Although I enjoyed this movie, it was obvious within the first 15
minutes why it received sub par reviews. They began the movie by breaking the
narrative rule, which is to say don't use a voice over telling what's happened
when it can be summed up in a brief scene showing what happened. And don't use the
excuse that there wasn't enough time in the film. A creatively written scene
can convey an entire emotional experience in 30 seconds to 15 minutes.
The second flaw I noted stems from it's
inherent theme, the main character is someone far beyond the everyday type of
person. Wrapping our brain around a completely foreign character requires us to
see him through the eyes of those around him. Had the film opened with Doctor
Frankenstein's facial expression when he looks upon his living creation and
declares him a 'Monster', then we may have understood the character's plight
better. Felt for him. Felt with him. This is a few concepts rolled into one
solution the film could have taken. The main point being, if you aren't going
to use your "every day guy" that people can relate to, then you need
to give the audience a way to relate to them. The narrative is the cheap
approach that often falls flat. (One example of narrative done extremely
well is James Cameron's Avatar video log. It makes so much sense that most of
us are completely willing to forgive the info dump.)
The backdrop of the whole world we're
exposed to in I, Frankenstein also has this grandiose air about it that makes
it harder to believe. I would have again solved this by including more humans.
Watching them interact among Gargoyles unaware. Seeing Gargoyles saving the
lives of humans--that never even noticed--would have gone a long way to make me
believe there could be a world beyond what I see everyday. That would add to
the emotion impact the film COULD have made, but didn't. To put it bluntly, the
movie didn't quite feel real until we met Terra, a human.
