The first season was amazing,exept botched finale...The dark, gothic detective story in the beginning ,unfortunately transformed in something unrecognizable...
Story became very slow, overly religious and plain,not in a good way,macabre.
All in all,decent one time watch.
73 Reviews
Wonderfully creepy and disturbing stuff...
bushtony19 December 2015
Warning: Spoilers
A six part mini-series with a top-notch cast, headed by Sean Bean, great production values and a nifty hook and line in grounding the Mary Shelley mythos in a real-world historical setting. It screams PRIME TIME, but finds itself inexplicably tucked away in a late night spot on the less than essential ITV2 channel. What gives? John Marlott (Sean Bean) is a London river cop in the early 1800s. In the process of busting a smuggling gang he stumbles upon the washed-up corpse of a child on the banks of the seriously polluted Thames. Only this corpse is a composite of body parts of multiple children crudely stitched together. It could never have lived, yet it briefly grabs Marlott's wrist before lying still forever.
The Home Secretary (Robert Peel) charges Marlott with finding out who is responsible for the "abomination" and we're off full tilt into a Gothic world of fog, body-snatchers, rotting corpses, child prostitution and murder, bizarre medical experimentation and political intrigue.
Mary Shelley (Anna Maxwell-Martin) widow of the poet Shelley and author of Frankenstein and William Blake (Steven Berkoff) poet, writer and artist are key figures who pop up along the way and are instrumental in driving the narrative forward.
It is wonderfully creepy and disturbing stuff. So atmospherically shot and mounted that you can almost smell and taste the stench of death and decay as the characters instinctively recoil from it, covering their faces with whatever they can to blot it out.
Sean Bean gives a master-class performance as a good, honest man adrift in a world of physical and moral corruption. Marlott is an ex-soldier (from the same regiment as a guy called Sharpe, reference spotters), veteran of Waterloo, wracked by grief, guilt and despair after having unwittingly passed on syphilis to his wife and new born child, resulting in their untimely deaths. The illness is active within him, and combined with mercury treatment (a painful and pointless remedy) induces florid nightmares and vivid hallucinations. Anyone who ever wrote Bean off as little more than a movie rent-a-heavy, or sitting duck dead villain in waiting, should reassess on this evidence. His affecting portrayal of tragically damaged and conflicted humanity here is nothing short of superb. Re-imagine it as if Di-Crapio or Crooze replicated in a movie with a bit of a profile, and he'd be instant Globe or Oscar bait.
I'm going to watch the last episode in a day or two, anticipating an outcome that I haven't even been able to guess at. I have no idea how this is going to pan out exactly, and that's a good thing. It is always a great, and indeed rare experience to find a period drama that is both captivating and unpredictable. Set at a time when religion was railing and losing ground against the advance of science and in a capital metropolis teeming with filth, crime, social inequality and exploitation of the weak and vulnerable, it's a compelling canvas upon which the action is drawn. The script is thoughtful and well-rendered and although ultimately it lacks the gloriously overwrought and fantastical dynamic of, say, PENNY DREADFUL, or the heroic wild-west undertones of RIPPER STREET, it represents a solid and entertaining companion piece to those two shows.
The Home Secretary (Robert Peel) charges Marlott with finding out who is responsible for the "abomination" and we're off full tilt into a Gothic world of fog, body-snatchers, rotting corpses, child prostitution and murder, bizarre medical experimentation and political intrigue.
Mary Shelley (Anna Maxwell-Martin) widow of the poet Shelley and author of Frankenstein and William Blake (Steven Berkoff) poet, writer and artist are key figures who pop up along the way and are instrumental in driving the narrative forward.
It is wonderfully creepy and disturbing stuff. So atmospherically shot and mounted that you can almost smell and taste the stench of death and decay as the characters instinctively recoil from it, covering their faces with whatever they can to blot it out.
Sean Bean gives a master-class performance as a good, honest man adrift in a world of physical and moral corruption. Marlott is an ex-soldier (from the same regiment as a guy called Sharpe, reference spotters), veteran of Waterloo, wracked by grief, guilt and despair after having unwittingly passed on syphilis to his wife and new born child, resulting in their untimely deaths. The illness is active within him, and combined with mercury treatment (a painful and pointless remedy) induces florid nightmares and vivid hallucinations. Anyone who ever wrote Bean off as little more than a movie rent-a-heavy, or sitting duck dead villain in waiting, should reassess on this evidence. His affecting portrayal of tragically damaged and conflicted humanity here is nothing short of superb. Re-imagine it as if Di-Crapio or Crooze replicated in a movie with a bit of a profile, and he'd be instant Globe or Oscar bait.
