Frankenstein (James Whale 1931)

The spiel claims that many believe Frankenstein ‘to be the greatest horror film ever made’ and indeed it is an interesting and well-made film which excels over modern interpretations of the tale. Frankly the film has grown such a reputation that it is automatically considered to be a classic by those who have not seen it and even those who shun the horror genre itself. Such a reputation can be difficult to live up to but Frankenstein carries it well. Both the story and characterisation are skilfully done and the cinematography is impressive. The image of Frankenstein and the monster, seen through the turning wheel of the windmill is particularly effective – creating a visual representation of the barrier which has come between Frankenstein and his creation.

Karloff’s portrayal of the monster is both perfect and dated. His slow, juddering movements, mocked in modern society, are more effective at portraying a creature learning a-new than any special effects could be today. Romero can be seen to acknowledge this in Night of the Living Dead (Romero 1968). The jerky movements of the zombies are not unlike those of Karloff’s monster and Johnny, who mercilessly teases his sister about the threat of the twitching, stumbling man in the distance, falls at the hands of this all-too-believable threat. Though his stunted movement is perhaps the most memorable characteristic of Karloff’s monster his portrayal of the creature’s emotions is equally important. Karloff makes the audience sympathise with the monster. It is his plight, not Frankenstein’s, in which the audience becomes involved. Yet Frankenstein too is played incredibly well. Colin Clive initially present a man teetering on the brink of sanity – the mad scientist, himself with little concern for right and wrong. Yet Clive pulls him back from this (a difficult task after distancing the audience as he has) by presenting a confused young man, unwilling to accept the monstrosity of the creature he has created but also determined to do the right thing. Though the monster is the object of sympathy, Frankenstein is not presented as the villain.

The key to Frankenstein is that the monster is not a monster at all. He is more like a child with superhuman strength, with no understanding of good and evil. His first kill, though this is not to say it is not wrong, is clearly provoked by the cruel of Fritz. His father and maker fails him – when he should be helping his creation to develop, teaching him as he would a child (not how to sit or follow instructions but in social and moral values), he instead brands him a monster and helps to plot his death. No wonder then that the creature reacts as he does. What is astounding about the film is how it explores these issues of nature or nurture. The audience is invited to consider whether the creature’s monstrosity is ‘born into him’ (the product of a criminal brain destined to be immoral) or induced by his father and those who would seek to destroy him.

Is Frankenstein, then, the greatest horror film ever made? Certainly it would be a forerunner for such a title. Though, to a modern audience at least, it does not have the ‘scare factor’ which we have grown to expect from horror films, it remains entertaining. Seventy years have not diminished its appeal, nor have they rendered it any less effective. Thus the film is a success, not only in its cinematic superiority, but in its ageless appeal – in its ability to entertain generation after generation of moviegoers.