Reviews

2 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
Frankenstein (2004 TV Movie)
3/10
Most common letter in English: eeeeeeeee
12 October 2004
This film, while having impressive production credits and a decent cast, lacks in several key areas. With a staff such as this I was expecting at least slightly more than I got. I noticed several amateurish audio glitches that would not exist in a film with higher production values. The main characters were given passable characterization, but then other characters (Parker's brother comes to mind) were simply glossed over and seemed to show that the story had potential and lots of ideas but for whatever reason did not make the final cut. I question the utilization of Michael Madsen in a role he did not seem suited for, nor did he seem particularly excited to be playing. The poor pacing of the "climactic" chase and the "ending" itself play out amateurishly as well. Everything in the last 20 minutes reeked of either an extended series pilot or foreshadowing of a sequel. I also see that before the film even played on USA that a number of people voted it up to 10. These folks must be huge fans of Parker Posey (which I am) or simply have no concept of mediocre. I rate this film a 3/10. If Frankenstein was not in the public domain after all these years this film would have no business existing. It completely lacks subtlety and interest, but it does have blood, which apparently excites people who must have been weaned on television dramas their whole lives. If that is you, give this one a whirl, it may be your cup of tea. I, on the other hand, was disappointed. I give this one slightly more credit than the absolute butchered and dumbed-down remake of Texas Chainsaw Massacre the director also put his name on. Personally I would of credited both to Alan Smithee or his counterpart and been done with them.
1 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Hollywood production style with Coen motifs and dialogue.
4 December 2003
You can certainly see that things were left out in order to make this film more accessible. For example, I feel that the Coens would of taken the "unable to achieve an erection" utterance by Ollie to a much higher level; as in possibly another major character (Howard D.? Miles?) would of had the same problem. Another is the small bits of Massey talking about the futility of a large amount of money and how useless Earthly possessions are in the grand scheme. Also the train (CHOO! CHOO!) obsession that Rex Rexroth had was only touched on slightly, possibly three times altogether. I may be digging a little deep here, but the little dialogue bits and humorous situations generally populating a Coen film were lacking here; what we did get consists of "You're exposed! A sitting duck!" and "Nail. Yo. Ass.". Not very funny compared to "How's my hair!?" or the ever popular "You know, for kids!". I may just be unwilling to accept the Coens being unable to consistently score big funnies in their films, but something was certainly absent; it's as though the Ethan and Joel magic was diluted. Diluted by what, we shall never know. I have faith that their new projects will be ever stronger for the large paycheck they hopefully got along with Clooney and Jones for this film. All told, not a bad film, certainly see it. Just don't expect Fargo or even O'Brother type action.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed