User reviews

I have to admit, I enjoyed this film, and I enjoyed it more than I thought I would. This is only the second Roger Corman film I've seen so far, and therefore I can only really compare it to the other film I saw by him, The Terror. I can clearly recognize the directing style, and basic film-making style, but I must say that this is better than The Terror. The plot is pretty good, and fairly interesting, and more original than most other films dealing with Frankenstein. It has a decent enough pace; I wasn't bored for the 90 minutes it lasted. The script is fairly good too, a good twist on the original Frankenstein story, though I guess some fans of the original story wouldn't like the various changes. The acting is good enough, both John Hurt and Raul Julia gives pretty good performances, and the rest of the cast is decent. The characters are fairly well-written and credible. The film has a fairly bad name, it seems; yes, the monster does look more like the result of genetic mutation or something similar, rather than a creature built together by human bodies, and, arguably, the film has several violent scenes that seem to be there mainly to add violence rather than substance to the film, but apart from that, the film is pretty good, at least worth a watch, if only one watch. The effects are decent enough, at least for a film from 1990. The makeup effects and such were also pretty good, I must say that the monster's face, especially the eyes, did send a chill through my spine, the first time he was shown. I liked the various science fiction aspects of the film, and the social commentary was very good, too. The ending was a little weird, but it was a fairly good climax. All in all, a decent enough science fiction/horror drama, and worth one watch, if you can catch it for free. I recommend it to fans of Roger Corman and open-minded fans of Frankenstein and/or horror films in general; just be prepared that it won't be an incredible or very memorable film, just an entertaining 90 minutes, if you're into violent movies without any real purpose. 6/10

The film narrates how a scientist (John Hurt) of the future is become into a time traveller . Thus , he accidentally returns 1816 and nearly a lagoon Swiss he meets Lord Byron (Jason Patrick), his lover Mary Shelley (Bridget Fonda) and Percy Shelley ; but also Baron Frankenstein (Raul Julia) and his monster (Nick Brimble). The Baron has created a terrifying monster and cannot ultimately control him but he develops a taste for a bride and he begins a killing spree .The monster is really horrifying , he's vengeful and craving of blood.

A sci-fi movie version of the legendary terror story. Lots of horror images and the picture's entertaining with no being too creepy . Good performances from John Hurt and Raul Julia and great supporting cast as Jason Patrick, Bridget Fonda, Nick Brimble, and with several powerful sequences . Besides, the film has great loads of blood and gore , the filmmaker retains a fascination with the decapitated members. Some typical elements as the monster's bride, the madness and electric storm on the tower remain still in similar way. Excellent atmosphere provided by professional cinematographers as Armando Nannuzzi and Michael Scott. Film is based on Brian Aldiss novel (Artificial intelligence A. I.). The motion picture was regularly directed by Roger Corman, in fact there are gaps as well as flaws in the plot and results to be a little slow-moving. Rating : 5.5/10. Average but amusing.

This movie is truly bizarre. It tries so hard to give the story of Frankenstein this fresh relevance to today by mirroring it to science/weapons development, but neglecting the fact that the whole original story has relevance already. So, what you're left with are some cheezy special effects and some mixed-bag acting. I especially love the early future scenes with blinking lights, dot matrix printers and IBM XTs. The KITT-rip-off car is rather entertaining too.

A couple great scenes to watch for: the early bike-burying scene from which the above quote comes from, the half-baked romance ("I've never even imagined someone like you." "That's because I don't exist yet.") and the spirograph-esqe lasers. I really don't think this movie deserves as high of a rating as it has (5.3 at the time of this writing), but at least it's kinda fun. Just don't expect it to change your life.

