165 posts
|
Post by MoreLife on Apr 15, 2024 15:40:17 GMT
Saw this Thursday night after a matinee of Uncle Vanya at Orange Tree. Went in a bit worried that I’d be let down after such a beautiful afternoon, but I loved this. It was for me. From the preshow music to the loss of innocence that chased the characters through childhood in the US (Columbine, 9/11, recession, on through COVID). As death continually shows up, we see how it has affected each one of them. We learn about their coping, their choices, and where it has gotten them. It’s a rich playground, looking back at childhood from the mid thirties, but it is generationally specific and a hard look at where the US is now, and what it means to live in it at our age (can you tell I’m an American their age?). The audience loved it. I did too. Excellent work from the actors. Excellent direction. I would say more about what I loved, but won’t spoil. I saw this on Saturday and loved it it, too. I'm close to the characters generationally speaking, but I grew up in Italy. This didn't make relating to their experiences difficult at all, even though some of their life stories are remarkably different from my own, because the play - whilst being set in the US and referring to certain events that certainly speak perhaps louder to someone who grew up in the US and experienced certain events there - is so much more generally about the human condition and what it means to deal with disappointment, grief, wrong choices, etc. It's true you hear them talk about themselves and their younger selves and their memories a lot, but I found that's what allowed me to get to know them well enough to care about them - especially the two that are introduced first because we get to spend longer with them than with anyone else. I'd probably see it another time if given the chance.
|
|
165 posts
|
Post by MoreLife on Apr 15, 2024 10:05:16 GMT
I did not think this came over well at the Oliviers. The use of the actors own accents (to me) does not work and create any kind of cohesive world (particularly for me Grace and Mel) - and Hades needs to sing about another octave down... I haven’t seen it in the West End yet but the accents are certainly jarring if you’re used to the Broadway album. I saw the show last week and I'd listened to the Broadway recording enough times that I needed a bit to tune in with the different accents used in the West End production. I must say that in general, after the initial "oh wait, now this character has this accent?" I was absolutely fine with it. While it creates perhaps a less cohesive sonic world for the show, out in the real world we all speak with some degree of accent... and maybe bathing everything in standard American accents produced by non-American performers could actually have felt less authentic? However, there are some who perhaps take that "I'll speak and sing in my own accent" a tad too far, and there were bits where, if I hadn't been very familiar with the recording, I'd have had some serious trouble deciphering Orpheus. And since I've mentioned him, a word of warning: if you're very used to the Broadway recording, Orpheus' accent is not the only thing you'll find jarring when you see the show - Dónal embraces the character and plays him with intensity and passion, but at least the night I saw the show he sounded like he really didn't have the healthiest and comfortable falsetto, I'm afraid.
|
|
165 posts
|
Post by MoreLife on Apr 11, 2024 14:41:02 GMT
Riiiight. It's the 'challenging financial landscape' we're blaming, is it? What nonsense. Well, there's really a lot of unsold tickets in the upcoming weeks and the divisive reviews and unfavourable word of mouth were not going to help fill them, so there certainly is a financial challenge that the producers are facing, which makes this statement an example of... trying to get people to look away from the other issues Personally, while I did not love the show, I didn't hate it either and I thought the performances were generally strong enough for me to enjoy a definitely uncommon, avant-garde night at the theatre. However, I can also see why it struggles to have any sort of commercial success and why many people have expressed more decisively negative opinions about it. I hope it doesn't create too much of a precedent whereby the more daring and out there shows can't really find a space, but I'm not surprised they're pulling the plug on it much sooner than originally planned...
