Writing Center 3/26/10

I went to the Writing Center on March 26, 2010 to go over my third writing project called Taking a Look at the Original Frankenstein Story in Film. Going to the Writing Center really helped me to improve my writing a lot. This was the second time that I visited the Writing Center to receive help with writing a paper this year. I had gone to the Writing Center a few times last year, but I feel like I got a lot more out of my visits this year. For my third writing project, I needed help with writing my thesis, introduction paragraph, conclusion paragraph, and just the whole essay in general. The Writing Center gave me a lot of tips for ways to improve my paper. Like when they helped me with my second writing project, they told me that I should write my thesis after I wrote my paper because a lot of people find it a lot easier to do. They also told me to add more about why the things I wrote in my paper were important, to combine things that I had written too many sentences about, to write about the relationship between Frankenstein and Victor in both the movie and the original Frankenstein story, and to add more about the significance of the creation’s name and physical appearance. They also helped me to realize that there was a much more effective thing that I could focus on, which was that the roles that the creation plays in the original Frankenstein story and the movie Van Helsing are completely different.  Their help has helped me with my other writing projects that we did in this class. I applied these lessons to my own writing in all of my writing projects for this class and for writing assignments in my other classes.

Lemony Snicket

I am very glad that I decided to go to see Lemony Snicket speak when he came to Washington College. When I first heard that he was coming to Washington College to speak, I really was not interested in going to listen to him at all but one of my friends convinced me to go with her. Lemony Snicket was such a great public speaker and he was absolutely hilarious. I was laughing pretty much the whole time. I really liked how he found some way to relate so many different things to each other. He began by telling a story about a mother who fell down the stairs because she was holding a baby and talking on the phone. Throughout his entire talk, Lemony Snicket kept relating back to the mother who fell down the stairs. He called her “Black and Blue Mom.” As I was listening to him read part of one of his books, I actually wished that I could write interesting stories like him. I really liked the way that he writes. It makes his stories seem so much more intriguing. I learned some things about writing from attending this event. I learned that it is okay to experiment with your writing and write about things that you probably would not have written about before. Lemony Snicket wrote about very strange things, but I think that is what made his writing so interesting. He writes how he feels and his personality really shows through his writing. I hope that I can improve my writing one day to make it as interesting as his writing.

Writing Center 3/5/10

I went to the Writing Center on March 5, 2010 to go over my second writing project called Victor Frankenstein and the Mariner: Their Lonely Struggle. Going to the Writing Center really helped me to improve my writing a lot. Unfortunately, I did not go to the Writing Center for this writing project until after the assignment was due but it was still worth it because they advice that they gave me helped me on the writing projects we had later in the semester. First, they helped me to work on writing my thesis. Like you, they also told me that writing my thesis last is probably the most helpful because your thesis can always change as you write your paper. When you write your thesis first, it sometimes constricts your writing and causes you to stick to one strict topic. When your writing is constricted, it keeps you from reaching out and addressing things that could really make your writing better. The Writing Center also helped me improve on incorporating quotes into my writing and to give my own personal reflection on the quotes. The Writing Center also helped me with my organization of my writing. Although the main focus of going to the Writing center was to receive help with writing my thesis, their help with all of the other things they taught me will help me improve on my writing a great deal in the future. Their help has helped me with my other writing projects that we did in this class. I applied these lessons to my own writing in all of my writing projects for this class and for writing assignments in my other classes.

Self Reflection

I chose to revise this essay because I think Van Helsing really makes Victor Frankenstein’s creation a more interesting character and involves his character in another story. I think Van Helsing actually helped me to appreciate Mary Shelley’s novel of the original Frankenstein story anymore because the film brought her story and her creation to life using animation. The movie brought the original Frankenstein story to a new level and gave Victor Frankenstein’s creation a much more intricate meaning and purpose. When revising this essay, I attempted to elaborate on the original Frankenstein story in contrast to the film, Van Helsing. I also added how the film shows some similarities to the original Frankenstein story and how the film specific medium brings the story to life. I also added how the film brings out the fact that Victor Frankenstein’s creation is a more complicated character than how Victor perceives him to be. Over the course of this semester I really wanted to work on improving my interpretations of stories, my introduction paragraphs, my conclusion paragraphs, incorporating quotes into my writing, my transitions, and my organization of writing. In this writing project, I think I really improved on these things since the beginning of the semester. However, I still think I can improve my writing further. I have also improved as a reader. It is much easier for me to do close reading now. I used to not like reading, but this semester’s English class had taught me to appreciate reading a lot more. I still would like to keep working on all of the things on my to do list from the beginning of the semester in the coming semesters at Washington College.

Taking a Closer Look at the Original Frankenstein Story in Film: Revised

Frankenstein. When most people hear this word, they immediately think of Mary Shelley’s novel, Frankenstein, and an evil, scary looking monster. The film Van Helsing is usually not the first thing that comes to mind. Van Helsing is one of many films that takes up and remediates the original Frankenstein story and brings it to life using animation. The original story of Frankenstein says one thing and the film Van Helsing uses the original story of Frankenstein to create a much more complex story. The primary “thesis” of the film Van Helsing in its re-telling of the original Frankenstein story is to give Victor Frankenstein’s creation a more intricate purpose. His creation plays two completely different social roles in the original Frankenstein story and the film Van Helsing. However, the film Van Helsing also shows some similarities to the original Frankenstein story.
In the original Frankenstein story, Victor Frankenstein’s creation was only given life for one reason. Victor Frankenstein only wanted to prove that he could infuse life into an inanimate object using science. He believed that God was not the only one who could give life. His creation does not really have any other significant purpose in the original Frankenstein story. He is only viewed as a monster that does not belong in the world and is not needed for anything. However, the creation in the original Frankenstein story is actually more complicated – just not from Victor’s perspective. In the novel, the monster is very intelligent and insightful and he has feelings and emotions just like human beings. It is understandable why Victor cannot see that his creation is more complicated than he thinks. It seems that he is blinded by the monster’s physical appearance and he is too frightened of what he has created that he cannot see the positive things that have come out of his creation. He gave someone a chance to live. Victor should have taken advantage of what he had created and given the monster a chance, but instead he immediately looked down upon him and hated him just like everybody else. He should have gotten to know the monster and maybe he would have learned that he is a decent being. If Victor had just given his creation a chance and gotten to know him, maybe Victor and so many other people would not have seen him as a monster.
In the film Van Helsing, Victor Frankenstein’s creation is one of the main characters. He is actually named Frankenstein as opposed to Mary Shelley’s novel, Frankenstein, where he remains nameless and is only referred to as “the creation,” “the creature,” or “the monster.” Actually having a name sort of gives him a more human-like and less monstrous quality. This also sometimes helps people to realize that he really is not a monster and leads them feel sympathy towards him. However, his physical appearance in the movie is the typical physical appearance that most people think of when they hear the word Frankenstein. He is very large and looks like he has been put together with many different parts that do not belong together. He is quite scary looking to most people who see this movie. He is literate and is actually a very insightful and intelligent being just like in Mary Shelley’s novel, Frankenstein. In the movie, anyone who sees Frankenstein automatically thinks he is a terrible monster, but all he really wants to do is be able to exist and not be looked down upon by everyone who sees him just because of what he looks like. He does not want to hurt anybody or cause any problems. He actually even saves a couple people’s lives in the movie. Unlike in Mary Shelley’s novel, he actually loves his creator, Victor Frankenstein, and is very upset when Dracula murders him. Frankenstein even calls Victor Frankenstein his father, which shows that he has a better relationship with Victor in the film, Van Helsing, than in the original Frankenstein story.
