It never fails.
Someone makes pronouncements on the state of HOW THINGS ARE - and not long afterwards, circumstances reveal that those pronouncements are premature at best. File this under "If man was meant to fly, he'd have wings", "That H-Bomb will never work, and I speak as an expert in demolitions", and "Don't worry, General Custer, those Indians won't cause us any problems"...
Two months ago, I spent two essays bemoaning the state of current films of Horror and Dark Fantasy. While I still stand behind what I wrote at that time, recent viewings and their critical and commercial success at have convinced me that perhaps the situation isn't as dire as I feared. So...some ruminations on two recent extraordinary viewings...
* * * * * * * * * * * * *
Last year, the National Theater of London tried an impressive experiment. In an attempt to bring their performances to the widest possible audiences, the theater refitted their auditorium with state-of-the-art motion-control digital cameras and sound equipment, and offered productions broadcast into participating movie theaters around the world as "real time" live broadcasts (or "real time-delayed", depending on your time zone; in other words, the broadcast is still a live performance from that evening, but filmed and rebroadcast for a more reasonable viewing engagement, much as NBC does with SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE ) under the auspice of "National Theater Live" . Several productions have taken place, including Derek Jackobi's KING LEAR and the upcoming THE CHERRY ORCHARD .
Two months ago I saw a notice that Danny Boyle, Academy award-winning director ( SLUMDOG MILLIONAIRE , TRAINSPOTTING , 28 DAYS LATER , and SHALLOW GRAVE , among others) would be helming a new adaptation of Mary Shelly's "Frankenstein" , featuring actors Benedict Cumberbatch (recently of PBS's modern adaptation of SHERLOCK Holmes) and Jonny Lee Miller (of TRAINSPOTTING , ELI STONE and the recent season of DEXTER ). the play was adapted by Nick Dear, and the interesting conceit in Mr. Doyle's staging is the bond and interlocking lives between Victor Frankenstein and his Creation. To emphasize this, Misters Cumberbatch and Miller would be playing both roles of Frankenstein and Monster, alternating their performances night after night!
The word of mouth from the beginning was phenomenal. Although known primarily now as a film director, Mr. Boyle got his start in live theater, and had been planning this project for over a decade. Performances were sold out almost as soon as the tickets were available, and the run was completely filled before opening. Critics had nothing but praise for it in previews, and the opportunity to experience a live London production in local theaters around the United States and the rest of the world promised a unique experience that I was eager to partake in. I did my part to let everyone know about this rare chance, and hoped everyone would leap at this.
Frustratingly, as much as I enjoy haunting the Lost Coast , the theaters in this area did not carry the production. I made arrangements to wander to the closest location, Santa Rosa , four hours south of me, and on March 22 sat in the glorious 6th Street Playhouse with a full and excited audience. (Just a brief aside: what little I saw of Santa Rosa , the Railroad District, seemed charming and inviting, and I hope to explore it further in the future. The same can be said for the 6th Street Playhouse; the main building is a huge modern facility that produced musicals, drama and comedy throughout the year, as well as hosting National Theater Live. In addition, the theater has a smaller theater known as The Studio for more intimate shows. You can learn more about it by logging onto HERE.)
First, a technical review: the production was filmed multi-camera, with many on tracks and floating cranes to follow the action, much as you see in NFL football. Obviously the technical director was in charge of the in-camera edits, going from angle to angle to best follow the action. (I wouldn't be surprised if Mr. Boyle had a great deal of say in this matter as well.) In this instance, it was more of a filmed play than a theatrical experience; you looked at what the director wanted to show you rather than anyplace that caught your attention. Still given that, the production went smoothly, and the filming seemed to capture the experience as spontaneously as possible with these built-in limitations. the sound quality, music, vocals and sound effects, were mixed perfectly and could be heard as clearly as any live event.
So how was the actual play?
Astonishing.
