FRANKENSTEIN

Frankenstein

Frankenstein

FRANKENSTEIN - BOOK VS. MOVIE

Throughout the various movies that have been based off of the novel Frankenstein, they have been surprisingly different. The fact that the book is so famous is because they would keep the movies true to the author's point of view. The movies also suggest the fact that eugenics was the reason they were created. The public did not think that it was right for someone to play God. The movies were to set examples of how this process could possibly go wrong.

When I first saw the movie Frankenstein, I realized that Hollywood was still changing the classic novels. In their usual fashion, they changed the names of the characters to be somewhat pleasing to the audience. I guess Henry Frankenstein was a better wholesome name than Victor Frankenstein. Instead they saved the name Victor for the supporting actor because no one would care what they named him. Next they changed Elizabeth to Margaret for some unknown reason. By movie standards today, the monster looked like a man in bad makeup and stiff acting.

One other very significant comparison takes place in the story and it is not between the movie and movie but between Frankenstein and the creator himself. Neither of the two are understand by the people around them, they are both on a quest for revenge. And none of their problems were able to be solved throughout the story and their actions. Although these two characters seem to be completely different in appearance the direction in which their lives lead them are still similar.

There are about 26 different editions of the novel of Frankenstein, and every movie that has been made based on the novel is different from the next. What you read in the novel is not exactly what you see on the movie screen. There are a lot of good moments in the book that "get lost in the translation". many parts of the novel aren't even mentioned in the movies.

In Mary Shelley's original interpretation, I envision a monster with pale Caucasian skin color, misshapen limbs and with more vocabularies than grunting noises. I have come to the realization that the 1931 movie review of Frankenstein and I share the same opinions for the movie. Though I did find the acting and the makeup mediocre, in 1931 it was said that is was the most effective of its kind. The background and scenery impressed me. Dr. Frankenstein's laboratory was indeed impressive. The elaborate machinery and sound effects added to the sense that life was being created, though they really did go into great detail as to how life was brought back from the dead. The review says that the actor portraying Frankenstein's monster, Boris Karloff, did not portray a robot but a man sewn together with an abnormal brain. However I believed that the monster acted like a robot in the scene with the little girl. The girl presented a set of instructions (throwing flowers in the ...