4F Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein

It’s about time to start our module on the great female writer, Mary Shelley, the writer of Frankenstein and wife of the romantic poet Percy Bysshe Shelley.

This Zaption video I made is an introduction to her  troubled life I’ll deal with in class. Click the link and answer the questions after writing your SURNAMEMary Shelley: A life about Death.

From the National Library of Medicine (thanks to EdTech teacher)  this exhibition FRANKENSTEIN PENETRATING THE SECRETS OF NATURE looks at the world from which Mary Shelley came, how popular culture has embraced the Frankenstein story, and at how Shelley’s creation continues to illuminate the blurred, uncertain boundaries of what we consider “acceptable” science.

The second video is a Summary of the novel some of you have already read 🙂 Just to revise it in a visual form before reading an extract together.

As some of you did for the novel read during the summer I’m embedding a very interesting Frankenstein Google Literary Trip, so that you can visualize the places off the novel. It was meant for teacher so you neednt focus on all information, just select the relevant information. It lasts 6m’. You can also see here Francesca’s and Cristian’s version.

Frankenstein from GoogleLitTrips on Vimeo.


The following videoclip is taken from “Frankenstein the 1931 classic showing the trials and tribulations of the man and his monster, directed by James Whale and starring Boris Karloff and Colin Clive.

The second video is taken from Kenneth Branagh’s movie Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein (1994 ) and it’s the scene of  The CREATION OF THE MONSTER.  Sticking close to the original novel, Kenneth Branagh guides us through the story of Frankenstein’s quest for knowledge and his creature’s search for his “father”. Director: Kenneth Branagh/Release Date: 4 November 1994starring  Robert de Niro, Kenneth Branagh and Helena Bonham Carter.

  • Assignment 1 After watching the clip answer the following questions IN YOUR NOTEBOOK.
  1. What leads to the creation of the monster?
  2. What does Dr.Frankenstein look like? How does he feel before and after the creation?
  3. What does he say DURING and AFTER the creation?
  4. Does the soundtrack contribute to the atmosphere of the scene?

You can (it’s optional) also have a look at this presentation I found while surfing the net . It’s incredible how many things you come across … by pure chance!

Here’s the funny website you are already familiar with: Frankenstein in 60 secondsI find the girl’s voice unbearable but you may like her. It’s a way of making  literature very easy and understandable to everybody. As I see it it’s a way of trivializing great masterpieces, not my cup of tea 😉

Assignment 2 TO BE DONE AFTER OUR CLASS SESSION  Leave your comment below answering to the following:

  • Which of the 2 monsters you have seen do you find more impressive and why?


FOLLOW UP : watch this video published May 22 2012 & produced by Ridley Scott (director of Blade Runner, the Gladiator, Prometheus to mention just a few) PROPHETS OF SCIENCE FICTION.  

    • Time required: 50 minutes
    • Do the activities  in the worksheet you’ll receive as a PDF in Schoology.

After all this work and effort you deserve a treat & a laugh: a clip from the the 1974 comically brilliant movie Frankenstein Junior. It’s a pun on the world “werewolf” (lupo-mannaro) & Where wolf? LOL Nella traduzione italiana il gioco di parole è andato perso 🙁

Last but not least! Frankenweenie (in Italian  theatres since 17 January 2013) is a 3D stop motion fantasy family film directed by Tim Burton. It is a remake of Burton’s 1984 short film of the same name and is a parody of and a homage to the 1931 film Frankenstein based on Mary Shelley’s book of the same name. Like both those films, Frankenweenie is in black and white. It is also the fourth stop-motion film produced by Burton and the first of those four that isn’t a musical. In the film, a boy named Victor loses his dog, named Sparky, and uses the power of science to resurrect him.” (Wikipedia)
Here’s the trailer. I loved this movie as Burton’s one of my favourite directors 🙂

Hope you’ve enjoyed discovering this gifted & remarkable writer whose dramatic life was so close to the fictional character she created and that was so prophetic and ahead of her time.

24 thoughts on “4F Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein

  1. What I found most interesting about these video on Frankenstein is the way every director tried to show how they felt about the story and the appearance of the monster and Frankenstein themselves. These aspects are extremely different in every clip, and things will keep changing in the future as well. I read the novel last summer and even though I didn’t watch any of the movies I personally think that the original one from 1931 best represents the book. Maybe because it’s the closest (in terms of time) to the original novel first released in the early years of the 19th century, or maybe because it’s definitely the one that comes the anyone’s mind whenever we talk about Frankenstein, I don’t know, but still I think that’s the one Mary Shelley would like the most if she was still alive. I was also quite impressed by the scene of the creation, because of the way Frankenstein gave birth to the monster: cruel, scary, definitely non-human.

