Thank you for joining me for the second part of Double Feature: 2004 Edition! Similar to my review of Sesame Street Presents: Follow That Bird, this review of Hallmark’s Frankenstein will be spoiler-free. If you’re curious about why I chose Hallmark’s Frankenstein for this double feature, you can check out the introduction in the link below.
Introducing my Double Feature: 2004 Edition!
Before I start this review, I need to explain why I’m referring
to this version of Frankenstein as ‘Hallmark’s Frankenstein’. On
Wikipedia, there is a page chronicling all the Hallmark Channel movies released
between 2000 to 2015. In the section listing Hallmark Channel’s films from
2004, Vincent Perez is listed as one of the stars of Hallmark’s version of Frankenstein.
But if you click on the italicized title of Frankenstein, the link goes
directly to Wikipedia’s page about the Hallmark movie starring Alec Newman. While
Vincent did star in an adaptation of Frankenstein released in 2004, it
is not the Hallmark version. I didn’t discover this error until after I had
seen Vincent’s film.
1. What are your thoughts on 2004 as a cinematic year?
2004 was a year where “event entertainment” took place. When I say “event entertainment”, I mean television or movie premieres that are popular enough to become anticipated events. I remember when full print ads would boast a new Hallmark Hall of Fame production, marking the movie itself as “must see television”. Four sequels for popular predecessors were released in 2004, earning a spot among the top ten highest grossing films of the year. Twenty years later, consumers have more options when it comes to entertainment. This provides fewer opportunities for “event entertainment” to take place. Even events that have always been considered “event television” are struggling to capture audience’s attention.
2. Frankenstein premiered on Hallmark Channel on October 5th and 6th, 2004. How has the network evolved since the movie’s release?
When Hallmark’s adaptation of Frankenstein premiered, Hallmark Channel was three years old. At the time, the network didn’t have the distinct identity it does today. This allowed content to be less restrictive when it comes to creativity. 2004 saw the debut of Hallmark’s second network, Hallmark Movie Channel. On that network, a lot of Hallmark Channel’s previously aired programming made up Hallmark Movie Channel’s catalogue, as well as Hallmark Hall of Fame titles and acquired content. But in the twenty years this second network has existed, the channel’s name has changed twice, with the network now known as Hallmark Mystery. With Hallmark creating two channels, it provided more opportunities to create movies. As time passed, both networks adopted a more distinguishable identity.
3. Is there anything about Frankenstein you liked or didn’t like?
While I think the acting was one of the strengths of this movie, the two strongest performances came from Alec Newman and Luke Goss! Alec’s portrayal of Victor Frankenstein was so captivating because of the wide range of emotions incorporated into the role. His versatility made Victor feel like an authentic human being. From crying over the loss of a loved one to playfully teasing Elizabeth, Alec’s performance allowed Victor’s interactions with other characters to be interesting, with each interaction appearing genuine. Meanwhile, Luke utilized emotion to make The Creature a complicated character like he was in the novel. In fact, Luke’s emotionality spoke volumes in scenes where dialogue wasn’t required. One example shows The Creature after he escapes from Victor’s laboratory. When he seeks refuge in a barn, The Creature bursts into tears, overwhelmed by the fear and rejection directed toward him.
When Frankenstein premiered on Hallmark Channel, it was released as a two-part mini-series. The first part revolved around Victor’s desire to create life, leading up to The Creature coming to fruition. But the second part was more drawn out, with scenes either longer than necessary or completely unnecessary. Frankenstein’s second part features a wedding reception that lasts about five minutes. I understand why that scene was included in the adaptation. In my opinion, though, the wedding reception should have been cut shorter or omitted from the script.
4. In your Word on the Street story about a potential sequel for The Polar Express, you talked about the technology applied to that film. Could you detect any technology incorporated into Frankenstein?
There were a few scenes where it appears CGI (computer generated images) was included in the film. Other than that, it didn’t look like technology (besides cinematography, sound editing, etc.) was relied on to create this adaptation.
