Voxitype Good films always raise compelling questions, whether the format is fiction or documentary fact.

StyleSk8r At first rather annoying in its heavy emphasis on reenactments, this movie ultimately proves fascinating, simply because the complicated, highly dramatic tale it tells still almost defies belief.

Kien Navarro Exactly the movie you think it is, but not the movie you want it to be.

Allison Davies The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

tvsweeney-39052 This was to be the first episode of a Dean Koontz-written series which, unfortunately, never was made and instead became a series of novels. Having owned a copy of the novel, I think it was a pity the series never happened. AS scripted, it's more a police procedural than a horror story, with tendrils of horror. This time, Frankenstein is called Helios and he's still searching for the perfect creature but now has a network of his creations, some living almost normal lives but still tied to him. The arrival in New Orleans of his original creation, now called Deucalion, and a series of gruesome murders bring together the creature and the police detective investigating. The tone is dark but compelling, the characters equally so. Helios is handsome, cold, and prepared to sacrifice even the wife he loves (and created) when she proves imperfect.The acting is good, the premise intriguing. Unfortunately, it stops just when things gets really interesting and the promise of answers to questions in the form of the next movie never materializes. It's too bad the series never was made because if it held to the precepts of the pilot and the novel, it would've been great.This movie was viewed as a rental DVD and no remuneration was involved in the writing of this review.

jacobjohntaylor1 This is a Frankenstein sequel. Most of the time Frankenstein sequels are good. But this one is not. In this movie the monsters is the hero and Doctor Frankenstein is the bad guy. I don't think I care for that to mush. This one doctor Frankenstein and the monster live into modern times. The monster meet a female cop. And there are both trying to stop the evil doctor Frankenstein. The book and older movies. Doctor Frankenstein is good guy. And the monster is the bad guy. So I real don't care for it. It not very scary. Bad story line. Bad acting. Skip it. This is pooh pooh. Don't wast your money. Do wast your time. Do not see this movie.

Leofwine_draca Let me get this straight to begin with: FRANKENSTEIN is a horrible reinterpretation of the classic Mary Shelley novel, which attempts to modernise the story in a pre-flooding New Orleans. Everything about this production screams cliché: there's a murky, depressing visual style that constantly uses David Fincher's SE7EN as its source material (isn't that so late '90s?) and a storyline that ends up going absolutely nowhere. The reason? This was the ill-conceived pilot of a television series that was never made, so don't go in expecting any kind of plot resolution or tying up of loose ends.The tired story sees a couple of lame detectives (Parker Posey and Adam Goldberg, possibly the most uninteresting cops I've seen in any movie) going after a killer leaving a string of bizarre deaths in his wake. Along the way, they come across Vincent Perez as a strangely scarred and hooded figure, and there are no prizes for guessing who he's supposed to be. There's also some pointless stuff involving ruthless scientist Victor Helios, played by Thomas Kretschmann. He's Frankenstein, but despite taking up a great deal of screen time he never actually gets involved in the main storyline.Yeah, the film really is that muddled and disjointed: the detectives never catch up with Frankenstein, and we never even learn how he's still alive in the modern day. Talk about a con. Instead, the thrust of the plot eventually turns out to involve Michael Madsen, playing a fellow detective with a few secrets of his own. But there's really nothing to keep you watching: no interesting set-pieces, no special effects to speak of, no drama, no tension, not one bit of suspense. Director Marcus Nispel's work feels adrift and aimless outside of his preferred genre (remakes), and Dean Koontz wisely took his name off the thing. You can hardly blame him.

Frankiiee I had no idea what this was about when I started watching, obviously the main idea was based on Mary Shelley's book but I struggled to make the link. It was just...a bit of a mess really. Yes, I think that the idea itself was original and could have been brilliant but all the fade outs made it impossible to follow. I understand why they did it after reading that it was going to be a TV series but there were still way too many. It felt like they were cutting out half way through something important and then when they went back to it, something completely different was going on. There were too many branches coming out of this film that weren't explained, Helios' spine for example. What was that about? Did I imagine seeing it, because it was never mentioned again. And the ending was ridiculous. Okay so it was supposed to be a cliffhanger but it just...stopped. In the middle of a conversation! Overall, I was very underwhelmed and to be honest, this film doesn't deserve to name itself after such an amazing story.