Support NeoGAF

[kruis]

Hmm. Enjoyable and well made, but very…unsubtle.

Del Toro movies haven't been subtle for a long time. I can't think of a movie that was as heavy handed in its messaging as The Shape of Water with the heroes (a disabled woman, a gay man and a black woman) fighting to rescue a social outcast (the monster) from a repressive neo fascist system that was represented by a hypocritical, ultra conservative who professed to believe in traditional values and family. No wonder Hollywood lapped it up.

 

[NotMyProblemAnymoreCunt]

Del Toro movies haven't been subtle for a long time. I can't think of a movie that was as heavy handed it its messaging as The Shape of Water with the heroes (a disabled woman, a gay man and a black woman) fighting to rescue a social outcast (the monster) from a repressive neo fascist system that was represented by a hypocritical, ultra conservative who professed to believe in traditional values and family. No wonder Hollywood lapped it up.

I hated The Shape of Water, Nightmare Alley and Pinocchio. I love the way he uses practical effects but his recent films have been boring

 

[John Bilbo]

It was closer to the book than any other adaptation I've seen. It was a bit like the Jackson's Lord of the Rings compared to the original: has a part of the original's soul and emotion mixed with it's own thing. A bit Grimm like fairytale, a bit Disney. Interesting overall.

The first adaptation I've seen including the creature's point of view. Although my favourite part of the novel was reading his thoughts directly.

 

[DKehoe]

I really wish I got to see this in IMAX but unfortunately none of the IMAX screens in my city were showing it.

 

[jason10mm]

I really wish I got to see this in IMAX but unfortunately none of the IMAX screens in my city were showing it.

There was a time when I would have been in that front row so I could be physically assaulted by the movie, but these days I sit waaay back if only to spare my neck

 

[DKehoe]

There was a time when I would have been in that front row so I could be physically assaulted by the movie, but these days I sit waaay back if only to spare my neck

When I saw Oppenheimer in IMAX I waited too long to book tickets and ended up in one of the front rows, so I spent the entire runtime craning my neck upwards. Worth it though!

 

[AJUMP23]

This is good and follows the book. Enjoyed the film.

 

[Liljagare]

Pretty good stuff, but the pacing felt off?

 

[Saber]

I find it ok tbh. The pacing was kinda strange.
The weakness of this movie were the forced blood dropping everytime, scenes at the marriage and the Elizabeth character. I find this new Elizabeth to be the weakest part of the film.

On the other side goddang the guy who interprets Victor surprised me. I had a bad feeling because of SW, but his act was pretty good. I think his act at the start in the medical trial would have way more impact if everyone were against him other than the weapon dealer.
Again overall was ok.

 

[Trilobit]

I'll probably watch Pan's Labyrinth beforehand to get in the right mood.

On the other side goddang the guy who interprets Victor surprised me.

"The guy"?! You mean Oscar fucking Isaac. One of the most terrific actors of our time. I've loved him since Ex Machina. He enhances everything he's in. Everything from Dune to Drive to Annihilation. Yeah, SW sucked, but he had extremely bad material to work with. I would have preferred to have seen him as a Jedi in a more mature SW movie.

 

[Saber]

"The guy"?! You mean Oscar fucking Isaac. One of the most terrific actors of our time.

Err...good for you I guess?
Didn't put much faith in him from my experience with SW, but thankfully I was wrong because he acted pretty damn good on this one. Hope to see more of him in the future.

 

[DKehoe]

Err...good for you I guess?
Didn't put much faith in him from my experience with SW, but thankfully I was wrong because he acted pretty damn good on this one. Hope to see more of him in the future.

Along with the ones Trilobit mentioned, you should check out Inside Llewyn Davis.

 

[John Marston]

I enjoyed it.
That creature was a pretty handsome feller.
Like a cross between a young Jim Morrison and the first Daario from GOT.
We're a long way from Boris Karloff

I didn't read the book and maybe I missed a time lapse but I was surprised at how quickly Victor got impatient with the creature.

I also think Del Toro identifies with ugly broken people who fall in love with purrty women because he himself is a short ugly happy troll

 

[jason10mm]

Watching now. It's well shot.

 

[Maiden Voyage]

I also think Del Toro identifies with ugly broken people who fall in love with purrty women because he himself is a short ugly happy troll

This just sold me on watching this movie.

 

[SirKicksalot]

When I was reading the book, I was thinking it could really use a badass wolf action scene or two.
A schmaltzy mess written by AI.

 

[SupaComputa]

This is a gorgeous movie with superb casting and good performances. I do agree with the "unsubtle" comment, particularly the fact that characters are 1 dimensional. At the same time there's depth in the themes and motifs, so there's a bit of meat to sink your teeth into. Found the score cliché, these paint by number orchestral scores bore me, but it's kind of understandable for a gothic movie like this so I won't hold this against it. It is rather long so I am not sure about rewatchability, but there's a physical release planned, it will be hard not to buy it in 4k. It made me want to read the book that's for sure.

 

[EviLore]

This is a gorgeous movie with superb casting and good performances. I do agree with the "unsubtle" comment, particularly the fact that characters are 1 dimensional. At the same time there's depth in the themes and motifs, so there's a bit of meat to sink your teeth into. Found the score cliché, these paint by number orchestral scores bore me, but it's kind of understandable for a gothic movie like this so I won't hold this against it. It is rather long so I am not sure about rewatchability, but there's a physical release planned, it will be hard not to buy it in 4k. It made me want to read the book that's for sure.

Yeah, the characters are the weak point. You know how they'll act in any given situation since their motivations are so one dimensional and transparent. Victor (plot details ahead) is fixated on his mother's death, falls for the woman who looks exactly like his mother, exclusively drinks milk, etc.

For a story so concerned about the essence of humanity, it would benefit from a deeper understanding of human nature.

I enjoyed it and I appreciate all the practical effects but doesn't have the makings of a classic like Coppola's Dracula.

Definitely curious to read the book though.

 

[jason10mm]

The novel is interesting, very different from any film adaptation, though this one hews closer than most. I think it benefits from an annotated version. It's fairly short by todays standards, you could almost read it in a day, though the language and rather long sentence structure warrants some careful reading at times.

 

[Saber]

Yeah, the characters are the weak point. You know how they'll act in any given situation since their motivations are so one dimensional and transparent. Victor (plot details ahead) is fixated on his mother's death, falls for the woman who looks exactly like his mother, exclusively drinks milk, etc.

For a story so concerned about the essence of humanity, it would benefit from a deeper understanding of human nature.

I enjoyed it and I appreciate all the practical effects but doesn't have the makings of a classic like Coppola's Dracula.

Definitely curious to read the book though.

Like I said, I think the weakest part of the film is Elizabeth. She is treated as this enigmatic, hard to understand and kind of wise woman. The final moments scene where the creatures attacks Victor are 100% predictable.
This film is suppose to give us this feeling that the monster is an abobination in the eyes of people, but that last scene of the creature carrying her fails miserably.

 

[Pejo]

GF and I watched this tonight. The cinematography, costumes/wardrobe, and set design was out of this world good. The story and characters, not so much. My gf is a big Mary Shelley purist when it comes to the story and she was really let down by that part. The acting was good enough, but it really felt LONG because the story moved kinda slowly for what they wanted to portray.

Anyway, beautiful movie visually. The imagery especially really wowed me, loved those caskets.

 

[John Bilbo]

Like I said, I think the weakest part of the film is Elizabeth. She is treated as this enigmatic, hard to understand and kind of wise woman. The final moments scene where the creatures attacks Victor are 100% predictable.
This film is suppose to give us this feeling that the monster is an abobination in the eyes of people, but that last scene of the creature carrying her fails misserably.

Yes the monster was Disneyfied. Too pretty. The appearance of the monster affected into his tragedy directly in the book. If I recall correctly he was described as hideous, so disgusting it was almost impossible to look at.

 

[Fake]

I watched and find Elizabeth the weak point of the movie to be honest. While everyone here have individual personalities and weaknesses, Elizabeth is like almost 'Merry Sue' territory. The confession scene was funny until 'she knew it all the time'.

Overall, the pacing was fine, not the the best and the Doctor actor was good. His infancy story was great too.

I give 3 stars or 7/10.