I've watched this film several times now and actually, every time I watch it seems to get a little better each time. It's an original concept on the continuance of the Frankenstein myth with some added "modern" futuristic bends and twists that motivate the story along. One of the best thing about this film is John Hurt. This doesn't seem to be his type of movie yet he does very well in it. His voice, especially, is captivating and keeps your attention. He has the type of voice that very few actors these days can boast about in that it has personality and sonority in tone. Something akin to the voices of Colin Clive, Vincent Price and of course, Claude Rains. If they ever decide to do a serious biopic about Rains, I really hope that John Hurt is considered: he'd be perfect for the part! "Yes...I know. Made me from dead. I love dead...hate living." - The Monster in the original 1935 "Bride of Frankenstein"

Legendary independent filmmaker Roger Corman returned to a directors' chair for the first time in almost 20 years with this ambitious, offbeat project, an adaptation of the novel by Brian Aldiss. It's fun to a degree, and certainly interesting, if not a patch on his best work, the Edgar Allan Poe adaptations of the 1960s. Fortunately for him the budget does look like it was bigger on this thing than on some movies in his filmography. That allows for decent production values and a whole smorgasbord of special effects. The main attraction is the cast, especially our two leads, John Hurt and Raul Julia.

Hurt plays Dr. Joe Buchanan, a scientist whose implosion experiments have created "time slips". Joe himself gets caught in a time slip and is transported back to Victorian times where he chances to meet none other than Dr. Frankenstein (Julia), his monster (Nick Brimble), Mary Shelley (Bridget Fonda), Lord Byron (Jason Patrick), and Percy Shelley (Michael Hutchence, the late singer of the rock band INXS). Joe becomes determined to save the life of Justine Moritz (played by Cormans' daughter Catherine) and ultimately put an end to the monsters' rampage.

As scripted by Corman himself and film historian F.X. Feeney, this is fanciful entertainment that does have a good pace going for it. It is amusing to see characters from far different worlds interacting, although Frankenstein and others in this story adjust extremely well to discovering such things as computers and Joes' ultra-sophisticated car (which comes complete with a sexy female voice supplied by Terri Treas). The effects are frequently cheesy but entertaining, Nick Dudmans' makeup for the monster is good, period recreation is acceptable, and the music by Carl Davis provides just the right touch. How well the ending works may be up to the individual viewer.

Must viewing for all Corman devotees, if only to see the kind of project with which he laid his directorial career to rest.

Six out of 10.

Toiling in the not-too-distant future, Joe Buchanan (John Hurt), a not-quite mad scientist, has invented a machine that vaporises the enemy while leaving the environment untouched, something that will protect the good ol' U.S of A from evil. The only flaw in Buchanan's invention is that it has a tendency to open up one of those time-space continuum thingies in the form of a neon-flashing cloud through which the odd Mongol warrior, etc, has a tendency to pop. Before you know it – and not without the viewer experiencing a certain sense of schadenfraude at his plight – Buchanan finds himself sucked into the portal and spat out again in the Alps of 1816. Him and his car, actually – an intelligent, talking, gull-winged item that looks like KnightRider KITT's sexy sister.

Hiding the car in a convenient barn, Buchanan wanders off in search of life and happens upon a tavern wherein he finds a certain chap named Frankenstein (the late lamented Raul Julia). Strangely enough, neither Buchanan or Frankenstein seem in the slightest bit perturbed to discover that the craggy-faced scientist has strayed some 200+ years from his own era, and strike up a cautious friendship when they realise they are both men of science. Frankenstein has just created his monster (Nick Brimble) who resembles an overweight redneck trucker in a strong headwind rather than a creature bolted together from spare human parts. The monster has adopted the annoying habit of killing locals, including Frankenstein's brother, seemingly unable to grasp the fact that, unlike him, they aren't all creations of the good doctor. A young girl has been accused of the murder, and is sentenced to hang for the crime, a fact which doesn't bother Frankenstein in the least, but which horrifies Buchanan, who attempts to enlist the aid of Mary Shelley (Bridget Fonda) to save the girl. The free-loving writer is in the early stages of writing the Frankenstein novel while enjoying a hippyish summer with George (Jason Patric) and Percy (Michael Hutchence), and is quickly taken with this mysterious (if rather craggy-faced) stranger with the silver horseless carriage. Even back in 1816, it seems, a decent set of wheels was enough to pull a bird…

