A Critique of the Compassionate Creature: Thematic Divergence, Character Reinterpretation, and Narrative Shift in Guillermo del Toro's Frankenstein (2025)
Guillermo del Toro’s 2025 film adaptation of Mary Shelley’s 1818 novel, Frankenstein; or, The Modern Prometheus, represents a deeply personal engagement with the source material, which the filmmaker has consistently cited as his "Bible" and his "dream project". While the adaptation eschews a strictly faithful plot structure, del Toro’s approach—which he described as singing the story "back in a different key with a different emotion"—prioritizes capturing the novel’s "heart". This analysis evaluates the film’s major thematic divergences, significant character reinterpretations, and critical narrative changes, demonstrating how del Toro transforms Shelley’s ambiguous tale of hubris and vengeance into a story primarily centered on generational trauma, empathy, and the quest for forgiveness.
Thematic Divergences: Shame, Innocence, and Forgiveness
Del Toro's most profound thematic shift lies in redefining the psychological motivations of Victor Frankenstein (Oscar Isaac) and the moral culpability of his Creature (Jacob Elordi).
In Shelley’s novel, Victor enjoyed a happy, supportive childhood; his ambition was primarily driven by an obsession with alchemy and the Faustian pursuit of scientific discovery and transcendence. Conversely, the film establishes Victor’s foundational trauma early, portraying him as the son of an abusive father, Baron Leopold Frankenstein (Charles Dance), whose cruelty and medical neglect possibly contributed to Victor’s mother's death. This new backstory reframes Victor’s creation of life less as an act of purely scientific hubris and more as a desperate attempt to conquer death out of shame and to surpass his father’s failed legacy. Victor’s subsequent abuse of the Creature—keeping him chained and beating him for his inability to develop—is presented as the continuation of this "chain of pain" and the theme of "the sins of the father".
This emphasis on paternal failure directly contributes to the film's second major thematic divergence: the sympathetic portrayal of the Creature. While Shelley's Creature is intelligent and deeply self-aware, his pain and rejection harden into vengeful rage, making him a complex figure capable of brutal, intentional murder. In stark contrast, Del Toro’s adaptation sanitizes the Creature. In the film, the Creature’s body count is significantly reduced, and his vindictive actions are largely restricted to self-defense or tormenting Victor. The crucial novelistic plot points that demonstrated the Creature's malice—such as the calculated murder of young William Frankenstein and the deliberate framing and execution of the innocent servant Justine Moritz—are either revised or eliminated entirely. By removing Justine's execution, the film scrubs a horrific example of Victor's cowardice and inability to take responsibility, thus keeping the Creature more purely sympathetic.
The most significant thematic departure occurs in the film's emphasis on forgiveness and reconciliation. The novel concludes with Victor dying consumed by rage, determined to destroy his creation, and the Creature expressing bitter regret before vowing self-immolation. Del Toro, however, chooses a "more optimistic note". The film's ending sees Victor repent, apologize to the Creature, and embrace him as his son. The Creature, having shared his own story, forgives his dying father and resolves to find a way to "truly live" as an immortal being, rather than ending his existence in self-destruction.
Furthermore, while Shelley’s text contained a strong social critique focused on the violence against women and the unfair treatment of oppressed people due to appearance, the film downplays these overt critiques. Instead, Del Toro leans into a "structural critique" concerning war, militarism, and capitalism, exemplified by the 1855 Crimean War setting and the introduction of war profiteer Henrich Harlander.
Character Reinterpretations and Relationships
Del Toro's vision necessitates fundamental changes in the key relationships and identities of the central characters, particularly Victor, Elizabeth, and the Creature.
Victor Frankenstein and the Creature
The nature of the Creature’s initial awakening and Victor's reaction differs substantially. In the novel, Victor is immediately horrified by the Creature’s "grotesqueness" and flees, abandoning his creation immediately. In the film, Victor is initially "amazed" and calls the Creature "son with genuine affection," attempting to educate him. It is only when the Creature fails to meet Victor’s intellectual demands that the scientist's patience crumbles, and he resorts to cruelty, chaining the Creature and treating him like a "rabid dog".
The Creature itself is recast not only as more empathetic but with different religious parallels. Shelley's Creature compares himself to Satan after reading Paradise Lost, identifying with Lucifer, who was cast out by his creator. Del Toro’s Creature, in contrast, is physically associated with Christ, as the slab upon which he is brought to life is shaped like a crucifix, emphasizing his role as a suffering, sacrificial creature. The film succeeds in retaining the Creature's foundational traits of being articulate, intelligent, and deeply self-aware, traits often reduced in previous film versions.
The Reinvention of Elizabeth Lavenza
Elizabeth is arguably the character who undergoes the most radical transformation. In the novel, Elizabeth is Victor's passive cousin/adopted niece, raised to be his wife, and later strangled by the Creature in an act of revenge.
In Del Toro's film, Elizabeth (Mia Goth) is reinvented as an independent scientist (an entomologist), the sharp-witted niece of Henrich Harlander, and is betrothed not to Victor, but to his brother William. Victor's mother and Elizabeth are both played by Mia Goth, visually reinforcing Victor's subconscious Oedipal connection to Elizabeth.
