Freedom...Not Completely Free

This whole split personality theme originally presented by Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde is a main theme in a lot of modern Hollywood movies. Spider man, Super man and pretty much most superhero is a good example of the split personality theme. I watched another movie that I found very interesting. The movie is called Limitless, staring Bradley Cooper and directed by Neil Burgur. I find the way it integrates this theme into the movie is very different compared to all the super hero movies. They take a very modern and scientific approach to the movie that sorta makes you believe it's a true story. Even though all these movies are different, there is two constant in everything with this theme. First is that all the characters are stronger in some way and feel liberated and the second is there are consequences for all their actions.

In the movie limitless, Bradley cooper plays the role of a broke writer that has no inspiration and is about to get evicted from his house. His brother in law see's the condition he's in and gives him a experimental pill call NZT that improves brain power from a max of 20% all the way up to an 80%.After taking this pill, he finishes his book in 2 hours and gets extremely rich and successful. What ends up happening is that he finds out that everybody that used the pill had the same affect of being unstoppable, but ended up being extremely ill or dead. He also has some problems with the mob and repaying them for the money he borrowed to get rich in the first place. This proves my previous statement of feeling free and powerful meanwhile paying the price for it.

This theme is relevant to the class novel we read, Dr.Jekyll and Mr. Hyde when Jekyll turns into Hyde and feels free and liberated. Every time Jekyll takes the potion he created, he turn into Hyde. Which is his evil side that he always had repressed inside of him. You can compare that to the human brain in the way that a human has all this potential but can only access a maximum of 20% of their brain power. Every time Jekyll is in the form of Hyde, he feels free and does things he would never even imagine of doing when he is Jekyll. The movie is similar in the way that the character Bradley plays reaches success way past his wildest imaginations. The last comparison I have to make between the novel and the movie is that they both pay for their freedom. Hyde ends up being wanted for killing Dr.Carew and has to hide like a fugitive. In the movie however, the character has to find a way to fight the side effects from this drug. Even though the drug makes you turns into your absolute best, it slowly kills your insides and you die. The character in the movie feels the effect of that after a few months of using NZT. He also has other problems with the mob, police and people trying to kill him to get NZT for themselves.

Kinda begs the question if freedom is really free? And if so, too what extent is it completely free?
I mean, in every story with this theme, the character with the split personality gets trouble. Or you can think of it as getting punished....

Now that I think about it, I wish I had that pill during exams, would be amazing. Except for that side effect... I'll just use my knowledge with that pill to modify the recipe and fix that little bug where it kills you! What would you do if you had access to NZT? Also what else movies or stories can you think of that can relate to Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde that don't consist of a super hero?

By the way, Limitless is a great movie and I encourage you to watch it if you haven't already.

Frankenstein Jr.

     Most of the topics I planned to write about have already been presented on this blog, so I figured I would write about my introduction to the Frankenstein story .When I was a kid, my mother worked at my school as the head of our daycare. She was usually in control of what we watched during movie time. My mom seemed to like the more off-beat childrens movies. We watched weird movies from the 80s, that probably creeped out some of my peers. But I loved my mom and I owe to her my love for the Never Ending Story.  Another movie I was introduced to by her is called Frankenweenie.

ARF!

         Frankenweenie is really a parody of the 1931 film version of Frankenstein, which is one of the most famous adaptions of Mary Shelleys Frankenstein. I find it a very funny and oddly sweet movie. It is only half an hour, and you can watch the whole thing on youtube. This movie was produced by Disney and directed by Tim Burton. Disney then fired Tim Burton, finding the movie too scary and a waste of the companies money. Years later,mainly because of a cult following, Disney decided to let Tim Burton remake the movie as a clay animation in the style of Nightmare before christmas. Look for it in theatres next October.

