Key Highlights
- The film adaptation of “Frankenstein” by Guillermo del Toro portrays the Arctic as a barren wasteland, ignoring its rich Indigenous heritage.
- Mary Shelley’s 1818 novel implicitly critiques colonialism through the character Robert Walton’s journey and his interactions with Victor Frankenstein.
- The film “Frankenstein” (2025) is set in 1857, a period marked by declining British imperial power and Arctic exploration disasters.
- Del Toro’s depiction of the Arctic echoes 19th-century colonialist views of the region as an uncharted frontier for exploitation.
The Arctic in Guillermo del Toro’s Frankenstein: A Critical Analysis
In Guillermo del Toro’s adaptation of Mary Shelley’s “Frankenstein,” set against the backdrop of 19th-century Arctic exploration, the film portrays a barren wasteland devoid of Indigenous presence. This depiction is a departure from both the original novel and reality, where the Arctic is home to numerous Indigenous peoples like the Sámi.
Shelley’s Anti-Colonial Stance
Mary Shelley’s “Frankenstein” (1818) subtly critiques colonialism through Robert Walton’s expedition. As a European explorer pursuing knowledge and land, Walton mirrors Victor Frankenstein in his quest for dominance over nature. Shelley’s narrative emphasizes the ethical implications of scientific pursuit and imperial expansion.
Del Toro’s Arctic: A Colonialist Perspective
In contrast, del Toro’s 2025 adaptation relocates the story to a more specific historical period—1857. This setting coincides with a decline in British imperial confidence due to events like the Indian Mutiny and the Second Opium War. Del Toro’s Arctic, much like the 19th-century paintings of Edwin Landseer, represents an untouched wilderness ready for exploitation.
The film depicts the Arctic as both hostile and exploitable by European explorers, mirroring Shelley’s critique but through a lens that emphasizes colonial dominance. The Creature’s solitary figure is left to wander this desolate landscape, symbolizing the enduring legacy of unchecked imperialism.
Expert Insights: Indigenous Perspectives
Janne Oula Näkkäläjärvi from the Sámi Education Institute notes that del Toro’s portrayal feels “sad and absurd.” The Arctic is far from empty; it is a homeland for many Indigenous peoples who have thrived there harmoniously. This perspective underscores the need to reframe historical narratives through an Indigenous lens, aligning with ongoing efforts to rewrite Arctic history.
Del Toro’s film, while faithful in other aspects, misses an opportunity to deliver the anti-colonial message embedded in Shelley’s work. By focusing on the Arctic as a blank slate for exploration and exploitation, the film perpetuates colonialist narratives that have long dominated Western discourse.
Conclusion
The depiction of the Arctic in del Toro’s “Frankenstein” raises important questions about colonialism and its enduring impact. While Shelley’s novel implicitly critiques imperial expansion, del Toro’s adaptation reinforces these very narratives through its portrayal of the Arctic as an unclaimed territory ripe for exploitation.
By revisiting this classic tale with a modern lens, del Toro has both honored and subverted the original story, offering viewers a nuanced exploration of ethical scientific endeavor and the complex history of colonialism in the Arctic.