  2. Hi everybody!
    The monster of the Kenneth Branagh’s version is definetly more impressive than the first video… the reason are obvious: at the time of Kenneth Branagh(1994) the techonolgy for movie-making were definitely more developed than the ones in James Whale’s time (1931).
    After introducing the life of Mary Shelley in class, I have to say I could understand a lot more about the binomial Frankestein-Creature. Since I had never read the novel and knew only the figure of Halloween Frankenstein, I could have no idea of ​​the whole emotional and psychological thickness and depth behind this such famous and distorted figure. Actually, among other things, this school year I finally got to understand that Frankenstein is only the doctor, and the monster is the ‘Creature’, and not Frankenstein…
    Anyway, the monster seems to me Mary. She, like the monster, is avoided by all, misunderstood, and repudiated. I pull this to the fact that his father had rejected her as daughter after she had gone to live with Shelley. Secondly, also because she found herself alone as a child after the death of her mother, like the creature found itself alone immediately after its creation.
    In the first video we see this factor of childishness in the figure of the creature, its own peculiar trait at the beginning. But this is not creepy. Whereas in the second video with the flesh impaled the creature gives me the sensation that I’m being impaled while watching the scene; therefore I consider the figure of the creature more impressive in the second video, but only because of factors of special effects and scenic possibilities, but also the distressing music cooperates.
    I am interested to read the book this summer, thanks for getting me closer to the real side of this famous but often misunderstood story!


  3. Hi 🙂 sorry for my lateness too…but I’ve just return from New York and my brain is still there. Anyway I watched the videos and the first video, taken from the movie ‘Frankenstein’ directed by James Whale, impressed me less than the other one taken from the movie ‘Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein’ directed by Kenneth Branagh. In fact in the first video there aren’t the special effects and the music that are in the other. Furthermore, for me, the monster was pure like child, not creepy and the men were like our scientists today…so they look normal. Whereas the one taken from Kenneth Branagh’s film was very creepy. During the video I was really scared by how the monster was creating and by Frankenstein’s behaviour. He was mad and his madness was the most frightening thing in the video. So I think the most fearsome thing is not the monster, but human behaviour.

  4. Hello! And sorry for the lateness!
    Well, I’ve always been fascinated by horror and “gothic” movies and sincerely none of the two videos scared me (maybe because I’ve seen too many scary things and now it’s hard to scare me ,lol) but I am a person that loves the “details”: I enjoy watching movies with nice settings, the characters with a well made make up and clothes (that impress the audience), thrilling soundtracks ecc.. So I think that the kenneth Branagh’s movie best fits my expectations: the monster was very dreadful thanks to the modern make up, the location where the creation of the wretched took place was breathtaking and very similar to the original description of the novel and the musical background gives dynamism and at the same time increases the anxiety of the action!
    I also love Dr. Frankenstein’s reaction before and after the creation of the monster, it’s almost identical to the original one! It’s interesting seeing the evolution of the cinematography, and how the things change with the time!

  5. I really like the story beacuse it’s full of connections with history and psychology.
    I saw the movie at the elementary school but obviously a simplified version for children and personally I don’t remember exactly my reaction but my classmates were afraid of this huge creature with deep cuts on his face. (It depends on the age)
    I prefer the first interpretation because I love old movies and usually they are adherent to the written story. The first one is grotesque and grisly and also a bit mysterious probably it’s due to the music and movements of the characters.
    In my opinion the monster that is more impressive is the second one. Nowadays, after several movies like “Saw”, our concept of an impressive scene is different from that times. To be impressed we need to see blood, cruelty and dead people and in the second video there are elements like the sound, colors and screams which make it just a bit more impressive than the first one. But new generation wouldn’t like it because there aren’t particular special effects.

