dark version à la Pan's Labyrinth that I had hoped for. Once assembled, the monster looks more like Nebula 2.0 with Pinocchio's brain.

Furthermore, the landscapes and exterior shots all seem to be produced by VFX with all those fake rays of light passing in front of the camera. It's the kind of graphics you find in video games. Then Mia Goth's arrival transforms the film into an impossible love story, except that unlike Winona Ryder, who was full of life in Edward Scissorhands and Dracula, Goth is as expressive as a 2x4.

After that, it's the creature's turn to tell his side of the story (is this a trial now?). His tale is a series of illogical events that teach us, among other things, that he can survive an explosion, like the T-1000 in T2. He can also drive fence posts into the ground by hitting them with his bare hands, just like the giants beyond the Wall, as witnessed by Jon Snow at the beginning of GOT season 3. What the captain gets from its story, however, is that Frankenstein is full of humanity, and so it is with great pleasure that the beast uses his superpowers to once again free the ship frozen in the ice. Personally, I would have liked to see Frankenstein put on his spiked boots, or see the sailors spread salt under his feet to help with traction, but oh well...

I guess this is what ten years of mediocrity in Hollywood has done: today, any movie that is even remotely decent is praised as a masterpiece.

This film is peak Guillermo del Toro. Stunning cinematography, good story and character development, and stellar performances from Oscar Issac and Jacob Elordi. I went into this film with low expectations, as many films in this genre are so predictable and underwhelming. This was not the case for this film. We got a whole new look at these characters and this story, without compromising the essence of what makes it familiar. Could we have just seen the rebirth of this classic cinematic universe?

It's no secret that talented and visionary director Del Toro has been working up the courage to complete Frankenstein, his biggest inspiration, for decades now. In interviews tailing many years he has told of his admiration for the story and it's effect upon him. Even some of his previous work has inspirations from the classic gothic novel, of course I'm referencing Blade 2 (believe it or not), where one of the reapers finally confronts his maker. And as a movie lover, nothing makes me happier than to see a director get to shoot his dream picture, especially a director who has contributed so much.

Now compared to some other reviewer's my score may seem pretty low, and let me start by saying it's going to be loved by critics and loved by award shows, and deserves the accolades it will receive, but for me personally, I respect it more than I love it.

Del Toro is a incredible director, and that's more than evident in this picture, I enjoyed the story, and his rendition of it, visually it's stunning. But, sorry to say, I'm just not a huge fan of Gothic horror, I never have been. I've tried over the years, and this movie I surprisingly enjoyed more than most, but it's something that's just not always going to be my cup of tea.

There were large portions of the movie I enjoyed, there did come a part in the movie where it headlined the title 'Part 2' which I dreaded, not because I wasn't enjoying it, but I had already felt like I watched a feature movie, yet I was only half way. It was a bit long for me. Which only felt longer because of the pacing.

On the positives, it looks great visually, set pieces are gothic but brilliant, and I loved the cast performances, especially Jacob Elordi as the The Creature. I was not familiar with this actor, but I give credit where it's due, that was a brilliant performance.

Look. If gothic horror is not your thing, still give it a chance, it can be long winded but it's a great rendition of a classic story, I'd be surprised if you hated it even if it's not your favorite genre. If you rated it higher, I'm not going to argue with you, it probably deserves it.

First off, I love a modern gothic horror adaptation, this just made my list of Halloween yearly rewatches along with Nosteratu (2024). There's just something about the visuals of rain flooded cathedral rooftops and blood flowing down cobblestone streets that gives you a faint touch of anxiety that you'll catch the plague while sitting in your theater's recliner.

But I digress, Oscar Isaac is brilliant, no surprise there, from Drive to Ex Machina, his villain arc continues to grow like the hump on Igor's back. I look forward to his next role as usual.

I have to admit, having never seen Euphoria, I didn't know how Jacob Elordi would play out but the dude's got range! He really brought the character to life, killed it, then brought it back to life again.

Mia Goth, great mother of Pearl! I found myself falling in line behind all of the other characters in the film that fell in love with her. She never misses.

Christoph Waltz... need I say more?

Guillermo del Toro delivers once again! The visuals and storytelling kept me engaged, even when scenes would slow down, the emotion picked up. And this film is brutal! The creature does not hold back, he was put together to rip others apart.

Go to the theater to see this one while you can! Every shot is masterfully framed and the grandiose set pieces require eyes to be feasted upon the big screen.

Even though it didn't impress me that much, I can still respect the effort behind it. It's one of those films you watch once, enjoy a few parts, but you don't really feel like coming back to it. Solid attempt, but it just didn't click with me the way I expected, even though the concept had real potential.

The first part of the movie looked like a staged opera without singers. The designmonster with painted scars was ridiculous. Anatomical details were more important psychological introspection.

The plot and actions had too much inconsistencies and logical fails to be credible. Mary Shelley's original monster was not a superman saving ships. The ending was a cliche.

Simply a masterpiece. Oscar-caliber writing, directing, acting, costumes, makeup, cinematography, sound, editing, music, VFX and so much more. Every frame is gorgeous. Even though it's funded by Netflix, see it on the biggest screen possible. Truly a cinematic achievement. Kudos and congratulations to Guillermo del Toro and company. Astonishing, brilliant, redemptive, everything you would hope a movie to be.

I was hesitant about going to see Frankenstein at TIFF (the plan was to wait until it hit cinemas) but I'm so glad I did. Thanks to a lovely friend I got tickets to the premiere!

