User Reviews (182)

Add a Review

  • kosmasp20 October 2016
    Does that mean that it's better than others? Maybe not, but maybe you are looking for a new way of telling a story that you are familiar with. Some do not like this, others really cherish the way this movie went. And it's up to the viewer to decide what he wants from a Frankenstein movie. A theme that I'm pretty sure everyone watching has heard of at least, before watching the movie.

    Since I haven't read the novel, I'm not sure if some of the "changes" are already in the book, but weren't used before in other adaptations. Both main actors are really good and convey the characters they portray. With all their flaws and downfalls, with all their dreams and hopes. Whether you agree with those or not, this is more than a decent effort and a really good movie
  • It's the story of Professor Frankenstein and his creation as you'd expect, but it's primarily the study of Igor, his man servant, we get his history, his present, and a glimpse into his future.

    It's a very good film, it's very nicely made, beautifully acted, it's a very nice gothic drama. I would argue it's not a horror as the classification states, if you are wanting lots of Monster action there isn't a great deal of that, what there is looks fantastic.

    Great special effects, particularly at the dramatic finale, it looks terrific.

    Not sure which of the two was billed as the star of the show, maybe an equal billing, but Radcliffe is excellent. I love how on occasion you hear McAvoy's wonderful Scottish accent peep through.

    Clever and well made, 7/10.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    If you are wondering what different things can they do for this very familiar story to make it worth watching - they do succeed in giving a fresh perspective - Igor's The cast is likable and watchable. Daniel Radcliffe is a good actor and his roles since Harry Potter are actually show his range. The transformation from hunchback to Igor is quite an extreme makeover. James McAvoy is a also a very convincing actor and acts obsessed enough. Despite both actors being small sized they can pull off a big action movie. Jessica Brown Findlay of Downton Abbey is a pretty love interest (for Igor no less) and her role isn't irritating.

    The first resurrected creature and organs are quite morbidly frightening for what they are.

    The ending is grand but kind of wonder what did Victor expect once they brought him to life? Anyway it's not necessary to look to deep into a story like this.

    Worth a watch.
  • "You know this story. A crack of lightning. A mad genius. An unholy creation," intones Daniel Radcliffe's Igor Strausman, who warns us at the start not to expect a literal re-telling of Mary Shelley's beloved horror classic. Instead, as imagined by writer Max Landis, this latest spin focuses on the relationship between the titular mad genius – played by James McAvoy – and his trusty associate Igor who becomes instrumental to his dream of re-animating the dead. Yes, though Victor first meets Igor as a nameless hunchback at the circus, the latter is in fact a gifted physician whose knowledge of the human anatomy makes him invaluable to Victor's plan of assembling various organs into an outer shell and introducing life into it.

    But even before that, Victor recognises something special in the filthy clown with the rat's nest of a hair who rushes to the aid of a trapeze artist Lorelei (Jessica Brown Findlay) following a near- fatal fall during a show and manipulates her bones in order to save her life. So Victor decides to give the destitute sad-sack a new lease of life by first busting him out of the circus, where at his cavernous home cum laboratory, he proceeds to drain the fluid from the young man's massive abscess, fit him with a back brace, and give him the name of his absent flatmate Igor whom Victor says is a morphine addict who has not been seen for months. Igor is indebted to Victor, and so without much question, assists his 'saviour' in his experiment to bring life to a homunculus stitched from animal- part discards from the local zoo.

    If you're waiting for the iconic hulking man-monster to appear, let us warn you that you'll have to wait until the very finale, which takes place on a very stormy evening in a remote Scottish castle right next to the sea. Indeed, this is less a movie about Victor actually creating his monster and what happens afterward than about the process leading up to that pivotal moment, which its director Paul McGuigan centres on a debate between theology and technology as well as an emotional complement in the bond between Victor and Igor. To introduce the former into the narrative, McGuigan interrupts the scientific proceedings with the entry of a moralistic Scotland Yard detective (Andrew Scott), whose past has not only made him a man of unwavering faith but also obsessed with stopping Victor's experiments he perceives as Satanic.

