More handpicked essays just for you.
Frankenstein compares the novel and screenplay
Comparison of a Frankenstein movie to Mary Shelley's Frankenstein novel
Compare Frankenstein Film And Novel
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
The movie, Frankenstein by Kenneth Branagh's, which was a later adaption of Mary Shelley's novel, is a very crude adaption of this novel. Kenneth Branagh changes how the creature comes alive and is there when the creature wakes up, the creature mumbles and grunts his sentences, and this movie makes the creatures seem like a dumb adult. The movie did a very poor job of recreating the specific feeling and mood that Mary Shelley incorporated into her novel.
In the movie, Kenneth Branagh changes how the creature comes alive. He made it gorier by bringing the creature to life in a cauldron filled with water and electric eels. When the creature finally wakes up, the water spills everywhere in the room and drenches Victor and everything else around him. Unlike the novel, where Victor realized how ugly the creature is and flees, Victor instead tries to help the creature up, when this happens we were supposed to feel sympathy for Victor, but the scene just came across as silly and gross. At the end of the scene, the creature is assumed to be dead and Victor goes to sleep. When he wakes up to the
…show more content…
creature standing near him. This is one of the only times in the movie that a scene is relative to the novel, but the execution of the scene made it humours, with Victor and the creature chasing each other like a cat and mouse. In the novel by the time the creature meets with Victor he has learnt a lot about language and is very eloquent.
Whereas in the movie he is when he meets Victor he mostly grunts and mumbles his sentences, One of the only lines where we see the creature's intelligence in the movie is when he says, "Yes, I speak, and read, and think, and know the ways of man..." then goes on to say, "what of my soul? Do I have one? What of the people of which I am composed?" But this line is still butchered by the movie. In the novel he is much more articulate, "Believe me, Frankenstein, I was benevolent; my soul glowed with love and humanity; but am I not alone, miserably alone?" (87) This shows how much more articulate the creature is in the novel than in the movie. it also shows that the creature believes that he's partly human because he has a soul and doesn't question it like in the
movie. One of the most important details in the movie is where we watch the creature mature in a way. We watch him learn and this happens very briefly in the movie. Some of the key lessons that we see in the novel are left out. In the movie when the creature starts living near the cottagers, he eats from the pig trough the use to feed their animals. This takes the place of him learning how to scavenge for food like we see in the novel. In the novel, Agatha is there as a means for the creature to learn how to speak the language But she is replaced by two children. This leads the creature to learn simply, it is one of the main reasons why he speaks in mumbles and grunts. When it comes time to burn down the cottagers house he has no prior knowledge of how to use fire in the movie. While in the novel he learns about fire by finding some left by beggars, "In my joy I thrust my hand into the live embers, but quickly drew it out again with a cry of pain. How strange, I thought, that the same cause should produce such opposite effects." (93) This shows how the creature learnt about fire and then with this knowledge has the ability to burn down the cottagers house. Without the creatures development, it makes us see him as a dumb adult instead of a clueless adult. Kenneth Branagh seems very reluctant to show any real character development for the creature and cuts out much of the creatures learning. Clearly, Kenneth Branagh's adaptation to Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, it very inadequate and misses the true feeling of the novel. The monster comes alive and Victor is around to support it in its first moments, the creature is very ineloquent unlike the novel and the movie portrays him as a dumb adult and not a clueless child. This movie was very poor quality when compared to the novel and even standing alone seemed cheap and overly melodramatic.
1. He came like a protecting spirit to the poor girl who committed herself to his care.
Frankenstein is a horror movie that tells the story of Dr. Henry Frankenstein’s experiment. In search for the fame and glory of playing to be god, he reaches a point where he is able to revive dead people. In this version of Frankenstein’s monster we see a selfish and careless scientist that created a creature with his intelligence. The way the character is shown reflects how ambitious someone can be to reach to be known in the world. This movie makes the people who are watching to feel empathy on the poor creature. This poor creature that did not want to live in a life where everyone is going to hate him for having a horrible aspect and not following rules that he has no idea about.
As a tragic hero, Victor’s tragedies begin with his overly obsessive thirst for knowledge. Throughout his life, Victor has always been looking for new things to learn in the areas of science and philosophy. He goes so far with his knowledge that he ends up creating a living creature. Victor has extremely high expectations for his creation but is highly disappointed with the outcome. He says, “I had desired it with an ardour that far exceeded moderation; but now that I had finished, the beauty of the dream vanished, and breathless horror and disgust filled my heart” (Shelley 35). Frankenstein neglects the creature because of his horrifying looks, which spark the beginning of numerous conflicts and tragedies. At this point, the creature becomes a monster because of Victor’s neglect and irresponsibility. The monster is forced to learn to survive on his own, without anyone or anything to guide him along the way. Plus, the monster’s ugly looks cause society to turn against him, ad...
