Rating: 
Summary: A refreshing movie experience.
Review: This is one of my absolute favorite movies, and after reading the book and seeing both movie versions, I felt that this one is the better of the two. Kenneth Branagh's performance of Victor Frankenstein is a bit pushed at times, but still manages to hold out for the duration of the film. Rober de Niro's performance of the monster creation is brilliant, and the make-up and costuming used to create the monster is well-crafted. As always, Helena Bonham Carter's performance as Elizabeth is masterful and empowered, delivering feeling to the film. All of these elements, combined with stunning sets and scenery and a totally mesmorizing score by Patrick Doyle, make this version of the classic novel a wonderful film, one that cannot be shaken from the mind once it is seen. This DVD is excellent, including French and Spanish language tracks, theatrical trailers, subtitles, explosive sound and vivid picture quality.
Rating: 
Summary: Film Does Novel Justice
Review: If you rent or buy this movie expecting to see a tall, big, green ugly monster with bolts on the side of his head that staggers around, then you might be disappointed. This is the real version of Frankenstien, which is based on the novel by Mary Shelley. I realize how hard it is to make a movie completely accurate to a book, but this film covers the crucial moments of the story while still keeping a good horror movie flavor intact. What made this movie were the scenes with Frankenstein's monster lurking in the shadows of society, waiting for the right time to try to take a chance on being accepted despite who or what he is. We get to see the progression of an ugly and relatively innocent "creation" to the "fiend" he becomes when people show hatred towards him. The monster's rejection from civilization is one of the main premises of the story, making him the "monster" that he is, and this element of the tale is often left unexplained in other versions of Frankenstein (including the very popular 30s version). I also thought the background of this movie and scenery where accurate for this film's story.The crew aboard the cold icy seas looking for a chance at a better existence. The confronation between Frankenstein and his creation in an cold, icy setting. Frankenstein's monster lurking in a forest, watching a typicial family in an attempt to comprehend how people and society operate. These settings highlight the dreariness and isolation that both Frankenstein and his creation feel. In my opinion, this is one of the best horror movies out there. This movie deals with the wrongs that are created when one tries to "correct" a problem with technology. Kenneth Branaugh and Robert De Niro do excellent jobs in this depiction of the Frankenstein story. An overall very good horror movie that I recommend for anyone.
Rating: 
Summary: NOT QUITE SHELLEY'S VISION
Review: This is a difficult one to assess. Obviously Kenneth Branagh's production of MARY SHELLEY'S FRANKENSTEIN is a sumptuous piece to watch but, unlike Shelley's literary Victor Frankenstein, Branagh makes poor use of the "raw materials" that he has at his disposal for this one. What a wasted cast including Aidan Quinn (who has barely a cameo), Tom Hulce (I think that I might have rather had Hulce as Dr. Frankenstein), Helena Bonham Carter, Ian Holm (another wasted cameo), John Cleese (what was it with putting a mouthful of oversized false teeth in Cleese's head?) and Robert De Niro. But then Branagh always suffers from an overwhelming desire to hog the spotlight. Branagh's portrayal of Victor Frankenstein goes way too far. Yes, he's supposed to be mad but I found him actually exaggerating the role much as Gene Wilder did intentionally in the wonderful parody YOUNG FRANKENSTEIN. Branagh seems unable to divorce himself from the stage where overacting is not only expected but also necessary. De Niro comes close but is still far too repulsive in the role. Shelley's monster is far more endearing and approachable. But then De Niro does an apparently masterful job of portraying Branagh's view of things. What he loses by misusing his cast he makes up for in the area of cinematography and special effects. The shock value of this film alone makes it worth watching. But do read Shelley's masterpiece first. You can then recognize what has been salvaged and what was unfortunately left behind. Branagh actually comes close with a few scenes but wanders aimlessly with most of them. An admittedly generous three stars for the cinematography, scenery and for Tom Hulce's tidy performance. Douglas McAllister
Rating:
Summary: Excellnt film!
Review: This is bye far, the best remake of Frankenstein ever. This is better than the Frankenstein sequel's to, well MOST of the Frankenstein sequel's at lest. Comes very close to the perfect book written by Mary Shelley. Some people said this was bad because there was to much drama. Will people stop being Nerd's!
Rating:
Summary: The Beauty In Frankenstein
Review: As most people have noted "Mary Shelleys Frankenstein" did stray far from the book. That does not, however, disclude the brilliance of imagry throughout the film. As a child I grew up believing that Frankenstein was some monster with bolts in his neck created by a mad scientist and a hunch back. It wasn't until jr. yr in British Literature that I was cleansed of these misconceptions. And yes, while it does tend to stray from its originial intent - how much pain staking attention to detail could any viewer handle? The movie is long as it is and if the main plot of the story is there why such a descrepency? Infact I think all lovers of Mary Shelleys Frankenstein should welcome the only real close depiction of such a timeless classic. Not to mention Robert De Niro's performance was amazing and utterly captivating.