I'm going to watch the last episode in a day or two, anticipating an outcome that I haven't even been able to guess at. I have no idea how this is going to pan out exactly, and that's a good thing. It is always a great, and indeed rare experience to find a period drama that is both captivating and unpredictable. Set at a time when religion was railing and losing ground against the advance of science and in a capital metropolis teeming with filth, crime, social inequality and exploitation of the weak and vulnerable, it's a compelling canvas upon which the action is drawn. The script is thoughtful and well-rendered and although ultimately it lacks the gloriously overwrought and fantastical dynamic of, say, PENNY DREADFUL, or the heroic wild-west undertones of RIPPER STREET, it represents a solid and entertaining companion piece to those two shows.
Great start, which promises to get better!!
Whitetower412 November 2015
Having watched the first episode last night, i am very impressed.
The show centres on John Marlott, who after an unsuccessful opium case, finds a dead girls body on the shore of the marshes. However this was not just one dead girl, but parts of many! So what ensues after is inspector john Marlott being put on the case to find the culprit.
Set in a bleak and dark London, the setting looks fantastic and eerie. The story seems clever, weaving the traditional Frankenstein story with real life London, nothing looks like it will be too far fetched at the moment, but has the capabilities of being so?
The acting is superb. Albeit the first episode it a little slow, Sean Bean carries it along by us the viewer being invested in his character with a troubled past. Bean has always had a uncanny knack of making the viewer transfixed on him, excellent screen presence. The supporting cast are also notably excellent too, with Richie Campbell as Nightingale (his partner) and Robbie Gee as Billy Oates also captivating.
The first episode finishes leaving the viewer intrigued, not waiting for episode two to see which direction the show will take, the tradition Frankenstein story with bolts in his neck? Or a more contemporary mad scientist detective case? Or maybe a mixture of both?
We will have to wait and see, but i will certainly keep watching.
The show centres on John Marlott, who after an unsuccessful opium case, finds a dead girls body on the shore of the marshes. However this was not just one dead girl, but parts of many! So what ensues after is inspector john Marlott being put on the case to find the culprit.
Set in a bleak and dark London, the setting looks fantastic and eerie. The story seems clever, weaving the traditional Frankenstein story with real life London, nothing looks like it will be too far fetched at the moment, but has the capabilities of being so?
The acting is superb. Albeit the first episode it a little slow, Sean Bean carries it along by us the viewer being invested in his character with a troubled past. Bean has always had a uncanny knack of making the viewer transfixed on him, excellent screen presence. The supporting cast are also notably excellent too, with Richie Campbell as Nightingale (his partner) and Robbie Gee as Billy Oates also captivating.
The first episode finishes leaving the viewer intrigued, not waiting for episode two to see which direction the show will take, the tradition Frankenstein story with bolts in his neck? Or a more contemporary mad scientist detective case? Or maybe a mixture of both?
We will have to wait and see, but i will certainly keep watching.
Nothing you will expect
timesplittertales24 December 2015
First of all, people need to stop saying this is an interpretation of the novel Frankenstein by Mary Shelly. It is anything but that. This story takes place about 10 years after that novel was published, which was my first clue that this was going to be something completely different. As a nice early surprise, the novel itself does exists in this tale, which adds further realism to the whole affair. What this tale is though, is two things. First, it's a superb detective mystery. Secondly, it is well-executed, well built-up, gut wrenching horror.
The premise is undeniably very dark, and ingrained in the times, but there are underlying themes that are quite relevant to the world of today--it is a mirror for certain scientific dilemmas of 2015. The protagonist (played by Sean Bean) is a good man but a tortured soul, with high potential for being of unreliable perspective (his character might be experiencing dementia). So that alone will keep you guessing. If you start watching it, watch it to the end. You will see that it is anything but an interpretation of the novel, Frankenstein.
The premise is undeniably very dark, and ingrained in the times, but there are underlying themes that are quite relevant to the world of today--it is a mirror for certain scientific dilemmas of 2015. The protagonist (played by Sean Bean) is a good man but a tortured soul, with high potential for being of unreliable perspective (his character might be experiencing dementia). So that alone will keep you guessing. If you start watching it, watch it to the end. You will see that it is anything but an interpretation of the novel, Frankenstein.