 

[Dev1lXYZ]

I liked the movie overall, but went in with low expectations. There was just something about the movie that felt off. It has Del Toro's signature theming, but it felt kinda toned down all the way around. The creature reminded me of Beast from Beauty and The Beast for some reason and wasn't ugly enough. He kinda looked like he walked off the set of an X-Men movie in an uncanny way. I went in blind hoping that this would be a close adaptation of the book and as soon as Elizabeth was introduced being the brother's wife, I was like well, there goes that.

 

[Dev1lXYZ]

I watched and find Elizabeth the weak point of the movie to be honest. While everyone here have indivisual personalities and weaknesses, Elizabeth is like almost 'Merry Sue' territory. The confession scene was funny until 'she knew it all the time'.

Overal, the pacing was fine, not the the best and the Doctor actor was good. His infancy story was great too.

I give 3 stars or 7/10.

Agreed. Elizabeth felt like the Hollywood checkboxes were focused all on her character and Victor was just about as pure evil as they could make him. It was sort of jarring how his personality shifted when he had to care for the creature. He was worse than Ma Fratelli from the Goonies! I would love for an outtake to have been done with the creature saying 'Baby Ruuuth'.

 

[SupaComputa]

Mia Goth isn't great in straightforward roles, didn't care much for A Cure for Wellness or Marrowbone. She's good in roles that are a bit off. They didn't give her much to play with here.

 

[Badlucktroll]

i liked it but i would have like to see robert eggers have a crack at frankenstein

 

[AeonGaidenRaiden]

I enjoyed the movie but a little underwhelming. First part had me hooked, when the monster started with his string of events, it got kinda boring and that ending does nothing really.

 

[Dr. Suchong]

I enjoyed it for the Cinematography.
No scene went to waste, stunning imagery, and effective use of light and colour.
Really was beautiful to behold.
But the monster was romanticised to the point of absurdity, he was almost Adonis like.
Victor was more annoying than maniacal He seemed more "cheesed off" with his ill considered creation, than aghast.
Dialogue was mid.
It was entertaining enough, but not something I'd watch again.

 

[near]

I thought it was alright. It's visually beautiful and the story aims for emotional depth, but it didn't quite land for me. It was somewhat predictable, the real monster being Victor and his creation being misunderstood. I found it a bit amusing that Elizabeth wants to care for and nurture the creation, the same way Victors mother cared for him since the film underlines this parallel by having Mia Goth play both Elizabeth and Victor's mother.

I've only ever seen Frankenstein (1931), which I've always considered overrated and pretty rubbish. I've never read the book either, despite owning it for many years. So, given my extremely limited reference points, this is easily the best Frankenstein film I've seen.

 

[lughnasadh123]

It's Guillermo Del Toro - of course it looks good as usual. The show was great up until the creature's perspective where all that energy just slowly drained out leading to a very anti-climatic ending. Not bad, just...there. Also didn't care for the creature design.

 

[EviLore]

the real monster being Victor

The film literally saying this word for word has to be its low point.

 

[kunonabi]

I thought it was alright. It's visually beautiful and the story aims for emotional depth, but it didn't quite land for me. It was somewhat predictable, the real monster being Victor and his creation being misunderstood. I found it a bit amusing that Elizabeth wants to care for and nurture the creation, the same way Victors mother cared for him since the film underlines this parallel by having Mia Goth play both Elizabeth and Victor's mother.

I've only ever seen Frankenstein (1931), which I've always considered overrated and pretty rubbish. I've never read the book either, despite owning it for many years. So, given my extremely limited reference points, this is easily the best Frankenstein film I've seen.

Unpopular opinion but Hammer made the best Frankenstein films. They also made some of the worst but hey nobody's perfect. I'm in the same boat with the book. I swear I'll read it one of these days but everytime I see a movie that's supposedly closer to the book I hate it and I put off the book again.

 

[skneogaf]

I watched this yesterday, I didn't think it was as good as reviews have said it was. I rated it 3/5 in my plex server.

Worth a watch as the picture quality is amazing and it supports 9.1.6 dolby atmos which was very used.

 

[GermanZepp]

It's not perfect but I like it. The inner struggle of the creature felted well portrait.

 

[DKehoe]

 

[EviLore]

Extended cut is in the works

 

[Bojji]

Mia Goth isn't great in straightforward roles, didn't care much for A Cure for Wellness or Marrowbone. She's good in roles that are a bit off. They didn't give her much to play with here.

