Benedict Cumberbatch, I tried to find you hot when monsterfied, but failed. I AM SO SORRY.
Hey guys! It's possible (shifty eyes) that I may have gone out and bought an iPad today and that this might be my first post written on it, and that it may be immense and wonderful and I may have named it Laertes. I BEG YOU NOT TO BELIEVE THESE HEINOUS RUMOURS. IT WASN'T ME, MR BANK MANAGER, IT WAS SOMEONE ELSE. Ahem.
Anyway, tonight I went to see Frankenstein at the National Theatre starring Benedict Cumberbatch as the monster and Johnny Lee Miller as Dr Frankenstein. As you may know, they are alternating roles each night, but I specifically booked a night when The Cumberbatch was playing the monster, since I figured that was the juicier role. Seriously thinking of going to the cinema to see it again on the night when it's the other way around.
Benedict Cumberbatch and Johnny Lee Miller were both excellent- real stage presence, delivering their lines powerfully and really putting their all into the roles. I especially loved the innocence and glee of the Monster right after birth, in love with the whole world and everything in it. BC was totally unselfconscious and it showed in a total abandon to childish joy at walking, running, birds and sky and sun, that was utterly charming. (Not really a serious review point, but we also got many eyefuls of BC's trouser snake, and he was a little bit happy to see the audience there at times, if you catch my drift. He has a very nice naked bottom, too, as well as a very nice back. Mmm. I appreciated the view.)
It's a shame the same compliment cannot be made to the rest of the cast, who were rather wooden. Also, JLM's dad was played by a black man, despite JLM being white- I don't object to colourblind casting generally, but it did knock me out of the play a bit when he was suddenly addressed as father by a guy who is clearly no relation. In addition to this, the writer needed to spend more time on the parts of the script that did not involve the two main characters, as it showed too clearly where his real interest lay, and worsened the situation with the supporting cast. In places the writing was rather awkward and dull, which is not what you expect at the NT having paid (gulp) £45 for a ticket.
All in all, I enjoyed the play, and as ever at the National the set was fantastic, really mind-blowing at times. But it was a shame that a play with such great actors and such a distinguished director/producer couldn't be said to be more than good.
As ever, YMMV. I'm happy to hear from anyone else who's seen it and would like to discuss :)
Posted via LiveJournal app for iPad.