September 30, 2025 • 28 mins
The episode provides an extensive overview of the upcoming Disney+ limited series, Frankenstein: Undying, a major television adaptation of Mary Shelley's classic novel, Frankenstein; or, The Modern Prometheus. The series is spearheaded by showrunner Jordan Peele and executive producer Guillermo del Toro, and it aims to update the gothic horror narrative with themes of modern technology and social allegory. Significant attention is paid to the casting of Jacob Elordi as the Creature and Mia Goth as Elizabeth Lavenza, highlighting their recent Emmy nominations and their history with Disney-related productions like The Bear and Ahsoka. Furthermore, the source details the show’s ambitious production, including a $200 million budget, plans for multiple timelines, and its expected fall 2026 premiere, positioning it as a "prestige" adult drama in the current streaming landscape.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Welcome to the deep dive. Today. We are strapping ourselves
into the high voltage chair because we are dissecting what
might be the most unexpected, ambitious and culturally resonant project
to hit streaming in years. That's right, Disney Plus is
limited series Frankenstein undying.
Speaker 2 (00:19):
It truly is a lightning strike moment, isn't it? And
the shock isn't just the well the sheer audacity of
the adaptation itself. But you know where it's landed, Disney Plus,
I exactly. We have a huge stack of sources detailing
the creative vision, this really audacious scope, I mean spanning
three separate timelines and a casting coupe that has wealth
(00:39):
the entire industry buzzin.
Speaker 1 (00:40):
Absolutely. So our mission today is to move beyond just
the headlines. We want to quickly and thoroughly understand why
this specific prestige adaptation, guided by the you know, the
joint genius of Jordan Peele and Germo del Toro, why
it's poised to reshape adult horror television and maybe more importantly,
hold a mirror up to our own contemporary anxieties.
Speaker 2 (00:59):
Yeah, and to really unpack that, we have to start
at the beginning right with the foundational myth, Mary Shelley's
Frankenstein or the Modern Prometheus, published way back in eighteen eighteen, right.
Speaker 1 (01:11):
Conceived during those famous stormy summer nights at Villadea Dotti.
Speaker 2 (01:14):
Exactly, it's the birth of this tragic archetype, the stitched Monster. Yes,
but I think more profoundly, it's that cautionary tale of
a creator who just denies responsibility for his creation.
Speaker 1 (01:27):
And that original title, the Modern Prometheus. It's so weighty,
isn't it. It sets the stakes immediately.
Speaker 2 (01:32):
Ye.
Speaker 1 (01:32):
Shelley fused the well, the chilling promise of the Enlightenment,
that unchecked scientific progress with really intense emotional dread of
the Romantic era. It's a story about what happens when
genius kind of outpaces morality.
Speaker 2 (01:46):
And that tension, that sense of the creation yearning for
a humanity he can't quite grasp because well, his own
creator rejected him. And that's the existential key. I think
that unlocks why this story remains so potent even two
centuries later. It's a class I'm sick of ambition and
Schubra are sure, but the true narrative engine it's that
cycle of vengeance. Born from just profound abandonment.
Speaker 1 (02:08):
Then boom, fast forward September twenty five, twenty twenty five,
Disney's D twenty three Expo in Anaheim. Yeah, the surprise
announcement just drops. Production is officially greenlit for Frankenstein Undying,
a sprawling, dark, ten episode limited series is heading to
Disney Plus lore right, and that platform pivot is what
(02:29):
truly shocked us. I think it's not exactly you know,
high school musical, the musical the series.
Speaker 2 (02:34):
No, definitely not. It's an incredibly aggressive strategic move for
Disney Plus. It signals this intent to dive headfirst into darker,
more mature, intellectual.
Speaker 1 (02:43):
IP, challenging that perceived safeness.
Speaker 2 (02:46):
Exactly challenging the safeness of their recent adult oriented acquisitions.
This is clearly intended to counter, you know, superhero fatigue
and compete directly with the likes of HBO and Netflix
for critical acclaim, big awards play potentially.
Speaker 1 (02:57):
But when you look at the architects behind it, the
stakes make a lot more sense. We are talking about
showrunner Jordan Peel Get Out Nope, he basically redefined social horror,
and executive producer Guillermo del Toro, the master of blending
body horror with that really tender, often weeping melancholy.
Speaker 2 (03:18):
It's a dream team. It basically guarantees the matic density
and you know, just top tier production quality.
Speaker 1 (03:25):
They're not chasing easy jump scares here, are they. Yeah,
they are chasing philosophical dread exactly.
Speaker 2 (03:31):
And Peel didn't shy away from setting that tone right
from the start. His quote from the D twenty three keynote.
It establishes a series mission statement right out of the game.
Makes it clear this isn't your grandpa's monster.
Speaker 1 (03:41):
Movie, he said, and I'm paraphrasing slightly, but Frankenstein isn't
just about bolts and stitches. It's about the monsters we
create in our pursuit of godhood and the ones we
become when we reject them.
Speaker 2 (03:52):
Wow.
Speaker 1 (03:53):
What I take from that, particularly that last part, is
that the series is going to focus just as much
on Victor Frankenstein's own decay, it's obsession, his monstrosity, as
it does in the creature's.
Speaker 2 (04:03):
Tragedy, precisely. And that is a massive promise for a
ten hour series, isn't it. It suggests a really deep,
character driven psychodrama just draped in gothic horror and the
initial timeline. It just confirms the urgency and the high
confidence driving this whole project. Production kicks off in Prague
this winter, so winter of twenty twenty five, right, No,
(04:25):
basically yeah, with the premiere ID for fall twenty twenty six.
This isn't some slow roll development. This is a clear
strategic push toward award season contention, they're moving fast.
Speaker 1 (04:37):
Okay, So to really understand the weight of this new
adaptation undying, we need a quick look back right at
the creature's cinematic DNA. The novel was, as you said,
a product of that radical fusion Romanticism's emotional intentity meeting
enlightenment scientific dread all during the rise of the Industrial Revolution.
It was a story really born of mechanism and anxiety.
Speaker 2 (04:58):
And Hollywood didn't wait long to grab onto that electricity.
The first major cinematic translation, of course, James Wales's nineteen
thirty one classic totally. It transformed the novel's you know,
often eloquent, verbose creature into this silent, lumbering figure of
profound sympathy, mainly thanks to Boris Karloff's incredible portrayal. The
studio essentially simplified Shelley's philosophical creation into a recognizable, visually striking,
(05:23):
tragic figure, much easier to market, I suppose.
Speaker 1 (05:26):
And that simplification created the cultural language we still use today,
rap the flathead, the bolts, those pronounced next scars, the
visual shorthand exactly visual shorthands for outsider anguish will That
expanded that legacy in the nineteen thirty five sequel Brida.
Speaker 2 (05:40):
Frankenstein, which added that amazing layer of campy wit and
operatic melodrama, thanks largely to Elsa Lanchester's you know, hissing
rejected mate. Unforgettable definitely, and.
Speaker 1 (05:51):
That template became hugely influential, didn't it. It shaped pretty much everything.
Speaker 2 (05:54):
That followed, Oh absolutely. Mel Briggs's nineteen seventy four masterpiece
Young Frankenstein directly satirized those universal films. But even Kenneth
Branna is more earnest and frankly expensive nineteen ninety four adaptation.
Speaker 1 (06:07):
With de Niro as the monster.
Speaker 2 (06:09):
Yeah, starring Robert de Niro as the monster. Even that
was still responding to Wale's legacy. It was trying to
restore some of the creature's original eloquence, his intellectual capacity.
Speaker 1 (06:19):
What's fascinating, though, is how sharply those dramatic, often heartbreaking
adaptations contrast with Disney's own previous and much softer engagement
with the mythos.
Speaker 2 (06:30):
Yeah, the Disney history is well, it's decidedly soft edged,
isn't it. The most notable example is probably Tim Burton's
twenty twelve Franke and Weenie.
Speaker 1 (06:38):
Love that film.
