Date Mel Brooks Young Frankenstein and Mary Shelley's Frankenstein - Essay Example

Name: Joaquin A. Gonzalez Course: Humanities 275 CS Course instructor: Dr. Justine Van Meter Date Mel Brooks "Young Frankenstein" Film compared to Mary Shelley's Frankenstein and the Films made of the Monster. Young Frankenstein and Mary Shelly’s Frankenstein is considered one of the best parody ever created. Mel brooks depicts the classic horror film in a through truly genius perspective although his portrayal is personal. This could have been the reason for the 1970’s box office blow out to Mel Brooks attention to the details where he was able to turn terrifying situations into incredibly funny and hilarious encounters. In the case movie Mary Shelly’s, Frankenstein depicts what happens black and white in the contemporary society coupled with its authenticity. This was a move to portray Young Frankenstein as more scary and horror inclined in his creations (Morton 19), which in this case was the driving factor towards his success in those early years. On the other hand, thrilling music that accompanies a detrimental situation, thunder blazes that ushered Mary Shelly’s Frankenstein create a sense of belonging to viewers across board and lack of that means that’s just a copyright infringement sort of. When Igor, the character in the original, is introduced, his witty banter and funny commentaries allows him to play a major role in the film. Following the creation of the monster by Dr. Frankenstein, a strong element of satire is introduced, and would remain present throughout many different scenes in Young Frankenstein. The way the monster escapes from Dr. Frankenstein’s castle (is a clear example of Brooks’ satire, which is extended into the scene where the monster wreks havoc in the town.) The satire is portrayed in how the monster wreaks havoc in the town (Tropp 64), though many a viewers would not wish for such to happen. A major scene that is spoofed from the terrifying strode by the monster through Transylvania is when the monster throws flower petals down a well with the intention of meeting a young girl. When the girl meets the monster, she is oblivious of the grime and ambiguous heritage of Frankenstein. Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein is radically flawed by its sensationalism, throughout the inflexibility of public and oratorical nature of its passages. The comparisons between the Young Frankenstein and Mary Shelly’s Frankenstein are wide and varying. With respect to Igor, there is no character in the book that corresponds to the Hollywood add-on. On close examination, the true Igor was not present in the original Movie and this further gives a reduced touch on level of professionalism in the field of films. As written in (Selley 92), the original character was a mad scientist named Fritz; Igor just appeared after the son of Frankenstein. While trying to examine the book closely, it further emerges that Victor Frankenstein gets becomes disgusted after creating the monstrous. He becomes angrily ashamed of monster and that runs away from it because it is ugly. The monsters presence is the predominant factor and its absence creates a bigger loss to the readers. On the contrary, in the Young Frankenstein, Fredrick looks upon his creation as beautiful, contrary to his grandfather’s repulsion of the creation as ugly. Fredrick tries to nurture and accept his creation the way a mother would do to her child. From the outset it used the original laboratory props that are compatible with the 1931 version and a few plot points. The book further draws parallels between itself and the stories set up in the Son of Frankenstein and the Bride of Frankenstein (Manguel and Whale 110). The inheritance plot in which Wolf Von Frankenstein returns to his father’s house and finds Victor’s notes is an obvious inheritance plot for the monster. The similarities in the movie and the book stem from the observation that villagers capture the monster and attempt execute it but the monster escapes. A notable observation is that the young Frankenstein fits nicely in each story and this makes a connection in continuity to all of the books. Therefore, where it was unsuitable to one genre, the other one did. The monster in the book wanders off and meets a bunch of folks and accidentally kills a young girl. In the young Frankenstein, these characters are represented as the two characters that accept the monster unconditionally, but the characters have their own comedic twists (Beaumont, David, and Gazzaniga 230). In the book Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, it is portrayed that the father of the family is a blind man whilst in the young Frankenstein; it is represented by a blind hermit character referred to as Gene Hackman all this is based on the blind hermit in the Bride of Frankenstein. A notable difference between the characters in the movies and the character in the book is clear: the blind father is not found to be as lonely as the blind hermit is, loneliness belongs to the monster and it arises from the fact that the blind man longs to spend time with the family that he observes from afar. Consequently, the monster goes to the blind man after the blind man’s children have left hoping that the blind man will accept him for who he is and not what he appears to be. The contrast in the movies is a reverse (Manguel, and Whale 34). Here, the blind man searches for consolation and accepts the monster because he is lonely and can not see what others call hideousness. Even with the similarities between Gene Hackman’s blind hermit and