Frankenstein - Movie Reviews - Rotten Tomatoes

Frankenstein Reviews

Page 1 of 5
April 5, 2014
It was a better book, TY D.K.
½ September 9, 2012
All kinds of bad. No wonder Koontz and Scorsese pulled their names from the title, it's nowhere close to the books.
August 29, 2012
Could've been better. All made-for-TV movies could be.
July 23, 2012
Creepy but enjoyed it.
½ July 5, 2012
Quite interesting story but the script was the weakest link. Decent acting and music save in some scenes.
May 14, 2012
Made for TV (USA Network) this was suppose to be a three part series. Well the 2nd and 3rd were never made....So don't watch the first.
Probably could have been an alright mini series.
½ May 13, 2012
It wasn't that bad... huh. Well yeah, there was lots of speaking and stuff but it was interesting. Descent performances, intense camera angles and views, good script, so what's wrong?
Well the lines are too long. Some background music could have saved this.
Super Reviewer
November 9, 2011
Intended as the jump start for a cable series the work suffers from the heavy hand of its young and "edgy" creator who fervently insists that you know who made it, in every single scene. I was getting a bit tired of it by the end. The story didn't help ... lame as well.
½ October 22, 2011
Perhaps because it was based in New Orleans, where I still consider home, I actually thought this was a really great, underrated movie.
½ August 30, 2011
Bad bad and then a little bit bad to. Weres the ending? Weres the good story? Weres the interesting acting?? Oh my.. Its gotta be one of the worst movies I've ever seen and that says a lot...
½ August 10, 2011
Difficile de dà (C)crire ce faux film, sans fin, car ce n'est qu'un pilote abandonnà (C). Très bien fourni, acteurs et compositeur mythiques,bon real, decors impressionants, et mon genie DEAN R KOONTZ au scenario.
January 26, 2011
Weird, semi-meta take on the Frankenstein concept, set in modern time. Actually, calling it "Frankenstein" is a deceptive choice, as it is not about that story as much as it parallels it. Any which way, it's a low-budget grime'n'grit film about science and ethics, at times hinting at a divine existence in a way that makes me uncomfortable. I usually go easy on low-bud flicks, but this one didn't carry too well. And don't be fooled by the movie having Martin Scorsese's name tacked to it. I'm sure he regrets it as much as I do.
January 3, 2011
The only reason I remotely want to see this, is because it's based off of Dean Koontz's "Frankenstein" which I adore....
½ November 9, 2010
Okay, it's terrible, terrible, terrible. I've never seen decent to good actors act this badly. And I'm almost ashamed that it came from John Shiban, one of the masterminds behind The X-Files.
½ October 4, 2010
This is a pilot for a show that never got picked up... It had a cliffhanger ending but there's no ending!!!! Grrr!!!!
½ July 29, 2010
not another one!!
did you know Frankenstein is the doctors name as the monster was never given a name in the films!!
July 7, 2010
It was freaking awesome
½ June 3, 2010
A "postmodern gothic reinvention." Originally aimed at being a tv series but ended up being a tv movie. It shows.

So, Dr. Frankenstein didn't die, nor did his monster. They both have lived for 200 years - among the others. The doctor has actually created an enhanced version of the human and intends to, more or less, conquer the world with them. But then people, enhanced people, start dying and the police has to intervene.

This is probably the first movie ever during which I have written notes. I just had so many thoughts in my mind that I had to write them down to remember what I was thinking while watching. In a nutshell, I think the modernization is interesting (and yet another remake would have been more than unnecessary) but the execution could have been better. But what can you do if the director's merits include the 2003 remake of The Texas Chainsaw Massacre?
Many familiar names appear in the credits: Michael Madsen (if I had paid to see this, it would've been worth it by the scene where he was pregnant), Thomas Kretschmann (for a change he is NOT a Nazi), Scorsese producing, Angelo Badalamenti's theme song... Adam Golberg's Detective Sloane pissed the hell out of me.

I wouldn't necessarily call this movie "crap" because the basic idea actually is quite intriguing. However, by no means I would say that this is a good movie either. Just recently I wrote down few lines to describe generally my rating criteria for movies and the description for 1,5 stars sums this movie up quite well: "Quite bad. However, either it has something quite good in it, I got some good laughs out of it, or I bothered to follow the plot." There you have it.
March 14, 2010
One of the best modern versions of the tale. First rate cast. I want a sequel.
March 6, 2010
A surprisingly good made-for-TV version of Dean Koontz's modern-setting sequel to the original novel Frankenstein. The teleplay is very good. The acting is excellent. The sets (mostly real places), special effects, cinematography and general look of the film is way above the usual low budget or TV standards. The story ends rather abruptly with much left unresolved because it is based on the first novel of a trilogy. If only the same people had filmed the other two novels! I would rate this as the best of the numerous Frankenstein movies I have seen.
Page 1 of 5