When it comes to film, Frankenstein has had several cinematic outings, second only to Dracula and Sherlock Holmes by sheer number.
This week, we’ll be taking a look at two notable adaptations of the Mary Shelley’s classic story and, over the course of 3 rounds, pit them against one another to see which film is the superior version.
The first adaptation is none other than the classic 1931 Universal Film directed by James Whale which stars Boris Karloff in the role of the monster created by Victor Frankenstein. The second adaptation, released in 1994, comes to us courtesy of Kenneth Branagh, although with a little help from Francis Ford Coppola’s studio American Zoetrope.
Round 1: Atmosphere
[1931 version] Since this film was made in the earlier decades of talkies, not as much emphasis went into the sound design and music, as most films were written and treated with an emphasis similar to that of a stage play. The film heavily relies on the cinematography and set design. The sets are quite expansive and help to create a feeling of timelessness that adds to the overall aesthetic.
[1994 version] This film is more specific with it’s setting, giving us a set time period rather than an abstract period like in the 1931 version. As a result, there are some parts of it that comes across as a sort of BBC soap opera, particularly with how certain shots take on a sort of melodramatic and theatrical quality. The films also takes on more of a hurried and frantic pace with some of the key moments, resulting in moments that don’t have as much build up as the 1931 version.
Winner: The 1931 version, as that film takes it’s time with some of the key moments and really allows you to take in the world it’s trying to build.
Round 2: Story
[1931 version] The story of this film is a very simple one. Like I mentioned earlier, it’s executed in a manner akin to a stage play, and therefore it’s paced like one. The scenes stay fairly contained within one another until we reach the climax at the flaming windmill. The characters are given little development. The focus is on the monster and the scientist while the scope of the film is kept on the events rather than the people.
[1994 version] This film goes in the opposite approach of the 1931 version, as much of the story is dedicated to developing the characters, particularly establishing the motivations of Victor Frankenstein and the Monster’s quest for vengeance. This film also covers a much larger expanse of time than the 1931 version, starting from Victor’s childhood and ending when he is on his deathbed.
Winner: The 1994 version wins this round as I feel that having the established motivations add to the film and helps to explain the driving forces behind the events of the story. While it does trade some of the horror for tragedy, the few scares and eeriness are worth it.
Round 3: Faithfulness to source material
[1931 version] This film is a very simplified form of the original story, with many of the novel’s elements not introduced until the sequel, “Bride of Frankenstein.” This film is actually based on a stage adaptation of the novel rather than the novel itself, with several elements removed to adhere to the Production Code of America.
[1994 version] This version is the most faithful to the novel, using the same framing device of a fatigued Victor Frankenstein telling his story to the arctic explorer, Robert Walton. All of the characters from the novel are featured, but certain events are still omitted and changed, particularly the film’s climax.
Winner: Much as I hate to say it, it’s a tie on this front. While the 1994 version is more faithful, it can’t really be called a definitive version. On that same note, the changes made for the 1931 version were more mandates of the code and marketing.
Final Verdict
Both of these films are definitely worth a look, but if I was forced to make the call, then I would have to say that the fight goes to the 1931 version. This is because the film takes it’s time in building it’s world and lets you really appreciate the imagery. While De Niro’s turn as the monster is still enjoyable, I believe that it’s a case of “less is more.”
Winner: The 1931 version directed by James Whale.
Next week, we have another battle before us, this time between two versions of an even more iconic monster. Our next match takes us to the heart of Transylvania, as we take a look at two versions of the gothic horror classic, Dracula.