the hermit in the bride of Frankenstein, Gene’s character seems more of than irony. The parents are worried in what the viewers are made to believe: that the monster will drown the girl. In the book, town’s people go on rampage after the monster kills the little girl. However, the scenario that is presented in the young Frankenstein is different whereby; Victor Frankenstein is supposed to have the monster not just as a pet but as an inheritance. The people in the town are ready planning to riot in this scenario, due to the presence of Fredrick Frankenstein because of his attachment to the monster. This is to prevent a repeat of what happened during the last time. The town’s people had insight into the connotations of the monster which provide an insight into the main themes of the book (Desser, Friedman, and Desser 34). The book drips with themes that are anti-industrial and or inhumane; for instance, killing the young girl portrays a fabrication that “industrialization kill’s innocence”. The original movie had a scene of the girl’s death, Young Frankenstein plays myriad role reversal with the original characters. An instance is found in the book and in the movie where the fiancée character is murdered by the monster and viewers are led to believe that Elizabeth will be murdered too. This is similar to the scene that made viewers believe that the young girl will be killed too. The twist in the plot inheriting the monster is that they end up together although the monster is ugly but Elizabeth is just comfortable with that. Her only concern is whether he is good in bed or not. From her point of view, as long the monster is good in bed, its good enough for her. This scene is not present in the Bride of Frankenstein. It is quite the opposite. In the bride of Frankenstein, the monster’s bride was created from a dead body. Further she was repulsed by the monster just as the towns’ people and his own creator were. In the young Frankenstein the monster’s bride had affection for him due to his abilities and not his looks as is the case in Young Frankenstein where the events were completely unexpected. Frankenstein, though it may be a spoof, is a wonderful way to tie all of these classics together (Morton 53). Furthermore, Mary Shelley’s book examines the protagonist who is Victor Frankenstein, he book looks at how his irrational behavior starts with ambition. This ambition starts as healthy curiosity which is about science and nature but his turns into an uncontrollable obsession. The book analyzes the effect of his curiosity on the characters present in the book showing Frankenstein’s behavior, which is highly irrational hence, his premature demise. In comparison to the movie, there are notable differences and similarities. On a close examination the differences can be grouped into a variety of situations: the first situation deals with differences between the book and the movie and focuses on the education of the monster, while notable difference has to do with the ending of the story. Further, the movie and the book are different in depicting the death of Justine, (Manguel and Whale 100) here the similarities have to do with the turning point of the story thus helping in creating a better understanding of the complexities in the story. In analyzing the differences between the books that have to do with the education of the monster, the book and the movie focus on the time spent with De Lacey family of old blind man. The movie shows the monster’s time devoted mostly on watching the family and how the family members acted towards each other. The monster learned how to speak, to read and also learned the different emotions that people posses.. The movie did not spend a lot of time showing the development of the monsters education but the book. The book went into details explaining the development of the monster’s education. During the monster’s stay in the cottage it is shown that it came across four books that were resourceful to him (Tropp 65). The books enlightened him, and it shows to the reader that the learning of the monster was a step-by-step process. The first book that the monster came across shows that the monster had insight on the governance, manners and insight into the religions of the world. The book also gave insight into the origins of humanity. The second book that the monster came across was the volume of Plutarch’s lives. The book provided the monster a lot of knowledge on the high thoughts, which elevated the monster above the sphere that wretched its own reflection which was to admire and love the heroes of the past ages. Shelley’s book expanded on the monsters horizons to the political quarters. The book “Sorrows of Werter” by Goethe, elevated the monster’s thoughts and enlightened it on the domestic world while the last book “Paradise Lost” by Milton, introduced the monster to the cosmic world. Through the book the monster learns about himself and his creator (Beaumont, David, and Gazzaniga 200). The monster was able to compare itself to the characters of Adam, Eve, and Satan. This knowledge enabled the monster to know his surroundings and the interactions that took place around him. In comparison to the movie, the development of the monster’s education is reflected better in the book because the monster grasps the process of learning faster when reading. In the movie, the process is shown to take place quickly and it becomes hard for the viewer to get a good understanding of the monster’s true feelings. When it comes to similarities between the movie and the book, we look at the monster’s actions after De Lacey