  6. I think that the most impressive of all the videos was the one of James Whale from 1931. I tought that all the special effects and things like that were a really important part on a film, but when i saw that i was like: “that is the REAL monster”.
    This summer i red the ”graphic novel” version of the book, but the pictures and the drawings weren’t the best ones for me. Infact the imagine of the monster that i always had in my mind was exactly the one created in 1931.
    I don’t really liked the version of 1994, because i found it quiet unreal, and i know this may sound strange, but is exactly what i felt when i watched that video. I absoletely agree with Chiara Z. when says that Mary Shelley wants to put in this novel part of herself, because i found out that the two charachters have some similar traits that i never could even imagine.
    Apart from this, i have to say that this story never interested me before this summer because when i was at elementary school my mom often watched ”The Addams family” in tv and i was so scaried about that film that i immediately used to ran in my room crying. One of the carachters was actually the monster that was creepy and ugly. Maybe only now i can understand what is behind this story and finally stay in front of a book studying it without crying from fear.

  7. The monster that i found more impressive is it from the first movie (1931). Maybe is because it is an old movie, and the effect of the black and white created a strange atmosphere. But, after the vision of the second movie, i’d like to watch it. I saw Kenneth Branagh in Harry Potter, in that movie he was stupid. I remember a scene when he broke Ron’s arm. I think it’s funny because in Frankenstein he gives life and in Harry Potter he can’t repair an arm. I watched also with my friend “Frankenstein junior” when I was in the middle school. The monster in that movie doesn’t scare you because it’s a comedy version of the Mary Shelley’s story. There are many and many movies about Frankenstein and his creature. Why did this story become so famous? is it for the monster? What is the monster a symbol of? I think the monster is the product of the ambition of the modern scientist who doesn’t think about the consequences of his actions.

    • because nowadays men do thinks without thinking twice. And after they regret what they did.
      P.S. I know it

  8. Hi everybody!
    Although I would really enjoy doing it, I haven’t read the novel “Frankenstein” yet. Anyway, as my classmates already said, the image of this supernatural creature is really famous and common. Especially between children the idea of the tall, big, clumsy and with metal parts in the neck, maybe electrodes, monster leads immediately to the character of Frankenstein.
    I start by saying that soon after watching the two extracts, the one that really impress me was the newest version by Kenneth Branagh (1994); maybe because of the insistent soundtrack or maybe because of the rapidity of the scene. Moreover the monster is portrayed as a really horrible creature and the sound of electricity, together with the anxiety of the scientist give the scene a special power. On the contrary I must say that the stereotype I have of the creature is perfectly represented in the James Whale’s Frankenstein and also the idea of a new born monster was entirely expressed.
    After reading “The creation of the monster” by Mary Shelley in class and after knowing a bit more about her life, my ideas were more than ever confused. Indeed from the beginning, I associated the figure of the monster: shy, clumsy and really different from the others, to the figure of the writer: in my opinion, clever, pained but innovator and also somehow out of her time.
    I think that Mary Shelley wanted to express herself in her novel, her mood and the state of mind of a new born supernatural monster, created bringing together the best parts of the human being. Furthermore, she wanted to entertain people with a good horror story and maybe also scare them.
    In conclusion I consider the first movie as the nearest to the story told by Shelley and to the condition of the monster that she wanted to pass on; at the same time I think that the representation of the creature in the second one suite better the ugliness and the frightful features of the monster.

  9. First of all let me start by saying that I’m a girl who get impressed very easily. Probably if it was not for the school, I would have never thought of watching Frankenstein, but I must say that this story is beginning to fascinate me, I think that Mary Shelley was brilliant in writing it. Of the two monsters presented in these films, the one directed by James Whale in 1931 and the other directed in 1994 by Kenneth Branagh, both have terrified me a little. Surely the first more than the second. The atmosphere created by the situation, and the sound effects are very influential, bring a sense of dread and anxiety adapted to a film. Although you see only some small parts of the monster and the rest is given everything by your imagination and the pictures really inspire fear. In the film of Whale we can see well the monster but it’s not scary as the other.The monster seems helpless and frightened by what’s going on. It seems almost embarrassed. Surely if I had to choose between the two films would watch it.

  10. I’ve never seen the movie “Frankenstein” by Kenneth Branagh,so when I talk about this story I always associate the monster to the one of the video in black and white. But the James Whale’s monster never scared me,because it isn’t represented as horrible as it describes Mary Shelley.
    Instead, after seeing the scene of the creation of the monster in the Kennet Branagh’s film, I consider it more impressive than the other one.
    Also the atmosphere, the music, the colors and the effects of the film help much the description of the scene and make the monster more horrible and scary.
    I think that most people consider the creature of the second video more monstrous than first one,this is because the movies have been made after many years away and obviously more years pass and more the cinema evolves creating effects more and more incredibles!