|
|
165 posts
|
Post by MoreLife on Apr 8, 2024 9:31:46 GMT
Balancng sound in such circumstances can be tricky, but un-muting mics in time shouldn't be that hard in a concert setting. Seems they had a very novice sound designer/ op. These producers are taking their audiences for suckers. I wasn't there last night, so my comment is more of a general one about what sound technicians do and how, and it is based on my experiences in an am dram context where professional sound people have been involved. Because of how technology has evolved and progressed, a lot of the mic cues (and similarly a lot of the light cues) tend to be at least in part pre-programmed, so that during the performance a sound tech person will only need to, for example, press a single button for the volume on a group of mics to be turned up simultaneously, instead of having to act manually on multiple sounds tracks at once, etc. Of course it's not just as simple as that, and there's more adjustments and fine-tuning happening live, etc. However, in order for this kind of set-up to work as smoothly and seamlessly as we typically hear on shows with a really good sound design, the sound tech team starts to attend rehearsals even before the shows goes officially into tech, so that they familiarise themselves with who is who and who sings what in the show. They'll take notes and make plans with the director and musical director, so that what is ultimately created sound-wise also matches their vision and needs, etc. Then, during the actual tech process, group numbers are often broken down and rehearsed in pieces so that mic cues and levels can be pre-adapted and the sound/light tech team end up with a very detailed map/timeline which attaches a certain set of mics being on at the same time with specific cues in the music or the script. Solo numbers are clearly easier to manage, but there still may be need to fine tune volumes to create certain effects (see Elphaba's mic typically being boosted at certain points during her big solos). After that, the final rehearsal runs of a show (and typically the first previews when those are a thing) can be used for all the above to be optimised - after all, the sound/light tech team need to rehearse the sequence of actions that form that map/timeline to have it in top shape. Very often it is also about adjusting sound levels on stage, which an audience won't be aware of, but which may help cue performers in, help with tempo issues, etc. Unfortunately, the producers behind some of these concerts are clearly skipping several ones of those steps in the process... For some of them, it's almost inevitable because, the team will only get into the theatre on the day of the concert, so there's little time for the them to adjust to the actual conditions in the space. My guess is that other issues could potentially be made up for and dealt with if these producers invested more money and had the tech team more involved during the rehearsal process and (I presume) if they had more of a rehearsal process to begin with. My impression is that they put these events together over a very short time, they get everyone in the room only in the very lead up to the event, and then there's so much to be worked on that unfortunately... a lot gets sacrificed, and quality is badly affected.
|
|
165 posts
|
Post by MoreLife on Mar 15, 2024 11:28:55 GMT
Yes it reminds me of Hair too, and doesn't look at all like Caissie Levy's character, Diana. They should have just reused the Donmar artwork which was far classier. My immediate thought yesterday was that it was... an homage to Caissie having been in Hair when the 2009 Broadway revival production played here in London for a few months Unfortunately, it didn't make me think of Next to Normal and specifically the Donmar production in any way... and after the build up in the days leading to it, I must say was a bit underwhelmed as I was dreaming of a London cast recording (but maybe that's just me being too hopeful). The reference to Milton Glazer's poster is evident. There are differences between the N2N artwork and the Dylan poster, and they may be considered to be enough to impart some distinctive character, which legally may make it ok. And yet... even just going from a profile view to a front view, whilst still playing with the same visual idea for the hair, would have been a bit more creative.
|
|
165 posts
|
Post by MoreLife on Feb 27, 2024 10:07:44 GMT
" Personally, I don’t get it." " Well, it does me." " Please, I muttered under my breath – don’t." It looks as though you're very good at making the whole review of a show about you, so... is this a case of the pot calling the kettle black? Fare thee well, Mr Nick Curtis, I will certainly steer clear of your non-informative, poorly researched and self-centred reviews in the future! Critics are surely employed to give a personal opinion, whether you agree with it or not? They definitely are, and I'm always happy to hear all sorts of opinions, especially those I don't necessarily agree with as they give me food for thought and at times they've helped me change my mind. In this specific case, however, I felt the tone of the review got dangerously close to what you could get from a tweet from a random audience member saying (way more concisely) "Really didn't get this show and didn't enjoy it". Which is perfect and perfectly valid as such, but I think that a review from a professional critic should inform and give readers what they need to decide whether to see a production or not. To give you a (completely made up) example: "Ugh, enough with reprises - if that Hades guy rambles about that wall once more I'm leaving my seat!" is perfect in a fan's post on social media. Of course a critic can think and feel exactly the same. But when it comes to writing an article, I'd rather they wrote something like "The score is full of recurring musical themes, and many of the songs are reprises of ones the audience has heard before. Although that means that different characters have a "signature" style or even a melodic line that introduces them when they return in a scene, this makes some of the songs feel redundant and doesn't really progress the plot. For instance, I found that Hades' singing about building a wall became less and less interesting with every repetition". This gives the readers some facts, provides a technical/expert comment on those facts, and includes a personal take on why those facts made for a less than brilliant experience. The ES critic... went directly to the bit where he had a less than brilliant experience
