![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
eldritchhobbitI just took advantage of the glorious opportunity to see the encore screenings of the National Theatre's Frankenstein (play by Nick Dear, directed by Danny Boyle, with Benedict Cumberbatch and Jonny Lee Miller alternating the roles of the Creature and Frankenstein). I first saw it last year.
These are my initial impressions of the Cumberbatch-as-Creature cast, including comparisons between Nick Dear's play as written and as performed.
Here are my thoughts on the differences between the Cumberbatch-as-Creature and Miller-as-Creature casts.
First of all, the lead performances in both versions were stunning. Absolutely stunning. I can't say this loudly or often enough. That said, my personal preference is for Cumberbatch's interpretation of the Creature and Miller's interpretation of Frankenstein. It comes down to the question of consistency, really. (I'll refer to the actors as BC and JLM, for the sake of convenience.)
BC and JLM had very different interpretations of the Creature. BC played him as a being cobbled together from the pieces of the dead, and it followed that he focused his research for his movements on injury victims who were trying to learn how to get their bodies working again. JLM played the Creature as a baby/rapidly-aging child, and it followed that his research focused mostly on his then-two-year-old-son. This contrast was made manifestly clear in the opening sequence; BC's Creature staggered, badly uncoordinated, clearly swept along by his own momentum; if he stopped, he'd fall flat on his face. JLM's Creature rocked on the ground, discovering his own body, at one point drawing his foot to his mouth and chewing on it.
The result of these differences in approach is that, once BC's Creature learned speech, he remained fairly consistent throughout the rest of the play. He was damaged goods, at the level of his very nerves and cells. JLM's Creature, on the other hand, "grew up" and shed much of his physical/verbal "strangeness," and the signs of those things - a stutter, a spasming of his leg, a nervous tick in his jaw and chin - only reappeared toward the end at moments of extreme distress.
Of the two, I strongly prefer BC's interpretation, which maintained the Creature's "Otherness" throughout. Sometimes JLM appeared rather inconsistent, more like a merely ugly person than a new life form, and I'm sure that's in part because of the premise from which he was working.
One of the scenes that's most pivotal to me is the bedroom scene between the Creature and Elizabeth. BC's Creature visibly had tears in his eyes and trembling lip as he apologized to her for what he was about to do, and he seemed to go through the mechanics of the rape for its symbolism as an act of revenge, although it pained him. JLM's Creature made the apology like something he knew he should do (without tears), and seemed to take animal pleasure in the act (which was longer and more graphic) before then showing genuine remorse.
To put it another way, BC's Creature seemed like a Good Man who Falls (or is pushed, as it were) and bitterly mourns the fact, whereas JLM's Creature seemed like an Innocent who becomes Disillusioned (and thus Angry). If that makes any sense.
That said, JLM's Creature was remarkable in the scene with his would-be Bride; he stood beside her, holding her hand, screwing up his eyes and nearly hyperventilating as he waited to hear Victor Frankenstein's decision about her. Very powerful.
As for Victor himself, the interpretations again were different, though more subtly so. I feel JLM was done a bit of a disservice, because his Victor was taped when he obviously was very hoarse, and so he came across as perpetually rather "shouty" just so his lines could be understood. His JLM felt very, very focused to me, holding an intense and even note - as I say, consistent. BC's Victor vacillated between moments of great hubris and moments of great doubt, and that made him quite sympathetic at times (more so than JLM's), but also a bit hard to pin down.
When JLM's Victor told the Creature to look down at the town, with its "little men, with little lives," he was stating a cold scientific observation; BC's Victor was openly sneering in contempt. When JLM's Victor told Elizabeth he loved her, he sounded as if he was trying to convince himself; when BC's Victor said it, he meant it, and it was an anguish to him. When Elizabeth kissed JLM's Victor, he didn't kindle for her, but he wished he could; BC's Victor was genuinely tempted and aroused, and had to pull himself away and remind himself of his priorities.