One specific scene in the film, Van Helsing, where the film gives Victor Frankenstein’s creation a more intricate purpose in its re-telling of the original Frankenstein story is when Anna Valerious and Van Helsing first discover Frankenstein in a dark cave. “The Frankenstein Monster!” Anna gasped when she spotted the large figure hiding in the darkness of the cave. “Monster! Who’s the monster here? I have done nothing wrong, yet you and your kind still wish me dead!” the creature replied. Frankenstein is hiding in this cave because he does not want to be found by Dracula and the other vampires. He is the key to his father’s machine – the same machine that had given him life – and the only one that can give lasting life to Dracula’s children. Frankenstein tells Anna and Van Helsing to kill him because he does not want to take part in giving life to Dracula’s children even though all he really wants to do is live. He really does have good intentions and does not act like an evil monster. He does not want to be responsible for giving life to so many monsters even though so many people consider him a monster. Frankenstein’s role in Van Helsing is so much more complex than the role he plays in the original Frankenstein story.
The material and medium specific characteristics of the film, Van Helsing, also help to give Victor Frankenstein’s creation a more intricate purpose in the film’s re-telling of the original Frankenstein story. The film brings the original Frankenstein story to life using animation just like how Victor Frankenstein brings his creation to life. The energy that Victor Frankenstein used to create Frankenstein and is needed to give Dracula’s children life is like how film uses energy to create what it does. Energy is needed to create the film, Van Helsing, which uses animation to bring the original Frankenstein story to life. Frankenstein’s energy is necessary to give life just like how energy is necessary to create films and bring novels like Mary Shelley’s novel, Frankenstein, to life. The entire film Van Helsing is also very dark with a lot of flashing lights and lightning just like many scenes in Mary Shelley’s novel, Frankenstein. The film also shows Frankenstein in his typical, most common physical appearance, which helps bring his character to life.
One similarity to the original Frankenstein story that the film, Van Helsing, shows is that Victor Frankenstein’s creation actually has good intentions. In Van Helsing. In the original Frankenstein story, Victor’s creation goes to the wilderness and hides to take refuge from the people who flee in fear when they see him. He steals food from a cottage where a young man, a young woman, and an old man live. Watching these people fascinates him, but he soon learns that they are very upset about something. When he learns that they are upset because they are suffering from poverty, he feels terrible about what he has done and he tries to help them to make up for what he had done. He does not want to cause anyone any pain. He would not have stolen the food from them if he had known that it would cause them to suffer further. In Van Helsing, Victor’s creation wants to try to save the human race. He even hid in a cave and suffered by himself in order to stay away from the vampires who were going to use him in order to give life to their children and wipe out the human race. All Frankenstein wanted to do was live and not be seen as a monster, but he sacrificed his happiness to save other people – people who have caused him to suffer because they refuse to accept him because of his physical appearance. Clearly, Victor Frankenstein’s creation had good intentions in both the original Frankenstein story and Van Helsing and the film brings those good intentions to life.
There are many films that take up and remediate the original Frankenstein story. Van Helsing is a great film that gives a much more complex purpose to Victor Frankenstein’s creation and brings the original Frankenstein story to life using animation. It also shows some similarities between the original Frankenstein story and the film, Van Helsing. Is it possible that Mary Shelley’s original story of Frankenstein was created so that others would be able to use it to make creations of their own?