|
|
165 posts
|
Post by MoreLife on Feb 23, 2024 11:51:20 GMT
Reviews are out. ★★★★★ Times ★★★★ Guardian ★★★★ TimeOut ★★★★ WOS ★★★ Telegraph ★★★ Stage ★★ ES I have yet to see this production of 'Hadestown' so I can't comment on it and/or say that I agree/disagree with the critics' opinions about this specific cast's performances, sound design, etc. However, I saw the NT production and I have listened to the recording enough times to be more than fairly familiar with the material. I have read the majority of these reviews (not a Stage or Times subscriber, so didn't even try) and I am rather disappointed to see that some of them show a really lazy and/or self-centred approach which isn't in any way helpful for an audience or an example of good, professional writing. Most name a lot of the people involved in it, cite a few song titles, and primarily include generic-sounding comments, using adjectives like "brilliant", "stupendous", "formidable" - which may more or less be used by anyone to describe anything, but don't provide any insight as to what makes this a show worth seeing / a story worth looking into / music worth listening to. But the worst of all has to be the ES one! " Spoiler alert: it doesn’t end happily for Orpheus and Eurydice because of his lack of trust. Theirs is a sad song [...]" Erm... pardon me, in which world have you - a journalist writing for the "Culture" section of a newspaper - been living if you aren't familiar with how the myth of Orpheus and Eurydice goes? I first heard that tale when I was maybe 9-10 years old. And it's one of those that stick with you precisely because it dares to say that destiny and "the gods" can be cruel, and you won't always get what you want. It talks about human vulnerability, of how our will is not always strong enough... " Every time this wall is mentioned – it’s the subject of the Act I curtain-closer and crops up a lot – the blatant illogic smacks you in the face and snaps you out of the action." Well, it's pretty much the same illogic of leaving the EU and wanting to reduce immigration as much as possible, whilst at the same time desperately needing foreign workers - both with "higher" qualifications and not - and having to trade with the same foreign countries you tried to separate yourselves from... Its repeated mentions is in fact there to smack you in the face repeatedly, because good theatre should also make you think, and if it destabilises you for doing so, well, it must have hit close to home! " Melanie La Barrie’s patois-accented Hermes, silver-suited like a riverboat gambler, swaggeringly narrates as if the whole show is about her." " Personally, I don’t get it." " Well, it does me." " Please, I muttered under my breath – don’t." It looks as though you're very good at making the whole review of a show about you, so... is this a case of the pot calling the kettle black? Fare thee well, Mr Nick Curtis, I will certainly steer clear of your non-informative, poorly researched and self-centred reviews in the future!
|
|
165 posts
|
Post by MoreLife on Feb 5, 2024 16:22:43 GMT
All 22 of them are listed clearly on the holidays page of the website! Thanks I hadn't checked, I'll be honest - I was mostly venting my frustration, as I'd like to see the production once again but the most recent MC/Sally pairings haven't excited me enough to book, and this one hasn't improved the game for me.
|
|
165 posts
|
Post by MoreLife on Feb 5, 2024 15:10:16 GMT
She's got a hefty amount of days off, so it at least gives ample opportunity to see Luke with the alternate Sally ...! I hope the Cara-free dates will be clearly advertised so if I wanted to go check what Luke brings to the role I don't have to endure... well... that!
|
|
165 posts
|
Post by MoreLife on Jan 31, 2024 12:38:11 GMT
I would imagine they'll be performing the role of the Leading Player - as that would seem (to me at least) to be a fairly good fit vocally and in terms of overall stage presence, charisma, etc. (especially if we use the most recent Broadway revival which opened with Patina Miller as a reference). If this is the case, they better have chosen a Pippin who is also a really strong vocalist and who has a certain personality as well, or Alex Newell will totally eclipse them. I've seen Alex perform live only once (in the Broadway revival of 'Once on this island') and let me tell you that there was nothing subtle or small or quiet about their take on Asaka, and I wouldn't expect that kind of energy should they actually be the Leading Player here.
|
|
165 posts
|
Post by MoreLife on Jan 29, 2024 10:34:00 GMT
I was at the first preview on Friday and had been able to grab one of the £10 seats for it - one of the circle ones where a pillar is in the way, but you know it will be since the moment you make your booking, and it's thin enough that it doesn't disrupt the experience all that much (especially when you've only paid a tenner!).