Speaker 2 (06:39):
It was beautiful, yeah, black and white stop motion, but
the protagonist, Victor, he resurrects his dogs Smarky, So the
stakes are just profoundly lowered. It's about grief and pet ownership, really,
not the philosophical limits of human creation. It got an
Oscar nomination, sure, but it fundamentally softened that gothic horror
into like family adjacent pathos.
Speaker 1 (07:01):
And you see little fragments scattered elsewhere in the bigger
Disney portfolio, right echoes and maybe some early ILM special
effects or those Marvel we If episodes that sometimes dabble
in Monsters origin right fleeting moments, but crucially, yeah they
were fleeting. They never attempted the mature, sustained philosophical deep
dive that undying is promising.
Speaker 2 (07:21):
And that really brings us to the void this series
seems designed to fill. Television film has consistently revisited Frankenstein
again and again, but TV TV has really struggled to
capture its serialized potential at a high prestige level.
Speaker 1 (07:37):
Yeah, you look at that failed attempts from what was
it twenty fifteen to twenty seventeen, the Netflix series of
Frankenstein Chronicles starring Sean Bean.
Speaker 2 (07:45):
Interesting concept.
Speaker 1 (07:46):
It was an interesting concept, Yeah, a procedural with victorian flair,
but it ultimately kind of faltered on execution, maybe lack
the budget or critically the thematic depth needed to sustain
that character over multiple seasons.
Speaker 2 (07:58):
And that failure, I think scores exactly why Frankenstein Undying
is such an audacious, expensive pivot. Peel and del Toro
aren't just adapting the story. They're claiming the prestige horror
space for this character, right, They're aiming for the kind
of cultural impact that TV just hasn't achieved yet with
Shelley's creation. They really have to convince us that ten
(08:18):
hours of serialized television can handle the myths immense scale.
Speaker 1 (08:22):
Okay, that sets us up perfectly for Section two. The
sheer scope of this audacious resurrection if past TV attempts
felt a bit constrained, maybe period pieces Peel's vision for undying.
It's being called a prestige prestige event.
Speaker 2 (08:40):
Yeah, I mean that term prestige prestige. It's intentionally hyperbolic, obvious,
a bit much maybe a little bit, yeah, but it
signals that blend of really high production values and profound
thematic ambition. The sources we have explicitly compared its tone
to like the intense psychological haunting dread of something like
the Haunting of Hill House, Okay, but interwoven with the
corrosive familial and social rat you see in say, The
(09:03):
Best Stems of Succession.
Speaker 1 (09:05):
Wow. Okay, so it's horror, but the root cause is
human failure societal filings exactly.
Speaker 2 (09:10):
And what allows them to tackle that kind of depth
is the structure, which sounds like maybe the most ambitious
aspect of the whole series, which is it uses this
complex three timeline narrative designed specifically to connect Shelley's nineteenth
century themes directly to our twenty first century anxieties.
Speaker 1 (09:26):
Okay, we have to break those down. That sounds key
to the whole tapestry.
Speaker 2 (09:30):
Totally So the first timeline is the necessary grounding, right
Victor's original nineteenth century Geneva lab. It covers the creation
phase and the immediate catastrophic fallout of the monster's rejection.
Speaker 1 (09:42):
Pure gothic horror, gaslight shadows.
Speaker 2 (09:45):
Yeah, the obsession of unchecked genius. Classic stuff done hopefully
really well.
Speaker 1 (09:51):
Then the story leaps dramatically into the second timeline, the
creature's nomadic twentieth century wanderings. This is what the sources
are calling the Dianae Espera phase, right.
Speaker 2 (10:01):
Where the monster, essentially a mortal and completely alone, navigates
a rapidly industrializing and modernizing world.
Speaker 1 (10:07):
Okay, so this is where the social allegory really kicks out.
Speaker 2 (10:10):
I think so. Yeah, we're told the creature will find
these fleeting, really precarious moments of kinship in specific historical settings,
like a nineteen twenties Harlem jazz club, for instance, where
he might be mistaken for just another outsider or maybe
a unique figure. Imagine the creature experiencing the vibrant cultural
rebirth of the Harlem Renaissance, but still fundamentally unable to belong.
Speaker 1 (10:32):
That's powerful imagery.
Speaker 2 (10:33):
Then maybe he appears decades later, perhaps as just an
observer in a scaral nineteen eighties Silicon Valley.
Speaker 1 (10:39):
Lab, a lab setting in the eighties. Yeah, that's an intentional,
chilling echo of his original birth.
Speaker 2 (10:45):
Scene, Isn't it absolutely intentional.
Speaker 1 (10:46):
He's watching the birth of new technology that will eventually
lead to the third.
Speaker 2 (10:50):
Timeline, exactly the near future biotech thriller timeline. This is
where it addresses the absolute apex of modern relevance. We're
talking AI ethics, the real world implications of genetic engineering,
you know, the fear of crisper babies, and just the
pervasive loneliness epidemic in our modern world. The creature's rejection,
(11:10):
originally driven by Victor's shame and disgust, becomes this metaphor
for society's current fear of creating something we can't control,
or maybe something we just don't want to take responsibility for.
Speaker 1 (11:21):
So it connects the eighteen eighteen fears about, say, the
textile mill worker being replaced by a machine directly to
twenty twenty five fears about AI replacing knowledge workers.
Speaker 2 (11:32):
Precisely.
Speaker 1 (11:33):
The themes are instantly animated for a contemporary audience and
providing immense gravitas overseeing this whole multi temporal effort is
executive producer Guillermo del Toro.
Speaker 2 (11:43):
Del Toro's involvement is like a thematic guarantee, isn't it
his signature blend of grotesque body horror, that wax squishy
reality of the creature and profound tender melancholy. It's exactly
what this project needs to stop it from becoming cold clinical.
Speaker 1 (12:00):
Yeah, he makes you feel for the monster.
Speaker 2 (12:02):
He's the master of making you wheat for the monster
even as you kind of flutch away from it.
Speaker 1 (12:06):
He spoke really powerfully about this at D twenty three.
He said something like, the Monster's the loneliest character in literature. Yeah,
this series will make you wheat for him and fear
what we've made of ourselves. In his image, he sees
the creature not as a villain, but as a victim
demanding recognition.
Speaker 2 (12:21):
Now Here is where it gets really interesting and introduces
a critical potential conflict or maybe synergy, depending how you
look at it.
Speaker 1 (12:28):
Okay, Del Toro is fresh from directing his own high
profile Frankenstein film for Netflix.
Speaker 2 (12:34):
Right, I heard about this?
Speaker 1 (12:36):
That film starring Oscar Isaac as Victor and Jacob Elordi
as the Creature.
Speaker 2 (12:41):
Wait wait, Jacob Elordi the same actor playing the creature
in the series, very.
Speaker 1 (12:45):
Same actor, and that film is premiering November seven, twenty
twenty five, literally right before production on the series kicks off.
Speaker 2 (12:52):
Okay, let's pause on that. You have del Toro producing
the Disney Plus series, and immediately before it starts shooting,
he's launching his own feature film adaptation on a rival
platform casting the same actor as the monster. Is that
synergy or is that saturation? Like? Are we gonna get
Frankenstein fatigue?
Speaker 1 (13:10):
That's the multimillion dollar question, isn't it? On one hand,
the synergy argument is strong. The Netflix film primes the
global audience, ensures the Frankenstein mythos, absolutely dominates the cultural
conversation for months right leading into the series production.
Speaker 2 (13:24):
Thanks the property inescapable exactly.
Speaker 1 (13:26):
On the other hand, you know I'm to play Devil's
advocate here. Isn't there a huge risk of audience burnout?
Viewers will have just seen a Lordy portray the creature
in a two hour, presumably very del Toro esque.
Speaker 2 (13:39):
Film, right intense gothic.
Speaker 1 (13:41):
Will they be ready for ten more hours of the
same character a year later? Even if Peel's vision is different,
The risk is Del Toro's own film could overshadow the
series production, maybe steal some of its initial thunder.
