Frankenstein is a fictional story written by Mary Shelly. It was later adapted into a movie version directed by James Whales. There are more differences than similarities between the book and the movie. This is because, the movie is mainly based on the 1920’s play, other than the original Mary Shelly’s book Frankenstein. A text has to be altered in one way or the other while making a movie due to a number of obvious factors. A lot of details from the book were missing in the movie, but the changes made by Whales were effective as they made the movie interesting, and successful. There are a number of differences between the book and movie adaptation of Frankenstein. The first evident difference is that, in the book, the novel gets some books and learns on his own to read and write from them .Comparably, in the movie adaptation, the monster learned from watching the De Lacy family and how they communicated to each other. The book goes in great detain to explain the monsters education and how the books helped whereas, in the movie, little is shared of how fast the monster acquired education. The monsters education is reflected best in the book compared to the movie. In addition to this, the monsters appearance is very different in the movie compared to how he is described in the book. In the book, the creature taught himself how to read and write from the classic literature the Prometheus and Milton’s Paradise Lost, where he learnt to speak very clearly. In the movie, the creature is inarticulate. Another difference between the movie and the book Frankenstein is that, in the novel, we are told that, Frankenstein created the creature from scientific principles of building up human body parts. However, we are not told how he got t... ... middle of paper ... ...e of his appearance that is different from humans. He was race of his own and needed a companion of his own race and appearance. In conclusion, there are notable differences and similarities between the book, and movie Frankenstein. The differences start with the education of the monster, the plot, the ending of the story, and the characteristics of the monster. The similarities dealing with the creation of the monster, and the turning point of the story. The differences and similarities preserve the genre themes, and the main points in both the story and the movie. Works Cited Shelley, Mary. Frankenstein. New York: Dover Publications Inc., 1994. Print. Young Frankenstein. Dir. Mel Brooks. Twentieth Century Fox, 2006. Film. Baldick, Chris. In Frankenstein's Shadow: Myth, Monstrosity, and Nineteenth-Century Writing. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1990. Print.
The setting along with most of the plot are similar between the two. The settings are both in the same castle and they are both creating something that will change science. Both of their creations are similar in their appearance and both stories recite the story of a curious scientists who creates life from the remains of the dead. In both Mary Shelly’s noel along with the movie, Frankenstein is the main character and is a scientist whose obsessed with power and the creation takes over their lives. They both strive for scientific greatness but in the end, they both feel different towards their respected creatures. The parts of the story where the creature’s soul searching is similar in a few ways. In the book and the movie, the creature realizes on its own that it will always have the problem of being rejected by society and different from humans. Both versions experience similar human feelings where they conclude that they are in fact different from others. In both versions, we see that the fiancé is names Elizabeth, I find this weird since I would have trouble being with someone that had the same name as my grandmother. As you can tell there are not too many similarities that are out there between the two of them. Overall it is clear that the movie is loosely based on Mary Shelly’s original book, but is different in a lot of
Many similarities can be found between Mary Shelley's 1816 novel, Frankenstein and the 1982 movie Bladerunner . The number of similarities between these two works, created more than two hundred years apart, is staggering. A cursory look at both works reveals these similarities:
James Whale and the many adapters/screenwriters involved in both films leeched onto the inhumanity of the monster and the terror he could create. The monster could not speak at all in “Frankenstein” but did learn to speak poorly in “Bride of Frankenstein.” However, when he is finally given the ability to speak, the monster is portrayed as a shallow character that indulges on simple pleasures. “Smoke ...smoke,” and “Drink…good,” are a couple of the commen...
First, to illustrate the events of the story a writer uses particularly well thought out and descriptive vocabulary. This is done to help the reader visualize the image in the author's mind. But in Mary Shelly's, "Frankenstein", she has gone far beyond this, she not only paints a picture in the mind of the reader, but the words written actually place them in a state of mind. A great example of this is when she wrote, "I saw the dull yellow eye of the creature open; it breathed hard, and a convulsive motion agitated its limbs." As a result of passages like this, "Frankenstein" has captivated it's readers for roughly two centuries. In addition it has not only taken hold of the literary minds of the world, the story has also found itself on to the big screen. Mary Shelly's crowning achievement has inspired about fifty movies. Unfortunately, a vast quantity of the motion picture created does not follow the theme of the original story. They branched out from it and portrayed the creation as an inarticulate, rampaging monster when initially he was a confused and vengeful genius. What ever the form "Frankenstein has taken root in our society and its here to stay.
Imagine an eight-foot-tall, misshapen human child. You might complain that this is contradictory - but do it anyway. Imagine some sort of humanoid being with the mind of a human child in an eight-foot body, green with a nail in its head if you want. This is what Frankenstein's creature is. Frankenstein's creature is mentally a child, and we see its evolution through traditional child development in the course of its narrative. But the creature is the only member of its species, and therefore its narrative can be taken to represent the history of an entire species - the creature's first experiences can be viewed as an amalgam of creation myths.
The most recent film which reflects the novel, was directed by Kenneth Branagh in 1994, Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein. The character remains one of most recognized icons in horror fiction today. Written almost 200 years ago about a man obsessed with creating artificial life continues to be a topic in the 21st century. Such as today’s controversy in stem cell research or human cloning which reflects the basic theme of Mary Shelley’s novel.