  11. Personally, I really like the story of Frankenstein and I watched a lot of films about this, all with different interpretations and I find the novel of Mary Shelly a real masterpiece with an amusing narration and a deep massage from the author that stand behind the simple horror story.
    Of the two films, I prefer the second one, “Mary Shelly’s Frankenstein” I think is one of the films that most sticks to the original novel. It was able to recreate the anxiety, the obsession, the alienation and the pride of Doctor Frankenstein that wants, through chemistry and electricity, to give birth to an inanimate body and tries, in a certain way, to equalize the power of God. We can see this sort of artificial womb where the monster is contained, that is another reference to the nature and the man who want to equalize it.
    The soundtrack helps a lot to create an anxious atmosphere; even the fact that Frankenstein runs up and down in the laboratory, screaming, makes us understand the feelings that he’s feeling in the moment of the creation of his creature.
    In the first one instead, maybe for the fact that it’s an older film than “Mary Shelly’s Frenkenstein”, I found it a little bit “slow”, there was no soundtrack and very short dialogues, so I didn’t found the same atmosphere and feelings that I liked in the second video.

  12. Hi everybody,
    this summer I read the novel Frankenstein written by Mary Shelley, and helped by the illustrations of the book I created my personal idea of the monster.
    I immediately imagined a monster taller than the normal men, bigger than the normal men and very cruel.
    After watching the two videos I’ve to say that the monster represented in the film directed by James Whale in 1931 is the one who is more related to my first idea. Infact this creature has all the physical characteristics which I previously listed with only some little differences. For example I noticed that in the book the monster has incredible athletic skills, he’s very fast, he jump like nobody can do it and has an incredible power while in the film he seems a bit clumsy.
    Obviously I’m giving my opinion without watching all the film: reading the novel we can briefly see the evolution of the monster, the physical skills got better, he became more cruel and lost every hesitation. Maybe it would happen also in the video, I don’t know.
    However I appreciate more the idea given by the first video: I think is most similar to the one given by Mary Shelley ( maybe because this representations is the most famous in the world and the most common into the various version).
    To conclude I want to highlight one thing which made me think. As I recently studied, this book should tell an horror story, so the main purpose of the author was to scary every readers or at least create a feeling of “fear”. Honestly neither of the clips succedeed in giving me a feeling of anxiety. The two director didn’t direct an horror film, it seems more like a science fiction film that makes us think about aliens or scientific discovery.
    Especially the second one, in my opinion, doesn’t reflect the real intention of the author: if I wouldn’t have the description maybe I wouldn’t have recognised that speaks about Frankenstein.
    Bye bye

  13. I’m one of the guys that read the streamlined novel this summer. Before starting reading it I had an idea of the creature that was the same at the end of my reading. I have never seen a movie about this story and in Frankenstein (1931) directed by James Whale, I think the monster suits the typical idea we have of Frankenstein’s creature and also the one media spread. It perfectly embodies my idea of Frankenstein’s creature, I mean, I have always imagined it like that. The character fits perfectly also with the entire movie, above all with the setting in black & white that, in my opinion, sends us back to the place were the monster was created and also were Mary Shelley wrote the novel, published 1818. Neither the first nor the second one is so impressive but I think the first one is a bit more similar to what Mary Shelley was thinking about while writing her book.

  14. I read this book during the summer ,like many of my classmates have written, but probably, even those who have not done it, they already knew the story.
    In my opinion the monster of the first video presents the classic monster with bolts in his neck, the face carved with smooth leather even if he has some scar, with superhuman strength and clumsy movements, similar to those of a newborn…and on this aspect I would like to stop and think.
    The monster seems not to feel part of the world in which he lives: is afraid and does not know where he is nor what surrounds him. It’s a primitive creature, who is surprised to see the light for the first time (just like a newborn baby) and is afraid to see an entity so violent, loud and frightening as is the fire of a torch..just like a baby.
    So, I think this scene shows us in a much more detailed and precise way, taking as reference the text of Mary Shelley, the behavior of the creature who ,confused, tried to figure out where he is, what he is and who can help him to find the answers..nevertheless i’m sure that is the second video the one which presents in the best way the physical characteristics of the monster, because in the first clip we see this dark giant who is still more human and natural compared to the monster of the second video.
    A monster created with different sections from human corpses, must be represented with many visible scars, blood, some malformation or something like that..
    In conclusion, while the first video presents very well the behavior of the monster immediately after its creation, the second video shows us perfectly the monster itself in all its ugliness