Speaker 2 (13:53):
It's a genuine concern absolutely, and the studio Disney plus,
but they're certainly betting heavily that the excitement around the
combined creative teams Peel's social allegory plus Del Toro's visual
shadow will overcome any sense of oversaturation.
Speaker 1 (14:09):
Gambling that the public appetite for high end gothic material.
Speaker 2 (14:12):
Is just vast, pretty much, and they're backing that gamble
with well unprecedented funds.
Speaker 1 (14:17):
Yeah, the whispers put the budget at over two hundred
million dollars for a ten episode limited series. That's that's
absolutely staggering.
Speaker 2 (14:24):
It is, But that level of investment feels necessary maybe
to manage the cinematic quality required by those three disparate
timelines and the global scope. You can't do that on
the cheat, and they're apparently sparing no expense on the
visual fidelity. The sources detail hiring practical effects gurus from Spectral.
Speaker 1 (14:42):
Motion known for hell Boy Del Toro.
Speaker 2 (14:45):
Connection there exactly guaranteeing that the creature will feel tactile
and real and then CGI oversight by weighted digital. The
mandate seems clear. The creature's appearance must be and this
is a quote visceral as it is.
Speaker 1 (14:58):
Vulnerable horror, and in equal measure that's the goal. Let's
pivot then to the absolute heart of the project, the
people who have to embody this tragedy. The success of
Undying really inges on its cast right, and the decision
to tap Jacob Belordi and Mia Goth is widely being
called a casting coup.
Speaker 2 (15:17):
It really is.
Speaker 1 (15:18):
They're both Emmy nominated stars merging from major properties, but
with precisely the sharp edges you need for this kind
of mature drama.
Speaker 2 (15:25):
Yeah, Jacob Elordi, the twenty eight year old Australian actor,
he's tapped to play the creature. Now. Many listeners will
know him from his breakthrough in Euphoria, obviously, but the
key performance, the one that really signaled his readiness for
the monster's unique dramatic demands, was his Emmy nominated turn
as Sidney Damu in FX is the Bear.
Speaker 1 (15:43):
Which streams internationally on Disney Plus reeas Funneling.
Speaker 2 (15:46):
Enough exactly, that Bear performance is just the perfect thematic
fit for this role. Isn't it. Critics praised his raw
animalistic grace. That phrase is so telling.
Speaker 1 (15:57):
That it captures it.
Speaker 2 (15:58):
It's about portraying that simmering playos that rage, but also
a profound, visible vulnerability. These are the exact qualities you
need for the monster who's supposed to possess the body
of a giant, but the emotional need of like a
neglected child.
Speaker 1 (16:12):
And his Emmy nomination for Outstanding Supporting Actor in twenty
twenty four certainly cemented his dramatic range beyond just you know, pen.
Speaker 2 (16:19):
Drama, absolutely, and beyond the awards, we have to talk
about the physicality. His impressive six foot five frame is crucial.
Speaker 1 (16:25):
Yeah, he needs to tower.
Speaker 2 (16:26):
The monster has to tower over Victor and others to
represent his otherness, his inherent threat. That height will be
amplified in those arctic exile scenes we expect and the
urban haunting sequences we know. He'll undergo significant physical transformation
using extensive prosthetics.
Speaker 1 (16:43):
Designed by Michael Azohl.
Speaker 2 (16:44):
Del Toro's longtime collaborator. Yeah, so the look will be
grounded in that del Toro.
Speaker 1 (16:49):
Esthetic too, and focusing on his facial features. The sources
note this strategic focus on the Lordy's piercing green eyes.
They're intended to convey the creature's quote milk tonic tragedy. Okay,
we need to unpack that phrase for the listener. High
concept language there, right.
Speaker 2 (17:05):
It connects directly to Milton's poem Paradise Lost. Milton's Satan
isn't just evil. He's this magnificent, intelligent, powerful creation rejected
by his all powerful creator God and cast into isolation.
Satan's tragedy is that his inherent goodness gets twisted into
malice by abandonment. So by calling the monster's gaze miltonic,
they're establishing him not as a simple villain, but as
(17:28):
the sort of fallen angel seeking justice against an unfair
creator that.
Speaker 1 (17:32):
Focus on abandonment rather than inherent malice. That's exactly what
Elordi himself emphasized in his own interpretation.
Speaker 2 (17:39):
Right yeah, he stated post d twenty three something like
playing the monster is like finally slipping into a skin
that fits. He's not evil, he's abandoned. That aligns perfectly
with Peel's mission to explore rejection.
Speaker 1 (17:51):
Okay, moving to the essential counterpoint. Mia Goth thirty two
years old, cast as Elizabeth Lovenza Victor's fiance, but it
sounds like she's far from the passive damsel of past adaptation.
Speaker 2 (18:03):
Oh definitely not. She seems positioned as the narrative lynchpin
that binds Victor to humanity and then maybe spirals into
a vengeful specter herself. It sounds like a much richer role.
Speaker 1 (18:13):
Goth's background is fascinating too, because it blends that high
concept horror with Disney adjacency, much like a Lordie Right.
Speaker 2 (18:20):
She played the forth sensitive inquisitor Maris Brood in Aska
back in twenty twenty three.
Speaker 1 (18:24):
Where she brought this blend of ferocity and fragility to
a really dark complex character and got an Emmy nomination
for it too Outstanding Supporting Actress.
Speaker 2 (18:33):
And she also brings these deep horror bonafides from indie
hits like Pearl and Infinity Pool. She's got the genre cred.
The New Yorker praised her specific ability to quote unearth
the quiet terror in Quiet Women.
Speaker 1 (18:48):
That's perfect for Elizabeth.
Speaker 2 (18:49):
It feels perfectly suited for Elizabeth's slow agonizing evolution from
innocent bride to potentially a figure mirroring Victor's own madness.
Speaker 1 (19:00):
Zat's interpretation of Elizabeth sounds key to understanding the series
more modern, maybe feminist approach. She explained to D twenty
three that Elizabeth isn't the damsel Shelley sketched. She's the
mirror to Victor's madness, the one who sees the beauty
in the beast before anyone else.
Speaker 2 (19:16):
Wow. So she becomes an active force, grappling with victor
sins and possibly finding her own agency in the monstrous aftermath.
That's a huge shift.
Speaker 1 (19:24):
It suggests a character arc that's deeply intertwined with the
Creature's narrative, elevating her far beyond just the object of
Victor's possession or the eventual victim.
Speaker 2 (19:32):
And inevitably this leads to the speculation about the chemistry
between the two leads.
Speaker 1 (19:37):
Right the source material mentions palpable chemistry between them, fueled
partly by their joint appearance promoting Del Toro s. Frankenstein
film at the Venice premiere in September twenty twenty five.
This speculation about onset sparks. It could really electrify that
forbidden romance, ankle equipment, the Creature's desperate demand for a companion,
(19:57):
and Elizabeth's potential attraction to the beauty she supposedly sees
in the Beast adds an odal layer.
Speaker 2 (20:03):
What stands out most here, I think is that these
are not legacy stars just cashing a check. They are
Emmy's adjacent talents who have proven their capacity for really
high stakes, challenging drama. A Lordie's tenderness and rage combined
with Goth's sort of ethereal menace, it makes them the
perfect conduits for this unique blend of modern Gothic dread
(20:24):
and sharp social commentary.
Speaker 1 (20:25):
Okay, let's move behind the curtain out to section four,
focusing on the mechanics the craft of bringing this monster
to life for the streaming age. Show Runner Jordan Peele's company,
Munkey Pop Productions is running.
Speaker 2 (20:35):
The show, which basically ensures his signature focus on social
allegory is baked right into the DNA of the script.
Speaker 1 (20:41):
He doesn't just do horror, He uses horror to analyze
society exactly, and those three timelines we discussed allow him
to use the monster's perspective, that perpetual outsider view to
critique various societal flaws across like two hundred years. It's ambitious.
Speaker 2 (20:58):
That global and chronological scope is huge, and it's reflected
in the filming locations. They're using Hungary's gothic castles for
Victor's hubers fueled nineteenth century lab.