    It is also this said inspector who causes Igor to question Victor's research, especially in the wake of Victor's Royal College of Medicine presentation of his first hodgepodge Prometheus which unsurprisingly does not end well. Not unsurprising too is how Victor is constructed as both the emotional and moral centre of the film – though he starts off subservient to Victor, Igor struggles with the ethical implications of using science to achieve immortality, which ultimately leaves him conflicted with the dilemma of sticking by the person who had rescued him from eternal ignominy or following his own conscience. Igor also finds his heart with Lorelei, who makes a somewhat amazing recovery to help Igor find his centre of being.

    Though the romance is contrived, McAvoy and Radcliffe are actors with charm and gravitas, and they make good use of both qualities to keep us engaged in their bromance. McAvoy overdoes the mad-genius bit on more than one occasion, but is on the whole appropriately brash and obsessed to play the brilliant, extroverted yet socially bizarre Victor. At least Radcliffe complements his partner with a nicely understated performance, which expresses his character's anguished, good-hearted and conflicted nature at various points. Next to Victor, Igor is a much more straightforward persona, but Radcliffe does what he can to make us empathise with the latter's plight.

    On his part, McGuigan keeps a tight balance between horror, drama, romance and even a few spots of comedy, while ensuring that the pace doesn't sag. No stranger to Victorian-era London from directing several episodes of 'Sherlock', he forgoes more handsome evocations for a more grimy and downbeat vision of 19th-century London that is more befitting of the grotesqueness of Victor's creations. Oh yes, despite the rating, you'd do well to note that some images are absolutely not for the squeamish, in particular because the film does not shy away from displaying the various organs of the body which Victor uses to assemble his unhuman work of science.

    As an origin story, you could do much, much worse than 'Victor Frankenstein', which is loud and messy all right, but has a quieter, more grounded centre on its arguments of faith versus science as well as a compelling relationship between its two lead characters. That's provided of course that you're willing to accept a revisionist take in the first place, with Frankenstein played as a soulless hulk that is prone to violence but nothing more and relegated almost to an afterthought right at the end. Like we said, this isn't about the monster as we typically know it, but the journey leading up to its creation, one that is undeniably intriguing in itself.
  • In London while the young medical student Viktor Frankenstein , James McAvoy , is watching a circus spectacle , a trapezist falls down , then he and hunchback Igor , Daniel Radcliffe, help save her : Jessica Brown Findlay .Later on, they are attacked by other circus members, fighting and dying one of them. They escape from circus, being relentessly pursued by a Scotland Yard police inspector, Andrew Scott. Both, Frankenstein and Igor, become good friends and the latter helps him in his experiments . By the way Frankenstein is working on finding a way to give life by reanimating dead tissue through electricity, being helped by Igor.

    This thrilling story is told from Igor's perspective , it develops the peculiar relationship between the impulsive , obstinate , but sympathetic Frankenstein and his naive assistant Igor . This is a particular recreation of the classic novel with script by Max Landis and several changes from original . Here Frankenstein is a radical but agreeable scientific who will stop at nothing to make his creature . Director Paul McGuigan develops some really chilling scenes, with amazing moments and various powerful images, especially when the creature is reborn, including an interesting storyline. The highlights of the movie are the beginning at the circus as well as the transformation's process of a deformed clown, Igor, into a handsome young thanks to ambitious , stubborn scientist Frankenstein .And thrilling and espectacular final, being frighteningly well made, and set at a Scottish Castle where takes place impressive scenes of resurrection and confrontation.The picture was compellingly played by Daniel Radcliffe and James McAvoy , along with the attractive Jessica Brown Findlay . And a fine support cast as Andrew Scott , Alistair Petrie , Bronson Webb, Mark Gatiss and veteran Charles Dance.

