Joseph Lanza, in his essay, states:
"While demystifying the horror, Whale does, however, manage to weave more subversion into this Hays-era production than in any of his other films. The slant on sacrilege (already present in Frankenstein) is here augmented ad absurdum."
Think cinematically about this quote and discuss it in 3 well-developed paragraphs. I want to hear about SPECIFIC influences on this film from German Expressionism, as well as any sociocultural influences. ALL DISCUSSIONS SHOULD BE CINEMATIC. This means choosing a scene to analyze! It also means using your vocabulary to tell me exactly what is on the screen and what the director is trying to imply to the viewer.
Take your time and have fun with this one.
Due: Tuesday, November 13.
In the film "The Bride of Frankenstein", James Whale is able to incorporate a lot of subversion into the movie that includes instances of sacrilegious themes and, some believe, instances of homosexuality, all while being influenced by German Expressionism, which creates the feeling of horror in this film.
ReplyDeleteOne of the main things that is easily noticeable in this film is the sacrilegious references that play there role throughout the entire film, effecting the course of the narrative. There are several scenes that greatly show these subtle references, some of the bigger ones being the scenes with references to the sacrifice of Jesus, and "his body and blood." One scene shows this when they have the monster tied up on a pole, with his hands and legs bound. Then they lift him up so we see him facing towards us, and this resembles very closely the image of Jesus on the cross. This has many sort of sacrilegious applications to it, including the huge difference between when Jesus is crucified, and when the monster is "crucified." Jesus was said to have come to the earth, the son of gods, to receive punishment for our sins, while he is rejected by everyone he came to save. The monster is pretty much completely different except for the fact that he is also rejected by everyone, no having any "friends" so to speak. The shot where this occurs, happens to have the monster within the center of the frame, because that is where the cinematographer wants our attention to be, where all the people's attention is. So we focus on him and we get the connection, but what does it mean? It is a sharp contrast to the normality of this symbol. Jesus is the son of God put on the cross, while the monster is the "son" of Frankenstein, who is put on the cross. Dr. Frankenstein and Dr. Pretorius both talk about how, in the process of creating human life, they are learning to posses the "power of God" to create life on earth, thus not needing God at all. They could do the work of God as man. So when, in this scene, they compare the son of God as being symbolically similar to the "son" of Frankenstein, they are being very sacrilegious by denouncing God under the power of man. The props in this scene, mostly including the large mast that the monster is tied to, and framing of the monster in the center of the frame, within the mise-en-scene, helps to create this similarity between the two symbolic meanings. Another thing you can point out about this scene relates to another. We see the monster on the pole, as Jesus was on the cross, and Jesus was sent to save humanity, while the villagers and people believe he is only there to destroy and to murder. Or is he? In a later scene we see that he comes upon an old blind man who lives in the woods, who is very thankful for the monster coming to be with him. The blind man prays to God that he is very thankful to have sent him a friend to look after and keep him company, to "save him from his loneliness." Then within the frame, we have the old man, and the monster, who is patting him on the back, start fading to black, while a religious symbol of Jesus being crucified still exists in the top of the screen. This reminds us of how the only difference between the symbol of Jesus and the monster in the previous scene was their purposes. Jesus' purpose, to save mankind, but now the monster had a purpose of saving this man. This shows that Dr. Frankenstein and Dr. Pretorius both have created someone of possibly equal significance to Jesus, which is being very sacrilegious. So by showing that one little symbol in the frame above their heads,Whale has implanted even more this idea that Frankenstein and Pretorius have been able to undermine God. Other sacrilegious references that involve the denouncing of Jesus specifically are the countless references to the bread and wine.
When the monster has a meal with the blind old man in the woods, the monster is taught how to say bread and wine and learns that "drink...good." The monster seems to take these props as just nourishment, having no significant meaning behind them. The old man never tells him of what these mean, so when the monster just guzzles them down without thinking anything of any symbolic Christian meaning, it greatly shows some sacrilegious attitudes,undermining the Christian church greatly. There are several other sacrilegious references too, simply with Frankenstein and Pretorius talking about being able to achieve God's work in a very serious way, and even when the monster knocks over the statue of the Bishop in order to escape, these show how these characters do not care about God, that they are even in cases on the same level, a very sacrilegious thought.
