The difference between the film and the book is the setting and atmosphere the director presents in the film. The setting is made as simple and realistic as possible to make, the atmosphere suspenseful. The director used foreshadowing by filming Tess Hutchinson's nervous, smiling face. The movie’s more defined because we see the serious and nerves faces of the town’s folk.
The film and the short story are very similar. Both are very bone chillingly suspenseful, and both moods are dark and morbid. The scene were the children were gathering rocks was foreshadowing the heart-stopping scene that has yet to occur. Both film and story stayed true to this moment. The film did an astonishing job of creating the feel of tradition for this morbid act.
hope this helps! :)
First read through the poem without analyzing. Then read through it again and start to highlight important bits in it. Then you read the bits you have analyzed and you explain whether the phrase or word could signify something and have a meaning. And that's about it :)
Answer:
Frankenstein is full of pleasure as he recounts these scenes from his childhood, since they remain untainted by his recent misfortune. He can, however, see how his early scholarly endeavors foreshadow his eventual ruin.
At the age of thirteen, he becomes fascinated with the work of Cornelius Agrippa (a Roman alchemist who attempted to turn tin into gold and men into lions). His father tells him that the book is pure trash; Victor does not heed him, however, since his father does not explain why the book is trash. The system of "science" that Agrippa propounds has long since been proven false; Victor, unaware of this, avidly reads all of Agrippa's works. This foreshadows Victor's thirst for science mixed in with the supernatural.
