3,472 posts
|
Post by showgirl on May 15, 2019 4:43:07 GMT
OFAH?
|
|
|
Post by dontdreamit on May 15, 2019 5:47:42 GMT
|
|
1,103 posts
|
Post by mallardo on May 15, 2019 6:37:42 GMT
Tennessee Williams wrote some dark plays but none darker than this one. As befits an Orpheus play, it is set in Hell, the rural deep south where mob violence seethes just under the surface and where years before an Italian immigrant (known locally as The Wop) was burned out and murdered for selling liquor to African Americans (not the term they use, of course). The Wop's daughter, Lady, is our Eurydice, still trapped in the town that destroyed her life and awaiting rescue from an Orpheus, in this case Val Xavier, an itinerant guitar strummer with a way with the ladies. Val, just turned 30 and looking for a restart in his wasted life, has his own issues. And then there's Carol, wild daughter of local gentry, whose role seems to be to force the past into the present for both Lady and Val. It's a potent trio, both literally and symbolically.
And then there's the townspeople who provide the menacing milieu; gossiping, back-stabbing women and brutal, xenophobic men - a cross section of southern "society" that could not be any more damning. And which, needless to say, still resonates today.
It all plays out with a kind of horrible inevitability that works well, the tension being continually ratcheted up, in Tamara Harvey's spare but effective production. The three leads are all excellent, especially Seth Numrich's Val - not just convincing but virtually ideal. Hattie Morahan, although not very Italian, matches him with her intensity and her rage and her desperate neediness and Jemima Rooper is equally fine as the frantic Carol.
It's not an easy play to love - the darkness can be overpowering - but it's gripping theatre, an experience only Tennessee Williams can provide.
|
|
984 posts
|
Post by nash16 on May 15, 2019 9:03:37 GMT
Ohmygoodness. Went to this last night thanks to theatremonkey' £10 offer.
It is SO bad.
Like, shockingly bad.
Like, am dram bad. And that is doing a huge disservice to the good folk who do am dram. At least they do things like mostly get the casting right, and do a nice set, and some lighting.
Whereas this.
We started to laugh at points in the first half, then after the interval discussion, we just out and out giggled our way through the second half.
How has Tamara Harvey managed to miscast it so badly? Rooper is awful. Morahan has moments but is out of her character depth. Did Helen Mirren really play that part to acclaim? And much older than Hattie one would presume?
Why are speeches meant to be delivered to other characters instead delivered out to us as monologues? Did TW really want the stage directions to be read out?
Why has Harvey picked such an uneven play and not even addressed that is is already problematic and tried to fix it? She's had weeks of rehearsal and weeks up in Clywd too and it's appalling.
Accents are from everywhere. Acting styles from everywhere. Some styles we'd never even seen before and we go to the theatre a lot.
The phone acting alone is hilariously bad. And we never thought we'd say that about a play.
They've managed to not have chemistry between the two leads, or any sexual frisson, or desire. Well done.
Did Seth Numrich realise/did they tell him that he is playing Orpheus? Did Tamara sit down with them and discuss that they were meant to be playing these characters with, well, character?
Numrich sings 2 songs, straying dangerously close to the "Death of a Salesman Musical" down the road on The Cut. Again, just because you've cast members who can sing...
The set is...the lighting is...
They even make a few characters read out the stage directions to inform us what they haven't built in this set design...
The production photos in the foyer, do look at them. Especially the one of Jemima doing some bad acting AND bad phone acting all in one image.
The creative team were sat very happily around a big table in the foyer at the interval, smiling and laughing, seemingly unaware of what they've created, or haven't bothered to create.
The reviews are going to be such a shock for them.
It's Too Close To The Sun. But with less songs (only a few less).
Whatever you do, if you are desperate to see it, pray that theatremonkey still has some £10 ones going, or get on "those" lists, as they may even crop up on there very soon.
Wow.
Wow wow wow wow.
|
|
614 posts
|
Post by jamb0r on May 15, 2019 12:08:49 GMT
Caught the first performance (at the Menier) last week, and thought everything about it was just 'OK'. Performances were fine but nothing particularly noteworthy, the set did what it needed to do (barely), the lighting was great in parts and bad in others. I wouldn't say it was particularly terrible overall, but I won't be telling people to rush to see it. Feel like I got my £10 worth, but glad I didn't pay more.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 15, 2019 12:33:05 GMT
So, a rave, a rant and a vanilla response. I'm inclined to agree with nash16, swinging it to 2x rants.
|
|
4,631 posts
|
Post by Phantom of London on May 15, 2019 12:38:10 GMT
What is the running time please?
|
|
614 posts
|
Post by jamb0r on May 15, 2019 12:49:14 GMT
It was a little under 2 hours 40 minutes I think.
