P.S. I uploaded the first part(page 1-3)! You can read from here→ https://www.tumblr.com/chimeranotes/804182282054352896/the-warmth-of-fire-fanfic-comic-14-page
💬 1 🔁 1 ❤️ 26 · The warmth of fire
Fanfic comic
1/4 (Page 1-3)
To be continued…
I'm not saying that I'm right but here's my theory:
So there's been a lot of discourse regarding why this shot is reversed. We all assume (probably correctly) that Guillermo Del Toro is too smart for this to be a mistake. It ate at me too but I didn't have a theory. Until now.
Last night I saw a user on here make a post about the use of mirrors in the film. So I watched the movie again tonight and paid particular attention to the use of mirrors, making sure to notice the scenes, and stories and characters, and the general themes at the times they were used.
And it started to remind me of something.
I started thinking about The Last Jedi. About how that film tackled perception and that part of its focus was on how perception can shape us and our beliefs.
So here's my theory on the use of mirrors and the reversed image at the end of Frankenstein:
All through the movie we are seeing the Creature through the perception of others, for good and for bad. Even when we are in the Creature's Tale we are still seeing how others see him, and we are seeing his assumptions about others. His story isn't just about revenge and about seeking love. It's also about knowing who he is. And this isn't just literal. It goes beyond him learning he's made from corpses. It's the most fundamental existential question we all have: Who am I and why am I here?
At the end of the film his vengeance is spent. He has made peace with his creator. He walks out to the sun and embraces its warmth. For the first time as his OWN person. Free from the perception of others.
I think this is why the image is reversed. It's saying: I am me now, whatever that is, whatever it may be. I am me.
Sooo I have some textual evidence to support this theory*. I too have been thinking about this image flipping thing for days now (honestly it's been bothering me ever since I first watched the movie, and op's was the first post I came across that addressed it, so thank you! It made me go back and rewatch the movie, and in particular some specific scenes). Anyway, so I found some things that support the "mirror and me" theory, and then I have additional thoughts about the filmmaking/narrative technique that del Toro used. Enough background, here's the further evidence - and, fair warning, this is going to be long:
Firstly, in Victor's Tale, when Victor is shaving the Creature's head and he keeps looking at the mirror - that's the first time the Creature is seeing himself (timestamp 1:08:57). So, in his own perception, that is how his own face looks, with the three forehead scars diverging from the scar on the right temple rather than the left (as is in reality).
You can zoom in and see him looking at himself, studying himself, with wonder. Victor already seems frustrated, and is constantly forcing him to orient his head in a specific way, which means that the Creature has been trying to study the image in the mirror repeatedly. So we can conclude that he has formed his self-image in his head, and this is how he looks to himself in his mind.
Sidebar: in the original novel, the 1818 version**, when the Creature first looks at himself, it's in a river, and he is repulsed by his own reflection:
"I had admired the perfect forms of my cottagers—their grace, beauty, and delicate complexions: but how was I terrified, when I viewed myself in a transparent pool! At first I started back, unable to believe that it was indeed I who was reflected in the mirror; and when I became fully convinced that I was in reality the monster that I am, I was filled with the bitterest sensations of despondence and mortification. Alas! I did not yet entirely know the fatal effects of this miserable deformity." (Shelley 104-5)
Here, the Creature looks at himself for the first time, and because he already has knowledge of humanity, he is repulsed; his self-image in his mind, how he saw himself in his mind's eye, does not match the reflection he is seeing, and so he is repulsed by himself. This is in contrast to del Toro's version, where the Creature is 'brought up' (for a small time) by Victor and is discovering himself without any such repulsions. So, his own self-image in his mind, informed by his reflection in the mirror, is normalized (as far as it can be; it's not as huge of a shock as it is in the book).
Secondly, in Creature's Tale, when he escapes from the tower and enters the forest for the first time, the shot is flipped. This is the first time shot-flipping happens (the second and only other time we see a flipped shot is at the very end, the screenshot op attached above). The timestamps are: 1:31:05-1:31:48.
As you can see in the screenshots, the scars are flipped. Nowhere else in the movie does this flipping happen again (except at the end). This is the first time the Creature is exploring the world on his own, and it is him telling the story here, with no one else present to perceive or see him. So, in his own telling of the story, because in these parts, no one else is present, we are seeing the scenes from the Creature's POV only (basically we are seeing his narrativised memories), and because in his mind, he is exactly as the mirror shows him, the image is flipped*. When he picks up the skull and compares it to himself, then too we are seeing as he sees himself.
As op wrote:
"Even when we are in the Creature's Tale, we are still seeing him how others see him..."
In isolation, unburdened by others' perception of him, or their characterization of him as a monster, this is how the Creature sees himself moving through the world. When any other individual (human or animal) is present, the narrative shifts to an omniscient camera, and we see the Creature as he is in reality (within the story's world), but in these two scenes, when he is completely alone, the narrative is from his own POV, and we see the flipped scars (a counterargument could be his escape scene from the tower, where also he is totally alone, but there we can argue that it's the omniscient camera operating and not subjective camera).
