I, Frankenstein

It should've been called 'Me, Frankenstein. You, Dead!'
 
if your only idea of Frankenstein is the slow moving, moaning monster from the movies then yeah...but he was pretty intelligent in the book. I'll never disparage someone for thinking outside the box.

The book wasn't very good to start with. That's why almost every movie doesn't follow it accurately. The monster - and pretty much anyone else - only speaks in endless speeches, and the love interest isn't one until the very last episode where Shelley decides that her death would be more tragic if she and Victor are in love, but that doesn't mean she's going to re-write some parts just for coherence, no sir.

Anyways, being intelligent and being a P.I. are two different things when it's about Frankenstein monster. And he shouldn't look like a hunk anyways. He has always been ugly, even in the book.
 
The book wasn't very good to start with. That's why almost every movie doesn't follow it accurately. The monster - and pretty much anyone else - only speaks in endless speeches, and the love interest isn't one until the very last episode where Shelley decides that her death would be more tragic if she and Victor are in love, but that doesn't mean she's going to re-write some parts just for coherence, no sir.

Anyways, being intelligent and being a P.I. are two different things when it's about Frankenstein monster. And he shouldn't look like a hunk anyways. He has always been ugly, even in the book.

I wasn't commenting on the quality of the book...just that people perceptions of what Frankenstein's monster should be are wrong. I don't think he's a PI in this though.
I agree he should be ugly.
 
So I finally gave this trailer a shot and I agree with the majority, it looks painfully awful I feel bad for Eckhart for even signed up for this, but then again it's not like the guy has amazing scripts coming his way on the daily.
 
He calls him self "Frank Stein" in the graphic novel.....eeeek.

Anyway the GN is pretty cheesy but a lot of fun. From the trailer the movie looks a bit too dour for its own good.
 
So I finally gave this trailer a shot and I agree with the majority, it looks painfully awful I feel bad for Eckhart for even signed up for this, but then again it's not like the guy has amazing scripts coming his way on the daily.

Needs to fire his agent and/or start being smarter because after Thank You For Smoking and The Dark Knight, he should have had every script coming his way
 
Needs to fire his agent and/or start being smarter because after Thank You For Smoking and The Dark Knight, he should have had every script coming his way

sometimes it's the agent and sometimes its the actor themselves that need to pick better roles.
 


New cover. The monster now looks like Aaron Eckhart in the comics too.
 
This movie looks like a monument to every bad choice ever made in film.
 
Last edited:
I got a Van Helsing vibe when I saw the trailer. I'll Netflix it...
 
I think I'd be more interested if the monster even looked remotely like a monster.

Eh... nevermind. That still wouldn't make me want to watch this. Poor Eckert.
 


New cover. The monster now looks like Aaron Eckhart in the comics too.

So is this the original comic coming out to buy or is it a movie tie-in? Looks like the latter as it looks like Miranda Otto and Bill Nighy on the front as well.
 
As ridiculous as Van Helsing is, I still think it actually shows it's love for the classics, albeit in an ott way.

This just looks generic as hell.
 
vluA0Nb.jpg
 
I'm curious to know why Eckhart hasn't been getting more quality film roles, especially after The Dark Knight. Although he was largely overshadowed by Heath's performance, he was still recognized by many critics as giving a fantastic performance.

And yet, we see him in popcorn flicks that do not rely on compelling performances - like Battle: Los Angeles and Olympus Has Fallen. And frankly, it looks like this movie falls under that same category.

It's quite a shame. He seems like a great actor, but he's been doing some terrible projects.
 
He did good with Rabbit Hole but yeah, I always think he's like Gerald Butler where their entire career has been a crazy crapshoot with some roles being a stroke of luck.
 
I wonder how much of it is simply actors taking on roles that sound fun. I look at films from Adam Sandler and, while the end product is terrible, I imagine making those movies is a great time.
 
Sure. But it sucks when someone like Eckhardt has so much potential and range though.

Also, image if Bill Murray had the same philosophy as Sadler.
 
Sure. But it sucks when someone like Eckhardt has so much potential and range though.

Also, image if Bill Murray had the same philosophy as Sadler.

We'd finally be getting Ghostbusters 3. For better or for worse. But yeah, I agree with you. I'd rather see Eckhardt stretching his acting muscles than flexing his action ones.
 
^I dont see why he cant do both, I think he is doing action movies now as a change from the independent and dramatic roles he did for years. Like Paul Bettany did, he is having a bit of fun before going back to what he's best at.
 
I like Eckhart, but he's wasted in this. They should've just made Underworld 5 instead of remaking it with Frankensteiners Vs. Harpies.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"