             The story is set in a suburban town, somewhere quiet with palm trees. A young boy named Victor Frankenstein loses his beloved dog Sparky when it is his by a car. He is introduced to the idea of reanimation through electricity and obsessively studies it. He succeeds in reviving his dead dog. Though Sparky is scarred and ugly, Victor loves him, unlike in the actual novel. His whole family embraces Sparky, but the neighbors are frightened by him. Victor and his father discuss the neighbors feeling scared and threatened by the Frankenweenie. His father tells Victor that they just don't understand, and perhaps they should meet him. This effort results in an angry mob.

            This short film is a movie for children, and so much of the topic matter touched in Mary Shelleys Frankenstein is left out.  But I think this film is a great introduction to two of the major issues in the original novel. Parents watching this with their kid ( as long as the child is not scared ) can really have some good discussions. Me and my mother did. Was it okay for Victor to bring Sparky back to life? Is it okay for anyone to bring anything back to life? What bad things could happen after bringing something back to life?

         You could also talk about the reaction to Sparky from the neighbors. They immediately hated Sparky because of his looks. They made no attempt to befriend him, they only chased him away. Kids often need to be reminded not to judge others based on their looks.  We as an audience know that Sparky is friendly, just like we knew the creature had good intent. Parents could also ask their child if maybe sometimes it is good to judge things based on looks, however.  Maybe if something looks dangerous it is because it is.

      Overall, I think this  adaption for kids of Frankenstein brings some really good material. Children may delight in the spookiness of the film, as well as form a little bit of moral and ethical opinions. This movie is not for every child out there, nor is it for every parent. If I can get my hands on this when I am an adult, I would like to show this to my children. I watched it for the first time when I was four, and I turned out fine. Right?



   
        Im both nervous and excited for the remake of one of my childhood favourite short films, but im hoping that as a feature length film it can only be improved on.
  

Vote Yes or Vote No

As you all clearly know, Dawson College has two campaigns which are head to head competing for a student strike. Campaigns are for and against the strike. Presently, there are over 65,000 students from different institutions that are not attending their schools. Those schools have voted yes for a student strike to run against the government’s hike of tuition fees. The voting will be held on the 1^st of March 2012 in Dawson, for the Dawson student’s to decide whether they are willing to have weeks of classes off or keep attending their classes. This decision seems easy, where on the other hand, it is truly tricky. Students must be aware of the advantages and the disadvantages of this issue.

Advantages due to the strike are favorable for the students. They would have two weeks off because of the Spring Break coming up the week of the 11^th March. During this precious time, those future employees/employers will do what they do best at: loaf.

In contrast, disadvantages are very disadvantageous to students who are aiming to finish studies this present semester or willing to attend summer school. For the reason that the school will do what they do best to students: make them suffer. A major disadvantage is that Dawson College will have one/two week(s) off during spring and will retake them by the end of this Winter 2012 semester.

My personal point of view towards this situation is that voting no will be beneficial in order to end this semester on time and to be able to move forward in studies by taking summer classes. This way, the system remains the same.

What are your points of views?

                                                                                                                                                

Who is the REAL monster?

            Watching the movie Hulk and reading the story of Frankenstein’s creature, we automatically conclude that these main characters are the “monsters” yet they are the most tender and emotional. If you look up the synonym for monster, we see the adjectives, “fiend, brute, demon, devil, and miscreant.” Clearly, we have been tricked in believing who the real monsters are in these stories and also in our own reality.

          In Hulk, we see the father using his innocent son, Bruce as a guinea pig to his science experiment. Later on, Bruce gets exposed to radiation and becomes a “monster” without the intentions of wanting to be one in the first place. He brutally fights his way through society’s misjudgements only because he was a victim of a selfish scientific experiment.

           We also see this atrocity in the book Frankenstein. The scientist, again, secretly creates a horrific being in which people would classify as a “monster.” The creature had the features of a monster, yes, but he had emotions and he felt love and hate, everything a normal human feels. What made him the “monster” was the neglect of love and nourishment from his creator. Frankenstein refused to embrace his creature and then refused to equip the creature with another being just like him, and in result his turned the creature into a monster.

