Cinema Scope

POOR THINGS

ith her 1818 novel , Mary Shelley not only authored a story that passed into myth, but also invented a new type of monster that exists independent of that story. It is the Monster—and a familiar but shifting set of surrounding circumstances—that has been numerously adapted over several decades, creating wildly varying resemblances between the original text and its propagations. The most absolute tenet of Frankenstein’s Monster is that he is an assemblage of parts of dead bodies that is reanimated into life, though in Shelley’s original text the act is achieved by isolating the moment where decomposing flesh gives nourishment to a seed. When Shelley’s Dr. Frankenstein immediately rejects his creation, it is not the revelation of a violent or uncontrollable nature

You’re reading a preview, subscribe to read more.

More from Cinema Scope

Cinema Scope8 min read
Now or Never
In what will likely be my last column in these pages, I’ve mainly tried to highlight releases and films that I’ve been meaning yet failing to watch for ages, following the assumption that it’s now or never. As most of my examples make clear, this avo
Cinema Scope18 min read
Your Own Hall of Fame
Two movies, both alike in indignity, in the ’90s, where we lay our scene. Because neither Videoheaven nor Pavements—both putatively non-fictional pop-culture essay films written and directed by Alex Ross Perry—have officially been released, programme
Cinema Scope9 min read
The Sense Of The Past
Time present and time pastAre both perhaps present in time future,And time future contained in time past.If all time is eternally presentAll time is unredeemable.What might have been is an abstractionRemaining a perpetual possibilityOnly in a world o

Related Books & Audiobooks