Del Toro’s Frankenstein: A Lavish Reimagining of the Timeless Tale

Oscar Isaac embodies the obsessive and charismatic Victor Frankenstein

Ken Woroner/Netflix

frankenstein
Directed by Guillermo del Toro, Now playing in selected cinemas in the UK and US, streaming on Netflix beginning November 7th

Guillermo del Toro has long been captivated by the intersections of science, mythology, and monsters. In his latest film, frankenstein, he finally explores Mary Shelley’s essential text—the 1818 novel widely regarded as the foundation of both science fiction and modern horror.

The outcome is visually lavish, delivered with intensity, and at times thought-provoking, though its pacing and certain design choices reflect the influence of Netflix, the film’s financier.

Shelley’s tale of Victor Frankenstein, the brilliant yet reckless scientist seeking to animate lifeless matter, remains one of the most poignant cautionary narratives regarding the allure and risks of scientific ambition. In del Toro’s rendition, Oscar Isaac portrays Victor as a charismatic and obsessive character, driven by his personal and intellectual struggles into unknown territories.

Isaac’s performance captures both arrogance and fragility, while the surrounding ensemble enriches the narrative. Charles Dance plays Victor’s authoritarian father, and Mia Goth delivers a standout performance as the poignant and compassionate Elizabeth Lavenza.

The film truly shines in the laboratory scenes. Del Toro, alongside production designer Tamara Deverell, crafts an environment echoing a 19th-century anatomical theater, equipped with towering instruments and rudimentary electrical devices. The representations of anatomy and experimental medicine are stylized, yet maintain an element of realism. Authenticity is embedded in the nuances of ligation, scalpel usage, and surgical procedures.

However, Victor’s excess may risk the film’s realism. The abundance of fresh corpses at his disposal stretches believability, yet his actions resonate with Romantic-era debates on electricity, vitalism, and the boundaries of life and death.

The creature, created and forsaken by Victor (played by Jacob Elordi), deviates from the iconic giant with a neck bolt seen in the 1931 film frankenstein. Instead, we encounter a leaner, scarred figure brought to life through prosthetics and CGI. While effective, certain close-ups—particularly when the creature lies still—evoke discomfort due to his jawline. Additionally, his appearance, imbued with a brooding “emo” aesthetic, aligns more closely with contemporary tastes than Shelley’s 19th-century context.


The film’s visuals present chiaroscuro depictions of captivating laboratories and landscapes.

In many ways, this aesthetic continues the early films’ fascination with biology as bricolage, viewing the body as a site for transformation, as seen in water shape. Even through a modern lens, this creature exemplifies our enduring interest in reconstructing life from remnants—a scientific ambition that remains as mesmerizing today as it was in Shelley’s era.

Story-wise, frankenstein may falter in places. Del Toro dedicates his 150 minutes of screen time to Victor’s formative years, intellectual development, and gradual immersion into his quest for conquering death. While this extensive focus fleshes out Victor’s psyche, it may result in a sluggish pacing that some viewers could find overly drawn-out. Additionally, the creature’s strength—capable of lifting a ship as if it were driftwood—runs the risk of exaggeration, potentially undermining the film’s serious examination of scientific potential.

Nevertheless, the central theme remains pressing. In the end, frankenstein is less about the mechanics of resurrection and more about society’s response to the unfamiliar. The film dazzles with consistent visual allure, featuring Dan Laustsen’s cinematography that highlights chiaroscuro scenes of both laboratories and landscapes, along with Alexandre Desplat’s score oscillating between eerie crescendos and tender motifs of longing.

Del Toro’s oeuvre includes various ambitious projects; however, frankenstein stands as a sincere and provocative exploration of one of science’s most profound fables. It compels us to question not only whether we can engineer life, but also whether we can coexist with what we’ve created.

topic:

Source: www.newscientist.com

New discoveries from Pompeii unveil the lavish lifestyles of the ancient elite

Recently, archaeologists uncovered the ancient city of Pompeii, preserved under volcanic ash for around 2,000 years.

The discovery of a massive private bathhouse, believed to be the largest in the city, by an international team of experts has shed new light on Pompeii’s reputation for innovation and wealth.

The baths included hot and cold rooms, intricate artworks, a large pool, and the capacity for up to 30 people, along with workers on site.