In fact, I have to say, to me the £10 ticket has the opposite effect to what suggested above by another poster. Because I have paid so little, I am really keen to give the production a chance and open to being entertained. Even more than that, as I'm fully aware it's a preview and I've not been ripped off, I am more inclined to let them get away with things that don't go as smoothly as they should, or even to tolerate flaws in the material. On the other hand, when I've paid charged full price I become really demanding, question every little flaw and have no mercy for poor performances!
Friday night, while I did think that the material wasn't flawless (more about this below), I was absolutely satisfied that I'd received plenty of good quality entertainment for those £10, so I did cheer the whole cast and crew at the end - yes, the stage managers and sound people too, because to get that machine to run that smoothly at the first preview, they must have done a hell of a good job, and totally deserved their brief moment of recognition at curtain call.
Moving on to the show itself, I didn't have a close, personal connection with the moment in time when the concert took place, nor am I really a big fan of most of the artists whose music was performed. Yet many of those songs are part of a universal soundtrack to our lives, and especially some of them have become anthems, as it were, so clearly a lot of that material felt pleasantly familiar and it was performed beautifully by a cast of inspired vocalists. Most of them - especially the younger ones - have clearly been cast because of how beautiful they sound when they sing, because of their energy and because of how they move on stage, not so much because of how they act... but they're there basically to recreate the vibe of a huge rock concert, so those are exactly the qualities they need.
While I was roughly familiar with the story and meaning of the event, I didn't know all the details of how it was put together and so, while the book does have a bit of that Wikipedia/Ted talk vibe, I was pleased to learn a few things through the night. The show never tries to investigate the plight of human beings faced with hardships and famine, that's not the story it wants to tell... so to me it made sense that the best acting actually comes in the comedic moments involving Julie Atherton's character. What I found weaker, though, were the moments where the Ted talk gets slightly preachy/rhetorical - not so much because of what it's trying to say, but because of the form, which IMHO gets a little too didascalic. Injecting some more pace in some of the scenes especially at the beginning may help - I think the audience needs to be able to relate a bit more to the characters and feel what they feel rather than just learn about their stories, and the nostalgia angle alone is not always enough.
The way I perceived it, the underlying "message" - which some posters above have asked about - is an invite for the younger generation to look at what the older generation tried to to through music and getting people together, learn from the mistakes that were made at the time, and try to do better, whilst bearing in mind that a profound change can only come if the powers that be get involved. For sure, today's youth would have different tools to use, take a different approach etc. but the (maybe slightly naive, maybe tinted with rosy nostalgia lenses) core message is: look at what we did, we were proud of what we achieved even if it was a bit improvised and tentative, and we may not have changed the world but we tried, and you can and should have a go, too.
Given the response on Friday, I think this show shouldn't struggle too much to find an audience. To me it feels much more refined than the average juke-box musical, and we've seen plenty of crappy ones have a fairly successful West End run, so why not this? Of course it's not life-changing theatre, but for a night of enjoyable entertainment it hits the mark.
|
|
165 posts
|
Post by MoreLife on Jan 26, 2024 10:04:18 GMT
In my opinion, whatever you do, do NOT make this decision, to leave at the interval. . . Instead, if you are the kind of person who leaves at the interval, having little patience for average material, have dinner from 7pm - 8pm, and show up at 8:30pm for the second half, which plays from 8:45pm to 10pm. The difference between before and after the interval is chalk and cheese, where the first hour is whiny chalk screeching across a wizened blackboard, and the second half is a delicious comic cheese platter to be savoured. I really enjoyed myself tonight, feeling that the first half was decidedly average, with skilful performances lifting intrinsically poor material, but found the second half was very funny, with skilful performances lifting good material towards excellence. Some spoilers follow. . . The three plays presented are essentially three two-handers, one before the interval, and two after. The connection between the plays is that they are all set in the same suite at the Plaza Hotel in the late sixties, and although the plays do not feature the same characters, they all explore the role of communication in middle-aged relationships. The first play is about a failure of such communication, the second about successful communication, and the third about something in between, as well as about how communication