family shuns the monster. The monster shows itself to elder De Lacy first as it believes that since the old man is blind, he lacks the capacity to judge him from his appearance (Beaumont, David, and Gazzaniga 212). To test the old man, the monster waits until everyone has left the castle so that he finds only the old man in the cabin and asks the blind man’s permission to rest a little bit. A conversation ensues and the monster becomes happy because the blind man did not turn it away. This situation made the monster highly satisfied and charmed. It was the first time someone was not turning on him. Despite the happiness of the monster, things were to turn around and go wrong since the family of the blind man came back and found the monster sitting there. The family members became very afraid and feared for the blind man’s safety. The fear can be explained using the following excerpts from the book, “…at the instant the cottage door was opened, and Felix, Safie, and Agatha entered. Who can describe their horror and consternation on beholding me? Agatha fainted; and Safie unable to attend to her friend, rushed out of the cottage. Felix darted forward and with supernatural force tore me from his father, to whose knees I clung: in a transport of fury, he dashed me to the ground and struck me violently with a stick." (Shelley 135). This was a situation in which the monster was shunned by the De Lace family that immediately moved out to run away from the monster for fear of the unknown, death. The monster never saw the family again and felt sorry for itself and thought that it was his creator’s wish to be shunned. The similarities of the events book and in the movie are that; the monster becomes angry and sets on ablaze the De Lacey’s cabin, this is the turning point where the monster vows revenge on the Frankenstein’s family. Looking at the differences, we find a departure between the book and the movie. The creature strangles William in the movie and plants evidence to suggest that it was Justine who strangled William. Justine the maid is accused of the crime. This is made possible because there is circumstantial evidence planted by the monster. The circumstantial evidence clearly shows that Justine is guilty and events are filled with a sequence of trials and deliberations thus deliberations eventually culminate into Justine’s conviction and hanging. While all this is happening, Victor realizes whom the real murderer is and stays steadfast in the existence of Justine’s innocence though taking no steps to secure Justine’s acquittal. Victor does not reveal what he knows. It is evident that when the creature confronts Victor, he is enraged and furious not only with the monster, but also with his feelings of guilt. These are events that are enumerated in the book that movie contrasts with reference to the above events. The events that are presented in the movie are; Justine being jailed only after William is strangled to death, before Justine’s trial begins, Victor can consider revealing the true story of what happened. However, a mad crowd breaks into the prison in which Justine is held and eventually lynches her. The timing does not depict a joke here (Desser, Friedman, and Desser 70), the events shows that Victor learns that Justine has been arrested and thrown off a castle wall. The movie shows Victor’s sin as being responsible for the deaths of people around him. It does not portray them as unfortunate or situations brought about by luck. The largest difference that exists between the book Frankenstein and the movie is the ending as both versions show the location as being deep north. There is difference depicted by the monsters, final ending just the book showing that victor Frankenstein passes on. Captain Walton finds the monster right beside Victor Frankenstein in the cabin and his human instinct instills fear in him. However, the captain alerts the monster of his presence in the room by the noise he makes when entering the room. In its sorrow, the monster speaks of the terrible sins that it has committed making it leave the ship vessel and head to the north only with the intention of dying there, peacefully, may be "He is dead who called me into being; and when I shall be no more, the very remembrance of us both will speedily vanish.” (Shelley 246). The monster finds a strong will to dispose itself but finds no option to do so. Once the monster finishes speaking with Captain Walton, he jumps out of the cabin window and lands on an ice raft this scene is the end of the story of Mary Shelly’s book. In the book the ice raft carries away the monster to a location far characterized by darkness. An analysis of the movie shows that, most parts of the story are followed as reflected in the book although difference comes in when a comparison is made between the monster’s departures as shown in the book and movie. The scenes in the movie show that Captain Walton and his crew built a stretcher to be used to carry away Frankenstein body and hold a funeral service for him. The movie shows the ice that the captain and his crew are standing on breaks and they run for safety back to their boat. The movie shows a scene where Walton sees the monster in the water and extends his hand to help but the monster declines to be assisted and swims towards a raft with his creator. While making the movie, the director allowed the monster and his creator to finish the movie together. This is different from the book’s version of the story. The book shows the monster ending the story in a totally different way it ends the story alone and goes far north to die