Sean Bean brings light to the darkness of London
qbangy22 December 2015
With the recent glut of Superhero TV series hitting our screens I found this show to be welcome relief. Sean bean as lead manages to play the inspector with the air of someone who just isn't quite right, with flashbacks to his troubled past becoming more frequent it helps to build on his mental breakdown.
I have found the story at times needing a little more "Umph", yes the characters are being fleshed out and the mystery appears to deepen with each step the inspector takes to catch his "Monster", but at the same time do we really need to spend so much time in the inspectors rooms, what do they add to the story?
The overall gloom of the setting does lend weight to the story, the divide between rich and poor, privilege and servitude is very apparent, with the inspector squarely in the middle of these differing worlds.
I have found the story at times needing a little more "Umph", yes the characters are being fleshed out and the mystery appears to deepen with each step the inspector takes to catch his "Monster", but at the same time do we really need to spend so much time in the inspectors rooms, what do they add to the story?
The overall gloom of the setting does lend weight to the story, the divide between rich and poor, privilege and servitude is very apparent, with the inspector squarely in the middle of these differing worlds.
Interesting & unique take
viper-5772631 December 2015
Felt this was let down by the marketing and fairly bland trailers. I only watched since Sean Bean was in it, thank goodness I did! Whilst its pretty slow initially, after 2 episodes when it all starts coming together the show stands out as a very creative one, with what I certainly felt was a completely original story based around the Frankenstein lore. In this respect it was a great surprise, and like others have mentioned, with so many shows coming out now based on established materials this was very refreshing.
Hopefully we see more, since whilst I do appreciate shows that keep it short and direct, instead of like others dragging on longer than they should (you know who you are!), this is one story that certainly has more to tell.
Not to miss.
Hopefully we see more, since whilst I do appreciate shows that keep it short and direct, instead of like others dragging on longer than they should (you know who you are!), this is one story that certainly has more to tell.
Not to miss.
I See Dead People
keikoyoshikawa20 November 2019
Most reviewers have said it - this is a really good series in that it has excellent acting, high production value, and Sean Bean in a rare (and well acted) starring role. However, the plot is convoluted and ultimately unsatisfying after two seasons.
Season one starts out slow but interesting, building up to an ending that lives up to the title. No, this is not your typical Frankenstein story, and the series is all the better for it. You definitely need to see the entire season one to appreciate how well crafted the ending is.
Sadly, season two fails to match the first one in keeping up with the mystery and intrigue. Instead, we get an inexplicable explanation for why the crimes are happening, and a disappointing outcome that answers nothing much at all - worse, by the end the audience might not even care anymore.
It was a good effort, but dropped the ball in the end. Also, what's with the main characters seeing dead people?
Season one starts out slow but interesting, building up to an ending that lives up to the title. No, this is not your typical Frankenstein story, and the series is all the better for it. You definitely need to see the entire season one to appreciate how well crafted the ending is.
Sadly, season two fails to match the first one in keeping up with the mystery and intrigue. Instead, we get an inexplicable explanation for why the crimes are happening, and a disappointing outcome that answers nothing much at all - worse, by the end the audience might not even care anymore.
It was a good effort, but dropped the ball in the end. Also, what's with the main characters seeing dead people?
Brilliant!
krugerh15 November 2015
Absolutely brilliantly directed! A Must watch series. Great cast, loving Sean Bean in this! and set in a bleak and dim London, it is fantastic and very atmospheric. Apparently filmed in Northern Ireland the scenery is fantastic. Cleverly written, with the traditional Frankenstein story woven with historic nineteenth century London, makes you feel it could be true! I'm a sucker for a period drama so this ticks that box for me too. So often you come across a series that tries hard to do a remake of a famous story and fails in an epic way, so it is refreshing to watch this as it has brought the story to life again and in a historically inspired way.
The celebrated mystery thriller seen from the eyes of a curious officer and the judgment of its time, while preserving the fair surreal ambiance.
quincytheodore3 January 2016
The Frankenstein Chronicles is a unique take of the famous story from the perspective of detective trying to solve a grizzly case. Audience might have an idea of what transpires from pop or literature experience, the series uses this as an advantage, teasing and making only vague connections to keep the interest. It invests quiet a lot on the social value as well as visual atmosphere, flamboyant it might not, but it does capture the gritty and muddy ambiance of the time.
Detective Marlott (Sean Bean) has the luxury of finding a mangled corpse of a child. The investigation takes a turn for the eerie worse as he finds more peculiar twists than expected. Marlott isn't the typical suave confident detective most shows opt for, he's just a simple working man with equal tragic past and drive to solve the mystery. Having a veteran actor like Sean Bean is a definite plus and he seems to fit the role living in faraway past remarkably well.
