|
Post by sgev1977 on May 1, 2020 13:00:44 GMT
Youtube was the one who has the rules about not showing the rape or murder, not NTL, although I had thought the modesty garment was done by NTL for filming and not necessarily requested by the actors. I might be wrong, tho. It’s happened once or twice before, lol. There's a new interview with the playwright and he claims that he would have preferred them doing the scene naked on the filmed version too but that the actors decided not to do it and that Danny Boyle RIGHTLY sided with the actors. I guess the shots would have been different if that was the case (something that probably would affect the recording) because if not, it would be extremely explicit. They were not just doing a full frontal but they were doing movements that revealed every detail of their bodies. I remember BC talking about it a pair of times with Graham Norton (in both his radio and TV shows). The anecdote about his girlfriend telling him that her mother got front row tickets it's hysterical!
|
|
|
Post by onebluestocking on May 1, 2020 14:55:11 GMT
I wish it was available to watch at other times of day. I can't watch non-child-friendly content in the middle of the afternoon. During ordinary times, the kids would be in school. But of course then, they wouldn't be showing it for free on YouTube.
I cried 5 times when I saw it in the theater! I'd love to see the JLM as Creature version, though.
|
|
|
Post by mllemass on May 1, 2020 15:21:25 GMT
This is part of the introduction video they used to show when Frankenstein was first shown in cinemas:
|
|
|
Post by sgev1977 on May 1, 2020 15:56:48 GMT
I wish it was available to watch at other times of day. I can't watch non-child-friendly content in the middle of the afternoon. During ordinary times, the kids would be in school. But of course then, they wouldn't be showing it for free on YouTube. I cried 5 times when I saw it in the theater! I'd love to see the JLM as Creature version, though. You can watch them any time you want for a week. Just click the links.
|
|
|
Post by MagdaFR on May 1, 2020 16:19:18 GMT
|
|
|
Post by sgev1977 on May 1, 2020 20:05:42 GMT
|
|
|
Post by mllemass on May 1, 2020 20:10:36 GMT
Having now watched both versions a day apart, I see clear differences in how JLM plays the Creature. It’s an amazing play, either way. The ideal version, of course, would be Benedict playing both parts at the same time! Ha!
I was planning to re-watch the first version again tonight, but it really is draining and I’m already exhausted at 4:00 in the afternoon!
|
|
|
Post by mllemass on May 1, 2020 20:24:30 GMT
I’ve been thinking about the scene where Frankenstein agrees to make a female for the Creature. He takes off his glove to shake the Creature’s hand. When they let go, they pull their hands apart slowly so that their fingertips are touching, much like Michelangelo’s Creation of Adam - with the Creature as Adam and Frankenstein as God,
The scene is almost repeated at the very end, but they’ve switched places. After the Creature finds that Frankenstein is still alive, he encourages him to get up and keep going. He puts out his hand, but Frankenstein pulls his away and instead points for the Creature to go so that he can follow.
|
|
|
Post by prudence on May 1, 2020 20:48:21 GMT
Having watched both now, I prefer Benedict as the creature. He brings a humanity to the role that’s slightly missing from the other version, which strikes me as more pure horror.
Both great though.
|
|
|
Post by sgev1977 on May 1, 2020 21:02:34 GMT
Those tweets I posted above reminds me to a post by a Spanish speaking reviewer around the time he was actually doing this play, (although surely the reviewer hadn't watched it!) comparing Tom Hardy and BC and concluding that Hardy was a very physical actor meanwhile BC was intellectual! I remember how simplistic and dumb was that idea! Hardy has big muscles so he is "physical" and BC played Sherlock so he is "intellectual". It's so crazy because it also shows how people completely misunderstand BC as actor. He is an extremely physical actor! I would dare to say that even more than Hardy!
It's almost comparable to those saying he always plays the same "intellectual" character. And I don't have anything against actors with movie personas. That's actually the cinematic way. A lot of great film actors not just in Hollywood but also in French cinema (see Ozon's 8 Women with some French divas including Danielle Darrieux, Catherine Deneuve, Fanny Ardant and Isabelle Huppert playing clearly parodies of their own film personas) tend to always play similar characters and they do it beautifully. Actually as someone who enjoys film more than theater, I tend to prefer that acting style but I recognize that BC is not that kind of actor. At least not completely. He clearly came from a theatre tradition and he is actually transformative and, yes, extremely physical. As a fan I would like to think that he is in middle ground between both traditions.
Anyway, you can see that in his creature but also on his screen characters. All of them are about movement: the way they walk, the way they stand up, the way the sit down, etc. And it doesn't matter how intelligent the character is described on the summary of the film, they always move in a different way: Sherlock is light like a ballerina meanwhile Tietjens is heavy and you can see he has weak lungs because for moments he finds difficult to walk. Even Patrick Melrose walks slightly different according his age... or the drug he is consuming at the moment! That's not all of course, he also can be a very subtle with his facial gestures. Tom Stoppard had a great comment about how he totally understood his true brilliance only after watching the small details of what he has just done in front of him a second time on a screen. That's the cinematic connection! But again, it's seem crazy to me that some randoms and some critics just ignore all that impressive physical work and somehow "reduce" him to an intellectual actor. Anyway who said that both characteristics were total opposites?
|
|