Camp Rhetorical Analysis Mel Brook's film ,Young Frankenstein, is a comedic throwback and famous parody to Univeral's Frankenstein (1931), Bride of Frankenstein (1935), Son of Frankenstein (1939), and The Ghost of Frankenstein (1942). (quote from interview generally describing movie experience). Young Frankenstein has important visual effects that bring to this film a well-rounded sense of both frivolity and campy thrill. Satirically embodying the older films, Young Frankenstein includes overly dramatic scene transitions such as iris outs, wipes, and “fading to black”, like all classic Hollywood horror films. In classic Hollywood horror, there are lightening flashes, villagers carrying torches and monsters moving in slow motion. The black and white filming technique of Young Frankenstein is one of the most essential elements to creating the film's vintage horror mise-en-scene, providing an air of authenticity to connecting this film to the earlier Frankenstein movies. (Burke quote involving scene:act) The Transylvanian village itself embodies much theatrical mise-en-scene. The Old World-styled buildings in the village cast an antiquated ambience to the film. Most of the setting of the film is seemingly unto itself and unattached to the contemporary world in which the film otherwise takes place. [aestheticism- brummett quote]The lightning that almost ubiquitously strikes during exterior shots of the Frankenstein castle, as well as scenes involving Frankenstein's laboratory, becomes a character of its own: with intense flashes of light during the scene in which the exhumed corpse is given life to become the Creature. Young Frankenstein's characters have a tendency to be overly stereotypical, adding another layer of camp s... ... middle of paper ... ... of his brother and Justine, finally ending in his own demise. This showcases some of the issues of the Enlightenment, a time where the boundaries of science and religion were defined. The character of Victor Frankenstein reflects the enlightenment scientists who wanted to discover the secrets of life, leading to what he discovered ultimately destroying him. There is no way that, according to the definition of Romanticism, Victor could ever be happy, since rationality is not a sufficient source of happiness and meaningful life. Even though he did succeed in unraveling the mystery of creating life, he was not going to be happy with it because it was found through reason. The Romantics see the Enlightenment as drawing away from nature. In Young Frankenstein, the Romantic qualities of death, rebirth, and sexuality renew these characters and change them for the better.
Frankenstein by Mary Shelly is an old classic that has been enjoyed by many generations. Despite the fact that the novel was written over a hundred years ago, it is not only beautifully written but also enthralling and well composed. At the young age of eighteen, Mary Shelly raises questions about education and knowledge to which are answered through the well written characters in the novel. The Monster, who is a creation of another character, is highlighted as an individual who goes through an intellectual change.
Mary Shelley’s novel Frankenstein shows the progression of maturity in many characters seen in the book. The monster in the book shows a significant amount of maturity at the end of the novel, however, the maturity progression is not seen because story is Victor’s narration. The wretch knows his murders were wrong and ultimately accepts responsibility for his deeds. In the beginning of the book, the monster has the maturity of an infant and knows not of the way humans behave. The monster lacks nurture and self-control and is emotionally disordered (Brown 148). The monster in Mary Shelley’s gothic novel Frankenstein matures throughout the book, ultimately taking responsibility for his actions, and inflicting upon himself the punishment he believes that he deserves for his sins.
The main focus in Frankenstein is the immense accentuation put on appearance and acceptance in the public eye. In society and in addition in the general public of Frankenstein, individuals judge one singularly on their appearance. Social bias is frequently established on looks, whether it is one 's skin color, the garments that one wears and even the way a man holds himself or herself. People make moment judgments taking into account these social biases. This recognition in light of appearance decides the conduct towards the individual. In Frankenstein, the general public of that time is like our own today. It is an appearance-based society that the ugly figure of Victor Frankenstein 's creature can be compared to a typical person of today.
How can we think of Frankenstein and ignore the film classic of 1931? Yet the celebrated film does not follow the novel by Mary Shelley. Although the scene of a futuristic laboratory entrances movie audiences with the mad Dr. Frankenstein and his faithful assistant Igor, the scene is derived from twentieth century imaginations and interests, not the novel itself.
What is a monster, really? Is it really a Creature that has three eyes instead of two, with pus seeping out of every crevice in his face and an abnormally large form? Or is it someone with a mind so corrupt it rivals that of Satan? Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein is a story within a story that centers on the tale of a man with an immense thirst of knowledge and a fetish to imitate the Creator. Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein is a lot like the Greek mythological tale of the Greek God, Prometheus, and his brother, Epimetheus, who were assigned the task of creating man. The story captivates the theme of monstrosity. Mary Shelley wrote the novel in a form so the reader’s opinions never stray far from sympathy for the monster and apathy for Victor Frankenstein. The novel looks at “Monstrosity” and “Humanity” in a deeply analytical way.
