The made-for-TV movie Frankenstein: The True Story (1973) is the most faithful movie adaptation of Mary Shelley's classic horror novel, Frankenstein. Produced in the United Kingdom and later distributed by NBC, the three-hour movie — broadcast in two parts — adapts the basic story of Mary Shelley's novel, but translates its themes for the small screen.
First published anonymously in 1818, Frankenstein was a cultural phenomenon, inspiring adaptations as early as 1823. Frankenstein during a difficult period in her life, and as a result of its rich narrative themes and philosophical quandaries, the book resonated with audiences — in fact, its appeal is so universal that the book has never been out of print in over 200 years. Frankenstein: The True Story may have been a modest-budget adaptation that willingly altered the content of its source material, but it — more than any other film adaptation to date — understood the core elements that make Frankenstein such a powerful and haunting story.
While Mary Shelley's Frankenstein (1994) is often described as the most faithful adaptation, the big-budget movie fundamentally changes many key aspects of the story. Some consider the best adaptation of Mary Shelley's novel, based solely on the similarities between its story and that of the 1818 novel — but these similarities are limited to basic plot elements. Adapted by Kenneth Branagh, the 1994 movie pays shallow tribute to its source material but injects its own bombastic content in an attempt to add excitement. In doing so, the blockbuster feature film misses many of the core elements of the original Frankenstein novel.
Why Mary's Shelley's Frankenstein Is Not A Faithful Adaptation
One of the core ideas in adaptation studies is the concept of being faithful to the spirit versus faithful to the text; in the case of Mary Shelley's Frankenstein (1994), Branagh may have intended to be faithful to the spirit of Frankenstein (as he claimed many times in interviews over the years), but he instead prioritized fidelity to the written word. Many aspects of Mary Shelley's Frankenstein are lifted directly from the source material — but in being translated to the big screen, the thematic significance is lost. This Frankenstein's monster is more victim than villain, but in the novel, the Creature is unambiguously a monster created by Dr. Frankenstein.
In Mary Shelley's novel, the Creature is a horrific abomination who, despite his tragic origins, is clearly evil (he even identifies with Satan after reading Paradise Lost). The Creature murders young William, Henry Clarvel, and Elizabeth — not to mention the various people who are injured or killed as a result of his actions — without remorse, and with no other purpose than to manipulate Dr. Frankenstein. The implication within the narrative is that the Creature became a monster because Dr. Frankenstein failed to take on his parental role (referencing the nature versus nurture debate). Had the Creature not been abandoned by his creator — and then rejected by the first people he encountered — he likely would have developed a healthy moral com. Mary Shelley's Frankenstein removes this suggestion because it elevates Dr. Frankenstein into a traditional hero role and the Creature into a tragic figure in the story — completely undermining the core message of the book.
There are several other examples of the 1994 movie changing fundamental aspects of Frankenstein in ways that depart from the spirit of the original: Victor Frankenstein builds his creation using Waldman's notes, rather than discovering the "principle of life" on his own; the Creature has Waldman's brain, implying that his memories are partially responsible for the Creature's motivations and intelligence; Victor never has an opportunity to save Justine from being hanged; and Elizabeth is killed because the Creature is angry — not as a method of cruel revenge. A particularly egregious example is how Elizabeth's story is rewritten so that a grief-stricken Victor brings her back to life as a monster, only for her to self-immolate when she sees her reflection (presumably because she looks hideous).
Not only does this change have uncomfortable implications for Elizabeth's value being tied to physical appearance (the novel has a distinctly feminist thread that hints Victor's biggest mistake was attempting to creating life without a woman — the movie instead uses Elizabeth and Justine as ive objects of desire), but it robs Victor of having learned the core lesson he learned in the novel. was not anti-science, but it was anti-hubris. Despite his initial failings, Victor in the novel at least recognizes that creating a second female creation would be dangerous and immoral — Keneth Branagh's version doesn't appear to have learned anything in Mary Shelley's Frankenstein.
Why Frankenstein: The True Story Is A Better Adaptation
Unlike other adaptations — such as the Universal Classic Horror version — Frankenstein: The True Story kept many key elements of the novel, such as the Creature's ability to speak, his loneliness, and the climactic showdown between him and Dr. Victor Frankenstein in the Arctic. Other elements — particularly themes — are altered slightly and/or combined to better fit in the new media. For example, best friend Henry Clerval plays a very different role in the movie than in the novel, but in both instances, he is a tragic reminder of Victor's corruption. A whole new plot involving the creation of a second female monster, Prima, is added by Frankenstein: The True Story, but it serves a similar (if more gripping and therefore screen-appropriate) function as the Justine murder plotline in the novel, which would be very difficult to do well in a movie format. Both versions have the same effect on the story: not only is there a tragic death, but Victor finds himself under investigation from the police. In both stories Elizabeth dies at the hands of the monster, finally pushing Victor over the edge.
Frankenstein: The True Story does a better job representing the novel's ideas in a way that resonates with audiences. The escalating violence in the ballroom scene, for example, is genuinely frightening, enhanced by the gradual increase in tension as the crowd turns from stunned spectators to a panicking mob. Frankenstein himself is much more despicable than the Branagh version of the character. Like his novel counterpart, this Dr. Frankenstein caused the Creature to become evil by abandoning it; unlike the novel version though, this movie version freely its this, taking full responsibility before his death in the end.
At its core, Frankenstein is a tragic story about a man dabbling in forces he does not understand — and then trying to ignore and then avoid the problems he creates rather than doing the hard work of fixing them. Victor is ultimately responsible for everything the Creature does in the novel because he is unable, or unwilling, to take responsibility for the monster he created. Even when he has the opportunity to come clean about his misdeeds and save Justine from being hanged, he chooses not to intervene. Although he is the protagonist, Victor Frankenstein is no hero: his inaction directly causes the deaths of his family , his best friend, and eventually his wife (who he marries knowing full well the Creature will kill her if he does). While sympathetic, neither the Creature nor the "mad scientist" in the novel are "good" people. Frankenstein: The True Story understands this, and responds by characterizing both its Dr. Frankenstein and his creature as deeply-flawed and villainous.