Works Cited
Van Helsing. Dir. Stephen Sommers. Universal Pictures, 2004. Film.

Taking a Closer Look at the Original Frankenstein Story in Film

Frankenstein. When most people hear this word, they immediately think of Mary Shelley’s novel, Frankenstein, and an evil, scary looking monster. The film Van Helsing is usually not the first thing that comes to mind. Van Helsing is one of many films that takes up and remediates the original Frankenstein story and brings it to life using animation. The original story of Frankenstein says one thing and the film Van Helsing uses the original story of Frankenstein to create a much more complex story. The primary “thesis” of the film Van Helsing in its re-telling of the original Frankenstein story is to give Victor Frankenstein’s creation a more intricate purpose. His creation plays two completely different social roles in the original Frankenstein story and the film Van Helsing.

In the original Frankenstein story, Victor Frankenstein’s creation was only given life for one reason. Victor Frankenstein only wanted to prove that he could infuse life into an inanimate object using science. He believed that God was not the only one who could give life. His creation does not really have any other significant purpose in the original Frankenstein story. He is only viewed as a monster that does not belong in the world and is not needed for anything.

In the film Van Helsing, Victor Frankenstein’s creation is one of the main characters. He is actually named Frankenstein as opposed to Mary Shelley’s novel, Frankenstein, where he remains nameless and is only referred to as “the creation,” “the creature,” or “the monster.” Actually having a name sort of gives him a more human-like and less monstrous quality. This also sometimes helps people to realize that he really is not a monster and leads them feel sympathy towards him. However, his physical appearance in the movie is the typical physical appearance that most people think of when they hear the word Frankenstein. He is very large and looks like he has been put together with many different parts that do not belong together. He is quite scary looking to most people who see this movie. He is literate and is actually a very insightful and intelligent being just like in Mary Shelley’s novel, Frankenstein. In the movie, anyone who sees Frankenstein automatically thinks he is a terrible monster, but all he really wants to do is be able to exist and not be looked down upon by everyone who sees him just because of what he looks like. He does not want to hurt anybody or cause any problems. He actually even saves a couple people’s lives in the movie. Unlike in Mary Shelley’s novel, he actually loves his creator, Victor Frankenstein, and is very upset when Dracula murders him. Frankenstein even calls Victor Frankenstein his father, which shows that he has a better relationship with Victor in the film, Van Helsing, than in the original Frankenstein story.

One specific scene in the film, Van Helsing, where the film gives Victor Frankenstein’s creation a more intricate purpose in its re-telling of the original Frankenstein story is when Anna Valerious and Van Helsing first discover Frankenstein in a dark cave. “The Frankenstein Monster!” Anna gasped when she spotted the large figure hiding in the darkness of the cave. “Monster! Who’s the monster here? I have done nothing wrong, yet you and your kind still wish me dead!” the creature replied. Frankenstein is hiding in this cave because he does not want to be found by Dracula and the other vampires. He is the key to his father’s machine – the same machine that had given him life – and the only one that can give lasting life to Dracula’s children. Frankenstein tells Anna and Van Helsing to kill him because he does not want to take part in giving life to Dracula’s children even though all he really wants to do is live. He really does have good intentions and does not act like an evil monster. He does not want to be responsible for giving life to so many monsters even though so many people consider him a monster. Frankenstein’s role in Van Helsing is so much more complex than the role he plays in the original Frankenstein story.

The material and medium specific characteristics of the film, Van Helsing, also help to give Victor Frankenstein’s creation a more intricate purpose in the film’s re-telling of the original Frankenstein story. The energy that Victor Frankenstein used to create Frankenstein and is needed to give Dracula’s children life is like how film uses energy to create what it does. Energy is needed to create the film, Van Helsing, which uses animation to bring the original Frankenstein story to life. Frankenstein’s energy is necessary to give life just like how energy is necessary to create films and bring novels like Mary Shelley’s novel, Frankenstein, to life. The entire film Van Helsing is also very dark with a lot of flashing lights and lightning just like many scenes in Mary Shelley’s novel, Frankenstein. The film also shows Frankenstein in his typical, most common physical appearance, which helps bring his character to life.

There are many films that take up and remediate the original Frankenstein story. Van Helsing is a great film that gives a much more complex purpose to Victor Frankenstein’s creation and brings the original Frankenstein story to life using animation. Is it possible that Mary Shelley’s original story of Frankenstein was created so that others would be able to use it to make creations of their own?

Works Cited

Van Helsing. Dir. Stephen Sommers. Universal Pictures, 2004. Film.

Taking a Closer Look at the Original Frankenstein Story in Film

Frankenstein. When most people hear this word, they immediately think of Mary Shelley’s novel, Frankenstein, and an evil, scary looking monster. The film Van Helsing is usually not the first thing that comes to mind. Van Helsing is one of many films that takes up and remediates the original Frankenstein story and brings it to life using animation. The original story of Frankenstein says one thing and the film Van Helsing uses the original story of Frankenstein to create a much more complex story. The primary “thesis” of the film Van Helsing in its re-telling of the original Frankenstein story is to give Victor Frankenstein’s creation a more intricate purpose.  His creation plays two completely different social roles in the original Frankenstein story and the film Van Helsing.

