Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Guest&nbsp; 85555" data-source="post: 9342871">It is central to the book. I have no issue with the monster in the movies. I also have no problem with the meaning being changed in the movies. Each movie is a new work in my opinion. But when engaging the book by Shelley or the movies by James Whale, I would give primacy to the intent and meaning of the creators rather than my own. Which isn't to say a lot of new meaning can't be found. I just don't agree with the idea that my interpretation is of equal value or weight to the author's, or that the author's is merely one view among many. Whether the mute creature carries the themes of the original better, that is a matter of opinion. But what isn't is that the original creature wasn't mute (at least not by the time he learns to speak) and when he does learn to speak, is far more eloquent than Karloff's "We belong dead". Now I would not change Karloff's final line in Bride of Frankenstein for anything. It is perfect. My point is just there is a difference between the Karloff incarnation and the creature in the book. To use another example: Starship Troopers. I like both the book and the movie. My experience is most people like one or the other. But I think Verhoeven was making a new work when he made the film, and that work was in many ways a commentary on the both. I take no issue with someone liking the movie better. But the movie is not the meaning of the book. It would be mistaken to suggest that the new meaning Verhoeven created with the new film, changes the meaning of the original.</blockquote>

Verification