October 22, 2025
FILM: FRANKENSTEIN
DIRECTED BY: GUILLERMO DEL TORO
STARRING: OSCAR ISAAC, JACOB ELORDI, MIA GOTH
RATING: 3 out of 4 stars
By Dan Pal
If you’re only familiar with the classic 1931 Universal Pictures version of Frankenstein, directed by the legendary James Whale, this new take on Mary Shelley’s 19th Century novel by Oscar-winner Guillermo del Toro may come as a surprise to you. For those who have read and/or studied the book, it will be clear that del Toro attempts to stay true to that original source material. Whale’s film ran only 70 minutes, while the new update clocks in at 149. That’s more than twice the length, but then a LOT from the novel was left out of the film in 1931. Of course, there have been other adaptations since, but the iconic imagery from that original film is what has pervaded our culture for almost a hundred years now. Are audiences ready for del Toro’s large-scale take on the story?
When del Toro’s version opens we encounter characters, including Dr. Victor Frankenstein who created “the monster,” in the frozen arctic on their way to the North Pole. After a lot of shouting and screaming it becomes that clear that the creature is creating havoc using his massive strength to overpower the men on the ship. Then we are transported back in time as the doctor tells his story of how the monster came to be. It’s a LONG story and del Toro starts at the beginning taking us back to the doctor’s childhood with his cold and demanding father. This scene, like many others early in the film, is beautiful to look at, boasting outstanding sets and impeccably created era specific costumes. The problem is that what we really want to see is the development of the monster – at least that is what Hollywood has conditioned us to want to see. While there is plenty of exposition, these scenes feel dull and full of big, we’ve seen it before, dramatic acting. I can’t completely fault del Toro with the choice of sticking to the source material, and he does attempt to make it look at least visually interesting, but some of these scenes feel unnecessary or at least worthy of some editing.
Once we get to the creation of the monster, played by “it” actor Jacob Elordi, the narrative takes more specific shape. The creature is still constructed of various parts of dead bodies but he’s almost entirely nude offering a more chiseled, almost handsome, version of the character than perhaps most of us have seen before. Some of this, of course, has to do with Elordi’s own physicality but he’s certainly caked with prosthetics to give him a more sizable and commanding look.
The basic conceit of the story is that that man should be much more careful with its scientific creations, which can become something more dangerous than ever intentioned. That has certainly been a big reason why the source material has continued to stay relevant for almost two hundred years. Yet, Mary Shelley also seems to be commenting on anything we create, whether that be children, mysterious creatures, or, in today’s society, high level forms of technology and artificial intelligence that may be doing more harm than good. When Dr. Frankenstein begins to lose interest in what he has created problems begins to escalate. The suggestion is that we shouldn’t let go of our creations but continue to nurture them.
Elordi’s performance as the monster stands in contrast to Oscar Isaac’s as Frankenstein. The latter is bigger, more exaggerated and animated in his speeches and movements. This style of performance comes across as similar to the kind of dramatic acting we saw in the early days of talking pictures right up through the middle of the 20th Century. Elordi is subtler in his portrayal. His movements are more specific and deliberate. He develops a very interesting and original walk for the character compared to the arms out depiction we’ve typically seen. His voice is also curious. I’m not sure if there was any digital manipulation of Elordi’s vocals but he nails his scenes with verbal intensity and vulnerability. That is, of course, until he becomes angry…
One of the problems I sometimes have with del Toro’s work is that he often resorts to bloody and brutal scenes emphasizing gross and grotesque imagery. It’s not clear how the monster has developed such incredible physical strength but when he starts fighting his enemies and throwing them around ships and castles, the effect is more comical than dramatic. Why does del Toro think it’s better to have the monster fly them through the air? They all look like victims in super hero movies rather than characters adapted from a 19th Century novel.
Such action scenes take away from the heart of the story’s messages in favor of big bombastic brawls. The digital special effects of these scenes are also more noticeable, taking away elements of reality that made the original film, with its reliance on production design, feel so spooky. Similarly, there is a scene in which wolves are on the attack. At no time do these wild beasts look like anything other than computer generated images.
So, I’m a bit lukewarm on what del Toro has done here. Yes, he stays truer to the more expansive nature of Shelley’s novel but I still prefer the general lower budget creepiness of what James Whale brought to the screen in 1931.
Frankenstein played at the Chicago International Film Festival. It opens this week in theaters.
