Watch Frankenstein For Free

Very very predictable, including the post credit scene !!!

If the ambition is to provide two hours of instantly forgettable, popcorn-munching escapism, it succeeds.

This is one of the few movies I've ever seen where the whole audience broke into spontaneous, loud applause a third of the way in.

This is a coming of age storyline that you've seen in one form or another for decades. It takes a truly unique voice to make yet another one worth watching.

This a great movie. It a remake. 6.4 is underrating it. This movie is a must see. It is based on one of the best horror books ever. And it is one of the best horror movies ever. This movie has great story line. It also has great acting. It also has great special effects. It the story of a scientist who takes part from different dead bodies and puts them together. He brings it to life. This movie is scary then The Exorcist. Frankenstein (1931) is scarier. But still this is very scary. If this movie does not scary you then no movie will. 1994 version is better. But still is very good movie. It one of closest versions to the book. This movie is a must see.

I watched this for the first time on Encore. Since I don't normally watch Hallmark, I never saw the movie until Encore showed it probably for the umpteenth time this week, and that was only because I was channel surfing. Fortunately I came in during the first fifteen minutes of the first part. I actually enjoyed this version better than any other because it truly follows Mary Shelley's novel. This is the true Frankenstein. Not a horror story, but, as one poster said, a tragedy.For younger viewers and anyone not familiar with the novel, it may be viewed as slow and probably even boring. Those who read the original material, however, will enjoy this film better than any of the past versions. Kenneth Branagh's take was close, but Kevin Connor truly followed Shelley's work.I haven't read the novel since I was a teen but have always remembered how it differed from all the movies except Branagh's. I saw Boris Karloff's original film long before I read the book, and I was completely surprised when I learned how much they differed. The Hammer Films were based more on Universal's film. When Branagh's film hit the screen, I thought it was the closest version to the novel. This one, however, along with its cinematography is truly faithful to the original source material. That is something rare in movies. It probably would never have made its way to the theaters due to its length and lack of real action until the latter stage.I must add viewing this movie 11 years after its release has made me realize what I've missed on the Hallmark Channel. I need to start reviewing what's being shown on that network more often. No telling what other classic adaptations I've missed. Thank you, Encore, for showing it in full without commercials.=0=

FRANKENSTEIN is a TV miniseries retelling of the Mary Shelley novel, made by Hallmark Entertainment. I do enjoy these Hallmark shows, which are invariably well-cast and good-lucking; certainly the production values in this one are sumptuous indeed, especially considering it was made for TV. The Arctic locations look fantastic, and the European location work really adds to the atmosphere of the piece.In scope and tone, this is closely aligned to Branagh's MARY SHELLEY'S FRANKENSTEIN, although it's not as good as that movie. For a start, the cast is less interesting, although there are exceptions. I can't see why Donald Sutherland, for instance, is wasted in the thankless role of the ship's captain, or why Luke Goss makes so little an impact as the Creature. William Hurt and Julie Delpy are similarly underutilised in relatively minor roles, while a hell of a lot is put on the shoulders of Alec Newman, playing Frankenstein. Newman is okay, but hardly great; surely this part cries out for a well-established talent.This miniseries boasts some decent cinematography, but it's an entirely bloodless affair, and somehow the drama is never as exciting as it should be. It doesn't help that the Creature looks like a tired goth, or maybe Lord Byron after a particularly heavy night on the booze. FRANKENSTEIN is acceptable and deserves kudos for capturing the right "feel" of the novel, but I'd rather watch the Branagh adaptation again than this one.

This movie is one fine example of dull storytelling alright. The pace is too slow, the character development is missing and all of the events are told uninteresting. But what else could you expect from a director who mostly works on TV-series and made for TV-movies, like this one.The movie tells the classic story of the Mary Shelley novel Frankenstein. It might be a faithfully adaptation but it certainly isn't a very good one.The movie is set in some kind of weird English costume drama environment. OK the result are some scene's with some impressive scenery but it doesn't really work well for the atmosphere of the story and it kills all the tension. The story never gets exciting or tense, due to the low pace, standard cinematography and weak editing. The characters are poorly development and I couldn't care more or less about them.The fine actors don't have an awful lot to do, with the weak script and directing. A bit of a waste of a great cast. And Luke Goss basically plays his "Blade II" role all over again, including screaming the lines; "Father, father!". His portrayal of the Frankenstein monster was not really convincing, interesting or memorable.Not a complete disaster to watch but most certainly not an interesting or recommendable one. This movie adds nothing new compared to previously made Frankenstein versions.5/10http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/