Guillermo Del Toro Originally Wanted Netflix’s Frankenstein To Be Two Films, But I Think He Made The Right Choice To Keep It Solo

by

Guillermo del Toro, renowned for his Oscar-winning works, has always aimed high in his cinematic pursuits. For more than three decades, he’s been meticulously planning his vision for a 2025 release of the classic tale, “Frankenstein,” which he refers to as his cinematic Mount Everest. From the initial drawings in the late ’70s to the dark, gothic elements in films like “Crimson Peak,” “Cronos,” and “Hellboy,” del Toro has viewed Mary Shelley’s story as a cornerstone of his artistic identity. Recently, the visionary filmmaker announced that his original plan for the upcoming Netflix release was to divide the movie into two parts. However, he decided against it, and in my opinion, that was the right decision.

Del Toro’s Original Frankenstein Plans

In a recent chat with Variety, the creative mind behind Pan’s Labyrinth unveiled some interesting details about his upcoming adaptation of a book. Originally, he intended to narrate the story from two distinct viewpoints: Victor Frankenstein and his creation, the monster. However, he chose to streamline this concept into a single film, with a pivotal scene occurring shortly post-creation where the narrative switches its focus from creator to creation. Given the project’s lengthy development, this revised approach seems daring yet fitting.

Why Frankenstein Works Best As A Single Film

The seminal 1818 novel, “Frankenstein,” tells the profoundly interconnected story of Victor and his creation, the “monster.” By splitting this into two movies, there’s a risk that the intensity and tragic nature of their relationship could be lessened. Mary Shelley’s novel is compact yet powerfully impactful, exploring themes such as lineage, suffering, and generational strife. The creator of the acclaimed film “The Shape of Water” views it not just as a monster story but also as a family drama. He elaborated:

1. The classic 1818 novel weaves together a single, all-encompassing narrative that reflects the symbiotic connection between Victor and his “monster.”
2. Splitting this into two films might result in a lessening of their tragic relationship’s intensity.
3. Mary Shelley’s novel is brief but packs an emotional punch as it delves into themes like lineage, suffering, and generational collapse.
4. The genius behind “The Shape of Water” considers the novel as much a family drama as a creature feature.
5. He stated that the story’s essence is found in its exploration of familial dynamics alongside monstrous elements.

The film delves into Victor Frankenstein’s transformation, under the influence of his domineering father (Charles Dance), into a reckless scientist. Later, as he feels disillusioned with his creation – the creature (Jacob Elordi) – Victor assumes an abusive role towards him, behaving harshly as a parent.

The filmmaker of Blade 2 approached the movie more like a character biography rather than a traditional horror film, maintaining an enclosed setting, thereby preserving an intimate connection to the characters.

Instead of suggesting that del Toro is skimping on details, it’s more accurate to say that he is focusing on intricate aspects in his adaptation of Frankenstein. The initial trailer and descriptions reveal an elaborate production design, operatic style, and the director’s characteristic emphasis on practical effects. Del Toro himself describes the monster’s creation scene not as a typical horror moment but as something more extraordinary. He elaborated further to Variety.

Rather than portraying it as a gruesome process of assembling parts from bodies, I transformed it into an exuberant waltz-like performance, more like a whimsical, slightly chaotic concert. In the lab, he’s darting around, piecing together this body, snatching a part here and there, and arranging them haphazardly.

Instead of a series of separate rock concert-style animations for the creature, presenting it as a unified montage in a single film offers a more seamless and symphonic flow, maintaining the sense of operatic momentum without interruption or pause.

Even The Casting Lends Itself To A Single Film

The casting further highlights why this particular film is the ideal selection. Oscar Isaac’s character, Victor, is portrayed as a Byronic rock star – charismatic, arrogant, and overflowing with pride. On the other hand, Jacob Elordi’s Creature embodies innocence, sorrow, and anger. Their interaction doesn’t necessitate two different movies to be impactful; instead, it shines most effectively in a single intense storyline that blazes fiercely before fading away, much like a bolt of lightning striking a laboratory.

Netflix is heavily investing in a new adaptation of “Frankenstein,” set to hit movie theaters starting October 17, and then become available for streaming on November 7. Given the success of their first theatrical release, “KPop Demon Hunters,” and the director’s impressive resume, including films like “The Shape of Water,” “Pan’s Labyrinth,” and even an Oscar-winning version of “Pinocchio,” there’s good reason to believe that “Frankenstein” will appeal to both genre enthusiasts and awards committees.

More significantly, by choosing to keep it as a single film, the story won’t be weighed down by the franchise-focused approach that is prevalent in much of Hollywood today. This approach, which may have contributed to this summer’s disappointing box office results, will hopefully not affect “Frankenstein.

Rather than just part of the story or hints for future installments, horror enthusiasts will experience Guillermo del Toro’s entire intended vision presented as a single, continuous work. Personally, I am eagerly anticipating this.

Read More

2025-08-28 03:38