Believing something does not make it true.

Continuing my trip up Empire's top 20 films of 2025

#18 :  Frankenstein

It might've taken Guillermo del Toro almost two decades' work and a lifetime of dreaming to bring his vision of Mary Shelley's Frankenstein to cinematic life, but boy was it worth the wait. Oscar Isaac and Jacob Elordi lead a starry ensemble here as Victor Frankenstein and his pitiable Creature, brought together — and torn apart — by their wildly divergent attempts to decode the mysteries of life. Gloriously Gothic, loaded with pathos, and deft in its handling of the themes of Shelley's book, del Toro's film is in many ways the culmination of all the Mexican fabulist's work to date. And yes, Jacob Elordi really is extraordinary as Frankenstein's accursed creation, a transformative physical performance even before you apply all the dead-guy makeup.

I'm sure this will look fantastic but I also have a suspicion it will feel a somewhat soulless exercise which wastes my time as much as it feasts my eyes.

Hmmm - soulless would be harsh (more on this later), but it most definitely feasts the eyes. Give Guillermo a gothic tale and he's obviously going to make it look gorgeous, but he really goes for it here. And they've obviously given him the cash to do so, so why wouldn't he? We have all the required locations - a lab built in an abandoned warehouse loft, a luxurious country house (holding a ball, obvs), a ship caught in the Arctic ice (huh - what?), Victorian sewers, etc, etc. And they all very much do the required job - possibly too much? (more on this later). Having said all that, there is some very ropey explosion FX in a couple of places in the film which felt very jarring considering how gorgeous everything else looks. 

The story is split into two halves - Victor's tale and The Creature's (NOT The Monster's) tale (apparently the original plan was to make it into two separate films and I think it's safe to say that would have been a mistake). Victor's tale gives us way more backstory than I was expecting and The Creature's tale gives us way more random wandering about than I was expecting - all of which does somewhat draw attention to the fact that there really isn't an awful lot to this story. Man creates "monster" - maybe "monster" isn't the problem here - it all goes wrong anyway. Done.

Oscar Isaac plays Victor perfectly adequately - he's not supposed to be likeable and he most definitely isn't. However, Jacob Elordi does do a good job as The Creature with a performance which is good both physically and emotionally - for someone who is unrecognisable, isn't in half the film and spends half the time he is in it not being able to speak, he does a good job in stealing the film. There are plenty of other recognisable faces in it including Christoph Waltz (in a most peculiar role), Mia Goth, Felix Kammerer, David Bradley, Charles Dance and others but it's fair to say they're all completely wasted - none of them do a terrible job, but you also don't feel anything they were doing was stretching their abilities and most of them are only present for small portions of the film. 

So we have a limited story and a load of wasted actors - is it possible they put too much effort into the look, but not enough into the feel? Well, errr, yes - soulless would be harsh, but pointless is very much on the nose here. There were just so many scenes in this film that I just didn't care about - it feels like the film is all "you shouldn't judge people on their looks (ooh, look at me I'm so wise)" whilst also being "look at how gorgeous I am - that's the most important thing". The only redeeming feature for me is Jacob Elordi and you have to wait such a helluva long time for him to appear that I'd struggle to say he's really worth the effort. 

However, looking at rottentomatoes.com, it's fair to say that most of the critics and audience disagree with me so if you like a stunning gothic tale then maybe you should check this out - but don't say I didn't warn you...

#19 - A lot to admire, but it's just too long