5,597 posts
|
Post by lynette on Apr 4, 2018 10:35:29 GMT
'Recent' a relative term 😂depending on how old you are.
|
|
573 posts
|
Post by princeton on Apr 4, 2018 11:16:22 GMT
Looks like lazy subbing from his Hamlet bio to me. Replacing 'for the Almeida' with 'recent theatre'.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 6, 2018 0:29:34 GMT
Are we going to have our First Theatreboard Wedding Parsley and Andrew ? He is no longer attending on the same date as me 😰 Did a trick on me
|
|
3,482 posts
|
Post by showgirl on Apr 6, 2018 3:43:06 GMT
Gutted to have missed out totally when public booking opened as I was in London all day (yes, going to the theatre, of all the ironies) and could see availability on my mobile but it's very fiddly on a small screen. So I left it until I got home, by which time there wasn't a single seat left. And it was the only production of the whole season for which I'd have booked ahead!
I know there's the Donmar version of weekly releases (I do hate this US habit of calling it "Rush") and the chance of returns, but both are a matter of timing and that's another lottery. Hence early reports eagerly awaited, so I can gauge whether to rope in OH to try to book on my behalf - which is always a last resort.
|
|
14 posts
|
Post by markmc on Jun 5, 2018 17:18:16 GMT
Saw this last night (first preview). 3 hours with one 15 minute interview. Having not read the novel or seen the film I went in with no particular expectations (save for the obvious talent involved). I enjoyed the play immensely. Lia Williams gives an excellent performances (comes across as far more sensuous than say Maggie Smith might have done in the film). I was skeptical of Rona Morison at first (her delivery is a bit flat in the beginning) but she certainly comes into her own by the end. The ever reliable Sylvestra Le Touzel offers wonderful support as the brisk Ms McKay. The other actors are equally impressive (even Angus Wright - plays the part of the dullard Mr Lowther to perfection). Staging is sparse and cold as is to be expected in a Presbyterian school in 1930s Edinburgh. The first two rows of the stalls are made up of hard wooden school chairs - be warned. You will feel very stiff after 3 hours. There were quite a few complaints from some of the audience members that there should be cushions on those seats particularly because "they are in the stalls and cost the most" - I had to laugh at that comment... It's only the first preview but the production seemed pretty seamless - could do with a bit of cutting here and there, particularly the ending which I'm not sure had the impact the playwright perhaps intended. The soundscape is effective - lots of bell tolling and choir singing. **** from me.
|
|
3,482 posts
|
Post by showgirl on Jun 5, 2018 18:30:06 GMT
Great news markmc - but in view of the running time, even if it were to come down, I'm SO glad I booked for a matinee!
|
|
29 posts
|
Post by vegas on Jun 5, 2018 20:39:09 GMT
I appreciate the warning about the seats. I'm still packing for my London trip, so I will throw in a fleece or something else soft to sit on. (It might come in handy for the evening performance of Peter Pan as well.)
|
|
90 posts
|
Post by gazzaw13 on Jun 9, 2018 9:54:05 GMT
I saw this last night and the running time has been cut to 2 hours 30 minutes including a 20 minute interval. Fortunately we were not in the school chairs but this still seemed a bit of a slog. The pace seemed slow and the framing device irritating as it comprised frequent very short moments that broke up the main narrative. Ultimately the play has nothing new to say and given its familiarity owing to the film and numerous stage versions, it's all a little predictable. The man next to me in the stalls was asleep after 5 minutes and proceeded to doze for the next 2 hours except for a trip to the bar for another glass of wine at the interval. In truth it's not bad at all and Lia Williams, Sylvestra Le Touzel and Angus Wright give fine performances. 3* from me.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 9, 2018 10:10:29 GMT
The first two rows of the stalls are made up of hard wooden school chairs - be warned. You will feel very stiff after 3 hours. There were quite a few complaints from some of the audience members that there should be cushions on those seats particularly because "they are in the stalls and cost the most" - I had to laugh at that comment... Well that's 'My Night With Reg' for you. Your fellow is right though. I wouldn't want to pay top price to sit on a wooden chair for three hours. You wouldn't do it to the Duchess of Kent so I'm certainly not doing it.
