Sign Up Now
Get instant access to over 1 million+ study documents
OR
Already registered? click here to login
By creating your account, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and student honor code.
The alteration of the relationship between Victor and professor Krempe does not change the meaning of the story, it only makes it more intense. I believe that the most important change regards the character of Victor. Reading the book one has the freedom to make his own judgement and evaluation of the character while the movie imposes a certain evaluation. Reading the book I had the impression that Victor was sorry for what he had done. He realized his error and what he was living was actually a drama. In the movie he is depicted as a person who is concerned with bringing the dead to life and that's that. In a certain way he seems to be punished for his ambition. His drama was that while trying to win the battle with death he did nothing but bring even more death in his life. In the book he loses everything, even the woman who he is supposed to marry. Ion the movie Elizabeth is reborn, which...
I believe that this changes the meaning of the story a bit and I personally dislike it. With the book the reader gets to meditate upon the condition of the human being who is so weak in front of death. Eventually you get to feel powerless. Shelley demonstrates that science can not make us immortal and even if it could it would be wrong. One does not get to reflect upon these things only by seeing the movie because the visual impact is too big. One gets distracted by the plot of the story. Reading the book one can identify himself with Victor while the movie draws you in a whirlpool of emotions and the viewer remains outside the story.
The casting was very good and this contributed a lot to reinforcing the images I had created in my head while reading the book. The setting was just I had imagined it, but the depiction of Victor that I had in my mind was focused more on his human dimension and not the professional one. The biggest advantage of the film is the emotional impact which it causes through the mixture of imagery and sound. There is an emotional impact when reading the book as well but the emotions are easier to control. I believe that a written story can no have the same emotional impact as a movie because it requires more intellectual effort, more rationalization, while the movie makes you abandon yourself to a whirlpool of sensations and emotions.
All in all the film was a good adaptation of the book, much better than other productions and it be considered that the director has managed to achieve his purpose while respecting Mary Shelley's book.
Frankenstein's Influence On Science And Medicine The scientific concepts presented in Mary Shelley's Frankenstein helped introduce the public to concepts that would revolutionize the fields of science and medicine. First published in 1818, Frankenstein examined the role of science and religion, commenting on the dangers of "playing God." Frankenstein has been considered by many to be the first science-fiction novel written, and many of the concepts introduced have been further explored
Good and Evil in Frankenstein Mary Shelley's Frankenstein tells the story of Victor Frankenstein, who bored with his mundane life, decides to attempt to create a new life out of deceased human remains. Dr. Frankenstein's ignorance of the responsibility necessary to take care of the life that he has brought into this world leads him to abandon his creation; this abandonment leads to the Frankenstein's Monster to react violently as he
Frankenstein and Enlightenment The Danger of Unregulated Thought in Frankenstein Mary Shelley's Frankenstein; Or, the Modern Prometheus, considered by many to be one of the first science-fiction novels written, is rife with anti-Enlightenment undertones. Shelley's novel, first published in 1818 and republished in 1831, examines the roles of science and religion, and provides a commentary on the dangers of playing God. Considering that Mary Shelley was the daughter of two prominent Enlightenment
Frankenstein & Romanticism How Romanticism is Demonstrated in Frankenstein In less than six years, Mary Shelley's Frankenstein will be 200 years old. This novel, indicative of the romantic period, is a compelling narrative with numerous themes and vivid imagery to consider. In the context of romanticism, Frankenstein is a worthwhile piece of literature to examine. Literature and art of the romantic period is characterized with an emphasis on intense emotional reactions, specifically
Frankenstein An Analysis of Mary Shelley's Frankenstein Mary Wollstonecraft Shelley wrote in her 1831 introduction to the reprint of Frankenstein that "supremely frightful would be the effect of any human endeavour to mock the stupendous mechanism of the Creator of the world" (x). These words not only indicate the manner of her thought on the night she conceived the idea for her gothic novel, they also reflect, as she notes, the ideas
Her list includes the following: culture / Nature reason / Nature male/female mind/body ( Nature) master/slave reason/matter (physicality) rationality/animality ( Nature) human / Nature (non-human) civilised/primitive ( Nature) production/reproduction ( Nature) self/other At first glance, this list seems to capture the basic groupings and gender associations that are at work in Mary Shelley's novel. The Creature exemplifies animality, primitiveness, and physicality, whereas Victor represents the forces of civilization, rational production, and culture. Victor is part of a happy family