          I found that the story of Hulk and Frankenstein, related to the incident of the Cold War where over a million innocent people were brutally and secretly exposed to radioactive experiments. The nuclear disaster was no accident and left many American citizens mutated in monstrous forms. Viewing the results on humans, we automatically flinch at the horrors of their features and we think of them as being monsters.just as Bruce in the Hulk and the creature in Frankenstein, these victims are sentenced to a life of deformation and constant mutation during generations to come. Monsters are defined to be horrific heartless and destructive brutes. Can we really identify these victims as monsters? Who fits the description more accurately?

Result of Nuclear experiment on a new born child.

     
When were faced with an ugly deformed creature, we automatically judge this being to have no feelings or any sense of human emotions. That’s just how we are, but we never go down to the depths of it. How did this happen? Who is responsible? Once you collect your data, we realize who the real monsters are, and it is those who intentionally brutalize innocent people and put them in a society that is well-known to be judgmental and harsh on deformities, meanwhile the scientists lay low and safe in their “natural” human “disguise.”

The elixir

The elixir

“The strange case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde” a tale of a man capable of switching from good to evil from a simple swig of his magic potion, a pretty useful trick if you ask me.  However, look no further, this magic potion may be closer than you think, it may even be in your home right now. I’m talking about beverages with alcohol in them of course. I have no personal experience with alcohol but I have lived a considerable amount of time with people who do, so I consider myself knowledgeable to so degree on the subject. Alcohol may not switch someone from good to evil but it will certainly have an effect on a person’s personality. From shy to outgoing or passive to angry, however big or slight the switch is, it’s there and that’s what causes the regret the next morning. For a closer look at the comparison I want to list what happens to Dr. Jekyll after he drinks his potion and after we drink ours.

- Dr. Jekyll drinks his potion and he becomes Hyde, his evil personality, switching both appearances and mental state. He feels no regret from the actions he does, but the regret is there when it’s time to become Dr. Jekyll again (after Hyde murders “what’s-his-face”). Even though he knows he is causing mischief and he knows that it is causing problems for himself (changing without the potion) he gives into temptation still drinks the potion (before the murder).

- drinking alcohol causes a change in people’s personality, however, not switching appearances.  One may not have regret for their actions after they've drank a few, but I’m sure it’s there in the morning, assuming they've remembered. And of course the constant use of alcohol despite the health risks.

 I'd show a picture but most pictures of drunks are kinda inappropriate. However if you really want to see some funny ones:  http://www.funatiq.com/simply-funny/hilarious-photos-with-drunk-people/

** I’m aware that this doesn’t apply to alcohol when it is drunk (drank, drunken…) in moderation.

Do Looks Matter?

Everyone is judged by their looks. It has been this way for so many years. But why does one jump directly at ones appearance and assume they are a certain way? As we have seen in both, Frankenstein and The Strange Case of Dr.Jekyll and Mr.Hyde, physical apperance means quite a bit.

In Frankenstein, the creature finds himself continually mocked and judged by the way he looks. Yes, one would agree that he does look quite frightening, but his appearance did not match the way he felt and thought, the creature became what he was because of everyone's neglect and disgust towards him. Why judge a book by its cover? Well it's the human instinct. If a guy approaches you on the street and he might just look a bit dirty or haggard, your first instinct is assuming that he's up to no good, this might be true but not in all cases. The video below will show an extraordinary example on how people judge others based on looks.

As shown in the video above, without paying attention to the bystander affect  mentioned therein, a man is laying on the floor acting like he's in pain, he is dressed in moderate clothing and no one approaches him. Towards the end of the video, the same man dresses up in a suit and does the exact same thing and in less than 6 seconds he gets help! What a shocking and astonishing experiment! Even when a person is in agony no one would approach him simply because he looked a bit dirty, yet when the same person dressed up all fancy everyone jumped in to help.

