404 posts
|
Post by dlevi on Feb 17, 2018 19:54:58 GMT
I booked because of Ms Atwell and Mr Riley. The play is a toothless Mamet wannabe. All the characters were assholes and at about the one hour point I almost shouted out : Fod God's sake why don't all of you just shut up! The play is slick but meaningless. The audience response was more than polite with one woman in the front row standing and cheering. The actors all avoided her gaze.
|
|
404 posts
|
Post by dlevi on Feb 14, 2018 9:37:41 GMT
Cal McCrystal's joyous comic take on this G & S stalwart is a delight from start to finish. Beautifully sung and the ENO orchestra sounds as sumptuous as ever. And then there are the laughs which are plentiful and just plain silly. A 21st century production to rival the great Jonathan Miller productions from the 80's ( or was it the 70's?) Just go and have a great time.
|
|
404 posts
|
Post by dlevi on Feb 13, 2018 9:11:51 GMT
I couldn't agree more. This is a quietly stunning production of a beautiful play. Perfectly pitched and simply exquisite.
|
|
404 posts
|
Post by dlevi on Feb 11, 2018 12:23:40 GMT
I saw this on Friday evening and thought it was tremendous, only sour note was Rob Howell's setting, I read his essay in the programme which was fascinating insofar as describing his process . The problem was that what was on stage simply didn't make sense - not the layout of the house, not the see-through walls, or the lack of a ceiling. That aside I found that in a lifetime of seeing productions of this play -maybe ten or eleven ( including film versions) I've rarely seen one so beautifully balanced. And Ms Manville especially finds both the weakness of Mary Tyrone and the fierceness of an addict. Just great!
|
|
404 posts
|
Post by dlevi on Feb 10, 2018 16:37:35 GMT
This has to rank as one of the worst plays I've seen in a long long time. I don't think Mr Ayckbourn has anything left to say. The last few plays have been long plays about small subjects but because he is one of our great playwrights and men of the theatre I've been willing to cut him some slack. But now that's over. There was no drama in this play - there was no "play" to speak of. In the programme notes he says that it was written first as a novel and I believe it. Unlike some of the other posters on here who admired the performances and the production values, I found everything to be of a low standard. This is a disaster as far as I'm concerned and if Edinburgh was as bad as the notices from there seemed to be then they should've cancelled it.
|
|
404 posts
|
Post by dlevi on Feb 9, 2018 14:26:35 GMT
Oh I'm so glad you believe me. Obviously without the validation of random internet people my entire career and research are totally invalidated. And really? people offer a different public persona to the one they really have. Wow, thanks for the enlightenment I never would have known. So as much as you 'believe me' clearly I'm stupid to believe what I was told, and you were right all along. Got it. Sorry you took my comment as being snarky. I wasn't being snarky.
|
|
404 posts
|
Post by dlevi on Feb 9, 2018 11:16:30 GMT
Where'd you hear that? Like any playwright who has achieved great critical success but is less commcercially successful than many of his contemporaries CRAVES commercial acceptance. ( the one thing he doesn't have). When Caroline initially premiered off-Broadway it was Kushner who led the charge to corralling producers to move it to Broadway. I don't believe he's taking the lead this time, but I do believe that part of the plan of the Hampstead transfer was to incorporate a move to the West End should the acclaim (critical and audience) continue at the level it was at Chichester. I hate to be 'that person' but the unfortunate answer (for you) is 'when he said it to me himself during an in-depth interview about his work' I believe you. But many of our most esteemed creative people have a public persona of not seeking commercial success and being satisfied with their share of critical esteem but privately (and through their various representatives) send quite a different signal. (and the opposite is true of those who are popular commercially but critically reviled (no names oh ok one: Frank Wildhorn) .
|
|
404 posts
|
Post by dlevi on Feb 9, 2018 10:45:25 GMT
Anecdotally too Kushner isn't that much of a fan of pushing for commercial productions- he hates the gamble element of it- so again I don't think it's something 'Caroline' needs. Where'd you hear that? Like any playwright who has achieved great critical success but is less commcercially successful than many of his contemporaries CRAVES commercial acceptance. ( the one thing he doesn't have). When Caroline initially premiered off-Broadway it was Kushner who led the charge to corralling producers to move it to Broadway. I don't believe he's taking the lead this time, but I do believe that part of the plan of the Hampstead transfer was to incorporate a move to the West End should the acclaim (critical and audience) continue at the level it was at Chichester.