In the original Frankenstein story, Victor Frankenstein’s creation was only given life for one reason. Victor Frankenstein only wanted to prove that he could infuse life into an inanimate object using science. He believed that God was not the only one who could give life. His creation does not really have any other significant purpose in the original Frankenstein story.  He is only viewed as a monster that does not belong in the world and is not needed for anything.

In the film Van Helsing, Victor Frankenstein’s creation is one of the main characters. He is actually named Frankenstein as opposed to Mary Shelley’s novel, Frankenstein, where he remains nameless and is only referred to as “the creation,” “the creature,” or “the monster.” Actually having a name sort of gives him a more human-like and less monstrous quality. This also sometimes helps people to realize that he really is not a monster and leads them feel sympathy towards him. However, his physical appearance in the movie is the typical physical appearance that most people think of when they hear the word Frankenstein. He is very large and looks like he has been put together with many different parts that do not belong together. He is quite scary looking to most people who see this movie. He is literate and is actually a very insightful and intelligent being just like in Mary Shelley’s novel, Frankenstein. In the movie, anyone who sees Frankenstein automatically thinks he is a terrible monster, but all he really wants to do is be able to exist and not be looked down upon by everyone who sees him just because of what he looks like. He does not want to hurt anybody or cause any problems. He actually even saves a couple people’s lives in the movie. Unlike in Mary Shelley’s novel, he actually loves his creator, Victor Frankenstein, and is very upset when Dracula murders him. Frankenstein even calls Victor Frankenstein his father, which shows that he has a better relationship with Victor in the film, Van Helsing, than in the original Frankenstein story.

One specific scene in the film, Van Helsing, where the film gives Victor Frankenstein’s creation a more intricate purpose in its re-telling of the original Frankenstein story is when Anna Valerious and Van Helsing first discover Frankenstein in a dark cave. “The Frankenstein Monster!” Anna gasped when she spotted the large figure hiding in the darkness of the cave. “Monster! Who’s the monster here? I have done nothing wrong, yet you and your kind still wish me dead!” the creature replied. Frankenstein is hiding in this cave because he does not want to be found by Dracula and the other vampires. He is the key to his father’s machine – the same machine that had given him life – and the only one that can give lasting life to Dracula’s children. Frankenstein tells Anna and Van Helsing to kill him because he does not want to take part in giving life to Dracula’s children even though all he really wants to do is live. He really does have good intentions and does not act like an evil monster. He does not want to be responsible for giving life to so many monsters even though so many people consider him a monster. Frankenstein’s role in Van Helsing is so much more complex than the role he plays in the original Frankenstein story.

The material and medium specific characteristics of the film, Van Helsing, also help to give Victor Frankenstein’s creation a more intricate purpose in the film’s re-telling of the original Frankenstein story. The energy that Victor Frankenstein used to create Frankenstein and is needed to give Dracula’s children life is like how film uses energy to create what it does. Energy is needed to create the film, Van Helsing, which uses animation to bring the original Frankenstein story to life. Frankenstein’s energy is necessary to give life just like how energy is necessary to create films and bring novels like Mary Shelley’s novel,Frankenstein, to life. The entire film Van Helsing is also very dark with a lot of flashing lights and lightning just like many scenes in Mary Shelley’s novel, Frankenstein. The film also shows Frankenstein in his typical, most common physical appearance, which helps bring his character to life.

There are many films that take up and remediate the original Frankenstein story. Van Helsing is a great film that gives a much more complex purpose to Victor Frankenstein’s creation and brings the original Frankenstein story to life using animation. Is it possible that Mary Shelley’s original story of Frankenstein was created so that others would be able to use it to make creations of their own?

Works Cited

Van Helsing. Dir. Stephen Sommers. Universal Pictures, 2004. Film.