In The Strange Case of Dr.Jekyll and Mr.Hyde, the same thing applies. Hyde is definitely judged by his looks, but what's different in his case is that he is evil. His personality is reflected by his appearance, he looks ugly therefore he is ugly on the inside. No one ever believed that Jekyll and Hyde could be the same being, because they were completely different from each other in both body and mind. This next video talks about how Susan Boyle was also judged by how she looked, take a peek and find out: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VSrAJsWvEIc

We can't escape from it, being judged by ones looks is a reality. Would people have accepted the creature in Frankenstein if he was more handsome? Would he have been different or done things differently? Would people have been more lenient towards Hyde if he were prettier, even with his cruel personality? Will we ever stop judging people on their looks? Why does physical appearance matter so much? These questions have yet to be answered. Howhever, considering everything, it is unfortunate but true that looks do matter.

Yes, he is hot!  
"Don't make me mad..."


There is a book called Twilight written by Stephenie Meyer that was published in 2005. In 2008, a movie was produced based on this book and the following years the sagas came out. In this book, the author writes about a girl named Bella Swan who falls in love with a boy named Edward Cullen who happens to be a vampire. She also has a best friend named Jacob Black. Jacob is a very fun and enthusiastic person who also has a big heart.


In the Twilight saga, New Moon, Edward leaves Bella with a broken heart. Thankfully, her best friend Jacob stays by her side for months and turns her frown upside down. Later in the book, Bella notices that Jacob's skin is very hot, as if he had a fever. Jacob runs home and Bella does not see him for weeks.The thing is, Jacob also has a secret like Edward. He is a werewolf. What happens is that  Jacob finds out that when he gets angry his body becomes very hot and he turns into a giant wolf. After having been forced into the wolf pack, his attitude towards Bella changes. He suddenly becomes very aggressive and mean. Along with these changes, he also gets taller and much stronger.


When Jacob is angry, he cannot control himself. He becomes very dangerous as he is turned into a wolf. He could easily kill somebody because the anger inside of him takes over. That part of the story reminds me of Robert Louis Stevenson's book The strange case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. Henry Jekyll is unable to control the monster inside of him. Although he tries to suppress it, it comes back and bites him when he least expects it. The same thing goes for Jacob. The minute the anger inside of him builds up, the Id comes out and takes over. That also reminds me of the Hulk who totally loses control as soon as something upsets him. Although, in New Moon there is a part where Jacob's superego acts up and signals him to stay away from Bella in order to keep her safe.


The young werewolf has a hard time dealing with his other side and refuses to accept himself for who he is. That part is like when Dr. Jekyll rejected the bad side of himself which led to the splitting of both sides. The only difference with Jacob Black is that at the end he overcomes his fear of becoming an angry wolf and is finally able to control himself. Later he starts to accept the fact that he is a werewolf and lets Bella in on the secret. That should have been the ending for Dr. Jekyll as well. He should have looked at his other half, Edward Hyde, and told him "You are me, I am you. We are one and I love you." in order to combine both sides. Unfortunately, that is not how the story ended.


The bottom line is that you should love yourself and accept yourself the way you are. No one is perfect in this world. Everyone has a bad side and a good side, but when you love someone, you learn to love both sides. Therefore when you love both good and bad sides, you start to see only the good in them. Although to be able to truly love another, one has to love themselves first. Who has been there for you the most? Who knows all your secrets? There is only one person who knows you as well as you do. Don't neglect that person. Care for yourself like you would care for your mother, sister or your best friend. Be your own best friend. 

My Little Franky

So lately I’ve been into this show that many people have probably heard of already. Its called “My Little Pony; Friendship is Magic”. Yes, I do realize that this might look like a show for little girls but in fact there’s quite a bit someone can learn from this show that you would hope that someone would already have learnt in the past. However that subject is for another time. Right now I would like to discuss one particular episode of MLP that I believe relates prey well to the novel Frankenstein by Mary Shelley.

