Frankenstein (Guillermo del Toro, 2025)

[Finch]

Del Toro's Frankenstein teaser

[brundlefly]

Del Toro's Frankenstein teaser

A POV swap for the trailer

[Mr Sausage]

Frankenstein (Guillermo del Toro)

Del Toro doesn't really do it for me, but every so often he makes something I really enjoy. And this was a handsome, stylish movie, just full of gothic atmosphere and ghoulish details. The movie hews close to the source, but it makes a lot of effective additions, especially at the beginning. Because Del Toro is such a softie, he can't help softening his Monster. In the book the Monster starts as a sympathetic victim but then becomes a gothic villain, committing many foul deeds out of revenge. Del Toro doesn't want to impinge on his hero's sympathetic origins, or his film's essentially sentimental message, so he finds ways to absolve the Monster of events the source material requires to happen. And that's fine--the movie is your usual del Toro morality play on how the normies are the true monsters. Del Toro overstates his themes and overdoes the melodrama a tad at the end, plus the second section from the Monster's perspective isn't quite as good as Victor's section; but the whole thing has great energy and style, and makes so many appropriate choices. I think this is the first Frankenstein to really centre the construction of the monster's body, with parts being removed from corpses and slotted together like gruesome architecture. The entire process from conception, to materials collection, to construction, to final experiment, to aftermath is given full development across the hour of Victor's section, and that physicality and sense of process really provides a nice counterpoint to the drama of Victor's psychological development. And despite refusing to make its Monster a gothic villain, the movie does make Victor a genuinely Byronic character, and situates him in Romantic landscapes signalling the sublime. Jacob Elordi is fine as the Monster, but like pretty much every adaptation outside the two Whales, fails to make the tortured naif an interesting character in himself. It's Oscar Isaac's brooding, fixated Victor, full of arrogance and nursing a victim complex, that propels the movie. You watch a man go through a whole process of escaping from and then turning into exactly the person he most hated. It's a terrific performance, aided by a restrained but sinister Christoph Waltz as Frankenstein's secretive benefactor. Mia Goth is flat as the film's moral centre, but happily hasn't much screen time. I'm a big fan of the Whales and many of the Hammer sequels, but this may well be the best adaptation the novel's ever had. Very much worth seeing on a giant screen (I saw it in IMax where the visuals were just sumptuous).

[therewillbeblus]

Mr. Sausage nails the strengths and weaknesses of Frankenstein, though I certainly gave the film less rope in its second half, which I borderline-hated. I typically don't gel with del Toro's overtuned yet shallow melodramatics, so it's not altogether surprising that Elordi's Creature's woes and Goth's golden-pure morality were so repellingly on-the-nose. Isaac's arc is incredibly involving, his character rich and performance the clear standout -like he's acting in a different film altogether, a human being transplanted in an artificial world- that the whiplash into the last act is even more frustrating. The film’s quality is bifurcated, like a patched together tonal monster, but that’s unfortunately not an intentional bit of self-reflexivity. Del Toro wants to make the Creature the simplified heart of the story rather than showcase two complex figures trying to navigate the complex themes of the novel, and in the process incidentally invalidates the Creature's diverse characterization. I did appreciate how the Creature's aims were not purely love or vengeance but

Spoiler

turned inward towards a goal of suicide to end a lonely existence...

I just wish the film did more with this idea, because it sowed a darker and more complicated side to the story that is overall neglected in favor of superficial drama

[Mr Sausage]

Something I really liked about the movie, but which its bluntness disguises, is its portrait of how the unheard become the unhearing. Victor is told at several key points: "Your problem, Victor, is you don't listen!", or some version of that, an eye-rolling exclamation point on a simplistic notion. But the actual case is more complex. Victor's big problem is that he in fact goes unheard, constantly, his entire life, until he ceases to understand how to communicate with others and then finally becomes unable to hear anything but himself. It reminded me of The Insect Woman in how it traced the exact way a victim becomes a victimizer (tho' not so brilliantly as Imamura obviously). It's as compelling a portrait of Victor Frankenstein as I've ever seen. So it's unfortunate the film seems to agree with Victor's diagnosers when they make their reductive criticism, because none of them understand Victor any more than he understands his creation. So instead we get a trite gesturing at 'men just don't listen!' online discourse whatever, when what the movie actually shows is far more complex. And the movie stages the Monster's narrative as a puncture to Victor's bullshit when, to me, both tell analogous stories that each would've benefited from hearing (tho' I guess it fits with del Toro refusing to make the Monster another victim turned victimizer as in the novel). Too much purity of intent?

So the movie gets in its own way, and yet it has riches here that I didn't expect in a Frankenstein movie.

