Critics Say

n/a

For Parents

n/a

Phenomenal.

By teh_twink
Written June 08, 2012
I saw what Fandango calls the "reverse casting", wherein Benedict Cumberbatch played Victor Frankenstein and Jonny Lee Miller played his Creature. At first, I had wanted to see Benedict as the Creature, but... Jonny Lee Miller was so tragic and so hauntingly beautiful in this role. From the way he was born, to the way he was brutally outcast, and everything he learned and how he showed it was all just... Unbelievable. It was well worth seeing, and if I had the opportunity, I would see it again and again and again.
14 out of 19 found this helpful. Did you?

Worth the 2nd ticket

By subtle science
Written June 08, 2012
The reverse casting of the National Theater production of Frankenstein is as worthwhile and satisfying a theater experience as is the original casting--just in a different way. Jonny Lee Miller is very good as the Creature, but his Creature is more essentially brutal and takes more pleasure in displaying that brutality than Cumberbatch's version did. While Miller is a strong actor, the bottom line is: Cumberbatch is better, more talented. However, that doesn't mean Miller's version of Creature can be skipped, to save on a ticket; choosing that route means missing Cumberbatch's portrayal of Dr. Frankenstein--yes, he's better in that part as well. Just as he does with the Creature, Cumberbatch exposes a greater complexity of character in Frankenstein; again, he elicits sympathy for the character--arguably, one far less sympathetic to begin with than the Creature; Cumberbatch conveys his motives and his fall from grace so that the audience has to mourn the ruin of a great mind.
14 out of 26 found this helpful. Did you?

Superb Frankenstein (Reverse Casting)

By susanwatson16
Written November 08, 2013
With Jonny Lee Miller in the part of the monster, this production was breathtaking. To watch the monster come out of shell and teach himself to stand walk and advance is just riveting. The first act sets up a compelling morality play in Act 2. I'm tempted to see this again with the cast members switched, but I don't really think it can be better.
13 out of 19 found this helpful. Did you?

Phenomenal Production

By stephenmwhite
Written November 04, 2013
I saw Cumberbatch as the monster in 2011 and Miller in 2013. Both versions I found inspiring and magnificent. Naturally each had their own interpretation, but each was riveting. I enjoyed seeing National Theatre Live so much this way, I already bought a ticket for 50 Years on Stage and plan on attending their subsequent broadcasts. I might even go see Cukmberbatch's monster again. The NT productions are so inventive, creative, and entralling, where unfortunately so many American Broadway prodcutions aren't. This is a great way to see them, without jumping the pond and spending outrageous sums of cash to see them live. Not to mention the schedule is easier to manager as well.
13 out of 16 found this helpful. Did you?

Frankenstein

By cathysch1
Written November 04, 2013
Thank you for bringing Live National Theatre to the movie screen. It is such a treat to enjoy the talent of amazing acting up close like this! This play was unlike anything I have ever seen! It brought out deep philosophical issues of our need as humans to be valued and loved. As a Christian believer...it is a reminder to me of what happens when man tries to "play" god and tinkers with what is not to be. The acting of the 2 main characters were exceptional! What a physically demanding role! It was quite emotional to see this and take it all in. My mom and I left in quiet and then discussed it over dinner.
12 out of 21 found this helpful. Did you?