|
|
404 posts
|
Post by dlevi on Feb 9, 2018 9:20:23 GMT
I saw this last night and while it's well done , it's pretty much a typical Royal Court Upstairs script except perhaps with more heart. If you like this sort of play, then you'll like this. If like me , you're tired of "lost youth being trapped by society and making the same mistakes their parents did" plays then you can skip this. Or you could even pretend to have seen it and no one would be the wiser.
|
|
404 posts
|
Post by dlevi on Feb 2, 2018 6:25:56 GMT
Critics weren't invited to review the plays, but they were allowed to come to see them. I believe that is still (pretty much) the case. But most critics passed on that because their diaries are extremely full to begin with. Maybe they're now allowing them to review the plays simply because it gives Hampstead more press attention especially in light of the relative failure ( and dullness) of their more recent offerings ( Gloria being the notable exception) .
|
|
404 posts
|
Post by dlevi on Jan 28, 2018 19:07:04 GMT
I've no problem with minimal sets and Lord knows I'm sympathetic to small budgets, but these were particularly cheap and uninventive. I haven't seen any of the reviews. I'll seek them out.
|
|
404 posts
|
Post by dlevi on Jan 28, 2018 11:01:00 GMT
I caught this show yesterday because I thought :this might be good. I was wrong. The play a bad play not knowing if it wants to be a serious play about "outsourcing" emotional and literal or if its a sitcom about a neurotic woman and her dysfunctional relationships with everyone she encounters. Worse than that was the quality of the production from the cheap set, the lousy and relentless musical underscoring and the amatuerish performances to the of-so- dim lighting. The Park Theatre is usually pretty choosy about the shows they book in but this was a loser.
|
|
404 posts
|
Post by dlevi on Jan 21, 2018 8:55:41 GMT
I saw this yesterday afternoon ( Todays tix £29 ?) row H ( 2/3 full) and while there was a lot to admire in terms of design and to a certain extent performances, I found the whole thing to be rather dull . Especially the music which seemed to be doodling around the idea of melodies rather than committing to them. It was like a whole evening of the Parlour Songs from Sweeney Todd. The climb over moment was terrific though. The rest of it? I'd just say it was a disappointment .
|
|
404 posts
|
Post by dlevi on Jan 7, 2018 10:58:02 GMT
I caught this yesterday afternoon and didn't hate it, but I didn't like it much either. I couldn't tell if we were supposed to laugh at it or with it, and when it was suspenseful Richard Jones direction would do something to dissapate the suspense. I've always been a fan of the original Twilight Zone series ( the various re-boots? not so much) so I didn't see the point in mocking them ( if that's what they were doing). The confrontation scene in The Shelter sequence was a disaster dramaturgically in trying to make the whole enterprise "relavent" and the American accents were a disaster. I'm fearful when the Almeida strikes a bargain with commercial producers and comes up with something mediocre.
|
|
404 posts
|
Post by dlevi on Dec 13, 2017 23:53:10 GMT
I saw this tonight and found it powerful, insightful and really wonderfully staged and effectively written. I felt the enviornment worked and that the performances were all strong and forceful. There's a bit of emotional discomfort in watching something so real and that we know is based in contemporary fact from the relative comfort of a theatre where we can have interval drinks and delicious snacks while these people suffer, but the fact is it's deeply affective political theatre.
|
|
404 posts
|
Post by dlevi on Dec 12, 2017 23:55:51 GMT
I saw this tonight and was completely baffled by what was on stage. It's charmless, joyless and witless. Yes there are a few lovely visuals but seriously, what were supposed to take away from this? That pain makes us human? Merry Christmas kids! The performances while sincere, failed to create any sympathy for any of the characters. Now I haven't seen the film since I was very very young a long time ago, and it wasn't one I remember liking, but it couldn't have been as dull as this ( it was only 88 minutes long and this ( not counting the interval) is a little over two hours. The sheer lack of musical numbers also made the show seem off-kilter. And I know the National has its budget troubles but seriously the black spare stage doesn't look great, it looks as if we're waiting for the set arrive. Bleah.