Frankenstein Unbound was veteran schlock-horror director Roger Corman's first official attempt at directing for nearly twenty years (although he did have a hand in the direction of 1978's Deathsport), and it's not difficult to understand why he might have been attracted to such a project. There's enough story-line crammed into a scant 82 minutes for three movies, and enough subtext to keep the most analytical of viewers absorbed. Having said that, Frankenstein Unbound is a movie that never rises above its budgetary constraints and the grade-Z origins of its famous director. A good cast tries manfully – with the notable exception of Fonda who is about as animated as a ventriloquist's dummy in need of a hand up its back – but their characters are never even remotely believable, and react to every increasingly hectic plot twist with a total lack of, well… reaction. Foe example, no sooner is Frankenstein's beloved torn asunder by his monstrous creation than he's calmly zapping ten squillion volts through her on the operating table. And peasants who believe in witchcraft tip their hats with only the mildest hint of apprehension or curiosity at Buchanan's sports car as it motors through their cobbled streets.

The subtext – that, like Shelley's Dr. Frankenstein, modern-day scientists are at risk of becoming 'an abomination in the eyes of God' as they pursue ever more extreme weapons of defence – is never far from Corman's agenda, and is presented with varying degrees of success. It's a message inherent in Shelley's tale and, while the finale, together with the brief prologue, mirrors the beginning and end of Shelley's novel, the film abandons any sympathetic attitude toward the monster in order to concentrate on its message. Ultimately, the film trips over itself with an unnecessarily confused final sequence in which Buchanan is left alone to face the consequences of his actions.

Bottom line: interesting idea, poorly handled by a director who may have been well-advised to leave the directing (and writing) duties to someone a touch more accomplished.

Frankenstein Unbound is one of those movies that is almost impossible to categorize. Part horror, part science fiction, part fantasy, and part comedy. And what is even more interesting is the cast of all stars. Roger Corman is able to put all of these together to form a truly mesmerizing film that you will never forget.

It is in the future. John Hurt plays Dr. Joe Buchanan, a slightly mad scientist who has developed a weapon for the government that harness's the power of a black hole. In the process, he has inadvertently created a worm hole that might destroy the world. On his way home from work, Buchanan is sucked into the hole and sent back in time to Europe 1812. It is here he meets Victor Frankenstein (played wonderfully by Raul Julia) and discovers that the story of Frankenstein's Monster is in fact a true story.

I believe what makes this movie so much fun is that as serious as the story appears to take itself it is actually rather humorous. Most of the scenes with the Monster in them are actually laugh out loud funny. There are a few scenes with the monster that just need to be seen to be fully understood as most of the movie is quite a bleak comedy. The ending to the movie is truly one of the bleakest endings I have ever seen.

For a Roger Corman film this is really well done. John Hurt and Raul Julia really compliment each other in this movie. It is too bad that Bridget Fonda and Jason Patric didn't have bigger roles in the movie as their characters are fascinating as well.

Well, I certainly enjoyed this film. I have watched it countless times throughout the years and I still have not grown tired of it. For me, truly a timeless film that I will watch many more times. 9/10

In 1990, B-movie god Roger Corman would return to the director's chair to 'show the kids how it's done'. I'm not sure why he chose to do this, as after his series of Edgar Allen Poe adaptations in the sixties; Corman has to prove nothing to nobody. Anyway, he decided otherwise and this film adaptation of Brian Aldiss's novel of the same title is the result. The plot absolutely reeks of something that would make a great campy B-movie, and while this is very messy indeed; Corman has created something that is indeed very camp, and very much a B-class film. The film, however, is absolutely nothing the like best films that Corman has made; but it does show that three decades after he made films like 'The Terror' and ' The Little Shop of Horrors', the man that made a hundred movies in Hollywood and never lost a dime hasn't lost his love for really silly movies! The plot blends classic literature with period drama and Sci-Fi, and sees the American inventor of a new weapon being sent back in time to 1817 Switzerland, where he meets Mary Shelly, along with the inspirations for her book; Victor Frankenstein and his monster!