Frankenstein Over Time Mary Shelley’s novel Frankenstein is impressive, entertaining, and fascinating, so it is 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 who 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 be 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.
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.
James Whale's Frankenstein is a VERY loose adaptation of Mary Shelley's 1818 novel. The spirit of the film is preserved in its most basic sense, but the vast majority of the story has been entirely left out, which is unfortunate. The monster, for example, who possesses tremendous intellect in the novel and who goes on an epic quest seeking acceptance into the world in which he was created, has been reduced to little more than a lumbering klutz whose communication is limited to unearthly shrieks and grunts. Boris Karloff was understandably branded with the performance after the film was released, because it was undeniably a spectacular performance, but the monster's character was severely diminished from the novel.
By the end of Frankenstein, Mary Shelley wanted the reader to discover that it was not Frankenstein’s creature that was the monster, but Victor Frankenstein himself. She was able to accomplish this fully by highlighting the absence of a single trait in Frankenstein; he has no empathy. Empathy, the ability to feel with another creature, is an integral part of what makes us human, what separates us from inanimate objects and animals. It is possible for a person to register another creature’s emotions without truly being empathetic. True empathy requires an individual to merge identities and act upon both their own and the others’ emotions.
In the novel Frankenstein, by Mary Shelley, the main theme revolves around the internal and external consequences of being isolated from others. Being isolated from the world could result in a character losing his/her mental state and eventually causing harm to themselves or others. Because both Victor Frankenstein and the creature are isolated from family and society, they experienced depression, prejudice, and revenge.
Is it possible for one thing to have such a negative impact on a person? Because of his creation, Victor Frankenstein was a recluse who did not tell anyone of his creation because he regretted creating it. Although this may be true, Victor only wanted to do good and help humanity by bringing loved ones back to life. In order to create life, he isolated himself from his family to work on his experiment. After the monster committed homicide several times, Victor could not tell any sane person the truth. And he felt guilt because his loved ones died too early and at the hands of his scientific advancement. To conclude, isolation, secrecy, and guiltiness are prevalent in the book Frankenstein by Mary Shelley.
In gothic novels tragic figures are symbols of pain to the characters. Victor Frankenstein brings misfortune to his loved ones, which concludes to his overall tragedy. Ironically the monster in this novel is Frankenstein the creator not the creature. He has seven victims including himself and his fall is due to his ambition to be superior.
As a response to the Enlightenment movement in 18th century Europe, Romanticism gradually began to undermine the way people thought about human consciousness and nature itself. Appreciation of the natural beauty of the world and pure, human emotion bloomed in Europe as Romanticism’s influence grew ("Topic Page: Romanticism”). Romantics valued Individualism and thought that being close to nature would make them closer to God (Morner and Rausch). People also searched for solace in nature to overcome the adversities and cynicisms that followed the French Revolution ("French Revolution."). Romanticism and Romantic ideals influenced Mary Shelley, and that influence can be seen throughout her novel Frankenstein. The two main characters, Victor Frankenstein
Gender inequality will always affect the way women are portrayed in society, the weaker, unnecessary, and other sex. It is not just a subject of the past, but still holds a name in society, however in the olden eras the way women were treated and are looked at, in a much more harsh condition. In Shakespeare’s Othello and Shelley’s Frankenstein women’s roles in the books are solely based on the way they are treated in their time period. The way women are portrayed in these books, demonstrate that they can never be in the same standing as men, considered the second option, and therefore will never have the same respect as men. In both Othello and Frankenstein women are treated as property, used to better men’s social standards, and lack a voice,
In the story Frankenstein, both Victor and his creation slowly become very similar in a multitude of ways. Victor begins to become more and more like the creature as they both have a thirst for knowledge that would ultimately cause them both despair, they both had a desire to be around and connect with a family, and they both gain a desire for revenge.
Since the beginning of civilization, nature has been an obstacle that life is forced to overcome. In areas of extreme adversity, life struggles to exist, while in calm and stable conditions, life flourishes. The environments of earth constantly vary between adverse and propitious; one allows for progress, the other allows for the indulgement of laziness. In her book Frankenstein, Mary Shelley depicts the Monstrous and Idyllic visions of nature, but in the way she writes them, the Monstrous acts as an anchor to reality while the Idyllic causes dissociation in the individual. Throughout the story, nature is a force that changes the emotions of the individual. In Idyllic settings, the individual
Mary Shelley in her book Frankenstein addresses numerous themes relevant to the current trends in society during that period. However, the novel has received criticism from numerous authors. This paper discusses Walter Scott’s critical analysis of Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein in his Blackwood's Edinburgh Magazine Review of Frankenstein (1818).