alone without his creator. By ending the movie that way, the director intended to create sympathy for the monster. Even though Frankenstein, the creator, committed horrible deeds to his creation (the monster), it still clearly shows its willingness to belong to Frankenstein (Desser, Friedman, and Desser 39). The movie shows a scene that shows how dependable the creature’s existence depended on Frankenstein its creator. The movie shows that because Frankenstein created the monster it should die with him. The movie qualifies the monster’s belonging to his creator by showing an event that is catching. The director of the movie proves that because the monster belonged to Frankenstein, then the monster should die with Frankenstein.. In the book Victor Frankenstein promised to create a wife for the monster but realized that he would end up with a monster family. The book explains a scene where Victor caught the monster glaring into the window and became very frightened that he took to kill the monster and go to the sea by boat. The monster said that his revenge would be carried out during the wedding night between himself and Elizabeth. He drifted far away and eventually found a beach that he stayed on, a place he called home. Once he found the beach, he was accused of Clerval’s death and is assigned to prison. Victor’s father visits him while he is in prison and they conclude that he is innocent. After the visit, Victor and his father leave for Paris for Victor’s wedding. On the night of the wedding, he searches for the monster and hears a scream. The scream was actually due to the murder of Elizabeth. Victor’s father was so shocked that he died a few days later. This convinces Victor to dedicate his life to finding the monster for revenge (Desser, Friedman, and Desser 69).On contrary, the movie shows Henry Clerval as alive when victor was wedding Elizabeth. The difference between the movie and the book is that Elizabeth was killed by the monster that ripped her heart apart. Victor was so shocked that he began to bring back Elizabeth to life by the way he created the monster. Later, Elizabeth becomes so confused that she doesn’t know whether to choose the monster or Victor. The option she faces brings her to the reality that she can never be happy either with the monster or with Victor. This feeling makes her to commit suicide by setting herself ablaze (Beaumont, Stanley, and Gazzaniga 45). In the process, she also burns the laboratory. Similarly, when the movie was made in 1970’s women empowerment was emphasized. The emphasis was through what is referred to as “lipstick feminism”. Lipstick feminism was a way in which women were told to use in order to seek power over men. The movie showed that women could seek over men by dressing provocatively and wearing clothes that were provocative. This way of gaining power is depicted by Elizabeth in many scenes in the movie. Women were seen as instruments for male oppression. The oppression existed in a male dominated conspiracy. Beauty devices were used by women to manipulate the eyes of men, which were judgmental, so that women could control the uncontrollable. The book and the movie both show women seeking to her femininity. This was done through different acceptable approaches. The book portrays conservative norms, which portrays women as powerful and strong. Elizabeth is introduced to the book as someone who gets adopted by the Frankenstein family. The book shows that the young girl was taken against her will. However, as the book progresses it is found out that the adoption helps Elizabeth by giving her an opportunity to live a better life. Throughout the book, the mentioning of Elizabeth is minimal as compared to how victor is mentioned. This is because victor and Elizabeth are separated (Shelley 98). The movie is full of fun, with a happy ending while the book is filled with horror, especially the ending. The book and the movie are similar because they have a theme of loneliness. Loneliness consumes Victor, the monster, Elizabeth, Walton and victor’s family. The monster’s appearance is scary. He cannot have friend because appearance scares away potential friends. Victor is so obsessed with his work that, his obsession pushes away people and he becomes lonely. When doing an analysis of the movie, it is found out that the movie contains a theme of loneliness. This is shown by how the monster goes out to seek for friends because he is lonely. A deep understanding of the movie shows that the monster is befriended by his creator. The friendship makes the creator and his creation happy. However, the movie reveals passages that show that Victor was killed by the monster. The book indicates that neither Victor nor was the monster was happy and did not have companionship. Works cited Top of Form Beaumont, Daniel, Stanley, David, and Gazzaniga Donald. 3 Screenplays Ready for a Producer. Hollywood: Panoply Publications, 2006 12. Desser, David , Friedman, David, and Desser Lester. American Jewish Filmmakers. Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 2004. Goldman, Harry, and Kenneth Strickfaden. Dr. Frankenstein's Electrician. California: McFarland, 2005 Manguel, Alberto, and Whale James. Bride of Frankenstein. Michigan: British Film Institute, 2008. Morton, Timothy. Mary Shelley's Frankenstein: A Routledge Study Guide and Sourcebook. London: Routledge, 2002. Shelley Mary Wollstonecraft, Frankenstein, or, The Modern Prometheus. Massachusetts: & Co Harvard University 2008, 139 Tropp, Martin. Mary Shelley's monster: the story of Frankenstein. New York: Houghton Mifflin, 1977. Read More

