Explain how the concept of the monster is explored in Shelley's novel and in the film versions viewed.
             The novel Frankenstein and its film versions explore the concept of the true monster/s each in distinct ways. From the Mary Shelley novel (1818) one could derive that there is a sense of joint responsibility between Victor and the creature and therefore both warrant the classification of being a monster. Whilst the James Whale version (1931), set in a considerably different time period and context differs in what it alludes to. It seems to imply that Victor is the true monster, and is quite obvious at times in doing so. The Branagh version (1994) can be considered as having much more in common with the novel than the James Whale equivalent yet is undoubtedly different at times in relation to its stance on the concept of the monster.
             Before one can come to a proper and just judgement on who is the true monster/s in each of these depictions of Frankenstein, the true meaning of a monster must be clarified. The Macquarie dictionary contains an array of definitions, which attempt to cover the characteristics of a monster ranging from "an animal of abnormal structure" to "a person who excites horror". For most, it's human nature to be overwhelmed by looks and consequently categorise people who are abnormally bad looking as monsters, but is this a fair justification for the use of this term? If so, then the use of the term monster would be inappropriate in the recent case concerning the execution of Timothy McVeigh as many regarded him as having the looks of a next door neighbour. So after deliberating over the reasons supporting each case, it is fair to come to the conclusion that even though it is inevitable that most people would feel threatened by the physical repulsiveness of a person, the term monster should rather be reserved for the inhumane actions of a person.
             The original novel Frankenstein ...