Du point de vue d'Igor, nous voyons les sombres origines du jeune assistant troublé, son amitié rédemptrice avec le jeune étudiant en médecine Viktor Von Frankenstein, et devenons des témoin... Tout lireDu point de vue d'Igor, nous voyons les sombres origines du jeune assistant troublé, son amitié rédemptrice avec le jeune étudiant en médecine Viktor Von Frankenstein, et devenons des témoins oculaires de l'émergence de la façon dont Frankenstein est devenu l'homme, et la légende... Tout lireDu point de vue d'Igor, nous voyons les sombres origines du jeune assistant troublé, son amitié rédemptrice avec le jeune étudiant en médecine Viktor Von Frankenstein, et devenons des témoins oculaires de l'émergence de la façon dont Frankenstein est devenu l'homme, et la légende, que nous connaissons aujourd'hui.
- Réalisation
- Scénaristes
- Vedettes
- Prix
- 4 victoires et 1 nomination au total
Avis en vedette
A predictable, perfunctory retelling of a renowned tale.
Victor Frankenstein is not a bad movie in the traditional sense. If this was the first telling of this story, it would be a perfectly serviceable standalone film. But since it's so well-known, nothing about Victor Frankenstein is memorable. It's just the same narrative with different actors playing it out. No surprises, no innovations, no purpose. Just a talented cast reenacting a renowned tale.
Stitched together from archaic fable tricks, Viktor Frankenstein is an empty vessel at heart.
A slight modification to the narrative is made, just like Sherlock the movie is narrated from the sidekick's perspective, in this case Igor's (Daniel Radcliffe). Aside from that, there's barely anything new that hasn't been done in similar or better fashion. To its credit, it's not utterly terrible in term of presentation, in fact the visual is rather nice. It's quaintly dark and electric version of last decade metropolis, Tesla would approve.
James McAvoy as the titular Viktor really tries hard on establishing the character. Given the stale material, he still manages to squeeze some emotional scenes as well as a good chemistry with Radcliffe in a bromantic kind of way. Andrew Scott from Moriarty fame, now plays the role of Inspector Turpin. He's the polar opposite of Viktor, conservative yet equally clever and ambitious.
Unfortunately, the far too familiar plot fails to produce any thrill, the strong acting prowess ends up rehearsing the same routine of mad scientist's banter. There's screaming, philosophical argument, faux science and slight mental abuse by the two leads. It's a lot of noise of little dramatic effect. Not that the script is bad in any way, it has occasional witty lines although any hint of humor or charm is muffled by the overly melancholy tone.
At some points, the movie tries to dabble in horror, action and even romance subplot. The atmosphere is already primed for thriller, but the shocking abomination is ironically timid and unmemorable. Action consists of a few scenes of slow motions repetition. Despite the production offering distractions, the main story line is very straightforward and streamlined, and sadly also predictable.
For all the star and flair, though they might be mildly amusing, the end product is a medium so lacking of life.
Weird Movie
Title (Brazil): "Victor Frankenstein"
Different view
Since I haven't read the novel, I'm not sure if some of the "changes" are already in the book, but weren't used before in other adaptations. Both main actors are really good and convey the characters they portray. With all their flaws and downfalls, with all their dreams and hopes. Whether you agree with those or not, this is more than a decent effort and a really good movie
Understandably not a totally strong "horror flick"; Victor Frankenstein, however, is a creative, likable, and fantastic movie.
In conclusion, this film succeeds in a pleasant surprise. Once again, I can see where people get disappointed, as we see barely any real "Frankenstein" or in this case, the reanimated monster, at least not as much as many may of expected. However, the film succeeded in dismissing that, as we're giving many succeeding elements, including stunning visual effects, great, likable characters. I fun, at the same time thrilling story, and an overall unique charm that doesn't disappoint. Although, as said before this wasn't a strong "horror" but for what it was, aside the dismiss of the appearances of monsters, this was a fun film, enjoyable, and over all fantastic. I'd highly recommend this one.
Frankenstein Through the Years
Frankenstein Through the Years
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesThe mispronunciation of Frankenstein's name as "Frankenschtein" is an allusion to a line from Frankenstein Junior (1974).
- GaffesIgor prescribes three ounces of arsenic for Lorelei. The LD50 (lethal dose for 50% of the population) is 13 mg per kg, so the amount recommended by Igor would be about 150 times the LD50, assuming she weighs about 100 pounds. But Igor is merely posing as a doctor in authority perhaps attempting to get as large a supply as possible to use over many months, and he may have been assuming only a partial order would get approved by any supervising authority at the hospital.
- Citations
Igor: It's alive.
Victor Von Frankenstein: Isn't that rather obvious?
- Bandes originalesUnter Donner und Blitz, Op. 324
Written by Johann Strauss (as Johann Strauss II)
Arranged by Craig Armstrong
Meilleurs choix
- How long is Victor Frankenstein?Propulsé par Alexa
Détails
Box-office
- Budget
- 65 000 000 $ US (estimation)
- Brut – États-Unis et Canada
- 5 775 076 $ US
- Fin de semaine d'ouverture – États-Unis et Canada
- 2 469 341 $ US
- 29 nov. 2015
- Brut – à l'échelle mondiale
- 34 227 298 $ US
- Durée
- 1h 50m(110 min)
- Couleur
- Mixage
- Rapport de forme
- 2.35 : 1






