Frankenstein

[InTheCloset 20,547]

I just finished watching Guillermo's Frankenstein and it was a masterpiece. The plot, the acting, the set, the cinematography it was all hauntingly beautiful.

Mia Goth as usual delivered an Oscar worthy role. Jacob () i have a soft spot for him. It was stunning. 

SPOILERS

Spoiler

The scene with Mia lying on the slab was so beautiful . The Creature in the end forgiving Victor all while he wanted a means to an end made me sob up. 10/10

 

[Jackaroo 2,122]

watched it last night and i can’t stop thinking about the creature’s full package 

[Bradley 59,648]

2 minutes ago, Jackaroo said:

watched it last night and i can’t stop thinking about the creature’s full package 

Is GGD a mistake? 

[Fantina 3,419]

I watched it and I really liked it! Elordi pleasantly surprised me in his role as The Creature, and I was so glad to see they based his appearance on the descriptions found in the novel (long hair, hauntingly beautiful etc...). The set pieces and the costumes were immaculate too and the two and a half hours flew by rather quickly. 

It is criminal that they decided not to show this movie in theatres. From what I gathered online from those that managed to see the movie in select theatres, the movie was much more powerful and haunting on a big screen. 

[Morphine Prince 107,684]

I liked it, visually stunning, BUT

I know GDT said it would be his version and not necessarily a faithful adaption of the book but I think the hundreds of changes made to the characters were so unnecessary and I couldn't get over it.

GDT being a huge fan of the book and this being the outcome shocked me because almost nothing was the same. 

I think having read the book made me not enjoy the movie as much, it was still a good movie although I didn't like the ending.

I felt lied to by the Internet cause I saw on Reddit people saying it was so "faithful" to the book.... did we read the same book? I think not.

[River 119,949]

20 minutes ago, Morphine Prince said:

I liked it, visually stunning, BUT

I know GDT said it would be his version and not necessarily a faithful adaption of the book but I think the hundreds of changes made to the characters were so unnecessary and I couldn't get over it.

GDT being a huge fan of the book and this being the outcome shocked me because almost nothing was the same. 

I think having read the book made me not enjoy the movie as much, it was still a good movie although I didn't like the ending.

I felt lied to by the Internet cause I saw on Reddit people saying it was so "faithful" to the book.... did we read the same book? I think not.

He did the same with Pinocchio and I felt that he strayed too much from the original story and it just felt like a different story but with a Pinocchio skin slap into it to make people feel familiarity and watch it 

[gagzus 16,308]

I think we’re in this weird place in media where you CAN’T really make anything original anymore because of the thought that it will fail so people attach projects to pre-existing properties and try to make them as unique as possible. Where in an era of movies being 10% originality, 20% good acting and like 50% just trying to make movies have good visuals to compensate for the the other 30% of unoriginality.

I’ve watched this and it was… ok not amazing but not terrible imo. I enjoyed the acting and the visuals and the attempt at some originality but I feel like everything suffers from the Saltburn/Poor Things perspective nowadays 

[TimotheeChalamet 6,194]

39 minutes ago, gagzus said:

I feel like everything suffers from the Saltburn/Poor Things perspective nowadays 

What do you mean? 

[gagzus 16,308]

9 minutes ago, TimotheeChalamet said:

What do you mean? 

Like in the sense that everything has to be stylised and “pushing” some form of boundary for it to work outside of nostalgia (I like both Saltburn and loved Poor Things) think about it; what movies in the last 5+ years that have been successful haven’t been either 1) a nostalgia fest, 2) hqve some form of stylised scene or controversy that goes viral online to make people want to see it; whether it’s something grotesque, or about a deeper message- there’s been a lot of movies that sort of have their style of film in camera angles, colouring, storytelling like this version of Frankenstein and (judging from the trailer) Wuthering Heights is going to be very much like that and since those films it’s becoming more and more.
 

Everything comes back to a message about something, or sexuality becomes a big thing (I don’t mean like in terms of gay or straight but more sexual energy of characters).

Hell even Wicked has a message, similar colouring and uses The Wizard of Oz nostalgia (yeah I know that’s the formula of the stage show- but I mean how it’s only been made NOW whilst it’s a trend in cinema is more than mere coincidence).
 

