Tag: horror film

Heading to Halloween: Bonus – Frankenstein 2025, Representing the Best and The Worst Adaptations

Ms Shelley, Victor Frankenstein, Universal Monster, Classic Monster
“So THAT’s where it all went wrong!”

“Frankenstein” 2025 is heralded by most horror fans as one of the defining and triumphant adaptations of the classic novel. But not by everyone and by everyone I mean me.

To be perfectly fair Guillermo del Toro has been quite clear that his vision is based not on the original novel but on “Frankenstein” 1931 and its various sequels. The 2025 version can only be seen as an amalgam of the classic novel, the Universal depictions of the Monster, and a lot of crap that came from who the hell knows where.

Make no mistake, Mr. del Toro is one of the most creative and accomplished filmmakers working today. His body of work has produced enough outright masterpieces as to make Mr. Hitchcock envious. He has the sensibilities of a rabid cinema and horror fan and this is evident in his work. He has the unique ability to create soul crushing dread, terror, and horror in a cinematic package that is as breathtakingly beautiful as it is mind explodingly terrifying.

And this is an absolutely gorgeous film. Or so I understand.

When first released, it had a limited theatrical run in theaters, some boasting a 35mm print. (Don’t get me started on the nostalgic and misplaced love of lower bandwidth media formats.) This is what my wife and I chose to see.

What a terrible mistake. The film was shot using digital technology that provided a much broader bandwidth that most contemporary film stock could ever offer. It was then mastered in 4k and I’ve heard that 4k presentation is stunning. Perhaps I can someday suppress enough of my distate to give it another try. The 35mm presentation is washed out, soft-focus to the extent of being blurry, and just visually unappealing.

Add in at least an hour of material not found in the novel and you’ve got something that just fails. We made it an hour into the film before walking out. I almost never walk out of a film in the theater. Hey, I made it all the way through “In a Violent Nature” 2024 and that’s saying something.

Enough bitching for one post.

Heading to Halloween: A Tale of Two TV Frankensteins

Frankenstein's Monster VS Frankenstein's Monster
Kind of pointless as neither of us can actually die.

The plan for today was to write about TV adaptations of Frankenstein. While doing research it became clear that there were quite a few TV adaptations and I’d seen very few of them. So let’s look at two adaptations I have seen, both from 1973.

Frankenstein 1973
Bo Svenson, still walking tall.

“Frankenstein” 1973 AKA “Dan Curtis Frankenstein” AKA “The Wide World of Mystery Frankenstein Parts 1 & 2” was (and is) the most faithful adaptation of the classic novel IMHO. It was a Dan Curtis production broadcast as part of ABC’s late night programming. Originally shown in two 90 minute episodes it looked fairly cheap even in 1973. It was shot on videotape as were most of the entries in The Wide World of Mystery. The cast was excellent and most of the sets were, if not lavish, more than serviceable. The listed running time for the entire production is 180 minutes (two 90 minute episodes) but this was late night TV which meant there were a LOT of commercial breaks. The best estimate that can be made is that most of the WWOM episodes contained between 67 and 70 minutes of content which would indicate the entire production ran around 134 – 140 minutes. The only existing version today is a single “movie” running 125 minutes. It’s still worth seeking out, even in a possibly truncated form.

Frankenstein: The True Story 1973
Looks more like Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde doesn’t it?

“Frankenstein: The True Story” 1973 is a puzzling title. To anyone who has actually read the classic novel, it’s clear that this is certainly not true to the novel. That’s not to say it’s not a star studded, lavish production in every way. It looked good enough to be on the big screen and a truncated two hour version did make its way to movie theaters in the UK and Europe. If one can look at this as a story unto itself, there’s quite a lot to like here. The direction, casting, and art direction are exceptional, especially for a TV production. It was shot on film and this gave it a much better look than the earlier 1973 production. It was also broadcast in prime time and was event viewing in 1973. This one is easy to find and worth your time to track down and watch.

Tomorrow we’ll take a look at two more recent films: “Diabolic” 2025 and “Dead Bloom” 2026.

See you then.