  15. In my opinion the monster that is more impressive is the second one.
    The deep colours and the music that is so strong create an involving atmosphere where the anxiety of the creator contributes to increase the expectations of who’s watching. You stay there wanting to know what is going to happen and I think that this is impressive.
    Something that impresses you makes you want to see more and this is the feeling that I had while watching the second video.
    Moreover, the fact that the video only shows the creation of the monster and not how it looks like after it, gives space to the imagination, so in your mind YOU create the creature and, while watching the video, you try to capture every information given on how it looks like.
    This is why I liked the second video, because you see some parts of the body of the monster but the rest is left to your imagination. We all know that the most impressive creatures are the ones that our mind creates.
    The first monster didn’t impress me (honestly I find it also a little bit funny). In my opinion it doesn’t look “real”, maybe because it’s in black and white, but I find it different from the idea of the monster that I had in my mind.
    I think that a monster, to impress you, has to be similar to something that you find in the reality and the fact that the second monster looks like a human emphasizes even more the idea of a thing that could really exist.
    What impresses people is the idea that what you see on the screen one day could be next to you.

  16. Hey guys 🙂
    Before doing this interesting and odd story I didn’t imagine that it would be so absorbing, above all for the people like me that love horror films! So broaching that i love both this video, i think that the second one has something more compared with the first, because while I watching it I was really enchanted. In fact even if it last only two minutes, it succeed to catch my attention ( and generally this is a really endeavour ahaha). Maybe is also for the fact that the first one is in black and white that gives me less intensive emotions, and i think also because it is a bit more surreal.
    Despite this I’m very happy to do this original and famous story at school and the thing that create in me more interest is that a similar innovation had been written by a woman, and this can make us reflect on the prejudices that there were on the women in that age. So if I was in Mary Shelley, I would be proud of me, for my invention and for the success that my work had been.. and even if she’s not still alive, hei story will make her live forever!!

  17. Hi everybody!
    In my opinion nowadays it’s very difficult to impress someone, because each film is made with special effects and it’s possible to create a very grisly and awful monster only with them. These films are a bit old and this is the reason why their monster are “foregone” and they don’t impress me because I’m use to see more frightening creatures.
    But, if I have to choose one of them, I’d chose the one from the second video, because dr. Frankenstein expresses a lot of vitality, anxiousness, excitement and happiness for his creation. All the scene is so chaotic because of the movements of the protagonist, the change of subject of the shooting and the sound.
    After our lessons I was impressed also by the meaning of all the machines. This scene recreate a womb and the born of a child, because the monster is like Frankenstein’s son. In my opinion the filmmaker has made a very cool trick.
    Instead the first monster it’s a bit too simple and fake, this is why I don’t like it a lot. But it represents the ideal Frankenstein’s monster that everybody conceive when you hear its name.

  18. I though about this question for quite a bit. It was a tricky question and I’m gonna explain why. Well, in our mind Frankenstein is well-known as represented in the first video-clip, the one taken from “Frankenstein the 1931 classic” directed by James Whale. As Shelley described him, the monster in the movie was incredibly tall, a hideously ugly creation, with translucent skin, watery, glowing eyes, flowing dark hair, black lips, and prominent white teeth. However, for the soundtrack and the special effects the second video-clip was more impressive. It makes you pop up in the scene not just like an audience but like an active protagonist of the creation. So my plight was basically whether to choose the more classic Frankenstein or the more modern one. In conclusion, in my opinion both of them are impressing in different ways.

