Chels

In my introduction post, I sort of came to the conclusion that if I were to be considered an expert in anything, it would probably be adaptations. If I like a story, I’ll consume it in as many forms as I can.

Case in point: Frankenstein. I literally wrote 14000 words on it. That being said, I’d only consider myself an expert on adaptations up until the end of the last century. It’s not because I’m a snob about it, but actually because despite it being one of my all time favourite stories, I’m still terrified of it. I’ve analysed the novel to the point of death, and the special effects of the older films are more charming than terrifying, so I can handle those, but the modern films just seem too horror focused for me to handle. Perhaps that takes away my credibility as an expert.

So, what’s my verdict?

If you don’t fancy reading the entire novel, it’s been adapted into countless comics and graphic novels over time. The comics tend to fall into two categories: abridged versions of the novel that stick close to the original story, or campy horror-comedies centred on the creature (and often the bride). 

In the first instance, Classics Illustrated made a stunning comic in the 1940s as part of a project to get younger people in the USA more interested in reading classics using what was, at the time, the most popular form of reading material – the comic. It stays pretty true to the original novel, although it (understandably) omits Victor and Elizabeth’s almost sibling relationship. It’s not afraid to be graphic though, and does depict Elizabeth’s death pretty directly.

In the case of the latter, I’ve been trying to get my hands on a copy of Electric Frankenstein (the comic, not the band’s lyric book) for ages. I can’t say for sure how good it is, but the samples I’ve been able to see are camp both in story and art. (As a side note, in looking into the copyright status of the films for this article, I learned that the reason why I’ve not been able to get a copy of Electric Frankenstein is because of Universal’s ownership of the creature’s likeness. Thanks, I guess, Universal.)

More recently, the story was retold by Nick Pierce and illustrated as a graphic novel by Isobel Lundie, and this might be my favourite retelling so far. It stays tightly to the events of the novel (and is the only adaptation I’ve seen so far that includes Victor’s dream sequence – one of my favourite parts of the novel) but puts it simply, and it’s a great introduction to the story, one that would be accessible to younger readers too. Since the graphic novel is so short (56 pages), it does simplify some of Victor’s more complex feelings and at times the bluntness of the lines make them more funny than tragic, but still, they convey the story straightforwardly.

Onto films. You can’t go wrong with the James Whale classics. The biggest plus is they’re only around an hour long each, which, as an ex film student who rarely watches films, is perfect. The first film kind of follows the original story of Frankenstein, but not really (the film was based on a play adaptation of the novel). Bride of Frankenstein picks up where the first film ends, and the many sequels become increasingly nonsensical, but honestly, nonsensical works. They’re the epitome of classic horror and they’re fun.

The Hammer Horror series is one I’m less familiar with. I watched The Curse of Frankenstein and it was a bit paint by numbers to me. I’d class the story as mostly reminiscent of the Universal films, but with a bit more of Shelley’s novel thrown in. The characters were largely unlikeable, but that was by design, and the film leant more towards conversation than action. I just found the Universal films more exciting than Hammer. That being said, the film was so important for the success of Hammer, and in turn for British horror, so I have to give it credit for that. Plus, I think it’s my favourite visual depiction of the creature so far.

My personal favourite Frankenstein film is Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein from 1994. Maybe I’m biased, Kenneth Branagh is my favourite director, but I think it perfectly balances the return to the story of the original novel, while paying homage to the iconography of the classic horror films. The only issue is that it’s just over 2 hours long and really tests my attention span.

The Rocky Horror Picture show technically counts as a Frankenstein adaptation. Does it have much to do with the original story? Absolutely not. Dr Frank-N-Furter builds a creature, and that’s about as far as the similarities go. Although, perhaps making Magenta and Riff-Raff both siblings and lovers was an homage to Victor and Elizabeth’s complex relationship dynamic. Still, it’s one of my all time favourite films. It’s silly and campy and a cult classic musical – and if you enjoy it, you should absolutely try and see the show on stage. What are your favourite Frankenstein adaptations? Are there any films from this century that aren’t too scary?