----------------------------Original message---------------------------- A P.S. to my earlier Frankenstein-related message re: Denis Hennell's message: Let's remember, too, that the word "madness" applied to anything the least bit off the nineteenth-century beaten path, and it could include a high IQ, depression, obsession, ego-mania (whether mild or OTT). Perhaps there is no evidence of what we refer to today as "madness," as Denis asserts, in the new Branaugh film because, once again, the version of Frank parallels the book more than the 1931 James Whale film. I realize, too, that the 1931 film created a nearly world-wide persona and (American) cultural image that many folks today want to see re-affirmed, and that's why they d8xvRbl[{disliked_ugh film. Shelley's masterpiece, for all the literary criticism it's had to bear (re: her famous parents and their influence, the possible meanings of the text regarding Shelley's motherlessness, comparative mythology and the mother as womb and tomb), does demand more -- as does Branaugh's film -- than simply comparison to Whale's film. That's all I'm trying to say. And again, I would encourage a close reading of Shelley's text. Donna Harrington Univ. of MD/NOVA- Loudoun