Realizing that the story of Frankenstein is universally known, Mr. Dear chose to focus on the point-of-view of the Creature. Indeed, we don't really meet Frankenstein himself until the halfway point of the production. Without any expository dialogue to set up the situation and world, the play actually begins with the birth of the Monster, and we watch for breathless minutes as this lump of sew-together flesh begins to breath, crawl, cry out, and finally to stand and walk as a child would. It is a hypnotic opening, catching the breath in the lungs and providing a tour-de-force of physical improvisation for the performer. From there we follow the Creature as he goes into the world, lost first amidst the steam-punk technological city, out into the country, and finally to the home of the blind teacher who will befriend him. The staging was imaginative and at times heartbreaking, and Mr. Cumberbatch (who I saw performing the Creature) carried the production effortlessly, engaging us into the Monster's thoughts and psyche in ways never before examined.
Mr. Dear's play, despite beginning already into the narrative of the book, was extremely faithful to it, in both the philosophies and themes that Mary Shelly found so intriguing. The dialogue was poetic and dark, filled with imagery that touched upon man's place in Creation, and the responsibility of the Creator. Here is a brief excerpt from when Frankenstein meets his Creature on the ice-covered mountain:
VICTOR: That's Paradise Lost! You've read Paradise Lost?
CREATURE: I liked it.
VICTOR: Why? You saw yourself as Adam?
CREATURE: I should be Adam. God was proud of Adam. But Satan's the one I sympathize with. For I was cast out, like Satan, though I did no wrong. And when I see others content, I feel the bile rise in my throat, and it tastes like Satan's bile..."
Wonderful...
Both Mr. Cumberbatch and Mr. Miller were fantastic. I initially wanted to see Cumberbatch as Frankenstein and Miller as the Creature, simply because I thought they matched those roles physically. But Mr. Cumberbatch brought the intellectual side of the Creature to the forefront along with his horror, and Mr. Miller gave Frankenstein a rough, physical presence that echoed his egomaniacal need to control everything in the world around him. Both actors deserved every kudo they've earned. (I understand from others who've seen the alternate performance that both do a fine job in their other roles as well.)
Were there any flaws? Some, of course. Most critics have noted that the play tends to drag a bit in the second part; this is where Mr. Dear hews closer to the narrative structure of the novel, and we interact with Elizabeth, Frankenstein's fiancé, and the other members of Frankenstein's household, including his father .As good as these performances were, and as literate as the scenes were presented, our sympathies are with the Doctor and the Creature, and any time spent away from them found our interest diminishing. (Still, I could offer that same criticism of the novel itself.) And I missed the most famous lines from the novel that for some reason weren't included; the Creature's boast to Frankenstein, "You are my Creator, but I am your Master!" , and his terrible threat, "I'll be with you on your wedding night!"
But these are very minor carps. Mr. Boyle's direction is hard and furious, the production design (which incorporates electric light as a physical representation of the science of the age) was imaginative and beautiful, especially the dark cabin in the Orkney's where Frankenstein creates the female creature. Mr. Dear's script is powerful and offers no false truce between two strong willed protagonists, and goes deeper into the emotional intensity of the story than any other adaptation. There is no subtlety in the Creature's threat; in this production we know exactly what he does to Frankenstein's bride in his horrific revenge. The play ends starkly, as does the novel: two individuals standing on the frozen wastelands of the North pole, their mutual dance of death unresolved, and their thirst for revenge unquenched. It's a strong finale, and fitting for the classic.
How did my fellow audience members react? When the actors on screen came out for their curtain calls, the applause in the theater was long and loud, with huge cheers for the two leads. You couldn't help yourself; you knew they couldn't hear you, but the cheers came just the same. It was a glorious production, everything I hoped and expected it to be, and it has remained with me all these days later.
I urge everyone to try and catch this very special production if they can; go HERE and find a theater near you that is showing this. The ticket cost is more than your average film; $22.00, but that is certainly equitable to any live theater performance. The production is continuing through the beginning of April; I'm certain that a DVD of the show will be made, but please, try and see it now as live as possible, if you can.
Why am I so excited about the prospects this production promises?
