Frankenstein (2004 TV Movie) User Reviews

Telefilm with mysterious and sinister atmosphere and with intense sequences of terror and violence

[ma-cortes · 5/10 · 7 November 2007]

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.

not bad as a pilot; pretty poor as a stand-alone movie

[FieCrier · 4/10 · 16 October 2004]

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.

Disappointing

[whenitsajar · 5/10 · 3 August 2011]

I had no idea what this was about when I started watching, obviously the main idea was based on Mary Shelley's book but I struggled to make the link. It was just...a bit of a mess really. Yes, I think that the idea itself was original and could have been brilliant but all the fade outs made it impossible to follow. I understand why they did it after reading that it was going to be a TV series but there were still way too many. It felt like they were cutting out half way through something important and then when they went back to it, something completely different was going on. There were too many branches coming out of this film that weren't explained, Helios' spine for example. What was that about? Did I imagine seeing it, because it was never mentioned again. And the ending was ridiculous. Okay so it was supposed to be a cliffhanger but it just...stopped. In the middle of a conversation! Overall, I was very underwhelmed and to be honest, this film doesn't deserve to name itself after such an amazing story.

Bear In Mind It IS A Made For TV Movie

[Daelock · 12 October 2004]

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.

It was horrible.....

[lnicolen · 2/10 · 17 June 2006]

I must admit, I bought the movie because I knew it was based off Dean Koontz version of Frankenstein (cant wait for the last book!!). The names are the same and the storyline follows the first book (somewhat)of the series Koontz is putting out. BUT, it ends right in the middle! One of the most horrible endings I have seen on a movie to date. There is so much more to the story. I didn't know why Koontz pulled out until after I saw the movie. No wonder he didn't want his name on it. If they would have followed / completed the story with what Koontz has written I think it could have been one of the best Frankenstein movies ever made. I am really hoping they plan on making a sequel, even though it was made for TV. Left entirely too much hanging. Disappointed I wasted money purchasing this movie.

Lamentable update of the classic story

[Leofwine_draca · 2/10 · 10 March 2012]

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.

Didn't like it.

[poolandrews · 3/10 · 24 August 2007]

Frankenstein is set in New Orleans where detectives Carson O'Conner (Parker Posey) & her partner Michael Sloane (Adam Goldberg) are on the trail of a serial killer who likes to cut open his victims & take their organs, the latest victim is Bobby a security guard at a library who is missing a heart. The autopsy has surprising results as Bobby originally had two hearts, concrete like bones & various organs the pathologist hasn't seen before. The case turns even spookier when Conner gets a visit from a man (Vincent Perez) who claims he is a 200 year old creature stitched together from various body parts by Victor Helios (Thomas Kretschmann) who is now working in genetics & was responsible for Bobby, he claims the killer is one of Helios's creations & wants to be killed but can't commit suicide. Conner has to suspend her disbelief & set out in search of a killer the likes of which she has never faced before...

Produced & directed by Marcus Nispel I have to admit that I really didn't like this made-for-TV contemporary modern day set adaption of Frankenstein. The script by John Shiban was based on a concept by Dean R. Koontz who went uncredited & was originally slated to write it but dropped out of the production due to creative differences (or perhaps the fact that he knew it was going to be crap?) & I have to say this is a really dull & lifeless adaptation which is far too long, far too uneventful & leaves a lot of unresolved questions at the end which can be attributed to the fact that this was planned as a pilot for a proposed TV series which judging by this thankfully never materialised. The character's are so clichéd & dull with the usual cop's & bad guy's, the dialogue is forgettable & bland, there's next to no gore or exploitation & some of the directions the story goes in are bizarre like making Michael Madsen's character pregnant! Some of the story goes unexplained & again I think that's down to the possibility of their exploration in a potential TV series so details like how Victor Helios has survived for 200 years or what was inside of Michael Madsen's character go unanswered. The film felt like it went on forever, I got pretty bored pretty quickly & even though I only watched it several hours ago I can barely remember anything about it, it really was that dull & forgettable.