1st half: 1 hour 40 20 minute interval 2nd half: 40 min.
My glutes have only just about regained feeling almost a week later after the 1 hour 40 minute first half on those awful Menier seats.
|
|
371 posts
|
Post by popcultureboy on May 16, 2019 0:02:45 GMT
They have moved the interval now. It's an hour 15 minutes first half, 20 minute interval and then an hour second half, so now running at 2 hours 35 all in.
|
|
|
Post by orchidman on May 17, 2019 15:00:15 GMT
It's not a great Williams play, that's the main shortcoming, the acting and direction are fine.
|
|
|
Post by missthelma on May 18, 2019 19:07:11 GMT
Oh my. This really is not very good. At all.
There's a gaping hole in the production and I'm not sure if it's the writing or this particular presentation of it. I saw the 89 version with Vanessa Redgrave and both film versions and don't remember reacting this way It generates a feeling of 'meh' rather than anything more passionate. No attempt seems to have been made to insert or highlight any relevance to more contemporary thoughts. I have always been a fan of Williams but his gallery of Southern grotesques and eccentrics is exposed here with nothing to back them up. Neither story or set to be fair. The latter appears to have been gathered at a 50% off day at B&Q and features cheap garden furniture and virtually nothing else. Watching the characters is cringe making in the way that we view 1970's sitcoms now, it just feels so out dated. Granted Williams was writing 60 years ago about mostly a time 20 years before that but if Rosmersholm, All My Sons, even The American Clock can feel to have resonance to a modern audience, why does this feel frozen in amber like one of the bugs in Jurassic Park?
The two leads are actually quite miscast. Hattie Morahan, so good in A Doll's House appears to be floundering here and reads a bit young for the role. Seth Numrich brings no sense of danger to the role of the drifter who is stirring up the small town. The scenes between them which should crackle a little bit feel empty, like biting into a doughnut that has no jam. It cheats the audience. Jemima Rooper was very good but it feels like she is from a different (and better) play, she is costumed and made up to look like a slightly deranged over the hill drag queen. There should be a more appropriate way of cluing us into this character than this which rings false.
Disappointingly undiverse cast which if used may have helped to off set the feeling of this being hauled out of mothballs.
Quite a muted response from a 3/4 full audience who were very Chichester (Pale, stale and failing)
Having broken one of my cardinal rules and returned to the Chocolate Starfish today (what can I tell you, interesting cast and cheap ticket) I can report that it safely remains in the top 2 most uncomfortable theatres in London. After the first act my backside felt like I had been sat on jagged concrete and I can only thank the theatre Gods, that this act is reduced from earlier reports. Also the auditorium remains a death trap with everyone having to file out of a single doorway barely wide enough for one. Today was made especially fun with the abundance of sticks etc and the general well being of the assembled folk. Praise the Lord there was no attempt at an evacuation here, we would all have been doomed.
|
|
|
Post by learfan on May 18, 2019 20:02:29 GMT
Oh my. This really is not very good. At all. There's a gaping hole in the production and I'm not sure if it's the writing or this particular presentation of it. I saw the 89 version with Vanessa Redgrave and both film versions and don't remember reacting this way It generates a feeling of 'meh' rather than anything more passionate. No attempt seems to have been made to insert or highlight any relevance to more contemporary thoughts. I have always been a fan of Williams but his gallery of Southern grotesques and eccentrics is exposed here with nothing to back them up. Neither story or set to be fair. The latter appears to have been gathered at a 50% off day at B&Q and features cheap garden furniture and virtually nothing else. Watching the characters is cringe making in the way that we view 1970's sitcoms now, it just feels so out dated. Granted Williams was writing 60 years ago about mostly a time 20 years before that but if Rosmersholm, All My Sons, even The American Clock can feel to have resonance to a modern audience, why does this feel frozen in amber like one of the bugs in Jurassic Park? The two leads are actually quite miscast. Hattie Morahan, so good in A Doll's House appears to be floundering here and reads a bit young for the role. Seth Numrich brings no sense of danger to the role of the drifter who is stirring up the small town. The scenes between them which should crackle a little bit feel empty, like biting into a doughnut that has no jam. It cheats the audience. Jemima Rooper was very good but it feels like she is from a different (and better) play, she is costumed and made up to look like a slightly deranged over the hill drag queen. There should be a more appropriate way of cluing us into this character than this which rings false. Disappointingly undiverse cast which if used may have helped to off set the feeling of this being hauled out of mothballs. Quite a muted response from a 3/4 full audience who were very Chichester (Pale, stale and failing) Having broken one of my cardinal rules and returned to the Chocolate Starfish today (what can I tell you, interesting cast and cheap ticket) I can report that it safely remains in the top 2 most uncomfortable theatres in London. After the first act my backside felt like I had been sat on jagged concrete and I can only thank the theatre Gods, that this act is reduced from earlier reports. Also the auditorium remains a death trap with everyone having to file out of a single doorway barely wide enough for one. Today was made especially fun with the abundance of sticks etc and the general well being of the assembled folk. Praise the Lord there was no attempt at an evacuation here, we would all have been doomed. Yes ive wondered about the exit issue, especially with the demographic of their clientele. Cant quite believe they got a safety certificate.
