1,037 posts
|
Post by jgblunners on Jan 26, 2018 20:27:12 GMT
How bad is the view from the sides? I have an Entry Pass ticket for tomorrow, right side of the upper circle, and I'm starting to worry As others have said, most of it is front and centre so isn't an issue. I was in the restricted view side seats in the pit, on the right-hand side of the auditorium as you look at the stage (i.e. closest to stage left), and there were maybe 4 or 5 moments where I couldn't see what was happening at the back of the stage or on the side closest to me. One or two of these moments have very little dialogue so you're left slightly awkwardly wondering what's happening, but it turns out you don't miss anything vitally important. The other moments are only momentary and you can still tell what's happening from the dialogue. I can't vouch for the difference that the height will make - you may have difficulty seeing the top of the stairs but I can't be sure. I wouldn't worry too much, everything important happens at the front.
|
|
5,593 posts
|
Post by lynette on Jan 26, 2018 20:40:13 GMT
1 for, 1 against and an intriguing comment about the last line.
|
|
2,962 posts
|
Post by crowblack on Jan 26, 2018 20:49:41 GMT
confirmation email say restricted view? The email just says Friday Rush, but as I bought them, checking out on the website, it said restricted view.
|
|
Xanderl
Member
Not always very high value in terms of ticket yield or donations
|
Post by Xanderl on Jan 27, 2018 17:04:34 GMT
I thought this was excellent and the 3 hours plus flew by! How often do you see a play where 3/4 of the cast are women, two of whom are over 75.
Pleased to report the front row rush seats are great, wouldn’t describe them as restricted. There are odd bits of the set you can’t see but suspect that will be the case wherever you sit. Definitely go for these rather than side on view.
|
|
724 posts
|
Post by Latecomer on Jan 27, 2018 17:36:52 GMT
I thought this was excellent and the 3 hours plus flew by! How often do you see a play where 3/4 of the cast are women, two of whom are over 75. Pleased to report the front row rush seats are great, wouldn’t describe them as restricted. There are odd bits of the set you can’t see but suspect that will be the case wherever you sit. Definitely go for these rather than side on view. Managed to miss you!I was in A4! I agree front row fine and really enjoyed this. May have to think about it for a while!are they deliberately trying to annoy people in side seats with staging? One scene far left (when they could have used more central table) and one far right, where a character moves an armchair even further to the right! It's almost like they don't check sight lines!
|
|
1,316 posts
|
Post by tmesis on Jan 27, 2018 18:26:31 GMT
I also loved The Flick but this, at 3hrs 15mins, really tried my patience. In The Flick I was really drawn into the characters and the play developed slowly but inexorably. There was no real development at all here and the long pauses and mundanity began to feel mannered and pretentious. Very disappointing.
|
|
|
Post by Honoured Guest on Jan 27, 2018 19:15:40 GMT
John (NT, 2017)
Uh, this is 2018, peeps.
|
|
1,016 posts
|
Post by andrew on Jan 27, 2018 21:37:06 GMT
I'd keep your tickets. If you're willing to submit to the world it presents, it has a lot of pay offs. But more in the smaller moments of life, than in a big end-of-show revelation. (In fact, and I'd be interested to hear others thoughts on this, the only thing that angered me was the last line of the play. For all her subtle work in the previous 3hrs and 19mins, the very last line was so obvious, and looked like an attempt to tie everything up, whereas I think her genius is creating moods and ideas in our heads that do't necessarily get pay-offs, and are all the better for it.) Can you remind me, in spoiler tags obviously, what the last line was? Pathetically, I can't remember it. The front row is not restricted view, I'd confirm. Rather it is unlimited legroom and a great view!
|
|
724 posts
|
Post by Latecomer on Jan 27, 2018 22:32:28 GMT
{Spoiler - click to view} The phone boyfriend has got off girlfriend beeps, indicating text message and he looks at it, puts it on the table and the B & B lady looks at it and says "who's John" I agree that this ending was very disappointing and far too neat......I would have liked something more ambiguous, so we could make our own minds up!
|
|
1,016 posts
|
Post by andrew on Jan 27, 2018 22:47:25 GMT
{Spoiler - click to view} The phone boyfriend has got off girlfriend beeps, indicating text message and he looks at it, puts it on the table and the B & B lady looks at it and says "who's John" I agree that this ending was very disappointing and far too neat......I would have liked something more ambiguous, so we could make our own minds up! Aaahh thanks. I liked the ending, I've remembered. I know what you're saying, but in this case it worked for me!
