Frankenstein

Horror is one of the oldest movie genres in cinematic existed and is one that is still going to this day. Since the human species is prone to various different forms of fears, the possibilities for horror movies are almost non-ending with how many times an idea can be repeated and re-imagined to tackle someone’s deeply rooted phobias. A different angle that came from horror films are the monster movies, and the famous icons that come with them, with such faces as Dracula, The Mummy, King Kong and the one of topic for this review, Frankenstein’s creation himself. Within the Bavarian Alps, a deranged medical scientist, Henry Frankenstein (played by Colin Clive) hopes to taunt the limits of life and death by creating a living creature through dismembered body parts and electricity. Though he receives doubts from his soon-to-be-wife Elizabeth (played by Mae Clark) and his college professor Doctor Waldman (played by Edward van Sloan), his experiment through help from his helper, a hunchback named Fritz (played by Dwight Fyre) proves to be a success and this abomination appears to be alive. His creation (played famously by Boris Karloff) seems to show the ability to learn and develop but quickly divulges into a violent beast, slowly ruining the lives of Frankenstein and the town he lives in. Having to destroy the thing he brought to life, Frankenstein sets out to put down his creature before he does any more harm. Made in 1931, the famous story loosely based on the very influential 1818 novel by Mary Shelley has been parodied and referenced so heavily that it’s almost impossible for someone not to know this set-up, and this level of fandom did transition into the film as well. Receiving good reviews and doing well at the office, Frankenstein along with the 1931 film, Dracula, became a craze of these classic movie monsters receiving their own film adaptations and resulted in several films being created underneath the Universal banner (which somewhat still occurs to this day to less than successful results). The movie obviously captures a lot of what made the original story a true spooky classic, with plenty of off-putting material, deathly quiet atmosphere and disturbing topics to keep the audience engaged, along with some memorable performances from almost everyone.

The movie more so took inspiration from the original novel rather than flat-out copying it beat for beat. As the novel does contain a lot more substance that probably couldn’t be fit into a one-hour movie, chopping it down to the creation of the creature and the havoc that follows was a decent change and story writer Richard Schayer was able to do this while still keeping the main focus and layout intact. Monster movies at the time and even to some extent nowadays, were mainly based around their themes and used their visuals and writing to illustrate that. Frankenstein fits that mold perfectly, showing the dangers of playing God and messing with life and death haphazardly, showing the consequences of that mindset and how much ambition can be destructive to oneself to those around them. The creature’s brutish appearance and attitude allowed for this theme to get across perfectly without a single word of dialogue over-spelling it. The film does manage to visual lay-out its premise and its overall narrative quite easily as the set-up is simple but powerful and the film is able to get across more symbols and motifs than a book can, where it has to rely on the reader’s’ perception. The direction by James Whale (who became known for directing several horror films of this type like The Invisible Man, The Old Dark House and even the film’s sequel, The Bride of Frankenstein) is very good, portraying the gothic element of the story whilst still retaining this existential fear surrounding the premise. The movie is short, not overstaying its welcome and doesn’t waste time going from one situation to another. The movie set some stables for the Frankenstein tale that even the book didn’t add, like the actual design of the monster including the various bolts and tears around him, which would become implemented into people’s minds and other interpretations later on in film history. With that said, while the story is told fairly well, it does remove a lot of the provocative themes and memorable moments from the book to not over-stuff the movie, which paints the story and therefore the monster as far less complex than it actually is, leaving out the creature’s ability to emote, its own fear of itself and the realization of its ugliness, and the question of which one is more monstrous; the creator or its creation. It gets the essential chunks down, but as a consequence of trimming the book down, makes it lose a lot of what made the story so impactful and shocking to audiences at the time, resulting in the film not feeling shallow, but a touch more hollow than it should Because of this, it leaves the plot feeling slightly simple and not the in-depth character analysis it should be (which is something The Bride of Frankenstein, would rectify later on).

The characters aren’t as much the focus of the story, so they aren’t given that much development or even complexities to them. Some characters are literally given no purpose, like Henry Frankenstein’s best friend, Victor (played by John Boles) who seems to contribute nothing to the overall story, but a few can stand out and have made it into pop culture. Henry Frankenstein is obviously the creator and responsible for the creature’s birth, and this craziness would be tackled more in-depth in a later sequel, but here outside of some obvious famous quotes, he’s nothing special. The real stand out is obviously the creature and how its entire life is wrought with tragedy whether he does good or bad. He is less identifiable in the film as it was the story’s first version, but the creature’s ability to express emotion and feel sympathy is largely glossed over except for a pretty effective and rather grim scene with a little girl. It does make the ending feel a little less effective as what should come off as bittersweet feels more stationary than anything, yet the pieces are still there so maybe it could be gotten across to someone who’s experiencing this story for the first time. The performances are pretty good; with the straight people playing it simple and clean, and the crazy roles going as energized as possible in the best way. Because it’s a black and white film and audio was still relatively new in films, the actors do still have the pronounced facial expressions of silent actors and the film is shot and paced like a silent film. But with that said, it still has its fair share of good acting. Colin Clive does great as the mad scientist, his father (played by Frederick Kerr) is wonderfully bitter as a curmudgeon lord, and Boris Karloff made his name with this role. His presence is a clear depiction of what a walking corpse would look and move like: like a robot skeleton covered in human flesh with how rigged and simple his movements are, that and his higher pitch scream for such a big creature does give off a creepy and memorable presence.

The movie isn’t outright scary by today’s common expectation of what horror is; there’s no jump scares or incredibly cheap loud music, it instead relies on atmosphere and creepy premises to instill a sense of dread. Being a black and white movie, the movie’s atmosphere is instantly received and perfectly fitted. The darker shadows, the grand locations, the still angles, it sets a morbid tone which stays with the audience, where even the daytime feels slightly off in moments. It rarely feels happy or positive; there’s always this dark mood surrounding the film especially helped out by the lack of music. As music was still foreign in movies, the non-existent soundtrack really makes the film feel immersed in death; its deathly quiet aside from the ambient sounds and monster growls so it always stands out when it jumps out at the audience. The screenplay for this film written by Garrett Fort and Francis Edward Faragoh (with uncredited help from Robert Florey and John Russell) actually does a pretty good job replicating the novel’s environment and time period without going too overboard, and while it does lack the film’s more interesting elements, it still was smart enough to paint the creature’s creation with build-up and its reveal with suspense. The shots for this film handled by Arthur Edeson (and an uncredited Paul Ivano) are very silent-movie esque as the close ups are very prominent as it would be the only way to show the actors talking, and sometimes the overly pronounced acting and closer shots can be a bit humorous at time, though the wider shots on the impressively large sets allows the sound to echo even louder and get an easy scare. Sometimes there can be an awkward edit from Clarence Kolster and Maurice Pivar on a scene where it was clearly longer, but some of the longer shots are really memorable, mainly a specific one of a man carrying something through a partying street.

Frankenstein is an infamous horror icon, as is his monsters creation and the film does a great job bringing that tale into the visual era. While it does become a lot more simplified and less interesting than some of the book’s more intricate and complex ideas, the film is still a landmark of monster movies and laid way for more to come in the future. Its execution of the Mary Shelley story is fantastically done even if its slightly abridged, the story is perfect for a Halloween watch, the acting is enjoyable, the lack of music is chilling, and its mark on horror as a genre is amazing. A great oldy to introduce to horror fans to check out the origins of one of its most famous icons as the monster, as well as the years of various versions and allusions, are brought to life.