Comparing the Creation Scene in James Whale's 1931 Frankenstein and Kenneth Brannagh's 1994 Frankenstein

Comparing the Creation Scene in James Whale's 1931 Frankenstein and Kenneth Brannagh's 1994 Frankenstein

James Whale’s 1931 portrayal of Frankenstein when compared to Kenneth

Brannagh’s alternate account from 1994 reveals some similarities but

also many differences in the way they try to evoke emotions such as

horror, fear and expectation from the audience and keep the plot

moving. To do this, the directors have used a series of techniques,

including: camera shots, use of sound and music, use of lighting and

shadows, and mise-en-scene. Many of the differences and similarities

between the films are due to the type of audience that the directors

were aiming the films at. For example, Whale uses a very traditional

horror opening for his creation scene, while Brannagh uses a more

contemporary opening with light play and symbolism through candles and

shadows. Some of the other main differences between the two styles of

films are how closely the film follows the original book, the style

through which genres such as horror, romance and action are portrayed,

and the strength of the horror and special effects used to keep the

audience in a state of expectancy and tension, but also scared and

unsure of the outcome. James Whale was trying to create a shocking and

contemporary film, which would scare his 1931 audience and be

revolutionary in the techniques he used while still retaining a

traditional gothic horror genre, whereas Kenneth Brannagh was trying

to create an action film, which follows the original book more

closely, and portrays the monster in a way that evokes sympathy for

the monster, rather than hatred and violence towards a predetermine...

... middle of paper ...

... the audience

never really knew how it was going to turn out and what was coming

next. However, social preferences and tolerances have changed

dramatically over time and so that is why I don’t find the 1931

version as effective at portraying the story or creating tension.

Moreover, I find that the 1931 film was certainly more revolutionary

than 1994 and tried to go past original limits in regard to style and

techniques used more effectively and more continuously than the later

film.

Finally, I find that although the 1931 film was more revolutionary and

may have been more effective if compared with audiences from the

respective times, I still prefer the later version it uses more modern

effects and follows the original book more closely which allows people

who have read the book to relate more closely to the film.