Imagine a beloved classic like Mary Shelley's "Frankenstein" getting a fresh twist on screen, only to leave audiences fuming over the finale—what if it turns out their outrage is missing the bigger picture?
Spoiler Alert: This piece dives deep into the ending of Guillermo del Toro's adaptation of "Frankenstein," so proceed with caution if you haven't seen it yet.
Del Toro's cinematic take on Shelley's groundbreaking tale shifts the timeline dramatically from the original novel. Instead of sticking to the 1816 setting where Shelley crafted the story during a playful horror-writing challenge with her husband Percy Shelley, their pal Lord Byron, and John Polidori, the film relocates most events to the 1850s—years after Mary's passing. (For context, Percy died in 1822, Byron in 1824, and Polidori in 1821.) This adjustment opens up intriguing possibilities, like a poignant moment where the Creature, portrayed by Jacob Elordi, learns to read from Percy's complete literary works. Del Toro might have avoided a scene of the Creature poring over Mary's own books to steer clear of sentimentality, opting for this creative workaround. But here's where it gets controversial... the timeline change suggests a universe where "Frankenstein" has already been published, raising the eyebrow-raising notion that Dr. Victor Frankenstein (Oscar Isaac) could have referenced the story to think twice about his reckless experiments. Picture it: If Victor had picked up a copy of "The Modern Prometheus," might he have paused his monster-making mania?
The film wraps up with a screen-displayed quote from Lord Byron, sparking widespread disapproval among some critics. Why Byron—Mary's husband's companion—over Shelley herself, the true author of the narrative? "Frankenstein" is undeniably her creation, not his. Yet, delving into Byron's parallels with the story's figures reveals a deliberate choice. And this is the part most people miss: It's plausible Shelley drew inspiration for the self-absorbed, egotistical Victor from the moody, irksome Byron himself.
Del Toro seemingly drew parallels between Victor and the infamous poet.
Many fans have reacted with frustration, even taking to online platforms like Reddit to "fix" the movie through homemade edits and digital tweaks, replacing Byron's words with Shelley's to 'correct' what they see as an oversight.
Byron is a polarizing character in literary circles, known for inspiring the "Byronic" archetype—a term often used critically to describe brooding, self-pitying types who might exploit their woes to charm others, especially in romantic pursuits. For beginners unfamiliar with this trope, think of it as a dramatic, tortured anti-hero who wallows in melancholy to draw attention. In the film, the Creature fits this mold surprisingly well: Towering at 6'5" and strikingly handsome (thanks to Elordi's star power from roles in "Saltburn" and "Euphoria"), he's brimming with innocent wonder, a love for animals and verse, yet fiercely protective and quick to retaliate. He's sensitive enough to shed tears, evoking an image of a poetic soul sipping coffee in a cozy sweater amidst bookstore aisles. Could the Creature embody Byron?
But a stronger case links Byron to Victor himself. The "Byronic" label also captures childish vanity and detachment, traits Del Toro amplifies in his depiction of Victor—a man estranged from the world, scarred by childhood neglect, unable to process loss, and driven by ruthless ambition and a flawed sense of ethics. He enters a romance with Elizabeth (Mia Goth), but approaches her without genuine empathy or tenderness.
Del Toro may have envisioned Shelley spotting in Byron a mirror of Victor's flaws—someone whose emotions feel performative. Thus, incorporating Byron's quote serves as a nod to him as a key muse for the film's ethical warnings. It's a bold move that some might argue undermines Shelley's authorship, but others could see it as a clever homage to the story's roots.
Breaking down the Byron quote in the film.
The featured line reads: "The heart will break and yet brokenly live on." This haunting sentiment resonates with both Victor and the Creature, drawn from Byron's epic poem "Childe Harold's Pilgrimage: A Romaunt," released in parts between 1812 and 1818. The poem follows Harold, a disillusioned aristocrat who embarks on a European journey to find meaning. He's awestruck by the continent's splendor, appalled by its war-torn scars, and mournful of bygone eras. For those drawn to gothic melancholy, it's a foundational read that popularized the Byronic hero archetype—think a blend of self-indulgence and poetic brilliance.
Shelley likely encountered "Pilgrimage" prior to that legendary 1816 writing contest, as it was a cultural sensation. It's entirely feasible that Byron's work, with its mix of vanity and lyrical beauty, influenced her horror masterpiece, perhaps even as a satirical target. In shifting perspectives, Del Toro's film adopts Shelley's viewpoint: By quoting Byron, he's not sidelining her but inviting viewers into her intellectual world. Shelley, immersed in the era's elite poets, channeled their egos into "Frankenstein," one of literature's timeless gems. Including Byron highlights the mockery in her narrative, positioning him as part of the equation without diminishing her role.
This interpretation invites debate: Is Del Toro honoring Shelley by spotlighting her inspirations, or does it risk overshadowing her genius? What do you think—does the Byron quote enhance the film's themes, or is it a misguided choice? Share your thoughts in the comments: Do you agree with this reading, or do you side with the critics who demand more of Shelley? Could this adaptation's twists change how we view the original story, and does it matter if a film takes liberties with history? Let's discuss!