Mary Shelley’s novel Frankenstein is impressive, entertaining, and fascinating so is it no surprise there have been so many films and artworks influenced by her novel. Many of which have put their own spin to the horror novel, especially the character of the creature that remains one of the most recognized icons in horror fiction. However, there have been critics whom argue modern versions and variations have lost the horror and passion that is an essential to the creature. The start of the Creature is bound to one book. However, public impression of the Creature has changed severely since the publication of the original novel, leading to diverse styles and plot lines in its diverse film adaptations. People’s impression of the Creature have become so twisted and turned by time and decades of false film posters and article titles that most use the name “Frankenstein” to refer to the Creature itself, rather than the scientist who created him! It’s a shame! An understanding of literary history is a necessity to comprehend the truth of the Creature’s tragic history and how decades of film adaptations changed him into the hulking beast most people know him as today.
A novel written in the epistolary style is by nature difficult to adapt to film. The director, perhaps already adept at navigating the ragged breakers of length-contraction and visual style, is forced to deal with the additional sandbar presented by a plot format in which no visual action occurs and, more often than not, this difficulty consequently runs the film aground. Kenneth Branagh, in bringing Mary Shelley's Frankenstein to the screen as Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, succinctly sidesteps this potential pitfall by completely discarding the epistolary format; rather than existing as a lengthy letter penned to Mrs. Saville, the plot is presented as an overheard conversation between Victor and Walton. It is therefore surprising that the problem of epistemology, which is primarily motivated in the novel by its epistolary form, is still present in the film. Whereas Shelley's Frankenstein creates an aura of distrust regarding the veracity of the narratives originally offered through use of the epistolary form, Branagh's Mary Shelley's Frankenstein illustrates the dilemma of epistemology quite differently; by presenting a flashback in which characters could not possibly possess knowledge of the events upon which they act, the viewer is left to wonder at the authenticity of the whole story as depicted in the film.
Many people consider The Bride of Frankenstein to be better than the original Frankenstein. This is because the sequel to Frankenstein had a musical score whereas the original Frankenstein never had one. The fact that the original lacked background music and the sequel had a wonderful music score is the biggest difference between the two movies when it came to sound. In The Bride of Frankenstein, music was used as a way of hinting things to the audience. Music would become faster and louder right before something big was about to happen and it would slow down and sound sweet in parts that were supposed to show the good, gentle side of the monster. The music also filled space in between scenes and made the film flow better.
James Whale's adaptation of the story of Frankenstein, while it is clearly and deservedly a horror classic, is tremendously less than it could have and SHOULD have been. There are unexplainable deviations from the novel, such as the fact that Dr. Frankenstein's name was, for some reason, changed from Victor in the novel to Henry in the film, and the film itself really only covers about a quarter to a third of one chapter in the book - that's how much has been left out. There was probably only about 5% or 6% of the full story included in this film, and I am willing to guess that the sheer magnitude of ignored material in the original story is at least as much of a reason that there were so many subsequent Frankenstein films (and Re-Animators and whatnot) as was the film's commercial success. This may, in fact, be one of those rare cases where the imitators may have just wanted to do it right, or at least tell the REST of the story.
Unlike the novel, the film begins with Henry Frankenstein and Fritz, his assistant, rummaging through graves in hopes of finding the remaining body parts to complete Frankenstein’s experiment. Upon returning to their laboratory, Frankenstein realizes he needs a brain and sends his assistant to find one. Through the ineptitude of Fritz, he secured a criminal brain for Frankenstein's experiments instead of the desired normal one. The assembled creation, despite its “grotesque” and “distorted” form, initially appears to be a simple, innocent individual (Lamb, Kibbler, Hall 1). However he is quickly ...
If someone were to ask people who Frankenstein is they would probably describe a tall, hideous monster with bolts sticking out of its neck. But long before movies reinvented their version of the monster, there was a novel by Mary Shelley entitled Frankenstein. In her novel, the monster is shown as child-like and uneducated. But what really makes someone a monster? Who is the true monster of Mary Shelley’s novel? Victor and the Creature present similarities and differences in their action and character throughout the novel.
In Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, Victor Frankenstein and the monster that he creates are very similar. For example, Victor creates the monster to be like himself. Another similarity is that the anger of both Victor and the monster is brought about by society. One more parallel between Victor and the monster is that they both became recluses. These traits that Victor and the monster possess show that they are very similar.
The book goes into greater detail regarding the monster’s hardships, has a more eloquent and persuasive monster and has a more heartbreaking ending. As a result a reader feels greater sympathy towards the monster in the novel rather than in the play. The monster begins his journey a purely innocent and kind being, but because he has to suffer the misfortune of having such a monstrous appearance he is condemned by society. Frankenstein tells the story of a benevolent being persecuted by man, and has the reader questioning who the real monster is.
He was at one point motivated by many good things like as virtue and honor, so much so that he wanted a companion to share in his happy life. “When I first sought it [sympathy], it was the love of virtue, the feelings of happiness and affec...