ReplyDeleteAnother "subversion" that Whale weaves into the film is the idea of homosexuality, which in of itself, is a sacrilegious concept. There are several instances that leave film skeptics wondering if it could be a reference to homosexuality. One scene includes where Pretorius separates the mini-king and queen that are supposed to be meant to be together in a "normal heterosexual relationship". This could be a hint at Whale's disproving of a "normal relationship" and be in favor of a homosexual type relationship. One huge example of a reference to a homosexual relationship is between Frankenstein and Pretorius. The both of them in one scene discuss Pretorius' experiments and where they will be going with them in the future. in all close up shot, the scene progresses with Pretorius showing Frankenstein his experiments of the miniature people. Then the low-key contrast is intensified while Pretorius tells Frankenstein that they should collaborate together in order to create a mate for the monster. This has a hint of homosexuality because the two men are coming together, to form a partnership in order to create life. which accordingly would have to be done in a heterosexual relationship. But in this film, the two of them work together and are able to create the "bride of Frankenstein" which gives off a huge homosexual hint in the movie.
part two
DeleteThis movie is also very very influenced by German Expressionism, which helps to portray these subversive ideas in the film by accounting in the mise-en-scene and the cinematography, the weirdness and unusual idea of these themes in the film. German Expressionism is very heightened in this film, and exists in almost every scene. However to save time, i will examine one scene, the scene where the "bride" is being made. Several similarities cane be seen from many German Expressionistic movies, including The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari and Metropolis. The lighting for example, is pretty much always low-key contrast, showing the darkness of this scene, and sometimes the light even come from underneath the figure like the shot where we have a close up of Pretorius with the light coming from under his face, like the shots of Caligari. Also we usually see peoples' shadows being projected onto the walls, like when Cesar's shadow is projected when he kills people. This lighting all gives that ominous feel, a key characteristic to German Expressionism. Also we have the dutch angle performed, especially on Frankenstein and Pretorius as they get ready to start the experiment, which is similar to the odd angles before the scientist in Metropolis gets ready to start his experiment with the Machine Man and Maria.This gives us the idea that something is "off" here, that this definitely is not normal. This helps these themes i was talking about, we know this is wrong, against God and that this is wrong, the unnatural making of a human(with two males). Lastly you can look at the decor and props, very similar to the experiment room in metropolis. We have all the machines surrounding the scientists, and we have the rings that surrounded Maria, surrounding the bride, also we have the vertical rings that are on the machine that resemble the vertical rings of various sizes that surrounded the machine man. All these similar German Expressionistic ideas in not just this scene, but in the entire film, helped to create the establishment of these subversive themes of sacrilegious ideas and homosexual ideas.
ReplyDeletepart three
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteThe film Bride of Frankenstein is a cinematically sound film directed by James Whale. Whale was able to fit many different themes into this film which made it such a controversial topic. It is also evident that Whale and this film as a whole had been influenced heavily by German Expressionism, as did many movies of this time.
ReplyDeleteIt has been said that Whale is very notorious for putting themes in his movies, and this one is no different. There are many underlying themes presented here that are concealed by horror and satirical humor. One of the main themes seen here is the sacrilegious references made in the film. Many critics and even ordinary movie goers have managed to debunk this theme and play the blasphemy card because of its sacrilegious references. This theme is introduced through the dialogue of the film, as Dr. Frankenstein says statements about being part of some divine plan in understanding the secrets of God's creations through the actual creation of life. A major Christian aspect is that God is the ultimate creator of life and we mortals should not have this power. Whale makes his characters disobey this "rule" not just once, but many times (not just in Frankenstein and Bride of Frankenstein, but Dr. Frankenstein's son in Son of Frankenstein). There are also many sacrilegious references within the action of the film. All throughout the movie, The Monster is supposedly going through a "Christ like" dilemma where he is harmless and everyone is misunderstanding his actions. I also did some research on this topic and found that some of the scenes were cut to censor most of the obvious religious themes. One scene in particular was of The Monster as he wanders in the cemetery. He comes across a statue of Jesus as he is on the cross and just stares in astonishment, as if he understands what Jesus had gone through. The thing about this is that Whale is trying to compare this monster to the son of God, something that can cause a lot of controversy. One instance that shows religion is the scene where The Monster got attacked by the two travelers while in the hermit’s house. He runs away into the woods and ends up in the cemetery. The dolly's right as The Monster runs through the cemetery, knocking over religious statues that are "in his way." This can symbolize a rise against and attack of organized religion, Christianity in particular.