|
|
1,316 posts
|
Post by tmesis on Jun 9, 2018 22:03:07 GMT
I enjoyed this tonight, mainly because of Lia Williams' excellent performance. It's a very big part; she's never really off the stage all evening. She also wears two stunning dresses; red in act one and green in act two - they are the more striking because of the (inevitable) drabness of everyone else. She is also very moving at the end. Good support from all the other actors, particularly the 'girls.' I understand that the spartan set was probably meant to evoke the coldness of the school environment but by the end I found it a bit wearing. It certainly didn't work as elegantly as the simple design for 'The Inheritance.' Oh and the constant tintinnabulation palls.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 10, 2018 12:37:33 GMT
Gosh, they cut it by 30 mins after an early preview! I am impressed. Sounds good. I’m looking forward to seeing it ina couple of weeks when the performances will have grown.
|
|
360 posts
|
Post by lichtie on Jun 11, 2018 11:37:47 GMT
I saw this one last Friday too, but was more impressed than Gazza or his sleeping neighbour. The only bit I felt fell completely flat was the coda. The whole point of the novel is that you never see into the internal head space of Jean Brodie, and the coda slid too far in that direction. It also means you lose the natural end with Sandy talking about MJB in her prime.
By the way, the framing is essentially from the novel, with the change that Sandy's multiple visitors at the nunnery are condensed down into the single unnamed young man who only appears once in reality in the book (but whose appearance is repeated at the end for emphasis to complete the frame).
|
|
1,233 posts
|
Post by Steve on Jun 14, 2018 22:26:44 GMT
Saw this tonight, and agree with Markmc's review. I loved Lia William's performance: Blanche DuBois, with added agency. Some spoilers follow. . . If like me, you missed Lia William's performance of Blanche DuBois, in Streetcar, at the Gate, this goes a long way to making up for that. Disgard your memories of Maggie Smith's unlikeable high-pitched nasal clippy pernickety Jean Brodie. Here, Williams is a warm and whispery, huskily seductive, albeit still destructive, Jean Brodie. She exudes all the poise and romantic delusion of a Blanche DuBois, although lacking the tragic backstory that Tennessee William's gave Blanche to explain her narcissistic romanticism, as well as a diabolical electric antagonist, like Stanley Kowalski, she is more a character to be analysed than to empathise with. Though I liked William's Jean Brodie far more than Maggie Smith's, the fact is that her rigid romanticism and fascistic leanings are not explained, merely asserted, so I was emotionally at arms ' length. All the ensemble are excellent, with Kit Young and Rona Morison confirming themselves as actors to look out for, but it is Harrower and Williams' vision of Jean Brodie as a Blanche DuBois type that makes this interesting. 3 and a half stars from me.
|
|
539 posts
|
Post by jek on Jun 15, 2018 7:01:55 GMT
I enjoyed this too yesterday afternoon. Not much to add to what has already been written here except to say that I thought Angus Wright was particularly impressive as Gordon Lowther - much less a ridiculous figure than I remember him being portrayed as by Gordon Jackson in the film. Good also to see one of the 'Derry Girls' doing something different. And - as a fan of Spark and with an interest in her religious ideas - I enjoyed the framing device.
|
|
|
Post by MrsCondomine on Jun 15, 2018 15:13:00 GMT
So... Nicola Coughlan is upset that her character was described as an "overweight little girl"... seems like a stupid hill to die on, particularly as she's not exactly a size 8.
|
|
2,543 posts
|
Post by n1david on Jun 15, 2018 15:24:16 GMT
BBC4 documentary on Muriel Spark next week may be of interest:
The Many Primes of Muriel Spark, BBC4 Weds 20 Jun 9-10pm
|
|
53 posts
|
Post by harrie on Jun 15, 2018 15:25:28 GMT
It doesn’t matter if she’s a size 4 or a size 22, a reviewer shouldn’t comment on an actor’s weight
|
|
|
Post by asfound on Jun 15, 2018 16:01:38 GMT
It doesn’t matter if she’s a size 4 or a size 22, a reviewer shouldn’t comment on an actor’s weight What about the character's weight, if it's relevant to the description of said character?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 15, 2018 16:13:07 GMT
Unless it's something as unsubtle as Neil LaBute's Fat Pig, I find it difficult to imagine even a purposefully-written-as-overweight-character's physique being worth commenting on and/or pointing out in a review. The production and the performances are FAAAAAR more important than what any of the actors look like.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 15, 2018 16:42:42 GMT
The production and the performances are FAAAAAR more important than what any of the actors look like. What the what now? Have you been drinking @baemax? What kind of insanity is this? The performances are more important than what the actor looks like. I ask you...