styles might be passed from one generation to the next. Throughout the evening, Matthew Broderick, who I found to be a sensitive and emotive actor in "The Starry Messenger," at Wyndham's Theatre, just gets funnier and funnier. In the first play, Broderick gets more comic mileage than Walter Matthau got out of the same material, in the film (which I saw a couple of decades ago, but in which I recall Matthau being unpleasantly and off-puttingly abrasive), by channeling a kind of Wallace Shawn drony drollness, a much more pliant and comic doormat approach of dealing with the wife he can't agree with about anything. Sarah Jessica Parker spends the duration of this first play desperately and tragically trying to penetrate the drone, but as an audience member, I found the most memorable moment of the play was when Parker threw a paper plane across the room for it to land precisely on Broderick's lap. Cue cheers. Despite a couple of laughs, and an effective moment of melancholy, I'd rate the first play 2 and a half stars, raised from a 2 star text by the performances. After the interval, the second play is an insightful comedy zinger, with both Sarah Jessica Parker and Broderick fizzing comically with desire for each other, after seventeen years of not seeing each other, though they now speak completely different love languages, with Parker desirous only of hearing about her former beau's Hollywood star connections, as he is now a big producer, and he desirous solely for her straightforward simplicity. The way these two love languages play off each other is utterly delightful, and both actors elevate good material into the stratosphere, with Broderick's Wallace Shawn comic whininess now informed by a youthful Woody Allen (before he got a bad rep lol) comic lustiness. For me, this is the best play of the evening, as the play is the match of the performances, and I'd give it 4 and a half stars. The third play is the broadest comedy of all, about a couple who can't talk their daughter out of a bathroom on her wedding day. Now Broderick fires on more comedy cylinders than ever before, dressed in humorously grotesque grey aging makeup, getting more and more frenetic, a Wallace Shawn crossed with a young Woody Allen crossed with a Basil Fawlty crossed with the aging waiter who stumbled around in "Man with Two Guvnors," a comedy character par excellence. Unfortunately, SJP's straight woman character, albeit well done, gets a bit sidelined by Broderick's bravura comedy performance, so overall the play is not as interesting in what it has to say as the second play, but moment for moment it is the funniest, and I give it 4 stars. Play 1: 2 stars; Play 2: 4 and a half stars; Play 3: 4 stars. Overall, 3 and a half stars, but taken by itself, AFTER the interval rates a dynamic and winning 4 and a bit stars for me! So, in my opinion, don't miss the second half. I went to see this earlier this week and I couldn't agree more about how different in terms of vibe and quality the three sub-plays are. I also found the first one to be the weakest, partly because of the writing and the material feeling old and "dead", but also in part (I think) because of how it's been directed. There's so little happening and what the characters say in that first half that it could have benefited from a faster pace and maybe a more daring way of inhabiting those two characters... they're just plain boring, but not even in a way that makes you laugh at how boring they are, if that makes any sense. I loved Play 2, it was playful and quirky and gave both SJP and MB some good material to work with, plus their complicity and chemistry really shone through. Play 3 was funny and also well acted by both, although as you say SJP was perhaps a bit limited by the script in terms of what she could do with her character, whereas MB was given ample room to shine. To me, this (well, the second half!) made for a rather enjoyable night out and yes it felt a bit special to see those two on stage (I loved how at curtain call the way SJP waved and interacted with the audience suddenly felt more reminiscent of Carrie Bradshaw's mannerisms, which I believe to be closer to SJP's own). But... I also have to mention that my ticket cost £55 - had I spent £100 or above, as so many have done / are doing, I certainly would have felt the robbed, given the content and quality of the first half.
|
|
165 posts
|
Post by MoreLife on Jan 18, 2024 16:57:20 GMT
If they are all back, then I will definitely be back! Does anyone know how tickets are going/if there's any danger of it selling out in the Wyndham theatre? I definitely want to go again but as I am not local to London I would like to book nearer to the time. I'm very wary of summer train strikes so last minute bookings/Today Tix are my preferred option for a London theatre visits these days. It doesn't seem to have sold massively for the time being, so I believe you will probably be fine booking closer to the date you pick for travelling into town. Just bear in mind prices are higher and some dynamic pricing may kick in if they do start to sell more It is on the TodayTix app, but for the time being just as a further source and with a bit of a mark-up over the Delfont website prices. I wonder if they'll do a lottery/rush or whether there'll be any other initiative to promote sales closer to the start of the run...