    It contains an evocative and sensitive musical score by Craig Armstrong . As well as a colorful and adequate cinematography by Fabian Wagner. The motion picture was competently directed by Paul McGuigan . He is a good craftsman who has made some successes as Push , Lucky number Slevin , Wicker park , The Reckoning , Gangster number 1, The Acid house , among others. Rating : 6.5/10. Better than average
  • Despise the bad reviews from some viewers on IMDb I did enjoy Victor Frankenstein. There's been a lot of movies based on Mary Shelley's novel, some bad ones and some good ones, and I thought this version belongs to the good ones. It's a different approach but entertaining to watch. Daniel Radcliffe proves that he can act something else then Harry Potter. His collaboration with Victor Frankenstein played by James McAvoy works perfectly well in this dark picture. There are plenty enough moments of disgusting creatures and scenes to make the more sensation seekers happy. Why some people rate it so low remains a mystery to me. There are thousands of worse movies then this. I truly enjoyed it and I'm sure a lot of people will do also.
  • I can't speak on the topic of accuracy as I'm not intensely familiar with the source novel but like most movies involving Frankenstein's monster, I imagine this one takes many creative freedoms. The fixation on Igor's character, played by Daniel Radcliffe, felt excessive and eventually boring; whole it served as an interesting and sentimental overture at the beginning of the movie, it gradually bogged down "what could've been." Victor, magnanimously portrayed by James McAvoy, was a far more engaging character - as we shouldn't be surprised - but most of the film seemed too concentrated on Igor. That said, it certainly had its thrills, more so in the first half, but the overlong climax of the "monster" itself literally had me heavy-eyed. I can only recommend this if you're either a huge fan of McAvoy, Radcliffe, or, possibly, Mary Shelley's story. That said, as a huge fan of McAvoy, I was somehow unfulfilled. His performance was outstanding, so perhaps the issue lies in the movie as a whole organism, ironically enough.
  • ferguson-624 November 2015
    Greetings again from the darkness. If a filmmaker is going to mess with the classics, there are two paths of creativity from which to choose: stay true to the original, or put a new spin on it. In this case, the classics in question are the nearly 200 year old novel from Mary Shelley (1818) and the nearly 85 year old movie from James Whale (1931). The filmmakers doing the messing are director Paul McGuigan (Lucky Number Slevin) and screenwriter Max Landis (son of director John). The spin they chose was (in theory) to tell the story from the perspective of Igor, the loyal assistant to Dr. Frankenstein.

    It's an interesting approach, but one that immediately presents a problem … since the title they chose was not "Igor", but rather Victor Frankenstein. The film does begin with Igor's backstory in the circus as a hunchbacked clown/amateur doctor, and the character does provide some early and late narration. The conundrum stems from the fact that pretty much everything else in the movie is centered on the mad scientist, rather than the skilled apprentice/partner.

    Daniel Radcliffe plays Igor and James McAvoy plays Victor Frankenstein (not Fron-kin-steen, in a nod to Mel Brooks), and both actors seem to be doing everything possible to bring energy and enthusiasm to a movie that can't seem to decide if it's a reboot or a reimagining or simply an origin story. Radcliffe effectively uses his physicality as the circus clown who is so mistreated and misunderstood, and McAvoy is such a hyper-active mad scientist that I'm sure his fellow actors many times were inclined to advise "say it, don't spray it". McAvoy does seem to be having a grand old time playing the brilliant yet unhinged young doctor-to-be, and to his credit takes a much different approach than Colin Clive when he gets to the infamous line "It's ALIVE!" The best parts of the movie are the intricate and amazing sets, the monster himself (albeit too brief), and the expert use of classical music and film score. The circus sets are colorful and active, while Frankenstein's soap factory home/laboratory is fascinating and creative, and the final Scotland castle on a cliff is breath-taking. Pulleys, chains and cranks are everywhere … as is an incredible amount of body parts, organs and fluids.

    After a very well done circus opening, we are jarred with a seemingly out of place action sequence involving a slo-motion chase and fight scene that seems to be attempting to mimic some of the recent Sherlock Holmes movie stunts. Here they are unwelcome and ruin the flow. Another aspect that seems forced and unnecessary is a romantic interlude between Igor and a trapeze artist (played by Jessica Brown Findlay). It feels like an add-on to remind us that it's supposed to be Igor's story. Additionally, Andrew Scott plays an intriguing Scotland Yard Inspector who is every bit as obsessed with his faith-based beliefs as Victor is with his science-has-no-bounds stance. A story told from the Inspector's perspective might have worked, but instead it comes across as another add-on. Another add-on is the filthy rich and very devious fellow med student (played by Freddie Fox) who agrees to fund the experiments, but mostly the character is an after-thought necessary to move the plot along. Wasted is the always menacing Charles Dance, who has but one scene as Victor's strongly disapproving daddy.