JLM's Victor was more thoughtless, oblivious even, out of his emotional depth, than cruel. BC's Victor had real moments of cruelty. When he realized he could exhibit a female Creature, his voice dropped an octave, and the audience had no doubt he would go back on his word. Later, when he asked what the Creature would do if the Bride "wants to live with a Man, not a Monster," he dipped her suggestively, pressing against her, undulating with her, as if suggesting he could "perform" where the Creature couldn't.
Two of Victor's key lines in particular worked better for me with JLM. When Victor asked the Creature what it feels like to love, and the Creature gives his wrenching description, JLM's Victor choked up and asked "Is that what it feels like?" as if he wished he knew and was well aware that he didn't. BC's Victor asked in an abstract kind of way, as he was already clearly a step ahead in his plan on what to do to the Bride.
Another example: when the Creature called Victor on the fact Victor didn't anticipate that he would have feelings, BC's Victor brushed him off by saying he was "an equation, a theorem," nothing more. Next question? JLM's Victor made it an accusation, an indictment with a weighty pause, and the audience gasped, both from his delivery and the obvious impact the blow had on BC's Creature.
BC's Creature hit every note I was looking for from this script, and I simply cannot say enough glowing things about his performance. He was the being who wanted to be good, the being capable of reason and logic, but love and empathy as well, and his Fall is deeply tragic because of it. (An example: the Creature explained to Elizabeth that he was good at assimilation, because from men he had learned "how to ruin, how to hate, how to debase, how to humiliate." JLM's Creature makes this an angry list, rapidly spoken. BC's Creature lingered on each one, mourning over it. That entire scene for BC was particularly spectacular.)
Through my recent viewings I also gained new appreciations for the complexity of Nick Dear's script, from the repetition of "We can only go forward, we cannot go back" motif, to the delicate use of the snow and the solitary moon as symbols throughout the work. It's a great achievement, this play, and I'm grateful I had the opportunity to experience it.
"All I wanted was your love. I could have loved you with all my heart. My poor creator."
- The Creature to Victor Frankenstein, Nick Dear's Frankenstein
These are my initial impressions of the Cumberbatch-as-Creature cast, including comparisons between Nick Dear's play as written and as performed.
Here are my thoughts on the differences between the Cumberbatch-as-Creature and Miller-as-Creature casts.
First of all, the lead performances in both versions were stunning. Absolutely stunning. I can't say this loudly or often enough. That said, my personal preference is for Cumberbatch's interpretation of the Creature and Miller's interpretation of Frankenstein. It comes down to the question of consistency, really. (I'll refer to the actors as BC and JLM, for the sake of convenience.)
BC and JLM had very different interpretations of the Creature. BC played him as a being cobbled together from the pieces of the dead, and it followed that he focused his research for his movements on injury victims who were trying to learn how to get their bodies working again. JLM played the Creature as a baby/rapidly-aging child, and it followed that his research focused mostly on his then-two-year-old-son. This contrast was made manifestly clear in the opening sequence; BC's Creature staggered, badly uncoordinated, clearly swept along by his own momentum; if he stopped, he'd fall flat on his face. JLM's Creature rocked on the ground, discovering his own body, at one point drawing his foot to his mouth and chewing on it.
The result of these differences in approach is that, once BC's Creature learned speech, he remained fairly consistent throughout the rest of the play. He was damaged goods, at the level of his very nerves and cells. JLM's Creature, on the other hand, "grew up" and shed much of his physical/verbal "strangeness," and the signs of those things - a stutter, a spasming of his leg, a nervous tick in his jaw and chin - only reappeared toward the end at moments of extreme distress.
Of the two, I strongly prefer BC's interpretation, which maintained the Creature's "Otherness" throughout. Sometimes JLM appeared rather inconsistent, more like a merely ugly person than a new life form, and I'm sure that's in part because of the premise from which he was working.
