I think I preferred (it's hard to tell!) Cumberbatch as the Creature and Miller as the Doctor, because in that version they both felt caught up and lost and struggling to understand. With Cumberbatch as the Doctor and Miller as the Creature, somehow, they both felt more cruel and more deliberate in their awful choices. It's definitely as much about their physicality, and their voices, as their line readings.

Cameron Crowe discusses working with Philip Seymour Hoffman in Almost Famous:

PSH – The Uncool - The Official Site for Everything Cameron Crowe

My original take on this scene was a loud, late night pronouncement from Lester Bangs. A call to arms. In Phil’s hands it became something different. A scene about quiet truths shared between two guys, both at the crossroads, both hurting, and both up too late. It became the soul of the movie. In between takes, Hoffman spoke to no one. He listened only to his headset, only to the words of Lester himself. (His Walkman was filled with rare Lester interviews.) When the scene was over, I realized that Hoffman had pulled off a magic trick. He’d leapt over the words and the script, and gone hunting for the soul and compassion of the private Lester, the one only a few of us had ever met. Suddenly the portrait was complete. The crew and I will always be grateful for that front row seat to his genius.

I think I preferred (it's hard to tell!) Cumberbatch as the Creature and Miller as the Doctor, because in that version they both felt caught up and lost and struggling to understand. With Cumberbatch as the Doctor and Miller as the Creature, somehow, they both felt more cruel and more deliberate in their awful choices. It's definitely as much about their physicality, and their voices, as their line readings.

I agree. Miller's Frankenstein benefited from seeming more of a callow youth, caught up in his panic about what he'd done, while Cumberbatch's Creature had an air of sorrow and guilt surrounding the actions born of rage and pain. (As a side note, watching him as the Creature, I could see how he managed to repeatedly damage himself during the production. Terrific physical acting, but total lack there of, oh, say, any sense of physical self-preservation.)

Thank you Tom and Ple. Two very thoughtful and interesting posts in a row.

DAmn, now I wish I had seen it. I was too caught up in my own circumstances at the time to go.

I was too caught up in my own circumstances at the time to go.

Stupid circumstances!

Well okay, they were fairly significant.

Well okay, they were fairly significant.

Yeah, but life gets in the way of cool movies and performances and shit.

I agree. Miller's Frankenstein benefited from seeming more of a callow youth, caught up in his panic about what he'd done, while Cumberbatch's Creature had an air of sorrow and guilt surrounding the actions born of rage and pain.

Those are pretty much my feelings about it, too. With an extra helping of Cumberbatch as Frankenstein felt too much like a Sherlock AU.

ION, a friend is taking me to the sneak preview of Vampire Academy. The book was meh-to-okay cracky YA, and I haven't seen any advance press for the movie that indicates it has risen above the source. Eh, whatever, free trashy vampire movie.

Report back! It looks fun from the trailers.