    A combination of the romance, minimal role of Igor in the grand finale, the medical school bumbling, the clunky Inspector involvement, and the all too brief monster appearance makes the film all but impossible for viewers to connect. They tell us twice "You know the story … a crack of lightning, a mad genius, and an unholy creation", but the reality is, the fact that we know the story, makes this one all the more disappointing. It's fun to look at, but is lacking the depth and soul that has allowed Shelley's book to stand up over two centuries.
  • If you're looking for a story that's true to the original, this isn't it. It strays significantly. The film is not without its merits though. It is visually very appealing and is generally well done. I did take issue though with the monster. The character was laughable, looking more like a superhero cartoon villan than something possibly resembling a human. James McAvoy steals the show and does an outstanding job playing Victor Frankenstein as the lunatic he most certainly was. Overall it's very watchable, but it won't be dethroning any classics.
  • It's hard not to be cynical about Hollywood sometimes, particularly when it produces films as lazy as Victor Frankenstein, an uninspired origin story of Victor Frankenstein and his assistant, Igor Straussman.

    Before a chance meeting with Victor Frankenstein (James McAvoy), a then nameless Igor (Daniel Radcliffe) worked as both a clown and a physician. A medical incident one night at the circus leads to their first meeting and Igor becoming Victor's assistant.

    Sharing a passion for medical science, the pair embark on a project to bring about life from death. After a few mishaps, Igor feels they should stop but Victor's drive to make a name for himself leads to the most volatile creation that even he thinks is too far.

    Right from the very beginning, Victor Frankenstein feels all over the place. Paul McGuigan directs the film as if he hadn't made his mind up on what sort of film this should be. Unfortunately, in the end he went with an edgy modern retelling of a classic tale that brutally highlights McGuigan's lack of imagination as a filmmaker.

    Considering the acting talent in Victor Frankenstein makes it even more of a disappointment. James McAvoy majorly hams it up as Victor, coming across as a mix between Benedict Cumberbatch's Sherlock Holmes and David Tennant's Doctor. Daniel Radcliffe, who I've never thought to be a very good actor, takes a step backwards with his portrayal of Igor, with awkward line delivery and no chemistry being his main problems here.

    They also manage to waste Andrew Scott, most famous for playing Moriarty in BBC's Sherlock, as a police detective on the tail of Victor. His character is so underwritten that Scott has little room to manoeuvre and ends up delivering one hell of a monotonous performance.

    Max Landis' story lacks any real punch and his script is daft yet not totally void of quality which, considering the history of this story that he had to work with, is a real shame. There are some good visual effects that lead to some entertaining moments and Craig Armstrong's score is a rare highlight in this ultimately disappointing film.

    I pray to God that the last scene isn't one that means we are going to get a sequel mind, because that is really what we could do without.
  • gojiseb25 November 2015
    "You know this story. The crackling lightning. The mad genius. An unholy creation."

    And so opens up the lastest interpretation of Mary Shelley's legendary novel-turned-pop culture myth. So, what does this version add to the time-tested tale? Surprisingly, a fair amount.

    An amalgamation of various film versions (taking most of its cues from Universal and Hammer), this film tells the origins of Victor Frankenstein through the eyes of a nameless hunchback who, after a quick and very nasty surgery, is dubbed Igor. It tells the story of how the world around Victor reacts to his experiments, from the conniving entrepeuneur to the over-zealous man of faith trying to stop him.

    And how does it all hold up? Again, surprisingly really well. The chemistry between Daniel Radcliffe and James McAvoy sparks the film up quite a few notches while Andrew Scott, Jessica Brown Findlay and Freddie Fox all make good work of their admittedly under-developed supporting roles.

    The direction by Paul McGuigan is energetic and lively, even if the pace is a tad too frenetic at times. The use of practical effects for the monstrosities that our heroes bring to life are impressive to behold and everything is boasted by a powerfully theatrical score by Craig Armstrong and some beautiful production design by Eve Stewart.

