This is one of the reasons I could never be a professional film critic. I'm too erratic with my viewing. At the moment I have more than 60 films on my to-watch list, but I've gone back to watch "Mary Shelley's Frankenstein" after watching it less than two months ago. I should be working my way through my list. In my defence, I had a good reason. After seeing "Mary Shelley" three days ago I wanted to watch the film based on her famous novel once again.
I read the novel when I was 15. I'd already seen the two major Frankenstein films, the Universal Studios film of 1931 and Hammer Studios' "Curse of Frankenstein" (1957). I expected the novel to be similar to the films, but it was very different. Instead of being a true horror story it was sad and emotional.There was nothing to scare me, not even the occasional murders, but there was a lot to move me. I remember my friend Bryan Westley interrupting me when he saw me reading the book. He asked me "How many people has he killed so far?" He didn't get it. I hope he's read the book by now.
The film has been badly rated by critics, but unfairly so. This is the most faithful adaptation of the novel so far. It's fast-moving and dramatic. Maybe it's lacking emotionally. Even though it's a sad film it doesn't move me to tears. Maybe there will be a newer better adaptation one day. Until then, this is the best available.
Was Helena Bonham-Carter the correct choice to be cast as Victor Frankenstein's sister Elizabeth? Maybe not. She's one of my favourite actresses, but there's an air of madness about her that doesn't fit the role.
Success Rate: + 0.5
 |
Order from Amazon.com |
| Order from Amazon.co.uk | |
| Order from Amazon.de |
No comments:
Post a Comment
Tick the box "Notify me" to receive notification of replies.