MovieChat Forums > Re-Animator (1985) Discussion > A Zombie film or a Frankenstein film?

A Zombie film or a Frankenstein film?


Would you say that this is a Zombie film or a Frankenstein film?


- No animal was hurt during the making of this burger -

reply

Definitely a Frankenstein film.

reply

[deleted]

I'd say it was a combination of mad scientist and zombie films, a bit like Zombie Holocaust (aka Doctor Butcher M.D.), only much better made.

reply

Perhaps I'm wrong here but I regard Frankenstein's monster as a type of zombie.

Frankenstein's monster is undead (as are the reanimated corpses in Reanimator) but a zombie doesn't necessarily have to be undead to be a zombie. If you drill holes in someones head they don't die but behave like a zombie (NB, I haven't tried this but I just read about serial killer Jeff Dahmer doing it!)

Anyway, technicalities aside I'd term Reannimator a zombie film (as its closer to Dawn of the Dead etc) and Bride of Reanimator a Frankenstein film (as the bride is a mish-mash of parts like the original monster).

"For God sakes, buy a better suit, you can come in here dressed like that"

reply

Nope, he was actually a re-animated human. Humans that turn into zombies usually re-animated after being somehow infected by whatever "sickness" the zombie already has.

Frankenstein's monster was cobbled together from dead body parts, the brain of a criminal & was (re-)animated thru chemical & electric means by the mad doc.

-----------------
Let's swim out tonight, love / It's our turn to try... - The Doors

reply

Nope, he was actually a re-animated human

No one was disputing that. The majority of zombies in zombie movies are re-animated humans.

Humans that turn into zombies usually re-animated after being somehow infected by whatever "sickness" the zombie already has.

So what? If a human has a cold, they're no longer human? You imply that zombies tend to stem from one un-human king of the zombies that infects all the others. That's not how zombie films usually work and regardless, your use of the word "usually" admits that there are exceptions to the rule.


Frankenstein's monster was absolutely a type of zombie and therefore Re-Animator works as both a zombie film and a modern re-telling (or parody as H.P. Lovecraft intended) of Frankenstein.

Art is a lie that tells the truth.

http://twitter.com/solmaquina

reply

I always thought of the Frankenstein monster as more of a superhuman, highly intelligent and extremely powerful. The Re-Animator creatures are the exact opposite of the the Frankenstein monster (and in the short stories, the less successful experiments DO feed on living flesh..I believe one of them even devours a little girl). Therefore, I think that the Re-Animator creatures are the prototype for modern flesh eating zombies.

Anyone ever play Resident Evil 3? After I played that game, I always pictured the monster from Frankenstein as the Nemesis..and I always pictured Mr. X from RE2 as the boxer zombie from Re-Animator. Hell, West in the stories is described as looking exactly like William Birkin.

---
Vive la mort, vive la guerre, vive le sacré mercenaire.

reply

It is a perfect balance between a Zombie film and a Frankenstein film.

The way Herbert West behaves is very much like Dr. Frankenstein, but the nature of the re-animated dead and their behavior is very much like zombies.

H.P. Lovecraft did take inspiration from Frankenstein, but in the end he added so many unique touches that his story cannot be said to be a mere imitation.

reply

[deleted]

Dear Zanity. Please try to behave like a normal human being and not like a troll. It is obvious that you know what you talk about so you really don't have to be rude to prove your point. Assuming that I'm illiterate because of my simple question is rather bewildering. How would you come to that conclusion? This film is on quite many Zombie film lists and I did not see this as a Zombie film at all, but much more like a twist on Frankenstein. I wondered if others agreed with me. Now how would my question indicate that I knew nothing about these subjects? I have actually not just seen a lot of Zombie and Frankenstein films, but also studied the subject and written a paper on it. Not that that does matter at all in this argument. The question would be a valid one even if I knew nothing about the subject. I don't see how this can't be a twist on Frankenstein just because it is Lovecraft. That sounds a lot like "Dumbing everything down to 'either or'".


- No animal was hurt during the making of this burger -

reply



It's like a mix of both if you ask me

You killed Captain Clown, YOU KILLED CAPTAIN CLOWN-The Joker on Batman TAS

reply

[deleted]

Both

reply

It starts out as a Frankenstein film and becomes a Zombie one.

Its that man again!!

reply

Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't zombies originally (ala pre-Romero) re-animated corpses, typically through witchcraft or necromancy? Thus, both Re-Animator and Frankenstein are "classic zombie" films.

Wiki excerpts: "The term comes from Haitian folklore (Haitian French: zombi, Haitian Creole: zonbi) where a zombie is a dead body animated by magic. "
"Zombies have a complex literary heritage, with antecedents ranging from Richard Matheson and H. P. Lovecraft to Mary Shelley's Frankenstein drawing on European folklore of the undead."

reply