                In this episode called Bridle Gossip, the town of Equestria (where all the lovely pony characters live), you learn that all the ponies are scared because there is this very suspicious character that would occasionally visit the town. All the ponies are terrified of it and lock themselves in their homes. They wait for this creature to pass by and leave them all alone. They know nothing about it but they only know what stories have been told of it, all telling of the creature’s powers and horror. That it comes from a different unknown land that no other pony had been before.

Later on in the episode, some curious little ponies decide that it is foolish to be scared of something and for reasons that aren’t even proven to be true as all they know is of the rumors that have been spread. They would copy everyone else, judging the poor creature without even a thought of what the reason might be!

After some investigation, they realize that this creature was actually a simple zebra named Zecora, who meant no one any harm, only passing by. They got to know the zebra and as expected, the ponies of Equestria and Zecora become good friends.

Doesn’t a lot of this story remind you of another? Similar to this MLP episode, Frankenstein’s creature was rejected by anyone. People would run scared of him and not give it a second thought, as that was their instinct.

The difference to these two stories is how the people surrounding these two characters; the creature and Zecora. In Frankenstein, people turned to attempt to kill the monster that approached them. As you all know, nothing turned out well for this monster, as he is continued to be misunderstood and in turn, murdered many innocent lives.

Obviously in the MLP episode, things are way less mediocre, but the basic message is still present. If those younger ponies had not gone after what they feared in an attempt to understand the zebra, it would have continued to live a solitary life, wandering around on its own, rejected by all of society. If the creature had been given the chance, he may have been accepted into society and been happier.

This shows how even a show meant firstly for children has the right ideas to teach that you shouldn’t judge things by the things you see and the stuff you hear. Children are able to accept that, but how come how society acts like they cant even grasp this simple message?

The Black Swan

After reading the novel Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde, the main theme of good vs. evil really made me think of the movie The Black Swan . In this movie, the main character Nina tries out for the role in a play where she must act a white swan, represented by good, gentleness and inocense, and at the same time she must also play the role of its twin the black swan which represents sensuality and evil.

At first, like Dr Jekyll, Nina is essentially good and shy and she is very much of a perfectioniste. She has a difficult time getting into the role of the evil swan as her personality fits more with the white swan,but as the movie progresses, she slowly becomes more and more like the black swan and a darker side of her personality starts to come out. She suddenly becomes very sensual and permiscuous, very different from her origianl personality. As time goes by she finds herself having evil thoughts and imagines she will kill her competition, another actress in the play. In the end, Nina finally completely loses control, and in a desperate attempt of being absolutly perfect as an actrice, she finally comitts suicide.

In some ways Nina makes me think of Dr Jekyll who at first was able to control his `bad`side but as he transforms more frequently into Mr Hyde, his bad side gets much stronger and becomes worse then it initially was. He is also a perfectioniste like the main character in the movie which is why he wanted to create Mr Hyde in the first place and in the end, he also ends up dying because of this.

Alter Ego or Inner Battle?

                                                                                

    The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde written by by Robert Louis Stevenson and published in 1886 , is a Victorian era spin on our own Spider Man. Think about it for a second… both plots consist of men creating alter egos in order to fufill urges and thoughts that they feel won't be accepted by the civilization at which they are surrounded by.

     In Robert Louis Stevenson's novel, Dr.Jekyll cannot seem to find happiness. He is described as a very somber man who has many inner thoughts and urges that he wishes to take action on. And just as we discussed in class, he has many repressions. He is just stuffing away all those thought and issues and trying to move along. However, we all know that not dealing with certain issues can drive us absolutely insane, and possibly pretty depressed. He news to find a way to unleash his inner, "crazy", if that is what you want to call it. When he has had enough, he decides to create an alter ego. He does this with the use of a so called mysterious potion, that changes his personality. This mysterious potion transforms him into a smaller man, a smaller but very evil man. Now if that is not a split personality, then i really don't know what is….unless he's a gemini…just kidding.  Via his alter ego, also known as, Hyde, he is able to be crazy and fufill those evil urges. He is comfortable with the idea because no one will ever no that it is Dr,Jekyll, that is, until he involuntarily transforms in public. 