Visually, the series is engaging, although not in traditional gorgeous manner. There's only few beautiful Victorian era architectural majesty, instead this is a look of dirty roads without pavement and widespread poverty. Strangely, the atmosphere works well for a medium loosely based on popular reading. Many other movies have tired the faint fantasy visage, this murky approach serves as a more grounded witness to the era.
It also produces a greater focus on the social or religious aspect of things. The archaic paradigm creates deeper emphasis on the gruesome puzzle. Marlott is clearly a sympathetic man, although he chooses more passive stance and might look deceivingly detached. It's not often that a main character takes less dominating spotlight, which gives the series ample time to tease whether it will follow the famous story line or sew together different branching plot.
By using still air of the past and fragments of broken doll, it's a retelling of renowned fable from modest man and the era's point of view.
Detective Marlott (Sean Bean) has the luxury of finding a mangled corpse of a child. The investigation takes a turn for the eerie worse as he finds more peculiar twists than expected. Marlott isn't the typical suave confident detective most shows opt for, he's just a simple working man with equal tragic past and drive to solve the mystery. Having a veteran actor like Sean Bean is a definite plus and he seems to fit the role living in faraway past remarkably well.
Visually, the series is engaging, although not in traditional gorgeous manner. There's only few beautiful Victorian era architectural majesty, instead this is a look of dirty roads without pavement and widespread poverty. Strangely, the atmosphere works well for a medium loosely based on popular reading. Many other movies have tired the faint fantasy visage, this murky approach serves as a more grounded witness to the era.
It also produces a greater focus on the social or religious aspect of things. The archaic paradigm creates deeper emphasis on the gruesome puzzle. Marlott is clearly a sympathetic man, although he chooses more passive stance and might look deceivingly detached. It's not often that a main character takes less dominating spotlight, which gives the series ample time to tease whether it will follow the famous story line or sew together different branching plot.
By using still air of the past and fragments of broken doll, it's a retelling of renowned fable from modest man and the era's point of view.
True Detective on the filthy streets of Regency Era London
venusboys315 February 2016
I'd heard nothing about this show going in. I'm kind of surprised no word of mouth reached me before discovering it... seeing as how it hits so many beats that share my interests. History and mysticism and conspiracy and film noir... and Frankenstein! I was impressed when William Blake showed up in the series and even moreso when Mary Shelley herself makes an appearance. Her infamous book being a possible impetus behind the crimes the protagonist detective is tasked with investigating. The show is gritty and gruesome and complex in the motivations of its various political factions vying for power. Add to that that the protagonist is not entirely reliable because of disease and medication and the show becomes a quite a heady mix at times. The bad guys range from street scum on up to, maybe, members of Parliament... and no one is safe.
Great stuff, I hope there is more to come.
Great stuff, I hope there is more to come.
Some people die more than once
guyzradio26 March 2018
Warning: Spoilers
As a fan of the Ripper Street series and Sean Bean, I looked forward to this tale. As of March 2018, Netflix has aired Seasons 1 and 2. As I watched the first few episodes, I enjoyed the interweaving of history, characterizations, and the Frankenstein literature theme with that particularly harsh and gritty setting in 1800's England. As some reviews state, this is not just another rehash of the standard Frankenstein monster tale. Despite the fictional basis of what the bad guys were doing, there is little need to suspend disbelief. I will say I was having some trouble differentiating one character from another, but by episode 6, that was the least of my concerns.
*** SERIOUS SPOILERS BELOW *** In the last 15 minutes of episode 6, we see our hero, John Marlott (Sean Bean), hanged for a crime for which he was framed. I was sure someone would come and save him, or at least cut him down in the nick of time, but (to quote Star Trek), 'He's dead, Jim.'
The show then promptly ran off the rails, as if the writing staff seemed to suddenly find themselves without a fresh idea, and so caved in to the temptation to create six more episodes of a B-grade horror movie. Marlott is brought back to life by the very people he has been pursuing, but in what appears to be a different body to which his head has been attached. His syphilitic hand is now healed, but he's acquired, at least temporarily, a lumbering gait reminiscent of Karloff's monster. He lapses through hallucination, lucidness, and a stupor-like state.
I gave up on the series, but did watch the S2E6 to see whether the viewer is hung out to dry. Much is left unresolved, but we do see Marlott paired up, Elsa Lanchester style, with a woman also revived from the dead as the wagon train drifts slowly into the sunset. They share a moment when you know the writers are leaving bread crumbs to keep it going for another season. Having misplaced my Suspend Disbelief button, I must pass.
