Change Your Image
withnailian
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Lists
An error has ocurred. Please try againReviews
Mary Shelley's Frankenstein (1994)
Branagh Creates 2 Monsters with this Abomination
"Sister, Friend, Lover"
I believe that this quote, said early on in the film, shows just how abysmal this film really is. To start this review I must first say I have recently read the third edition of Frankenstein for my English Literature course and can honestly say it was one of the greatest books I have ever read. I was well accustomed with what I believed the story to be from how it is often portrayed in various media, but was completely mesmerised by the story, having so many underlying messages and themes, a story that takes us all across the world which gives this novel the worthy status as the pinnacle of the Romantic and Gothic Genre. In the 1930's we got Boris Karloff's iconic portrayal of the monster, a landmark of film, but it certainly did not translate Shelleys wonderful book well to the screen. In fact for nearly 70 years there has never been a Frankenstein adaptation that has ever been faithful to the original book. And so some goon in Hollywood decided Kenneth Branagh would be the go-to guy for the book adaptation. It is actually surprising how someone with such "talent" (said with a sore heart)could mess up this badly is truly more shocking and horrifying than any event in this film.
It starts off like the book; Walton's ship is trapped in the arctic, where him and the crew see the monster far off and meet the eponymous Frankenstein (Branagh). The characterisation of Walton was just plain awful, not being the romantic adventurer desperate for human companionship from the novel. This character in the book was interesting as it is he whose letters frame the whole novel, it is him who learns Frankenstein's lesson at the end, and it his personality that mirrors Frankenstein's and The Monsters ideologies; Frankenstein's quest for knowledge and exploration and The Monsters need for a companion. But in this adaptation he is barely there, and when he is he is poorly played, acted more like a pompous and arrogant captain than a man striving to explore. And where is the relationship between Frankenstein and Walton? No, Branagh believes that it be better that the captain is aggressive to him, so he can just fall straight into his convulsing story.
We are then introduced to the love story between Victor and Elizabeth (Helena Bonham Carter). I do really like Helena Bonham Carter in other films (Particularly in Sweeney Todd) but here it is like watching a completely different actress, as she theatrically throws herself with no meaning or skill from scene to scene. As the pivot to the events in the book, we have Frankenstein's mother die, but in a completely different way to in the book, so we get a gory shot of a dodgy birth. They have also from this film adaptation got rid of Victors younger brother Ernest, changed it so it is Victors professor who has the idea of bringing dead matter back to life, Making Victor meet Henry at university... Eventually all this artistic licensing and changing of the mythology has made this film completely different from the original novel and alienating any true fan of the book. For example, the death of Judith isn't as severe as in the book it is the law that kills her, whilst here it is a lynch mob. It is as if Branagh ran out of running time in the second half so tried to quickly summarise the rest of the book. But in doing this, has stopped it being even remotely Gothic. Where is the vast scenery, where is the slow picking off of the various characters... It is a rushed and bloated mess.
The one possible saving grace for this film is Robert De Niro, who does actually create a believable and quite emotional monster. But he is so rushed and thoughtlessly thrown through the action that the audience finds it hard to connect with this innocent gone bad. The rest of the acting in this film is wooden and unbelievable, so the characters that are so well rounded in the book are taken back a step. The penultimate change to Elizabeth's death, making her resurrected in one last experiment by Frankenstein, is just ridiculous and at that point was the last straw to this abhorred film. The ending attempts to be bittersweet, but fails to see the ambiguity that Shelleys novel was regaled with. I did not care when any of the characters, even Victor, died, and I doubt anyone else could.
Branagh, a lot like Victor himself, has taken bits of beauty from the book, built and constructed it into this monster and as soon as Branaghs monster has opened its eyes we are revealed to how hideous and monstrous it truly is. You want classic Gothic, read the book, and stay away from this film.
Dredd (2012)
Dredd: The 2010's RoboCop
Having never read the original 2000 AD comic strip, or having never watched the apparently awful film adaptation with Sylvester Stallone, I entered this film yesterday with an open mind. I had previously been put off the film with the awful La Roux song playing over the trailer, thinking the director had tried to take what could be an awesome action film into some Artsy Fartsy Bulls**t. How wrong was I.