    Now in the whole SpiderMan plot, there is an obvious aspect that is completely opposite to The Strange Case Of Dr. Jekyll and Mr Hyde. Peter Parker's alter ego was made to do good and not evil ! .. Peter Parker is a teenager who is being bullied and who does not quite feel accepted by his society…(similar to Dr.Jekyll who also thinks he would not be accepted by his "society"). Peter Parker sees all the unfortunate events around him and in his own life, that he decides to create an alter ego in order to do good.. Wait…Im getting ahead of myself, i forgot a HUGE part to the story! Peter Parker is bitten by a escapee spider at a museum. He felt kind of ill and the next morning, his spider senses were tingling. The bite had given him spidery characteristics, he could shoot webs, crawl on walls, basically he had powers normal teenage boys didn't. He then decided to use these so called powers in advantage to do good and help people.  He created a costume, with a mask of course, in order to hide his indentity. He became THE Spiderman. Both Dr. Jekyll and Peter Parker stressed over hiding their true identities.

       In both of these plots, there is the whole idea of alter egos and split personalities.These men created alter egos in order to find happiness or in hopes of creating another identity for themselves. Dr.Jekyll went from being overly good to overly bad . And Peter Parker went from being very timid to tough, brave and saving a bunch of people. Their alter egos satisfied them, however it was harder for Dr.Jekyll because his alter ego was evil. These alter egos were like defense mechanisms. Split personalities are seen in our day to day lives. Im sure we all know a couple of people who have split personalities, perky to angry for example. Disorders such as bipolar disorder and depression also contribute to people's split personalities, even if it is out of the person's control. And then personalities affect how people interact with us and how people view one another. Its kind of like a cycle of human nature and interaction. The way I see it, Dr.Jekyll was depressed. He did not feel like himself and he felt like he needed a change. He did not feel all the acceptance he should have felt. Now i don't know about you, but nobody is perfect, I certainly am not, it is highly impossible to be perfect 24/7, we all mess up. Now imagine worrying about being good all the time, all day everyday, it can drive people bozo. Just live. Dr. Jekyll was upset and felt like he needed change, sadly his change was pretty drastic, don't you think? Another connection that I made, which might sound a little silly, is the mysterious potion to substance abuse. Dr. Jekyll was upset and used a magic potion to become a different person. In our society, many people turn to substance influences such as drugs & alcohol in order to feel different, and they end up acting different. It can definitely be considered as another personality.  If you think about it, there is somewhat of that same ideology behind Dr. Jekyll and his mysterious potion. Its impossible to be good all the time, humans are humans. Many of us think that we have to impress the people around us. It seems to us that society is our biggest critic, we are judged by first appearances and our actions are criticized. But there is something bigger than society, a bigger critic we must be aware of….ourself. We are our own worst critics and we are all way too hard on ourselves. Jekyll was having an issue with himself most definitely and it lead to his ultimate alter ego….Hyde.

"Man is not truly one, but truly two" - Dr. Jekyll

As I was reading Robert Louis Stevenson’s The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, I found the notion of good versus evil quite interesting. Actually, it  was particularly the idea of both good and evil residing in a single person that got me thinking about the duality of human nature. Are we born good? Are we born evil? Or are we born both? 

When Dr. Jekyll sees himself for the first time in the mirror as the deformed and decayed Edward Hyde, he expresses a feeling of relief: “And yet I looked at upon the ugly idol in the glass, I was conscious of no repugnance, rather of a leap of welcome. This too was myself. It seemed natural and human” (81). Relief of finally being able to do the things he would not have otherwise done, as laws are to be respected in order to maintain social order. The importance of maintaining an honorable reputation is also made clear throughout the book. However, all falls into pieces when Hyde is actually seen committing a murderous act, thus becoming a hunted criminal. Dr. Jekyll loses control over his transformations, and keeps changing back into Mr. Hyde, causing him to withdraw himself from society.