Director Nispel has filmed everything in very muted colours to such a degree this looks like it's black and white at times, now some may find that stylish & on occasion it is but the film is already so dull & lifeless that bleeding all of the colour out of every frame doesn't do it any favours overall. Nispel also sets all of his scenes in run down factories & apartments, even the police pathology lab looks like it need to be torn down & rebuilt! Again it just looks awful & it becomes a chore to sit through as there's no energy or life to it. Nispel admits in one of the documentary's featured on the 2003 remake of The Texas Chainsaw Massacre DVD that he doesn't like blood or gore & he proves it here as there's barely a drop of blood in it, someone is shot, someone is impaled on some metal pins & there are a few internal organs which really isn't good enough. This certainly isn't scary, there's no tension & it's utterly predictable when it's not being totally bizarre.

Technically the film looks nice in terms of photography & lighting but the lack of colour & constant run down depressing locations really drove me nuts! It's better made than the usual made-for-TV crap but that's about as positive I can be. The acting was poor, I didn't like anyone in it at all either actor's or character's.

Frankenstein is a bad contemporary take on Mary Shelley's often adapted novel, I'll take Peter Cushing in a full blooded Hammer horror Frankenstein over this modern day crap every time & I strongly suggest you do the same.

Mildly amusing retelling

[fataloblivion · 5/10 · 10 October 2004]

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

A Half-Formed Creation

[ghoulieguru · 5/10 · 16 January 2006]

Marcus Nispel clearly shows himself to be a talented filmmaker with this film. His Frankenstein has all the style of his Texas Chainsaw Massacre remake. Without a doubt, the man knows how to shoot a movie. However, despite the striking visuals, this movie winds up feeling a little vacuous. In a way, the movie itself mimics the creature of its title, being the somewhat half-formed, brainless and empty creation of a brilliant but misguided mind. In this case, Marcus Frankenstein started with good intentions and constructed a beautifully shot film, but neglected to put the brain into his creation. This version of Frankenstein suffers because it teeters on the brink of being unique and distinctive, but never really commits. Perhaps it's because it was made for television, and it's clearly been made with a strong PG aesthetic in mind.

This story is not as much of a straightforward adaptation as a revisionist's version of Mary Shelley's novel. Frankenstein himself is much more like the Terell character in Blade Runner. He's an egotistical, megalomaniac named Helios. Even with its departure from the standard Frankenstein story, this version feels much more in line with the tone and intention of Shelley's novel than most of the past cinematic versions of Frankenstein. Even keeping the tone intact, the story operates on a completely different engine, acting like a version of Seven, with Parker Posey playing the detective who is hunting down one of Frankenstein's psychotic creations.

While I'm on the subject, I need to vent momentarily. Parker Posey really is one of the worst actresses around. I used to like her when she was the quirky girl in movies like Best in Show. But her ridiculous vampire queen in Blade: Trinity and her laughable portrayal of a shotgun-toting detective in this movie have made me lose all respect for her. But not even Parker's silly acting can completely ruin this movie. Although it does feel a little thin at points, this is still an interesting and somewhat new approach to an old myth, beautifully shot and edited by Marcus Nispel... who may be a modern day Frankenstein.

Good Pilot for the Spot of X-Files

[claudio_carvalho · 7/10 · 15 November 2005]

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"

Are there detective courses in high school now?

[tonopah6 · 5/10 · 1 December 2004]

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.

definitely worth seeing

[conan4742 · 8/10 · 10 October 2004]

If you stick to Kubrick's idea that tone is more important than plot or theme, Frankenstein is a great movie. It indulges itself in decadence and decay and manages to produce things that are both beautiful and profoundly disturbing.

There may be a few spoilers here.

The story follows two cops (Parker Posey and Adam Goldberg) hunting down a serial killer in New Orleans who dissects the corpses of those he kills and takes out various organs. As seen here, New Orleans is a tottering pile of rotting buildings and knick knacks, and one can definitely feel that the movie has gotten its bent from Se7en, particularly the scene in the Sloth murder house. Of course, the murders turn out to be more than they seem, and they become linked to a certain Doctor Victor Helios, who is, of course, the famed Frankenstein, who has survived the last two centuries by methods unknown. Dr. Helios is being hunted by a "man" named Deucalion, whom, as it is revealed through several impressively nightmarish flashbacks, is the original Frankenstein monster.

This is an interesting take on the monster. Here, he's no half-witted rag-tag pile of body parts, but is instead enigmatic, brooding, and intelligent. One of the most interesting scenes is when he tries to show Posey the truth of his origins. Deucalion is onto Helios's trail because he has discovered that Helios has not stopped his experimentations at all- rather, he has been perfecting them, and has produced numerous successful creations. Part of the fun of the movie is trying to guess who's "of God" and who isn't.