  19. I’m one of the guys who read the novel “Frankestein” last summer. Before starting reading I had my own idea of how the monster looked like. His features were the same of the typical and funny image taking from the movie “Frankenstein” (1931) by James Whale, that I had already seen.
    While I was reading (I had never read it before) I changed my mind. I saw a monster who suited perfectly the representation of the monster in the Kenneth Branagh’s movie “Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein” (1994), that I find more impressive than the other.
    Thanks Fabiola for sharing the photo of the monster after his creation made by doctor Victor Frankenstein in the second movie. THIS is exactly how he should look like: ugly, scary, creepy and sewn. The last particular, that I consider essential, misses in the first movie. The book spends lot of lines describing how doctor Victor studies and selects his bodies and how much was scared when he saw the monster for the first time. But the first monster remembers me a puppet and not a MONSTER (I think Mary Shelley thought about a creature particularly disgusting and horror).
    Despite that I like the videoclip that shows us the first trials and tribulations of the monster as he was a child who is discovering the world.
    The second one is for sure powerful and close to book, that made me want to watch it.
    I recommend the book to my classmates.
    Bye 😉

  20. Hi 🙂
    I start saying that I was really fascinated by the story of Frankenstein because until now I had only heard others speak about this but I had never analyzed it so thoroughly. In my opinion the creator (1831) is not very scary also because she has become the image common to us all, and we are not afraid anymore.
    While the other creature , yes it is real monster, it is impressive. I think this reflect perfectly the idea of Mary Shelley infact you can see the scars much more than in the movie in black and white. So for music, for special effect and for the images I prefer the second movie.
    In addition the great thing is that the protagonist has alway believed in himself and for this he achieved his purpose and this is underlined by his enthusiasm in the second movie.

  21. The creature of the first video in black & white is, in my opinion, the most impressive because it actually suits the typical idea we have of Frankenstein’s monster. For instance, it really looks like a “thing” that is cobbled together from parts of other bodies, while the second one has more “human” features.
    Frankenstein’s monster is a complex character which develops his personality along with the story. Initially he’s not cruel nor brute. He’s almost naïve, instead. You see an hesitant creature, uncertain about what to do and still unable of taking sides. However, he changes his attitude as soon as he becomes aware of his physical aspect: all he can see is a disgusting thin tall body and a pale face. Only dead pieces which hang in place and have been brought to life.
    He also understands how often he’s treated unfairly. Forgetting about being tired, sad and lonely, Frankenstein overpowers and slips out of the control of his creator, managing to turn on him and harm him. He starts to create disorder and behave evil. The whole reason, the whole purpose is for him to be respected not only because he wants to, but because he’s after all a human being. Indeed, you can see him sigh, frown, wishing, hiding, running, fighting for all his concerns and fears to go away. He knows he has been brought to life and doesn’t want to be considered as a monster, but as a living creature. Thus wants to be treated that way.

  22. Color images, music engaging, the special effects, the scars on the face of the new human being, the physicality of the actor are elements that, in the first instance make it more impressive the extract of the movie directed by Kenneth Branagh, but the original version directed by James Whale is the one that has involved me more because it highlights the two sides, the good and the bad of the protagonist.
    Frankenstein, in the black and white’ s video, is impressive, physically very tall, very ugly but at the same time he’s sweet like a child who has to learn to move, walk, sit down; he listens and executes the orders he receives from his creator, even when he was invited to take the light coming from a window.
    The fact that impressed me is the reaction that the monster has when he sees two men enter into the room with lighted torches: he gets scared and become aggressive. The brain used for its creation is that of a murderous criminal and the view of the fire breaks out in him the ferocity and then an atmosphere of great drama.
    The video is short but it is enough to convey the meaning of the whole film: it is the desire to know the environment in which he was introduced, the will to be independent and free, its diversity to make the new creature a monster for society. And this is awesome!

  23. This summer I read the novel, the one for students, with exercises and some illustrations. I think twice or three times, I saw “Frankenstein Junior” (1974), but I’ve never seen this two films.
    The creature of the first one (1931) is the typical image that we all now, also for halloween’s dresses. I think it’s not very impressive: it’s a bit creepy, but I don’t find it “scary”. Compared to the second one, the film of Kenneth Branagh’s, this one is certainly more impressive.
    I found this image because I had no idea how it looks like https://ttcritic.files.wordpress.com/2011/05/244735-frankenstein_1994_movie_2_super.jpg

    This is not scary to me, but we can see better what Frankenstein did: we can see the seams all over his face; we can see he’s wretched and misshapen. THIS is the real monster, the real demonstrations that Victor has put together corpses and part of human flesh.
    But I also think that this one, the ones from the other film, the one from the novel I’ve read … and all the images that we can found on the Internet, are not even a little similar to what Mary Shelley was thinking about while writing it.
    To being so disgusted from the body (and I mean, NOT from what he has done, but only from it) it should be a lot more scary and impressive than all these, and also more than what we all could ever imagine.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.