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 15, 2018 19:08:35 GMT
It doesn’t matter if she’s a size 4 or a size 22, a reviewer shouldn’t comment on an actor’s weight What about the character's weight, if it's relevant to the description of said character? I was really uncomfortable with the "fat" jokes in Hangmen by Martin McDonagh. It made me wonder how an actor copes when an audience laughs at their physical appearance.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 16, 2018 12:14:30 GMT
Post removed, pending moderator review. This seems like a strange paradox... Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
|
|
5,597 posts
|
Post by lynette on Jun 16, 2018 22:22:45 GMT
Meh. Apart from a patch in the middle I thought Lia Williams was fine. In the middle she started a parody of herself. There were two points when she and Mr Lowther actually were laughing not in the play. Methinks. He dropped the ring. Then at some other point. To be honest I was sitting too far away to see, hear or care. I was in Row E the new row which is very uncomfortable because your feet don’t touch the floor. Well mine didn’t and I’m no shorty. So we took the cushions that were for the bums on the school chairs and used them to make footstools as it were. I was at the end of the row and the sight lines were dire. . I couldn’t hear quite a lot because the actor was facing to the back..pretty well all of them. The criticised actor playing Joyce was by far the best, accent, demeanour, clarity, everything so poo to whoever criticised her. Lots of walking in, walking out, moving chairs, singing a bit, catching characters as they were leaving and then they turned round, a bit amateur I thought. For me no sense of a confined classroom. I could not see the layout with chairs for the first rows of the audience so it had no impact at all. Lots of people went for cushions for the second half. The ushers said they had complaints. Excuse me but isn’t the first rule of any place taking your money to make it comfortable?
Now to important matters: The toilets. Yes, here she goes again but I am sick of standing in along line for the loo when the fellas trot in and out, in and out. They should remove the urinals from the men's ( isn’t just saying men's so from a bygone age now most places are embracing all gender toilets) add a couple of toilets and then have all genders use both. Not difficult. Actually I asked the front of house to allow the women to use the men's but he copped out because I was a bit bolshie about it. What, moi? People who design theatres out there- just put in as many toilets as you can and do not have restrictions on who uses them. Simples.
|
|
562 posts
|
Post by jadnoop on Jun 16, 2018 22:54:48 GMT
They should remove the urinals from the men's ( isn’t just saying men's so from a bygone age now most places are embracing all gender toilets) add a couple of toilets and then have all genders use both. The idea of removing urinals and making all toilets unisex has been mentioned a few times on this board. While I definitely agree that changes need to be made to deal with the ridiculous imbalance of queueing times, in my opinion removing the urinals isn't the best way forward. I don't say this because of issues of sexual equality, but simply practical factors. While less talked about than emissions, reducing water consumption is an important part of the sustainability agenda. While there are measures to reduce the water demand in toilets (low flush, water recycling, rainwater collection etc. [the latter two apply not just to WCs though]), urinals still generally use less than sit-down toilets. The other thing is time; part of the reason that the gents' moves quickly is that using a urinal is generally faster than a sit down toilet. My feeling is that a better approach would be to change the numbers of male vs female toilets in design standards (or use urinals alongside unisex toilets). According to this (https://www.washroomcubicles.co.uk/how-many-toilets-do-you-need/#sports_entertainment ) it seems that a 1000-seater theatre in the UK expecting 50:50 male:female should have 26 female WCs; 3 male WCs and 11 urinals. I haven't been in a ladies loos but I suspect that these numbers don't match with reality.
|
|
2,389 posts
|
Post by peggs on Jun 16, 2018 23:10:23 GMT
I missed lynette?! That's what comes from slumming it upstairs though if my the sounds of it I had a comfier seat and better view.