Another major underlying theme that Whale introduced in this film was the idea of homosexuality. This theme is not as predominant and blatantly used as the religious theme, but it is just as important. In Roger Ebert's essay on this film he says that Gary Morris interpreted many different homosexual references. Morris believed that the way the Monster and the hermit acted towards each other could simulate a "model for a 'blissful married couple'", the homosexual reference being that the two are both men. In the scene where the Monster and hermit first meet, the hermit says a prayer over the Monster, that of which could simulate a prayer of a couple during their wedding. Morris also believed that Dr. Frankenstein and Dr. Praetorious coming together to create the Monster could represent same-sex parents, which could be argued true.
This film is also heavily influenced by German Expressionism and the different movies that came before it. The overall mise-en-scene of the film was German Expressionistic. There is virtually no lighting in the film, or Whale made the illusion of almost no lighting. There is awkward architecture such as the spiraling dark staircase, which can also be seen in The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari and Metropolis. The look of the lab and the use of lightning for the creation is also similar to the look of the room in Metropolis where the robot Maria was created. Roger Ebert even says that the inspiration for Bride was originally the artificial Maria from Metropolis.
In The Bride of Frankenstein, the director, James Whale manages to weave subversion into this film, more so than any of his other films. Whale led a very private life, and it is now commonly accepted that he was a proudly gay man. He managed to sneak in subversive ideas about sexuality, and even religion.
ReplyDeleteOne of the scenes that portrays this the best is the one with the older blind man. Firstly, he is wearing a robe, and his hair and beard all resemble god-like qualities. The two of them may allude to a homosexual relationship.
Another idea is that of the one in which the two creators of Frankenstein are two homosexual males, "artificially" creating a human. Pretorious especially openly disdains heterosexual relationships throughout the movie, another hint at homosexuality.
In the film “The Bride of Frankenstein”, many evident themes in the movie was ecstatically portrayed on screen, and the use of German Expressionism is apparent in the film as well. The dreadful and unaccepting feel of the film is further emphasized by Whale’s feelings of acceptance and dread due to being criticized as a gay director.
ReplyDeleteOne of the many evident themes of the film is the reoccurring biblical reference used in comparison to the monster himself. For example, when they have the monster bound up in chains in the dungeon, Whales is making an implicit reference to how Jesus was locked up right before his crucifixion. This helps to strengthen the idea of un-acceptance of the truth from the common people. Also, when the monster is tied up to the pole and held for all to see, it most directly represents the crucifixion of Jesus, ad once again, helping to illuminate the idea of non-acceptance. Finally, the scientist who created the monster and his bride seems to be playing the role of God in which the power of breathing life into nothingness can be bestowed upon man. Lots of the symbols of this film are criticized and mocked due to their over-religious nature, and obviously posed many problems for religious viewers.
Another major theme of the film comes from the idea of homosexuality. However, this theme seems to be more shrouded, mainly because the director may not have meant to include these symbols in the film, and that his beliefs are shown within his work. Lot’s of relationships in the film are frowned upon, but the one between Frankenstein and the blind man is interestingly emphasized. The way they acted towards each other surprised me, and suggested to me that the characters may have somewhat of a hidden homosexual attachment. Critics may argue that homosexual references n the film are invalid, due to the reoccurrence of Christian ideals, and most people know that “homosexuality” and “Christianity” do not go together. Another idea is the fact that two men are creating an artificial monster. This may symbolize the strain for the normality of homosexual love, and to go as far as to create a “child”, further strengthens that purpose.
Finally, one of the major influences of the film, German Expressionism, is apparent in the mise-en-scene and the composition of the lighting within the shots. Most of the film was very dark and dreadful, which helped to bold the isolation and oddness that most Expressionistic films share. Much like “The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari”, thick makeup was used on the characters, and lots of shadows within shots may have been painted on the wall. This allows the film to share the apparent whackiness and distortion that Caligari was able to pull of. Also, much like Metropolis, many themes concerning class are conveyed throughout the film, such as the idea of “the Creator” and “the created”, and lots of mechanical elements are used in both films as well.
