Muddled Monster Mash-Up

In the latest cinematic adaptation of Frankenstein, scientists Victor Frankenstein (James McAvoy) and Igor Strausman (Daniel Radcliffe) are conducting experiments in immortality, when things, of course, go awry. Apparently this film is constructed as a mash-up of Shelley’s novel as well as its many adaptations — and maybe it’s just trying to be too many things at once, blending CGI action scenes with buddy comedy-esque jokes.

Victor Frankenstein opens in wide release Nov. 25.

‘VICTOR FRANKENSTEIN’ TRAILER REVIEW BY METRO CREW

PAIGE: This trailer reminds me a lot of Sherlock Holmes, the Guy Ritchie version that I really shamelessly love. Except, like, not in a good way. It’s so tonally dissonant. Like, it’s Frankenstein, but instead of ruminating thoughtfully on the nature of humanity, we’re going to make jokes that are all somehow extremely unfunny and never land right. The action doesn’t even look good. Very little about this movie looks appealing enough to watch. 


JAIMIE: Snore. As much as I do like a good interpretation of Shelley’s Frankenstein, I just cannot with this one.

NICOLE: I would watch this just to see how bizarrely the (monster’s) body parts move. And I want to see how realistic said body parts are. I’m glad that this is a little darker. I think the traditional version is supposed to be like that. And also I feel like this is more realistic.

JAMES: There’s a certain level of suspension of disbelief when watching period films. It’s a delicate world-building exercise. The atmosphere, the details, they all need to cohere so that you feel the events you’re watching are actually happening in 1800s London. When you add to that a layer of slick and frictionless CGI, it doesn’t seem to fit. Maybe the movie itself will be tonally different, but the thundering action movie soundtrack suggests otherwise.

CHRISTINA: Is the monster supposed to be that fast and that violent? Also, I thought a big part of the story is that the monster was supposed to be fairly intelligent. It sort of just looks like this monster is a rabid dog on steroids. Not that I really care about an accurate adaptation since I have never read the novel — or even seen any of its resulting films — but this just looks boring. And kind of ridiculous.

JAMES: I appreciate the way they envisioned the monster as something that looks less human and more alien. Previous iterations were pretty much people in costumes (Boris Karloff, Robert DeNiro). Here, Doc Frankenstein says, “Let’s make a monster in our image,” and we see an incomprehensible critter that looks like it was designed by H.R. Giger.

NICOLE: I’m excited for this. Because as a Harry Potter fan, I will always have a soft spot in my heart for Daniel Radcliffe.

JAMES: Somehow, Radcliffe fits the image of Igor.

PAIGE: This is a bromance that I do not see really working for me. McAvoy and Fassbender — like, hot damn. I would watch 80 hours of the two of them playing chess and talking about philosophy and making doe eyes at each other (re: X-Men: First Class). McA-voy and Radcliffe — meh. I’m not feeling it … I also don’t like Daniel Radcliffe. So he was Harry Potter. Great. I’ve just never found him endearing or especially entertaining as an actor in any other role. And that hair is not working for him at all.

JAIMIE: Daniel Radcliffe will just always and forever be Harry Potter.