Timothy Treadwell and Frankenstein, in their own "stories," took it upon themselves to intervene with something nature had already set into place, whether it be human bodies laying to rest after the person has died, or trying to become close to a species of animal which has proven not to be a docile as assumed. The question whether players in both cases are evil or not is a complicated question. Your opinion sort of rests upon your personal beliefs. Can an animal be "evil," if it is only following its natural instinct, what ever that may be, and end up harming a human being? I do not feel this is the case. Frankenstein's actions on the other hand, were he a real person, I would deem evil. Messing around with the bodies of people who have passed away crosses over a line of respect for that human being. There are ceremonies and rituals and other traditions that a family performs (most of the time through another person) to take care of the deceased person's belongings and body in hopes they can lay at rest. I don't think tampering with any of those this is kosher in the least.
These two people are definitely comparable. Their actions were both not condoned by the general public. They also to a certain degree went off into solitude to do such things. They also both thought of themselves as a parent figure to their creatures, Treadwell's being the bears and Frankenstein's being his monster.
Treadwell's circumstance is undoubtedly an unfortunate one, something no one should ever have to experience. He cared deeply for these bears enough to spend 13 years of his life defending them. He is like Frankenstein in a way such that his most admired creature one day rebelled against him
