Blog 1

The written story of Frankenstein was very interesting after watching many different adaptations to the story prior to the Shelley story itself. One of the major aspects of the book that stood out to me was the monster. The book emphasizes the intelligence of the monster, which speaks with art in every word. The first adaptation of the Frankenstein was quite far from a literal retelling of Shelley’s writing with the director James Whale who was the first to take the liberty of turning the rather intelligent creation and turn it into an almost hollow killing machine. This killing machine was turned from a monster that could be understood and empathized with to a monstrosity that ends up killing everything it touches. After knowing the real story of Frankenstein I found this kind of annoying that it is not the same Frankenstein.

The creation of the monster in the three stories we read or watched was interesting as well. I don’t know if Mary Shelley planned on her story being altered and made into someone else’s story, but one part that she did very well that lets the imagination take control is the creation or birthing of the monster. In the book, the scene does not go into too much detail about what happens. All you really get is that there was a mix of alchemy and chemistry that brought the monster from the dead. This process has been emblazoned in my head from the 1931 film as creating life from a lightning storm. This process has been repeated numerous times, the most memorable for me being a Scooby Doo variation. The most recent adaptation had the most believable birthing process of the monster through the re-creation of the womb, which was nasty. Taking the liberty to make the process a bit more detailed and believable made the story more acceptable than the first adaptation, in my opinion.