A Universal Monsters Fan Takes on del Toro’s Frankenstein: Classic Meets Modern

Frankenstein poster (from Netflix)

Cereal Creatures reviews the new Netflix movie Frankenstein (2025), from director Guillermo del Toro--from the perspective of a Universal Monsters fan.

Our take on Frankenstein, in general, is perhaps one that is not unlike many, but does introduce a perspective unlike what one might expect from a movie based on a book. Rather, our perspective is that of a different movie based on a book—i.e.. the 1931 Frankenstein starring Boris Karloff.

We’ve never fully read the Mary Shelley novel, but we’ve seen the many takes on it in different media including the James Whale movies or many other pictures or tv shows in the last 75 or so years. Not to mention the Marvel and DC comics, Halloween decorations and collectibles and heck, even our own takes here at Cereal Creatures (Mad Boy Monster, etc.).

Given the vast breadth of takes on Frankenstein and his monster, how does the Guillermo del toro 2025 Netflix movie stand up?

Pretty darn well.

The two-and-a-half-hour movie is broken into three parts—a prelude, Victor’s story and then the Creature’s story. The movie is a cinematic masterpiece that blends Shelley’s story with visual spectacle. The story weaves between the man and his monster and as the story progresses, the viewers begin to see how man himself becomes something of a monster himself.

But, back to our exploration of how we experienced the movie—through the lens of the Universal Monsters movies. Here are a few things we recognized:

• All the pieces are there though pretty unrecognizable for fans of the Universal movies. Instead of Henry Frankenstein, we have Victor, which of course comes from the novel. Elizabeth is there. The monster, the life-giving lightning, the castle—all the things you’d expect.

• There is a nod to the Bride. Unlike the novel, or the Universal movies, Frankenstein refuses the Creature and doesn’t create a companion for him. In this movie, Elizabeth, who is getting married to Dr. Frankenstein’s brother, serves as a fill-in for the concept, but when she is killed no one brings her back to life. Though I swear I hear notes of the Franz Waxman score from the 1935 movie as the monster carries Elizabeth away. Perhaps it’s just my imagination.

• The hermit, from Bride of Frankenstein, is also there, but this is much different from O.P. Heggie’s hermit. This is still a blind man, but here he has a family who leaves him behind for the winter. The bonding between the monster and the blind man is still equally strong here as the man teaches Frankenstein’s creation how to speak and read. I almost expected them to throw in Ave Maria, but alas that was not the case.

• In my head canon, I imagine the wolves that attack the blind man and his family are actually Dracula! The one all-black wolf at the end looks very menacing in a Dracula sort of way!
  

And that’s it. There’s not a lot to compare from the perspective of a Universal Monsters Frankenstein fan. It’s almost certainly one of the best movies I’ve seen this year, but it also highlights how much room to play Universal could take advantage of if they really wanted to make a new Karloff-style horror movie. Even the Monsters Unchained ride at Epic Universe lays the groundwork for storytelling potential.

Guillermo del Toro’s Frankenstein is everything you could ask for in a picture based on Shelley’s novel—and that is what elevates it beyond previous attempts. It was its own thing—its own vision. And not once, did Frankenstein utter the words “It’s Alive!”