Speaker 1 (21:09):
Scenes, giving that timeline a dense, classical, almost suffocating visual aesthetic.
You imagine.
Speaker 2 (21:16):
Yeah, but that's going to be drastically contrasted with the
Creature's diaspora timeline.
Speaker 1 (21:20):
Right as we mentioned, we'll apparently see the creature in
a nineteen twenties Harlem jazz club, that moment of cultural effervescence,
and then in a sterile nineteen eighty Silicon Valley lab
where the next generation of creation is being.
Speaker 2 (21:31):
Developed, connecting Victor's nineteenth century workshop directly to the beginnings
of our modern tech world exactly.
Speaker 1 (21:37):
And the series culminates apparently in this truly dystopian setting,
a twenty forties climate ravage tundra where biotech airrors are
forced to confront the old sins of creation. It sounds epic.
I love the peel As injecting his signature humor too,
even within this dark framework. That quote it's Frankenstein's remix.
What if the monster unionized?
Speaker 2 (21:57):
Huh Yeah, it.
Speaker 1 (21:58):
Suggested, amid the profound horror, there will be this sharp
satirical commentary on labor rights, technology, social systems that constantly
reject the other. It's the comedy of the existential outcast.
Speaker 2 (22:11):
And del Tora's executive oversight ensures that visual poetry remains
paramount even amidst Peel's sharp social focus. You should expect
scenes of candlelight dissections reminiscent of the Gothic Phay realms
he explored in Pan's Labyrinth.
Speaker 1 (22:25):
Oh Yeah, and.
Speaker 2 (22:26):
Creature designs that use practical gore to root the story
in reality, contrasting maybe with high tech CGI used for
those futuristic settings. Thus to both worlds, hopefully, and to.
Speaker 1 (22:36):
Achieve that level of cinematic intimacy on the small screen.
Hiring Hoyt van Hoi Kamma, the cinematographer behind Oppenheimert Dunkirk
de Lens the pilot, that's a massive signal of quality.
Speaker 2 (22:46):
Huge. This isn't just a TV show visually. They wanted
to feel like a high budget feature film stretched across
ten hours.
Speaker 1 (22:52):
And Voidum is known for that tactile, almost documentary like realism.
Isn't he using natural light and shadows to.
Speaker 2 (22:58):
Create deeply immerse of large format visuals. Yeah, this will
ensure the scenes in Victor's dark gothic lab feel weighty, oppressive,
while the twenty forties tundra scenes will likely use a cold,
vast scale that just emphasizes the creature's unending isolation, and.
Speaker 1 (23:16):
The score by Oscar winner Alexander display It promises to
be just as immersive. The description mentions weaving their men
waiales with orchestral.
Speaker 2 (23:25):
Swells, the vere men that eerie spectral sound. It's the
perfect instrument to evoke the creature's profound, non human isolation
and melancholy great choice.
Speaker 1 (23:35):
The supporting cast reinforces this prestige pedigree too. We have
Felix Kmer, the standout star from all Quiet on the
Western Front, brilliant in that cass is a young Victor
channeling that maybe shell shock genius and the arrogant youthfulness
that precedes his madness.
Speaker 2 (23:49):
Good casting, and Lars Michelson, known for complex, often patriarchal
roles and shows like The Last Kingdom. He's Swinging Doctor
Waldman Victor's mentor figure.
Speaker 1 (23:58):
It's also crucial to highlight the updates being made for
modern relevance. The sources confirm the inclusion of a non
binary actor for the blind Hermit's.
Speaker 2 (24:06):
Subplot, updating Shelley's original Delacey character.
Speaker 1 (24:09):
Yeah. This provides a welcome, intentional layer of queer inclusivity,
ensuring that core theme of rejection and acceptance is explored
through a modern lens of identity. It's not just window dressing.
It feels thematically vital.
Speaker 2 (24:22):
And the marketing momentum already confirms the cultural hunger for this.
That d twenty three teaser trailer scored to a haunting,
almost satirical cover of Puttin' on the.
Speaker 1 (24:32):
Ritz, which was a delightfully inspired choice totally unexpected.
Speaker 2 (24:36):
It drew over fifty million views overnight. That demonstrates immediate
massive global resonance for the combined brand of Frankenstein, Peel
and del Toro.
Speaker 1 (24:46):
People are ready for this, and Disney Plus is strategically
maximizing that buzz. They're planning to bundle Undying with Bel
Toro's Netflix film for a Monster Month in November twenty
twenty five, making the myth inescapable exactly in s and
gets everywhere by the time the series drops in twenty
twenty six. This isn't just a release, It's a full
on cultural blitz.
Speaker 2 (25:05):
Ultimately, all of this suggests that Frankenstein Undying isn't just
aiming for entertainment, It's aiming to be a cultural defibrillator.
As one source put it, Ooh, I like that it's
striking that urgent modern question who deserves life? Exactly when
we are actively debating the sentience of AI overlords and
(25:26):
the ethical lines in genetic engineering. It feels incredibly timely.
Speaker 1 (25:30):
And for Disney, this series is a massive stake in
adult oriented IP, pushing back against the idea that their
mature content relies solely on Marvel or Star Wars.
Speaker 2 (25:40):
Definitely, this series is aiming squarely for Emmy sweeps. Critics
are already speculating that a Lordie's physicality and intellectual depth
could rival DeNiro's attempt back in ninety four, and that
Goth's depth evokes the best Gothic performances high praise.
Speaker 1 (25:54):
Already, they're eyeing subtitles in one hundred and ninety languages globally,
tapping into the myths universal appeal of creation and rejection. However,
we have to address.
Speaker 2 (26:03):
The risks, always risks with something this ambitious.
Speaker 1 (26:05):
There are always the fidelity purists who will probably decry
the timeline hopping as sacrilege, worrying it dilutes the classical
Gothic purity of Shelley's text. You'll definitely hear that, and
that timeline structure is inherently challenging, balancing three distinct eras,
three visual aesthetics, maintaining narrative cohesion across ten hours. It's
a massive directorial and writing feet.
Speaker 2 (26:25):
No question. But given the talent involved Peel, Del Toro,
van Houtema displat the cast and that intense focus on
making the creature visceral as it is vulnerable, undying is
just pulsing with cinematic promise. Even a story stitched from
scraps can spark new fire right now, So let's synthesize
(26:45):
what we've learned, try and wrap this deep dive up.
The core draw here, it seems, is this masterful blending
of a nineteenth century literary cornerstone with twenty first century
prestige television.
Speaker 1 (26:56):
Yeah, anchored by the aut vision of Peel and del Toro,
and crucially by those two adjacent stars A Lordy's raw
physicality meeting Goth's ethereal modern menace.
Speaker 2 (27:06):
He promises to be a powerful animation of the original story,
not just a repetitive adaptation. The series is clearly challenging us,
the audience, to address the question of the monsters we birth,
whether they're technological, biological, or societal, and.
Speaker 1 (27:18):
Whether we choose to embrace them or reject them entirely.
That seems to be the core tension.
Speaker 2 (27:24):
As lightning inevitably cracks over those progue spires this winter,
the creature truly stirs from its slab. Should probably mark
your calendars for twenty twenty six. The creature walks again,
and this.
Speaker 1 (27:35):
Time he is demanding to be seen, demanding acknowledgment, and
demanding that his creator and by extension, maybe all of
us society take responsibility for his existence. Yeah, okay, here's
where it gets really interesting. The final spark we want
to leave you with, drawing on that profound relevance we
found in all these sources, Frankenstein Undying seems to suggest
(27:57):
that our biggest fear shouldn't be the monster itself, the
product of science, however flawed, but the act of rejection,
the final abandonment that transforms potential humanity into tragedy and
ultimately vengeance.
Speaker 2 (28:10):
Think about the post pandemic anxieties we all feel about
scientific oversight, about isolation, about identity. They really echo Shelley's
original warnings from two hundred years ago.
Speaker 1 (28:19):
Don't they. They really do.