He becomes angrily ashamed of monster and that runs away from it because it is ugly. The monsters presence is the predominant factor and its absence creates a bigger loss to the readers. On the contrary, in the Young Frankenstein, Fredrick looks upon his creation as beautiful, contrary to his grandfather’s repulsion of the creation as ugly. Fredrick tries to nurture and accept his creation the way a mother would do to her child. From the outset it used the original laboratory props that are compatible with the 1931 version and a few plot points.

The book further draws parallels between itself and the stories set up in the Son of Frankenstein and the Bride of Frankenstein (Manguel and Whale 110). The inheritance plot in which Wolf Von Frankenstein returns to his father’s house and finds Victor’s notes is an obvious inheritance plot for the monster. The similarities in the movie and the book stem from the observation that villagers capture the monster and attempt execute it but the monster escapes. A notable observation is that the young Frankenstein fits nicely in each story and this makes a connection in continuity to all of the books.

Therefore, where it was unsuitable to one genre, the other one did. The monster in the book wanders off and meets a bunch of folks and accidentally kills a young girl. In the young Frankenstein, these characters are represented as the two characters that accept the monster unconditionally, but the characters have their own comedic twists (Beaumont, David, and Gazzaniga 230). In the book Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, it is portrayed that the father of the family is a blind man whilst in the young Frankenstein; it is represented by a blind hermit character referred to as Gene Hackman all this is based on the blind hermit in the Bride of Frankenstein.

A notable difference between the characters in the movies and the character in the book is clear: the blind father is not found to be as lonely as the blind hermit is, loneliness belongs to the monster and it arises from the fact that the blind man longs to spend time with the family that he observes from afar. Consequently, the monster goes to the blind man after the blind man’s children have left hoping that the blind man will accept him for who he is and not what he appears to be. The contrast in the movies is a reverse (Manguel, and Whale 34).

Here, the blind man searches for consolation and accepts the monster because he is lonely and can not see what others call hideousness. Even with the similarities between Gene Hackman’s blind hermit and the hermit in the bride of Frankenstein, Gene’s character seems more of than irony. The parents are worried in what the viewers are made to believe: that the monster will drown the girl. In the book, town’s people go on rampage after the monster kills the little girl. However, the scenario that is presented in the young Frankenstein is different whereby; Victor Frankenstein is supposed to have the monster not just as a pet but as an inheritance.

The people in the town are ready planning to riot in this scenario, due to the presence of Fredrick Frankenstein because of his attachment to the monster. This is to prevent a repeat of what happened during the last time. The town’s people had insight into the connotations of the monster which provide an insight into the main themes of the book (Desser, Friedman, and Desser 34). The book drips with themes that are anti-industrial and or inhumane; for instance, killing the young girl portrays a fabrication that “industrialization kill’s innocence”.

The original movie had a scene of the girl’s death, Young Frankenstein plays myriad role reversal with the original characters. An instance is found in the book and in the movie where the fiancée character is murdered by the monster and viewers are led to believe that Elizabeth will be murdered too. This is similar to the scene that made viewers believe that the young girl will be killed too. The twist in the plot inheriting the monster is that they end up together although the monster is ugly but Elizabeth is just comfortable with that.

Read More