Despite 2025 producing many excellent films, famed director Guillermo del Toro’s adaptation of Mary Shelley’s infamous “Frankenstein” has topped conversations as one of the most outstanding films of the year.
“The overall tone in this movie is that it’s hauntingly beautiful,” said OH junior Sora Williams. “The colors pop… and many of the shots are melancholy and grim, but there is always a slight hint of color.”
Alongside other praises, the film is being heralded as the most accurate adaptation of the original novel, and I’m inclined to agree.
Certain iconography of the novel, namely the framing device of the Arctic expedition, was completely absent from film adaptations until now.
“It can be more accurate to the novel, although I do respect every director’s choice that was made in the film,” said OH senior Jordyn Washington.
However, that’s not to say this film was entirely accurate. One big change is the themes that the film seeks to focus on.
The book sets itself firmly on examining the dangers of knowledge and the philosophy of nature vs. nurture. The film addresses these issues differently by combining or cutting certain characters present in Shelley’s original text, and it works to great effect.
“I think the movie does still keep the core theme of nature vs. nature and the contact of humans can better or worse us,” Washington said.
However, the biggest difference between the book and this film, as well as other film adaptations of “Frankenstein,” is that Victor is presented as the antagonistic force. In contrast, the creature is portrayed as far more sympathetic.
“I appreciate the film’s ability to acknowledge Victor is ashamed of the monster,” Washington said, “Victor basically [shuts] him out, which isn’t true to the book.”
That’s actually my biggest issue with film. It’s a common opinion that in “Frankenstein,” Victor is the monster rather than his creation, and it appears that del Toro thinks the same way. The issue, for me, arises when the adaptation lacks the moral ambiguity of the original novel.
“I liked how it put much of the pathos on the creature and begged the audience to feel sorry for him,” said OH English teacher Amy Severinski, who teaches the English 4 Critical Interpretations of Literature & Composition course focused on film analysis.
Despite my issues with the film, its technical aspects, acting, and cinematography elevate it to another level.
Guillermo del Toro’s “Frankenstein” is thoughtful, even if it diverges from Shelley’s original intent.
I'm a senior at OHS and it's my first year as a journalist. I hope to go to school for directing and screenwriting. I plan on mostly writing about movies and video games, and most nerd stuff. You can contact me by emailing 42Fifty@sd308.org and putting my name in the subject line. We welcome comments on our articles and feedback on our publication!
I watched this movie and didn’t really peak my interest but is it just because these are not my types of movies