EXCLUSIVE: Creepily Good I, FRANKENSTEIN Concept Art By Martin Mercer

Super rad artwork.
Mary Shelly is rolling in her grave at the movie though.

Thanks, rabid!

These are pretty awesome. What happened between these and the end product?

The whole point of Frankenstein's Monster Was that he was a horrible creature who was the only one of his kind. From the moment he was "Born" his creator was terrified of him and shunned him, without even giving him a name. The monster yearned for the love of his Master, which included wanting Victor to name him and create a female for him.
Maybe do some reading before falsely calling me a dumbass.

@CuddlyCereal
This movie is not based on Mary Shelley's novel. It is based on a graphic novel. It isn't called "I, Frankenstein" because it parallels the themes of the original novel, it is named that because the monster has a similar origin. No need to be pretentious. It can be a Frankenstein movie if it wants to.

Haven't seen it but it looks fun. Also, this art is great.

@Chancho It's a guilty pleasure kinda movie. Still bad, but fun bad

I did, but you didn't make yourself clear

I mean if the whole point of the character is that its degrading to not have a name, and hurtful to just be called the monster or the devil ect...causing him to hate humanity.
At what point does someone go...We really need to have Frankenstein in the title, but [frick] all that other stuff. We're going to make him a cool guy who fights demons and wears hoodies.

@cuddly sorry to chime in here but did you watch the movie? I for one have not studied the original works of Mary Shelly to be at all offended by what was made of this creature by the end of the movie but I do have to say based on what you have described, his origins were actually rather spot on, it's what happened after, over the next 200 years that differed drastically. It's a "what if" story and therefor has liberties it can take. He was nameless, he was shun, he killed Frankenstein's love, and was responsible for Victor's death. It goes on to show that he not only hated his creator but loved or at least respected him by burring him in his families plot. He is wanted by the demons at this time because he is a soulless monster. He then is given the name Adam and over 200 years, finds a purpose and heart and even soul.

@cuddlycereal
Mary Shelley named her monster twice... not in the book, but in the public readings of her novel. She named him sometimes Prometheus, sometimes Adam (the name he uses in this film). I say that it's a faithful interpretation because the monster in her story is intelligent and after some psychological birth pangs, he learns to read in other languages and he learns the skills of man. At the end of the novel, he is left alive in the Arctic seemingly to perish, but this movie serves as a sequel to that... in which he lives and learns to live alongside man, eventually becoming a badass. So yes, in terms of a sequel, it is faithful to the original novel. The only difference really is that the monster in the novel is a bit taller.

Actually, the creature from Mary Shelley's novel is WAY taller and stronger than the portrayal in this film. The old films failed to show his intellect and speed (several references were made, in the book, to him moving faster than the eye could follow). He was also a vegetarian. In the books, he proudly talks about how he only eats raw nuts, fruits, and vegetables. So, yeah, I know a bit about the story and, having seen this movie, I can say that Mary Shelley is truly dead for, if she was not, she would have already filed suit for "shitting on intellectual property".