Since childhood, Guillermo del Toro has been fascinated with monsters. In fact, one of his first toys, which he still owns, was a plush werewolf that he sewed together with the help of a great-aunt. This love for the dark, gothic and grotesque has been translated into movies like “The Shape of Water” and “Pan’s Labyrinth.” His newest work, “Frankenstein,” premiered in theaters in October and was released globally on Netflix on Nov. 7, 2025.
The del Toro name, as well as an all-star cast—Jacob Elordi, Oscar Isaac, Mia Goth—has led to audiences waiting impatiently for the release.
Many viewers appreciated the detail involved with the making of the film, from the lush color grading to the symbolism to a fitting soundtrack by Alexandre Desplat; the movie was elevated to the point of true art. Production Designer Tamara Deverell explains that the viewers should expect to see a lot of circle motifs, which represent the circle of life, the beginning, the end, the endless ouroboros, the snake eating its tail…It’s a definite theme and she does her best to incorporate it as many times as she can, showing the dedication and skill of del Toro and his team.
Another reason for public appreciation was how closely del Toro followed the original Frankenstein novel by Mary Shelley. In the novel, a young scientist, Victor Frankenstein, creates a sentient creature—referred to, literally, as the Creature— from body parts but is horrified by its appearance and abandons it. The creature, driven to vengeance by isolation and rejection, murders Victor’s loved ones, leading to a tragic pursuit across continents that ends with both Victor’s and the creature’s deaths.
Most of the film closely follows this plotline, with few instances straying from it. In fact, one of the only great artistic liberties del Toro took was reimagining Elizabeth, who, in the novel, is Victor’s gentle adopted sister and eventually, his wife. In the film, Elizabeth, played by Mia Goth, is very much a character of her own. Her character is clearly more fleshed out not only through her being an entomologist, but through her interest and sympathy with the Creature.
Other viewers, however, expressed their disappointment in the less obvious aspects of the storyline that del Toro decided to forgo. A common interpretation of the novel is that there are two villains, or at least two morally gray characters: the Creature and Victor Frankenstein. However, in the film, Victor is undoubtedly the antagonist and the Creature is the innocent protagonist. This unambiguous portrayal, which occurs several times in the movie—shown when the Creature peacefully pets a mouse in the woods and through Victor’s megalomaniacal and uncaring personality—takes away the nuance and critical thinking aspect for the viewers. Some have even questioned whether del Toro’s sympathy for the grotesque has gone too far, and that his efforts to humanize the horrific have taken away what makes it truly monstrous.
Shelley’s novel is often read in two ways: an exploration of what one owes to one’s descendants or an examination of oppression. This film tends to focus on only the latter and adds its own elements, making it subject to judgment. In fact, Julie Carlson, an English professor at the University of California, Santa Barbara and an expert on the British Romantic period, notes that “the film downplays what was so strong in Shelley’s ‘Frankenstein’: the social critique. The film is a structural critique. It’s more about war, militarism, capitalism . . .” This is also something that numerous viewers have criticized.
The conjunction of the novel and movie, however divisive at times, allows audiences to explore questions of the media, society, and creation itself: How far can a movie stray from its source material and remain a great work, or at least a work true to its origins? And what responsibility do parents (and creators) have over what they create?
