Frankenweenie - A Mixed-Up Science Message

We finally got around to Netflixing Tim Burton’s animated film, Frankenweenie. The original Frankenstein is a cautionary tale with a definite message about science: be careful what you create! As an homage to vintage horror films, perhaps Frankenweenie doesn’t need to espouse a particular view on science, but it does, in a sewn-together-from-various-parts sort of way.

As you may recall, one of the things I cover in this blog is portrayal of the scientific process in popular culture aimed at kids. I understand that in a fantasy or sci-fi movie, nature works differently. I have no problem with stories about impossible things, such as the re-animation of a dead dog. I’m happy to suspend disbelief to enjoy a ripping yarn. My concern is with the way scientific investigation is portrayed; in particular how Hollywood tends to spread certain misconceptions. Frankenweenie starts to get it right, but disappoints as well. So here we go…

Happily, in this movie the children are all budding scientists. In New Holland you gain social status by winning the science fair! Science is cool! Go science!

Sadly, each of the children of New Holland is odd or creepy enough to be the social outcast at any other school. None of them are motivated by wonder or curiosity; Victor wants his dog back and the others want social status. I don’t know whether real kids who view this film will be much inspired to emulate the characters’ scientific pursuits.

Happily, the science teacher, Mr. Rzykuskie, is encouraging and inspiring and wise and his love of science is motivated by wonder. He tells Victor that it’s okay to try, and fail. This message gives Victor the confidence to hit a home run in his first baseball game, after twice swinging and missing.

Sadly, we do not see Victor try and fail at science. We see the same old scene that always gets my goat: the kid cobbles together some impossibly complex project out of household utensils, and viola - the first time he tries it a miracle occurs! The unfortunate message is that people who do wonderful things with science are just gifted; they don’t have to work at it. Therefor, for most of us, scientific accomplishment is not a possibility.

Hilariously, in my favorite speech of the movie, Mr. Rzykuskie, who is not a whiz at the English language, is asked to explain his teaching philosophy to the parents at a town meeting, which he does thusly: “To you, science is magic and witchcraft because you have such small minds. I cannot make your heads bigger, but your children's heads, I can take them and crack them open. This is what I try to do, to get at their brains!” Of course this does get him fired.

Conflictedly, Mr. Rzykuskie’s parting conversation with Victor has some really good stuff in it, but this is also where the wheels really start to loosen from the science cart in this tale.

Spoiler alert: To explain what I mean I’m gonna have to get into some plot specifics.

In Victor’s first “experiment” he resurrects his dead dog, Sparky, with a jolt of lightening directed through a mishmash of toys and appliances. The dog comes back as basically the same happy curious playful pet he always was.

Happily, Victor’s classmate Edgar forces him to repeat his experiment, as any good scientist should. To validate your results you must be able to replicate them! However, this time he uses a dead fish, which comes to life as an invisible fish that shows its skeleton in direct light and eventually disappears altogether. 

Now we come to that mixed conversation. Victor asks Mr. Rzykuskie why his experiment went badly the second time. 

Happily, Mr. Rzykuskie tells Victor that science itself is neither good nor bad; it’s what you do with it that matters. He says if Victor got different results, perhaps he never understood the experiment in the first place. That line is brilliant! My heart leapt at the prospect of further investigation conducted to tease out the underlying reason behind the two very different results. 

But then, oddly, Mr. Rzykuskie tells Victor that his second experiment turned out differently because he loved it the first time, but not the second. Huh? What? Emotions effect experimental outcome? Well, yeah, maybe if your heart isn’t in it your methodology gets sloppy, leading to varying results. That’s what he meant, right? Actually I’m guessing what Mr. Rzykuskie said was meant to set up our acceptance of what happens next. 

Spoiler alert: even more plot details are about to be revealed.

In the next sequence, all the children begin reanimating their dead pets with jolts of electricity. They get wildly differing and equally dramatic results. Sea monkeys become giant sea monkeys. A dead bat and living cat become merged into one creature. A dead turtle reanimates as a gigantic Godzilla turtle. These results are seemingly random. Application of lightening can do anything! 

Sadly, none of the characters who fancy themselves budding scientists seem the least bit curious or surprised about what’s going on here. They are pleased with themselves for “succeeding” with their “projects.” Then they are frantic to escape the mayhem that ensues. Do any of them make hypotheses by way of explanation? Do they use scientific investigation or logic to try and understand what’s happening and make things right again? No, all that science stuff is dropped at this point. Instead they rely on slapstick antics and luck to get the job done. 

What does this communicate about science? “Forget about trying to understand why things happen the way they do, kids.” After the science teacher’s speech about “to you, science is magic and witchcraft” I was hoping we’d see some proof to the contrary, that we would see kids figuring things out with a scientific process, but no - turns out science really is magic and witchcraft after all! 

If I had to guess what the film-makers were thinking, it’s probably that because the tricks are done with electricity rather than magic wands, that makes this about science, not magic! Electricity can be found in science books, after all. This movie, like so many many others, mistakes the trappings of science for actual science. This is why millions of dollars are wasted each year on healing magnets, power bracelets, and other pseudoscientific claptrap that uses scientific language and does nothing! 

Big spoiler alert: I’m about to give away part of the ending.

Going out on a happier note, after Victor’s re-animated dog Sparky proves his valor, Victor’s parents finally accept him for the wonderful walking-dead pet that he is. In the beginning they treated the rekindled canine as an abomination. They tried to hide the dog from the world, simply because it arbitrarily freaked them out. But what’s really so wrong about re-animating your pet if he can have all the same enduring characteristics he did before he died, plus the added benefit of parts adorably falling off now and then? Getting your beloved pup back is a good thing. Embrace it! 

Where the original Frankenstein condemns science for working against the natural order of things, Frankenweenie takes the opposite tack and ends up proving some of Mr. Rzykuskie’s words of wisdom: Science itself is neither good nor bad. It’s what you do with it that counts. And that, at least, is a good message for kids to receive.