It’s sort of like how every horror movie became a found footage film or about ghosts in the early 2010s, or how every major movie in the late 90s/early 2000s had to be a blockbuster about the world ending or a world ending threat. 

It’s a trend yes but cinema and media in general is oddly cynical right now, even the reception to something campy like All’s Fair gets criticised for instance because it doesn’t follow the formula, same happened to Doctor Who or even down to kids show reboots. I just want some more fun back in media and for colour grading to be better and people to experiment a little.

The Substance for instance was a breath of fresh air to me. Yes it was stylised heavily but it just felt different, or maybe I’m biased because I watched the director talk about it in depth and because she’s female and a French film maker it’s nice to have a fresh perspective.

 

 

Edited November 9 by gagzus

[Fantina 3,419]

2 hours ago, Morphine Prince said:

I liked it, visually stunning, BUT

I know GDT said it would be his version and not necessarily a faithful adaption of the book but I think the hundreds of changes made to the characters were so unnecessary and I couldn't get over it.

GDT being a huge fan of the book and this being the outcome shocked me because almost nothing was the same. 

I think having read the book made me not enjoy the movie as much, it was still a good movie although I didn't like the ending.

I felt lied to by the Internet cause I saw on Reddit people saying it was so "faithful" to the book.... did we read the same book? I think not.

SAME! I really enjoyed it, but I can see where you are coming from!

Frankenstein is one of my favorite books and while the first half of the movie was somewhat faithful to the novel, the ending felt a bit anticlimactic. It was good, but the book makes the story so much more powerful. I understand that they wanted to do their take on the story, but I just felt like the book still remains on top.

Spoilers below

Spoiler

The first half was alright, but their decision not to show Frankenstein's "monstrous" side made the movie's plot a bit weaker when compared to the book. It's been a while since I read the book, but I remember him going on a killing spree, taunting Victor with notes, framing people for the killings he committed, warning that he will be present at Victor's wedding, etc...I guess we got this version because GDT is famous for humanizing the monsters (Shape of Water for example). Honestly, I am just happy we got a cool movie with amazing visuals, no AI and a story that somewhat resembles the original novel. Oh and if it gets more people into reading that's also a huge plus!

Edited November 9 by Fantina

[Cavadour 2,522]

4 hours ago, Morphine Prince said:

I liked it, visually stunning, BUT

I know GDT said it would be his version and not necessarily a faithful adaption of the book but I think the hundreds of changes made to the characters were so unnecessary and I couldn't get over it.

GDT being a huge fan of the book and this being the outcome shocked me because almost nothing was the same. 

I think having read the book made me not enjoy the movie as much, it was still a good movie although I didn't like the ending.

Yeah. Same. I think I finally disliked it. First part until the Creature appears was a great appetizer, but sorry... what was that Prometheus-like (no pun intended) so-called monster ? Just some guy with scarce skin prosthetics ? Where is the monster ? Please, you can give me back Karloff any time !

Then the whole thing turns to a pathethic ending. Nope. And that Goth (no pun intended) actress. Sorry. That kid presence was hollow af. Christoph Waltz was great and underused.

Pan's Labyrinth is there to remind us the true genius of GDT. I confess since the stinky plagiarism story of the Shape of Water, not to speak about Pinocchio, I cannot ever jump in excitement at the release of a new GDT movie...

 

Edited November 9 by Cavadour

[Lord Mayhem 1,929]

I watched the first 30 minutes and already could be an Oscar contender! Such beautiful cinematography, the writing is so poetic, and the execution is fresh and distinct! 

Can't wait to finish the movie! It's so good! 

[hELXIG 43,830]

I'm so sad I missed it at the movies   it only played on select days for like two weeks at one small cinema. Idk why the f.uck it's being treated by cinemas like some indie, arthouse movie. It's acclaimed director Guillermo Del Toro, stacked cast of HUGE A-list stars, and it's receiving rave reviews all around. I'm actually kinda pissed it's not being shown more. Guess I'll have to watch it on f.ucking Netflix at home on my dumbass TV 

[phantasmas 10,780]

Guillermo's  storytelling usually makes me cry but this time i cried over how visually beautiful this movie was. Like i've never responded like that to costuming and styling? I know it all gave this Victorian/Edwardian vibe but to me it still felt very Mexican which welled me up with pride. i felt the same kind of emotions when i attended a Diego Rivera exhibit a few years ago.