           Dr. Jekyll is obviously the “good” side of himself, and Hyde is his alternate evil ego whom he has kept restrained for the most part of his existence.  Does this mean that Dr. Jekyll was born good, but turns bad, or was he always struggling with both personas to finally let his evil side take over at the end?

Anyhow, I was reading an article from the Daily Mail, and there was this one passage that got my attention. The article mentions the 18^th century philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau speaking about the total absence of “fundamental perversity in the human heart” (Daily Mail) and that society is what leads humans to commit evil deeds. This immediately got me thinking of the creature in Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, who only craved for love and affection, but only ended up being abandoned by his creator, Victor Frankenstein, and violently rejected by society.  This forced seclusion from the human society sparked a feeling of hatred in his soul, which caused him to murder several people that were close to Victor, all in the name of revenge. Thus, the creature initially had a good and genuine soul, which society twisted into something evil and vengeful. 

The Creature/The Phantom

(ps the book is better than the movie.)

While reading Frankenstein, I tried to make connections with other "monster stories". This is one of them.

I see a pretty strong connection between Frankenstein and The Phantom of The Opera, both the novel by Gaston Leroux and also the movie.

The obvious similarity is that both of these characters are frighteningly disfigured. Erik (The Phantom) is even referred to several times as "the monster" just as Frankenstein's creature is.

Furthermore, the reaction to the sight of these two characters is pretty much the same. In The Phantom of The Opera, when Erik's mask that covers his face is removed, Christine claims that his face was a horror to look upon.

Both of these characters are shunned by society in general. A lot of is said about Erik, concerning his evilness and his ugliness until everyone is terrified of him.

Another obvious connection is that both characters are murderers. A more interesting version of this connection is their motive for killing. Both the phantom and the creature resent themselves and humanity. They are both repulsed by the themselves and tempted, to some degree, by human beings. The rejection they face makes them hate people in general for the way they've been treated.

Vengeance

Since many bloggers have been showing resemblances and differences of Frankenstein with a movie, I personally find the best movie that could be compared with the retaliation situation is The Rise of the Planet of the Apes.

Towards the end of this movie, we see that the main character “Caesar” is not seeking revenge towards his master, rather love. Where on the other hand, in Mary Shelley’s novel, Frankenstein wanted vengeance from Victor (his creator); because he thought that his creator did not leave him anything before his death.

Many reasons could have been prevented Frankenstein’s point of view towards his creator: where one of the most inspiring motives is the fact of taking care of a creation. Whereas Victor’s main reason behind crafting the monster was to return life to the inanimate.

By the director Rupert Wyatt, the movie shows how a chimpanzee with inheritance of high intelligence adapts quickly to the human and animal race. It also illustrates as a final resolution, the animal does not want harm towards anybody where he lives in a forest with all the other of his kind. As a response from his master, he shows no obligations neither denial in regards to his idea.

My Brothers, Walton and Victor.

  Walton and I never played ball. I have never played soldiers with Victor. I've never known their smiles or their frowns. I've never had the chance to shake my brothers' hands. I do not share their century, the tomes of their libraries, or the clothes on their backs. These men may not have blood same as I, but they are akin to me.
  In truth, there are very few ties between us; I do not have grandiose family or wealth to support my passions. I may not even know of a forbidden science or have planned a mad course for the wilds at the end of the Earth.
  But what anchors my thoughts in their worlds, what asks me to seek glory as they did, what draws me to the air of their time was the only true tie between my Brothers and I. This tie is the desire to find my own reason. A personal reason for being, a way to reason with the world. It's that desire to walk off the beaten path and trudge my own way through the wildernesses of the mysterious dreamscape that is our lives.




  I do not have the wealth or the resources to charter a ship to the frozen unknowns, neither do I have the heart to pull apart the flesh of the deceased and shape a walking corpse. I do not share the knowledge of their forefathers nor will I study their sciences.
  But I have my own black magic and there is a hardship just for me. I've mentors and resources to fuel my imagination and all the ingredients for the recipe of my own making or undoing. I have friends to make and to lose. I have goals to achieve, hazards to meet, tails to chase and beasts to hunt. I've monuments to build and lands to claim. And I'll run through fucking hell and back to make sure I do these things because nothing else will tell me, at the eventual end of my days, that I've done a damn thing.