I'm sure that the themes were a lot better handled in the book, but even though this is a very silly film; they still shine through. In the classic story, Frankenstein created his monster with the intention of helping mankind, and our scientist here has done the same thing. Both men's experiments ended up going wrong with dire consequences, and the story harks back to Shelly's classic theme of how man should not try and play God. One thing I really didn't like about this film was the make-up on the monster. It looks silly, and not in a good way; and since the monster is a big part of the story, it brings the film down a little. Corman has recruited a decent cast for this flick, including John Hurt, Raul Julia and Bridget Fonda. This is hardly an actor's film, however, and none of them put in good performances. John Hurt looks bored most of the time, and the rest of the cast are on autopilot; but like I say, it's not an actor's film so it doesn't matter. Overall, I can definitely see why a lot of people don't like this film - but if, like me, you have a penchant for ridiculous movies; you'll probably find something to like here.

I'm a great admirer of Roger Corman and I definitely think that he's listed high among the most influential persons ever to be active in the horror industry. But – let's face it – it's been more than 30 years since he directed those adorable quickies of his and he certainly 'lost the touch'. In 1990, after nearly twenty years of producing only, Roger all of a sudden decided to direct again and he chose for a funky, hi-tech update of the classic Frankenstein tale. Even though the cast is filled with prominent names and even though Corman's filming budget was reasonably high, "Frankenstein Unbound" constantly looks like amateurish garbage. The screenplay, adapted from the Brian Aldiss novel, attempts to spoof the Frankenstein premise by catapulting 21th century scientist John Hurt back to the 1800's where he encounters the mad doctor Raul Julia. This latter tries to involve the mysterious man from the future and his sorcery tricks in his experiments to create life, etc etc... The story is too stupid for words and it's really exaggerated to see how Hurt even succeeds in seducing the legendary female novelist Mary Shelley. The monster looks very un-scary and the gore – although plenty of it – fails to entertain. Corman stuffs his film with metaphors that make no sense and there's a complete lack of involvement. The only sequence that slightly pleased me was Raul Julia screaming out his interpretation of the famous "It's Alive...It's Alive!!!!"- words. I still think Roger Corman is a genius for the brilliant Edgar Allen Poe cycle he did in the sixties (starring Vincent Price!) but this "Frankenstein Unbound" is one movie you won't ever see me recommending.

First I must admit I have never been a Corman fan - all that spurting blood just never appealed to me. Yet something drew me to this, despite that concern, and I am not sorry I followed my hunch and rented this so many years ago. I tend to read the book either before or instead of watching movies, and Shelly wrote one amazing story. As much as I loved them, Karloff's movies had next to nothing besides the names to do with the book. As far as I am concerned, even though the story clearly does not precisely follow Shelly's tale, it is by far truest to the underlying depth of the book, and quite possibly the only film version that captures her primary theme of personal responsibility. The acting all around was good, especially considering some of the stretches required, and I quite enjoyed the special effects. Without going to wild extremes they were subtly effective and quite haunting. There were, of course, a few of Corman's trademark touches, but they fit the story so well even I could find no objection. As of this writing I have just watched this for the fifth time - quite a record considering I am still not really a Corman fan ;-)

In the year 2031, the (mad?) scientist Dr. Buchanan, played by John Hurt, gets sucked into a time portal by accident and is transported back through time a few hundred years. At first he has no idea of where he is, but after a quick dinner with a mysterious man, Buchanan thinks he knows. The man is actually Dr. Frankenstein himself! At first Buchanan is excited about the situation, but after he encounters a well-known historical monster, he is more than anxious to find a way to return to his time.

Director Roger Corman´s comeback is not as good as it should have been. With an original and interesting story and a really good actor in the leading role, this should have been ace. The start is very promising, but then the monster enters and everything collapses. The monster is poorly made and it almost behaves like an American wrestler from the WWF, not like the scary creature it is supposed to be. The effects when the monster kills people are also laughable. And in the end the story just becomes to much to handle. The ending is pure idiocy. Buchanan´s talking car is a pleasure to watch though, even if it looks like something that didn´t make it to the set of "Knight Rider".