*** SERIOUS SPOILERS BELOW *** In the last 15 minutes of episode 6, we see our hero, John Marlott (Sean Bean), hanged for a crime for which he was framed. I was sure someone would come and save him, or at least cut him down in the nick of time, but (to quote Star Trek), 'He's dead, Jim.'
The show then promptly ran off the rails, as if the writing staff seemed to suddenly find themselves without a fresh idea, and so caved in to the temptation to create six more episodes of a B-grade horror movie. Marlott is brought back to life by the very people he has been pursuing, but in what appears to be a different body to which his head has been attached. His syphilitic hand is now healed, but he's acquired, at least temporarily, a lumbering gait reminiscent of Karloff's monster. He lapses through hallucination, lucidness, and a stupor-like state.
I gave up on the series, but did watch the S2E6 to see whether the viewer is hung out to dry. Much is left unresolved, but we do see Marlott paired up, Elsa Lanchester style, with a woman also revived from the dead as the wagon train drifts slowly into the sunset. They share a moment when you know the writers are leaving bread crumbs to keep it going for another season. Having misplaced my Suspend Disbelief button, I must pass.
A very dark interpretation of the Frankenstein novel
s327616929 November 2015
The Frankenstein Chronicles is a very dark interpretation of the novel Frankenstein by Mary Shelly.
Indeed, this work is far more bleak than the original book. Its mired in the misery, inequality and depravity of 19th century London. The focus in this case is not adults but missing children, making this already disturbing tale that much more troubling.
Sean Bean hands in an excellent performance as the lead detective who knows the case he has been tasked with solving, is not, in fact, the case he is really investigating. There's a dark underbelly to this stories dark underbelly.
This is a masterful work, but I would say its not for everyone. I personally found its heavy, sombre and at times downright depressing tones, a little too much to handle. No doubt its true to the awfulness of the times but that's in some ways little consolation. That said, if you are prepared to accept the dark tones of this series I have little doubt it represents an impressive watch. Eight out of ten from me.
Indeed, this work is far more bleak than the original book. Its mired in the misery, inequality and depravity of 19th century London. The focus in this case is not adults but missing children, making this already disturbing tale that much more troubling.
Sean Bean hands in an excellent performance as the lead detective who knows the case he has been tasked with solving, is not, in fact, the case he is really investigating. There's a dark underbelly to this stories dark underbelly.
This is a masterful work, but I would say its not for everyone. I personally found its heavy, sombre and at times downright depressing tones, a little too much to handle. No doubt its true to the awfulness of the times but that's in some ways little consolation. That said, if you are prepared to accept the dark tones of this series I have little doubt it represents an impressive watch. Eight out of ten from me.
I really wanted to disprove naysayers over the 2nd season...
GSK2313 May 2022
BUT they're all mostly right. Too bad!!
First season was a nice original approach to the now overly flogged story, with a swell twist ending even! I mean, it wasn't phenomenally great or anything, but it was very enjoyable.
The second season is literally Sean Bean staggering around in a daze, hallucinating on the beach, sort of seeing dead people and never quite focusing on the task at hand; which SHOULD be about him hunting down the Doctor.
I've got three episodes left in the second season and I'm very tempted to not finish it. I watched way too many already thinking that things might pick up.
Yes, other things happen, but they're kinda from left field and don't always relate to anything in particular. It all (the second season) feels very vague for some reason.
I guess solid bonus points for introducing the "monster's" bride as an incredible piece of clockwork! Kinda silly, but I liked that.
6 stars for the first season... maybe two or 3 for the second.
First season was a nice original approach to the now overly flogged story, with a swell twist ending even! I mean, it wasn't phenomenally great or anything, but it was very enjoyable.
The second season is literally Sean Bean staggering around in a daze, hallucinating on the beach, sort of seeing dead people and never quite focusing on the task at hand; which SHOULD be about him hunting down the Doctor.
I've got three episodes left in the second season and I'm very tempted to not finish it. I watched way too many already thinking that things might pick up.
Yes, other things happen, but they're kinda from left field and don't always relate to anything in particular. It all (the second season) feels very vague for some reason.
I guess solid bonus points for introducing the "monster's" bride as an incredible piece of clockwork! Kinda silly, but I liked that.
6 stars for the first season... maybe two or 3 for the second.
