Horror Aficionados discussion

A new Frankenstein movie coming to Netflix this fall from Guillermo del Toro.
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1312221/

Could be a good one, sometimes I get leery about the adaptation that come out of Netflix.

Just as I dropped Netflix. :(

Char wrote: "Just as I dropped Netflix. :("

Probably could sign up for a free trial again.

Finishing up Dept Q on Netflix. I love the book series, and the show isn't terrible, but it's fairly disappointing for me. They've sped up a lot of timelines from later books, cramming them into the first one, and Assad, who is a major character in the book and usually a wonderful point of comic relief, is an afterthought in the show.

Alan wrote: "Finishing up Dept Q on Netflix. I love the book series, and the show isn't terrible, but it's fairly disappointing for me. They've sped up a lot of timelines from later books, cramming them into th..."

It's so disappointing when that happens.
They squished a lot into the series The Expanse, (one of the best TV adaptations that I've ever seen). And because they only did 5 seasons, the truncated series suffered for it. Other than that, though, it was a magnificent series and a lot of the main characters were strong, kickass women.

Sort of on topic, I'm reading a historical fiction Frankenstein take right now. The Unkillable Frank Lightning

Alan wrote: "Finishing up Dept Q on Netflix. I love the book series, and the show isn't terrible, but it's fairly disappointing for me. They've sped up a lot of timelines from later books, cramming them into th..."

Assad is a major character in that series, and I love his character arc. I don't think I could watch this without him. I love the books too.

The likeness rights to Frankenstein expire in 2028. I imagine they'll cost a pretty penny to purchase but assuming Universal doesn't renew them I'd be interested in knowing how much they'll go for.

Justin wrote: "The likeness rights to Frankenstein expire in 2028. I imagine they'll cost a pretty penny to purchase but assuming Universal doesn't renew them I'd be interested in knowing how much they'll go for."

I've never really liked the design of Universal's Frankenstein's monster. I kinda liked what they did with it in Van Helsing where you could see more of his mechanical parts, but I liked it even less after reading the novel. I feel like they really did the creature a disservice, robbing him of all nuance and nerfing his superhuman prowess. If anything, the monster should be like a severely disfigured Captain America in terms of visuals and physical ability.

As for personality and intellect, the monster should be a genius who uses eloquence and philosophy to mask his sorrow and eventually justify his murderous rage.

Universal's monster comes across as a lumbering, bumbling idiot.

The movie is coming to theaters from what I have read, sometime in November. Anything by Guillermo del Toro is golden. I just reread Junji Ito's take on Frankenstein, and can't wait to see what Guillermo has in store.

PJ wrote: "Justin wrote: "The likeness rights to Frankenstein expire in 2028. I imagine they'll cost a pretty penny to purchase, but assuming Universal doesn't renew them, I'd be interested in knowing how much ..."

I think there is a reason for that, well, besides changing it, probably to be scarier, the actor, Boris Karloff, never did a monster where they can talk, where you can see that in his role in The Mummy, as well, The Mummy, which scared me as a kid. And I personally never saw him as a bumbling idiot, but as someone both on the spectrum and someone with a speech disorder (mainly as a kid growing up with both, which I guess is why I have a soft spot for Frankenstein's monster, both the book and Universal's Frankenstein's monster). Anyways, I, Frankenstein, used the non idiot of Frankenstein's monster. I also read Dean Koontz's Frankenstein Trilogy #1, Prodigal Son, for example

Sarah wrote: "PJ wrote: "Justin wrote: "The likeness rights to Frankenstein expire in 2028. I imagine they'll cost a pretty penny to purchase, but assuming Universal doesn't renew them, I'd be interested in know..."

I, too, have a soft spot for the novel version because of being on the spectrum. :)

That's interesting about Karloff never doing another speaking role. I saw The Ghoul many years ago, and he didn't speak in that after becoming the titular monster. My dislike of the Universal monster probably comes down to me feeling irritated when a film deviates too far from the source material.

WendyB wrote: "A new Frankenstein movie coming to Netflix this fall from Guillermo del Toro.
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1312221/"

I am SO EXCITED for this!

Lupe wrote: "WendyB wrote: "A new Frankenstein movie coming to Netflix this fall from Guillermo del Toro.
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1312221/"

I am SO EXCITED for this!"

Same here, been trying to rewatch/ reread some of my favorite Frankenstein retellings before seeing it. I am hoping to see it in the theater just to support Guillermo del Toro, since he hasn't done a theatrical run in any of his work since pre-cvoid19, I think

I'm very much looking forward to it.

Frankenstein will have a limited release in theaters starting Oct 17. This would be the best way to see the movie, on the big screen.

For the rest of us, Netflix will have Frankenstein starting on Nov 7.

WendyB wrote: "Frankenstein will have a limited release in theaters starting Oct 17. This would be the best way to see the movie, on the big screen.

For the rest of us, Netflix will have Frankenstein starting on..."

Nice, glad Netflix will have it.