One of the scenes that's most pivotal to me is the bedroom scene between the Creature and Elizabeth. BC's Creature visibly had tears in his eyes and trembling lip as he apologized to her for what he was about to do, and he seemed to go through the mechanics of the rape for its symbolism as an act of revenge, although it pained him. JLM's Creature made the apology like something he knew he should do (without tears), and seemed to take animal pleasure in the act (which was longer and more graphic) before then showing genuine remorse.
To put it another way, BC's Creature seemed like a Good Man who Falls (or is pushed, as it were) and bitterly mourns the fact, whereas JLM's Creature seemed like an Innocent who becomes Disillusioned (and thus Angry). If that makes any sense.
That said, JLM's Creature was remarkable in the scene with his would-be Bride; he stood beside her, holding her hand, screwing up his eyes and nearly hyperventilating as he waited to hear Victor Frankenstein's decision about her. Very powerful.
As for Victor himself, the interpretations again were different, though more subtly so. I feel JLM was done a bit of a disservice, because his Victor was taped when he obviously was very hoarse, and so he came across as perpetually rather "shouty" just so his lines could be understood. His JLM felt very, very focused to me, holding an intense and even note - as I say, consistent. BC's Victor vacillated between moments of great hubris and moments of great doubt, and that made him quite sympathetic at times (more so than JLM's), but also a bit hard to pin down.
When JLM's Victor told the Creature to look down at the town, with its "little men, with little lives," he was stating a cold scientific observation; BC's Victor was openly sneering in contempt. When JLM's Victor told Elizabeth he loved her, he sounded as if he was trying to convince himself; when BC's Victor said it, he meant it, and it was an anguish to him. When Elizabeth kissed JLM's Victor, he didn't kindle for her, but he wished he could; BC's Victor was genuinely tempted and aroused, and had to pull himself away and remind himself of his priorities.
JLM's Victor was more thoughtless, oblivious even, out of his emotional depth, than cruel. BC's Victor had real moments of cruelty. When he realized he could exhibit a female Creature, his voice dropped an octave, and the audience had no doubt he would go back on his word. Later, when he asked what the Creature would do if the Bride "wants to live with a Man, not a Monster," he dipped her suggestively, pressing against her, undulating with her, as if suggesting he could "perform" where the Creature couldn't.
Two of Victor's key lines in particular worked better for me with JLM. When Victor asked the Creature what it feels like to love, and the Creature gives his wrenching description, JLM's Victor choked up and asked "Is that what it feels like?" as if he wished he knew and was well aware that he didn't. BC's Victor asked in an abstract kind of way, as he was already clearly a step ahead in his plan on what to do to the Bride.
Another example: when the Creature called Victor on the fact Victor didn't anticipate that he would have feelings, BC's Victor brushed him off by saying he was "an equation, a theorem," nothing more. Next question? JLM's Victor made it an accusation, an indictment with a weighty pause, and the audience gasped, both from his delivery and the obvious impact the blow had on BC's Creature.
BC's Creature hit every note I was looking for from this script, and I simply cannot say enough glowing things about his performance. He was the being who wanted to be good, the being capable of reason and logic, but love and empathy as well, and his Fall is deeply tragic because of it. (An example: the Creature explained to Elizabeth that he was good at assimilation, because from men he had learned "how to ruin, how to hate, how to debase, how to humiliate." JLM's Creature makes this an angry list, rapidly spoken. BC's Creature lingered on each one, mourning over it. That entire scene for BC was particularly spectacular.)
Through my recent viewings I also gained new appreciations for the complexity of Nick Dear's script, from the repetition of "We can only go forward, we cannot go back" motif, to the delicate use of the snow and the solitary moon as symbols throughout the work. It's a great achievement, this play, and I'm grateful I had the opportunity to experience it.
"All I wanted was your love. I could have loved you with all my heart. My poor creator."
- The Creature to Victor Frankenstein, Nick Dear's Frankenstein
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2012-06-08 03:15 pm (UTC)*hugs you*
no subject
Date: 2012-06-10 04:58 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-06-08 04:17 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-06-10 04:58 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-06-10 05:03 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-06-15 08:26 pm (UTC)This was a wonderful treatment on how actors bring their own life to a character.