I love John Hurt, I really do. But why does he have to make so strange career choices? I loved him in "The Elephant Man" and "Alien", but since then he hasn´t done much work worth seeing. But John Hurt is always worth seeing, and this case is not an exception. Hurt actually saves the movie from being a total disaster. Raul Julia and Bridget Fonda also do a job well done, as Dr. Victor Frankenstein respectively the author Mary Shelley.

But this is still a big disappointment, with both the science fiction and the horror elements lacking in creativity. Nice settings and good acting saves this one.

* * out of * * * * *

Like a great many Roger Corman movies, Frankenstein Unbound isn't very good overall, but it is quite interesting. It has a beefier budget than the vast majority of his movies, only really looking cheap at the very end when things get snowy (it's such a massive downgrade, as if they shot this in chronological order and, at a point, ran out of money entirely).

But the first hour or so looks pretty good, and the cast is generally impressive too, doing about as good a job as they can with the material at hand. The only performance that didn't work for me was Nick Brimble as the monster, but the look of the creature was also pretty shoddy.

Funnily enough, I lost a good deal of interest when the monster showed up, with the blend of time travel and horror before then making this interesting enough to feel watchable. I think Corman's at his best when he's working with sci-fi, and Frankenstein Unbound is pretty decent for a good chunk of its runtime, though it does sadly fall apart/collapse in on itself at a point.

Who would had guessed that a Roger Corman directed movie, involving the Frankenstein story and time traveling would work out so well? Honestly. I simply liked watching this movie and I'm willing to call it a very underrated one.

It's obviously not a perfect movie but it's still one that works out for most part, despite its crazy and silly sounding concept. You could thank the story for that, which is being more creative and original than you beforehand would imaging. Credit for this though should mostly be given to Brian Aldiss, who was the author of the novel on which this movie got based.

There are so many different Frankenstein knockoffs out there but thing they all have in common is that they seem very much alike. Much alike with its themes, characters and performances. This movie is an original spin on the familiar Frankenstein story, that features still most of the familiar characters but not in the way they normally get presented. It's more a movie that delves into what the inspiration for the Frankenstein story was, as if it all really happened.

This by no means is being a typical Corman flick. It's still a cheap movie but it really isn't being a cheap looking one. It's not far as campy and filled with cheese as basically any other Corman production. My guess is that this simply was a project Corman really had a heart for and this (which also would explain why he directed this movie personally, even though he had previously quit directing movies back in 1971 already) was being a straightforward attempt at making a serious and good movie. And in my opinion he also for most part succeeded in this!

The movie also has a real awesome cast in it, with John Hurt as the main lead and Raul Raul Julia as Dr. Frankenstein. Especially Raul Julia is acting as if he was in a Shakespeare play, which might seem a bit over-the-top for a movie like this but I still really liked his performance and he gave the character something extra with it.

It's definitely true though that the movie its second half is not as good as its first. The movie suddenly starts to become more messy and less fun. The first part of the movie was so entertaining and made me enjoy the movie very much, which makes it all the more a shame that not the entire movie is being like this.

Nevertheless, this movie is as good as a time traveling movie involving the Frankenstein story can get! A bit of an underrated movie, that definitely deserves some more credit, for being original and effective as well.

7/10

http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/

Movie starts in 2031 with John Hurt playing a scientist that develops a bomb so powerful it creates a time rift. Him and his (talking) car are whisked back to 1817. There he meets Dr. Frankenstein (Raul Julia) and finds he DID make a monster who wants a mate. He also runs into Mary Wollstonecraft Godwin (Bridget Fonda) who later became Mary Shelley and wrote "Frankenstein", George Byron (Jason Patric) and Percy Shelley (Michael Hutchence).