Recently I found about at her earlier movie Nymphomaniac: Vol. II... It's certainly interesting to compare her Frankenstein "perfect woman" character vs. what she does in that movie, haha.

 

[Chuck Berry]

How does this compare to the Frankenstein from 1994 with DeNiro and Kenneth Branagh?

Does anyone else remember that one? Riding on the coattails of Dracula and wasn't nearly as successful...

 

[Tomorrow]

How does this compare to the Frankenstein from 1994 with DeNiro and Kenneth Branagh?

Does anyone else remember that one? Riding on the coattails of Dracula and wasn't nearly as successful...

never saw that one but surely can't be any worse than GDT's frankenstein. didn't like anything about this movie.

edit: i've never watched it but reading about it. i mean it's got Kenneth Branagh, Helena Bonham Carter, Robert mf DeNiro, Ian Holm, and John Cleese.

that alone makes it a million times better already. I should watch it.

 

[IDKFA]

Extended cut is in the works

Hopefully it'll get a physical release

 

[Mr Reasonable]

We saw this earlier this week as my local cinema is showing Oscar nominated films. I'm not sure how this ends up on the best picture long list, let alone the nominations.

A great opening then endless requests to suspend your disbelief at character motivations and actions. It feels like they wrote down 10 key scenes they needed to hit and realised they were going to be way over run time so linked those scenes as quickly as possible.

Also, I'm editing this in later, I didn't want to be argumentative because I know some people have highlighted liking the look of the film, but it's not all that common for me to find green screen CGI environments as distractingly obvious as they are here.

It feels like for most of the film they filmed the actors, a chair they might sit on and a table with a bowl of fruit on it, and then got the SFX dept to fill in the rest later. I accept it happens a lot but here it looks far too obvious to me to not be distracting.

 

[EviLore]

We saw this earlier this week as my local cinema is showing Oscar nominated films. I'm not sure how this ends up on the best picture long list, let alone the nominations.

A great opening then endless requests to suspend your disbelief at character motivations and actions. It feels like they wrote down 10 key scenes they needed to hit and realised they were going to be way over run time so linked those scenes as quickly as possible.

Also, I'm editing this in later, I didn't want to be argumentative because I know some people have highlighted liking the look of the film, but it's not all that common for me to find green screen CGI environments as distractingly obvious as they are here.

It feels like for most of the film they filmed the actors, a chair they might sit on and a table with a bowl of fruit on it, and then got the SFX dept to fill in the rest later. I accept it happens a lot but here it looks far too obvious to me to not be distracting.

There were a ton of elaborate practical sets, basically shot in such a way that they looked like CG. For example the wrecked ship.

The rest is probably Netflix executive demands to make everything on the nose and for idiots.

 

[Mr Reasonable]

There were a ton of elaborate practical sets, basically shot in such a way that they looked like CG.

I've just looked at a video that has Del Toro talking about the sets, and find it somewhat baffling that they'd go to so much effort to get something that looked so artificial. But, people seem to like it. FWIW, I didn't doubt the ship looked good or have a problem with it. I'm thinking about a scene where

Spoiler

Young Victor is being schooled by his father, in what looks like a long library-alike room. That immediately pinged my CGI radar, and you could forgive it (I think it only appears once) but it nonetheless caused me to doubt a number of other spaces.

Maybe I just think they should have found an actual old castle to film in, etc. And anything that doesn't feel like that jars on me. Either way, consider me told!

 

[Nocty]

There were a ton of elaborate practical sets, basically shot in such a way that they looked like CG. For example the wrecked ship.

The rest is probably Netflix executive demands to make everything on the nose and for idiots.

did you see the article recently about them deliberately editing scripts to have characters repeat the plot points verbatim 4-5 times during the film at certain points because they know most people watch these days while scrolling, not fuly engaged. So they basically have the main characters narrate what they are doing.

shit's just fuckin tragic tbh. Can you imagine Coppola or Kubrick being alive today and some asshats in suits around a table telling them to dumb their shit down so morons scrolling on phones can understand it?

 

[Diddy X]

Great movie, the whole thing I loved it!