'Frankenstein' - Play review

I'm putting this under the heading of 'Play review' even though I saw it at my local cinema as I can't really classify it as a film review. This was a National Theatre Live production, which made another rounds of the cinema because everybody was so wowed by it the first time, and now catching it just before it closes for the last time I can definitely see why.

Directed by Danny Boyle, the National Theatre's 'Frankenstein' was originally staged in 2011 and (as a brief introductory documentary told us) starred both Benedict Cumberbatch and Jonny Lee Miller as both the titular Victor Frankenstein and his Creature. In that, one night Cumberbatch played Frankenstein and Miller would play the Creature, and then the next Miller would play Frankenstein and Cumberbatch would play the Creature.
On the night that was filmed and ended up being broadcast to cinemas we had Cumberbatch as the Creature - I won't be able to comment on how good Miller might have been as the creature, but after seeing this production I'm fairly sure it was better this way around.

It now seems a tragedy to me that Cumberbatch will always be most well-known by the masses for his role in 'Sherlock' (…as Sherlock). 'Sherlock', the show, is of course phenomenal, and Benedict's interpretation of Sherlock is without doubt attractive and alluring, and I'm not saying that it is any way a 'waste' of his acting talent*. However, I recently read an article in The Stage magazine, saying that some theatrical VIPs (I can't remember who) were saying that drama school graduates are overtrained. At the time I thought that was a ridiculous thing to say, but couldn't come up with a why - but here is the why: Benedict Cumberbatch's 'Creature'. But I'll get on to that.

They alternated roles.

It's interesting how deeply ingrained the tale of 'Frankenstein' is on our cultural consciousness. Everybody is aware that there is a story of a man who made a monster in an effort to create life, and for some reason (and this happened gradually as I grew up) everybody seems to know that Frankenstein is the name of the creator, not the monster, either not knowing the Creature's name or not knowing the Creature doesn't have a name. It's therefore fascinating that the National Theatre can make a play which starts with the birth of the creature, which then focuses on the creature almost exclusively for the beginning of the play, in which we don't see Victor Frankenstein until at least half an hour in, and call it 'Frankenstein', and we'll know what it's about. It isn't called 'Frankenstein's Monster', though Danny Boyle and Nick Dear (the writer) said in the introductory documentary that the play was about giving the Creature a voice - and that is why I think a) an actor cannot be overtrained for good theatre and b) it's a pity that Cumberbatch will always be remembered for his 'Sherlock'.

The only reason 'b)' is sad is because he'll be remembered for that instead of his Creature in 'Frankenstein'. It is without doubt the single most impressive feat of acting I have seen in my entire life. Now I'm not a fanboy of Cumberbatch (or a 'Cumberbitch' or whatever they're called) so this isn't biased; before now I've thought of him as a very good actor who's in some very good shows, but this was phenomenal. Which also feeds into the notion that professional actors are not overtrained. Cumberbatch said in the introductory documentary that he was observing stroke survivors and people recovering from paralysis for inspiration, and watching him as the Creature an adult body learning to move again as a newborn it was obvious that there was no Benedict Cumberbatch there - he became the creature with his entire physicality and mentality. I strongly doubt that without the proper training an actor could achieve that incredibly high degree of discipline, and how can anyone possibly call it over trained to be so invested in a character and knowing ways to get so deep into what you're doing that you lose all trace of yourself and become the character. That is how good this performance was from Benedict Cumberbatch.

Especially, since the opening what must have been 10 minutes focussed on the birth of the Creature. 10 minutes of watching a new born adult (that being Cumberbatch but as I say you couldn't tell it wasn't a new born adult) floundering around you'd think would be boring, but thanks to Cumberbatch's physical acting it was incredibly captivating, as he experimented with moving each limb individually, then in tandem, then trying to crawl, to crab walk, to stand and eventually to walk. It sounds odd me saying it, but there was something beautiful in that.

