HOME | DD
devilkais — The Modern Prometheus
#frankenstein #horror #literature #monster #modernprometheus #lukegoss #justinmoritz #frankensteinmonster #maryshelley #robertdeniro #victorfrankenstein
Published: 2017-02-11 18:26:27 +0000 UTC; Views: 2124; Favourites: 28; Downloads: 4
Redirect to original
Description
How´s that for a cover, baby ? I WOULD do one for Dracula but there´s a big problem... Stoker´s novel sucks ass. Despite a decent first act, the rest is plodding garbage (Thank God for Lugosi, Lee and Oldman !).Say what you will about the poetic and at times over-sentimental prose, Shelley managed to at least 2 interesting protagonists !
Favorite actor for this version ? DeNiro for the voice and personality and Luke Goss for the looks and the emotional scenes. Their movies are good both as movies AND adaptation but I´d say Branagh had an excellent idea to kick things up a notch with Victor www.youtube.com/watch?v=UmYEfF…
The Boris Karloff version ? Not as frightening as our creature here but still a great character all around and with a more heartbreaking existence (and that says a lot) www.youtube.com/watch?v=MA9opH… www.youtube.com/watch?v=uebg79…
Related content
Comments: 24
Typically for mainstream knowledge that the Boris Karloff version is the most famous one, that everyone knows.
Frankly, the entire Screws-in-the-neck-and-angular-skulls-design always looked more like a robot to me.
Not to mention the "kind-hearted simpleton" personality that movie gave him.
Surely a very tragic character and quite fitting for the entire "Who is the real monster here?" moral.
But that one never actually scary to me.
When I was in my mid-teen I read Shelley´s novel.
And the original creature? Scaaaary!
Not only does he look like a human jigsaw puzzle with non-fitting parts, reminding us of the fact that he was made from various human corpses. He is also angry and vengefully enough to murder innocent children and women on purpose. Not to mention that he has the smarts to use his strength with malicious purpose.
What I remember the novel for is that Shelley did indeed create two sympathic but also disturbing protagonists.
Never got my hand on the Dracula novel so far.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
And don't forget Young Frankenstein ! That Movie rules !
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Have to disagree with you on Dracula. The original version is a pure evil force of Darkness in the way that vampires should be. Francis Coppola may have paved the road for Hellsing(which was great) but he also paved the way for Twilight which was just ridicules. For me personally I prefer the Nosferato version were Dracula is a grotesque force of evil that sickens people both mentally and physically(Like a Chtulhu who actually does something more then just mental confusion).
But that just my opinion I just feel like more liberal interpretation of Dracula like Hiranos and Coppolas versions while not bad in their own right kinda watered him down from the kind of ominous mysterious monster he was meant to be.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I stand with what I said, the first part with Harker in the count´s castle. The rest is A CHORE to get through !
The fact that you prefer Murnau´s Nosferatu (which does the pure evil concept WAY better than the book) proves this point: The legacy of Dracula AND the inclusion of Vlad Tepes improved leaps and beyond what Stoker invented. As for Copola, the love story made Drac even more frightening and a reason to be fixated on Mina (that and movie Lucy... slllrrrp !)
And Twilight ? It would not even be a thing if people flat out ignored it...
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Really?? I actually prefer the middle of the book because to me what makes Dracula great is the way he indirectly effects his victims. Hell his first victim(the mental patient) does not even have to come near him in order to be effected. So my favorite part of the book is with Reinfield and Lucy because it is not about how evil and horrible of a person Dracula is but how the people are decaying around him are horrible effected. How their doom is inevitable because they have been cursed beyond any salvation other then dead. My favorite line in the book by away comes not from Dracula himself but from Reinfield when he says ''blood is live'' as he drinks it.
This by the way is why I am annoyed by the Symbiote haters within the Spider-man fanbase. They rail on about how the symbiotes have no personality or character not grasping that, that's not the reason people like me like them. We like them because they are like a disease or an evil spirit(which is what Vampires also ultimately are) that corrupts it's host from within(In this case applyfining it's host aggressive nature). And what is interesting is showing how it effects characters that we are engaged in.