Overall, “The Bride of Frankenstein” expressed many themes that are reoccurring and relevant in today’s culture. The controversy behind the film is yet to be cracked, but in time many hope to unlock the secrets behind the reasoning of the mise-en-scene and composition of shots within the movie.
The Bride of Frankenstein (1935), as a German Expressionist Era film, deals with sociocultural themes not evident in previous film noir and action films, in this case through horror and suspense. Themes include religion, homosexuality/unconventional relationships and mainstream society’s ever-changing relationship to science. One of the establishing scenes is one of the most sacrilegious. The monster is burned at the stake, positioned like Jesus. He is someone different, who is automatically ostracized from the community out of fear. The parallel continues as the monster is impossibly “resurrected” out of the ashes of the bonfire. He shocks and scares everyone he comes to. This brings up a more modern view on the importance of acceptance of those different from ourselves. The film is made so that the viewer sees the world from the monster’s perspective and feels sympathy towards his plight.
ReplyDeleteThe scene at the old man’s house is also filled with horror and theme and sacrilegious parallels. The blind man offers the monster wine and bread, a direct reference to the communion ritual and the blood and body of Christ. It also furthers the motif of “different people” and questions reasons for ostracism. The relationship between the hermit and the monster also brings up a homosexual tone, or at least an unconventional relationship. They are gentle with each other and touch and are important to one and other. They are the only connection the other has. This is seen partially through the soft lighting and close quarters of the on screen space; it is intimate. Society’s rejection of this idea is the cottage burning down. Another example of the criticism of society’s quick judgments is the filmmaker’s exploration of the unconventional and Pretorius’ obvious rejection of the conventional, nuclear family. This is seen in the way Pretorius is presented in relation to Dr. Frankenstein and his bride. The Frankenstein house is large, relatively empty and cold in comparison to the small cottage of the bling man. Pretorius speaks as though he should have priority in Frankenstein’s life over his soon-to-be-wife.
The relationship of the viewer to these ideas however, is complicated. We see Pretorius as creepy and somewhat wrong, although the filmmaker seems to support his rejection of mainstream ideals. We also feel sympathetic to Pretorius because he has no real relationships and is rejected because of his controversial work. We are sympathetic to the monster for being rejected, due to no fault of his own. We are sympathetic to the wife because she is really in the dark and in fear of the whole situation. We are sympathetic to Dr. Frankenstein because he is a slave to his talents and curiousity and wants nothing more than to fade into an ordinary life. We are sympathetic to the people that the monster scares, because they are blinded by ignorance to who he really is. We are sympathetic to the Frankensteins’ birdlike servant woman because she is never believed. Obviously, all these sympathies caused by the cinematic elements bring confusion and contradiction.
The Bride of Frankenstein, while being the sequel to a horror film, was not in itself a horror film. The film strays from having a scary set up, and is more of a philosophical exploration of the limits that man should take with science.
ReplyDeleteIt has been said by a few people on this blog that this film tries to subtly reinforce the ideas of homosexuality, as we see Pretorius and Frankenstein create life together, and both are men. I disagree with this. If anything, this relationship would suggest that homosexuality is immoral. Yes, the two men come together to make life, and yes, I personally felt that Pretorius was gay from the moment he was introduced, but Frankenstein was obviously a heterosexual man. From the introduction of Pretorius, Frankenstein sets himself against the man and refuses to help him, showing the objection of heterosexuals to homosexuals. Pretorius continues to pester and threaten Frankenstein, showing a homosexual man who is frustrated by having his advances denied. When Elizabeth is kidnapped, Frankenstein goes to all odds to preserve his HETEROSEXUAL relationship, and only then grudgingly gives into Pretorius. Also, the men do successfully create life, but their bastardized creations are horrifying and ungodly, and run on impulse, causing them to hurt others and work only toward themselves (while we don't exactly see this with the bride, Frankenstein's monster's behavior suggests this would happen). Ultimately, this film would support the idea that homosexuality is immoral and inly leads to mistakes and pain.