5. Did you develop any thoughts and/or questions while watching this film?
In one of Victor’s science classes, Victor claims the brain is the most important body part because of its electrical connections between nerves and other body parts. As he is attempting to create life, Victor collects various body parts from the morgue and the graveyard. When The Creature is awakened, wouldn’t he remember his life and identity prior to passing away? Wouldn’t The Creature recognize the body Victor gave him is not the body he was born with? With Victor’s statement about the brain, wouldn’t the nerves in The Creature’s brain not connect with the rest of his body? I never thought of these questions until I saw Hallmark’s adaptation of Frankenstein.
6. You’ve mentioned reading Frankenstein, but seeing few adaptations of the story. How does Hallmark’s version compare or contrast to the Frankenstein related movies you’ve seen?
Besides Hallmark’s adaptation of Frankenstein, I’ve seen three films that incorporate elements of Mary Shelley’s story. But because The Curse of Frankenstein follows the source material closer than the other two films, I’ll be discussing that movie alongside Hallmark’s version of Frankenstein. When I reviewed The Curse of Frankenstein last year, I was disappointed by the creative liberties the film’s creative team adopted. One of these creative liberties was presenting The Creature as a bumbling, destructive machine. As I mentioned in answer number three, The Creature was a complicated character in the novel. While he was destructive, The Creature’s actions were not always impulsive. In Hallmark’s adaptation of Frankenstein, Luke’s performance and the screenwriting illustrated how complicated The Creature is. The Creature’s intelligence was also highlighted in this adaptation, adding to The Creature’s complexity. Shortly after he escapes from Victor’s laboratory, the audience can hear how The Creature already understands the English language, grasping concepts like God and Heaven, as well as reading Paradise Lost.
7. Hallmark’s adaptation of Frankenstein is a made-for-TV production. Has there been a change in small screen cinema from 2004 to now?
In the same year Hallmark Channel premiered their version of Frankenstein, Hallmark Hall of Fame movies debuted on major networks. But fast forward to 2024, Hallmark Hall of Fame is no longer utilized by Hallmark, even after moving to Hallmark Channel in 2014. These decisions are examples of how made-for-TV programming has become more exclusive. Since 2004, Hallmark Channel has grown into one of the biggest creators of made-for-TV content. In fact, Hallmark Channel and its two networks, Hallmark Mystery and Hallmark Family, are three of the few places creating and/or distributing made-for-TV movies today. Rewinding to twenty years ago, major networks were still willing to include made-for-TV programs in their schedules. With the changing television landscape, including the invention of streaming services, major networks are just trying to stay afloat.
8. Now that it’s been twenty years since Frankenstein premiered, has it stood the test of time or become a product of its time?
For the most part, Hallmark’s adaptation of Frankenstein stands the test of time! It helps how this project is bringing to life a story that is iconic and timeless. I mentioned in my review of The Curse of Frankenstein how an overarching message in Mary Shelley’s novel is some good intentions possibly leading to bad results. This message also overarches Hallmark’s adaptation of Frankenstein, as Victor strives to do the impossible. There are other timeless messages in this version of Mary’s story, such as prioritizing what is irreplaceable.
9. After watching Frankenstein, is there anything you can take away from your movie viewing experience?
Similar to my review of I Am David, I will describe Hallmark’s version of Frankenstein in one word. That word would be ‘immersive’. This production made me feel like I was transported to another time and place. A combination of the acting performances, set design, costume design, and screenwriting achieved the illusion of an immersive experience. As someone who has read Mary Shelley’s novel, I appreciate how close to the source material Hallmark’s project is. From what I remember, the majority of the book’s key events and elements were included in the script. With that said, I understand why Hallmark chose to split Frankenstein into two parts. But, in my opinion, the second part was weaker than the first part. Looking back on Hallmark’s adaptation and I Am David, Frankenstein is a more underrated film that was not only forgotten by time, but also overshadowed by other titles released in 2004, like A Boyfriend for Christmas and Love’s Enduring Promise. I’m hoping my review inspires other fans of Hallmark to discover this hidden gem!
Have fun at the movies!
Sally Silverscreen
18 Cinema Lane 