Kevin Scrivner
Apr 26th, '03, 04:15 PM
I just finished watching the 1931 version of "Frankenstein" with Boris Karloff. The Monster isn't the powerhouse of popular perception. He's stronger than the scientists and villiagers he encounters; they usually lose a one-on-one confrontation. But he's not so strong that Frankenstein and two companions (an elderly medical instructor and a hunchbacked assistant) aren't able to overpower him and tie him up, more than once. Now, I realize that by the second movie, "Bride of Frankenstein," the Monster is tearing out of chains and knocking down heavy wooden doors. But even then a group of irate villagers is able to overpower him and drag him off to jail (that's how he got in chains in the first place).
Same with the Wolf Man. He's dangerous but not so powerful that he can't be threatened with hunting dogs or beaten to death with a cane by his own father. It's only later that he becomes indestructible.
Maybe it's escalation, like in the James Bond movies. In "Dr. No," Bond is a skilled but normal human being capable of making mistakes and being tricked. He's even threatened by a tarantula let loose in his room. Several decades later, Bond in "Goldeneye" is leaping off cliffs and tearing through downtown Moscow buildings in a stolen tank.
Thoughts?
Same with the Wolf Man. He's dangerous but not so powerful that he can't be threatened with hunting dogs or beaten to death with a cane by his own father. It's only later that he becomes indestructible.
Maybe it's escalation, like in the James Bond movies. In "Dr. No," Bond is a skilled but normal human being capable of making mistakes and being tricked. He's even threatened by a tarantula let loose in his room. Several decades later, Bond in "Goldeneye" is leaping off cliffs and tearing through downtown Moscow buildings in a stolen tank.
Thoughts?