Tuchergson Truly the worst movie I've ever seen in a theater

Ceticultsot Beautiful, moving film.

Roy Hart If you're interested in the topic at hand, you should just watch it and judge yourself because the reviews have gone very biased by people that didn't even watch it and just hate (or love) the creator. I liked it, it was well written, narrated, and directed and it was about a topic that interests me.

Matylda Swan It is a whirlwind of delight --- attractive actors, stunning couture, spectacular sets and outrageous parties.

mlwitvliet I'm (as most people) familiar with Frankenstein because of the 1931 Horror flick Frankenstein and to my shame I must admit I like it. Shame because this movie also shows that Hollywoods arrogance was already there in 1931 by taking someones story and maim it completely for commercial purposes. Because it's a very simple horror entertainment story i never had the urge to read the book.Then I come across the trailer of this film and I immediately wanted to see the movie, Some people gave this movie very bad remarks. Those are the people that, in my opinion, completely misunderstand the true story of Frankenstein.200 years after the book is written we haven't learned much. People still like to play god, the makers of the atom bomb for instance, and you can only hope that they have suffered in their lives like Victor Frankenstein did. "we never intended to use them". Why make them then??? Did you people really were that stupid that you don't understand that when you have something like an atom-bomb there will be somebody that would use it? (as they did).There are also a lot of people in this world who think (like Frankenstein) they have the right to take lives of other human beings just because they are treated bad in their past. There are also a lot of people in this world (the lefties) who think you should understand a creature like Frankenstein, but don't understand that "people" like Frankenstein will kill them with a smile on their face when they feel like it. Therefore I'm glad that in the film is stated, "does a person who takes innocent lives deserve understanding?" on the other hand, do people have the right to misjudge people just because they are different?These are very good questions and therefore i think this movie should be obligatory on Highschools all over the world and should be discussed afterwards so that also people who don't understand this movie can understand and hopefully are as much impressed with this movie as I was. The world would be a much nicer place to live in.

jacobjohntaylor1 This a great movie. It a remake. 6.4 is underrating it. This movie is a must see. It is based on one of the best horror books ever. And it is one of the best horror movies ever. This movie has great story line. It also has great acting. It also has great special effects. It the story of a scientist who takes part from different dead bodies and puts them together. He brings it to life. This movie is scary then The Exorcist. Frankenstein (1931) is scarier. But still this is very scary. If this movie does not scary you then no movie will. 1994 version is better. But still is very good movie. It one of closest versions to the book. This movie is a must see.

FromBookstoFilm Spoiler almost a scene for scene remake of Coppola's 1994 Mary Shelley's Frankenstein except Elizabeth being reanimated as the Bride of the Monster like in Coppola's 1994 version. A decade improved the material. Hallmark did a great job with this story. It was way better than the 1994 Mary Shelley's Frankenstein which by the way was close to the original novel but the miscasting of Robert DeNiro as the monster ruined that production. This is the definitive version in my book followed by the 1977 film Viktor Frankenstein known as Terror of Frankenstein in the United States as second choice.Third and fourth the Turner Network Television version with Randy Quaid and the Francis Ford Coppola 1994 version with the miscast Robert DeNiro.The 1984 version with David Warner and the 1973 film with Bo Svenson. Hammer films and Universal films put out good productions but could hardly be considered faithful adaptations of the Frankenstein novel and the 1973 Frankenstein:The True Story with Michael Sarrazin was not the true story but true in spirit in the novel and the story retained most of the novels characters. The Hallmark version is long but worth it definitely get the video because on commercial TV it well to put it crudely SUCKS!

Alex Haladay I liked this version. Sutherland and Hurt were good in this. In the beginning the acting seemed kind of bad but Alex Newman did a great job in this. For me, he really saved the beginning. I never saw the DeNero version so I can't say anything about it but I did see the Boris version and I did read the book and I have to say that it did impress me.Hurt was good, Goss was good, Sutherland was good,but Newman really made this movie I think. As for people saying that the dialog was annoying, it was annoying in the book too. Slow scenes were the same in the book. All in all, it was a good screening of the book. I liked having an articulate creature, it was how I pictured in while reading it. If the other actors had better acting in it, It would have raised the 'out of 10' rating for me.