Order by:

Add your comment

Do you want to let us know what you think? Just login, after which you will be redirected back here and you can leave your comments.

Comments 1 - 15 of 18

BeasleyOnFilm's avatar


Karloff injects a surprising amount of warmth into the monster actually. It only works if you see it as completely different to the book.
9 years 2 months ago
caley's avatar


It's surprisingly sad.
10 years 4 months ago
Joker of Gotham's avatar

Joker of Gotham

Well I finally understood of what movie this scene came from


A classic of horror that at this day it donĀ“t seems so scary like it probably was back then.

6 years 6 months ago
myrnawilliams's avatar


it's surprisingly sad. [2]
9 years 4 months ago
Auz's avatar


I do agree that as a standalone film it's pretty good and I can see that it definitely left a mark on pop culture.

However, I also have to agree with kellyoung that this is absolutely terrible as an interpretation of the book. Nothing that made the original story deep, interesting and horrifying is in here and the monster in the film is about the worst character portrayal I've ever seen in a film.

I don't like to throw in phrases like "The book is better" when judging a film(s plot), because I understand a film can never tell a story as deep and elaborate the way a book can. But in this particular case it is absolutely true.
9 years 8 months ago
Woliver's avatar


Oh boy, so what if it's way too different from the original book plot? IT IS A MOVIE! Is not supposed to be a video-book!
It's absurd to claim "but the book was better" both are different thing's, or was the comic book better than the operetta? Pfff! Stop being pretentious guys, you obviously don't read neither see enough movies.
9 years ago
Oneironaut's avatar


Would have liked this to have been the first Frankenstein adaptation that I saw. It was good, not particularly great. Book is much better - not always something that needs to be said but I feel that it does here.
9 years 4 months ago
george4mon's avatar


much better than dracula!
9 years 11 months ago
Dieguito's avatar


it's sad to be a monster
9 years 12 months ago
E. T. Blunt's avatar

E. T. Blunt

Proof that society oftentimes sees the monster in the creation, not the creator.
9 months 1 week ago
DisneyStitch's avatar


I feel like it could have used a soundtrack. The pace and tone of the film feels somewhat off with just sheer silence punctuating the screen. Karloff does a good job portraying the monster.
9 months 4 weeks ago
Siskoid's avatar


Universal's Frankenstein, with Boris Karloff, came out in 1931, just like Dracula, its cousin franchise, did, and I'm happy to report it doesn't suffer from a similar slowness. Of course, it's not the Mary Shelley novel. I find her book to be astonishing in that it creates an entirely new Gothic monster, not one pulled from folklore like vampires, werewolves, etc. Universal's version does that too, because its child-like, but dangerously strong monster with an "abnormal brain" is completely different from Shelley's existential "Modern Prometheus". It's worth celebrating its originality and sustained popularity. The film is well shot, the violence shocking without being overwhelming, the make-up iconic, and the monster sympathetic. I might question the mix of American and European accents in what appears to be Gothic Bavaria, but overall, Frankenstein retains its power and does not feel as dated as Dracula.
3 years 9 months ago
fakirfikir's avatar


One of the best scenario I have ever watched.
Also this is our(humanity's) first (fictional) AI experience in modern times. Awsome movie, must-watched.

It is interesting how writer fictionalized AI and how humanity respond it (in a most bigoted and irrational way)
5 years 1 month ago
SLionsCricket's avatar


Great storyline, good performances, well paced, interesting yet lacks tension. 3.5/5
7 years 10 months ago
roobin_22's avatar


d'oh this is awful.. liked the part with the drowning girl though..
10 years 5 months ago

Showing items 1 – 15 of 18

View comments