Two of the best: Benedict Cumberbatch.Jonny Lee Miller |
Mary Wollstonecroft Shelley wrote an earth-shattering book
in 1818, putting forth the concept of man’s ego and pursuit of science running
away with him, causing him to think himself capable of the undreamed-of feat of
cobbling together a living human being out of the scraps of dead ones. Frankenstein
is sometimes called the first science fiction novel, and as such, it is a story
of science gone wrong—and is fraught with the high drama of the exploits of the
most terrifying monster imaginable, one created by man to prove his own worth.
The idea has fascinated us for two centuries now, and will
likely do so for more to come. In England’s National Theatre production,
presented on screen at the Rosendale Theatre yesterday, the two principle
characters—Dr. Frankenstein and the monster he created—appear to be vying for
the position of most despicable. They discuss philosophy (unlike in the beloved 1931 film starring Boris
Karloff, this monster can speak, and does so with erudition and eloquence),
they spar and try to kill each other, as they debate morality and they both
behave like sociopaths.
Benedict Cumberbatch is the monster. He begins life almost
as an embryo, in an extraordinary, almost balletic slither across the floor,
replete with contortions and spasms until he can stand upright. He is so
grotesque we can hardly bear to look at him, and indeed almost everybody who
does look at him tries immediately to kill him. He comes upon a remote cottage
where a blind man lives and takes him in. This man gives him the education and
compassion he needs for a year’s time, and also demonstrates to the monster, by
happenstance, that no man is trustworthy or good.
Jonny Lee Miller is convincing as the mad genius who came up
with the idea that, with all the tools of modern science, he not only could
create a human being from scratch, but he should—for his own personal glory and, he thinks, for
the advancement of mankind.
Cumberbatch and Miller are the best of the best, products of
the English discipline of theatre. They are extremely intelligent but also
extremely emotional, and in control of every gesture and emotion a human being can
conjure. They are extraordinary and awe-inspiring to behold; one feels
privileged to live in a generation that can see them at their best, alive and
creating before our eyes. Both have done extensive television, but like most
English actors, they are at their finest on the stage.
The National Theatre production demonstrates the full art of
stage production, with fiery lighting, special effects, and an ensemble of first-rate actors to
support the leading players. Both the stars are on an equal footing, and all
the cast and special effects and technicians serve them by split-second timed
changes and commitment to the show. It
is a phenomenon to see.
The second show of the evening was scheduled to be a unique
twist—the leading roles switched with Miller as the monster and Cumberbatch as
his creator. I was emotionally exhausted at the end of the show and not sure I
could have tolerated another, obviously equal, version of the same that evening, so I was
not 100 per cent looking forward to seeing it again. I was a bit relieved when
the announcement was made that the second version hadn’t arrived and the
evening screening would be the one we had just seen. There will be another
showing on Wednesday; if it is the one will Miller as the monster, I must go
again (and will do so with relish), but the production was complete and
satisfying as I did see it.
Mary Lois--thanks for this post! It's made up my mind--I'll see you there on Wednesday.
ReplyDeleteLast June I visited a favorite cousin in La Crosse WI. She teaches high school English, and I asked her what book she most enjoys teaching. Her answer: Frankenstein. She says that through the first-person story, most of her students grasp issues that are provocative and relevant in a new way.
And so, of course, I'm sending her the link to your blog post too!