Speaker 2 (28:20):
So the deep dive kind of challenges you, the listener,
to think about this, what modern abomination, maybe in technology,
maybe in culture, are we currently rejecting dismissing as the
other that we should perhaps be trying to understand instead
Speaker 1 (28:35):
Because undying implies the true lasting horror It lies in
that dismissal and the ensuing vengeance it inevitably fuels down
the line food for thought,
Welcome to the deep dive. Today. We are strapping ourselves
into the high voltage chair because we are dissecting what
might be the most unexpected, ambitious and culturally resonant project
to hit streaming in years. That's right, Disney Plus is
limited series Frankenstein undying.
Speaker 2 (00:19):
It truly is a lightning strike moment, isn't it? And
the shock isn't just the well the sheer audacity of
the adaptation itself. But you know where it's landed, Disney Plus,
I exactly. We have a huge stack of sources detailing
the creative vision, this really audacious scope, I mean spanning
three separate timelines and a casting coupe that has wealth
(00:39):
the entire industry buzzin.
Speaker 1 (00:40):
Absolutely. So our mission today is to move beyond just
the headlines. We want to quickly and thoroughly understand why
this specific prestige adaptation, guided by the you know, the
joint genius of Jordan Peele and Germo del Toro, why
it's poised to reshape adult horror television and maybe more importantly,
hold a mirror up to our own contemporary anxieties.
Speaker 2 (00:59):
Yeah, and to really unpack that, we have to start
at the beginning right with the foundational myth, Mary Shelley's
Frankenstein or the Modern Prometheus, published way back in eighteen eighteen, right.
Speaker 1 (01:11):
Conceived during those famous stormy summer nights at Villadea Dotti.
Speaker 2 (01:14):
Exactly, it's the birth of this tragic archetype, the stitched Monster. Yes,
but I think more profoundly, it's that cautionary tale of
a creator who just denies responsibility for his creation.
Speaker 1 (01:27):
And that original title, the Modern Prometheus. It's so weighty,
isn't it. It sets the stakes immediately.
Speaker 2 (01:32):
Ye.
Speaker 1 (01:32):
Shelley fused the well, the chilling promise of the Enlightenment,
that unchecked scientific progress with really intense emotional dread of
the Romantic era. It's a story about what happens when
genius kind of outpaces morality.
Speaker 2 (01:46):
And that tension, that sense of the creation yearning for
a humanity he can't quite grasp because well, his own
creator rejected him. And that's the existential key. I think
that unlocks why this story remains so potent even two
centuries later. It's a class I'm sick of ambition and
Schubra are sure, but the true narrative engine it's that
cycle of vengeance. Born from just profound abandonment.
Speaker 1 (02:08):
Then boom, fast forward September twenty five, twenty twenty five,
Disney's D twenty three Expo in Anaheim. Yeah, the surprise
announcement just drops. Production is officially greenlit for Frankenstein Undying,
a sprawling, dark, ten episode limited series is heading to
Disney Plus lore right, and that platform pivot is what
(02:29):
truly shocked us. I think it's not exactly you know,
high school musical, the musical the series.
Speaker 2 (02:34):
No, definitely not. It's an incredibly aggressive strategic move for
Disney Plus. It signals this intent to dive headfirst into darker,
more mature, intellectual.
Speaker 1 (02:43):
IP, challenging that perceived safeness.
Speaker 2 (02:46):
Exactly challenging the safeness of their recent adult oriented acquisitions.
This is clearly intended to counter, you know, superhero fatigue
and compete directly with the likes of HBO and Netflix
for critical acclaim, big awards play potentially.
Speaker 1 (02:57):
But when you look at the architects behind it, the
stakes make a lot more sense. We are talking about
showrunner Jordan Peel Get Out Nope, he basically redefined social horror,
and executive producer Guillermo del Toro, the master of blending
body horror with that really tender, often weeping melancholy.
Speaker 2 (03:18):
It's a dream team. It basically guarantees the matic density
and you know, just top tier production quality.
Speaker 1 (03:25):
They're not chasing easy jump scares here, are they. Yeah,
they are chasing philosophical dread exactly.
Speaker 2 (03:31):
And Peel didn't shy away from setting that tone right
from the start. His quote from the D twenty three keynote.
It establishes a series mission statement right out of the game.
Makes it clear this isn't your grandpa's monster.
Speaker 1 (03:41):
Movie, he said, and I'm paraphrasing slightly, but Frankenstein isn't
just about bolts and stitches. It's about the monsters we
create in our pursuit of godhood and the ones we
become when we reject them.
Speaker 2 (03:52):
Wow.
Speaker 1 (03:53):
What I take from that, particularly that last part, is
that the series is going to focus just as much
on Victor Frankenstein's own decay, it's obsession, his monstrosity, as
it does in the creature's.
Speaker 2 (04:03):
Tragedy, precisely. And that is a massive promise for a
ten hour series, isn't it. It suggests a really deep,
character driven psychodrama just draped in gothic horror and the
initial timeline. It just confirms the urgency and the high
confidence driving this whole project. Production kicks off in Prague
this winter, so winter of twenty twenty five, right, No,
(04:25):
basically yeah, with the premiere ID for fall twenty twenty six.
This isn't some slow roll development. This is a clear
strategic push toward award season contention, they're moving fast.
Speaker 1 (04:37):
Okay, So to really understand the weight of this new
adaptation undying, we need a quick look back right at
the creature's cinematic DNA. The novel was, as you said,
a product of that radical fusion Romanticism's emotional intentity meeting
enlightenment scientific dread all during the rise of the Industrial Revolution.
It was a story really born of mechanism and anxiety.
Speaker 2 (04:58):
And Hollywood didn't wait long to grab onto that electricity.
The first major cinematic translation, of course, James Wales's nineteen
thirty one classic totally. It transformed the novel's you know,
often eloquent, verbose creature into this silent, lumbering figure of
profound sympathy, mainly thanks to Boris Karloff's incredible portrayal. The
studio essentially simplified Shelley's philosophical creation into a recognizable, visually striking,
(05:23):
tragic figure, much easier to market, I suppose.
Speaker 1 (05:26):
And that simplification created the cultural language we still use today,
rap the flathead, the bolts, those pronounced next scars, the
visual shorthand exactly visual shorthands for outsider anguish will That
expanded that legacy in the nineteen thirty five sequel Brida.
Speaker 2 (05:40):
Frankenstein, which added that amazing layer of campy wit and
operatic melodrama, thanks largely to Elsa Lanchester's you know, hissing
rejected mate. Unforgettable definitely, and.
Speaker 1 (05:51):
That template became hugely influential, didn't it. It shaped pretty much everything.
Speaker 2 (05:54):
That followed, Oh absolutely. Mel Briggs's nineteen seventy four masterpiece
Young Frankenstein directly satirized those universal films. But even Kenneth
Branna is more earnest and frankly expensive nineteen ninety four adaptation.
Speaker 1 (06:07):
With de Niro as the monster.
Speaker 2 (06:09):
Yeah, starring Robert de Niro as the monster. Even that
was still responding to Wale's legacy. It was trying to
restore some of the creature's original eloquence, his intellectual capacity.
Speaker 1 (06:19):
What's fascinating, though, is how sharply those dramatic, often heartbreaking
adaptations contrast with Disney's own previous and much softer engagement
with the mythos.
Speaker 2 (06:30):
Yeah, the Disney history is well, it's decidedly soft edged,
isn't it. The most notable example is probably Tim Burton's
twenty twelve Franke and Weenie.
Speaker 1 (06:38):
Love that film.
Speaker 2 (06:39):
It was beautiful, yeah, black and white stop motion, but
the protagonist, Victor, he resurrects his dogs Smarky, So the
stakes are just profoundly lowered. It's about grief and pet ownership, really,
not the philosophical limits of human creation. It got an
Oscar nomination, sure, but it fundamentally softened that gothic horror
into like family adjacent pathos.
