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.
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.
t sits by Plei and Jilli, who explained it much better