Within a small room, the remains of two individuals – a male slave and a high-status woman – were found.

Dr. Sophie Hay, an archaeologist working at the excavation site, stated, “This site truly brings the past to life, revealing the stark disparities in Roman lifestyles within these ruins.”

One of the excavation sites discovered during the work – Credit: BBC / Lion TV

In addition to the baths, a complete block of Pompeii was unveiled, featuring a grand house with direct access to a laundry, bakery, and bathhouse, all likely belonging to wealthy politician Aulus Rustius Verus.

The direct connection between the bathhouse and the house suggests it was a venue for private gatherings, a luxury reserved for the affluent in Pompeii.

Skeleton discovered next to set of coins during excavation – Credit: BBC/Lion TV

The discovery also revealed advanced technological features in the city, like a boiler room with a system of pipes distributing water from the road, highlighting Pompeii’s engineering progress.

The contrast between the affluent luxuries of the bathhouse and the toil of slaves in the boiler room is a poignant reminder of social inequality in Roman society.

These earrings discovered during excavations are thought to belong to wealthy individuals – Credit: BBC/Lion TV

The bodies of two individuals in a room exemplify this inequality, with valuable items found with the high-status woman but signs of labor on the young man’s body, suggesting different social statuses. The woman likely perished in the volcanic eruption, while the man died from a collapsing wall.

Despite nearing the end of the excavation, the possibility of further discoveries remains open as the team delves deeper into the site.


For more insights, tune in to BBC Two’s documentary, “Pompeii: New excavations – House of Treasures,” airing on Monday, January 20th at 9pm.


read more:

Source: www.sciencefocus.com

Introducing the Billionaire’s Unconventional and Lavish Doomsday Bunker

Have you ever considered what your doomsday plan would entail? If not, you’re not alone. While most people are more concerned with what’s for dinner tomorrow than surviving the apocalypse, billionaires have already thought ahead.

Instead of spending millions on extending their lifespans, reversing aging, or planning space trips, the ultra-rich are now investing in giant underground shelters to prepare for the end of the world. These luxurious bunkers offer comfortable living conditions below the surface, away from the chaos above.

While doomsday bunkers are not a new concept, recent trends show that billionaire bunkers are becoming increasingly extravagant. From zombie-proof fire moats to 10-car garages, these shelters cater to the highest levels of luxury. It seems fitting, considering they will likely be located underground.

But what exactly are the ultra-rich preparing for? And what do these apocalyptic shelters look like?

undefined

What are they preparing for?

Once seen as odd and paranoid, those who invest in shelters now have valid concerns about the future. The rise of artificial intelligence, pandemics, and global warming has instilled fear in many, even among the wealthiest individuals.

According to Douglas Rushkoff, a billionaire and writer who focuses on doomsday scenarios, the ultra-rich are not driven by fear but by desire. They see isolation in space stations or underground shelters as a reward for their accomplishments. It’s about winning the game of life and building the best shelter, not merely preparing for worst-case scenarios.

What do these bunkers look like?

End-of-life shelters come in various sizes, luxury levels, and features. Some are as small as a single room, while others resemble small apartments with amenities like garages, gyms, and saunas. The top-tier bunkers designed for billionaires include added rooms, tanks, and other necessary items, driving up prices significantly.

For many wealthy individuals, owning an island with a grand mansion on the surface conceals a maze of rooms underground for emergency situations. These bunkers serve as highly secure vacation homes with additional features for survival.

Will we all soon have bunkers?

While shelters were once exclusive to the ultra-rich and paranoid, the trend is shifting. Newer firms offer shelter options for a broader demographic, making it more accessible to average individuals. Popular group bunkers reminiscent of games like Fallout are also on the rise, accommodating large groups at a fraction of the cost of individual bunkers.

Architect Dante Vicino describes these group bunkers as underground cruise ships, with private and communal spaces for residents to gather, eat, and relax together. While luxury shelters may offer comfort during doomsday scenarios, building connections with neighbors and forming a community may be a more realistic survival strategy.


About our experts

Douglas Rushkoff is a writer and documentarian who has researched billionaire behavior and attitudes regarding doomsday scenarios.

Dante Vicino is the project lead at Vivos, a doomsday shelter company specializing in affordable alternatives.

Read more:

Source: www.sciencefocus.com