Film review: frankenstein 2025
Del Toro, G. (Director). (2025). Frankenstein [Film]. Netflix; Universal Pictures.
This film is like a half baked attempt at restoring antique wooden furniture; you begin by overestimating your abilities and over sanding to the point that you've erased the original ornate detailing which was the reason you scoured marketplace to begin with. You then proceed to 'cover' the water stains with an ill-matched wood stain that's trapped moisture and is now slowly rotting. You proceed to find yourself left with a hodge-podge mess that has cost 5 times the original budget and it’s a regrettable mess.
Guillermo del Toro's must see epic- flop adapts Mary Shelley's brilliance into a predictable film that fails to pass the Bechdel test. Imagine remaking a tale based off a 200 year old iconic classic book and infamous parable that warns against hubris and playing god and remaking it but without any substance, just, dastardly screen writing.
As most of us know the tale of Frankenstein well, I will refrain from discussing the plot and point out notable aspects of the film as well as distinctions between the book and interesting… Choices made in this film. For those who are yet to see: The primary differences between rhe classic tale and this film lies within the film's focus on Victor's (played by Oscar issac) upbringing and exploration of the themes of fatherhood and abusive cycles over the book's focus on his maniacal ambition. Shortcomings however fall into play with this decision as the overall horror and scare factor of the tale gets lost in a family focused soap opera surrounding victors abusive father and the impact death of his mother (played by mia goth).
Del torro made the intriguing decision to get a bit Freudian and cast Mia Goth as the role of Lady Elizabeth in conjunction with Claire (victor's mother) which could have been fruitful for taking the narrative somewhere unexpected but unfortunately doesn’t get explored further. Moreover, the use of prosthetics on Claire made many miss the fact that she was also played by goth which renders the decision somewhat pointless, perhaps an oedipal complex would have added some kind of broader commentary to the film but the writing remained shallow.
Hollywood has seen a resurgence in zombie films in the past couple years; when one compare s this film to a very exciting counterpart: poor things (2023) directed by Yorgos Laminthos, this adaptation face plants even harder. Frankenstein's Screen writing reads like it was written by a 15 year old at the beginning of their fanfiction journey. With predictable pseudo-poetic lines like "you are the monster' like okay colleen hoover! Is this Tumblr or a 120 million dollar film? I actually think there is more substance in Paul Hoen's zombies (2018) than Frankenstein (2025) because at least they demonstrated a clear albeit fun parable that warns against prejudice!
Circling back to the topic of missed opportunities, pretty much every decision around the underutilisation of Mia Goth was disappointing! But to no fault of her own but the creators! Mia Goth is one of the best modern scream queens with infamous dramatic roles like that of Pearl directed by Ti west (2022). I cannot for the life of me understand why someone would make a horror film with Mia goth and not give her an opportunity to demonstrate her acting prowess! What a waste.
Further regarding the acting, Isaac is insufferable and prances around the screen like a Shakespearean actor that’s been doing the same bit at the ren faire since 8 am but even his irritating brittish accent wasn’t enough to stir me awake during this snoozefest (2 and a half hours by the way..). Safe to say Oscar Isaac wont be winning an oscar for this, or perhaps if he does we will know for sure just how rigged it is.
Moreover, Jacob Elordi was comparatively ok as the creature but is the acting fine or is it just masked by a deep voice, styling and barely any lines? How can we tell? Lwas bill skarsgard as count orlock a fine actor or was there just not that much material to base a criticism off? Though, perhaps casting elordi wwas a saving grace because infatuated fans willl actually watch the film, which, I suspect the creators figured this which is why his makeup is nothing more than some contoured lines around his muscles (great thinking there del torro!)
The cinematography in this film is lacklustre, coupling wide angle shots that pile in as much lavish setting as possible with cheap CGI resulting in what could believably be AI slop. Maybe it’s the netflix affect or just a reflection of all of the choices made within this production to avoid any individuallity or daring decisions but the aesthetic feels like that of a video game. The scenes of victor in the tower genuieny resemble wicked's tower scenes.
One element of this film that I truly enjoyed however (see I can be civil) was the costuming. Kate Hawley's costuming choices for most notably, Lady Elizabeth, were ravishing. From period accurate designs to creative detailing like the organic halo-like feathered headdresses to accompany lady elizabeth's character's fascination with biology, thoughtfully executed decisions that aid the narrative and keep your focus during .
Personally, I reserve a stricter lens for critiquing adaptions/ remakes, so perhaps my harshness may have been eased if this was an original story/film; but its not and I hold the position that if you are going to take a brilliant work of art that already exists then remix it there MUST be a good reason behind it, otherwise you are just lazily recycling a plot that you know has been successful make money, avoid doing something daring like; be creative and contribute nothing interesting; which, is exactly what this film has done.