Speaker 1 (07:01):
And you see little fragments scattered elsewhere in the bigger
Disney portfolio, right echoes and maybe some early ILM special
effects or those Marvel we If episodes that sometimes dabble
in Monsters origin right fleeting moments, but crucially, yeah they
were fleeting. They never attempted the mature, sustained philosophical deep
dive that undying is promising.
Speaker 2 (07:21):
And that really brings us to the void this series
seems designed to fill. Television film has consistently revisited Frankenstein
again and again, but TV TV has really struggled to
capture its serialized potential at a high prestige level.
Speaker 1 (07:37):
Yeah, you look at that failed attempts from what was
it twenty fifteen to twenty seventeen, the Netflix series of
Frankenstein Chronicles starring Sean Bean.
Speaker 2 (07:45):
Interesting concept.
Speaker 1 (07:46):
It was an interesting concept, Yeah, a procedural with victorian flair,
but it ultimately kind of faltered on execution, maybe lack
the budget or critically the thematic depth needed to sustain
that character over multiple seasons.
Speaker 2 (07:58):
And that failure, I think scores exactly why Frankenstein Undying
is such an audacious, expensive pivot. Peel and del Toro
aren't just adapting the story. They're claiming the prestige horror
space for this character, right, They're aiming for the kind
of cultural impact that TV just hasn't achieved yet with
Shelley's creation. They really have to convince us that ten
(08:18):
hours of serialized television can handle the myths immense scale.
Speaker 1 (08:22):
Okay, that sets us up perfectly for Section two. The
sheer scope of this audacious resurrection if past TV attempts
felt a bit constrained, maybe period pieces Peel's vision for undying.
It's being called a prestige prestige event.
Speaker 2 (08:40):
Yeah, I mean that term prestige prestige. It's intentionally hyperbolic, obvious,
a bit much maybe a little bit, yeah, but it
signals that blend of really high production values and profound
thematic ambition. The sources we have explicitly compared its tone
to like the intense psychological haunting dread of something like
the Haunting of Hill House, Okay, but interwoven with the
corrosive familial and social rat you see in say, The
(09:03):
Best Stems of Succession.
Speaker 1 (09:05):
Wow. Okay, so it's horror, but the root cause is
human failure societal filings exactly.
Speaker 2 (09:10):
And what allows them to tackle that kind of depth
is the structure, which sounds like maybe the most ambitious
aspect of the whole series, which is it uses this
complex three timeline narrative designed specifically to connect Shelley's nineteenth
century themes directly to our twenty first century anxieties.
Speaker 1 (09:26):
Okay, we have to break those down. That sounds key
to the whole tapestry.
Speaker 2 (09:30):
Totally So the first timeline is the necessary grounding, right
Victor's original nineteenth century Geneva lab. It covers the creation
phase and the immediate catastrophic fallout of the monster's rejection.
Speaker 1 (09:42):
Pure gothic horror, gaslight shadows.
Speaker 2 (09:45):
Yeah, the obsession of unchecked genius. Classic stuff done hopefully
really well.
Speaker 1 (09:51):
Then the story leaps dramatically into the second timeline, the
creature's nomadic twentieth century wanderings. This is what the sources
are calling the Dianae Espera phase, right.
Speaker 2 (10:01):
Where the monster, essentially a mortal and completely alone, navigates
a rapidly industrializing and modernizing world.
Speaker 1 (10:07):
Okay, so this is where the social allegory really kicks out.
Speaker 2 (10:10):
I think so. Yeah, we're told the creature will find
these fleeting, really precarious moments of kinship in specific historical settings,
like a nineteen twenties Harlem jazz club, for instance, where
he might be mistaken for just another outsider or maybe
a unique figure. Imagine the creature experiencing the vibrant cultural
rebirth of the Harlem Renaissance, but still fundamentally unable to belong.
Speaker 1 (10:32):
That's powerful imagery.
Speaker 2 (10:33):
Then maybe he appears decades later, perhaps as just an
observer in a scaral nineteen eighties Silicon Valley.
Speaker 1 (10:39):
Lab, a lab setting in the eighties. Yeah, that's an intentional,
chilling echo of his original birth.
Speaker 2 (10:45):
Scene, Isn't it absolutely intentional.
Speaker 1 (10:46):
He's watching the birth of new technology that will eventually
lead to the third.
Speaker 2 (10:50):
Timeline, exactly the near future biotech thriller timeline. This is
where it addresses the absolute apex of modern relevance. We're
talking AI ethics, the real world implications of genetic engineering,
you know, the fear of crisper babies, and just the
pervasive loneliness epidemic in our modern world. The creature's rejection,
(11:10):
originally driven by Victor's shame and disgust, becomes this metaphor
for society's current fear of creating something we can't control,
or maybe something we just don't want to take responsibility for.
Speaker 1 (11:21):
So it connects the eighteen eighteen fears about, say, the
textile mill worker being replaced by a machine directly to
twenty twenty five fears about AI replacing knowledge workers.
Speaker 2 (11:32):
Precisely.
Speaker 1 (11:33):
The themes are instantly animated for a contemporary audience and
providing immense gravitas overseeing this whole multi temporal effort is
executive producer Guillermo del Toro.
Speaker 2 (11:43):
Del Toro's involvement is like a thematic guarantee, isn't it
his signature blend of grotesque body horror, that wax squishy
reality of the creature and profound tender melancholy. It's exactly
what this project needs to stop it from becoming cold clinical.
Speaker 1 (12:00):
Yeah, he makes you feel for the monster.
Speaker 2 (12:02):
He's the master of making you wheat for the monster
even as you kind of flutch away from it.
Speaker 1 (12:06):
He spoke really powerfully about this at D twenty three.
He said something like, the Monster's the loneliest character in literature. Yeah,
this series will make you wheat for him and fear
what we've made of ourselves. In his image, he sees
the creature not as a villain, but as a victim
demanding recognition.
Speaker 2 (12:21):
Now Here is where it gets really interesting and introduces
a critical potential conflict or maybe synergy, depending how you
look at it.
Speaker 1 (12:28):
Okay, Del Toro is fresh from directing his own high
profile Frankenstein film for Netflix.
Speaker 2 (12:34):
Right, I heard about this?
Speaker 1 (12:36):
That film starring Oscar Isaac as Victor and Jacob Elordi
as the Creature.
Speaker 2 (12:41):
Wait wait, Jacob Elordi the same actor playing the creature
in the series, very.
Speaker 1 (12:45):
Same actor, and that film is premiering November seven, twenty
twenty five, literally right before production on the series kicks off.
Speaker 2 (12:52):
Okay, let's pause on that. You have del Toro producing
the Disney Plus series, and immediately before it starts shooting,
he's launching his own feature film adaptation on a rival
platform casting the same actor as the monster. Is that
synergy or is that saturation? Like? Are we gonna get
Frankenstein fatigue?
Speaker 1 (13:10):
That's the multimillion dollar question, isn't it? On one hand,
the synergy argument is strong. The Netflix film primes the
global audience, ensures the Frankenstein mythos, absolutely dominates the cultural
conversation for months right leading into the series production.
Speaker 2 (13:24):
Thanks the property inescapable exactly.
Speaker 1 (13:26):
On the other hand, you know I'm to play Devil's
advocate here. Isn't there a huge risk of audience burnout?
Viewers will have just seen a Lordy portray the creature
in a two hour, presumably very del Toro esque.
Speaker 2 (13:39):
Film, right intense gothic.
Speaker 1 (13:41):
Will they be ready for ten more hours of the
same character a year later? Even if Peel's vision is different,
The risk is Del Toro's own film could overshadow the
series production, maybe steal some of its initial thunder.
Speaker 2 (13:53):
It's a genuine concern absolutely, and the studio Disney plus,
but they're certainly betting heavily that the excitement around the
combined creative teams Peel's social allegory plus Del Toro's visual
shadow will overcome any sense of oversaturation.
Speaker 1 (14:09):
Gambling that the public appetite for high end gothic material.
Speaker 2 (14:12):
Is just vast, pretty much, and they're backing that gamble
with well unprecedented funds.