  Passionate as I am, it all begins with small things. I'm still the guy spending his Saturday nights stenciling images in the opening of an alley on your street. I still have a hard time drawing the same cannon of feminine beauty in the worn out sketch book I bring to school every day. I pack my lunches. The jokes I make with the girls in my classes bomb really badly. I still wear the now-too-small-for-me t-shirts I did in high school.
  But slowly, I begin to understand things and dance a little dance, and before my eyes it all snowballs into the greatest experience I will ever know.


  So, with a little luck, maybe I too will find myself into waters unsought or driven to madness by the creation of my hands one day. And if that day comes, in that fleeting moment in the infinite reality to which we are bound, I might truly know what it means to be.

  

Jurassic Fate

                        At first glance, there is little in common between Michael Crichton’s Jurassic Park and Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, but there are some aspects that are extraordinarily similar between the two.  

Jurassic Park is about the recreation of extinct animals in the modern world while attempting to control them, but that this plan would inevitably fail, regardless of the precautions taken. Frankenstein is about a man’s ambition to create life, and how it backfires on him, bringing misery into his life and cursing the day he ever created the creature. Starting to see a similarity between the two?

            The two stories bring up the idea of doing the impossible and creating something that has passed on and was thought to never be able to come back. In Jurassic Park, Hammond treats the animals like objects that are easily manageable and predictable enough to contain. Meanwhile, in Frankenstein, Victor treats his creation like an object, something that can just be brought back to life and then forgotten when he finally sees the monstrosity he has created. The creations of the two men, with their big ambitions, end up becoming the end of them, as Victor chases the creature to his deathbed, and John Hammond succumbs to a pack of compies (procomsognathus). The two men also die peacefully, knowing that everything will be all right.

            Furthermore, both the island of dinosaurs and the creatures end up getting destroyed after the death of their creator, with the creature leaving to kill himself and the island being destroyed by the military. Both stories also seem to show the inevitability of the outcome, with the island going to hell and the creature causing mayhem before his death. The idea of science being a powerful and misused tool is all too common in these two books, and they display this idea to the fullest extent possible.

            In short, both Frankenstein and Jurassic Park are books about the creation of life, and how the inevitability of how it will backfire. Whether it would be through revenge and hatred or through chaos theory, in the wise words of Ian Malcolm “Life will find a way.”

The Ugly and The Hairy

After reading so much about Frankenstein, the ugly monster, and watching the movie Hulk, I decided to do some comparisons with another hero movie, X-Men Origins: Wolverine. Although very different, the story of Wolverine has some important similarities with the story of Frankenstein.

When Victor was working on the monster, he thought if he could “bestow animation upon a lifeless matter”, it would be possible to give life to a dead person. In other words, he was seeking immortality in a way. In Wolverine’s story, his creators wanted a super soldier with admantium covered bones allowing him to be nearly indestructible as a result of his incredible healing capacity. In both stories we can see how the pursuit of power and immortality are the main goal in the scientists’ minds. However, not everything goes according to plan.

Revenge is another similarity in the plot of the two stories. Both Wolverine and the Frankenstein monster turn against their “creators”. Frankenstein found himself ugly and lonely and blamed it all on Victor. He sought revenge on Victor for making him what he was. Although Wolverine was lucky enough to keep his human appearance and was not really ugly (other than a full head of hair making him look like an animal!), he wanted revenge on the scientists that had disturbed his life and memories.

As we can see, the scientists in both stories were so concentrated on their pursuit of immortality, they had no regard for the life they were creating and the negative impact their manipulations would have on their subjects. This eventually came back to haunt them.

Think about it. Next time you seek perfection don’t use human guinea pigs, they are too unpredictable!