    As I said, pacing is a tad too fast and certain bits of writing could've used some tweaking, but the cast and enthusiastic direction definitely make this a more than worthy entry into the Frankenstein mythos that I will gladly welcome into my collection as soon as it makes its to Blu-Ray/DVD.

    I'm pleased to say that it is very much alive.
  • darthsteele-3933824 November 2020
    Visually reminiscent of Sherlock and enjoyable in that way. Always love James McAvoy. Interesting take on Igor and creating the story from his perspective. It doesn't tug on the heartstrings the way I feel it should. It does not evoke any empathy towards any of the characters. Otherwise it's a decent ride.
  • Perhaps the Frankenstein name is indeed cursed, there hasn't been a great Frankenstein based movie in years, even decades. From last year's I, Frankenstein to Van Helsing who only has it as subplot, all have met mediocre fate. Now armed with robust acting power and visual that oozes Victorian era, also a bit or horror and action attached somewhere, another rendition shares the same exact fate; cinematic tediousness.

    A slight modification to the narrative is made, just like Sherlock the movie is narrated from the sidekick's perspective, in this case Igor's (Daniel Radcliffe). Aside from that, there's barely anything new that hasn't been done in similar or better fashion. To its credit, it's not utterly terrible in term of presentation, in fact the visual is rather nice. It's quaintly dark and electric version of last decade metropolis, Tesla would approve.

    James McAvoy as the titular Viktor really tries hard on establishing the character. Given the stale material, he still manages to squeeze some emotional scenes as well as a good chemistry with Radcliffe in a bromantic kind of way. Andrew Scott from Moriarty fame, now plays the role of Inspector Turpin. He's the polar opposite of Viktor, conservative yet equally clever and ambitious.

    Unfortunately, the far too familiar plot fails to produce any thrill, the strong acting prowess ends up rehearsing the same routine of mad scientist's banter. There's screaming, philosophical argument, faux science and slight mental abuse by the two leads. It's a lot of noise of little dramatic effect. Not that the script is bad in any way, it has occasional witty lines although any hint of humor or charm is muffled by the overly melancholy tone.

    At some points, the movie tries to dabble in horror, action and even romance subplot. The atmosphere is already primed for thriller, but the shocking abomination is ironically timid and unmemorable. Action consists of a few scenes of slow motions repetition. Despite the production offering distractions, the main story line is very straightforward and streamlined, and sadly also predictable.

    For all the star and flair, though they might be mildly amusing, the end product is a medium so lacking of life.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    There doesn't appear to be a lot of love for this latest reimagining of the classic Mary Shelley novel. Personally, I liked it, so maybe I caught it in just the right frame of mind. Placing Victor Frankenstein's (James McAvoy) assistant Igor (Daniel Radcliffe) as the central character was an interesting twist, by making him an equal in the quest to forge human life from the inanimate. I love the old time horror flicks of the Thirties and Forties in which some pseudo-scientific jargon is used to describe what the mad scientist was attempting to achieve. This story didn't go too far out on a limb in that regard, utilizing the theory of converting electrical energy into a biochemical equivalent, with a rabid, gone wrong chimpanzee as Frankenstein's first attempt. I've come on board as a tentative McAvoy fan ever since he portrayed the disturbed, personality riddled character Kevin Wendell Crumb in 2016's "Split" and the follow up in 2019, "Glass". Here he goes a bit more over the top in execution, almost verging on bat-s--t crazy in order to achieve his daring vision. A major component to the story is how Victor felt guilt and remorse over the death of his brother years earlier, and his resolve to correct the imbalance so to speak, by creating new life in his honor. The creature that resulted, the monster itself, was a grotesque amalgam of collected body parts, a standard feature of these numerous Frankenstein stories. I always wonder why the scientist couldn't simply take a deceased person and work the magic on him or her, but I guess then the story loses some of it's luster. This latest reinterpretation of the Frankenstein mythos combines elements of the 1931 movie original with a love story sub-plot that's visually exciting and well crafted. Fans of the original novel ought to give it a try.
  • First off, I will say that this movie is not perfect by any stretch of the imagination. The writing could've been better,, the direction could've been better. Now,, that being said,,, I still thought it was pretty dang good. I'd say a 6.8