From the very start it opens up the violence with a brooding and angry monologue spoken from the eponymous anti-hero (played by Karl Urban, pretty much a futuristic Dirty Harry, as he hunts down a hit and run criminal. It plays out a lot like a Clint Eastwood or Arnie flick, with this unstoppable yet likable hero kicking ass whilst grunting lame cliché catchphrases. We are then introduced to the threadbare story of him training his psychic rookie partner, who has failed the initial test to be a judge but due to her abilities is given a trial run. We are then given a ruthless villain and a tower setting for our two heroes to battle through, playing out a lot like a video game. The introduction of the drug "slo-mo" and the introduction of the psychic sequences gives us a chance to watch the truly excellent violence all slowed down and made more surreal, giving this quite clichéd film some innovation and originality.
This is an excellent adaptation of the original 2000 AD anti-hero that I went in to with little expectations and was literally blown away. The impressive action sequences make for a standard shoot-em-up, but the use of impressive shot types and the interesting contrast between the two leads make it an impressive watch. Hopefully this will be preserved as the main version of the character, rather than the awful Stallone version. Some people may question this films underlying message... Is it a message about totalitarianism? A message against Nuclear War? How we all idolize fascism and secretly need it? No... I believe this film to just be pure fun, a film where a guys cheek is blown off in slow motion, a film where three skinned bodies are thrown from a tower, a film where a woman's brain bursts out of their head and one where the good guys always win. This will easily play out to be the RoboCop of this decade.
Watchmen (2009)
A Perfect Example of The Superhero Genre
Firsts things first for this review, I watched this film a few months ago and at the time had never read the book. I was recommended this film by a friend who is obsessed by the book and film alike, and I must say I was very skeptical of this title for two main reasons;
1.) The trailer didn't really sell it for me, mainly as it didn't really give an insight to the story and seemed more interested in showing the effects to create Dr. Manhattan.
2.) Judging by the quality of most Superhero Films (e.g. Green Lantern, Spiderman, X-Men, Hulk etc.) I didn't expect much. Probably just having a casual disregard for the comics back story, instead having more focus on lame catchphrases and dull set pieces to hope a few drones will recognize the name half-heartedly and be willing to give up a few pounds for 2 hours or so of mind numbing boredom.
How wrong was I. I was very impressed by almost every aspect of this film, particularly the way it swaps between genre to genre; having noir- detective qualities for the scenes with Rorschach, typical superhero standards for the back story of Dr. Manhattan, to surprisingly real feelings of inadequacies and feeling of worthlessness with Nite Owl. This mix of genres blended together superbly, creating a film that can be watched by anyone.
The ensemble cast are excellent, particularly Rorschach, played perfectly by Jackie Earl Harley, who gives the very complex and difficult character with style, poise, and even having a few truly heartbreaking moments. Patrick Wilson was excellent as the insecure Nite Owl, Billy Cruddup gives a perfect monotonous genius to the difficult Manhattan and Jeffrey Dean Morgan creates a truly terrifying yet reasonable Comedian. Even model Malin Akerman gives a good turn at the pretty generic Silk Spectre. The only real let downs in the cast is Matthew Goode as Ozymandias, who just isn't as physically powerful and domineering as his "perfect" character should be.
The Soundtrack for the film, like almost all the elements of the film, is superbly done, right down to the haunting opening montage to Bob Dylan's "The Times They Are A-Changin'" to "The Sound of Silence" playing in the funeral scene, to Jimi Hendrix's cover of "All Along The Watchtower" in the penultimate scene. I can think of very few films, particularly made in the last few years, which have a soundtrack as superb as this one, blending, like the comic itself, popular culture and science fiction.
After reading the comic for the first time, I believe people do not truly appreciate the masterpiece that Snyder has created with Watchmen. He has created a film which follows the comic nearly frame for frame, something which is rarely achieved by a film of this calibre. Whilst Alan Moore may view his truly excellent comic masterpiece as elitist over Watchmen in the medium of film, I believe that Snyder has created a deeply complex and riveting Action Film that should take high ranks amongst Superhero films and the medium of Film itself.