|
|
404 posts
|
Post by dlevi on Dec 11, 2017 8:47:23 GMT
I finally caught up with this on Saturday. Having seen the original over-bloated Broadway version (which defeated its great cast) I was curious to see it now scaled down and in a smaller venue. What was once over-produced and headache inducing is now a mildly enjoyable mediocre musical which could've been written in the sixties, the kind that are harmless but forgettable. The physical production looks cheap, the costumes feel rented and the sound is tinny. There are laughs to be had, mostly from Ross Noble and a few from Lesley Joseph ( who seems to be doing an exact recreation of Andrea Martin's Broadway performance) but themain problem for me is that no oneon stage ( except Mr Noble ) is organically funny. Everyone is pretending to be funny so it all felt false. I didn't have a bad time, just not a good one.
|
|
404 posts
|
Post by dlevi on Dec 1, 2017 8:01:57 GMT
I have a special fondness for this play having seen both Vanessa Redgrave and Natasha Richardson in it over the years. But what I saw yesterday was just plain bad. Elinor Cook's version of the play is bizarre. Why move the setting to Jamaica and keep the Norwegian names? And why of why, keep the language stilted and unnatural so that it sounds like a direct translation? The design is, and I rarely say this, is downright stupid. It doesn't illuminate the play, it doesn't evoke any period or time or place, in fact - it doesn't do anything. It could just as easily be the setting for the opening scene of 12th Night or the musical Titanic. What a botch! Nikki Annuka Bird is a good actress but lacks the appropriate mystery and other-worldliness for the part and the supporting cast around her are not up to her level. One simply wonders what inspired this production? Was it for Nikki? Was it a passion project for Kwame? or was it a funding initiative for the Donmar to involve minority creatives ? No matter what it was, it was bad. The Donmar has been through a bad period of late, I'm more hopeful about it's next three productions but right now it's in danger of entering Royal Court territory in terms of play selection and irrelevancy.
|
|
404 posts
|
Post by dlevi on Nov 30, 2017 9:05:22 GMT
A couple of things - but I can't figure out how to quote from some of the comments above so please bear with me. It's true Miss Merman was famous for knowing how she wanted to play a role but in the case of the "Birdseye " remark she had made it clear to all of the creatives that she had a date after which she wouldn't incorporate changes in "her" show , the creatives had gone to her after that date and she said no.
Follies: The Young Buddy and Young Sally furniture in the Follies number has always been there - even at the first preview. It just makes its entrance later in the the number.
The Drag Margie and Sally in the Buddy Follies number were an idea of Mr Sondheim's and it never worked, they were converted to real women about a week ( or maybe two) before the NT Live transmission.
Also Janie Dee now sings " I could tell you someone who" three times before the final dance break in Lucy and Jessie when previously she only sang it once.
Ben's breakdown even in the first preview involved the entire company but the staging was very messy, since then it's become the sort of a regimented circular breakdown that has been described, a version of which has always been in the show no matter who has staged it. Personally I like it because it's given more focus to Ben's losing his place in the number rather than the whole evening falling apart. And I think the ensemble clearing the vast stage at the conclusion of the number and just the two couples left there is a devastating and thrilling image.
|
|
404 posts
|
Post by dlevi on Nov 26, 2017 21:15:41 GMT
This production of Glengarry is from hunger. Ineptly directed and designed, the play isn't bullet proof but rapid fire delivery can cover a multitude of sins but this production didn't even have that. It's enough to make you doubt the play's quality.
|
|
404 posts
|
Post by dlevi on Nov 16, 2017 23:27:58 GMT
I'm sorry to hear of so many sound and sync problems in the cinemas. I was at the Oliver tonight and it was all fine LIVE in the theatre. A great production of a great musical and I'm thrilled its been preserved and that so many people around the world will get to see it.
|
|
404 posts
|
Post by dlevi on Oct 28, 2017 10:48:03 GMT
I saw this last night and was utterly captivated by it. The smart lyrics, infectious music and delightful performances made this a very happy surprise. It's a little twee, but I guess I was in the perfect mod for it.
