Frankenstein: Day of the Beast (2011) Reviews

• Frankenstein Day of the Beast: A twist on the old tale

  Platypuschow2017-12-22

  I like the concept of Frankenstein's monster but movies using the story very rarely manage to entertain me. The last one that came close was The Frankenstein Theory (2013) and even that failed to live up to my expectations. Day Of The Beast see's Victor Frankenstein enjoying his wedding day right up until the moment that his monster crashes the party and goes on a killing spree. I see what they were doing here but for over 1 million dollars this should have looked a great deal better. Marred by a dire cast including an outstandingly beautiful lead who still couldn't act to save her life. Questionable sfx (The fire was laughable) pitiful acting, some weak moments in the script and an odd looking monster ruined what should have by all rights been better. The Pet Cemetery (1989) inspired ending did nothing to change my opinion either. The Good: Some nice ideas Leading lady was very distracting The Bad: Dreadful acting Weak sfx All looks so very cheap Things I Learnt From This Movie: I found myself wondering why they gave the monster a penis when building him, is that wrong? Horatio Sanz has a freakishly similiar down to his man mannerisms twin this film

• The indie Frankenstein

  Leofwine_draca2017-05-06

  FRANKENSTEIN: DAY OF THE BEAST is an indie reworking of the Mary Shelley tale, shot in Chicago. About the most interesting about it is the Creature make up, which copies the Karloff extended forehead look from the Universal FRANKENSTEIN. Still, the staging in this cheapie is better than you might expect, with well lit outdoor photography throughout and that's not always something that's easy to achieve. However, the story itself is quite dull and the indoor scenes smack of amateurishness.

• Spoilers follow ...

  parry_na2016-09-03

  This is a very interesting rearrangement of the Frankenstein story which manages to create something refreshingly new from the old myth. We begin with Felix (Frank Warpeha) bringing home his new wife, Safi (Ruth Terefe) to his isolated home in the middle of the woods, which he shares with his sister Agatha (Ticia Martyr) and blind father (Bruce Spielbauer). Secreted nearby, The Monster (Tim Krueger) seems set to learn English from French Safi's English lessons – but things never get that far, and he isn't much interested anyway. He is after only one thing, and everyone else he meets, he kills. He has a predilection for pulling out people's intestines. Victor Frankenstein (Adam Stephenson) and his new wife Elizabeth (Michelle Shields) are being guarded by seven heavily armed men. Where and when this happens in regard to earlier events is not clear. The creature, whose creation is told briefly in flashback, is somewhere out in the surrounding woods. Restructuring the story into what is really a series of 'boo!' moments has its merits, with the creature hunting the men who are, in turn, hunting the creature. Pretty soon, these guards are fighting amongst themselves anyway, echoing the behaviour of Robert Walton's crew in the novel. There's a new development here: the Monster can regenerate himself. He literally cannot die. Vaguely resembling a bulkier, pulpier version of the fiend seen in Toho's 'Frankenstein Conquers the World (1965)', he is something more than human. One scene, which is (I imagine) unintentionally enduring, is when its severed hand assumes a life of its own for a scene. The idea was never going to succeed visually on such a small budget! {SPOILER} "I opened the door to something unspeakable," admits Frankenstein. He certainly suffers in this story, but is hard to sympathise with – The Monster too has not a modicum of pathos. That is saved for poor Elizabeth, with whom The Monster wishes to mate. In a series of twists at the end, it seems such a thing is possible. Shields is excellent throughout, emerging as the central character. I really enjoyed this. The locations are excellent – all long shadows, crispy snow and skeletal trees. What it might lack in polish is made up for in the respect shown for the story, and a cast and crew who invest in it a genuine sincerity. A genuinely fine independent adaption.

• Disappontinting

  jacobjohntaylor12015-04-25

  I have seen some great horror movie that were best on the book Frankenstein. Unfortunately this is not one of them. Frankenstein is one of the greatest horror stories ever told. And it was ruined by bad acting. And bad writing. This movie is very d.i.s.a.p.p.o.n.t.i.n.t.i.n.g. It has an awful ending. See one from 1931 it's great. Or the one from 1994 that one is also great. This one as an awful ending. It is pooh pooh. I can believe a Frankenstein movie could such pooh pooh. Most of the time Frankenstein movies are great. They are the best in horror most of time. The book is great. But this is stinky pooh.

• Horrible

  rickbre2017-04-28

  I don't know what is considered a "spoiler" so I guess I'll warn you just in case since IMDb will blacklist anyone not warning of spoilers. I don't think this spoils anything about the movie. Nothing could spoil junk like this. I've seen virtually every Frankenstein related movie there is. This is the worst ever. The acting is just horrific. The dialogue is stilted and stupid. A kid in his basement with a video camera could do no worse. It is an absolute insult to the real story, which isn't even really a horror story, let alone a ridiculous slasher tale. Be ashamed Ricardo Islas and all actors in it, be very ashamed.