|
|
165 posts
|
Post by MoreLife on Jan 18, 2024 16:50:44 GMT
This isn't a fair comment. Musicals are meant to make you feel something. It is no good just being a fantastic singer if the audience aren't connecting with the story. You should leave the theatre feeling a whole hoard of emotions. Some of the finest MT performances have been from people who in fact aren't the best singers in the world but who give the lyrics new meaning and pull you in. You just have to watch the Sondheim Gala to understand this. I fear you may have misunderstood that I was taking the mickey… I am a firm believer that this craft is called musical theatre because both components need to be fully honed and honoured, musicality and vocal ability count only as much as acting skills. Great acting through song is definitely what I personally look for in musical theatre, that's what moves me more than a million riffs or notes held for - how long was it? 42 seconds? - but that kind of great acting through song can only come when the singing is solid and accomplished enough that the actor can comfortably "worry" only about telling the story and inhabiting their character. To make a concrete example, I believe Jonathan Bailey is a much better actor than he is a singer. But, thinking back to his performances in 'The last 5 years' and in 'Company' (both of which I loved), he still sang on pitch, didn't run out of breath, and had clear enough diction throughout, and that established a solid platform for him to act the proverbial sh*t out of those roles. Unfortunately, as far as Mr Dunbar is concerned, what I could infer from that video is that he is not an accomplished singer, and you may have "taken the mickey" out of me, but you did not quite provide evidence that he is a great actor who can, because of outstanding acting skills, make an audience forget his vocals are a bit on the shaky side.
|
|
165 posts
|
Post by MoreLife on Jan 17, 2024 11:36:38 GMT
Interesting! It’s an intrigued yes from me with an open mind, will book as soon as I see a deal on. Adrian Dunbar is a great actor. Here he is singing! I wouldn't normally do this, but... desperate times call for desperate measures, I guess. I can see he has been a prolific actor for TV and film, though I must say I hadn't heard his name until today (and this is clearly down to my limited knowledge / different tastes in genres, etc.). But a good singer he is NOT. His breath control is so poor he often blurs the ends of sentences / cuts words abruptly because he runs out of air. Because his breath control and support is so poor, he is often pitchy - a lot of of the time he's flat on a note that needs to be held for a vaguely longer duration at the end of a sentence His diction is lazy, for lack of a better word. This has further repercussions on his general (im)precision as his placement / vowel choice does not favour a free and healthy phonation. His phrasing is boring. I've heard way better renditions of this song by improvised karaoke singers. How someone with such shaky vocal skills can be cast in a production as the male lead to play against a bona fide Broadway diva is a mystery to me...
|
|
165 posts
|
Post by MoreLife on Dec 20, 2023 15:51:32 GMT
There was a raw, gutsy, explosive quality to Maimuna's vocals, with more than a hint of Amy Winehouse in her phrasing that would magnetise you, and have you listen to her from the moment she opened her mouth to sing. I'm afraid all that - judging purely based on this new video - is missing from Lauryn's rendition.
Nice to hear it sung in a more pronounced northern accent, but Lauryn's version is more of an indie, contemporary reading filled with riffs, flips into head voice, cry-infused onsets... and to my ear that started to feel a bit repetitive halfway through the song.
|
|
165 posts
|
Post by MoreLife on Dec 12, 2023 9:53:23 GMT
In cinemas 14th and 18th Feb. That’s ambitious. It’s not even sold out for the actual concerts See, the thing is, in spite of the glorious cast that's been put together and announced bit by bit, I never felt motivated to fork out the amount of money that was requested for the kind of seat I'd want to see said glorious cast from. Personally, while I know how R&H made the history of musical theatre and their golden age scores have helped develop and grow musical theatre as an art form, I tend to not enjoy their shows entirely. Yes, the melodies are lush, but in a show they're repeated and reprised and then played by the orchestra alone... yes, voices soar and sound gorgeous over those legato melodic lines and long held notes, but (and this is a very personal thing, I am aware it's very different for others) that type of execution and performance often leaves me with a sense of "that sounded really pretty, but it didn't really move me"... and of course that's before I start looking at some of the plot and characterisation issues through a 21st century lens. In other words... no, I'm not a huge R&H fan So while I really love a good chunk of the big names involved, and I'd have loved to see them perform I was not willing to pay 120-140£ for something I knew I'd enjoy only to an extent. On the other hand, I'd probably be willing to buy a (presumably) much more reasonably priced cinema ticket to see it on screen, as my brain would find that more acceptable. Other people may not have the same complicated relationship with R&H I have, but I suppose the economic factor may play a role in potentially favouring a cinema ticket for them as well.
