I saw Kenneth Branagh’s Frankenstein on the big screen back in 1994. I liked it. I felt bad, however, when Roger Ebert gave it a bad review because we generally agreed on most movies. (No, I’ve never actually met the guy, but he was always the one I cheered for in the heated debates on Siskel and Ebert!) I thought that Branagh brought a whole new Shakespeareanesque-tragi-brooding thing to the good (?) Doctor. And De Niro definitely brought the Monster to life. (If I remember correctly, De Niro’s performance was the one thing Ebert liked about the movie.) Seriously, I felt this version delved more into the moral ambiguities that make Shelley’s novel what it is. It was never a monster story; it was a story about what makes one a monster. For that reason alone, I prefer Branagh’s vision to all the others I’ve seen.
FINALLY, someone agrees with me! What makes me happier still is that I found this article on Roger Ebert’s website. You can read it here.
Who knows? Maybe Ebert will even change his mind about it.