In the end I am just expressing my own opinion and I am not trying to prove you wrong in anyway because we are dealing with fiction here not facts. Although if I had to guess a to why you prefer the movies it would probably be that you find Dracula much more of an fascinating character then protagonist and various supporting characters of the book and since Dracula is barely present after the first chapters at the castle I can see why the rest of the book would be a bore to you.
I also have to make my self more clear on Nosferatu. I don't prefer him over the original. What I meant is that I prefer him over Oldmans version(I have never actually seen the films with Lugosi and Christopher Lee) They way I see it is that Coppolas Dracula is a rebel against God, his eternal life a swell as his evil deeds is a rebellion against Gods will(basically he is a villain motivated by revenge) and then his other motivation is of getting Mina Harker which he is not only attracted to but seems to actually love since she looks like his former wife. Nosferatu and Book Dracula on the other are evil by their mare nature with their only possible goal outside of just being themselves is to get to drink the blood of female virgins that they lust(not love) over.
With that being said I think we can both agree that Nosferatu(or atleast the one in the remake) is FAR more deadly I mean by using the plague he basically committed genocide against the people of London something that the SS cyborg from Hellsing had to use an entire army of Vampires to do and neither book nor Oldman version of Dracula had even came close to do. Not to mention that the remake of Nosferatu leaves itself open ended instead of a happy ending like those others. So hopefully we can at least agree that no matter what Dracula we prefer Nosferatu was at the very least the most harmful.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
t would probably be that you find Dracula much more of an fascinating character then protagonist and various supporting characters of the book
You got that right. The other characters are TEDIOUS. It´d be a decent read if Stoker trimmed the fat but letter after letter, I´d wanted Drac to get the bullshit over with already !
Oldman Drac might be a rebel against God, he´s still a horrifying creature that sees people as means to his ends.
As for the symbiotes being an infection... that may be right for the original species but the one that fused with peter then Eddie actually wants a mate and friend. The Carnage one however is already half Clete Kasady...
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Then I recommend you don't read Lovecrafts horror stories. They are all about characters with little to no personality getting sucked into the horror of some unknown creature who barely shows up in the story.
He was also a big fan of Bram Stokers original novel btw.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I prefer Lovecraft´s pen pal, R.E. Howard myself XD
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I actually forgot to ask have you seen the 1979 remake of Nosferatu also known as Nosferatu the vampyre and have you any opinion on the upcoming remake by David Lee Fisher.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I don´t remember.. wasn´t there a movie where a director hired Nosferatu himself to play the titular role ?
The remake I´m waiting for is It.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
No, that was a kind of mockumentary with William Defoe. I am talking about this one en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nosferat…
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Then I have not. Do you recommend it ?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
It is the darkest take on Bram Stokers Novel so far. So if that is to your liking then I recommend it.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Well that´s as tantalizing as Sadie Frost´s Lucy !
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Nice! I've been meaning to watch the DeNiro version. Of all the classic monsters, Frankenstein's has always been my favourite 
Have you seen the one that came out a little over a year ago, Victor Frankenstein? That one was a fun watch, you could tell the people behind it had seen a lot of Frankenstein movies when making their own. James McAvoy as Victor and Daniel Radcliffe as Igor (seriously his choices after Harry Potter have certainly been...interesting XD)
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Well Frankenstein simply hit bullseye both on his original AND alternate interpretations XD And yes the DeNiro one is a great watch !
Haven´t seen it.
X-men Apocalypse really soured me on McAvoy... I paid for the big A, not Singer´s Yaoi fanfic...
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I recalled reading Mary Shelley's original novel for one of my assignments for Drama class.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Hope you liked it man !
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Fun fact: I could only read the first pages of the original Stoker's novel
I really liked the 1994 Frankestein version, while I had issues with him killing the kid intentionally (though maybe the wanted to make him more monster than just a tragic figure so I can give it a pass), for the most part the movie was pretty good
That black and white movie seems also pretty good too
good work
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yeah, it´s amazing how the initial Drac is dreck. And those damn love letters...
In the book, he does kill little William because the kid tells him that he´s the brother of Victor. And due to his resentment at the time, the monster decided to kill off William out of spite.
Yeah, the movie version of the monster in those days is indeed a tragic innocent who does not know better. In 1933, it was horror but to me, it´s a tear jerker.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I heard it wasn't unintentional so I stand corrected XD
In 1933 was horror? I should watch it before making any comments
👍: 0 ⏩: 0