England, 1875. A century after Victor Frankenstein's doomed experiment, his journals have traded hands for decades.England, 1875. A century after Victor Frankenstein's doomed experiment, his journals have traded hands for decades.England, 1875. A century after Victor Frankenstein's doomed experiment, his journals have traded hands for decades.
Featured reviews
Well, I had no idea what to expect on this movie. I thought maybe it was a horror film and I had not seen the previews or at least that made me remember anything about it. So I went in kind of blind, not having any expectations on this movie. But I found myself laughing in some of this movie and it kept me entertained and that's what a movie is for so I do believe it deserves at least a rating of five or higher. You won't be bored in it and for any of the younger folks, they were really find the movie, enjoyable, and funny. It's one of those movies that teens can see and it's just not a horrible or provocative show. So I felt like it was a movie that was fine for teenagers.
I recently watched this gem on Amazon, and I must say, it left quite an impression. The characters were wonderfully crafted, and the storyline held a firm grip throughout. It's easy to develop a genuine empathy for these characters. Plus, it had all the delightful madness of a classic mad scientist narrative, which is right up my alley. And let me tell you, the conclusion is an absolute whirlwind of emotions. Prepare to have your heartstrings tugged, particularly in the moments involving family and the monstrous.
Having enjoyed Paul's previous work, 'Fear the Invisible Man,' I had high hopes for this one, and I wasn't disappointed. The team truly knocked it out of the park.
From direction to storytelling, cinematography to score, every aspect of this film is stellar. The actors breathed life into the legacy of Frankenstein like never before.
As someone aspiring to venture into film production myself, this serves as a prime example of what independent producers can achieve with dedication and a commitment to delivering an immersive artistic experience. It's a testament to the power of storytelling and the creation of characters so compelling that you can't help but stay invested until the very end. And oh, what a journey it is for these wonderful characters!
Having enjoyed Paul's previous work, 'Fear the Invisible Man,' I had high hopes for this one, and I wasn't disappointed. The team truly knocked it out of the park.
From direction to storytelling, cinematography to score, every aspect of this film is stellar. The actors breathed life into the legacy of Frankenstein like never before.
As someone aspiring to venture into film production myself, this serves as a prime example of what independent producers can achieve with dedication and a commitment to delivering an immersive artistic experience. It's a testament to the power of storytelling and the creation of characters so compelling that you can't help but stay invested until the very end. And oh, what a journey it is for these wonderful characters!
This is a Frankenstein follow up ??.
A woman gets hold of Dr Frankensteins diary and recreates his experiment on her husband to cure him 100 years after Frankensteins original monster.
This diary has been sought after by many but a secret group are trying to locate the diary and destroy it for good as it goes against nature and god.
Sounds fairly interesting and and the overall concept is solid.
The costumes and settings are pretty believable for the time, around late 1800s.
The dialogue is a bit wooden however like a stage show, I'm pretty sure this is down to both the writing and the poor way in which the actors deliver the lines attempting to sound authentic from that Era.
There are some experienced and decent actors here but I never felt they embraced the ideology or the era properly.
Phillip Martin Brown does a decent job here but not enough to carry the film.
The way in which it was shot also removed an authentic feel and resembled a higher image quality version of a 90s tv movie.
I watched this to see Michelle Ryan as i liked her in Eastenders and the she did Bionic Woman and then her career fizzled out.
She appears later in the film in a limited role.
There were quite a few moments watching this where I chuckled at some of the poor dialogue or the poor delivery or facial over acting.
Honestly Id skip it even if you have Prime, unless you are a huge Frankenstein fan but then you might hate it even more.
4/10.
A woman gets hold of Dr Frankensteins diary and recreates his experiment on her husband to cure him 100 years after Frankensteins original monster.
This diary has been sought after by many but a secret group are trying to locate the diary and destroy it for good as it goes against nature and god.
Sounds fairly interesting and and the overall concept is solid.
The costumes and settings are pretty believable for the time, around late 1800s.
The dialogue is a bit wooden however like a stage show, I'm pretty sure this is down to both the writing and the poor way in which the actors deliver the lines attempting to sound authentic from that Era.
There are some experienced and decent actors here but I never felt they embraced the ideology or the era properly.
Phillip Martin Brown does a decent job here but not enough to carry the film.
The way in which it was shot also removed an authentic feel and resembled a higher image quality version of a 90s tv movie.
I watched this to see Michelle Ryan as i liked her in Eastenders and the she did Bionic Woman and then her career fizzled out.
She appears later in the film in a limited role.
There were quite a few moments watching this where I chuckled at some of the poor dialogue or the poor delivery or facial over acting.
Honestly Id skip it even if you have Prime, unless you are a huge Frankenstein fan but then you might hate it even more.
4/10.
The mention of Frankenstein has always attracted allot of attention and expectations, the story line goes back ages, with fans from all age groups.. that last one Frankenstein angels and demons was a blockbuster fans couldnt get enough of it, that was real acting, money well spent. This Frankenstein legacy of 2024 on the other hand is the opposite, low budget, terrible characters, the doctors mom was nothing to write home about, the doctor though showed potential. In my opinion the worse action in this movie was the lady that was on a journey to find and destroy the journal, she was TERRIBLE, trigger happy, the role was usless, I wouldn't let her act a village movie.
From the start it's clear this is a VERY cheaply made movie. They get an old house, dress some people up in period costumes and get out the digital camera.
It sure isn't Universal's Frankenstein. Heck, it's not even Hammer's Frankenstein.
The writing is really bad and the directing is amateurish. Perhaps because of a low budget that require a lot of close up so you don't see the surroundings.
It tries to be a serious effort but its all bogged down by a complete lack of talent for all involved.
Not sure why they bothered to make this movie. The concept might be OK but it really requires a bigger budget and better writing and acting to make it work!.
It sure isn't Universal's Frankenstein. Heck, it's not even Hammer's Frankenstein.
The writing is really bad and the directing is amateurish. Perhaps because of a low budget that require a lot of close up so you don't see the surroundings.
It tries to be a serious effort but its all bogged down by a complete lack of talent for all involved.
Not sure why they bothered to make this movie. The concept might be OK but it really requires a bigger budget and better writing and acting to make it work!.
Did you know
- GoofsWilliam and Liza mention Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson - yet the film is set in 1875, 12 years before the publication of the first Holmes story, but this could be a joking reference to imply that Holmes and Watson are real people.
- How long is Frankenstein: Legacy?Powered by Alexa
Details
- Runtime1 hour 41 minutes
- Color
- Aspect ratio
- 2.35 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content