|
|
888 posts
|
Post by lonlad on Jun 17, 2018 0:19:32 GMT
Are Lia Williams and Angus Wright an item?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 17, 2018 0:41:29 GMT
I think in the case where the jokes are scripted and the actor knew what they were taking on before they took the job then it's very different. A play is a fiction in which anything can happen, the story is served by the words the author thinks fit. Reality is a review taking place in real life and we have the duty to moderate our commentary on the story we are being told. One is a creative expression which must be free, the other is a commentary which should take a more balanced and carefully worded approach. Erm, does that make any sense? My brain is now hurting. This doesn't quite resolve the issue for me. I hated the audience laughing at the "publican's fat daughter jokes." I didn't find them funny. I think performers of that size might take those roles because they don't get offered much. This is very much a "looksist" industry.
|
|
1,018 posts
|
Post by andrew on Jun 17, 2018 0:45:01 GMT
Looks like a gang of us were there. I swanned past the downstairs pre-show ladies queue which was quite substantial. Then past the upstairs one at the interval. I didn't want to look like I was enjoying the lack of queue as I walked in and out. I obviously was enjoying it though. It's great being a man, I'd recommend it. I won't wade in to the "scrap the urinals" saga other than to say that it doesn't make sense to get rid of the most efficient form of toileting, what you want is more toilets for ladies (and anyone else etc etc), not fewer toilets for everyone. Men at urinals are faster than men in stalls, and urinals take up a fraction of the space. I don't really understand why you'd want to make it less efficient and force men into bulky cubicles when you could be using the space (as is often done) for more stalls for ladies, although I fully understand why you want to make it more equal.
Mild spoilers generally follow.
I was upstairs in B11 and had a fine view. I could see people struggling though, and a few seats downstairs had issues with a light shining quite brightly at them, a woman popped her sunglasses on at one stage. I didn't like the lighting very much, it was quite fussy, and honestly if you've got patrons that can't see the action because of a light you've hung for significant portions of the show, you have erred. I did like the bells though. They really do 'strike', it's not a speaker inside. That's the sort of theatre gimmick I'm into, more bells please.
I really really liked this, I've never seen or read it which I think always gives one an advantage over wiser and more experienced people of culture. I had a great time, Lia was at times mildly over the top in doing her own-special-thing. She has enormous stage presence and commands the character. I disagree with a lack of development, I really enjoyed piecing together as things went by more and more about Brodie. You start off with a sense of this mildly inspiring renegade teacher and by the end even without the denouement you have a much more complex, sad and disturbing figure to reckon with.
Something about the actors and the way the "book" scene is written was really difficult to watch, I'm not even sure what it was I was just mildly overcome with sadness. Did someone say childhood trauma? Someone definitely said that. No no, I'm fine, it's hayfever. Nicola Coughlan was a real winner, I forgot until midway through the first act the whole thing about the reviewer, and then I couldn't believe that that was what he chose to comment on. She was brilliant. This is possibly the first thing I've seen Angus Wright in, where I don't wonder why he got the role. There's a particular section where he has a moment of affection with Lia which was just beautifully handled. And on that line I thought there was a lot of very well directed pieces throughout the play.
Anyway I had high hopes and they were met. I'd probably give it five stars. For context I think I've given out 5 stars (in the review journal thats in my head) up to twice so far this year. Reading around I'm slightly off kilter with general opinion, and I wonder if it's because I'm new to this material, or possibly because I think Lia Williams is something near a kind of stage goddess and I'd like her to play me in a show about my life. If we get the budget, we'll have her flip a coin at the start with Juliet - oh that's a different show? Never mind.
|
|
2,389 posts
|
Post by peggs on Jun 17, 2018 8:30:58 GMT
I missed andrew too? And I stared at those bells as assumed they were for more than show but couldn't see them ring so thought I must have been wrong, I'm blaming poor eye sight. I was completely new to this too which which think benefited me too.i thought it was one thing and then it turned out to be something rather different. From the side circle didn't see how lighting was done and could block some audience members so perhaps for once upstairs was not so bad. Really enjoyed the cast and thought Lia Williams was excellent. Plus I was on the end of the row so had first run to the toilets and a nice chat with the lady next to me, always a bonus.
|
|
1,018 posts
|
Post by andrew on Jun 17, 2018 11:15:40 GMT
The bells have got a contraption inside that pushes a rod sharply onto the inside of the bell, so they don't need to be 'rung' to be 'struck', if that makes sense. They look like they're doing nothing, but I spent long enough inspecting them to ascertain their dark mysterious truth. Shame to have missed you peggs!
|
|