This film also deals with a number of sacrilegious topics. The most obvious is man creating life, a job that people of that time would agree is a job that should be left in the hands of God and no one else. When these man tamper with the order of things, they produce creatures that have a human body, and with it a human id(psychologically) and a bit of ego, but lack the superego that would be paired with a God-given soul to spiritually balance them and make them successful creatures. This, paired with the pseudo-homosexual conditions the creatures are born under, results in horrendous creatures of deadly impulse that kill, are fueled by anger, and yearn to return to death. A number of similarities are drawn between Frankenstein's monster and Jesus Christ, like the monster's lack of acceptance by people, both having a resurrection after their premature deaths, as well as having superhuman abilities, positive dealings with the handicapped, and both being used as public examples for their crimes. However, instead of this drawing sympathy for Frankenstein's monster, it further helps outline his disgraceful existence, and the fact that he shouldn't be around.
There are a good many expressionist influences in this film. Shadowing plays an important role (as is expected) in setting the tone of the many ungodly scenes of this film. For example, in the scene where we see the two doctors bringing the bride to life, shadows are used heavily. For example, both Pretorius and his henchman Ludwig have their faces thrown in shadow while theyre working, while Frankenstein, in contrast, maintains a lighted face, to show the difference between the selfishness of Pretorius and his henchman, and Frankenstein's innocence. Also, as the doctors converse with each other, dutch angles are used to show the slanted nature of the on goings, and the fact that this whole scene is hugely unnatural. Furthermore, when we see Ludwig ascending the stairs, the final destination of the stairs is unclear, which is another expressionist idea. Lastly, the theme of the strong preying on the weak is evident, as the physically powerful monster hurts
many people and impresses his will upon weak humans.
I like, Elijah, that you are taking a different stance on the themes in this film. However, your argument would be MUCH STRONGER had you included CINEMATIC EVIDENCE of Frankenstein's heterosexuality. Remember, you are not to stay at the sociological level of the discussion, but must delve deeper and provide cinematic evidence to support your statements.
DeleteAlso, the impression and camouflage of science as humanity, often times through the use of vivid electricity (galvanization), as well as complicated machinery, are often used in German expressionism.
ReplyDeleteJames Whale incorporates more subversion into his film, "Bride of Frankenstein," than any of his other cinematic master pieces. He is influenced by German Expressionism, as well as posing controversial themes such as religion and homosexuality. All of these combined components give the film a spooky feel, keeping the audience on edge and waiting to see what move Whale will make next.
ReplyDeleteThe theme of religion is recurring in Bride of Frankenstein. For example, the scene where the monster is burned at the stake is almost symbolic of Jesus dying on the cross. The monster is dying to protect others, like Jesus did. Although I'm sure he did not want to die, the monster knew it had to be done to save the community and the well being of others. Also, the scene where the blind man lets the monster into his home and cares for him. The blind man can be seen as God, not only because of his physical appearance (old, white beard, etc.), but also because he helps the monster without even knowing him. God is supposed to be this almighty power that helps all without judging, and this is what the blind man did.
Another theme in the film was homosexuality. The same scene where the blind man cares for the monster can be seen from different viewpoints. In a religious way, as stated above, or this scene can be viewed as a hidden representation of homosexuality. The relationship between the blind man and the monster is frowned upon in society, much like homosexual relationships were frowned upon back in that time period. One reason to back this theory up was the fact that Whale himself was homosexual. The blind man and the monster both have missing senses, so touch is their way of communication. Gentle touches between two males on camera during that time period were not common. These two characters shared a special bond because they were dependent on each other. And compensated for what the other person lacked. For example, sight and the development of language.
Christina--Remember, as I told Elijah, to take your discussion to a CINEMATIC level. Do not just stick with sociological themes and discussion. Your argument will be much stronger with cinematic evidence. Plus, that is the only way you'll do well next year on your assessments is if you provide cinematic evidence to support your arguments.
Deletei just posted my response and it somehow never showed up.... fml
ReplyDeleteso if my response seems rushed and fast that's why. i dont like redoing things
DeleteJames Whale was influenced by German Expressionism in 'Bride of Frankenstein,' as well as other controversial topics he had incorporated into the film, such as homosexuality and religion.