This story is actually two stories, and this can be troubling. On the one hand we have a detective story, but on the other hand we have an exploration of character with Helios and his wife, who is also a creation. Helios's hunt for perfection is essentially tearing her apart, and her wish for death becomes more and more evident as time goes on. But the two plots have almost nothing to do with one another, except perhaps thematically, and oftentimes the Helios plot takes away from the tension with the murder hunt.

It seems to be going somewhere, like they might intersect somewhere, but never does.

All in all, this movie is more about impressions than anything. Some scenes and performances stand out. For instance, there is a "birth" scene that may just match the original birthing scene from the first Frankenstein movie. Here the creation is covered in some sort of white fluid and looks exactly like a marble statue. It is a profoundly inhuman and disturbing effect, and as it awkwardly comes to life you can't help but be creeped out. Another good part about this movie is the performance by the killer (whom I won't reveal here), who manages to be deranged and childish at the same time. There's no real resolution to the movie, so don't expect one. Personally, I wish that we could be given a little more backstory to what exactly Frankenstein and his monster have been doing for the past 200 years, but I suppose they couldn't work that out in 2 hours. Eventually it tries to become a study about humanity and what it means to be really human, but I feel that it's better just to sit back and enjoy the macabre vision in front of you. 7/10

Cool stuff. Wish it was continued

[NateWatchesCoolMovies · 7/10 · 8 March 2016]

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.

Disappointing and disjointed effort

[kannibalcorpsegrinder · 5/10 · 4 July 2013]

When a New Orleans detective finds a series of strange mutilations and deaths to be the cause of the fanatical doctor and his creations trying to continue their work, she teams up with a sympathetic work to stop him before his rampage spreads throughout the city.

This was a pretty disappointing and not all that worthwhile effort that had a few potentially intriguing moments about it. One of the better elements here was the use of the novel to make the new story come around, as it manages to make a lot of the same elements together here in a modern-day take that feels like a true connection between the two, which is quite unique. As well, there's a lot more action to be found in the later half here with several different encounters with the creatures and the victims, a nice shoot-out in a dank factory and some actual energy that makes for an overall enjoyable time here. It's all too late, though, since the first half of this is all pretty much a lame police investigation that isn't in the slightest bit interesting as there's nothing that comes of it as all we do is stumble upon the bodies after- the-fact and there's nothing of interest there when it's not shown. Even then there's not a lot going on with the story until the revelation of the increased organ-count that brings about the experimental genetics angle that carries the story onward, and more so for the fact that, as it's a pilot for a never-filmed TV series there's just way too many hanging story lines that aren't explained the lack of excitement in this section is hammered home even further.

Rated R: Graphic Violence, Language and a mild sex scene.

Most common letter in English: eeeeeeeee

[samantha67-1 · 3/10 · 12 October 2004]

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.

Loved the book...

[KrissXed4Wes · 2/10 · 3 October 2005]

I originally read the book written by Koontz and in the beginning of the book, Koontz speaks about how he originally wanted to make it into a TV series, but backed out of the project due to 'artistic differences'. So today, I'm flipping through the channels and see this movie, and I flipped, because I couldn't wait to see how it compared. So let me put it this way... it didn't.

The book was far better. I did not like the casting first of all. Granted, I did LOVE who the picked for Victo Helios, but as for everyone else, I was very disappointed.

I also didn't like the fact that everything was all set to the same tone and when they switched scenes, you couldn't tell they had done so. Everything was so dirty and dingy.

In the book, Helios's Lab was clean, pristine, and he had hundreds of people working for him. He was a man of perfection, and man who did not take no for an answer. And in the book, he murders Erika because he is angry with her, he murders her out of spite.

Anyway... I could go on all night about how the book was SOO much better. So I will put it this way, if you saw and loved this TV movie, go read the book, and I guarantee you will fall in love.

CREEPY COOL, BUT...(spoilers!)

