Netflix movie review

(Text originally published during coverage of the 2025 Toronto Festival)

“That was my messiah! My Jesus Christ.” It was in this way that Guillermo Del Toro described his relationship with Frankensteinadaptation of Boris Karloff launched almost 100 years ago, in 1931. And it couldn’t be any different. The passion for monsters, gothic and horror permeates the Mexican director’s entire filmography. His first film, Cronuswas already a great reference to the work of Mary Shelleyauthor of the original book by Frankenstein. It took a while, but finally Del Toro did it – with financing from Netflixwhich continues in search of its long-awaited Oscar for Best Film – putting its dream project forward.

The director brings together a starry and pop cast for his adaptation, bringing Oscar Isaac as Victor Frankenstein, the scientist who defies death by creating a being from the remains of lifeless bodies from war. Mia Gothstar of the Trilogy Xyes A24plays Elizabeth, the passion of Victor and his Creature, played by Jacob Elordi. The team still has Christoph Waltz like Harlander, David Bradley, Ralph Ineson, Charles Dance e Felix Kammererthe latter of Nothing New on the Front.

Frankenstein is yet another visual delight in the hands of Del Toro and his production team, but the truth is that no one would have the courage not to believe it since the film was announced. The Mexican filmmaker has proven over the last 30 years that he is a master in this artisanal way of building stories, settings and creatures. From O Pan’s LabyrinthHellboy and his companions until the Oscar with The Shape of Water e PinocchioDel Toro became a master at putting practical effects and realistic makeup on screen. When he needed to delve into CGI, with Circle of Firethe director showed that he also understood physics and proportions, giving weight to the robots and kaiju in the story. So what seems strange, when several actors from Frankenstein They need to reinforce this artisan side of the director so much when promoting the film, it actually works as a distraction for what doesn’t work in the story.

The plot of Frankenstein’s monster has been told countless times in cinema, whether in faithful adaptations of Shelley’s book or in blockbusters like Van Helsing. There is little left for anything new in the tragedy of this modern Prometheus who, in trying to immortalize life, creates even more destruction and deaths. Del Toro bets on some elements, such as the star cast, but not all of them work well. Mia Goth and Christoph Waltz, for example, continue repeating their previous works. The actor can’t escape the mistakes that made him win two Oscars at the hands of Quentin Tarantino. Goth, on the other hand, always seems to wait for a moment to scream again “I’m a star!”, like you did in Pearlin the films of the trilogy X the Ti West.

The responsibility lies completely with the protagonists of the story. Oscar Isaac makes a mix of Steven Tyler with a mad scientist, in an affected performance, but one that works, especially after the arrival of the Creature. And that’s where Frankenstein’s greatest asset comes in. Jacob Elordi, in makeup that completely resembles the Engineers from (look!) Prometheusis fantastic as the monster who searches for meaning in his creation. Del Toro is very intelligent in paying more attention to the Creature’s feelings and taking advantage of the actor’s talent to focus even more on the character’s nuances, with Elordi moving perfectly between melancholic and lonely, but imposing strength and fear when necessary. It is interesting to realize that the great merits of the film stand out each in their own part. If Victor’s story fills the eyes with the technical part, the Creature’s point of view is where the plot really gains its most interesting moment, focused on forgiveness and sensitivity. And it’s curious that, upon reaching this point, the film slips into the use of CGI, with very strange creations of animals such as deer, sheep and wolves.

Frankenstein is far from being a bad film. The soundtrack of Alexander Desplat It’s beautiful and nothing takes away from the merit of seeing a story created more than 200 years ago still being told with so much passion, care and attention. As the popular saying goes, perhaps Guillermo Del Toro is wrong to love the work too much. The director is stuck with the mission of trying to prove the scale of his tale. Did this with The Scarlet Hill and Nightmare Alley, both with the same predicates as Frankenstein. It lacks the sensitivity of the director who retold Pinocchio in the best possible way, who made the novel à la Beauty and the Beast com The Shape of Waterand told the horrors of war through the eyes of a girl in Pan’s Labyrinth. Frankenstein is beautiful, but warm and common. Something that neither Mary Shelley’s work nor the director’s great films ever were.