|
|
165 posts
|
Post by MoreLife on Dec 8, 2023 10:44:26 GMT
Wow! Sorry to read of this experience MoreLife! Thanks for the solidarity Anthony! Of course it's a very first world problem to have... I thought I'd share it here more than anything to warn other forum members so they can avoid those seats and actually see the show
|
|
165 posts
|
Post by MoreLife on Dec 8, 2023 10:42:51 GMT
Thank you for the above review. I think that’s very poor from the venue. Personally I’d be giving them another chance to make amends, and if they don’t I’d be raising a credit card chargeback, if this is how you paid. You may be covered by the broad strokes of the Consumer Rights Act, should the venue dispute the chargeback and you are required to provide further information. CAB/Resolver and other online services can assist with this. Another option is to contact SOLT (explained here: www.theatremonkey.com/how-deal-your-visit-going-wrong) as the Menier is a SOLT venue and abides to their rules of membership. The main question is, did you complain at the venue itself at the earliest opportunity? Thanks for this advice toomasj, we did not in fairness raise it at the venue - perhaps we could have done it in the few minutes prior to the show beginning, but then there's no intermission to use to speak with their staff... My friend wrote to them on Monday, I think, as of course we would not expect the Box Office team to deal with emails at the weekend.
|
|
165 posts
|
Post by MoreLife on Dec 8, 2023 10:39:29 GMT
Oh dear. There's really no excuse for this kind of thing nowadays. May I ask what seats they were sitting in so to know which to avoid? We were in B30 and B31. The really massively obstructed one is B30, and I think it's fair to guess any one of the seats behind B30 would have a similar issue (possibly less so at the very back as the angle may change slightly with the rake and all). We've noticed that the Menier website has been updated, and now if you go and try to book them it advised as follows: "Please note that some scenes will be slightly obstructed from view by a pillar. No main action is missed." "Slightly" being... well, a bit of an understatement And they're on sale at 55£ instead of the full 59.50£ you pay for the one immediately next to it.
|
|
165 posts
|
Post by MoreLife on Dec 8, 2023 9:53:15 GMT
Had a similarly unpleasant experience at the weekend. Having booked fairly early (i.e. before the usual Menier price increase policy kicked in), my friend had picked two seats at the left end of the row on what is probably considered the "back" of the auditorium. These seats were sold at full price and not marked as "restricted view" in any way, shape or form.
Lo and behold, the view from them - and especially from the one at the very end of the rod - was super restricted by a pillar that's at least a good 20 cm wide. Yes, most of the action takes place at a more central location on stage, to the right of the pillar, but having such a chunky object in your visual field is massively distracting anyway, and there are a fair few bits happening to the left of the pillar and... on the opposite side of the pillar itself which plays the role of a tree, at some point.
We thought it was rather unfair that the venue had put those seats on sale at full price in the first place, but perhaps even a touch shady that they did not include a warning re: the pillar. Plenty of other theatres in London - the Almeida and the Old Vic come to mind - are very thorough at marking seats that have (much thinner, btw) pillars in the way as restricted/partially restricted view, and they price them accordingly. The NT goes to the extreme of labelling "restricted view" their front row seats for "Infinite lives" at the Dorfman, where actually there's no impediment in the way whatsoever, and the stage is set at a comfortably low height.
Because of this, my friend contacted the Menier Box Office to flag that those seats should have been marketed as providing a significantly restricted view and that, like many other venues in London do under the circumstances, they probably should have been priced taking that into account.
The response from the Menier's management was rather disappointing. First of all, they offered my friend the (oh so generous...) opportunity to see the show again, maybe from different seats, that they would have been able to buy at the preview price instead of the now updated higher price. Secondly, they told an interesting story of how only during previews had they become aware that views might have been somehow restricted from those seats, and so they couldn't have adapted their prices in advance.
Which is, quite frankly, hard to believe and not a very honest answer. Even am dram productions - which get virtually no tech time in the venue they'll perform at - pay special attention to how their staging works and impacts the view for audience, and so it wouldn't be unfair to expect a professional production to be at least conscious of the space they'll be inhabiting. Further, it is not the first time that the Menier uses this very set-up in the traverse, and so that pillar will have been obstructing views for audience members in other productions... so Mr Babani and the Menier's management must be very much aware of it by now.