|
|
3,074 posts
|
Post by david on May 18, 2019 22:49:16 GMT
So, a rave, a rant and a vanilla response. I'm inclined to agree with nash16 , swinging it to 2x rants. Now swinging it to x3 rants after seeing it tonight. This did very little except leaving me frustrated as I walked out of the theatre tonight (though other patrons seemed to have gotten something out the piece from overheard discussions). I’ve seen some great TW productions both at the Manc REX and in the WE, unfortunately this isn’t one of them. I knew it would be a bleak play and not really a fun night out at the theatre, but this production just left me cold from start to finish. nash16 sums up my thoughts perfectly. I just couldn’t invest any emotional energy into any of the characters and the casting choices for the female leads was just baffling. I was speaking to one lady post show who agreed with me that this was the biggest issue here. The ladies just appeared to be too young for their respective roles (Jemima Roper as an example) and I just couldn’t see the characters that they were portraying as real people. Carol Royal did manage to bring some depth to her character of Vee Talbot and Seth Numeric was ok as Valentine, but I didn’t get that sense of chemistry between the two actors portraying this forbidden relationship. Overall a 1* production and the first disappointment I’ve had visiting the MCF. Hopefully my next visit to see “Bridges” will be a better one.
|
|
3,069 posts
|
Post by Rory on May 18, 2019 23:03:15 GMT
I saw the Donmar version with Helen Mirren, Stuart Townsend and Saskia Reeves back in 2000 and remember liking it. This new production seems to be dividing opinion in a way the Donmar one didn't.
|
|
|
Post by londonpostie on May 18, 2019 23:13:09 GMT
It was certainly lyrical but I did come away not knowing what TW was aiming for or at with this. It would be interesting to see a clearer vision, if that is what was at the Donmar.
Passion/desire seemed a strong thread in this but somehow it wasn't happening.
to be fair, there are plenty worse ways to spend a tenner in London on a Saturday night.
|
|
3,472 posts
|
Post by showgirl on May 19, 2019 4:14:04 GMT
Sigh. I should've trusted my instinct on this one and Tennessee W is definitely back on my "Never Again" list and won't be getting any more chances from me. The positive reviews from the Theatr Clwyd part of the run and the £10 ticket deal (thank goodness I paid no more!) persuaded me to give it a go but not only is this type of play clearly not to my taste but the production itself seemed so lame and lacklustre that the enthusiam for it baffles me.
I was at yesterday's matinee and when I wasn't nodding off the first act seemed interminable so I left at the interval. The disappointing part was that I was by then so utterly dispirited and disappointed that I couldn't face hanging around for the best part of 3 hours until the evening show I had booked, so after trying in vain to pysch myself up for it, I simply went home instead. Obviously my own decision, a waste of money and time and I won't have another chance to see Ain't Misbehavin, but sometimes you just aren't in the mood and I wasn't.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 19, 2019 9:33:46 GMT
So, a rave, a rant and a vanilla response. I'm inclined to agree with nash16 , swinging it to 2x rants. Now swinging it to x3 rants after seeing it tonight. 4, taking the views of missthelma into account.
|
|
1,936 posts
|
Post by wickedgrin on May 19, 2019 10:29:46 GMT
The Menier is a theatre I have vowed never to go back to - very uncomfortable and expensive for what it is!
|
|
1,936 posts
|
Post by wickedgrin on May 19, 2019 10:34:34 GMT
Quite a muted response from a 3/4 full audience who were very Chichester (Pale, stale and failing) LOVED this remark - so accurate and I consider myself proud to be pale, stale and failing!!!
|
|
1,197 posts
|
Post by theatrefan77 on May 19, 2019 11:54:06 GMT
I don't think this was that bad. Not a perfect production but at least it kept my attention until the end.
Maybe it's just because I love Tennessee Williams work and I always find interesting aspects even in his less successful plays.
I also quite like the film version with Brando and Magnani
|
|
3,472 posts
|
Post by showgirl on May 19, 2019 12:42:07 GMT
Quite a muted response from a 3/4 full audience who were very Chichester (Pale, stale and failing) LOVED this remark - so accurate and I consider myself proud to be pale, stale and failing!!! Indeed, but not only the audience....
