Forgot your password?
Don't have an account? Sign up here
Got more questions about news letters?
Already have an account? Log in here
and the Terms and Policies,
and to receive email from Rotten Tomatoes and Fandango.
Please enter your email address and we will email you a new password.
We encourage our community to report abusive content and/ or spam. Our team will review flagged items and determine whether or not they meet our community guidelines.
Please choose best explanation for why you are flagging this review.
Thank you for your submission. This post has been submitted for our review.
Sincerely, The Rotten Tomatoes Team
It certainly passed the time. It took me 3 different sittings to complete this movie. I would start watching it and then get bored a bit down the line and leave it till the next day before trying again. Which isn't a good sign in itself when it comes to finding an interesting movie.
But I eventually finished it and it wasn't too bad. But it was lengthy and dreary.
Dull and depressing - quite like the life of Mary Shelley herself.
But the cast kept me interested but the plot most certainly didn't.
I'm sorry but it's not one that I would recommend nor one I would watch again.
A nice and entertaining, one-time watch drama. But don't make me watch it twice.
Loved the movie! Loves of drama and love. It’s not a scary movie. Mary Shelley’s life was so interesting interesting , takes place in the 1800s. Acting was excellent and filming was excellent, it was never cheesy. Makes me want to read the book Frankenstein now.
It was entertaining, story was something hollywood done yet.
What a fascinating tale for a movie. The genesis of the novel Frankenstein involves powerful, charismatic characters who were movers and shakers in the the worlds of the arts and social politics in the 1800s. Add to this an isolated, exotic chateaux, a violent storm and the excesses of sex, drugs and alcohol and this has to make for a tense, spine-tingling tale. Sadly, in Mary Shelley, much of the story as we know it appears bland and inconsequential. It's not that it is a particularly bad movie it just seems to be missing something. Too much relies on undercurrents of emotion that are not fully explored. The actual holiday at the Villa Diodati could have been so much better developed and climactic to the plot but it could well have been set in Margate for all the dramatic tension that is portrayed on the screen. It is a sad waste of a great cast and a story as interesting and worthy as Mary Shelley's novel itself. It really needed a good injection of some gothic horror.
Elle Fanning leads the cast in the indie biopic Mary Shelley. After falling in love with a young poet, Mary Wollstonecraft Godwin runs off with her sister to live with him but things take a turn when his father cuts him off and they find themselves living in poverty and avoiding debt collectors, then one fateful night she has a dream that inspires her to write a chilling horror story that would become one of the most famous ever written. Fanning delivers a strong performance and the rest of the cast is pretty good as well. And the sets and costumes are incredibly well-done. However, there seems to be a bit of a political agenda, pushing acceptance of polyamory and the bohemian lifestyle. Also, the film doesn't really go much into the creation and legacy of the Frankenstein novel; just a few scenes of Mary writing it and struggling to get it published. Yet while it has some issues, overall Mary Shelley is an intriguing look at the woman behind one of the most frightening novels ever written.
It's a great movie that really inspired me to start writing again.
Mary Shelley, a.k.a. Moving House: The Motion Picture, is a tiring melodrama that tries and largely fails to explore and dissect the reasons that inspired the titular character to write her magnum opus, Frankenstein. Elle Fanning is a great actress who gives an earnest performance as the 19th century author, but the film is constantly bogged down in soap opera bickering masquerading as character development. The dialogue feels stagey and completely unnatural, and most of the characters are utterly insufferable, to the point that you just want to give up watching. They're not compellingly evil or menacing, they just feel like those jerks who turns up uninvited at house parties and spends all their time annoying the other guests. It takes over 90 minutes before we get to the creation of Frankenstein, and it's dealt with in 2 minutes. Then her quest to get it published is taken care of in about 10. The film goes out of its way trying to hammer home the point that Percy was an awful person, and the film completely loses its focus as a result. You spend less time thinking about Mary's literary ambitions and more time thinking about why she didn't just kick him to the curb. All the baddies are caricatures, with performances straight out of a cartoon, and little is done to make the audience care about any of it. It's well assembled and has plenty of great period detail, but the story is a hodgepodge of irritating arguments and tired cliches, and in the end it does little to illuminate Mary Shelley's literary success and even less to distinguish itself from the hundreds of periods dramas already in existence.
it was good. and interesting. about breaking roles. and love. and famely.
Movie is not at the level of its character (or, better, the character of Frankenstein) for most of the movie, although some of the messages of the interpretation of the book enlight the end. Anyway, probably, the movie makes a malinterpretation of the motivations that leaded Mary Shelley to write her most famous novel, as most of the researchers talk about the key role of relation with her daughter ("I can only give birth to dead sons", it is told she said), and not much about the influence of her couple.