Speaker 1 (14:17):
Yeah, the whispers put the budget at over two hundred
million dollars for a ten episode limited series. That's that's
absolutely staggering.
Speaker 2 (14:24):
It is, But that level of investment feels necessary maybe
to manage the cinematic quality required by those three disparate
timelines and the global scope. You can't do that on
the cheat, and they're apparently sparing no expense on the
visual fidelity. The sources detail hiring practical effects gurus from Spectral.
Speaker 1 (14:42):
Motion known for hell Boy Del Toro.
Speaker 2 (14:45):
Connection there exactly guaranteeing that the creature will feel tactile
and real and then CGI oversight by weighted digital. The
mandate seems clear. The creature's appearance must be and this
is a quote visceral as it is.
Speaker 1 (14:58):
Vulnerable horror, and in equal measure that's the goal. Let's
pivot then to the absolute heart of the project, the
people who have to embody this tragedy. The success of
Undying really inges on its cast right, and the decision
to tap Jacob Belordi and Mia Goth is widely being
called a casting coup.
Speaker 2 (15:17):
It really is.
Speaker 1 (15:18):
They're both Emmy nominated stars merging from major properties, but
with precisely the sharp edges you need for this kind
of mature drama.
Speaker 2 (15:25):
Yeah, Jacob Elordi, the twenty eight year old Australian actor,
he's tapped to play the creature. Now. Many listeners will
know him from his breakthrough in Euphoria, obviously, but the
key performance, the one that really signaled his readiness for
the monster's unique dramatic demands, was his Emmy nominated turn
as Sidney Damu in FX is the Bear.
Speaker 1 (15:43):
Which streams internationally on Disney Plus reeas Funneling.
Speaker 2 (15:46):
Enough exactly, that Bear performance is just the perfect thematic
fit for this role. Isn't it. Critics praised his raw
animalistic grace. That phrase is so telling.
Speaker 1 (15:57):
That it captures it.
Speaker 2 (15:58):
It's about portraying that simmering playos that rage, but also
a profound, visible vulnerability. These are the exact qualities you
need for the monster who's supposed to possess the body
of a giant, but the emotional need of like a
neglected child.
Speaker 1 (16:12):
And his Emmy nomination for Outstanding Supporting Actor in twenty
twenty four certainly cemented his dramatic range beyond just you know, pen.
Speaker 2 (16:19):
Drama, absolutely, and beyond the awards, we have to talk
about the physicality. His impressive six foot five frame is crucial.
Speaker 1 (16:25):
Yeah, he needs to tower.
Speaker 2 (16:26):
The monster has to tower over Victor and others to
represent his otherness, his inherent threat. That height will be
amplified in those arctic exile scenes we expect and the
urban haunting sequences we know. He'll undergo significant physical transformation
using extensive prosthetics.
Speaker 1 (16:43):
Designed by Michael Azohl.
Speaker 2 (16:44):
Del Toro's longtime collaborator. Yeah, so the look will be
grounded in that del Toro.
Speaker 1 (16:49):
Esthetic too, and focusing on his facial features. The sources
note this strategic focus on the Lordy's piercing green eyes.
They're intended to convey the creature's quote milk tonic tragedy. Okay,
we need to unpack that phrase for the listener. High
concept language there, right.
Speaker 2 (17:05):
It connects directly to Milton's poem Paradise Lost. Milton's Satan
isn't just evil. He's this magnificent, intelligent, powerful creation rejected
by his all powerful creator God and cast into isolation.
Satan's tragedy is that his inherent goodness gets twisted into
malice by abandonment. So by calling the monster's gaze miltonic,
they're establishing him not as a simple villain, but as
(17:28):
the sort of fallen angel seeking justice against an unfair
creator that.
Speaker 1 (17:32):
Focus on abandonment rather than inherent malice. That's exactly what
Elordi himself emphasized in his own interpretation.
Speaker 2 (17:39):
Right yeah, he stated post d twenty three something like
playing the monster is like finally slipping into a skin
that fits. He's not evil, he's abandoned. That aligns perfectly
with Peel's mission to explore rejection.
Speaker 1 (17:51):
Okay, moving to the essential counterpoint. Mia Goth thirty two
years old, cast as Elizabeth Lovenza Victor's fiance, but it
sounds like she's far from the passive damsel of past adaptation.
Speaker 2 (18:03):
Oh definitely not. She seems positioned as the narrative lynchpin
that binds Victor to humanity and then maybe spirals into
a vengeful specter herself. It sounds like a much richer role.
Speaker 1 (18:13):
Goth's background is fascinating too, because it blends that high
concept horror with Disney adjacency, much like a Lordie Right.
Speaker 2 (18:20):
She played the forth sensitive inquisitor Maris Brood in Aska
back in twenty twenty three.
Speaker 1 (18:24):
Where she brought this blend of ferocity and fragility to
a really dark complex character and got an Emmy nomination
for it too Outstanding Supporting Actress.
Speaker 2 (18:33):
And she also brings these deep horror bonafides from indie
hits like Pearl and Infinity Pool. She's got the genre cred.
The New Yorker praised her specific ability to quote unearth
the quiet terror in Quiet Women.
Speaker 1 (18:48):
That's perfect for Elizabeth.
Speaker 2 (18:49):
It feels perfectly suited for Elizabeth's slow agonizing evolution from
innocent bride to potentially a figure mirroring Victor's own madness.
Speaker 1 (19:00):
Zat's interpretation of Elizabeth sounds key to understanding the series
more modern, maybe feminist approach. She explained to D twenty
three that Elizabeth isn't the damsel Shelley sketched. She's the
mirror to Victor's madness, the one who sees the beauty
in the beast before anyone else.
Speaker 2 (19:16):
Wow. So she becomes an active force, grappling with victor
sins and possibly finding her own agency in the monstrous aftermath.
That's a huge shift.
Speaker 1 (19:24):
It suggests a character arc that's deeply intertwined with the
Creature's narrative, elevating her far beyond just the object of
Victor's possession or the eventual victim.
Speaker 2 (19:32):
And inevitably this leads to the speculation about the chemistry
between the two leads.
Speaker 1 (19:37):
Right the source material mentions palpable chemistry between them, fueled
partly by their joint appearance promoting Del Toro s. Frankenstein
film at the Venice premiere in September twenty twenty five.
This speculation about onset sparks. It could really electrify that
forbidden romance, ankle equipment, the Creature's desperate demand for a companion,
(19:57):
and Elizabeth's potential attraction to the beauty she supposedly sees
in the Beast adds an odal layer.
Speaker 2 (20:03):
What stands out most here, I think is that these
are not legacy stars just cashing a check. They are
Emmy's adjacent talents who have proven their capacity for really
high stakes, challenging drama. A Lordie's tenderness and rage combined
with Goth's sort of ethereal menace, it makes them the
perfect conduits for this unique blend of modern Gothic dread
(20:24):
and sharp social commentary.
Speaker 1 (20:25):
Okay, let's move behind the curtain out to section four,
focusing on the mechanics the craft of bringing this monster
to life for the streaming age. Show Runner Jordan Peele's company,
Munkey Pop Productions is running.
Speaker 2 (20:35):
The show, which basically ensures his signature focus on social
allegory is baked right into the DNA of the script.
Speaker 1 (20:41):
He doesn't just do horror, He uses horror to analyze
society exactly, and those three timelines we discussed allow him
to use the monster's perspective, that perpetual outsider view to
critique various societal flaws across like two hundred years. It's ambitious.
Speaker 2 (20:58):
That global and chronological scope is huge, and it's reflected
in the filming locations. They're using Hungary's gothic castles for
Victor's hubers fueled nineteenth century lab.
Speaker 1 (21:09):
Scenes, giving that timeline a dense, classical, almost suffocating visual aesthetic.
You imagine.
Speaker 2 (21:16):
Yeah, but that's going to be drastically contrasted with the
Creature's diaspora timeline.
