Having one of the most awesome cinema’s I’ve ever had to fortune to visit in my city, I took advantage of it again and saw the National Theatre’s production of Frankenstein, since there was no chance I’d get down to London to see it.

Frankenstein (directed by Danny Boyle) stared Benedict Cumberbatch and Jonny Lee Miller, alternating as Frankenstein and the Creature each night. I saw it with Cumberbatch as the Creature.

Before the performance there was a short documentary about the making of the play (and before that about half an hour of repeating adverts for the NT Live’s digital programmes, which I was keen on to start with but grew progressively bored of by the time I’d seen the ad three times). Miller said his protrayal of the Creature came from watching his infant son learn to walk, while Cumberbatch said he’d studied stroke and accident victims (presumably with their permission…). It was an interesting insight into how actors approach a character like that, and made the opening scene even more interesting.

The play itself began with the Creature freeing itself from a membranous screen and teaching himself to stand and walk. It was powerful and fascinating, and I’m glad they chose to start the story there. The Creature was immediately made the main character, taking precendence over the eponymous. Frankenstein himself didn’t appear until after the Creature had achieved basic motor fucntions (I didn’t take a note of the time, but I’d guess about ten minutes it), and then only briefly.

Lighting played a huge part throughout the play, the stage lit from above by hundred and hundred of hanging lightbulbs. They used it to imply electricity as the Creature’s motivating force without any of the traditional trappings – no electrodes, no lightning rod, no table (nothing to remind the audience of Carry On Screaming). Every play uses lighting to play with the mood of scenes, but the visual spectacle of all those bulbs really brought it home.

The stage itself was round, with a circular turn table that could rise and fall in the centre. There was very little background scenery (though when it was called for it would appear in spectacular fashion) for most of the play, just enough to hint at the setting when accompanied by the props. Favourite moments included the Creature being rained on, a boardwalk being lowered from the ceiling and the meeting on the mountain. Boyle likes to draw attention to his direction and technique in his films, and it’s no surprise to see him doing the same in a play.

The meeting between Frankenstein and the Creature was the first time both actors were on stage since the opening. The Creature took up the main part of the play up to this point, his experiences with humanity and learning how to talk and read under the tuition of blind De Lacey, though Frankenstein did reappear after the drowning of his brother to learn of a monster in the mountains. The stage transformed intself into an icy wilderness. Frankenstein’s approach to the Creature was satisfyingly self-serving, viewing his creation as an object and as his own achievement. Though he shows a basic knowledge of the arts, he disdains them in favour of science, and belittles the Creature’s learning while smugly congratulating himself on the Creature’s capacity to learn. This is not a particularly likeable, sympathetic Frankenstein, but it is a completely believeable one.

As well as the Arts/Science theme there’s also a male/female element. Elizabeth bemoans her lack of education; society has made her as ignorant as Frankenstein made the Creature. Like the Creature, she has a massive capacity to learn, but unlike him she lacks the opportunities. And, still like the Creature, she sees Frankenstein as her master.

One element I really didn’t like was the decision to have the Creature rape Elizabeth before killing her. There’s an awkward moment between him and Frankenstein where the Creature contemplates how he is now a ‘man’ while Frankenstein is not. In a play otherwise so powerful it was unnecessary and fell pretty flat. Elizabeth’s dialogue suggested thematic sexism, but her rape and the Bride’s sexualisation came over as institutionalised sexism instead. As in so many other aspects of modern culture, the female characters existed solely to motivation the male, to inspire them to lust or vengeance. In an otherwise brilliant play, it was deeply disappointing.

Overall I’m very glad I got a chance to see it, and I’d love to see it with the roles reversed. I prefer it to many of the other adaptations I’ve seen (though the Universal one will always hold a spot in my heart), and if it comes out on DVD  I’ll be tempted to buy it, but Elizabeth’s rape will definitely make me think hard about it.