[parks5920 · 3/10 · 19 October 2004]

OK, they got the creepy, crawly thing down - Nispel's direction looks like one long running Marilyn Manson video (take a look at the video for "The Beautiful People"; dead on) and Shiban's script is at it's best X-files spooky. Adam Goldberg is his usual interestingly goofy and the rest of the cast plays the monster thing nicely. BUT Parker Posey is...awful, at best. From that black mop hair head to the ridiculous scenes of her running around with a shotgun, it SO does not work. With a tiny bit of re-casting, USA could have a pretty decent series on it's hand, but only if that thing crawling around in Michael Madsen's guts turns out to be a 're-creation' of himself. Note to USA - don't kill off your potentially most interesting character in the first ep., you'll be sorry later!

This is not good.

[jacobjohntaylor1 · 4/10 · 12 May 2015]

This is a Frankenstein sequel. Most of the time Frankenstein sequels are good. But this one is not. In this movie the monsters is the hero and Doctor Frankenstein is the bad guy. I don't think I care for that to mush. This one doctor Frankenstein and the monster live into modern times. The monster meet a female cop. And there are both trying to stop the evil doctor Frankenstein. The book and older movies. Doctor Frankenstein is good guy. And the monster is the bad guy. So I real don't care for it. It not very scary. Bad story line. Bad acting. Skip it. This is pooh pooh. Don't wast your money. Do wast your time. Do not see this movie.

a shortcut to vacuity

[atrolleynatrain · 5/10 · 11 January 2006]

okay. so it isn't that bad. it has all a lover of Gothic sightseeing can long for: the colours, the indie-looking actress, the support act is not exceedingly hilarious and milicevic is stunning. but it's bad. bad in a sense you can't ever get any sort of genuine like for any of the characters, not even harker. madsen's voice is state-of-the-art and ever creepy but you can't put a film together based on some good pretty details. vincent perez is worse than the overall movie. he couldn't be phonier and more inappropriate in the incarnation of "his first". all the missing bits aren't a justification for some considerably wrong choices of clichés: the hooded perez, the sick librarian (it could be any other middle-aged female for that matter) throwing up while some nasty lines are jerked unskillfully and the yucky matchmaker nanny. despite what's read before, i need to point out the best thing in this movies lies beneath the intriguing character of the priest. i only hope the sequel keeps track of that sort of exquisite type of idea.

Visually Stunning, But Poorly Compacted

[gavin6942 · 7/10 · 3 May 2007]

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.

A new generation of improvement Frankenstein arrives in America!!

[elo-equipamentos · 5/10 · 21 February 2023]

What does a protruding name as Martin Scorsese as a simple executive producer, it mean that about to see a major production stature of such prolific name, wrong this is a TV movie that meaning goes straight to streaming, no theaters, it's a small production that had wrong idea to put Scorsese as if it were the director, easy to catch the unwary.

They use a workaround premise, whereby the first one Frankenstein Deucalion (Vincent Perez) he was made two hundred years old at Europe, now his arrival at America he pursuit his undying creator overachiever Dr. Victor Helius (Thomas Kretschmann), that continues making those monster in scientific top grade, including re-working in order to improvement of these being whom didn't work out at first creation, meanwhile Dr. Kretschmann scattered many them that sadly entered in process of mental breakdown ends up committed suicide.

Your goal is replace all human beings for these monster created a laboratory whereof had an asset, they had at least two hundred years, two hearts and high degree of endurance, thus they could override the human being with plenty way, this picture has a gloomy atmosphere which this kind had, however misconstrued, the ending leads us to believe that it was a pilot for a possible series, when Detective Carson and Deucalion made a deal to struggles against the evil Dr. Victor Helius , stays explicit such statement.

Thanks for reading.

Resume:

First watch: 2023 / Source: DVD / How many: 1 / Rating: 6.

This could still be a good streaming series.

[daisygrl-29818 · 8/10 · 17 July 2021]

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.

Good story but never finished

[tvsweeney-39052 · 7/10 · 27 May 2017]

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.

Great movie but.....

[waterfox210 · 5/10 · 7 December 2010]

OK So the movie was great. Great storyline And good acting the only thing that totally blows about this movie is there is no second movie i wish that i have never watched it. It was so good that when i found out there's no more i was devastated got my hopes up and they came crashing down so if you love to watch movies with no ending in sight and to be cut off once you are totally into it then watch it . if they do make another one witch they most likely wont I will be the fist to yet you know this movie is so great its a bummer to watch it go no where. so thats all i have to say about it if you hear any thing at all about another one being made please let me know thanks for reading goodnight.