“Many times I considered Satan as the fitter emblem of my condition; for often, like him, when I viewed the bliss of my protectors, the bitter gall of envy rose within me.” - Mary Shelly
Three things that are the same but different.
Mary Shelley’s book was great, if not a tad bit long in spots. It provided great insight into a monster who so desperately wanted to feel some sort of humanity, only to break into a rage to punish his maker after being denied a companion. Pursuing Victor through different lands, watching him suffer, and relishing in his loss. I highly recommend it if you haven’t already read it.
Frankenstein (1931), while a Universal classic, lacks context. It’s short and to the point, though. Classics are classics for a reason, I guess. Worth noting this film was based on a play that was adapted from the book.
Frankenstein (2025) is a bit closer to the source material in terms of layout. It gives Victor a different and very dark upbringing. The Monster (or in this version the Creature) is more a victim and less the cunning hunter, and the ending is different. I’m not entirely sure why Guillermo del Toro decided to change it, but I’m not mad at it. It was a pretty decent film and definitely had more context than the beloved classic from the 1930s.