ForgotPassword?
Sign Up
Search this Topic:
Forum Jump
Mar 30 11 12:50 AM
Mar 30 11 3:21 AM
Mar 30 11 4:24 PM
Apr 13 11 2:50 PM
Oct 16 11 7:54 AM
Oct 18 11 1:58 PM
Jan 15 12 11:01 PM
Feb 2 12 9:58 PM
Feb 3 12 3:09 PM
Feb 5 12 12:38 AM
Monsterpal wrote:It's tough to get a head in the mad scientist business.
Feb 5 12 2:58 AM
Mar 1 12 3:59 PM
Mar 3 12 2:37 AM
Mar 3 12 4:11 AM
Ted Newsom wrote: Why then does it not make sense that his soul (mind, whatever) would do exactly that through the only vehicle he has, the re-formed Christina?
Mar 3 12 11:27 AM
Mar 3 12 12:25 PM
Interesting point, Rick...
In the Shelley original, and in some of the better films including "Bride" and others, it is The Monster who has to teach Victor/Henry that he's meddling with souls/inner beings, when he thought he was just stitching tissue.
Mar 3 12 1:23 PM
Rick wrote:But even more than that, to me at least, is the whole subject of "soul transference." It just doesn't seem very Frankensteinian to me. Too mystical, too spiritual. I always think of Frankenstein as more of a "hardware" guy -- brains, bodies, eyeballs. This is the "software" Frankenstein and it's just never cut it for me.
Mar 3 12 8:48 PM
Mar 4 12 4:32 AM
Ted Newsom wrote:I don't think THE ASPHYX has souls shaped vaguely like human beings, does it? And it's not identified as a "soul," more like an amorphous essence, a personality. The idea that a spirit will hold on to certain (often diagreeable) human attributes is a classic ghost-story theme, as is the idea that any given chunk of flesh also contains the "character" of its source, as in HANDS OF ORLAC or DONOVAN'S BRAIN.
Mar 4 12 10:32 AM
Share This