Evaluate 4-5 changes made in the film. Why do you think those changes were made? How effective were they to the story? To the film experience?
How did the film experience help you better understand the novel? The Romantic Period?
Give it a star, rating, thumbs up/down, or fresh/rotten score (100%) and justify your reasoning.
Response
"Frankenstein," a 1931 horror film, tells the story of Dr. Henry Frankenstein, an ambitious scientist who creates a living being from dead body parts. The creature, monstrous in appearance, is misunderstood and mistreated by society. This mistreatment leads to a series of tragic events, highlighting the consequences of man's tampering with the natural order.
The film changes the name of the scientist from Victor Frankenstein in the novel to Henry Frankenstein.
Unlike in the novel, the creature in the film does not speak.
The film's creation scene, where the creature is brought to life amidst dramatic lightning and electric machinery, is iconic but not present in the novel.
The film omits the creature's self-education and emotional development shown in the novel. This makes the creature seem more monstrous and less sympathetic.
The film experience, with its focus on the horror and ethical implications of unchecked scientific ambition, helps underscore themes prevalent in the Romantic Period, such as the awe and terror of the unknown and the dangers of overreaching human ambition. The creature's portrayal, though less nuanced than in the novel, still reflects Romanticism's fascination with the sublime and the grotesque.
I would give "Frankenstein" (1931) a rating of 85%. While the film makes significant changes from the novel, these alterations are largely effective in creating a standalone cinematic experience. The cinematography was pretty good (considering its time), but the character of Frankenstein feels oversimplified and the plot is too predictable.