It's a stunning and layered film-the details! A Beautifully shot gothic tale. A technical and visual masterpiece that deserves to be seen on the big screen. You can feel the love and passion del Toro poured into the film.

It honours Mary Shelley's story while adding that distinct Guillermo del Toro stamp. It reminded me of both The Shape of Water and Crimson Peak, and because of that think it's going to be a divisive film.

Jacob Elordi is the standout star of the film. His portrayal of the Monster made my heart ache. Heartbreakingly beautiful and just simply phenomenal acting from him.

I wish they could have explored the connection between Elizabeth and the Monster more. However, it's definitely one of my favourites of the festival so far. I can't wait to see it again.

While very different from the book in many ways, Frankenstein (2025) still delivers key plot points and emotional beats of the original novel in expert fashion.

Elordi was by far the most captivating piece of this cinematic puzzle, and I would be shocked if he isn't at least nominated for an Oscar off the back of his performance. Isaac was fantastic as Victor, and he embellished the role just enough to get the audience to love and hate him just like Mary Shelley originally intended for the character. Goth was also great, as she always is, but it was nothing that would be seen as a staple of her career like some of her other more recent works.

The set design was immaculate, the score was present but never in your face, the costume design was flawless, and the supporting cast was all fantastic. My favorite cinematic piece of this film was the shots and framing. Good god, many moments of this film could have been snapshotted and turned into gorgeous posters or photography prints.

Netflix really messed up by not giving this a wider release, because this film DEMANDS to be scene on a theater screen. From the moment the opening sequence began, I knew that it wasn't going to be done justice by being watched primarily at home on peoples' televisions, phones, and tablets. I'm so grateful I got to experience it in true cinematic fashion.

Now, I do have some gripes, albeit personal ones, regarding the difference in the plot points, character usage, and narrative arcs that this adaptation altered from the novel. However, this film is still a massive achievement in adapting a literary work to the big screen, especially one written so long ago. This was one of my favorites of the year. Perfect for spooky season, and one of the highlights of 2025. 9.5/10.

I was really looking forward to this but in the end I was disappointed by it. Why? Overblown and overlong by at least 30.minutes. Some of the deviations from the original story were just ridiculous such as giving Victor a prosthetic leg, making Elizabeth into a 17th century trouser chasing strumpet and making the monster into Superman. Talking of the monster, no, it didn't work did it? He looked like a member of Duran Duran that hadn't quite got his Halloween make up right.

The acting was OK but Mia Goth was miscast as Elizabeth and Christoph Waltz was just thrown into the.mix for gravitas. The movie did look good, I will give it that but in general this was a director who got carried away with a subject he loved in the same way that Peter Jackson did with 'King Kong'. I award it 5 5 but can't give a half mark so give it a generous 6.

Guillermo Del Toro delivers a refreshing new take on one of the most famous horror stories of all time. Rather than crafting a typical horror film, he presents Frankenstein as an intimate and emotionally layered character study. Del Toro's deep affection for his "monsters" is once again evident - he consistently stands on their side, suggesting that the true monster is, in fact, Frankenstein himself.

The performances are strong across the board. Oscar Isaac offers a convincing, if occasionally a little over-the-top, portrayal of Frankenstein. However, he is ultimately outshined by Jacob Elordi as the Creature. It's a challenging role that could have easily been one-dimensional, but Elordi imbues it with remarkable depth, emotion, and soul - a truly fantastic performance. Christoph Waltz delivers a familiar turn, very much in line with his recent work, while Mia Goth is solid, though it remains to be seen whether she truly lives up to her "next big thing" reputation.

On a technical level, the film excels. The cinematography is stunning, the set design meticulous, and the score beautifully complements the film's emotional tone. The makeup work is exceptional, and while the costumes are impressive, they occasionally verge on being a bit too extravagant.

If there's one major flaw, it's the runtime - the film could easily have been trimmed by at least thirty minutes. Nevertheless, this is a deeply emotional and visually striking experience, and another remarkable addition to Guillermo Del Toro's already distinguished filmography.

A visually beautiful, yet utterly unengaging movie. It reminds me of an elaborately decorated but empty eggshell-ey (pun intended).

It's watchable of course, but you might want to see "Mary Shelley's Frankenstein" (1994) by Kenneth Branagh with Robert De Niro and Helena Bonham Carter instead if you haven't already.

Read the book in high school and loved it! This is the most faithful movie version in modern history. Though most definitely not fully accurate, I believe it carries a part of the spirit Mary Shelley intended. This movie will make you hate victor the way he deserves to be hated.

Side note: Jacob Elordi has RANGE.

Frankenstein 2025 strays far from Mary Shelley's original vision. The characters are reversed, simplified, and stripped of the depth that defines the novel. The film completely misses the essence of the story - the tragedy of creation, responsibility, and abandonment - and the core message is nowhere to be found.

For true admirers of the book, this adaptation will feel frustrating and even painful to watch. Instead of honoring the profound themes of the classic, the movie delivers a hollow spectacle that has little to do with the real Frankenstein.

Firstly, hitting the negative as I found the prelude/exposition lengthy and slowly-paced. My fault, have just picked copy of shelf to reread and see what I was missing!

Thereafter, was transfixed by all aspects of this tour-de-force gothic roller-coaster!

Sets, costumes, locations, effects and performances all excel and are as far from Ham-it-up Horror as you can get- much as I love them!

Elordi's 'monster' engages and dominates throughout with some erotic subtext that I'd never noticed before! Hope that's not just me!

Now want to revisit 'Pan's Labyrinth' again as well as 'Chronos' and 'Devil's Backbone'!

It's a long film but worth every minute!