Being a live performer, I am greatly aware of the immediacy of a live performance versus film. Unfortunately, for those who do not live near any major metropolitan area, your chances of seeing such a production are limited to special vacation trips. National Theater Live bypasses that, and brings the experience to you, in your neighborhood! for a slightly higher (but still reasonable) ticket price you can share a genuinely theatrical experience in the comfortable and cost-effective way possible. because of the success of the London National Theater Live, it was announced at the performance that some New York theaters are retrofitting their buildings and will soon be presenting their shows to the public ar4ound the world in this same manner.
Think of what this can mean, not just for the average filmgoer, but for those of us whose interest in Horror and the Dark Fantastic are paramount. We are no longer at the mercy of the studios with their needless remakes, teenage slasher snuff atrocities, or CGI extravaganzas! Some possibilities to consider...
I was not terribly impressed with Tim Burtons screen adaptation of SWEENEY TODD ; I thought Johnny Depp was wonderful, but Helena Bonham Carter weak and the production on whole lacking the verve and ghastliness of the stage show. (Some of my disappointment is attributed to the fact that Mr. Burton cut the Greek Chorus from the film, even though he assembled and filmed their segments. Not only do these singers have some wonderful musical moments, but Mr. Burton had employed excellent casting by including, among others, Christopher Lee and Anthony Head - although Mr. Head survives barely with a almost unseen cameo in one section.) BUT - what if one of the New York houses chose to revive the stage production? Wouldn't that be a grand event?
There have been staged versions across the country of a ballet version of "Dracula" that includes flying vampires in its production. Of course unless it comes to your town, you've missed the chance to see this - but come down to your local movie theatre and enjoy it on the large screen!
May years ago, some of my fellow Patient Creatures and I enjoyed a special production of "Lord Of The Rings" that came through the Philadelphia area. It put the entire trilogy on stage through the use of life-sized puppets, special costumes and masks and mime performers. It was incredible. (I alluded to this play a few months ago in my movie critique essay.) What an experience it would be to see that with your family - especially if the theaters took the initiative and had creatures walking in the aisles as in the original production!
National Theater Live holds the possibility of experiencing the very best that movie audiences can partake in; if nothing else, it offers an alternative to the adults among us who are tired of what is being thrown on the screen by Hollywood. I urge you to seek it our and support it as much as you can!
(This review of the play goes into much more detail than my synopsis above; if you are planning to try and catch it you should know there are many spoilers contained within it. However, it does a fine job of relating the entire story, and has some wonderful photographs of the production. You can see it by logging onto the artwork below.)
* * * * * * * * * * * * *
In 1972, Ira Levin wrote what became a classic of the Satirical Horror Tale, a view of the Woman's Liberation Movement skewed through the eyes and thoughts of the panicked male of the species. It was called "The Stepford Wives" , and was later made into a classic film (not the recent debacle that watered down and homogenized the concept, but the original adapted for the screen b y William Goldman and directed by Brian Forbes, and masterpiece of macabre darkness).
Despite what many critics perceived at the time, that Mr. Levin was targeting NOW and Women's Rights, Stephen King points out that the genuine targets were men suddenly confronted with wives and lovers and family members acting in ways that baffled and troubled them. THE STEPFORD WIVES took Freud's question "Women; what do they want?", turned it on its head, and gave back a terribly disturbing reflection of society: men want sexual partners who agree with everything they say and know their place - and they're willing to murder and spend their lives with artificial automatons to ensure that reality holds true.
Mr. King knows more than a little about the Sociological Horror Tale. His first major success was his novel "Carrie" , also made into a classic film, that detailed the terrible class system that passed for normal high school existence. Carrie White was locked into a caste system as rigid and unforgiving as any Third World nation, and her attempts to rise above what is perceived as her station results in an apocalyptic cataclysm the night of the senior prom. It was another story that bit deeply into society's psyche.
