After viewing the 1931 Frankenstein movie clip “It’s Alive” and reading Mary Shelley novel I noticed there are a few differences between the two. In the movie clip Frankenstein begins his experiment by having the creature lay on a metal table. Using a harness and attached lightning bolt electric current travels throughout the lifeless body. This idea was clear, detail and scientific. In Shelley’s book she describes the scene by collecting instructions that helped “infuse spark”into the veins of the lifeless creature. In this experiment, I definitely think Shelley should have taken a different approach because she’s lacking an enormous amount of detail when describing the scene.
Sayhonara Gonzalez
In addition to my previous response, after watching both the clip and the movie it became obvious to me that there are solid differences between the book and the movie. For instance, the movie clip shows a much more detailed and elaborate monster “birth” scene with lots of flashy Hollywood special effects, some over the top acting from Dr. Frankenstein. In comparison the book had a much ore passive description for the birth of the creature. To me the movie clip seemed somewhat exaggerated, I had a hard time getting myself to believe in it. I was more impressed by the subtle yet frightening description of the creature from the book. The movie reminded me to much of that 1960’s show “The Monsters”.
The movie clip was definitely exaggerated. It was made dramatic with the thunder and storm effects. It’s interesting that you enjoyed the ‘subtle yet frightening creation of the monster’ may be it felt more realistic minus the whole drama in the movie clip. But for me the effects in the clip made it more easy to imagine the scientific process of the monster’s creation. I felt Shelley’s description lacked the gravity of the situation in describing the monster’s creation.