I watched Frankenstein last night. It gets a thumbs down from me. Too much deviation from the novel.
And get this, the "monster" looks like a refugee from The Rocky Horror Picture Show, Rocky himself. I'm not joking. :/ I was waiting for Tim Curry to appear and ask if anyone wanted to come up to his lab to see what was on the slab.
Visually the movie was well done. Even the acting wasn't terrible. But the sum of its parts was not very good at all.

Walks away singing quietly... 🎵 Let's do the time warp again. 🎵

WendyB wrote: "I watched Frankenstein last night. It gets a thumbs down from me—too much deviation from the novel.
And get this, the "monster" looks like a refugee from The Rocky Horror Picture Show, Rocky hims..."

Well, the look of this version takes from the book (in a way), and the uncanny beauty of the monster, rather than what we are used to in most Frankstein movies, the flat head, neck bolts, and lumbering gait. Frankenstein's attempt to create a beautiful person by parts that he sees as beautiful, but when the creature comes to life, it invokes the uncanny valley type of beauty/ look.
Del Toro's monster reminds me a lot of Beast from Beastly (the movie, not the book) if you ask me, lol

I think the movie is an excellent adaptation of Mary Shelley's novel. Here's my in-depth review https://paullev.substack.com/p/review...

I'm waiting for more reviews before I watch it. Shelley's novel was a masterpiece.

I've been unimpressed with del Toro for awhile. Crimson Peak was the last good thing he made IMO.

I've heard really good things about this movie, but I don't have Netflix. They so seldom have anything worthwhile that we couldn't justify the expense.

I haven’t watched the del Toro Frankenstein yet, but a couple of years ago I saw the Joffrey Ballet’s Frankenstein at the Lyric Opera House and it completely rewired my brain for how this story can look onstage. No dialogue, just music, movement, and those huge gothic visuals — it was gorgeous and genuinely terrifying in parts.

Ever since that production, I’ve been extra picky about Frankenstein adaptations, because I know how haunting and operatic this story can feel when everything clicks. Curious to see how the Netflix version stacks up.

Below I've posted the review I wrote for my Facebook author's page. It does contain a few spoilers.

I watched Guillermo del Toro’s Frankenstein over the weekend and thought I’d share my review. It’s a little long, but I wanted to be thorough. I’m not sure it’s possible to give spoilers to such a well-known story, but I do provide some specific detail in the third paragraph where I note changes del Toro made to Shelley’s story. So, to begin with, I want to say this is a fantastic adaptation and well worth the watch. The sets are beautiful and the costuming sumptuous. The acting is first rate—only to be expected from the movie’s wonderful cast. The Creature is an outstanding interpretation of Shelley’s creature in the novel and I really appreciated the way he looked like something from an anatomy muscular system illustration. The movie definitely focuses on the Creature’s suffering and the idea that the real monster of the story is Victor. All in all, I would have to say the movie was worth the wait and anticipation and rests up there alongside several other notable interpretations of Shelley’s novel. What I can’t say is that it’s the definitive interpretation.

I read early praise online that del Toro’s version was the most accurate in following the novel and, as a huge fan of Shelley’s novel, was excited to see a film completely capture what she wrote (an almost impossible task). I can not honestly say, however, that del Toro’s adaptation is any more true to the novel than Branagh’s version, or Frankenstein: The True Story from the 70s. Like the aforementioned films, del Toro is very true to the spirit of the novel and does choose several important themes present in the novel to emphasize, such as the nature vs. nurture argument, and he even gives passing attention to the question of whether the creature has a soul, something important in the novel and of more than a little interest to the novel’s early audiences. He does an excellent job maintaining the structure of the novel, preserving the frame of Walton’s voyage to the arctic and allowing both Victor and the Creature to have their own voice in the narrative. I found the real gem to be the amount of time del Toro gives to the Creature’s education at the hands of the DeLacey family, first hiding in the attack and later as the companion of the blind DeLacey (an exceptional performance by David Bradley). There was a wonderful moment where the Creature recites Percy Shelley’s Ozymandias.

However, del Toro makes numerous changes to the film such as unnecessarily changing Walton’s name to Anderson. More significantly, he changes several details of the plot. Victor’s younger brother, William, is much older in del Toro’s version and it is he, not Victor, who is engaged to Elizabeth. The entire subplot of Justine and William’s death is left out. Henry Clerval is completely absent from the story and his character appears to be somewhat folded into the character of Elizabeth’s rich uncle—a character and subplot completely invented by del Toro. Also, unlike the novel, del Toro’s Victor Frankenstein does not initially shun his creature and spends some time with him locked in his tower’s basement trying to teach him. The subplot of the Creature’s companion is reduced to a few sentences of discussion, and the cycle of vengeance the Creature and Victor are locked in seems rushed in the last act of del Toro’s adaptation.
In fairness to del Toro, it would likely take three plus hours to really make a book accurate movie of Shelley’s novel. I want to reiterate that this version is a beautiful interpretation of the novel and well worth a watch. But do not go into it expecting it to be any more book accurate than several other really fine attempts to adapt Shelley’s work to the screen.