[colinr0380]

Something I heard regarding Del Toro's adaptation is that the visuals are also a homage to Bernie Wrightson's illustrated version of the novel. Is that the case?

[Mr Sausage]

I’m not familiar with it, but based off that video, I could see it. But then there’s also a clear influence from Romantic painters.

[zedz]

Something I heard regarding Del Toro's adaptation is that the visuals are also a homage to Bernie Wrightson's illustrated version of the novel. Is that the case?

I haven’t seen the film yet, but Bernie Wrightson is a likely influence on a lot of Del Toro’s visuals, and it’s unlikely that a horror nut like Del Toro was unaware of his work. After all, he’d previously expressed an interest in filming Swamp Thing, which Wrightson co-created.

[Matt]

del Toro is a huge Wrightson fan:

When del Toro’s Bleak Houses were endangered by wildfires, he focused on securing just a few items: his diaries, some of his awards — and Bernie Wrightson’s “Frankenstein” illustrations.

The possibility of those items perishing in a fire “weigh so heavily on me, because that’s his masterpiece,” del Toro said.

And the end credits actually say "Frankenstein character design inspired in part by Bernie Wrightson’s 'Frankenstein Monster.' Early concept development and early concept sculptures by Spectral Motion and Bernie Wrightson.”

[tenia]

I liked it a lot, even more so by seeing it in theater, but as too often with such productions, there is no world in which it justifies its 145 minutes.

But it is nevertheless a gorgeous and quite moving movie, a finely done and written one, that makes completely sense for del Toro. He said all his previous movies had a little Frankenstein in them, but the reverse is true : Frankenstein feels like a best of of his world, a movie that feels completely logical in his career, and is made like this too (I'm fairly certain fans of Crimson Peak will feel at home). I read that some found Isaac's performance a bit over-the-top, but I thought it was fitting his arrogant god-playing character. Like Waltz', it's a character that starts seemingly sincerely altruistic and "for the science" but that quickly show they're just opportunistic egotistical megalomaniacs, willing to create something they won't have the patience nor the inclination to care for. As such, the Creature feels as lonely as ever, a new life from people who never realised they'd create something that's not asking for it and won't care about the consequences. In this, I found Victor's brother bland, while Mia Goth, acting as a proxy for the viewer, does well with what she's given (not that much, restropsectively).

The one thing that surprised me is how directly gore the movie is. While it's fairly seamless during big setpieces like the prologue, the rest of the movie provides gruesome details in shots that most likely could have been done without or less ("could have been without" as in alternatives were possible, not as in they would have necessarily be better without that) : a gluey head in the floor, a torn leg, a wolf skined by hand, etc).

If it wasn't for its length, I'd say it's a home run, though as it is, it's still a very fine movie.

[Matt]

I don't think I've seen a del Toro film that I unreservedly like. Maybe Cronos. But I did find a lot to like in this one. The early reanimated corpses (and parts of corpses) were truly horrific—intensely repugnant on a (pardon me) visceral level. The costumes were stunning, especially Goth's, and ESPECIALLY her bridal gown with the nod towards the Bride's bandages in Whale's Bride of Frankenstein. I about hollered out loud when I saw that. Isaac's performance is excellent and totally fitting to the tone and atmosphere of the first two-thirds of the film. Elordi does a lot with just his eyes, and Goth did not irritate me as she has done in every other film of hers I've seen.

However, I'm always exhausted by del Toro's maximalism and pictorialism, his need to stuff every frame with ostentatious and oversized bric-a-brac and light it from behind with golden light. And by his cheap sentiment. Abrupt tonal shifts are not out of keeping with Gothic literature, but it did seem a little programmatic when Victor goes from treating the Creature as a miraculous child to an abused pet in successive scenes. And then the Creature goes from vengeful beast who's tracked Victor to the ends of the Earth to tender and forgiving son just as quickly. It's been decades since I've read the novel, but I don't remember it quite that way. (Looking at the Wikipedia summary just now, I see how del Toro has condensed and somewhat inverted the latter half of the book and changed the ending completely.)

Spoiler

I wish del Toro had also eliminated the Creature's demand that Victor make him a companion entirely since he cut the part of the story where Victor (almost) does it anyway. As it stands, the demand ends up being inessential as it seems like Elizabeth would have been happy to go off with him. The monster's pain at not being able to die is a nice addition, but the Wolverine/Terminator 2 self-healing power seems awfully silly.

[nicolas]

Del Toro confirmed that a physical release of the film is upcoming: https://x.com/RealGDT/status/1993745044923404361

[Monterey Jack]

I'm not surprised. Criterion loves GDT, and previously released his Netflix production Pinocchio.

One only wishes they'd do the same for Scorsese's Killers Of The Flower Moon and Scott's Napoleon.

