Frankenstein
May. 3rd, 2020 01:45 pmI've heard it said that this play is the most faithful adaptation of the novel, and I'm not sure if that's true, but they definitely did take some liberties, and most of what the did I think is an improvement. Like they got rid of the awkward frame story Robert Walton, who was always IMO kind of a throwaway character. And they made a more significant role for Elizabeth, which I had mixed feelings about. Like, on the one hand, I appreciate her being given more to do because the character in the book is essentially a prop. But on the other hand, they make her into a sort of audience stand-in and some of the things she says are just a little too on-the-nose for her to feel like an actual human being. And her motives for loving Victor are never clear, because he sure as hell doesn't love her.
I think Benedict was the better actor in both performances, but I think overall I preferred the Creature!batch version of the production because the Creature for me is what makes or breaks the show. But BC's Victor was super interesting, and very Sherlock-y. So that was nice. I really loved JLM's portrayal of the Creature at the beginning of the play. He had rather less flopping that BC, which to be honest BC's flopping was a bit over the top for me. And his pure joy at discovering things like birds and grass and the sun was wonderful to see. But once they both opened their mouths, I think BC gave the better performance. His creature was more erudite, and felt more world-weary, whereas JLMs felt more childlike. I do think, though, that JLM's Victor was kind of flat. BC definitely found more moments of humor, and also I think just gave a more nuanced performance overall. And I loved the actress who played the female Creature! Such a brilliant dancer! Oh, and I loved the lighting and set design. So well done. Especially those overhead lights!
A couple of moments I wanted to talk about.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
Elizabeth wants to have children, and her desire to create life the good old fashioned, natural way, is contrasted with Victor's desire to create life from death. And he rejects her, choosing instead to play god and violate nature. I think this symbolic rape of nature that is being brought to the forefront in this adaptation is the reason they added the rape of Elizabeth, a detail not mentioned in the novel.
Normally I'm wary of adaptations adding rapes that aren't in the source material. But I do think this one made sense thematically. I'm super annoyed they had to censor it for Youtube, because I understand JLM and BC played it differently and I would have liked to have seen that. But from what I've heard (and can extrapolate from the Creatures reflections on it afterwards), BC's Creature seems to have regretted the rape and felt like it was necessary to balance the scales because Victor broke his word. Whereas JLM seems to take pleasure in the act of rape and in the memory of it. Of the two, I think JLM's is the braver choice because it's the harder one for the audience to understand and accept. Anyway, I'm annoyed by censorship in general, I do think that a rape scene, like any other scene, tells us something about the characters. And I think they have a place in art.
Anyway, let me know your thoughts!