Speaker 1 (21:20):
Right as we mentioned, we'll apparently see the creature in
a nineteen twenties Harlem jazz club, that moment of cultural effervescence,
and then in a sterile nineteen eighty Silicon Valley lab
where the next generation of creation is being.
Speaker 2 (21:31):
Developed, connecting Victor's nineteenth century workshop directly to the beginnings
of our modern tech world exactly.
Speaker 1 (21:37):
And the series culminates apparently in this truly dystopian setting,
a twenty forties climate ravage tundra where biotech airrors are
forced to confront the old sins of creation. It sounds epic.
I love the peel As injecting his signature humor too,
even within this dark framework. That quote it's Frankenstein's remix.
What if the monster unionized?
Speaker 2 (21:57):
Huh Yeah, it.
Speaker 1 (21:58):
Suggested, amid the profound horror, there will be this sharp
satirical commentary on labor rights, technology, social systems that constantly
reject the other. It's the comedy of the existential outcast.
Speaker 2 (22:11):
And del Tora's executive oversight ensures that visual poetry remains
paramount even amidst Peel's sharp social focus. You should expect
scenes of candlelight dissections reminiscent of the Gothic Phay realms
he explored in Pan's Labyrinth.
Speaker 1 (22:25):
Oh Yeah, and.
Speaker 2 (22:26):
Creature designs that use practical gore to root the story
in reality, contrasting maybe with high tech CGI used for
those futuristic settings. Thus to both worlds, hopefully, and to.
Speaker 1 (22:36):
Achieve that level of cinematic intimacy on the small screen.
Hiring Hoyt van Hoi Kamma, the cinematographer behind Oppenheimert Dunkirk
de Lens the pilot, that's a massive signal of quality.
Speaker 2 (22:46):
Huge. This isn't just a TV show visually. They wanted
to feel like a high budget feature film stretched across
ten hours.
Speaker 1 (22:52):
And Voidum is known for that tactile, almost documentary like realism.
Isn't he using natural light and shadows to.
Speaker 2 (22:58):
Create deeply immerse of large format visuals. Yeah, this will
ensure the scenes in Victor's dark gothic lab feel weighty, oppressive,
while the twenty forties tundra scenes will likely use a cold,
vast scale that just emphasizes the creature's unending isolation, and.
Speaker 1 (23:16):
The score by Oscar winner Alexander display It promises to
be just as immersive. The description mentions weaving their men
waiales with orchestral.
Speaker 2 (23:25):
Swells, the vere men that eerie spectral sound. It's the
perfect instrument to evoke the creature's profound, non human isolation
and melancholy great choice.
Speaker 1 (23:35):
The supporting cast reinforces this prestige pedigree too. We have
Felix Kmer, the standout star from all Quiet on the
Western Front, brilliant in that cass is a young Victor
channeling that maybe shell shock genius and the arrogant youthfulness
that precedes his madness.
Speaker 2 (23:49):
Good casting, and Lars Michelson, known for complex, often patriarchal
roles and shows like The Last Kingdom. He's Swinging Doctor
Waldman Victor's mentor figure.
Speaker 1 (23:58):
It's also crucial to highlight the updates being made for
modern relevance. The sources confirm the inclusion of a non
binary actor for the blind Hermit's.
Speaker 2 (24:06):
Subplot, updating Shelley's original Delacey character.
Speaker 1 (24:09):
Yeah. This provides a welcome, intentional layer of queer inclusivity,
ensuring that core theme of rejection and acceptance is explored
through a modern lens of identity. It's not just window dressing.
It feels thematically vital.
Speaker 2 (24:22):
And the marketing momentum already confirms the cultural hunger for this.
That d twenty three teaser trailer scored to a haunting,
almost satirical cover of Puttin' on the.
Speaker 1 (24:32):
Ritz, which was a delightfully inspired choice totally unexpected.
Speaker 2 (24:36):
It drew over fifty million views overnight. That demonstrates immediate
massive global resonance for the combined brand of Frankenstein, Peel
and del Toro.
Speaker 1 (24:46):
People are ready for this, and Disney Plus is strategically
maximizing that buzz. They're planning to bundle Undying with Bel
Toro's Netflix film for a Monster Month in November twenty
twenty five, making the myth inescapable exactly in s and
gets everywhere by the time the series drops in twenty
twenty six. This isn't just a release, It's a full
on cultural blitz.
Speaker 2 (25:05):
Ultimately, all of this suggests that Frankenstein Undying isn't just
aiming for entertainment, It's aiming to be a cultural defibrillator.
As one source put it, Ooh, I like that it's
striking that urgent modern question who deserves life? Exactly when
we are actively debating the sentience of AI overlords and
(25:26):
the ethical lines in genetic engineering. It feels incredibly timely.
Speaker 1 (25:30):
And for Disney, this series is a massive stake in
adult oriented IP, pushing back against the idea that their
mature content relies solely on Marvel or Star Wars.
Speaker 2 (25:40):
Definitely, this series is aiming squarely for Emmy sweeps. Critics
are already speculating that a Lordie's physicality and intellectual depth
could rival DeNiro's attempt back in ninety four, and that
Goth's depth evokes the best Gothic performances high praise.
Speaker 1 (25:54):
Already, they're eyeing subtitles in one hundred and ninety languages globally,
tapping into the myths universal appeal of creation and rejection. However,
we have to address.
Speaker 2 (26:03):
The risks, always risks with something this ambitious.
Speaker 1 (26:05):
There are always the fidelity purists who will probably decry
the timeline hopping as sacrilege, worrying it dilutes the classical
Gothic purity of Shelley's text. You'll definitely hear that, and
that timeline structure is inherently challenging, balancing three distinct eras,
three visual aesthetics, maintaining narrative cohesion across ten hours. It's
a massive directorial and writing feet.
Speaker 2 (26:25):
No question. But given the talent involved Peel, Del Toro,
van Houtema displat the cast and that intense focus on
making the creature visceral as it is vulnerable, undying is
just pulsing with cinematic promise. Even a story stitched from
scraps can spark new fire right now, So let's synthesize
(26:45):
what we've learned, try and wrap this deep dive up.
The core draw here, it seems, is this masterful blending
of a nineteenth century literary cornerstone with twenty first century
prestige television.
Speaker 1 (26:56):
Yeah, anchored by the aut vision of Peel and del Toro,
and crucially by those two adjacent stars A Lordy's raw
physicality meeting Goth's ethereal modern menace.
Speaker 2 (27:06):
He promises to be a powerful animation of the original story,
not just a repetitive adaptation. The series is clearly challenging us,
the audience, to address the question of the monsters we birth,
whether they're technological, biological, or societal, and.
Speaker 1 (27:18):
Whether we choose to embrace them or reject them entirely.
That seems to be the core tension.
Speaker 2 (27:24):
As lightning inevitably cracks over those progue spires this winter,
the creature truly stirs from its slab. Should probably mark
your calendars for twenty twenty six. The creature walks again,
and this.
Speaker 1 (27:35):
Time he is demanding to be seen, demanding acknowledgment, and
demanding that his creator and by extension, maybe all of
us society take responsibility for his existence. Yeah, okay, here's
where it gets really interesting. The final spark we want
to leave you with, drawing on that profound relevance we
found in all these sources, Frankenstein Undying seems to suggest
(27:57):
that our biggest fear shouldn't be the monster itself, the
product of science, however flawed, but the act of rejection,
the final abandonment that transforms potential humanity into tragedy and
ultimately vengeance.
Speaker 2 (28:10):
Think about the post pandemic anxieties we all feel about
scientific oversight, about isolation, about identity. They really echo Shelley's
original warnings from two hundred years ago.
Speaker 1 (28:19):
Don't they. They really do.
Speaker 2 (28:20):
So the deep dive kind of challenges you, the listener,
to think about this, what modern abomination, maybe in technology,
maybe in culture, are we currently rejecting dismissing as the
other that we should perhaps be trying to understand instead
Speaker 1 (28:35):
Because undying implies the true lasting horror It lies in
that dismissal and the ensuing vengeance it inevitably fuels down
the line food for thought,
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.