Frankenstein: Legacy

For a low budget film, I thought this was a very good effort that keeps in the spirit of Shelley's classic. The location of the old house was great and I think the best coup of the film. Great use of sets and decent acting. It was fun to see Michelle Ryan (Zoe from Eastenders) in a role again though wish she was in it more.

Small complaints were that I think some of the character scenes went on for too long and not enough of the monster. Also the location of the old house made other locations really stand out as sets (cut from a beautiful stately home to cheap looking special effects of an asylum)

Otherwise, great watch for a lazy afternoon.

I recently watched this gem on Amazon, and I must say, it left quite an impression. The characters were wonderfully crafted, and the storyline held a firm grip throughout. It's easy to develop a genuine empathy for these characters. Plus, it had all the delightful madness of a classic mad scientist narrative, which is right up my alley. And let me tell you, the conclusion is an absolute whirlwind of emotions. Prepare to have your heartstrings tugged, particularly in the moments involving family and the monstrous.

Having enjoyed Paul's previous work, 'Fear the Invisible Man,' I had high hopes for this one, and I wasn't disappointed. The team truly knocked it out of the park.

From direction to storytelling, cinematography to score, every aspect of this film is stellar. The actors breathed life into the legacy of Frankenstein like never before.

As someone aspiring to venture into film production myself, this serves as a prime example of what independent producers can achieve with dedication and a commitment to delivering an immersive artistic experience. It's a testament to the power of storytelling and the creation of characters so compelling that you can't help but stay invested until the very end. And oh, what a journey it is for these wonderful characters!

This is a Frankenstein follow up ??.

A woman gets hold of Dr Frankensteins diary and recreates his experiment on her husband to cure him 100 years after Frankensteins original monster.

This diary has been sought after by many but a secret group are trying to locate the diary and destroy it for good as it goes against nature and god.

Sounds fairly interesting and and the overall concept is solid.

The costumes and settings are pretty believable for the time, around late 1800s.

The dialogue is a bit wooden however like a stage show, I'm pretty sure this is down to both the writing and the poor way in which the actors deliver the lines attempting to sound authentic from that Era.

There are some experienced and decent actors here but I never felt they embraced the ideology or the era properly.

Phillip Martin Brown does a decent job here but not enough to carry the film.

The way in which it was shot also removed an authentic feel and resembled a higher image quality version of a 90s tv movie.

I watched this to see Michelle Ryan as i liked her in Eastenders and the she did Bionic Woman and then her career fizzled out.

She appears later in the film in a limited role.

There were quite a few moments watching this where I chuckled at some of the poor dialogue or the poor delivery or facial over acting.

Honestly Id skip it even if you have Prime, unless you are a huge Frankenstein fan but then you might hate it even more.

4/10.

From the start it's clear this is a VERY cheaply made movie. They get an old house, dress some people up in period costumes and get out the digital camera.

It sure isn't Universal's Frankenstein. Heck, it's not even Hammer's Frankenstein.

The writing is really bad and the directing is amateurish. Perhaps because of a low budget that require a lot of close up so you don't see the surroundings.

It tries to be a serious effort but its all bogged down by a complete lack of talent for all involved.

Not sure why they bothered to make this movie. The concept might be OK but it really requires a bigger budget and better writing and acting to make it work!.

The direction was solid overall, and the production design was visually engaging.

One of the most impressive aspects was the richness of language and expression, particularly in the portrayal of the doctor. The mother's character was intriguing, though unfortunately underdeveloped in several key areas. A deeper exploration of her emotional world and psychological depth would have added much-needed weight and resonance to the story.

However, some events came across as shallow or unconvincing, and the characters' reactions to them felt either weak or completely absent.

Additionally, a few performances such as that of the nurse were noticeably weak.

The portrayal of the young woman seeking the book from the mother was especially disappointing; the role had significant potential but failed to deliver any emotional or narrative impact..