Bean's the boss, but the rest is a mixed bag
Leofwine_draca6 May 2016
THE FRANKENSTEIN CHRONICLES is a six-part miniseries originally shown on the ITV Encore channel here in the UK. In it, Sean Bean essays the role of a detective investigating the discovery of a child's dead body which has been stitched together from various parts. His investigations lead him into some very dark places as he uncovers a conspiracy ranging from illegal grave robbers to the highest pillars of society.
I'll be honest, modern-day TV doesn't really do much for me, so I mainly watched this for Bean. He doesn't disappoint, playing the part like a latter-day Sharpe, and the writers even throw in some cheeky references to his famous role as the soldier. The authenticity is very strong in this show, and it's noticeably ghoulish, which I appreciated.
The first episode is excellent and full of mystery, atmosphere, and fine acting. The second episode is nearly as good, but then I found the show starting to lose steam. The resolution of the mystery is overwrought rather than thrilling, and I found the atmosphere and suspense dissipated with each passing episode. The final episode wasn't to my taste at all and I found it hugely climactic.
THE FRANKENSTEIN CHRONICLES suffers, in the end, from poor writing which makes everything feel staid and predictable. There are some good performers mixed up in this - the excellent Vanessa Kirby in particular is someone to watch - but the addition of real life historical figures like Mary Shelley, Charles Dickens, and William Blake feels a bit silly and more of a lazily-written distraction than a good addition to the story. The writers really needed to come up with something thrilling and fresh-feeling in order to make this fully work.
I'll be honest, modern-day TV doesn't really do much for me, so I mainly watched this for Bean. He doesn't disappoint, playing the part like a latter-day Sharpe, and the writers even throw in some cheeky references to his famous role as the soldier. The authenticity is very strong in this show, and it's noticeably ghoulish, which I appreciated.
The first episode is excellent and full of mystery, atmosphere, and fine acting. The second episode is nearly as good, but then I found the show starting to lose steam. The resolution of the mystery is overwrought rather than thrilling, and I found the atmosphere and suspense dissipated with each passing episode. The final episode wasn't to my taste at all and I found it hugely climactic.
THE FRANKENSTEIN CHRONICLES suffers, in the end, from poor writing which makes everything feel staid and predictable. There are some good performers mixed up in this - the excellent Vanessa Kirby in particular is someone to watch - but the addition of real life historical figures like Mary Shelley, Charles Dickens, and William Blake feels a bit silly and more of a lazily-written distraction than a good addition to the story. The writers really needed to come up with something thrilling and fresh-feeling in order to make this fully work.
This needs to air in North America ASAP!
SMcFirefly10 November 2016
Sean Bean, superb as usual, leads a fantastic supporting cast through this dark and gritty investigation of mutilated corpses and the possibility of galvanizing the dead back to life.
I cannot say enough about this 6 episode (what was originally supposed to be mini-series - but now renewed for a second run!) season. Everything from the costumes, the sets, and the music (oh, the great music!) is phenomenal! The opening credits and theme deserve some recognition as it was very well done (I had a Game of Thrones vibe watching it)!
This could have easily ended at episode 6, because it was a perfect way to end this story, but I am also excited to see where they take Sean Bean's character next!
I cannot say enough about this 6 episode (what was originally supposed to be mini-series - but now renewed for a second run!) season. Everything from the costumes, the sets, and the music (oh, the great music!) is phenomenal! The opening credits and theme deserve some recognition as it was very well done (I had a Game of Thrones vibe watching it)!
This could have easily ended at episode 6, because it was a perfect way to end this story, but I am also excited to see where they take Sean Bean's character next!
Good, but not entirely compelling viewing
grantss21 February 2019
London, 1827. A body has washed up on the banks of the Thames. Inspector John Marlott of the River Police discovers that the body is composite of body parts from several people, sewn together. The Home Secretary tasks Marlott with solving the mystery.
Good drama. The connections with Mary Shelley's 'Frankenstein' make for a fair amount of intrigue and twists. The connections with Frankenstein seem quite direct at first, adding a layer of engagement, as the series appears to be re-imagining of the classic tale.
Add in Mary Shelley herself as a character in the series, plus William Blake, and you have a series with great ambition.
However, it is not entirely compelling viewing. Things drift on occasion and the tension is never sustained very well.
Still, not bad and quite entertaining.
Good drama. The connections with Mary Shelley's 'Frankenstein' make for a fair amount of intrigue and twists. The connections with Frankenstein seem quite direct at first, adding a layer of engagement, as the series appears to be re-imagining of the classic tale.