|
|
404 posts
|
Post by dlevi on Oct 23, 2017 3:47:31 GMT
I saw it Saturday afternoon and there were maybe 300 of us scattered throughout the house. I thought it was pretty awful. One of those plays which shouldn't have been let out of the studio. John Heferrnan tried valiantly ( as a Knight should) but all was in vain. The play had some funny moments and some witty ones but the rest I found to be a lot of work. Mr Mullarkey is still a promising playwright, but this nearly 3 hour opus could've been trimmed to just under an hour and offered us the allegory much more successfully and effectively as well as a sense of bouyancy which would make the whole enterprise go down well. This is a huge misfire on the part of the Norris regime. Not that Hytner was perfect but he could be tough and not allow sh*t to come from the studio to the main stage. There had to have been a point a few months ago when the plug needed to be pulled on this. Lyndsey Turner did nothing with the material and even failed in her usually successful collaboration with her design team. What a botch!
|
|
404 posts
|
Post by dlevi on Oct 17, 2017 22:44:22 GMT
I caught the matinee today and was pretty much blown away by the whole production. Like popcultureboy I had pretty much written off David Eldridge after Knot of the Heart, and I sort of hated In Basildon when I saw it a few years ago at the Royal Court. So I'm not even sure why I bought a ticket for this. But I'm glad I did. Unlike Heisenberg which seemed foolish and endless, this play has two lonely people at its center who are entering a period of their lives where their personal and professional prospects are narrowing. They've made some unfortunate choices and now are dealing with the consequences . This one night which could be casual and forgotten takes on an importance to both of them for different reasons and yet they find their common ground and take a chance on changing their lives. Pitch perfect performances and direction make this not only one of the most surprising plays of the year but also one of the most satisfying. I wouldn't be surprised ti see it produced throughout the country in the next couple of years and well remembered around awards time.
|
|
404 posts
|
Post by dlevi on Oct 17, 2017 10:57:31 GMT
enough already with Stomp. The West End needs its smaller playhouses for PLAYS not tourist attractions. Though maybe Cameron has plans to cut down Les Miz even more and move it in after Stomp... nothing would surprise me.
|
|
404 posts
|
Post by dlevi on Oct 17, 2017 10:53:50 GMT
I logged in at 9 am and waited patiently, when the queue started at 10 I was 171 and by 10:40 I had tickets to all three shows and was logged out. Not bad at all. Though my Belleville seats aren't great. The locations for the others though are fine.
|
|
404 posts
|
Post by dlevi on Oct 16, 2017 22:22:53 GMT
I think its sad that 25 years on Stiles and Drewe remain the hope of the British Musical Theatre. Honk! had energy and imagination and truly everything else is professional but uninspired. Their additional material for Mary Poppins and Half a Sixpence was no better than the songs they replaced and Betty Blue Eyes, to me, was imply a bad show that was wildly over-produced. But who else is there on these shores?
|
|
404 posts
|
Post by dlevi on Oct 15, 2017 22:36:03 GMT
I think part of the reason that colleagues/media/people have come down so hard on Harvey Weinstein is that he is a difficult man to work with/for. He's a bully of the highest order (my personal experience) . If he were a nice guy and a joy with whom to work, I don't think the swarm would be as bad or vitriolic. I'm not in any way condoning what he has done but I believe his overall treatment of other people has contributed to the scrum on his career and reputation. Karma baby, it's a bitch.
|
|
404 posts
|
Post by dlevi on Oct 15, 2017 3:29:30 GMT
I caught this play earlier this week and found it to be entirely what I thought/feared it would be: 90 minutes of histrionics about madness and the nature of creativity mixed with some awkwardly sandwiched in exposition about Strindberg's life and work. Brenton is a terrific playwright but here I think he was just treading water. The set was well-intentioned but badly executed and while Susannah Harker was giving a smart performance, Mr Britton's performance was one of those technical hysterical performances that one sees so often at the RSC. The less said about the other two somewhat fresh-from-drama school actresses the better. It all seemed so damned worthy and when it was over I really didn't feel as if I had learned anything about anyone. I hope Jermyn Street is able to up their game more successfully in the future.
|
|
404 posts
|
Post by dlevi on Oct 14, 2017 11:42:57 GMT
Thanks all! Well it certainly adds an air of suspense to whom my friend from the states will see later this week...
|
|