Michael Ledo This is an interesting retelling of the classic horror tale, taking place in late 19th century London through the eyes of Igor Strassman,(Daniel Radcliffe) which would make for an uninteresting title. Igor starts out as a circus hunchback whose medical skills and genius is recognized by Dr. Victor Frankenstein (James McAvoy). His rescue from the circus involved a ruckus and a death, which is being investigated by Scotland Yard detective Rafferty (Bronson Webb) who puts together an unbelievable report of "high society hunchback and undead monsters."The film is also theme and theologically loaded with numerous statements such as Victor Frankenstein proclaiming, "God has no authority here" while being warned "There is no mercy in nature." The film also discusses Victor's past, need for a financial benefactor, and Igor having a love interest (Jessica Brown Findlay.) This brings in more characters, turning the feature into a drama with moments of dark humor and horror.Guide: No swearing, sex, or nudity. Monster horror.There are numerous wisps within the film that are references to previous Frankenstein films that may go unnoticed such as the mispronunciation of the name as was done in YOUNG FRANKENSTEIN. The name Rafferty for the Scotland Yard detective immediately brought to mind the song "Baker Street" by Gerry Rafferty which was also the residence of Sherlock Holmes.

Leofwine_draca VICTOR FRANKENSTEIN is another Hollywood attempt to go back to horror's classic routes, and the good news is that it's better than the overblown VAN HELSING and the silly I, FRANKENSTEIN, two previous outings I didn't have much luck with. That doesn't make it perfect, however. I found this just about watchable but that's as far as it goes. The 'hook' is that the film's central figure isn't Frankenstein but rather his hunchbacked servant Igor, an important figure in the Universal classic THE SON OF FRANKENSTEIN but one who has been neglected in recent years. Daniel Radcliffe plays Igor in a semi-successful performance although he seems to think he's in a more comedic film than those around him. James McAvoy is Frankenstein himself and better, with his usual intensity. The film generally keeps you watching to a degree, although I found it to be lacking in many memorable moments aside from the OTT climax.

drjgardner Not really a retelling but an imaginative prequel to the original 1931 Frankenstein film which itself was a major deviation from the book.Some people may think this is a retelling, but by the end of the film it's clear that it is a prequel, though the hints are there all along.The film has much to commend it, including the acting of James McAvoy (Frankenstein), Andrew Scott (Detective Turpin), and Jessica Findlay (Igor's love interest). The music and photography are excellent and the set and costume people create an excellent picture of Victorian London.I particularly liked the idea of the film being told from the POV of Igor.On the negative side, Daniel Radcliffe's performance added very little and the film was a tad too long.There is nothing to match the 1931 original nor the 1935 Bride of Frankenstein, but otherwise this film holds up well against the hundreds of other Frankenstein films. OK. I'm not counting the Abbott and Costello version, which is great.

smashthecontrolmachine Finally got around to seeing this one. This is a cautionary tale, a re-imagining if you will of a classic tale that we all know. I, as many, found fault in how long it takes to see the actual creation of Frankenstein, and that really is a shame. I think the movie takes too long in general to get to the creation of any sort of monster. I think that is why I cannot rate it a 10. This is a good film, but it doesn't seem to be the movie anyone would expect it to be. Daniel slays as Igor and James as Victor, however this movie gets in it's own way and is more often then not just plodding along at a snails pace. The idea was there, this movie could have been a 10 star film, but the execution was messy and incompetent and this is to the films detriment. I rated it as I did because I see a brilliant idea and great actors, it's not the actors fault that they were ultimately trapped in a movie taking way too long to reach its precipice.