Add in Mary Shelley herself as a character in the series, plus William Blake, and you have a series with great ambition.
However, it is not entirely compelling viewing. Things drift on occasion and the tension is never sustained very well.
Still, not bad and quite entertaining.
Excellent Series..
morrisstephen18 December 2015
I just want MORE! Just sad that it ended after such a short run. I hope there is a second series. I liked the 'suggestions' in the series relating back to Sharpe! Including the kid whistling 'Over the Hills and Far away' and even at the end when Sean Bean' opened his trunk, there was his pistol, sword and uniform from the Sharpe series.
Luckily I have the Sharpe boxset and intend to watch it again this week.
Well worth watching if you are a 'Sharpe' fan but don't mind blank endings!
Sean has never lost his accent in any of the series or films he has been in. I think that makes him unique.
Luckily I have the Sharpe boxset and intend to watch it again this week.
Well worth watching if you are a 'Sharpe' fan but don't mind blank endings!
Sean has never lost his accent in any of the series or films he has been in. I think that makes him unique.
A tru frankensteins monster to be sure
lilablack19 October 2021
Loved the first season, second season lost its way but still had gorgeous atmosphere and enough action to make you want to hold on. Sean Bean and number of the other cast give great performances, personally I think the character of Joseph Nightingale was awful to watch but that has more to do with the writing than the acting (honestly expected him to be a redshirt and die within a few episodes, also "falling in love" with a very young girl you've just met and know nothing about is weird and problematic). If you like a good period horror with some tasty literary references than you'll love it, but don't get too hyped just sit back and enjoy it as it is.
Can't Stop Thinking About This Series
trygolf11 March 2018
I loved Penny Dreadful and am enjoying The Alienist, so the period drama The Frankenstein Chronicles appealed to my taste perfectly. It started as a very gritty early 19th century police procedural, with an investigation of a strangely mutilated dead child led by Thames River police inspector John Marlotte (Sea Bean). It quickly became something much more. It intertwines many timeless themes, including guilt and redemption, the corrupting influence of power and greed, science versus religion, and the nature of the afterlife. Literary references and themes are liberally added, with glimpses of Frankenstein author Mary Wollstonecraft Shelly and poet/visionary William Blake.
The lead actors inhabit their characters completely and heartbreakingly. Sean Bean's Marlotte is a decent man drawn into the most extreme and horrifying circumstances, who maintains his humanity even when it is taken from him by force. A new actor to me, Richie Campbell, plays Marlotte's smart and ambitious partner with great depth. A little surprisingly given the period of the show, a number of fine women actors play more than decorative parts in the series, including Vanessa Kirby (The Crown), Maeve Dermody and Eloise Smith.
The show's tone is very dark; sadness (and lots of blood) permeate each episode. There is not much humor or lightness to leaven the seriousness, but this show is a nightmare trip worth taking if you enjoy the cerebral and the macabre.
The lead actors inhabit their characters completely and heartbreakingly. Sean Bean's Marlotte is a decent man drawn into the most extreme and horrifying circumstances, who maintains his humanity even when it is taken from him by force. A new actor to me, Richie Campbell, plays Marlotte's smart and ambitious partner with great depth. A little surprisingly given the period of the show, a number of fine women actors play more than decorative parts in the series, including Vanessa Kirby (The Crown), Maeve Dermody and Eloise Smith.
The show's tone is very dark; sadness (and lots of blood) permeate each episode. There is not much humor or lightness to leaven the seriousness, but this show is a nightmare trip worth taking if you enjoy the cerebral and the macabre.
6 1/2ish
baywoodarborist10 September 2020
Sean bean and Richie Cambell did a fine job so did the rest of the cast. It's just that it really was slow and the flashbacks were constant and heavy handed with no real purpose. I fast forwarded the many flash backs and some scenes that were boring but mostly it kept onpoint. The director failed somewhere here.
Historically correct and interesting
patherwill17 November 2021
Was what I personally believe to be correct in almost every character of note, the slum areas and the brutality and health problems of the time. For me, there are so many excellent acting performances and so many other departments who absolutely nailed it. Richie Campbell (Nightingale) Tom Ward, Ryan Sampson, Laurence Fox, Charlie Creed Miles and a host of others. The very poor DID clean the corpses and bury them, Did drink the same water that had their urine and faeces in it. They washed in it also. Carcases of animals as well as human bodies were by all accounts thrown into the river. Boz, mentioned in history of Charles Dickens was the 'pen name' of the illustrator of Dicken's books. The 'Rookeries' which described an area of London full to the gunnels with Crims, actually existed and was virtually a 'no - go' area situated near Covent Garden Market.