[Finch]

That'd be up to Apple. Scorsese might have to request them to license it to Criterion. CODA was/is getting a disc release (Universal?) so there may be movement on other Apple films next year.

[swo17]

CODA was/is getting a disc release (Universal?)

It's already out and Apple is the only company listed on the packaging

[FrauBlucher]

I saw this today. Didn’t love it. While I appreciate Del Toro’s prowess and talent for filmmaking. I’m always left cold by his narrative. With this one the ending was so disappointing. I felt like after all that, that’s the climax. Ugh. As Matt said about being exhausted from his maximalism and pictorialism, I’ll take that one step further by saying he sacrifices story to achieve all that visual grandioseness. I wanted to really like it as I’m a sucker for the Frankenstein horror story. Almost 100 years later I still appreciate the Whale and Karloff versions more.

[The Curious Sofa]

The Whale version trusted its audience by not smoothing over all the edges of its source. The most disappointing thing about Del Toro's film is the lack of nuance. Here Frankenstein becomes a one dimensional villain and the monster a sinned-against innocent. Despite attempts at greater fidelity to the novel, Del Toro removes anything that was genuinely heart wrenching or horrifying about the book, most of all Justine's horrific fate (which admittedly hasn't made it into many adaptations but for me was the most hair raising part of the novel).

I enjoyed the film on a surface level, the costumes deserve an Oscar, but it's a misreading of its source.

[Mr Sausage]

I agree with you about the monster, but Victor is no mere villain. We watch his whole progress from victim to victimizer, often with great sympathy. In fact it takes the monster’s progression from the book and applies it to Victor. I wouldn’t say the book misreads its source; it just takes the prevalent modern understanding of it and makes it explicit. I have no problem with that—I expect an adaptation to interpret rather than wholesale present. And I would say this is the most interesting depiction of the Victor Frankenstein of the book we’ve ever had.

[The Curious Sofa]

I'm fine with adaptations that stray from the source, I liked what Del Toro did with Pinocchio. But I thought Oscar Isaac gave a rare, bad performance here, which I blame mostly on the screenplay but he also struck me as miscast. Peter Cushing all the way, as far as I'm concerned.

[Mr Sausage]

Oh Peter Cushing is the best—I have many posts on here celebrating his performances as the Baron. When I wrote “Victor Frankenstein of the book”, it was with him in mind, since his Victor Frankenstein is very different from the one in the book. Or I should say Victor Frankensteins, since after the second movie you can’t even say they’re the same character. He changes from movie to movie.

So Isaac’s Victor is the most interesting of the Victors drawn from the novel, but Cushing remains my favourite overall. I rather like Colin Clive, too. He does a good job of seeming on the knife edge of nervous collapse.

[The Curious Sofa]

It's one of the things I love about Cushing's Frankenstein, he got to give a whole range of great performances in his many variations on the character.

Isaac was very good as a tech bro Frankenstein in Ex-Machina.

[RPG]

I agree with you about the monster, but Victor is no mere villain. We watch his whole progress from victim to victimizer, often with great sympathy.

If creating sympathy was the intention, it was totally lost on me. In my view, Isaac does play him as a straight villain, who only feels remorse after the deaths of Elizabeth and his brother, and through being worn down by being relentlessly chased by (the indestructible rampaging) monster he created.

[Mr Sausage]

It's one of the things I love about Cushing's Frankenstein, he got to give a whole range of great performances in his many variations on the character.

Do you have a favourite? Mine might be the one in Frankenstein Must be Destroyed—he’s such a cold, malicious psycho, deftly manipulating everyone around him. It’s great fun.

[Mr Sausage]

I agree with you about the monster, but Victor is no mere villain. We watch his whole progress from victim to victimizer, often with great sympathy.

If creating sympathy was the intention, it was totally lost on me. In my view, Isaac does play him as a straight villain, who only feels remorse after the deaths of Elizabeth and his brother, and through being worn down by being relentlessly chased by (the indestructible rampaging) monster he created.

I found a lot of sympathy for the way the child was bereft of his lone loving relationship and then slowly ruined by a unloving tyrant of a father until he found himself turned into exactly whom he loathed. But it’s a sympathy that sits alongside repulsion, sure. I just think the movie did a lot to explain and humanize Victor’s flaws, unlike many of the Hammers, where Victor is very much a straightforward villain, far more so than in del Toro’s movie.

[The Curious Sofa]

It's one of the things I love about Cushing's Frankenstein, he got to give a whole range of great performances in his many variations on the character.

Do you have a favourite? Mine might be the one in Frankenstein Must be Destroyed—he’s such a cold, malicious psycho, deftly manipulating everyone around him. It’s great fun.

Yes, that one is the best!