Facebook: Legitimate or Not Legitimate Form of Literature?

Novels were once considered inappropriate for study and of course are now familiar to English departments.  Even though it is electronic, I believe that facebook is a legitimate form of writing.  I believe that the same thing might happen with digital texts.  However, I do not think it is worthy of study in school – at least not yet.  Facebook is a social network that many people use to communicate with each other and write information about themselves.  Facebook is sort of like the new and advanced form of letter writing.  Today, people study letters that were written in the past as a way to find out historical information.  With the way that our society is advancing in technology, I believe that it is a possibility that one day in the future, Facebook could also be studied just like how letters are studied today.  Birkerts might say that Facebook cannot be considered a legitimate form of literature because it is too public and literature should be about getting lost in a text.   According to Birkerts, reading and writing should primarily be private and intimate experiences in which the reader can become lost within the words on the page.  With that being said, I strongly feel that everything about Facebook is indeed literary.   I feel this way because Facbeook is centered around individuals and their relationships – the words on the site allowing them to maintain those intimate and somewhat private relationships.  I think Hayles would agree with my argument that Facebook can be considered a legitimate form of literature because it is centered on personal connections and intimacy and it is so easy to get lost in the text that is available on the site.

Facebook is just like writing a letter to someone, but using a computer and the internet instead of mailing an actual letter to someone.  I believe that both of these ways of communicating with other people can be quite personal and intimate.  Therefore, I believe that facebook should be considered a legitimate piece of literature because letters are considered as such.   The only difference between letter writing and writing to someone using Facebook is what a person is using in order to communicate with others.  With all of the technological advances that have come about in the world today, why shouldn’t people take advantage of what they have been given? Communicating with others on Facebook is a much faster way of communication than by means of writing letters.  If people do not like the idea of communicating with others using the internet, they still have the option of doing so through letters, should they choose to.  Facebook is also an effective and fast way to learn information about other people by reading what is written on their profiles.

I think Hayles would agree with my argument that Facebook can be considered a legitimate form of literature.  In Hayles’ book, Writing Machines, she talks about how the technological world and all of its advances have affected reading, writing, and literature.  She believes that these changes in the technological world and the world of literature are good changes.  What you use to read and write should not be what determines if something can or cannot be considered a legitimate form of literature.  The only thing that should be able to determine whether a text can or cannot be considered legitimate is the content within the text itself.

I think Birkerts would disagree with my argument that facebook can be considered a legitimate form of literature.  In his book, The Gutenberg Elegies, he talks about how reading and writing should be personal and intimate experiences.  He says that literature should be about getting lost in a text and spending hours reading or writing because it is just so intriguing that you cannot stop.   I completely agree with Birkerts’ thoughts about reading and writing.  However, I do not think that he would consider Facebook a legitimate literary piece even though so many people spend hours on Facebook each day, getting lost in the text that is available to them on the site.  If he thinks that reading and writing should be about getting lost in a text, then why can’t he consider Facebook a legitimate literary piece? I believe that Birkerts would not even give Facebook a chance to be considered legitimate because he considers all technology to be the devil.  He believes that the technological advancements that have come about in today’s society are changing the “modification of the relation between the writer and the language” (Birkerts, 157).  I can definitely see where Birkerts is coming from with this statement, and I do agree with him.  However, I do not think that these technological advancements are necessarily changing the modification of the relation between the writer and the language in a bad way.

Although I believe that Facebook can be considered a legitimate form of literature, I understand why some people like Birkerts would disagree with my argument.  Maybe the technological advancements that are coming about in today’s society are coming into the world too quickly.  Maybe everyone should slow down with technology and all of its new advancements and cherish the simple things that have been around for a long time.  I would not want to see technology completely replace print texts.

Facebook: A Legitimate Literary Text?

For this writing project, the text/site that I have decided to critically evaluate is facebook. Facebook is an online social network that some people consider to be a form of electronic literature while others believe that it cannot be considered a form of electronic literature. Facebook is something that many people use to communicate with other people and find out information about them.

