Peter Swanson I can't decide whether this is one of the best films I've ever seen or one of the worst, but it is definitely one of the strangest. I was expecting a benign period piece, with the challenge to write a horror story issued over a glass of port in front of the fireplace. What I found was an exploration of the egos, neuroses, and idiosyncrasies of some very creative, intelligent, and troubled people. The appearance of the monster in the middle of the film bothered me, but I've since realized/decided/guessed that it's SYMBOLIC (emphasis intentional) of the influence that Mary Shelley's book and its reception by the literary world had upon this group of friends. I'm going to have to dig out old textbooks and read up on these writers, as I don't recall knowing before of the wave of suicides and unfortunate deaths which washed over them in a short span of time. The settings and photography of this film are as good as it gets, with beautiful natural light used most of the time. I'd recommend this movie to adult viewers, but not for anyone under 17. This thing would've been disturbing to me when I was in my early teens, and the monster would've scared the crap out of me.

ma-cortes At a mansion by a lagoon nearly Geneva reunite (1816) various known characters as Lord Byron (Hugh Grant), the poet Percy Shelley (Valentine Pelka), his fiancée (Lizzy McInnery), her stepsister Claire (Elizabeth Hurley) and Doctor Polidori (Jose Luis Gomez), Byron ex-lover and secretary . The movie is situated in the time when Mary Shelley wrote her novel "Frankenstein". There happens mysterious events with appearance a fantastic personage trying to scare each other and then occurs unfortunate deaths . Meanwhile , Mary Shelley has fabled and hallucinatory nightmares .This haunting film is based on real events about famous characters as the eccentric poet Lod Byron, , his secretary Doctor Polidori, Percy Bysshe Shelley and Mary Shelley . It concerns the deeds were inspired to write their classic Gothic novels , as Mary Shelley created ¨Frankestein¨ and Doctor Polidori wrote ¨The vampire¨. It's a romantic drama paced in slow-moving , enjoyable visuals and some nudism . It packs glamorous gowns by Ivonne Blake , Oscar winner for ¨Nicholas and Alexandra¨. Luxurious scenarios by Wolfgang Burmann , such as interior with lush palaces and breathtaking mansion from Venice (including a giraffe where resides Byron) and exteriors filmed in Norway , Venice, Veneto, Switzerland , Toledo , Asturias (beaches of Llanes), Spain. Colorful and brilliant cinematography by Carlos Suarez, director's brother . Stunning score with a sensitive leitmotif by Alejandro Masso , adding classical music by Bethoven , Mozart and Paganini . The picture was beautifully directed by Gonzalo Suarez who gives special treatment this interesting flick.This story was formerly depicted in the ancient classic ¨The bride of Frankestein¨ by James Whale in which Elsa Lanchester played Mary Shelley . Subsequently in 1986 Ken Russell directed ¨Gothic¨ with Natasha Richardson as Mary , Gabriel Byrne and Julian Sands in similar characters and full of ordinary Russell's bag of tricks . And the same tale was told two years later by Ivan Passer who directed ¨Haunted summer (1988)¨ with Eric Stolz , Alice Krige and Laura Dern . But I think that ¨Rowing with the wind¨ is better than ¨Gothic¨ and ¨Haunted summer¨.

Cajun-4 Although the story of how Mary Shelley came to write her famous horror story FRANKENSTEIN is a familiar one that has been touched on in quite a few movies, there is always room for a different viewpoint and probably there is the germ of a good idea here but something went horribly wrong. It could be a case of too many cooks which often happens in these international co-productions. It has obviously been heavily cut but I don't think the edited scenes would have helped any, we would have just been bored for longer that's all. The acting is generally poor and the actors are miscast especially Hugh Grant as Lord Byron who has none of the brooding qualities one associates with the poet and who also looks downright ridiculous in some of the costumes even they may be historically accurate. There are one or two rather pretty scenic shots but that's about it.The whole thing ends up as so boring I would suggest it as a cure for insomnia but the music is so inapt and irritating is would probably have the opposite effect.One to avoid.

Jeffrey Wang After watching this film, I thought to myself that it was an interesting film, and there were individual scenes which were strong. However, the pacing seemed to be a bit off, and somehow the flow of the film didn't feel right. Then, I noticed that the version I saw was 95 minutes long, while the original version was 126 minutes long. That's thirty whole minutes cut! As far as I'm concerned, this is criminal! Obviously, Miramax re-released this film during early 1999 in order to cash in on Hugh Grant and Elizabeth Hurley. In the process, they cut the film to shreds, and perhaps rearranged the scenes around to make it more "coherent."