| Film Analysis |
[Dec. 3rd, 2006|11:20 pm] |
A Comparison of Frankenstein: The Book and the Movie
Ever since Mary Shelley wrote Frankenstein, there have been many interpretations and re-enactments of this famous novel. Some of them have been comedies, some of them have been traditional horror movies, and some have been altogether foolish. One version that has been exceptional was released in 1994 by director Kenneth Branagh. This version was a far cry from most of the other adaptations, as it attempted to capture what made the original book so inspiring.
The 1994 version of Frankenstein does an amiable job of translating the book onto the movie screen. Most of the plot elements remain unchanged, and the atmosphere and the attitude of the movie reflect how I myself had imagined the book. There are, however, several significant differences. In the book, Frankenstein had no assistant, while in the movie, he had an accomplice that helped with the overall preparation of the monster. A second difference pertains to the relationship between Victor and Elizabeth. In the movie, as in the book, the two were always the best of friends and meant to one day be married. This is sbout the extent of the similarities, though. In the film, Victor and Elizabeth were much more expressive with their emotions, where as in the novel, Victor kept to himself and always left Elizabeth in the dark. The manner in which Elizabeth dies on their wedding night is much more ghastly in the film. Another contrasting element between the movie and the book is how much time the deamon spends with the De Lacey family. The novel spends a great deal of time illustrating the monster’s relationship with the family. As, he observes them interacting, the monster learns how to speak, how to read, and many things dealing with the nature of humanity. In the film, much of this is trivialized. A more ambiguous difference is how the characters presented the ideas of the story. The book had an air of thoughtfulness about it, while the movie did more work for the audience, trying to prompt the reader to think about the issues put forth by the themes in the novel. There are also several subtle differences, such as how Elizabeth visited Frankenstein at school. These are rather insignificant, and have no special bearing on the story or the ideas presented therein.
While the film and the novel share the same approach with regards to the overall message of the story, the manner in which the deamon is presented is somewhat different. The novel tediously develops the monster from the mindset of a small child to a fully developed adult. We, as readers, are with him from his acknowledgement of existence and watch as he learns of his own existence and unfair treatment. The book also gives the monster a metaphysical, superhuman aspect. Frankenstein’s monster in the book is supernatural in thought, strength, and in conscience. The film version of the deamon seems much more humanized, and overall loses several of the characteristics that mad him so formidable in the book. In one sense, though, the monster is more cruel and vicious, as the murders that he commits in the film are ghastly and insensible. The movie is dark and gothic, and does an exceptional job of recreating the dreary mood of the book.
Overall Kenneth Branagh deserves credit for his work with this film. It is effective in that the film is a departure from the typical Hollywood monster movie. Instead of a cheesy storyline and an unpractical reliance on special effects, this film tries to relate the movie back to the book and to the themes that made the book so powerful. The story of Frankenstein is a “ghost story,” but it centers around the need to show what happens when man tries to usurp the almighty power of God. The film presents this idea almost as well as the novel does, though it is a little more obvious. The effect is still meaningful, and, after watching the movie, the audience is left to ponder the ideas Shelley intended for her readers to consider upon reading the novel.
Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein takes a few liberties with the story, but is still the most accurate translation of the original book. Both the novel and the film are thoughtful and inspiring, great pieces of art that were enjoyable to experience. |
|
|
![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}
ccarterp1's journal