Yes, that's it exactly. (And very interesting to contemplate in light of the different Sherlocks...)
Thanks
Date: 2012-06-12 04:05 pm (UTC)Re: Thanks
Date: 2012-06-15 08:24 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-06-22 11:48 pm (UTC)I was absolutely fascinated at how the approach to the Creature so affected the portrayal of Victor. JLM's Victor matches up with BC's Creature so well - his anguish over his faults and short-comings is palpable. And the chilling coldness of BC's Victor matches perfectly with the more aggressive, less emotionally-developed portrayal of JLM's Creature. You could not have BC's Victor paired with BC's Creature - the portrayals would not mesh at all. I am so impressed at how both actors have moulded their performances in partnership with the other.
I'm off again this weekend to see the JLM Creature, can't wait! I took some friends to see the first version last week, and I'm taking them tomorrow to see the second. I'm looking forward to seeing what they think of the differences.
no subject
Date: 2013-10-11 05:59 pm (UTC)I was absolutely fascinated at how the approach to the Creature so affected the portrayal of Victor. JLM's Victor matches up with BC's Creature so well - his anguish over his faults and short-comings is palpable. And the chilling coldness of BC's Victor matches perfectly with the more aggressive, less emotionally-developed portrayal of JLM's Creature. You could not have BC's Victor paired with BC's Creature - the portrayals would not mesh at all.
Yes! You make such an excellent point here. The degree to which each of the two actors crafted his performance/interpretation to respond to his counterpart's is stunning. It allows the two different shows to be in conversation with each other rather than simply reworking the exact same ground. I'm so glad I saw both performances!
I'm thrilled it's coming back for this Halloween season.
Thanks for sharing your wonderful insights!
Yang Xuezeng- Simply because there was produced preparation to problem,beat large mansion
Date: 2013-04-23 11:41 am (UTC)Wu Xi connects throughout Avoid Tianshen uses Jiangsu within assistance transforms Pan Manbo in the make while in the interacting with is actually whole
Though Shanghai demonstrate stunning value concern nonetheless could not acquire often be settlemented proficiently, yet reveal shell out help within submit the conference however earn Pot Manbo is definitely entire, after delivers Feng Renliang so that you can Guangzhou right after consistent is big, wu Xi regarding boundary rear end secure is unveiled with good price by means of Jiangsu Shun day all over again. Last night, federal of Jiangsu Shun morning announces formally to help ended up being authorized visit Shanghai demonstrate Wu Xi of beautiful brunt gambler. "Shanghai describe rose and Jiangsu Avoid working day turn with regards to Wu Xi achieving things involved reachs single thoughts and opinions, team with Avoid evening soccer witout a doubt authorized working plan together with Wu Xi. Not too long ago, arrangement the participant involves Nanjing to accept check-up. Inches turn to this specific meeting, demonstrate a plant had a reply throughout established small get, "Explain the factor that will throughout wasting an organization by way of thanking Wu Xi to remain in A couple of years the following, tends to make the pub, wish the pup professional profession of foreseeable future is productive. Need the pup specialist employment regarding long run is productive.. This calendar year Wu Xi with Twenty-three yrs old is definitely reveal your flower seemed to be used The year just gone Six-hundred 1000 where second staff presents. Be in for explain with 3 sporting events season of lovely success, wu Xi is at connected with right back work regionally quite dovish, previously determined cross national range. It is claimed, associated with Wu Xi change membership due surpassed 16 trillion, that is right reveal your exchanging this five university evaluate brushstroke is without question for any blossom. Include meet with producing a scheduled visit with 17 million cultural rank to make furthermore to Guangzhou consistent big Feng benevolence stands out, reveal used that sporting events year