Let’s get this out of the way first, I watched Frankenstein on Netflix.
Yes, that Frankenstein. Guillermo del Toro’s long awaited, long hyped monster epic.
Before I dive in, a quick note: I pushed my usual Tuesday “Lists” and Wednesday “In Memoriam” blog posts to later this week, maybe next week, because if I don’t get these Frankenstein articles out now, they’ll get buried behind the mountain of drafts waiting in my queue. (A good problem to have, surely.)
So if you’re wondering, “It’s Tuesday, why’s he talking about Frankenstein?” or “It’s Wednesday, where’s the weekly remembrance?” … that’s why.
Anyway. Thanks for reading. I appreciate you more than you know.
What I Expected vs. What We Got
I said a while ago that del Toro’s Frankenstein would either prove me wrong or prove my point.
Turns out, I was kinda right on both counts.
To sum it up in one line:
Del Toro’s Frankenstein is nothing like he promised, and exactly what you should expect from him by now.
That’s not an insult, just a fact. If you love del Toro’s movies, you’ll love this. If you find his work a little too self impressed, this won’t change your mind.
It’s classic del Toro: gorgeous, operatic, and emotionally distant.
We get jaw dropping mise-en-scène (say it with the French accent, or risk sounding like a film school snob), haunting gothic architecture, and lavish production design. You want gothic romance? You got it.
It’d pair nicely with Coppola’s Dracula, though Bram Stoker’s Dracula feels darker, richer, and far more deserving of its own atmosphere.
The Good: Craft and Pace
It’s two and a half hours long, but it doesn’t feel like it.
That’s a win. The pacing is solid, the cinematography is stunning, and the cast gives it their all.
It’s a good movie. Not great. Not groundbreaking. Just good.
I’d give it a solid 3 to 3½ stars out of 5.
That’s my “decent film” baseline, something I don’t regret watching but probably won’t revisit for fun in the next decade unless it’s for a podcast or review.
The Monster Problem
Let’s talk about the creature, the heart of the story.
He’s charismatic, sure. But every time he kills, it’s either self defense or righteous anger.
Where’s the horror in that?
The monster of Frankenstein isn’t meant to be noble every time he lashes out. He’s supposed to be tragic and terrifying, an embodiment of creation gone wrong.
Here, he’s too safe. Del Toro’s too gentle with him.
And then there’s the convenience factor, every gunshot, every death happens right when the plot needs it to.
Yes, I know: “Screenwriters create situations to serve the story.” Fine. But good writing hides the seams. You shouldn’t notice the convenience.
In Frankenstein, you notice it.
Structure and Storytelling
The film’s divided into two halves:
- Part 1 — Victor’s story
- Part 2 — The monster’s story
It’s an interesting idea, but it doesn’t really pay off.
We never get overlapping perspectives or dual tragedy like Shelley wrote. By the time we shift from Victor to the creature, Victor’s suddenly an arrogant, emotionless jerk. Maybe that’s the creature’s perception, but it plays flat.
Honestly? I’d rather just have the monster’s story.
Victor Frankenstein isn’t a relatable guy, he’s a brilliant, antisocial genius who’s more concept than character. He’s alien, detached, and hard to care about.
Characters That Work (and Don’t)
Don’t get me wrong, the movie did keep me watching. I wasn’t bored once.
Del Toro knows how to keep your eyes glued to the screen, even when the story’s slipping.
But some characters just don’t stick.
There’s Herr Hemler, played by Christoph Waltz, and his daughter (or niece?) Christine, engaged to Victor’s brother Henry. Everyone’s great. The performances are solid across the board, because del Toro doesn’t let actors fail.
He can pull the humanity out of anyone.
That’s his biggest strength and also his biggest curse.
Because del Toro’s films are all surface.
They’re flamboyant, loud, boisterous, but that’s it.
He’s like that guy at a restaurant who stands up and yells that his daughter just got engaged, and everyone claps. He knows how to get attention. But the average folks in the corner, the ones covered in marinara and just trying to enjoy dinner? Nobody claps for them when they make the same announcement. That’s del Toro, the master of cinematic showmanship.
And hey, it works! The guy’s talented as hell.
But outside of Mimic and Pan’s Labyrinth, how many of his films really have emotional weight? Hellboy? Maybe. But they’re more spectacle than substance.
Family Friction and Filler
The opening with Victor’s parents feels unnecessary.
Sure, it gives him a “why,” but it’s on the nose as hell.
“Father, I’ll be the greatest doctor who ever lived!”
“Better than me, my son?”
C’mon, Guillermo. You’re better than that.
I don’t need to know where Victor’s money comes from or why he has the castle with the lightning rods. We’ve all seen enough Frankenstein adaptations to just accept that he does.
Final Thoughts
Frankenstein is good, not great, not awful, just good.
It’s a del Toro movie through and through: stunning visuals, sincere emotion, thin horror.
It’s not the Frankenstein I wanted, but it’s the Frankenstein I expected.
There’s beauty in that — and maybe a little disappointment too.
If you go in expecting del Toro’s version of a gothic monster tale, you’ll enjoy yourself.
Just don’t expect to be haunted after the credits roll.