(Warning: May contain spoilers)
This past Saturday I went to see
the supposed sequel to Mary Shelley’s novel Frankenstein
and left the theater feeling unsure about the movie. I was hoping that the
movie would meet my expectations, but it seemed like a lost cause from the
beginning. To start, the only people seated in the theater were my fellow
classmates, a young couple, two brothers (who I doubted were 13), and a lone
middle aged man. Even though it was a bit bare, I chalked the empty audience up
to bad advertising and still continued in my hopes of a good movie. However, as
soon as the lights dimmed and demon- fighting gargoyles came to life on the
screen, my hopes for an accurate sequel flew out the window.
It was not a complete disappointment,
but I couldn’t help remembering that it was supposed to be based off of Mary
Shelley’s novel. Some quotes from the book were used, which I was pleasantly
surprised about. I was also relieved to see that they accurately stated that
Frankenstein was the creator, not the creature- which was named Adam in the
movie. Other than a few correct facts,
such as the setting of victor’s death, the movie felt like a random plot twist
on the novel. Adam, a creature still shunned by society and full of hatred
towards his wretched self, is told by the gargoyles that he is sought after by
an evil demon prince. He runs away to become a recluse and fights demons on his
own until he comes to the city and is again thrust into the battle between gargoyles
and demons. Adam falls in love with a human in his quest to stop demon souls
from possessing thousands of human bodies and discover his higher purpose, both
of which ultimately end up happening. It was very predictable- the self-pitying
outcast discovers that he is not a monster, kills the antagonist, and ends up
with the girl. If it weren’t supposed to
be based off of Shelley’s novel, then it would have almost been bearable. At least he wasn’t green and displayed some
of the same character traits as in the book- lost, vengeful, and desperate for
a companion.
Overall,
movies based off of books never do end well for anyone- so why do we bother
seeing them? I know that if a book I have read is transformed into a novel, an
unquenchable desire to see the motion picture takes over me. Perhaps it is to
see how the image on the screen compares with the images in my head. Even
though the spin-off movie of Frankenstein
was successful in introducing some accurate background, it was simply not
captivating enough to be considered a success. The maker of the movie gave a good effort-
interestingly naming the character Adam and putting him in a situation that
made him choose between good and evil, heaven and hell. But even with the constant action scenes and the dramatic music, I found myself distracted and even bored-which rarely happens during movies. On a scale of 1 to
must-see, I would give I, Frankenstein a
2.5.
No comments:
Post a Comment