Behold the curse of Frankenstein Mary Shelley’s novel, Frankenstein, explores the themes of science, creation, and the consequences of playing God. The story revolves around Victor Frankenstein, a young scientist who becomes obsessed with the idea of bringing the dead back to life. Through his experimentation, he creates a creature that he becomes repulsed by, thus setting in motion a series of tragic events that serve as a cautionary tale about the dangers of unchecked ambition and the pursuit of knowledge. One of the main themes in Frankenstein is the consequences of playing God. Victor Frankenstein, driven by his desire for scientific discovery and the fear of death, takes on the role of a deity by creating life from death. However, he quickly realizes that this act goes against the natural order of things, and his creation becomes a source of horror and destruction.
Interestingly. Fisher apparently did not watch the 1931 Frankenstein film, which may have been a very good decision. In Curse, it’s easy to see that this is a person who knows exactly what they are doing and where they want their film to go. Every camera movement means something and every piece of dialogue is necessary. There are even several scenes with little to no dialogue as if to emphasize this point. A love story is used to add to the story rather than just to give characters something to do. The relationships here never feel forced like they are so often in other films. The whole film is so superbly built as well. The pace is perfect, and you’ll be on the edge of your seat for the climax of the film.
The opening credits, with a blood red background and dramatic music, now feel very typical Hammer Horror, especially from this period of the mid to late 1950 s. Fisher abandoned the monochrome documentary look of Quatermass in favour of the lovely pastels and lurid primaries of Eastmancolour, and the half-modern half-fairytale world of the James Whale version gave way to a meticulous mid-Victorian Switzerland, complete with elaborate sets, hairstyles and costumes.
However, he quickly realizes that this act goes against the natural order of things, and his creation becomes a source of horror and destruction. The creature, rejected by society and denied any form of companionship, seeks revenge against his creator, causing suffering and death wherever he goes. Through the character of Victor Frankenstein, Mary Shelley warns of the dangers of humans attempting to control and manipulate life, highlighting the ethical dilemmas that arise when playing with the powers of creation.
Late to the Party: The Curse of Frankenstein (1957)
No. After watching Hammer’s The Curse of Frankenstein, I can confidently say that he is not. He makes a great one, but he is not the ultimate monster. Oh, and by the way, the monster can appropriately be called Frankenstein. It’s technically Victor Frankenstein’s son, so his last name would be Frankenstein. Just sayin’. Moving on!
“DID YOU EAT MY LAST TWINKIE!? WHAT DID I TELL YOU!?”
The Curse of Frankenstein (1957) does a lot of things right. For one thing, the monster here is downright terrifying. Christopher Lee plays the creation here, and although his iconic voice is missed, his stature, paired with the wonderfully terrifying makeup, makes for a very effective creature. In 1957, the monster (in full color, no less) would have horrified audiences through and through. The first Hammer Horror film would feature more blood, more color, and more terror than the Universal Studios version from 1931.
The frights are here indeed, but they are few and far between. The film underutilizes Christopher Lee in an almost criminal way; the focus is more on the relationship dynamics between Victor Frankenstein (Peter Cushing), his tutor-turned-assistant Paul Krempe (Robert Urquhart), and Frankenstein’s arranged fiancee, Elizabeth (Hazel Court). Straying from both the Universal film and the original novel, Victor Frankenstein is an absolute madman here. An evil genius; strong emphasis on evil. He will go on to kill people for his creation. He will treat people like dirt, only to come to them for help when he needs them. He will have no regard for anyone besides himself and completing his project – which, as you can guess, is animating a body pieced together from separate parts.
The cinematography in this film is one of the best parts about it. The Curse of Frankenstein makes clever use of zooming and also framing; not something you’d expect from a monster flick from the late 1950’s. Set design and coloration are both given much detail. The film is expertly made and is a joy to watch. It’s always refreshing to watch a monster film and have everything given proper attention, as opposed to only t
he main attraction.
So, maybe in that regard, I’m wrong about my assessment of Christopher Lee being underutilized. Maybe that’s exactly the point. The scenes in which he is shown on film are highly effective, and not only because he looks scary. There are scenes which exemplify extreme pity; the monster is eventually shot and the brain is damaged. Once revived, it is like a pathetic dog, chained up and forced to behave like a puppet. My heart sank at the sight of this, making me feel angry towards the mad doctor and his selfishness and the embarrassment that this creature who never asked to be created is forced to feel. While it lacks the playfulness that Universal’s picture had, it makes up for it in stern emotion and psychological themes.
The novel also explores the theme of scientific discovery and the pursuit of knowledge. Victor Frankenstein represents the archetype of the mad scientist, driven by a relentless desire to uncover the mysteries of life and death. However, his ambition blinds him to the potential consequences of his actions. As he delves deeper into his experiments, he becomes isolated from society and his loved ones, consumed by his obsession. Shelley suggests that knowledge without wisdom and moral responsibility can lead to disastrous outcomes, as seen in Victor’s creation and the havoc it wreaks on both his life and the lives of those around him. Ultimately, Frankenstein can be seen as a cautionary tale about the dangers of unchecked ambition and the ethical boundaries of scientific inquiry. The curse of Frankenstein lies in the overwhelming desire to control and manipulate the natural world, leading to disastrous consequences. Mary Shelley’s novel serves as a stark reminder that even the pursuit of knowledge and the pursuit of good intentions can have unintended, and devastating, consequences if not approached with caution and humility..
Reviews for "The curse of Frankenstein: How the novel challenges societal norms and expectations"
1. Emily - 1/5 stars - I found "Behold the curse of Frankenstein" to be extremely disappointing. The acting was subpar, the storyline was predictable, and the special effects were laughable. I expected a thrilling and engaging horror film, but instead, I was left feeling bored and uninterested. The whole movie felt like a cheap attempt to cash in on the classic Frankenstein story, without adding any originality or depth. Overall, I would not recommend this film to anyone looking for a genuinely scary or well-crafted horror movie.
2. Jason - 2/5 stars - "Behold the curse of Frankenstein" fell short of my expectations. While the set designs and costumes were visually appealing, the film lacked a cohesive plot and failed to hold my attention. The pacing was slow, with too much time spent on uninteresting side stories and not enough focus on the main narrative. The performances felt lackluster, and the dialogue was often cliché and uninspired. Overall, I was disappointed with the film's execution and would not watch it again.
3. Sarah - 2.5/5 stars - I found "Behold the curse of Frankenstein" to be a fairly average horror film. The storyline was decent, but it lacked the suspense and scares that I was hoping for. The performances were decent, but nothing outstanding. While it had some entertaining moments, the movie as a whole failed to leave a lasting impression. I would recommend it to die-hard Frankenstein fans, but for those looking for a truly thrilling horror experience, this may not be the film for you.