I would definitely recommend this series to anyone who enjoys science fiction or mysteries.
lasreviews26 October 2020
As a longtime fan of Mary Shelley's classic novel Frankenstein, I couldn't wait to see how this film interpreted some of those ideas in a new way.
No, this isn't a retelling of the original Frankenstein. Think of it instead as something that happened in a universe where people were aware of that tale and often horrified by the thought of interfering with the natural processes of life and death.
One of the biggest strengths of this TV show was the thorough way it explored the parts of 19th century London culture that clash with how people in western societies live today. Back then the thought of using cadavers to show medical students how the human body works was extremely controversial because any folks believed that anyone who was dissected after death would be denied entry to heaven.
These glaring cultural differences continued with the treatment of children in this time and place. Some of the crimes Inspector Marlott investigated involved kids, but because they were poor, and often orphaned or abandoned, it was difficult for him to convince his fellow officers that investigating these disappearances was worthwhile. The callous attitudes that many in the upper classes held about the fates of these kids was disturbing, but it was also historically accurate.
Speaking of this plot line, I should mention the fact that this series does include multiple references to children being harmed and what happened to them afterwards. Some of these scenes were graphic, so I would recommend viewer discretion to anyone who is sensitive to this topic.
Inspector Marlott's backstory provided plenty of opportunities for the audience to get to know him better and to understand why he was so willing to risk permanently damaging his career and reputation by investigating the deaths of people that polite society liked to pretend didn't exist. He had excellent reasons for making this choice!
Finally, the mystery was handled beautifully as well. There was an excellent reason why Inspector Marlott kept uncovering suspicious deaths and disappearances among people who didn't seem to know each other or have much in common at all other than their poverty and tender ages. It was a great deal of fun to come up with my own theories about who the killer or killers might have been as I waited for the next clue.
I would definitely recommend this series to anyone who enjoys science fiction or mysteries.
No, this isn't a retelling of the original Frankenstein. Think of it instead as something that happened in a universe where people were aware of that tale and often horrified by the thought of interfering with the natural processes of life and death.
One of the biggest strengths of this TV show was the thorough way it explored the parts of 19th century London culture that clash with how people in western societies live today. Back then the thought of using cadavers to show medical students how the human body works was extremely controversial because any folks believed that anyone who was dissected after death would be denied entry to heaven.
These glaring cultural differences continued with the treatment of children in this time and place. Some of the crimes Inspector Marlott investigated involved kids, but because they were poor, and often orphaned or abandoned, it was difficult for him to convince his fellow officers that investigating these disappearances was worthwhile. The callous attitudes that many in the upper classes held about the fates of these kids was disturbing, but it was also historically accurate.
Speaking of this plot line, I should mention the fact that this series does include multiple references to children being harmed and what happened to them afterwards. Some of these scenes were graphic, so I would recommend viewer discretion to anyone who is sensitive to this topic.
Inspector Marlott's backstory provided plenty of opportunities for the audience to get to know him better and to understand why he was so willing to risk permanently damaging his career and reputation by investigating the deaths of people that polite society liked to pretend didn't exist. He had excellent reasons for making this choice!
Finally, the mystery was handled beautifully as well. There was an excellent reason why Inspector Marlott kept uncovering suspicious deaths and disappearances among people who didn't seem to know each other or have much in common at all other than their poverty and tender ages. It was a great deal of fun to come up with my own theories about who the killer or killers might have been as I waited for the next clue.
I would definitely recommend this series to anyone who enjoys science fiction or mysteries.
It just faded out...
alangthompson4 August 2018
Marlott/Sharpe...One in the same?
charlesj-morin0015 March 2018
I recently discovered this series and have thoroughly enjoyed it. I am also glad that I am not the only one to notice the references to the character Richard Sharpe. I have read every one of Bernard Cromwell's books and you can't ignore the constant references to John Marlott's past life that mirrors Richard Sharpe. The boy whistling "Over the Hill and Far Away." Marlott's reference of him being in the 95'th Rifles, and being at the Battle of Waterloo. The time when Marlott took his shirt off while bathing showing off scaring on his back (In the Shapre books, the main character was once punished by flogging), and in episode five when Marlott retrieved his pistol, it showed his old dark green army uniform, similar to the one Sharpe wore as a member of the 95th.. I wonder if all this was the doing of Sean Bean. if it was, then it compels the viewer to pay especially close attention to the story line. Great hook.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