ReplyDeleteWhale was influence by german expressionism in films like Metropolis, and Nosferatu. German expressionism is commonly defined as a film style characterized by its lighting, symbolic actions and characters, and distorted sets. This is evident in scenes such as the one where Dr Pretorius had shown Dr Frankenstein his miniature people, Pretorius’ face is half shrouded in shadow when he speaks of his scientific creations. This is symbolic of his devious straying nature from social standards as well as his truly innocent nature in just wanting to experiment the boundaries of science- as evident by the lit side of his face (the side closest to the experiments). This type of lighting is also used in films like Metropolis, Nosferatu, and the Cabinet of Dr Caligari, all portraying a sinister old man in similar lighting at one point or another.
Whale acknowledges and implies controversial topics in his film ‘Bride of Frankenstein’ like homosexuality. Whether or not Whale supports homosexuality or not seems to be unclear, but he implies it with ‘two men working on creating life’ as well as the ‘blissful relationship’ that Morris described between the monster and the hermit in the cabin. This is not concrete on either perspective on homosexuality and remains to be argued whether or not it’s in support or in rejection of it.
Another controversiality implied in ‘Bride of Frankenstein’ is religion, more specifically Christianity. Whether or not Whale supports Christianity is also uncertain. The most Christian implication is when the hermit is teaching the monster words while feeding it. The foods displayed are bread and wine, symbolizing holy communion in the Christian church, and this can be argued as positive mention of the religion. There are also scenes in which the monster pushes down christian symbols like in the graveyard where he pushes down a statue of a religious figure (a bishop or something), as well as when the people are chasing the monster, one of them yells ‘this way! to the monster!’ and behind him is a depiction of Christ on the cross. this may signify Christ’s abandonment of humanity, or just the unholiness of the monster, no one can really tell.
James Whale, while creating an arguably enjoyable film about Frankenstein, a monster well known to the general population as a fictional character, also displayed themes of religion and society's connection with and usage of science. The film also reflects the style of German Expressionism (as it was made in the era, although it was American).
ReplyDeleteReligion and specifically Christianity (especially the idea of immoral actions) was a strong theme in Bride of Frankenstein. First, the blind man teaches Frankenstein language by showing him objects and telling him what they are. Among the first things he shows/gives to Frankenstein are bread and wine, which are turned into the body and blood of Christ during the process of transubstantiation. They seem to be the only two things Frankenstein ever eats, which can indicate a positive light shone on religion in general. However (and I think I saw it mentioned above), that's somewhat juxtaposed by the scenes in which Frankenstein is in the cemetery, wreaking havoc on the religious monuments (we can infer that it is a religion-based cemetery based on the various monuments and Christian symbols). This could be interpreted as the downfall of religion, as Frankenstein has been generally rejected by society. This could be a reference to Christ's original rejection by society, but I think it means that religion is an empty belief where we rely too strongly on being "saved". As symbols of Christ look on, nothing can be done to the depredation of the cemetery just as nothing can be done to help all the bad things that are happening in the world.
As for the theme of science and its affect on people and its strong development (which was occurring greatly in that period, especially in Germany concurring with the rise of the Nazi regime). Frankenstein, a monster, was created by means of scientific experiment. I believe society's reaction to Frankenstein reflects society's reaction to science in general, especially at that time. Their initial thoughts are to attack it, to be scared of it, and to want it to disappear without even giving it a second of trust. This is exactly what happens to Frankenstein as he tries to talk to people but they are scared of him, therefore he gets violent. Perhaps this is a metaphor for science backfiring if misused. However, when the blind man accepts and takes in Frankenstein we realize that Frankenstein can be good. (This also brings up another theme of people judging others based on physical appearance instead of getting to know them and their nature).
As for German Expressionism, there were several parts of the film that reflected the style. First, the lighting was very dark. In some situations you could barely see some of the characters. The lighting was also natural many times and a lot of fire was used as a primary light source in a lot of the film. Along with lighting, shadows are also used often. Lastly, some parts of the film are very tight and rigid (for example, the laboratory shown in the last 15-20 minutes of the film is very crowded, and the walls of the cave shown in the beginning of the film are curved inward almost as a trapezoid almost in the way of Dr. Caligari).
Anna--You, too, must provide CINEMATIC EVIDENCE to support your statements. To make statements for your argument on the sociological level and then not to go deeper with the cinematic evidence will go against you next year when you do your assessments (especially the presentation). Be sure to ALWAYS provide evidence of cinematic nature. Canted angles, mise en scene, lighting, etc....The cinematic evidence should not be an afterthought.
Delete