Speaking of which, the venue itself is not in great conditions. What once was the restaurant upstairs now looks like a rather decrepit community hall, the bathrooms have issues with water not running smoothly and taking forever to refill the toilet tanks, and overall they don't really convey a sense of hygiene and tidiness. It's all very sad, as in its own quirky kind of way the Menier used to be a venue I looked forward to visiting and spending time at, the restaurant upstairs used to feel warm and cosy and sort of invited you in as you made your way to the actual theatre. I've seen so many memorable productions there, but if this is the standard they're content with nowadays, well... I don't feel like I'll want to go back particularly soon.
|
|
165 posts
|
Post by MoreLife on Nov 30, 2023 16:01:19 GMT
The sequence with Henry in Nevada with the bats and the demogorgon was another highlight for me, although from my seat at the end of the row, I missed him standing on / conquering the demogorgan. I seem to be in the minority with thinking the ending was excellent, I never expected them to do anything with 11, with this being the origin story for Henry, she isn't important in this part of the story but it was exciting getting a glimpse of her just to bring us back to the series. I came away thinking about it and am still thinking about the new information we have about the story and how it is all going to come together in the final series, so for me, it did what it needed to. I saw it last night, when the director announced they'd have some new set piece and new scenes, so clearly some bits of the play are still a work in progress and changes are happening. So much so that... last night I didn't really see a demogorgon encounter nor bats, and the Nevada events were only alluded to as something that happened and left Henry "changed" but without much detail. I agree that the ending establishes the perfect connection with the series, both for those who may see the play having never seen the series and for the fans. After all, if you've seen Season Four you already know those characters and you kind of already have seen that very scene. Definitely plenty of implications for the final season, as certain characters [ I'm keeping this vague in case someone comes here having seen the play, but not the series! ] know things from their experiences in 1959 that may prove very relevant when, twenty-something years later, they return to Hawkins after spending some time abroad.
|
|
165 posts
|
Post by MoreLife on Nov 30, 2023 15:51:16 GMT
I’ve heard a lot of people saying it’s impressive, but what actually happens in the opening scene? Opening scene takes place aboard a Navy vessel that is conducting an electromagnetic invisibility experiment … ostensibly being the first portal into the Upside Down / source of Henry Creel’s later powers who discovers some remnant of the ship ( and or the experiment ) in Nevada as a child. Brenners father was aboard that ill-fated vessel and was the only survivor. Brenner’s father smuggled something ( what isn’t exactly clarified in the story ) back with him to Nevada which Henry Creel coincidentally discovers. This is all very briefly alluded to in the show as a very minor exposition / plot point. Combination of projection / set / lighting and the ultimate appearance of a “full size” ship make for an incredible opening act. Lighting and effects also help - in a matter of seconds - recreate a visual that's very much like the Upside Down of the TV show, down to the floating particles and darker colour palette, so if you're familiar with it you are immediately drawn into it, and because of what you associate it with already it makes for a very powerful moment.
|
|
165 posts
|
Post by MoreLife on Nov 30, 2023 15:43:52 GMT
Interesting! 30 mins cut and yet new scenes added! Please share more details in the spoilers thread? I was there last night, too, but since it was my first time seeing the play I couldn't guess what has been cut and/or what it's been slotted into. Daldry referred specifically to new pieces of set being used, and warned us that because of that something might have gone wrong and required the show to be stopped (that wasn't the case). Again, as I'd not seen it before I can't make comparisons, but especially Act One was beautifully fast-paced, and almost all the transitions from one scene to the next were so seamless and quick (even when they involve quite a few changes on stage), so some of the time gained may also be a consequence of an improved pace and the cast beginning to settle into their tracks. As someone who has watched all four seasons on Netflix and loved them, and therefore already has a certain connection with the characters and the world they inhabit, my general comment can only be that this was oh so engrossing and enjoyable. I found myself grinning at how well put together it is several times throughout! Of course there's plenty of references that are meant to delight the fans, and going in with a certain knowledge of what will happen to certain characters some twenty years later will make a difference. However, I believe those who go and see it without knowing a thing are equally in for a treat. Performances are really good across the board, and Louis Mc Cartney who plays Henry is a joy to watch (assuming that joy is a suitable term!) and it's hard to believe this is his professional stage debut. I'll definitely want to go back after opening night to see if anything changes and to experience the whole thing again once everything's been finalised and they all have had some time to further fine-tune their performances.
|
|
165 posts
|
Post by MoreLife on Nov 20, 2023 16:18:42 GMT
The twitter link doesn’t work for me for some reason.. Are they keeping all the cast? The cast for the transfer has not been announced yet. However, they have announced the creative/tech team behind the production (for example, Nick Barstow - the MD - is staying from the Donmar run).
|
|