I believe that facebook can be considered a legitimate piece of literature. People can write their own stories on other people’s profiles, write information about themselves on their own profiles, and do many other things that I believe can be considered a form of literature. The conversations that people have with each other can be read by others and are sort of like their own little short stories. I believe that literature is something that a person begins reading and gets lost in that piece of work, sometimes even spending hours reading the text. Facebook is a place where so many people get lost in the text that they are reading. In my own experiences with facebook, reading one thing often leads to me reading other things that have to do with what I previously read and I continue to read and get lost in the text. To me, this is what literature is really about. Literature should not be about where a certain text is found or what it is about. It should be about the effects that it has on people when they read it. Many people would consider writing letters to other people and posting texts up on bulletin boards legitimate pieces of literature so I do not understand why some people believe that facebook cannot be considered a legitimate form of literature. Facebook is just like writing letters to other people and posting texts up on bulletin boards. It is just a more modern way of producing texts and communicating with other people.

N. Katherine Hayles would agree with my argument that facebook can be considered a legitimate piece of literature. In her book, Writing Machines, she talks about how the technological world and all of its advances have affected reading, writing, and literature. She believes that these changes in the technological world and the world of literature are good changes. What you use to read and write should not be what determines if something can or cannot be considered a legitimate form of literature. The only thing should be able to determine whether a text can or cannot be considered legitimate is the content within the text itself.

One objection to my argument that I could anticipate is that facebook should not be considered a legitimate piece of literature because it takes away from the amount of privacy that many people consider to be an important part of reading and writing. Almost everything that is posted on facebook is available for almost any person using facebook to read. Birkerts would argue that reading and writing should be private and personal actions.

Focusing on Van Helsing and Frankenstein

There are many films that relate to Mary Shelley’s story about Frankenstein. Some of these films blatantly relate to Frankenstein and others do not show an obvious relation to Frankenstein. One film that relates to Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein is Van Helsing. Although Victor Frankenstein’s creation is actually one of the characters in the film, his character’s role in the film has a much greater significance in the relation to Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein.

In Van Helsing, Victor Frankenstein’s creation is actually named Frankenstein. His physical appearance is the typical physical appearance that most people think of when they hear the word Frankenstein. He is very large and looks like he has been put together with many different parts. He is quite scary looking to most people who see this movie. In this film, Frankenstein is literate and is actually a very insightful and intelligent being just like in Mary Shelley’s novel Frankenstein. In the film, anyone who sees Frankenstein thinks he is a terrible monster but all he really wants to do is be able to live and not be looked down upon by everyone who sees him just because of what he looks like. He does not want to hurt anybody or cause any problems. He actually even saves a couple people’s lives in the movie. Unlike in Mary Shelley’s novel Frankenstein, the creation actually loves his creator, Victor Frankenstein and is very upset when he is murdered by Dracula.

One of the scenes that I chose to focus on is when Dracula and his vampire wives are trying to bring their vampire children to life. In order for their children to be brought to life and continue living, the vampires need Frankenstein’s energy. They need this energy to send it through the eggs that all of their children are in so that it will spark life in them. The vampire babies cannot continue to live if they do not keep getting this electricity generated through them. They first attempt to use a human being but he is not able to generate enough energy for them to survive. Frankenstein is the only being that is able to generate enough electricity for their children to survive. Frankenstein does not want to play any part in creating so many monsters even though many people consider him a monster. Frankenstein also does not want to be killed. He really does have good intentions and does not act like a monster. This scene in the film presents many themes that are present throughout the entire film. Two of these major themes are giving life and preventing life. I will present this focus in my writing because the themes of giving life and preventing life are very important in both the movie and Mary Shelley’s novel. I will present this focus in my writing by pointing out the parallels of the movie and the novel and how film brings Mary Shelley’s novel to life using moving pictures. Mary Shelley’s “monster” plays a major role in the film Van Helsing even though Van Helsing is usually not the first thing that comes to mind when one hears the word Frankenstein.