    McAvoy and Radcliffe together as Frankenstein and Igor?!? Are you kidding me? They were a perfect duo!! If nothing else, watch the movie to see them work together. (Also,, Lorelei is a nice character as well. 😍)
  • "The world of course remembers the monster not the man, but sometimes when you look closely there's more to a tale. Sometimes the monster is the man." Victor Frankenstein (McAvoy) is an eccentric scientist who has a dream of creating life from death. After rescuing his assistant Igor (Radcliffe) from the circus he has finally found someone he can work with. After bringing to life a small animal he is approached and asked if he can make a human. Victor and Igor set out to change the world, but somethings should be left alone. A story this old that has been told and seen over and over again faces an up hill battle. How can you turn something like that into something fresh and new? This one really pulled that off. The story you know is here, with a few needed twists and additions. This movie deals more with the madness within Victor rather than the actual monster itself. The best way to describe this is a Frankenstein done in the style of the Robert Downey Jr. Sherlock Holmes movies. A movie that is just fun to watch and really adds to the story that everyone knows in a way that does make it seem new and exciting. Overall, surprisingly good and a movie that I recommend if you want to be entertained for a few hours. I give this a B+.
  • Happy Thanksgiving everyone! This glorious holiday is a day filled with turkey, football, family, and monsters. Wait did I just say monsters? Yes I did my friends. Although it is a holiday, movies do to take a break from premiering on the silver screen. My holiday movie assignment is a little unorthodox this year, and comes in the form of Frankenstein. The patchwork nightmare from Mary Shelly's imagination has had many iterations, but Paul McGuigan has delivered us a movie that promises to be darker in tone. Today we cover Victor Frankenstein, headed by the dynamic duo of Daniel Radcliffe and James McAvoy.

    The theme of this movie focuses on the Mary Shelley's classic tale told through the eye of the assistant Igor. Radcliffe takes the lead in this origin story, as Igor is dragged into the world of 19th century scientific medicine and its unethical practices. The main plot of this film corresponds to the classic book, but Victor Frankenstein is laced with multiple subplots that provide some variety and character development. Almost all of these side stories are laced with darkness, many involving the obsessive pursuit of answers by immoral means. While the variety is a nice welcome some of these elements I felt were hastily pieced together and lacked the emotional fervor they were looking for. In addition the plot was also kind of boring, lacking the suspense and excitement I was hoping for. This was especially true in the horror element.

    For a horror movie, Victor Frankenstein was not the scariest thing to grace theaters. Instead I felt it went more down the disturbing avenue. This is especially true of the visual effects and make- up, which were fantastic in this film. I was impressed when I saw organs and muscles pulsate and contract, in a high-definition shine that amplified the effect. The computer animation also was well done, blending into the live action with fluid transition and texture. This realism certainly establishes nightmare-inspiring moments, where festering creatures and a beefed up Lunk from Goonies roam about unbound by any rationality or restraint that mirror their creators' desires. Even our human characters are not spared from inhumane torture and gore strewn injury that is truly skin crawling. I felt that some of these moments were a little over the top, and took too much focus from the story. Nevertheless, those with weak constitutions or religious zealots should avoid this tale.

    For this reviewer, the acting was the best quality of this film. James McAvoy as the mad scientist was a fantastic pick by the casting director. The man continues to impress me with how he can juggle his characters emotions without crossing over into annoyance. McAvoy's portrayal of insanity in voice work, facial expressions, and body language itself is first class. Daniel Radcliffe also doesn't disappoint as Igor, committing to his character from the start by portraying the shuffling gait of the hunchback (not an easy task). Radcliffe's charm was nice to see, which made for a likable character that I could to root for in this miserable setting. As usual it's the chemistry between the two that is the most impressive component. They played well off each other's emotions, with a synergy that was dynamic, energetic, and somehow dark at the same time. I hope to see these two reunite for further films. Jessica Brown Findlay deserves some mention, for she provided the touch of elegance in this chaotic slew of science. Not only is she beautiful, but Findlay radiates the classiness of her character that commanded respect and provided a love story. Andrew Scott once more steps into the mad, obsessive role, though ironically plays an inspector this time around. Scott not only captures the mannerisms of the insane, but somehow adds that hint of uneasiness to really sell the part. If only he had been utilized a little more.