Yes the creature was naked to begin with and we got to see some Cumberbuns

Indeed, the Creature's introduction into the world was a wonderful expose of what it is to be alive, something truly remarkable to witness which almost had me in tears (no hyperbole there either). Of course this was created a nice contrast with later in the play as the Creature is confronted with adversity and loses its innocence, and becomes the monster that everyone treats it as. The Creature ends up as a monster, but thanks to Nick Dear giving the creature a voice we can see why this happens, and thanks to Cumberbatch's superb acting one can't help feeling sympathy for him/it.

The acting throughout the entire play was fantastic but I think we really are meant to focus on the Creature, he is, in a way, the 'point' of the story, and most of the character development is focussed on him. It must be said however that Jonny Lee Miller did a sterling job as Victor Frankenstein, getting the right balance between a selfish asshole and an understandable asshole - as a man who hadn't thought of what effects his actions may have he struggles to get a grip by always going too far. If you want an example of 'too far' I'd have to say murdering the only female partner to your creation before she is even 'born', but Jonny Lee Miller makes it very clear that Frankenstein does these thinks as over-reactions, striking out against something he doesn't understand. He is more on-the-back-foot than he is stupid, and I think it noble of Miller to present Frankenstein as anything other than an asshole, even if he probably deserves it.

Also of much note (dare I say more not than Jonny Lee Miller?) was Naomie Harris, who played Elizabeth, Frankenstein's much-neglected fiancée. Her attempts to be understanding of Victor Frankenstein and then of the Creature were skilfully balanced with how much she would attempt to be understood, and she played with beautiful subtlety her dismay when Victor doesn't. As my director in Wuthering Heights said recently, male actors tend to just show everything whereas female actors are better at layering emotions, and I think it's very impressive how Naomie Harris' subtlety was just as powerful and emotionally affective as Jonny lee Miller's blind brashness.

For lack of a better illustration on Google images.

The set was astounding. I've seen 'War Horse' but he National Theatre and that was a great set, but this play was something else again.coooooooooool and there was a fire breathing train used to represent the industrial revolution. The train was only used once for about a minute and was never seen again, but it looked cool.

The light show from these babies was incredible

I don't have much to say about sets because I'm not really a set design person, but it was inventive in its use of space, bridging the gap between very sparse and simultaneously detailed, as everything moved and changed. Frankenstein's house was under the floor and spun up out of it when needed which was

COOL FUCKING TRAIN.

But the music. Dear GOD the music. I was sat about twenty minutes in thinking that the music was beautiful and at the same time quite recognisable (bear in mind we used 'Caliban's Dream' from the Olympic Opening Ceremony as a cool down track in HYT and couldn't get enough of it then), and when I got home I knew I had to find out what it was. There was one track I had to find, all I knew was that it had to do with sunrise, so I just searched 'frankenstein music sunrise national theatre' or something, and would you know, the music was written by Underworld! That explains it! The music throughout was great but there was one specific track which stuck out to me. I mentioned before almost being brought to tears during the Creature's introduction to life, and that was the morning after he escapes from the laboratory and witnesses his first sunrise. The track they used in this took me a while to find (though I am definitely buying the album now), but it's called 'Dawn of Eden'. Try this link, if the 'start at' doesn't work just skip to 22:05. It doesn't have quite the same umph without the visuals and sounds on stage, but just imagine it in the actual show with a blazing sun at the back of the stage and the Creature flailing around in joy and making appreciative noises (in the context of a creature which cannot talk) very loudly, almost shrieking at his first glimpse of sunlight with his brand new mind. Having this piece of music playing over that was profoundly jubilant, so jubilant in fact I could feel myself welling up, and just dying to go out and see a sunrise for myself on the downs somewhere (this was cinema on the Isle of Wight) and THAT is the power of theatre.

This play deserves a 10/10, without a doubt. It's the first play I've seen in quite a while which even 4 days later I am still dying to see it again (some plays have that effect bit it only stays that way for a few hours of 'oo I'd like to see that again'). The acting from Cumberbatch was mind-blowing and the rest of the cast were excellent as well, the set was wonderfully creative and the music was music to the point of moving. 10/10, well done folks.

I only hope it comes out on DVD somewhen so I can relive that experience again.

*anyone who thinks that you can 'waste' acting talent by doing something fun are idiots and should not be allowed to drama. Ever.