|
|
1,465 posts
|
Post by foxa on Jan 28, 2018 11:55:21 GMT
In terms of seats - I had a restricted view seat in the Circle, N11, for £26 and thought it was okay. Missed a little bit far stage left, but not enough that I thought it was bad value. There were a number of empty seats - perhaps 30 or so, including some of those which would have the most restricted view (side to the stage in the circle.) Also quite a few available in the last row in the pit.
|
|
Xanderl
Member
Not always very high value in terms of ticket yield or donations
|
Post by Xanderl on Jan 28, 2018 12:45:28 GMT
Managed to miss you!I was in A4! I agree front row fine and really enjoyed this. May have to think about it for a while!are they deliberately trying to annoy people in side seats with staging? One scene far left (when they could have used more central table) and one far right, where a character moves an armchair even further to the right! It's almost like they don't check sight lines! Sorry I missed you! I was in A12 so I guess we were directed in and out of the opposite sides! Agree with you that the staging could have been more central - lots of stuff on the sofa at one side and table at the other. Although of course the reveal in the final scene only worked because the reading in the previous scene had been off at the side
|
|
989 posts
|
Post by nash16 on Jan 28, 2018 14:23:00 GMT
{Spoiler - click to view} The phone boyfriend has got off girlfriend beeps, indicating text message and he looks at it, puts it on the table and the B & B lady looks at it and says "who's John" I agree that this ending was very disappointing and far too neat......I would have liked something more ambiguous, so we could make our own minds up! Aaahh thanks. I liked the ending, I've remembered. I know what you're saying, but in this case it worked for me! My friend felt it worked for them too. She said it completed the circle. But for me it just felt too neat. I would have liked to have gone to the Q&A with her to ask her about it. Although tricky to ask about as most wouldn't have seen it by that point! Maybe I'll write to her, haha!
|
|
4,575 posts
|
Post by Mark on Feb 2, 2018 13:09:33 GMT
Got Friday rush no bother for this today - A10 in the pit for Tuesday Matinee. Says restricted view but I can't imagine it to be bad here?
I think I've seen more in the Dorfman this past year than the Olivier and Littleton put together, all been very good.
|
|
137 posts
|
Post by jason71 on Feb 2, 2018 13:11:20 GMT
Does anyone know the length of the intervals?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 2, 2018 13:18:29 GMT
I think that just means you might lose feet, and maybe there's a possibility of furniture blocking people periodically in a way you wouldn't get from further back, but otherwise I can't imagine anything else wrong with it.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 2, 2018 13:19:37 GMT
Does anyone know the length of the intervals? I want to say the first one is 20 minutes and the second one is 15? Don't be in a hurry to leave the auditorium during the second one though, there's some additional content.
|
|
137 posts
|
Post by jason71 on Feb 2, 2018 13:39:13 GMT
Thanks
|
|
Xanderl
Member
Not always very high value in terms of ticket yield or donations
|
Post by Xanderl on Feb 2, 2018 13:53:44 GMT
Yes, no restriction to speak of in row A - a few bits of the set you can't see but you don't miss any of the action. Much better to be there than on the sides.
I think the second interval is only 10 minutes, starting from after the bit Baemax refers to. The bar is shut and there's no ice cream available in the second interval.
|
|
1,119 posts
|
Post by martin1965 on Feb 2, 2018 18:36:13 GMT
Fantastically bad review in Spectator!
|
|
1,846 posts
|
Post by NeilVHughes on Feb 2, 2018 23:44:07 GMT
Enigmatic, well crafted and perfectly paced.
A production with the confidence to allow an all pervasive silence drive the narrative, so much can be said with an expression. Never has the lighting of candles been so absorbing.
As stated previously the last line leaves no ambiguity which is in line with the premise that when you feel something isn’t right then it isn’t.
|
|
2,962 posts
|
Post by crowblack on Feb 5, 2018 0:05:26 GMT
Is that it?
I don't have a problem with slow, and I'm happy for something to take Hamlet-amounts-of-time if I feel it is offering something new, significant or profound but this just didn't.
|
|
853 posts
|
Post by bordeaux on Feb 5, 2018 9:53:58 GMT
Fantastically bad review in Spectator! I think he probably found it a bit difficult. He finds Pinter 'boring and baffling'. He seems to grab the wrong end of a lot of sticks in his reviews.
