Expected more

I like movies that are aware of what they are selling... without [any] greater aspirations than to make people laugh and that's it.

Good films always raise compelling questions, whether the format is fiction or documentary fact.

At first rather annoying in its heavy emphasis on reenactments, this movie ultimately proves fascinating, simply because the complicated, highly dramatic tale it tells still almost defies belief.

Having said that, being closer to Mary Shelly's book does not in it's self make the movie good or bad. I love the Karloff version but it is nothing like the book. From the many Frankenstein based movies I gave this one a 5. Bo Svenson's height was perfect for the role of the creature and he played it with sensitivity.The book is a first person account with Victor Frankenstein narrating the story to the captain of a ship who rescued Victor from freezing on the same ice that the ship is locked in.The only movie that I have seen that is really close to the book is the 2004 Hallmark version. While the creature is more good looking than described in the book, the characters are correct, the chronology is correct and the changing disposition of the creature is correct. It is available on DVD and I recommend it to all fans of the book and/or the movies.

Among the myriad 'offsprings', I have watched a dozen direct adaptations of the Mary Shelley horror tale (1910, 1931, 1935, 1952, 1957, 1958, 1970, 1973, 1977, 1985, 1994, 2004); this new addition to the list is an average production, not too bad in itself but hardly inspired. The best thing about it is the reasonably strong presence of creator (Robert Foxworth) and creature (Bo Svenson) – the former is as engrossed in his Great Experiment as he is detached from his home life, while the latter handles the character' essentially guileless nature, developing into (and alternating between) brute strength and pathos, quite well. The rest of the cast hardly matters – John Karlen (from Harry Kumel's arty vampire flick DAUGHTERS OF DARKNESS {1971}) as one of the Baron's (technically, he is not one since his father is still alive!) associates is killed off early (his inadvertent death at the monster's hands effectively replacing the celebrated one of the little girl from James Whale's seminal 1931 version!) and Susan Strasberg is wasted as Elizabeth.Interestingly, when the film begins, Frankenstein is already a pariah among his own peers – yet, nothing is subsequently made of this, with Dr. Waldman barely figuring in the narrative at all! Again, however, the creation scene being disrupted by the arrival of Frankenstein Senior, Elizabeth and his clueless old colleague (not to mention the harnessing of natural electricity, i.e. lightning, to this end) shamelessly rips off the classic Colin Clive/Boris Karloff picture! The famous educational scenes with the blind hermit from BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN (1935) are there (except the visually-impaired one is a girl) but these have none of the poignant beauty of that film. However, there is no malevolent figure like Ernest Thesiger's Dr. Praetorius from Whale's even better sequel or James Mason's Polidori in the rival (and decidedly superior) production to the film under review, FRANKENSTEIN: THE TRUE STORY (1973). The death of Young Frankenstein{sic}'s kid brother and Elizabeth herself are ported over from the original source…but the finale is rather tame, bafflingly eschewing a decent final confrontation between monster and mad scientist by having Foxworth slip and impale himself on a spike(!) and Svenson conventionally expiring to bullet wounds fired by the conveniently-arriving Police!! Incidentally, despite being part of a TV series called "Wide World Mystery" and originally shown in 2 segments, the film has been released on DVD as DAN CURTIS' FRANKENSTEIN – even if he only served as Producer/Co-Writer on it. For the record, this was the third of his TV adaptations of literary horror classics: the others were THE STRANGE CASE OF DR. JEKYLL AND MR. HYDE (1968), THE PICTURE OF DORIAN GRAY (the only one I have not watched and do not own yet!), Dracula (both 1973) and THE TURN OF THE SCREW (1974).

Dan Curtis production originally made for television, one of the many renderings of the classic Mary Shelley tale. It's shot on videotape and was originally aired as a two-part episode of a show called "Wide World Mystery". It's quite underwhelming at first, at least until the appearance of the monster (interestingly played by Bo Svenson). From then on, Svenson's humanistic approach as a tortured and sympathetic creature makes for a decent take on the original story. His is one of the finest monsters in any Frankenstein production. Robert Foxworth doesn't fare as well as Dr. Victor Frankenstein; he's over the top and rather theatrical. **1/2 out of ****

I first saw this movie when it was first shown on TV, months before the other TV version from ' 73, the famous James Mason / Michael Sarrazin one. So to me, it's always the "early" one, and I'm partial to it, partly because I'm that way about all those Dan Curtis TVMs (and of course, Dark Shadows itself). As good as everyone in it is, Robert Foxworth and Bo Svenson were really great as Victor and the Creature. I really agree with Michael Morrison - Bo Svenson has to be the most underrated actor ever to play that part. Just about everything he did was so believable, including the "De Lacey" scenes - this might be the only version that shows that whole family from the book (though, strangely, it made the daughter the blind character in place of the father), and it might be the only one that shows the Creature spying on them at any real length, which makes the next thing that happens that much sadder.