Comparative Analysis of the Portrayal of Frankenstein´s Creature on Film

• Název práce v češtině: Srovnání a rozbor zobrazení Frankensteinova stvoření ve filmu
• Název v anglickém jazyce: Comparative Analysis of the Portrayal of Frankenstein´s Creature on Film
• Klíčová slova: Frankenstein|Frankensteinovo stvoření|Film|Filmová adaptace|Mary Shelley
• Klíčová slova anglicky: Frankenstein|Frankenstein’s Creature|Film|Film adaptations|Mary Shelley
• Akademický rok vypsání: 2021/2022
• Typ práce: bakalářská práce
• Jazyk práce: angličtina
• Ústav: Ústav anglofonních literatur a kultur (21-UALK)
• Vedoucí / školitel: Mgr. Miroslava Horová, Ph.D.
• Řešitel: skrytý - zadáno a potvrzeno stud. odd.
• Datum přihlášení: 10.11.2021
• Datum zadání: 10.11.2021
• Schválení administrátorem: zatím neschvalováno
• Datum potvrzení stud. oddělením: 24.11.2021
• Datum a čas obhajoby: 05.09.2022 00:00
• Datum odevzdání elektronické podoby: 06.08.2022
• Datum proběhlé obhajoby: 05.09.2022
• Odevzdaná/finalizovaná: odevzdaná studentem a finalizovaná
• Oponenti: Mgr. Petra Johana Poncarová, Ph.D.

Zásady pro vypracování

Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein; or, The Modern Prometheus was first published in 1818. Almost a century later, in 1910, in the early days of the cinematograph, Frankenstein’s Creature appeared in black and white on the silver screen for the first time in Thomas Edison’s experimental production directed by J. Searle Dawley. Since then, a plethora of film and television adaptations have been created. The goal of this thesis is to compare and analyse how Frankenstein’s Creature, or, increasingly, the Frankenstein monster, was portrayed in these adaptations, paying attention primarily to the intelligence of the monster. The aim is to discover how and why the Creature, who is described in the book as an intelligent being capable of thinking, feeling, reading and speaking, is transformed in some adaptations into a senseless and brainless monstrosity. The thesis will also discuss the effect of this transposition on the overall atmosphere, genre and meaning of the adaptation, and the related problems of the novel’s popular cultural legacy. The analysis of the adaptations which are closer to the original vision of the novel will serve as material for comparison. The analysis of the different representations of the Creature throughout various adaptations will additionally allow to determine some of the reasons for the transformation or rather degradation of the Creature into the monster, commenting on the ways in which new media influenced this paradigm shift, complete with the synecdochal shift of the name ‘Frankenstein’, which has since come to mean the Creature rather than its creator. The films selected for closer analysis in this thesis represent different eras of filmography, which offers a more comprehensive perspective on the historical development of Frankenstein Creature’s visual and performative representations.

Seznam odborné literatury

List of films:

• Frankenstein. Directed by J. Searle Dawley, Edison Manufacturing Company, 1910.
• Frankenstein. Directed by James Whale, Universal Pictures, 1931.
• Bride of Frankenstein. Directed by James Whale, Universal Pictures, 1935.
• The Curse of Frankenstein. Directed by Terence Fisher, Warner Bros., 1957.
• Flesh for Frankenstein. Directed by Paul Morrissey, Compagnia Cinematografica Champion, 1973. (?)
• Frankenstein: The True Story. Directed by Jack Smight, 1973.
• Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein. Directed by Kenneth Branagh, Japan Satellite, 1994.
• Frankenstein. Directed by Mark Kruger, 2004.
• Frankenstein. Directed by Bernard Rose, Bad Badger, 2015. (?)
• Victor Frankenstein. Directed by Paul McGuigan, 20th Century Fox, 2015.
• Depraved. Directed by Larry Fessenden, Glass Eye Pix, 2019.


Secondary Sources:
Brannon, J. S. “Mary Shelley’s “Frankenstein”? Kenneth Branagh and Keeping Promises.” Studies in Popular Culture, 35(1), 1–23. Accessed September 22, 2021.http://www.jstor.org/stable/23416363
Caroline Joan (“Kay”) S. Picart. “Visualizing the Monstrous in Frankenstein Films.” Pacific Coast Philology 35, no. 1 (2000): 17–34. Accessed September 22, 2021. https://doi.org/10.2307/3252064.
Codr, Dwight. “Arresting Monstrosity: Polio, ‘Frankenstein’, and the Horror Film.” PMLA 129, no. 2 (2014): 171–87. Accessed October 4, 2021.http://www.jstor.org/stable/24769446
Davison, Carol Margaret, and Mulvey-Roberts, Marie, eds. 2018. Global Frankenstein. Cham: Springer International Publishing AG. Accessed October 4, 2021. ProQuest Ebook Central.https://ebookcentral.proquest.com
Detweiler, Craig. 2020. “Holy Terror: Confronting Our Fears and Loving Our Movie Monsters.” Interpretation: A Journal of Bible & Theology 74 (2): 171–82. Accessed September 22, 2021. doi:10.1177/0020964319896310.
Dixon, W. W. 2017. “The Ghost of Frankenstein: The Monster in the Digital Age.” Quarterly Review of Film and Video, 34(6), 509–519. doi:10.1080/10509208.2017.1313030
Fahy, T. (Ed.). The Philosophy of Horror. University Press of Kentucky, 2010. Accessed September 22, 2021.http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt2jck39
Forry, S. E. Hideous Progenies: Dramatizations of “Frankenstein” from the Nineteenth Century to the Present. University of Pennsylvania Press, 1990. Accessed September 22, 2021.http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctv5136px
Gigante, D. Facing the Ugly: The Case of “Frankenstein.” ELH, 67(2), 565–587. Accessed September 22, 2021.http://www.jstor.org/stable/30031925
Harmes, M. K. The Curse of Frankenstein. Liverpool University Press, 2015. Accessed September 22, 2021.https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv13841mm
Heffernan, James A. W. (1997). “Looking at the Monster: “Frankenstein” and Film.” Critical Inquiry, 24(1), 133–158. Accessed September 22, 2021. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1344161
Horton, Robert. Frankenstein. WallFlower Press; 2014. Accessed October 4, 2021. https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=e000xww&AN=760985&lang=cs&site=ehost-live
Monaco, James. How to Read a Film. Oxford University Press: 2000. Accessed October 31, 2021.
Shelley, Mary. Frankenstein. London: Vintage, 2014.
Twitchell, J. B. (1983). ““Frankenstein” and the Anatomy of Horror.” The Georgia Review, 37(1), 41–78. Accessed September 22, 2021.http://www.jstor.org/stable/41397330
Young, Elizabeth. “Here Comes the Bride: Wedding Gender and Race in ‘Bride of Frankenstein.’” Feminist Studies 17, no. 3 (1991): 403–37. Accessed September 22, 2021. https://doi.org/10.2307/3178280.