Mary W. Shelly’s classic book, Frankenstein, was written in the early nineteenth century. The setting that is taken place within the story has multiple locations. Amongst these multiple locations are Switzerland, Geneva, the home of Dr. Frankenstein, unknown villages/cottages, and the North Pole which was the exposition of the story to begin with. The style of the classic, Frankenstein, has a different style of writing due to not being written in the proper chronological nature. When Frankenstein, is adapted to motion picture film, the film focuses on the horror of Frankenstein’s monster, however the book is really about romanticism. Stephen Gould intertwines his opinion on the book Frankenstein. His opinion is
The monster “Frankenstein” is thought of as a horrible, evil creation. One informant thought of him as frustrated, loud, and uncommunicative. Some others remember aspects from the many different movies such as the monster having “the mind of a killer and the heart of a kind man.” One informant recalled the monster having a “soft spot for children” when he helped a little girl kill all the evil monsters in one of the movies.
Frankenstein is the story of an eccentric scientist whose masterful creation, a monster composed of sown together appendages of dead bodies, escapes and is now loose in the country. In Frankenstein, Mary Shelly’s diction enhances fear-provoking imagery in order to induce apprehension and suspense on the reader. Throughout this horrifying account, the reader is almost ‘told’ how to feel – generally a feeling of uneasiness or fright. The author’s diction makes the images throughout the story more vivid and dramatic, so dramatic that it can almost make you shudder.
In this 1700’s society the standards for society are quite different than what they are now, for one the general measure of someone’s worth and goodness is based primarily upon their appearance. Another of these societal standards that Shelley conveys is the social classes of the time with the cottagers and the monster’s description of them and how they are divided by wealth and family reputation. The last of the aforementioned societal standards is that of hiding one’s problems in the case of Victor Frankenstein and his hiding of his creation that became a monster, a monster that society
Both “Frankenstein” (1931) and “Bride of Frankenstein” (1935) portrayed characters and events differently than Shelley would have desired. Her novel had many deeper implications than the movie portrayed. James Whale and the many adapters/screenwriters involved in both films leeched onto the inhumanity of the monster and the terror he could create. The monster could not speak at all in “Frankenstein” but did learn to speak poorly in “Bride of Frankenstein.” However, when he is finally given the ability to speak, the monster is portrayed as a shallow character that indulges in simple pleasures.
Frankenstein is a fictional story written by Mary Shelly. It was later adapted into a movie version directed by James Whales. There are more differences than similarities between the book and the movie. This is because, the movie is mainly based on the 1920’s play, other than the original Mary Shelly’s book Frankenstein. A text has to be altered in one way or the other while making a movie due to a number of obvious factors. A lot of details from the book were missing in the movie, but the changes made by Whales were effective as they made the movie interesting, and successful.
In Frankenstein and The Bride of Frankenstein, sound is used as an effect to scare people and create a “spooky” feeling. They used the sounds of a storm with rain and thunder, the sound of footsteps coming up from behind people, and other noises like creaky stairs, floors, and doors. This created that “haunted” or “spooky” feeling that would be used over and over again in horror films for decades. When they used sound effects, it was to emphasize that something was either happening or about to happen.
First, to illustrate the events of the story a writer uses particularly well thought out and descriptive vocabulary. This is done to help the reader visualize the image in the author's mind. But in Mary Shelly's, "Frankenstein", she has gone far beyond this, she not only paints a picture in the mind of the reader, but the words written actually place them in a state of mind. A great example of this is when she wrote, "I saw the dull yellow eye of the creature open; it breathed hard, and a convulsive motion agitated its limbs." As a result of passages like this, "Frankenstein" has captivated it's readers for roughly two centuries. In addition it has not only taken hold of the literary minds of the world, the story has also found itself on to the big screen. Mary Shelly's crowning achievement has inspired about fifty movies. Unfortunately, a vast quantity of the motion picture created does not follow the theme of the original story. They branched out from it and portrayed the creation as an inarticulate, rampaging monster when initially he was a confused and vengeful genius. What ever the form "Frankenstein has taken root in our society and its here to stay.
Frankenstein’s creature, the concept way ahead of its time but a terrifying thought to its first audiences.
Like all works that have been taught in English classes, Frankenstein has been explicated and analyzed by students and teachers alike for much of the twentieth and all of the twenty-first century. Academia is correct for doing so because Frankenstein can appeal to the interests of students. Students, teachers and experts in the areas of medicine, psychology, and sociology can relevantly analyze Frankenstein in their respective fields. However, Peter Brooks explains in “Godlike Science/Unhallowed Arts: Language and Monstrosity in Frankenstein” that Shelly had presented the problem of “Monsterism” through her language. According to Brooks, Monsterism is explicitly and implicitly addressed in Shelly’s language. While this may be correct, Brooks does it in such a way that requires vast knowledge of subjects that many readers may not be knowledgeable in. After summarizing and analyzing the positive and negative qualities of Brooks’ work, I will explain how the connection of many different fields of study in literature creates a better work.