So, the final shot of the film being this flipped image of the Creature is as he is seeing himself, standing before the sun, free and forgiven, now able to be who he wants to be, unperceived or uninfluenced by any other individual's perception.
Here's further analysis (see: convoluted overanalysis) of the filmmaking/narrative technique, and more on the omniscient and subjective camera, under the cut. You can skip this, I'm just rambling atp.
The Creature's Tale is titled as such, but unlike the book where the Creature narrates his own story and only tells what he himself knows or has seen, in the movie, we are seeing a mix of what the Creature has seen/experienced, and what those around him have seen. This includes those scenes where William tells Victor he is the monster, or where we see Victor buying ammo and milk as he sets out to hunt the Creature (maybe Victor spoke in between and filled in the gap, idk out of guilt maybe). So, even though the parts are titled Victor's Tale and Creature's Tale, they don't necessarily reflect events as perceived solely by Victor or Creature. If that was so, there would've been another title card once the Creature ended, titled the Epilogue or something, and then the last part would've begun. Instead, we're seeing the story as told by an omniscient camera. Essentially, the title cards are indicating whom the story is about (and the movie is therefore divided into two main parts, two main stories, one of the creator and one of the creation), and the narrative includes all the events that are required to show the story to the audience. It's an omniscient camera, but one whose lens is, sometimes, influenced or subjectivised by the character it is capturing - which is how we see Victor's dreams, and the Creature's own view of himself.
In the book, Victor tells Walton of his own life, and then within that narrative, the Creature's narrative occurs, in which the Creature produces documents to support his own claims; Victor then tells the rest of the story, and towards the end of the book**, Walton is basically live-blogging, as he keeps writing letters in his journal to his sister of what is happening, with it all culminating in his own encounter with the Creature, who grieves Victor and then leaves. So the whole book is a bunch of letters to Walton's sister Mary Saville (MWS), and from a more broader viewpoint, all the letters are for the reader. In the film, del Toro is doing the same thing. As we, the readers, hold the book Frankenstein in our hands, told from the frame narrative of Robert Walton but telling the full story of Victor Frankenstein and his Creature, similarly the film Frankenstein begins from the frame narrative of Robert Walton and then proceeds to tell the complete story of Victor Frankenstein and his Creature.
Only, towards the end of the film, the focal character is the Creature, as he sees himself. And so the shot is flipped - it shows the Creature's perception of himself.
In the book, towards the end, the Creature says:
"You hate me; but your abhorrence cannot equal that with which I regard myself." (Shelley 215)
Remember his earlier surprise at seeing himself in the river - he was surprised because in his own mind, he did not look as his reflection showed him, and as others saw him, monstrous and evil; now, towards the end, his self-image is aligned to that reflection, and he too considers himself hideous and hates himself, and so promises to kill himself in the last paragraphs of the book.
del Toro's Creature, on the other hand, sees himself not as monstrous or evil, but as just another being on the Earth who has to live. And so, now fully free from the burden of his own existence or any guilt, this Creature looks to the sun and, as op said, embraces its warmth.
*I should confess here that even though I just wrote all this shit above, I am not a 100% sold on the whole idea of the flipped shots as intentional and having deeper symbolic significance (only 40% sold). It could just be that these specific shots looked better flipped, and so they were flipped. It might just be a logistics thing. del Toro himself said he loves accidents that happen during filmmaking, so he might've done this flipping to see how the shots looked from this perspective (and these shots were easier to flip, since there's no text in them nor any other characters whose movements might appear strange). After finalizing the flipped shots, we can then explain the reason behind them by using the mirror and everything. If it was just the final shot flipped, I might've been 80-90% sold on the intentionality, but because some of the forest shots are also flipped, my skepticism rises. But I do love op's theory and analysis of the mirror and explanation of the flipping.
**I'm quoting from the 1818 text here, because that's the one I have handy right now, and it's the one I reread just before watching the movie. I'm planning on rereading the 1831 text eventually, but for now, this is the one I have. It's the Penguin Classics edition.
Thank you so much @orneltec! This was such great insight! And what a good catch. I hadn't even noticed the flip in the forest scene.
Perhaps I can convince you slightly above 40%. I went and watched again tonight after reading your analysis and I had another thought!
What is the creature doing in the forest when the scar is flipped? He is observing a human skull. And despite his lack of language he shows clear signs of understanding what he is looking at. You can see him flex his mouth to match the skull. I feel that this is perhaps his first spark into understanding himself as an entity, as something of nature, something beyond being just a receptacle for Victor's anger and frustration. It differs from mimicking the Medusa's mouth because there Victor was trying to control him. Here, he is free to wonder.
Or. It's a mistake. But as you said, it's fun to think about. :)
I also want to give shout out here to @3lenorec for the original post on mirrors in the film! Thank you!
I think there are some from his comic, as well, but I'll have to go home and get the comic books to check. I did notice some thematic elements similar to that, though.
kaledo-art
dededos
origamiaround
annaxmalina
vaporwave
kianamaiart
discoholicmusic