    Victor Frankenstein is a movie that truly calls for those who love the dark and grotesque. The acting and special effects will immerse you into the world and deliver the realistic horrors you have been looking for. While I did enjoy the focus on Igor this time around, I have to say the movie wasn't as suspenseful as I had hoped. This left me bored at times and waiting for the move to end. I cannot recommend this movie for a theater visit, but would encourage you to give a shot when it comes to RedBox.

    My scores for this film are: Drama/Horror: 7.5 Movie Overall: 6.5
  • Zbigniew_Krycsiwiki29 November 2015
    The opening shot, blurry, a figure moving in slow motion, brought to my mind a scene in the book of the monster seen going across the snow- covered landscape from a distance, ... but that is about as close to the book as the film gets, which is both good and bad. It's good because it tells an original take on the story, but it's also bad because it tells a mostly satirical story, told from Igor's perspective, largely poking fun at the clichés in the various film versions of Frankenstein, rather than a faithful adaptation of the novel.

    James McAvoy hams it up as Victor Frankenstein, with a brilliant intro ("Might I know your name?" Igor asks him, Vic turns to look at Igor, freeze frame, title appears) while the rest of the cast downplays it nicely, Jessica Findlay is quite attractive, even in the unrevealing Victorian-era clothing. The film is sightly more serious than its comedic-looking trailer made it appear. Good sets and costumes, and some quick witted, sharp dialogue, but the story never really comes alive (pun totally intended)

    Curiously released at Thanksgiving 2015, it might have fared better than its $600.000 opening if it had been released at Halloween. Considering this was filmed in late 2013, it surely must have been ready for Halloween 2015, or 2014 for that matter.
  • The classic Frankenstein story is mostly culturally known for the monster more than the creator, thus many accused that Frankenstein is the iconic monster. Victor Frankenstein wants to center on to the human aspect of the story and nothing more. The creature is there, but isn't quite what the movie is showcasing. The movie wants to be more about the relationship between Victor and his lab assistant, Igor, and how things fall apart once they think through about this experiment. It's actually a lot interesting when they deal with the titular character's madness, but when the twist and climax comes, it's a total safety zone, in a shameful Hollywood way. It has a strong theme it was willing to handle, but it seem too feeble to handle it any longer, thus result to dumb and clichéd decisions.

    This is in Igor's perspective about how Victor Frankenstein found him and build a friendship until they create the monster that will be their trouble afterwards. It's all a fine idea, but there isn't much in Igor other than being an outcast in a new environment and having a love interest who instantly falls in love with him after an incident and nothing else. There's also a conflict about an inspector finding suspicion to Frankenstein, which has hardly anything more than obsession with the scientist. But whenever they contradict with Frankenstein's idea of creating life, it comes close to really good moments, sticking close to what this story is really about. We see an ambition being pushed too far, kind of living up to its aim of portraying Frankenstein as the real monster than the creature he is making. But it stops being interesting when he reveals his true motivation. It also enormously lost it once it finally goes to the climax, which is a point where it reveals that the movie ultimately lacks the gumption of handling this theme in the first place.

    To be fair, it does help having this nice cast keeping the movie at least entertaining, maybe only when Frankenstein himself is around. It's kind of fun watching James McAvoy going insane while others around him are either stick-in-the-mud or genuinely worried. Daniel Radcliffe, having Igor as the protagonist now, carries it well, despite of being an ordinary hero kind of Igor. Andrew Scott displays a quieter madness compared to McAvoy's Frankenstein's, yet equally effective, anyway. I'm not exactly sure what the movie is trying to do with the action and some mix of humor. The action seems a little too stock, with these indistinct looking slow-mos and stuff, and there isn't enough sense of horror to it, either. At least the monsters look weird enough, but not impressive enough as action scenes. There isn't much humor in it, unlike the sense of sarcasm it was pulling off in the trailers, but it never matters anyway. The production looks nice, but that's it.