I recently seen another film that I believe can stand easily beside both THE STEPFORD WIVES and CARRIE . It is dark, sardonic, outrageous, probably offensive, and alternately fascinating, and the filmmakers have worked their skills to create a powerful, demanding work of art that wouldn't be out of place among the tale in Harlan Ellison's groundbreaking anthology "Dangerous Visions" . The movie is called DEADGIRL , and asks a similar question to that posed by THE STEPFORD WIVES : what do teenage boys want, particularly teenage boys who are considered outsiders? The answer is extremely unsettling.
One way to view DEADGIRL is as a twist on the tried and true zombie formula; I wrote about that two months ago. But the zombie plotline is just a surface detail to examine the heart of the movie. It's a coming-of-age story, an ethical dilemma, a sex comedy, and an examination of the depth of friendship and other relationships. It is strictly for adults, and many adults may find it rough-going as well. It has been somewhat controversial since its release, being equally praised and condemned by genre and mainstream critics. Many reviewers are able to look beyond the surface trappings to the allegory beneath, as I do. Others find it shocking for shock's sake, and unbelievable. No doubt whatever your reaction will be will depend on what you bring to the experience yourself.
The reviews range from "The best Horror Film of the year" from the Seattle Post Globe, " DEADGIRL will remind you of the best of Cronenberg. Cleverly written, stylishly directed and morbidly fascinating" from Film Threat, " DEADGIRL intends to crawl deep under your skin and stay there awhile" from Fangoria Magazine to " It's a well crafted but hollow repulsion, the film equivalent of chugging ipecac on an empty stomach" from Horror's Not Dead and "When a monstrous piece of exploitative junk called DEADGIRL was unveiled to aghast audiences almost a year ago in the “midnight madness” program at the Toronto International Film Festival, it was labeled “too shocking to produce.” But here it is. Vile and disgusting, it is being shown at special midnight shows next week, before opening wider in August. Don't say you haven't been warned" from Rex Reed. (Although the filmmakers are exploiting Mr. Reed's "Don't Say You Haven't Been Warned" tagline in their publicity implying a good review, which may be a shade unfair, but not untruthful.)
The plot is simple. Two young men, Ricky and JT, best friends since childhood and considered 'losers' at their high school, skip class and spend the day exploring an abandoned mental hospital. Behind a rusted iron door in the basement they find the body of a beautiful naked girl, cold and dead but still moving and alert. After a brief discussion, the boys decide to keep her existence a secret...and use her for their own purposes. And a trip down to a very special Hell begins...
The direction, by Marcel Sarmiento and Gadi Harel, is low-key and lean, the script by Trent Haaga is (to my ears) authentic and honest; the performances by Shiloh Fernandez, Noah Segan, Eric Podner, Candice Accola and particularly Jenny Spain as the title character are uniformly excellent. The tone of the film is not fright or aggressive cruelty by utter sadness, despair, and the use of the somber soundtracks songs helps to heighten the felling. It reminds me in many ways of RIVER'S EDGE , another film about teenagers doing horrible and secret things (which gave Keanu Reeves probably his finest role and his very best performance). There is a bleakness in the lives of the youth in this out-of -the-way small town, a helpless .miasma of people with no future to look forward to. I felt the actions of all involved quite believable and heartbreaking, and the conclusion is as troubling as anything that had come before, reflecting on paths and actions taken in the name of love and loneliness.
I think long after you've seen DEADGIRL it will stay with you, and you'll have questions about what actually happened. I believe it will easily offend many, and I warn you ahead of time that this may not be for all my human friends.
But if you are a courageous filmgoer; if you are not afraid of allegory and a degree of tastelessness in the pursuit of Art; if you wish to look deeply into the underside of small-town existence in the manner of BLUE VELVET ; if you can stare into the face of sexual perversion and recognize the tortured humanity beneath, then DEADGIRL should prove as thought-provoking to you as it did to me. If nothing else, it shows that the adult, thinking Horror Film is not a thing of the past; it's alive and well in the hands of independent filmmakers with the nerve to fully explore their taboo subjects. I applaud and salute them, and recommend this fine effort without hesitation.
You have been encouraged, and warned.