Rating:
Summary: Monster Mash
Review: Maybe I have deplorable tastes, but I liked Branagh's version of "Mary Shelley's Frankenstein." In fact, I watched it twice in a row just to make sure. Yep, despite the generally negative critical reviews of this film, I like this version of Shelley's immortal classic a lot. What sold me on "Frankenstein" was the relative faithfulness to the spirit of the book. (I say relative, because bringing a novel to the screen involves some necessary alteration. The two media are different.) Shelley's hastily-written tale pits Man and Science against God and Nature. Surprise, surprise, Man loses. Branagh is believable as the obsessed and arrogant Frankenstein who stops at nothing, risks everything to beat Death. Robert DiNiro is absolutely the most true Frankenstein's monster ever depicted on screen. The scene where Frankenstein brings the monster to life is thrilling. The set looks right, the scheme of reanimation is brilliant. It's my favorite scene in the film. There is a lot that is excessive and frankly over the top in the film, but to me that added to the Nineteenth Century feel and pacing. Romantic literature can be huge--because Romanticism exaggerates and dramatizes the heroic and tragic. This film captures that sensibility. If you look at any of the other attempts to film Shelley's novel, you might agree with me that they don't come close to doing justice to the novel (for example, the old black and white film, which is not one of my favorites, and the more recent flop "The Bride".) This version comes very close, perhaps as close as a film can come to Shelley's masterpiece.
Rating:
Summary: Not an authentic adaptation of the book, but still fun.
Review: "Mary Shelley's Frankenstein" is an incredibly melodramatic adaptation of the book that takes huge liberties with the plot, but I still find it thoroughly entertaining. The movie is perfectly cast, and I think that the embellishments that Kenneth Branagh takes with the story only make the film more enjoyable. Even though I doubt that Dr. Frankenstein ran around without a shirt on as much as Branagh does in the film, most women will probably find it quite enjoyable. Robert DeNiro is amaing in his role of "the creature," and Helena Bonham Carter gives a great performance as Elizabeth. If you're the type of person who detests it when filmmakers stray too far from the text of the book they're adapting, then this film probably isn't for you. If you're a bit more open-minded and are just looking for an entertaining movie to watch, this is a perfect film to add to your collection.
Rating:
Summary: Ingolstadt,?
Review: The scene with the crowd was gathered during the lynching,
did'nt the caption say Ingolstadt and is'nt Ingolstadt in
Germany? I am wondering why De Niro was talking like an englishman
and the crowd sounded like english too? Maybe I missing something; should'nt the people so german?
I remember like thirty years ago about you should be true
to your heritage.
Rating:
Summary: The Beauty In Frankenstein
Review: As most people have noted "Mary Shelleys Frankenstein" did stray far from the book. That does not, however, disclude the brilliance of imagry throughout the film. As a child I grew up believing that Frankenstein was some monster with bolts in his neck created by a mad scientist and a hunch back. It wasn't until jr. yr in British Literature that I was cleansed of these misconceptions. And yes, while it does tend to stray from its originial intent - how much pain staking attention to detail could any viewer handle? The movie is long as it is and if the main plot of the story is there why such a descrepency? Infact I think all lovers of Mary Shelleys Frankenstein should welcome the only real close depiction of such a timeless classic. Not to mention Robert De Niro's performance was amazing and utterly captivating.
Rating:
Summary: Mary SHelley's Frankenstein
Review: ok, im a student in high school, and i can tell the differences in the book and the movie easliy. the movie is nothing like the book, in the first 5 mintutes there are almost 10 thing different from the book, 1. it looks like the monster is chasing victor, 2. the monster doesn't attack the dogs, 3. they don't see the monster off in the distance sledding away 4. no letters to robert walton's sister, 5. Robert walton seems power hungry, 6. the threat of mutiny doesn't happen until the end of the book,
7. victor never brings elizabeth back to life
8. the monster does not kill victors dad
9. the monster all together, hes 8 foot 3, long black hair, yellow skin, black lips, hes not supposed to be white, w/ pink lips and bald, if Mary Shelley was here today i don't think she'd be proud of this movie, its nothing like her book
i have not completly seen all of this movie, but i don't tihnk it should be called Mary Shelley's version, b/c of the obvious differences in which i stated above.
| 