What a mess! The story lumbers all over the place--I had no idea where this was going. It looks pretty good but has lousy makeup (on the monster) and hilariously terrible special effects. The acting is the sole saving grace. Julia is terrible (as always) but Hurt is good and Fonda, Patric and Hutchence are obviously having a GREAT time. Stiil, it can't save the movie.

This got a lot of notice when it came out in 1990 because it was the first film Roger Corman had directed in about 20 years. All the interest evaporated when people actually SAW the film. I saw it in a totally empty theatre back in 1990! This is a real disaster and has (rightfully) been forgotten. Only the scenes with Fonda, Patric and Hutchence work. Skip this one.

I really like this movie and can't understand why some people seem to enjoy trashing it and picking apart every little detail. Haven't they seen any of Corman's old films? Were they expecting some kind of masterpiece this time around?

That said, I thought that the "double opposable thumb" idea was excellent - seems like a plausible next evolutionary step.

The talking car was AWESOME! It's MUCH better than K.I.T.T. from Knightrider. I especially like the part when he goes into the past and the car is checking for satellites and radio stations, and all the cool graphics come up as the car reports that it can't find any types of links to modern society. It really made me think, "Woah! How would a person from the year 2004 deal with that situation?" Cell phone doesn't work, no payphones around, no phones of ANY kind, no Television or radio, none of the modern conveniences that we take for granted these days...

I love SciFi, futuristicky kinda stuff. So the ending (although somewhat confusing) was also enjoyable to me. If you like time-travel type Sci-Fi movies, I would definitely recommend this movie to you.

I saw this film for one reason--it was directed by Roger Corman. He has had an amazing ability as a producer and director to make the absolute most of every single penny--making amazingly good films for rock-bottom prices. This was his first time directing in almost two decades--and that's more than enough reason to see the film.

This version of "Frankenstein" is different than most because of instead of setting it about the time of Mary Shelly's novel in the early 19th century, this one sets the story in the near future--at least in the beginning. However, this sci-fi aspect, the gorgeous scenery as well as some decent actors (requiring higher salaries) make this a film that MUST have been relatively expensive for a Corman film. Unfortunately, IMDb does not list what the film cost to make.

Dr. Joe Buchanan (John Hurt) is a guy who makes weapons for the Defense Department! However, his weapon has weird side effects and inexplicably transports him (and his majorly cool car) to 1817--where he meets up with Dr. Frankenstein! Now I sure didn't see THAT coming! What makes this more interesting is that this is not some parallel world--there really was a Dr. Frankenstein AND Buchanan gets to also meet Mary Shelley--the lady who wrote the novel! It seems that her inspiration was very close to the book--the doctor DID work on reviving the dead. However, unlike the reckless guy in the novel, this doctor was not irresponsible...he was EVIL! So, you get to see Buchanan interacting with both the author and her worthless friends, Byron and Percy Shelley, as well as the monster and the mad doctor! It's all VERY strange--but oddly interesting.

Is this a great film? No. The ending is pretty cool--but also pretty weird and out there! But, what I really appreciate is that it took the original story and completely redid it in an interesting and novel manner. Worth seeing and STRANGE!!

Tivo recorded this for me, so at first glance I thought I was watching a movie made in 1970 judging from the story and cheesy props (ala Logan's Run). I kept thinking, "Wow, these effects are really good for a B movie from the 70's". Then I hit info and saw it was made in 1990 and my jaw dropped. I wonder if this had been intended as a camp classic. When Hurts character uses a clapper to activate the laser effects in the ending sequence, I would have laughed if the movie didn't take itself so seriously. I can't decide if it was a really lame attempt at high camp, or a miserable attempt at science fiction. Apart from clap on clap off laser effects projected on the side of a castle (I've seen better in gay night clubs), there wasn't much to like about this film. I wondered why such high profile actors with such obvious talent agreed to such a bad film. The car was cool though. I wish I could have one of my very own. Maybe I'll watch it again, but make sure I'm in an altered state first, and then it might seem worth watching. I'll have lots of munchies on hand so it will be a really good experience. clap clap...laser On! Hey Car, go get monster... clap clap. where's my copy of the Logan's run series?