|
|
2,962 posts
|
Post by crowblack on Feb 5, 2018 11:01:37 GMT
A long three hours and twenty minutes of atmosphere produces loads of false narrative trails resulting in no pay off and only the tiniest of resolutions. I'm not arguing for traditional story telling, I don't require resolution - but I need something to take away from a play and I got nothing here. Foxa is right in her comments above - the central pair of characters, Elias and Jenny, one a neurotic, the other a confused liar, are simply not engaging. No fault to the actors, Tom Mothersdale and Anneika Rose, who are excellent, but their situation, for all the window dressing with dolls and depression, is banal. Like foxa, I cared about the people of the Flick - but not these two. Yes, have to agree with this - the central couple annoyed me, and as soon as the mobile was left on the breakfast table it was clear where that plot was going and I though, well, maybe there'll be a clever or profoud twist on that, because otherwise it's such a mundane cliche, but there wasn't. It felt like a short story played at 16rpm (mixing my formats, but you know what I mean). And there may be a cultural gulf here - many of my neighbours oop north have houses that look like that, so that aspect and the belief in ghosts - many here still do - didn't strike me as jarring in a way they evidently do for a middle-class London or New York audience. Basically, for me, I suppose the guest house and old women felt 'homely' and it was the couple who felt alien. It was atmospheric, yes, but I felt it needed more than that. Btw, this is not about my attention span - I'll happily seek out Tacita Dean stuff and since a teenager have had to go to cinemas on my own because friends walk out of or fall asleep in films I like - Aki Kaurismaki etc.
|
|
5,593 posts
|
Post by lynette on Feb 5, 2018 17:51:01 GMT
I’ve dumped the tix. What with trying to recover from this blimin cold and the length of this play I decided to change my Saturday night into a takeaway movie night at home. Now, what to watch...?
|
|
724 posts
|
Post by Latecomer on Feb 5, 2018 21:17:58 GMT
I’ve dumped the tix. What with trying to recover from this blimin cold and the length of this play I decided to change my Saturday night into a takeaway movie night at home. Now, what to watch...? Hope you feel better soon Lynette, I loved this play....a good companion piece to The Birthday Party for me as it felt a bit Pinteresque at times and I liked the theme of "being watched" that was explored throughout....but long evenings out in winter are not much to my liking and your takeaway movie night sounds lovely! Perhaps Amelie or Little Miss Sunshine (one of my favourites!) I also muchly like Le Gout Des Autres or Chocolat!
|
|
5,593 posts
|
Post by lynette on Feb 6, 2018 21:47:18 GMT
Thank you, latecomer. I'll report back.
|
|
4,575 posts
|
Post by Mark on Feb 6, 2018 22:36:29 GMT
Saw the matinee today and thoroughly enjoyed. My seat in A10 was perfect for this, stage is fairly low and loads of legroom - nothing missed. Haven’t seen The Flick but with all the comments on this thread I really need to now! Marylouise Burke was just wonderful, and I loved how it played out in “real time” for the most part, and then some very obvious theatrical devices such as the clock turning and the opening of the curtains. Loved the way the play ended - that’s all the payoff I needed. The time flew by. My craziest thought towards the end was Her husband is actually dead and is being preserved in the “hidden” room upstairs, hence the reason why she likes to keep the upstairs heating off and goes up check on Jenny.
|
|
|
Post by partytentdown on Feb 7, 2018 12:12:48 GMT
Really enjoyed this show, maybe more than The Flick. I found it very absorbing and the time flew by. I’ve been trying to work out if there was or a wasn’t a paranormal explanation for the spooky goings on, so for anyone who’s seen it, I would REALLY like to discuss.. {Spoiler - click to view} - The piano: played by ghosts or is this the electrical gizmo that George was working on in the basement? - The ‘lost’ room – genuinely a spooky missing room, or an actual room annexed off the other bedroom. As a poster above suggested, is this where she’s keeping the deteriorating body of her husband, hence why she’s so alarmed that Jenny has gone in there (and she wants to keep the heating low)? - What was the spooky language that Eli found in the journal and why was it different from what was read out earlier? Some kind of spell/curse?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 7, 2018 12:23:23 GMT
(Hopefully this reply is non-specific to not require a spoiler tag, but shout at me if you disagree and I'll fix it.) I've seen John described as an uncanny play rather than a supernatural one, so I think while there are mysterious goings-on that aren't easily explained, I think they're very purposefully meant to be low-key and/or ambiguous. Which I kinda love, 'cos if you're searching the internet for evidence that ghosts exist, you don't get perfect videos of spectral figures clearly identifiable as long-deceased persons, you get photographs of "orbs". Evidence of "real" hauntings always tends towards the vague rather than the conclusive, and even if you *want* to believe in ghosts, most evidence can be VERY easily explained away. So we can read what we like into the play, but although your discussion points (among other things) could be used as evidence of spookiness, there's no way they can be considered conclusive.
|
|