However, the social structure and details of this movie are very good. The circus at the beginning reflects the unique style of the Victorian era. In particular, you will find that the circus leader does not regard his members as his own employees, but sees them. As part of their own wealth, it can be seen that this is an era that has just developed into a capitalist society, and people are concerned about their wealth rather than people themselves. There is also the detective's fascination with God, and he does not allow others to produce evidence that can prove that God does not exist. Frankenstein's father was furious because Frankenstein did not receive an orthodox education. It can be seen that he only cares about academic qualifications rather than real knowledge. The rich second generation mastered a technique for his family and did not hesitate to kill a chicken that would lay golden eggs (Frankenstein). This is a value that seems backward now, especially the cruelty of people to people, wealth (the circus leader), ignorance (the detective), honor (Frankenstein his father) and power (the Finnegan family) The second generation of the rich) desire, but this kind of value can prevail in the whole society.
The protagonist once said, "You have never been treated with tenderness, so you don't know what cruelty is." In fact, this is a theme of this work. Both "you have never thought about your ignorance" and this applies to this society as well as ours. Needless to say, only about this movie, some people will give bad reviews because it is not in line with the original work. This is that people cannot break through themselves, and so on, people will desperately maintain the values that they have instilled since childhood, and they never think about whether it will be a backward or naive point of view. For example, people who have been brainwashed by the simple story of Journey to the West since childhood, many people don't want to believe that it is a work satirizing the society at that time, and they regard that kind of speech as a conspiracy theory, which shows that the concept is difficult to change. It also explains why there are so many people defending the backward dynasty. Why a constitutional monarchy is more acceptable than a republic, and we know that a republic is better because we have been influenced by the concept of equality for all since we were young. And those who live in the feudal society, even though they have been humiliated, I am afraid that they have never thought about whether they are pitiful, and that they are living happily.
Although Frankenstein said that being with others is progressive and he likes to accept advanced ideas, some of his ideas are also lagging behind because of society. His purpose and original intention to create life may be good. But he never thought about what if the life he created had no soul? What to do if it causes devastating harm to mankind? If you really master the technology to bring back the dead, what if there are all living people on the earth? (Of course, there was no concept of ecological balance at the time) Therefore Frankenstein's paranoia---developing science and technology and ignoring the possible problems that might cause problems, showed his worship of primitive technology and his ignorance of social ethics and ecological balance.
For other aspects besides the theme, the old idea of "Sherlock" full screen text was used for the screen display, but it was replaced with anatomical drawings. In addition, the punk style is full. Part of the plot is slightly bloody and terrifying. The actors acted a little bit. For example, when the detective came out, I thought it was a character similar to Moriarty's big boss, which was a bit regrettable.
In addition, I personally feel that this drama should be around 8 points. The result is only 6 points. I am a little disappointed. Some people think that they are not in line with the original work. Why do they have to match the original work? Isn't it good to tell a different story with an original story frame? Some people think that the story is too old and new. Have you seen the original or other movies or watched this movie carefully? There is also a bad review because you can’t understand it. It’s like making a fuss. The quality of a work has nothing to do with whether you can read it or not. If you don’t understand it, can you comment on it? Why do you write a movie review like a joke, with so many emotions. Since it is a work, it depends on the theme, and it must be combined with the original work, and the story is not old. Or it's just that Ji, Ji, Ji, Ji, Ji rot into the bone marrow, really speechless. . .
View more about Victor Frankenstein reviews
