Sep
18th
2020
Wait, they made a Frankenstein musical? · 2:11am Sep 18th, 2020
Why did nobody tell me about this?!
Also, before anyone asks, yeah, that's pretty much what the "monster" (and I put it in quotes, because at the end of the day I believe he is a man dealt cruel hand by fate in the end) is described as in the book; don't believe the Halloween decorations or the Boris Karloff movie. I'm almost tempted to call that look a spit in the face of the novel's character and everything about him.
...Yeah, do me a favor, and don't.
It's one thing to prefer the original novel to other versions, but no need to be a dick about it.
5357688
Which is why I said 'almost'.
5357737
Which kinda feels like an easy way out, in my opinion.
Love it or hate it, the Universal movies arguably helped make Frankenstein's Monster an iconic character. Jack Pierce, the makeup artist who created that look for the creature, put in a ton of work in designing that appearance... and Boris Karloff even more so, sitting in the makeup chair for hours every day to have the makeup applied. The 1931 movie was a labor of love on the part of director James Whale, who in fact loved the Frankenstein story and greatly revised the original script and concept he was given to try and make the monster much more sympathetic and tragic than what was originally intended by Universal Studios. People put in a LOT of hard work, so forgive me if I'm a little surly about someone calling that "a spit in the face" to the original book and writing it off out of hand.
5358006
And all that is fine. But at the end of the day, I just feel that the way the creation is commonly portrayed is devoid of a lot of the tragedy and nuance and humanity that the original character had, and I sorely wish it'd gain more prominence in the public eye. I'm sure the movie itself is fine, but I'm sorry, but I just find that much more intricate and meaningful than the big green brute.
5358024
So you've never seen the movie for yourself then?
5358042
Parts of it. I know the gist of it and how the Monster is portrayed.
5358058
But you've never sat down and actually watched it?
5358075
When I can find it I'll watch it. But as of now, I vastly prefer the original version.
And that is the last I'll say of that.
5358092
If you ever watch the Karloff version, I do hope you'll give it a chance. And also consider that maybe you should try out a movie before writing if off as inferior to its source material, because you never know, it might just surprise you.
And that is the last I'll say of that.
5358101
Y'know, now that I think about it, this whole conversation kind of reminds me of a similar one I had with a fellow Godzilla fan a while back.
Except that one was over the Anime trilogy. So make of that what you will.
I'll give it a chance if I can, but from what I've read and seen and know, it honestly doesn't impress me all that much. By making the monster more of a dumb brute, it strikes me as–however unintentionally–degrading him to the very thing that people believed he was upon first seeing him...and eventually driving him to actually be the monster that they feared.
5358301
And what I'm more-or-less making of this whole conversation is that you seem to have pre-judged the classic movie and don't really seem at all inclined to try and reconsider your stance on it. I'm almost about ready to say DON'T watch the Karloff movie now, because I kind of get the feeling that you'd just write it off as inferior to Shelley's novel anyway.
5358311
Honestly? You're probably right. Even when I was getting into the book for the first time I never felt too inclined to watch it. It's never really drawn my interest. In fact, the reason that I loved the book in the first place was specifically because it was more than just the lumbering brute.
I'll probably end up seeing it someday, but as of now I'm in no real hurry. I'll stick to the book. I kind of have to, anyway; one of my college courses that I've picked this year is wholly dedicated to the novel and the social environment that shaped it.
5358319
*sighs* That's what I was afraid of. Well, fine then. Enjoy your book then. I still find meaning and enjoyment in Karloff's performance. Perhaps the later movies turned the character into a lumbering menace, but I still find plenty of tragedy in the 1931 movie and in its sequel. Look at this scene right here--
Look at the Creature's reaction to the light when he first sees it - and when the doctor takes it away. In my opinion Karloff "said" more with just those gestures of his hands than most actors of that era could do with an entire script. To me, that is NOT just a "mindless brute," but a pretty damned pitiable and tragic being, in that performance right there.