Film Comparison

Out of the 80 different film interpretations for Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, Jade and I first came across a 2004 version directed by Marcus Nispel. We had been hoping to find a version that was more similar to the book but between the school library, public library, and Family Video, this is what we got. Entitled Frankenstein (of course) and starring Parker Posey, Vincent Perez, and Michael Madson, this movie was nothing like the novel. The film takes place in 21^st century New Orleans and in a way it is like the future of Frankenstein 200 years after the end of the novel (if Victor wouldn’t have died that is). Dr. Victor Helios is well-known for his research but no one really knows what kind of work he is doing. Dr. Helios is actually Dr. Frankenstein who has kept himself alive and youthful for the past 200 years through biotechnological advancements and experimentation. The original Frankenstein monster has also survived these 200 years and is known as Deucalion. He is not the only one however. Frankenstein has created dozens of other creatures who basically cannot die unless they get vital organs removed or destroyed, or are turned into a bloody pulp. Deucalion was created from body parts dug up in a prison graveyard but these newer creatures require the death of innocent people. Frankenstein actually has one of his creatures, known to the public as Detective Harker, helping him to kill people and collect the parts. The murders and bodies begin to pile up which of course leads to in depth police investigation.  Detective Carson O’Conner and Michael Sloane are partners investigating the case. Their clues along with the help from Deucalion lead them to Detective Harker and ultimately to Victor. It is difficult to fully compare and contrast the novel and film based on scenes and experiences due to the fact that the film is more of a continuation (which is the angle at which I am going to discuss the film because that is how it was intended). I can however point out major differences in the overall plot and set up. 

The majority of the similarities stem from the base story of Frankenstein. Dr. Helios (Frankenstein) is still interested in doing something different and extraordinary that no one has ever done. He wants to create life and be a “God-like” figure being able to give and take away life. In his mind he is taking away the useless pieces of others’ lives and using them to create better, more advanced, and evolutionary beings. He dedicates himself to his work and strives for absolute perfection. Also like the novel, Victor does not take responsibility where he needs to. He has one of his creations doing his dirty work and committing murders. Others are once again suffering because of his selfish actions and he does nothing about it. The last major similarity I can express between the novel and film is the creatures’ utter hate of their lives. They live day-by-day miserably and feeling incomplete and like something is missing.

Unlike the novel, the film depicts Dr. Frankenstein as the villain and Deucalion is the hero helping the detectives find the answers and find the person responsible for these murders. Also, while it is conceivable that in the 200 year time period that has passed, Frankenstein and his creatures moved overseas, the movie takes place far from Geneva and is instead in 21^st century New Orleans. So obviously, the time period and technologies available are very different as well which is clearly seen by Frankenstein’s ability to maintain his health and youth over such a long span of time. The major difference I want to point out though is that in this film the creatures, including Deucalion, don’t look like monsters at all. They actually look quite human and are of normal human proportions. The only creature that even has any scars is Deucalion, the rest of them are flawless with no scars or deformities. In one scene we see Deucalion remove his hood and his cloak partially and we can see the three major scars on his face and then sutured scars on his shoulder and chest but overall, he is actually quite attractive; far from being a monster. The flawlessness of the creatures caused me to be confused watching the film. For example, when Victor expresses that his wife is his creation I literally looked at Jade and said, “Wait, what? How is that even possible? She has flawless skin!” I had a similar reaction every time we learned that yet another average looking human being was a creature of Victor’s. He was striving for perfection and was seeking an evolutionary advancement in human beings. His creatures were built with advancements such as multiple hearts, more arteries and veins, more lymphatic system attributes and other organs that cannot even be identified by the coroner. They were, in a sense, super-human. He designed them to look like everyday humans so they could live among the world and thrive with the possibility of eventually taking over once he perfected his work. He was constantly making more advancements and improvements with every creature. He even sacrifices his wife and then edits her and brings her back to life.

Why would Hollywood change Mary Shelley’s classic so much? I guess we really cannot classify the film as completely changing the story because of it being a continuation of the novel, but the simple answer it comes down to just making a ‘good’ horror movie. They used the base plan of Frankenstein and took a new 21^st century twist on it. Watching the bonus features on the DVD also helped to answer why they made some of the decisions they made. The producer wanted to make something that had not been done before, hence why this film barely related to the original novel. The novel has been recreated in film so many times that it would have just been repetitive to follow the same plot line. He wanted to put a twist on things which he definitely did. It is not stated why they did not make the creations hideous but I think it was for the idea that creatures like this could live among us without us even knowing it. There was no way to tell that these ‘people’ were not natural unless you cut them open and examined their organs and body physiology which would not happen since they are basically invincible. The film creators took the original Frankenstein’s ideas on creating something completely new and turned it into a science fiction popular topic of creating the ultimate human race. There are many movies out there that look at bio-technologies and the possibilities of genetically engineering humans to be better than we are now. The film makers used these ideas and basic horror movie tactics to create a movie that would get people to think and maybe even question the world around them. What’s real? Who’s a monster? Are they walking among us? What can science really create? The film makers play off the imaginations and fears of their viewers.

I personally found the movie to be kind of strange but good apart from the very abrupt ending. There is not a closure or ending to the conflict and would be an ending that would set up for a sequel (which there won't be). The changes they made to the original Frankenstein story line for the continuation made sense for the plot line that the film makers set up and would have made a successful film if it would have been finalized. After doing some research I found out that the ending is so abrupt because this particular version was originally meant to be used as the beginning of a television series that never launched and they chose to make it into a film. Even so, I don’t see why they didn’t give it a better ending once they knew it was going to be a movie instead of a television show. All-in-all however, the changes they made worked for me as a viewer because of how they pulled it off as a continuation 200 years later while Victor and his creatures still survived. Like I have already stated, I think this film interpretation would have been more exciting if they had not killed it with the ending. As a reader, while the novel itself could have used a little more action, is a timeless classic that I could see myself reading again in the future. The movie however, I do not see myself watching again.