On the other hand, Kenneth Brannagh’s interpretation of Frankenstein uses lighting, camera and sound effects to create suspense and tension for the audience in a very different way. The scene opens with a half-extinguished candle casting a large flickering shadow on the wall. This creates tension for the audience as it builds up the audience’s anticipation of a dramatic event about to unfold; this is because they do not know who the shadow belongs to. The music used is very fast paced and dramatic, there is also the sound of quick footsteps moving across a stone floor. These sound effects heighten the audience’s sense of foreboding by introducing unknown elements, for example the audience is unaware of who the footsteps belong to, where they’re going and what they signify within the scene. The scene then moves on to a tracking shot following Frankenstein walking quickly through the lab; by doing this he has reveal who the footsteps belong to and where they are going, but has also created a new tension for the audience as they don’t know why Frankenstein is agitated and moving so quickly.
The way in which the monster is revealed to the audience and brought to life in the two films is also very different. In the 1931 version of the film James Whale delays revealing the monster for as long as possible. He uses interruptions, such as the arrival of Elizabeth, to distract the audience from the monster, this builds up a lot of suspense and frustration for the audience as they want to see the creation but cant. Also, the monster is revealed to the other characters before it is revealed to the audience, the reactions of the other characters towards seeing the monster helps to build tension for the audience as the audience are wanting to know what the creation looks like and why it has made the characters act this way. James Whale uses camera angles to create suspense as he hides the monster from the audience’s view but shows the characters faces instead. During the creation of the monster a lot of mechanical sound effects are used, such as the moving of heaving machinery and electrical sparks, this could give the impression that the “birth” of the monster is very unnatural, also, when we see the hand of the monster it appears to be very inhuman, this creates tension for the audience as it makes it hard for them to relate to the monster.
On the other hand, in the 1994 version of Frankenstein, Kenneth Brannagh has tried to portray a very natural birth. The vat that the monster is kept in could be seen as the womb and the fluid in which the monster is in could be seen as the amniotic fluid. However, before the “birth” of the monster we see its face through the small window in the vat, it appears misshapen and deformed, this could be trying to show that although the birth has natural elements to it the monster is still inhuman and was created against God’s will.
The two films also differ in the way that Frankenstein reacts to the monster after its creation. In James Whales version Frankenstein seems to have been taken over by the creation and at the end of the scene he has the restrained by the other characters. This could show how reckless Frankenstein has been by creating life as the power he appears to feel has taken over him. It also creates a sense of foreboding for the audience as Frankenstein’s reaction could be seen as an insight as to what the monster will be like later in the film.
In Kenneth Brannagh’s interpretation Frankenstein seems very depressed and unhappy with his creation. At the end of the scene we see him looking into the mirror and asking ‘What have I done?’ Brannagh could be using the mirror to show that Frankenstein is not who he once was and has been changed by this experience, we can also see this in his physical appearance. These create tension for the audience as they can see that what has happened is a bad thing and are unsure of what is going to happen to the monster. Furthermore, a gloomy and depressive atmosphere is created by the bells which can be heard in the background, these could signify death or funerals.
Nevertheless, James Whale’s and Kenneth Brannagh’s interpretations of Frankenstein do have similarities; they both make references to religion and specifically Christianity. In James Whale’s interpretation Frankenstein is wearing a white lab coat, this could symbolize the purity of God and Frankenstein’s attempted to play God by creating life. Further on in the scene Frankenstein is bent over the monster stroking its hand. This could show that Frankenstein is taking on a fatherly role by caring for the monster and showing it love, this could also be religious symbolism as Frankenstein could be seen as God tending for his son, Jesus Christ, attempting to bring him back to life. Kenneth Brannagh’s interpretation again shows religious symbolism. Towards the beginning of the scene the monster is lying on a wooden board with its arms outstretched, this could be an imitation of Jesus on the cross, Frankenstein then hoists the monster up to the ceiling and it is bathed in a bright light from the window, this could be seen as Jesus rising up to heaven as the monster appears to be disappearing into the light.
In conclusion, I think that the ways in which James Whale and Kenneth Brannagh have created tension and suspense for the audiences are very different; they have done this by using sound effects, lighting techniques and camera shots but in very different ways. However, the films do have some similarities; they both make religious references and their purposes are also the same, to create suspense and tension for the audience. I thought that Kenneth Brannagh’s interpretation was more effective in the way that he used the various techniques to create tension and shock the audience. Although on the other hand, James Whale’s interpretation would have had the same effect on a 1931 audience.
