Having read Mary Wollstonecraft Shelley’s Frankenstein (1818) more than once, I went into Guillermo del Toro’s Frankenstein (2025) with a number of questions. How will Victor be portrayed? What will the creature look like? Most importantly, how far will the plot stray from Shelley’s original masterpiece? After eagerly seeing the movie on the day of its release, I walked out of the theatre with my jaw on the floor.
For those unfamiliar with the classic 19th-century novel, Frankenstein (or The Modern Prometheus) tells the tale of Victor Frankenstein, a scientist who brings to life a creature stitched together with dead body parts. Soon after, chaos and tragedy ensue, leaving readers to wonder: who is the real monster — The Creature or its maker?
The Cascade decided to keep things fresh by dividing this review into sections based on different body parts, as per the Frankenstein brand.
Head, Torso
As much as I ultimately enjoyed del Toro’s Frankenstein, the first act had me skeptical. As a long-time fan of the original story, I was disappointed by the changes to Victor’s backstory, especially when it comes to his relationship with Elizabeth and his father. Not only that, but the way the film constructed the idea of who the true monster is felt spoon-fed at times with little nuance and limited room for discussion. Still, I kept an open mind, and I’m so glad I did.
As the film went on, I noticed that certain aspects were still faithful to the source material. Other than the depiction of The Creature, another book-accurate element in del Toro’s version was its use of a frame narrative. Much like The Creature — stitched together from different body parts — the story itself is a combination of different perspectives embedded within one another. Something I was also excited to see was the film’s incorporation of one of the book’s most iconic quotes; when Victor shares that he “pursued nature to her hiding-places.”
Del Toro’s Frankenstein is full of hauntingly beautiful visuals, however one scene in particular took my breath away. A staple in any Frankenstein adaptation, the scene in which The Creature comes to life was truly epic in del Toro’s version. Everything — from the murky shots of Victor’s gothic tower to the foreboding cracks of lightning — had me absolutely enthralled.
Another visually satisfying element of this movie was the design of Frankenstein’s monster. With long limbs, hair, and yellow skin, del Toro’s creature sticks close to Shelley’s monster compared to other depictions that often include cartoonish green skin and bolts protruding from its neck.
Hands
Oh, how del Toro’s Frankenstein tugged at my heartstrings. The film plays up The Creature’s innocence and naivety, causing any scene where the monster is in pain or despair to leave that much more of a lasting impact. The movie also showcases an even crueller side of Victor, which made me further empathize with his creation.
The hands behind the making of the monster belong to Oscar Isaac — known for Ex Machina (2014) and Star Wars: The Force Awakens (2015) — who delivered an incredible performance as Victor. On par with the rest of his work, Isaac’s range is on full display in Victor’s passion, joy, despair, and jealousy.
While Victor still has a larger hand in the story’s plot, one character is given a bigger role in the movie than in the book. In the book, Elizabeth (Mia Goth) is presented as little more than Victor’s bride. However, in del Toro’s adaptation, Elizabeth plays a more active role, which pleasantly highlights Goth’s talent, as most famously seen in Pearl (2022).
Waist, Feet
Arguably the character that the whole movie rests on, The Creature is played by Jacob Elordi — known for Euphoria (2019-) and The Kissing Booth (2018). An undeniable shift from the high school jocks he’s played before, Elordi’s portrayal of Frankenstein’s monster left me pleasantly surprised. Elordi disappears into the role — both through his performance and the work of makeup and costume — conveying true understanding of such a tragic and complicated character.
Going into del Toro’s Frankenstein, one question haunted me more than any other: will The Creature speak in eloquent monologues like he does in the book, or will he be reduced to a handful of blunt words? To my excitement, not only is Frankenstein’s monster articulate, but the low, gravelly voice Elordi uses for the role showcases a perfect blend of the character’s innocence and rage.
Was del Toro’s Frankenstein entirely book-accurate? Definitely not, but it’s still worth watching. This might be a hot take, but I don’t think film-adaptations always have to follow their source material to a tee. Something that works well in a book might not translate well onto the big screen. Are there bad film adaptations? Absolutely, but del Toro’s Frankenstein is simply not one of them.
