Btexxamar I like Black Panther, but I didn't like this movie.

Brightlyme i know i wasted 90 mins of my life.

Mabel Munoz Just intense enough to provide a much-needed diversion, just lightweight enough to make you forget about it soon after it’s over. It’s not exactly “good,” per se, but it does what it sets out to do in terms of putting us on edge, which makes it … successful?

Francene Odetta It's simply great fun, a winsome film and an occasionally over-the-top luxury fantasy that never flags.

GL84 Rescued out in the middle of a blizzard, a scientist recounts for the crew of his saviours how his past experiments on instilling life to the dead resulted in the creation of a being made from dead body parts hounded him and his family and forcing him to stop it.Overall this one was quite the troublesome and incredibly problematic mini-series that isn't all that enjoyable. The biggest problem here is the fact of it being so obviously and utterly intent on following the original novel, which in turn results in a pace that it just mind-numbingly bland and flat-out boring. Continuously spouting off completely banal methods for scientific processes and bland religious debates that end before they start are featured so prominently in the first half leaves this one will such a dull, lagging pace that it stumbles over itself before even starting by getting a pace so bland and impossible to rile up any kind of interest here that regardless of how well it sets up the ill- mannered nature of his obsession the lack of interest is such that it doesn't really offer much of a chance to get going until he brings the creature to life so late in the first half. This here is mainly due to how closely this one manages to follow the storyline of the book and getting everything set-up so intently that there's almost no horror at all in this one, even during the second half when the creature escapes out into the wild, and as those are all about him as the sympathetic force in an unknown landscape there's little about it that generates any kind of fear or suspense at his actions with it spending the majority of the time doing little of any interest.with this one so fascinated with the bland story lines about his obsession and the search throughout the woods. While this indeed holds back the first half with some overly-long scenes that just go nowhere, the second half does manage to go for a few more enjoyable bits of action namely from his confrontation at the church ruins and the confrontation at his cabin in the woods. Even beyond these points, there's still a lot wrong with the second half that's even more egregious than the first, with the sympathetic wailing of the monster inspiring derision more than any kind of actual fear, the consequences of his actions against the creature unleashing nothing but shallow melodrama and once against filled with an incredibly long and bland section which doesn't have any interest in anything with it not feeling at all like a horror film for much of this section. With an underwhelming and completely uninspiring finale also making this quite a downbeat effort, this overall isn't all that impressive a miniseries.Rated Unrated/R: Violence, some Language, strong violence against animals and intense themes of death.

Adam Foidart Kevin Connor's "Frankenstein" (not to be confused with the other 2004 "Frankenstein" film based on "Dean Koontz's Frankenstein") is a pretty faithful adaptation of the novel by Mary Shelley and if that's what you're looking for, you'll be very satisfied. This 3 1/2 hr made for television film leaves out few details (sometimes to a fault) and while it makes a few changes, these are very minor and for big fans of the book, it will be a pleasant experience. The downside is that the movie does not really attempt anything new with the material, even when it comes to the monster's design. For people who are big fans of the story, like myself it did at times make me wish a bit more freedom had been given to the people in charge. The movie aims to make us feel sympathetic to both the creature and the doctor and it succeeds, with good performances from Luke Goss and Alec Newman. The same can't be aid for all of the child actors, but otherwise it's convincing in its performances and as compelling as the original source material. You'll be hard pressed to find a more faithful adaptation so if you needed a refresher of the story or if you are studying the book this is a great watch. (On DVD, July 29, 2012)

Rick P My daughter brought home the DVD of this mess the other night for a school assignment. She asked if I could watch with her to help with the assignment. What started out with so much promise (Donald Sutherland) just blathered away into a Jane Austinique exercise in excess. Other than Sutherland and Hurt, the cast was kind of weak, the adaptation of what is supposed to be a classic horror novel was made to look more like a spoof of Mel Brook's "Young Frankenstein". Hey its a spoof of a spoof. While I do understand that first it's a "Hallmark" (as in greeting cards) Production, so right there schmaltz and rubbish and that it was also a "Mini-Series", it seemed as though the producers were looking only to fill time and in a feature package... (DVD) meant for one complete viewing... it came across so God awfully long and boring. Almost as draining as watching a "Pirates of the Caribbean" episode. I started cheering for the monster to kill off everyone so that the stupid film would end already. If you have insomnia, and need some help sleeping - please watch this. If, however, you have better things to do with your 3 some hours, skip this. Blechh!

Cheerful_Dragon This is the story of Frankenstein the way Mary Shelley wrote it. A running time of nearly 3 hours gives the story time to develop. Use of less well-known actors allows you to see the characters (although a good actor should allow that anyway). Luke Goss was good as the monster, better than I expected from an ex-rock star. He really made me feel sympathy for the Creature. Only two things grated a little: William Hurt's German accent was corny, and they insisted on using electricity to reanimate the Creature (Mary Shelley doesn't say how it was done).Other than that, it's the best adaptation I've ever seen. In fact, at the end my husband said, "I never realised that 'Frankenstein' isn't a horror story. It's a tragedy." So well done to the film-makers for breaking the mould.