Crucially, the film introduces a tragic emotional bond between Elizabeth and the Creature, where she alone responds to him with empathy and compassion. She identifies with the Creature as an "odd" and "subordinated figure," questioning Victor's cruelty. This romantic/maternal thread replaces the Creature’s demand for a female companion, which Victor outright refuses in the film (unlike the novel where he initially agrees to create a Bride before destroying her). Elizabeth’s death is also fundamentally altered: she is fatally wounded by Victor's misplaced gunfire while attempting to protect the Creature, making her demise a direct result of Victor's hubris and jealousy, rather than the Creature’s deliberate revenge.
Narrative Structure and Exclusionary Changes
Del Toro demonstrates fidelity to the novel's form while manipulating key plot points to enhance the Creature's sympathy and the film's emotional core.
Structural Fidelity and Pacing
The film remains faithful to Shelley’s original structure by employing the framed narrative device. The film opens and closes in the Arctic with Victor (rescued by Captain Anderson/Walton) recounting his story, followed by the Creature recounting his own experiences. This allows the Creature a strong, articulate, and human voice, consistent with Del Toro's focus on humanizing monsters.
However, the pacing of the narrative differs: the film places a large emphasis on Victor's process of creation, securing funding, and constructing the body and equipment, which happens relatively quickly in the book. The film also shifts the timeline to 1855, placing the events firmly in the Victorian era and allowing Victor to source bodies from the Crimean War casualties.
Inclusion and Exclusion of Key Episodes
Del Toro honors one of the novel's most crucial episodes by including the Creature’s time with the De Lacey family, where he learns to speak, read, and understand the world by observing the kind, blind patriarch. This inclusion, often cut from other adaptations, serves as the story's emotional centerpiece, showing the Creature's innate innocence and heartbreak upon realizing humanity’s cruelty. A narrative modification is made here, however: while the blind old man survives the Creature's expulsion in the novel, he is tragically murdered by wolves in the film, leading to the Creature being wrongly blamed by the returning hunters and reinforcing his grief and isolation.
To sharpen the focus on the central conflict, del Toro omits several important characters found in Shelley's novel, including Victor’s best friend Henry Clerval and the falsely accused servant Justine Moritz. The removal of Justine is specifically noted as a choice that keeps the Creature more sympathetic. Conversely, the film introduces the new character Henrich Harlander (Christoph Waltz), a wealthy war profiteer who funds Victor’s experiments, perhaps serving as a modern allegory for "tech-bro hubris".
In summation, Del Toro’s Frankenstein is a lavish, gothic drama that maintains fidelity to the structural framework and empathetic spirit of Mary Shelley’s novel. Yet, by fundamentally altering Victor’s backstory, eliminating the Creature's intentional violence, and reinventing Elizabeth as an independent figure who provides the Creature with love, the film fundamentally shifts the tragic arc. The adaptation moves away from Shelley's ambiguous exploration of reciprocal moral corruption towards a clear moral statement about paternal cruelty and the ultimate necessity of forgiveness, transforming the tale from a cautionary lesson in scientific hubris into a powerful, emotional requiem for a misunderstood creation.
The divergence in the film’s conclusion—where Victor embraces his creation and the Creature chooses to live—is the metaphorical equivalent of del Toro himself choosing empathy over condemnation, ensuring that his creature, unlike the literary monster, is not condemned to eternal guilt but finds a path toward grace. While the novel functions as a grim warning about "science unrestrained by empathy," the film acts as a plea for paternity redeemed by compassion.
References
Chang, J. (2025, October 28). In Guillermo del Toro’s “Frankenstein,” a vast vision gets Netflixed down to size. The New Yorker.
del Toro, G. (2025, October 24). Why Guillermo del Toro made Frankenstein. The Atlantic. https://www.theatlantic.com/books/2025/10/why-guillermo-del-toro-made-frankenstein/684673/
Di Placido, D. (2025, November 9). How does Netflix’s ‘Frankenstein’ compare to the original novel? In Del Toro's Frankenstein: Novel to Netflix Comparison.
Marvelous Videos. (n.d.). 10 differences between Frankenstein (2025) monster & the book - explained [Video transcript]. YouTube.
McCluskey, M. (n.d.). Guillermo del Toro’s Frankenstein serves up a creature Mary Shelley might not recognize. Time.
Petty, M. J. (2025, November 12). The 10 biggest changes del Toro's 'Frankenstein' makes from Mary Shelley's original novel. Collider.
Rutigliano, O. (2025, October 29). Guillermo del Toro’s new Frankenstein adaptation is life-giving. Literary Hub.
Shafer, E. (2025, November 8). ‘Frankenstein’: How close is Guillermo del Toro’s film to the original novel? A Mary Shelley expert answers our burning questions. Variety.
The Conversation. (n.d.). Guillermo de Toro’s Frankenstein: beguiling adaptation stays true to heart of Mary Shelley’s story. The Conversation.
Wikipedia contributors. (n.d.). Frankenstein (2025 film). In Wikipedia.
This content was generated with the help of prompts by Dilip Barad and curated by NotebookLM, which organized various source materials.
No comments:
Post a Comment