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 19, 2019 19:43:39 GMT
Quite a muted response from a 3/4 full audience who were very Chichester ( Pale, stale and failing) LOVED this remark - so accurate and I consider myself proud to be pale, stale and failing!!! Ohhh, I thought they were talking about the show!
|
|
|
Post by missthelma on May 20, 2019 10:31:39 GMT
To be fair it could apply to either the production or the audience!!
|
|
227 posts
|
Post by barelyathletic on May 22, 2019 10:58:47 GMT
I saw this last night and have to say I am surprised by the negative reaction. It's the third time I've seen this play and, though it's not classic Tennessee Williams, I think it has moments of real poetic beauty and is a fine example of a well made play. Yes, it takes a while to shift out of first gear but, once it gets going, it's a compelling drama that I found constantly gripping and engaging.
I liked the simplicity of the staging here, which pushes focus onto the actors, nearly all of whom give excellent performances. I wasn't sure about Seth Numrich at first but, rather as his character grows throughout the play, he became engaging and sympathetic and oh, so charming. His chemistry with Hattie Morahan was quite powerful and I thought she was so much better here than in A Doll's House, strong yet vulnerable, and her grief and pain at the final revelation was very moving. I really believed in them and felt that their story was tragic rather than melodramatic, as it so easily could have been.
And most of the supporting cast were top rate. Terrifying but believably human. Special mention to Ian Porter as Sheriff Talbot, Mark Meadows as Jabe Torrance and Carrie Quinlan as a chillingly icy Nurse Porter. I've always liked Jemima Rooper, who gives a typically strong performance, though I think she is slightly miscast as the fey and damaged Carol Cutrere.
Valentine Hanson's performance of Williams's stage directions I felt was a very effective touch. Tennessee Williams is, I believe, such a great writer that even these moments have a genuine descriptive beauty, adding to the sense of storytelling and the dreamlike quality of this production. And they perfectly set the scene without adding unnecessary clutter to the design.
Only the slightly odd decision to turn monologues into soliloquies jarred with me slightly. But even that would have worked if it had been followed through with a bit more confidence.
Atmospheric and constantly involving, this was a fine production of a lesser known Tennessee Williams play that took me into another time and place, and one that was warmly received by an appreciative audience. Four stars.
|
|
1,846 posts
|
Post by NeilVHughes on May 22, 2019 11:05:57 GMT
took me into another time and place I saw this last week and found it quite intense and a fair representation of the setting and glad that there was no effort to make it current.
|
|
4,591 posts
|
Post by Someone in a tree on May 23, 2019 10:17:28 GMT
I thought this was rather good in its slow burner kinda way.
The themes of the play are really strong but I can't help feeling the script could be shorter and tighter. Also the production needed to have some dirt in it. Dirt on the floor, table clothes and blood on the walls it was all too clean and generally lacking some umph.
|
|
|
Post by learfan on Jun 1, 2019 22:16:53 GMT
I quite liked this. Morahan excellent. Intense atmosphere especially second half. Not quite full house.
|
|
|
Post by sfsusan on Jun 12, 2019 22:41:30 GMT
I thought this was rather good in its slow burner kinda way. The themes of the play are really strong but I can't help feeling the script could be shorter and tighter. Also the production needed to have some dirt in it. Dirt on the floor, table clothes and blood on the walls it was all too clean and generally lacking some umph. I think the place was appropriately shabby and run-down, but I don't think it would have been dirty. The owner of the mercantile wasn't slovenly or lazy, so why would she be opening a new confectionary with dirty tablecloths, much less be running a general store that had blood on the walls? I think the phrase "genteel poverty" comes to mind... people who were poor, but still proud enough to keep up appearances and aspire to more. That certainly fits Lady's background as the daughter of a (briefly) successful, hard-working immigrant and her aspirations in opening the confectionary. (I agree about the script, though... the first act pretty much beat the main points into the ground.) And sitting in the front row puts you pretty much right on the edge of some loud and violent action. I had my fingers stuck in my ears for much of the second act. All in all, it kept me interested throughout, but 'interested', not 'engaged' or 'enthralled'. And I see what people mean about the glacial pace of leaving after the show. Although I did have time to look around and saw another, emergency exit. Oh, and the seats... better than the Globe, but only because of the back rests.
|
|
4,591 posts
|
Post by Someone in a tree on Jun 13, 2019 6:54:12 GMT
More dirt to represent the evil townsfolk and the environment the couple are trapped in. It is Hades after all.
|
|
|
Post by sfsusan on Jun 13, 2019 13:41:16 GMT
More dirt to represent the evil townsfolk and the environment the couple are trapped in. It is Hades after all. I think they downplayed that aspect throughout this production. (Although I've never seen or read the play, so don't know how explicit that was made in other productions.)
|
|