    Victor Frankenstein is not awful enough, as many critics may claim. It has stronger moments when it still had potential, when it's just a character study of madness, until it finally admitted that the movie is not bold enough to tackle such ordeal for its characters. Again, this is a Hollywood blockbuster, and like many out there, it isn't fond of pushing the limits or getting away from its comfort zone, unlike its main character. Thus, it's just another blockbuster. And for its blockbuster elements, the action is kind of awkward and there is nothing remarkable about the effects. If there is one thing that keeps the movie watchable and it's nothing more than the cast, because their committed performances just makes its thematic moments sort of compelling in a short while. Everything else is just disappointing compromise.
  • Story could've been better but the acting, cinematography were brilliant. Scenes between Victor and Igor were really good. A solid 7 film.
  • "Victor Frankenstein" is a weird movie using Mary Shelley's notorious and famous character. There are many versions of this adaptation of the novel to the cinema, but this one rewrites the story in a totally different situation. The result is entertaining and intriguing in the beginning but becomes boring and annoying in the end. My vote is five.

    Title (Brazil): "Victor Frankenstein"
  • There are no spoilers here, just a real person's true review. I almost did not watch this due to the overall reviews, and that would have been a shame, because I liked it. To all the naysayers looking for a solid track to the original story, this is a bit different. This a a completely different take. Parts of the movie were not so great, but overall, I LOVED IT.Depends on what you're looking for. If you are looking for a story perfectly true to original - not so much. This movie is a wonderful alternative view. I appreciate and really enjoyed the risk-taking and the different view. May not be for everyone, but thoroughly enjoyed it.
  • While not a "fine film" it kept me glued to the screen. For fans of, well, Frankenstein movies, this is a lot of fun. Very much a mashup "best-of" selecting bits and pieces from other Frankenstein movies. Also Igor and Victor are very believable and relatable characters, and that goes a long way.
  • Everyone knows the story of Frankenstein, whether or not you've seen the films. A mad scientist named Victor von Frankenstein, with help from his friend Igor, manage to reanimate a corpse consisting of different parts from different bodies. A monster, if you will. From a storytelling perspective, Victor Frankenstein is as run-of-the-mill as you can get. The only unique aspect is that it's told from Igor's perspective, which isn't much different since Victor is still a large part of the story. We all know what's going to happen. Even the first line is, "You know this story," and it proceeds to tell it to us again. The only conceivable reason I can think for this movie's existence is for the performances. James McAvoy is excellent as the mad genius, and Radcliffe does a fine job as his right-hand man. Andrew Scott is always nice to see, playing another antagonistic role as the inspector assigned to Frankenstein's case. And Charles Dance makes a small cameo for some reason as Victor's disapproving father. But the bulk of the movie revolves around Victor and Igor, as you can imagine, and it's exactly what you would expect, beat by beat.

    Victor Frankenstein is not a bad movie in the traditional sense. If this was the first telling of this story, it would be a perfectly serviceable standalone film. But since it's so well-known, nothing about Victor Frankenstein is memorable. It's just the same narrative with different actors playing it out. No surprises, no innovations, no purpose. Just a talented cast reenacting a renowned tale.
  • Victor Frankenstein (2015) is a movie I recently watched on Hulu. The storyline follows a young man named Igor in the circus who is admired by a scientist who cures him of his hunchback and takes him as help for his science experiments. Due to a troubled past the scientist becomes obsessed with creating life regardless of the depths he needs to pursue to make it happen. While Igor would prefer to not sink to those levels he feels compelled to help to not seem ungrateful.

    This movie is directed by Paul McGuigan (Lucky Number Slevin) and stars Daniel Radcliffe (Harry Potter), James McAvoy (Split), Jessica Brown Findlay (Brave New World), Andrew Scott (Spectre) and Daniel Mays (Rogue One: A Star Wars Story).

    The storyline for this is actually pretty entertaining and has a great look and feel. This reminded me a little of Penny Deadful (Seasons 1 - 3). The cast was really good as were the sets, props, attire and makeup. The circus scene opening was very well done, the dinner and date scenes were hilarious and the monkey at the school was absolutely awesome. The ending was perfectly done and sets up nicely for a sequel (that will never come).

    Overall this isn't perfect but it is entertaining and worth a watch. I would score this a 6.5/10 and strongly recommend it.
An error has occured. Please try again.