for you to had been obtained for at least Thirty million flip membership rights owing. Also, the [url=http://kidsjordans.webnode.cn]cheap jordans for sale[/url] us govenment expressed Guangzhou loaded pressure last night brushstroke changes assembly, zhang Yaokun with crew leader associated with group of serious significant character in the Dalian prior to a good deal fell, along with Hangzhou environment friendly town additionally keeps a click meeting yesterday, say having Japan guide recommend Wu Shi with Shuai Session cropland renews anything 24 months. Brilliant subscribess pertaining to reporter They Haibo relevant information
Mum connected with activity beautiful body- Liu Xiang's Mother changes as soon as statigic planning
Date: 2013-04-24 11:40 am (UTC)Nibbles associated with media upon Landon Donovan, Omar Gonzalez
Nibbles involving news about Landon Donovan, Omar聽Gonzalez
Steve Davis
Economy is shown Teen, The year 2013, 6:Thirty-eight Pm hours EDT
1 Review
Getty Photographs
Your Multiple listing service Set up is mainly intended for drafting, naturally. But it鈥檚 and a possibility of breakthrough, because [url=http://wholesalenikeshoesairmax.weebly.com]wholesale nike shoes[/url] just about every mentor will there be. (Effectively, unless of course you鈥檙e instruction Greater FC 鈥?although let鈥檚 not go there at this time. 聽And, well, unless you could become taking that dirty, bare instruction seats inside Nyc 鈥?nevertheless let鈥檚 not really go there right this moment.)
Back on place 鈥?is there a Landon Donovan image resolution coming soon? And just what connected with Omar Gonzalez, who's going to be away from contract next time while using Whole world?
Through today鈥檚 draw up, ESPN鈥檚 Monica Gonzalez questioned Globe director Bruce Industry regarding the two participants.
Upon Omar Gonzalez (shown), the most effective person in Multiple listing service Goblet 2012, Market mentioned the particular golf club would 鈥渓et this current year play out,鈥?apparently implying they sometimes will never or can't emergency Gonzalez into a longer bargain.
Area acknowledged in which his or her huge core back again may have 鈥渓ots connected with options鈥?to come. In fact.
This speculate the following is that will Area and the Globe aren鈥檛 a lot making 鈥渢his calendar year participate in out鈥?as much they can be doing good a reduced predicament. That's, Gonzalez鈥檚 counsel equip features most likely explained to Multiple listing service along with the Environment the client will not likely indication a whole new bargain. Meaning he鈥檚 proceeding international as soon as possible.
Which simply leaves the actual Universe having 2 options (assuming these people don鈥檛 advertise Gonzalez today on best worth, which in turn remains to be from a technical perspective feasible over the continuous global transfer windows):
They could market them during the warm [url=http://www.ok-buyjordans.com]Cheap Air Jordans[/url] months at the forcefully price (due to the fact Gonzalez may possibly also sign some sort of pre-contract, playing out the actual MLS time of year whilst beneath obligation to advance in Present cards, therefore shrinking his or her worth above where by the item appears these days). Or the Environment could just let Gonzalez play out 12 months, gaining up to they could through his / her capability and enabling your ex go for totally free 13 several weeks by today.
(A lot more: Donovan but not on Anyone.Utes. camp out lineup)
In terms of Donovan, that has however to decide the long term within master football, here鈥檚 what exactly Arena explained to Gonzalez:聽 鈥淲e鈥檙e about to come with an possiblity to take a moment together with Landon last week and extremely learn exactly where he鈥檚 on, what direction we鈥檙e many on course, as well as preferably almost everything is fine away for your pet as well as the Globe.
http://agenciapinocho.com/2010/01/03/no-sabe-como-decirle-a-su-novia-que-tiene-bozo/comment-page-1/#comment-7703
http://xn--72-6kca2bng1btk.xn--p1ai/index.php?option=com_fireboard&Itemid=19&func=view&catid=9&id=22#22
http://www.gaomi169.com/bbs/forum.php?mod=viewthread&tid=14210&extra=
no subject
Date: 2013-10-09 01:51 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-10-11 06:00 pm (UTC)