FILM: FRANKENSTEIN
DIRECTED BY: GUILLERMO DEL TORO
STARRING: OSCAR ISAAC, JACOB ELORDI, MIA GOTH
RATING: 3 out of 4 stars
By Dan Pal
If you’re only familiar with the classic 1931 Universal Pictures version of Frankenstein, directed by the legendary James Whale, this new take on Mary Shelley’s 19th Century novel by Oscar-winner Guillermo del Toro may come as a surprise to you. For those who have read and/or studied the book, it will be clear that del Toro attempts to stay true to that original source material. Whale’s film ran only 70 minutes, while the new update clocks in at 149. That’s more than twice the length, but then a LOT from the novel was left out of the film in 1931. Of course, there have been other adaptations since, but the iconic imagery from that original film is what has pervaded our culture for almost a hundred years now. Are audiences ready for del Toro’s large-scale take on the story?
When del Toro’s version opens we encounter characters, including Dr. Victor Frankenstein who created “the monster,” in the frozen arctic on their way to the North Pole. After a lot of shouting and screaming it becomes that clear that the creature is creating havoc using his massive strength to overpower the men on the ship. Then we are transported back in time as the doctor tells his story of how the monster came to be. It’s a LONG story and del Toro starts at the beginning taking us back to the doctor’s childhood with his cold and demanding father. This scene, like many others early in the film, is beautiful to look at, boasting outstanding sets and impeccably created era specific costumes. The problem is that what we really want to see is the development of the monster – at least that is what Hollywood has conditioned us to want to see. While there is plenty of exposition, these scenes feel dull and full of big, we’ve seen it before, dramatic acting. I can’t completely fault del Toro with the choice of sticking to the source material, and he does attempt to make it look at least visually interesting, but some of these scenes feel unnecessary or at least worthy of some editing.
Once we get to the creation of the monster, played by “it” actor Jacob Elordi, the narrative takes more specific shape. The creature is still constructed of various parts of dead bodies but he’s almost entirely nude offering a more chiseled, almost handsome, version of the character than perhaps most of us have seen before. Some of this, of course, has to do with Elordi’s own physicality but he’s certainly caked with prosthetics to give him a more sizable and commanding look.
The basic conceit of the story is that that man should be much more careful with its scientific creations, which can become something more dangerous than ever intentioned. That has certainly been a big reason why the source material has continued to stay relevant for almost two hundred years. Yet, Mary Shelley also seems to be commenting on anything we create, whether that be children, mysterious creatures, or, in today’s society, high level forms of technology and artificial intelligence that may be doing more harm than good. When Dr. Frankenstein begins to lose interest in what he has created problems begins to escalate. The suggestion is that we shouldn’t let go of our creations but continue to nurture them.
Elordi’s performance as the monster stands in contrast to Oscar Isaac’s as Frankenstein. The latter is bigger, more exaggerated and animated in his speeches and movements. This style of performance comes across as similar to the kind of dramatic acting we saw in the early days of talking pictures right up through the middle of the 20th Century. Elordi is subtler in his portrayal. His movements are more specific and deliberate. He develops a very interesting and original walk for the character compared to the arms out depiction we’ve typically seen. His voice is also curious. I’m not sure if there was any digital manipulation of Elordi’s vocals but he nails his scenes with verbal intensity and vulnerability. That is, of course, until he becomes angry…
One of the problems I sometimes have with del Toro’s work is that he often resorts to bloody and brutal scenes emphasizing gross and grotesque imagery. It’s not clear how the monster has developed such incredible physical strength but when he starts fighting his enemies and throwing them around ships and castles, the effect is more comical than dramatic. Why does del Toro think it’s better to have the monster fly them through the air? They all look like victims in super hero movies rather than characters adapted from a 19th Century novel.
Such action scenes take away from the heart of the story’s messages in favor of big bombastic brawls. The digital special effects of these scenes are also more noticeable, taking away elements of reality that made the original film, with its reliance on production design, feel so spooky. Similarly, there is a scene in which wolves are on the attack. At no time do these wild beasts look like anything other than computer generated images.
So, I’m a bit lukewarm on what del Toro has done here. Yes, he stays truer to the more expansive nature of Shelley’s novel but I still prefer the general lower budget creepiness of what James Whale brought to the screen in 1931.
Frankenstein played at the Chicago International Film Festival. It opens this week in theaters.