2,502 posts
|
Post by n1david on Dec 4, 2016 9:59:10 GMT
A friend of mine saw the show tonight, and apparently it was the same pairing that I saw last night. However, in comparing notes with her, we noticed a discrepancy that could mean the whole thing is rigged. Last night, Williams called "heads." It landed on heads, and everyone bowed to her as Elizabeth. However, according to my friend, STEVENSON called "heads" tonight, the coin landed on heads, but Williams was still Elizabeth. If there is no consistency between who calls heads and what "heads" even means for the outcome, they can easily decide beforehand who plays which role, and in the moment, they bow to the pre-determined Elizabeth regardless of the coin toss result. They can easily get away with this because the audience has no idea beforehand which coin result yields which pairing. Hopefully this theory is debunked later in previews. It's also possible that they just have yet to decide how they want the coin toss routine to go, and they just tried something different tonight. I suppose it's possible they want to work on one version more than another in previews (beforehand the director said it was like rehearsing two plays at once). I can't imagine they'll get away with it for long once the play opens.
|
|
5,495 posts
|
Post by Baemax on Dec 4, 2016 10:48:00 GMT
Yeah, I'd assume they're removing the random element while in previews to ensure both combos get a decent amount of stage time. We should definitely all make a point of reporting back after press night though. Although tbh, what does it hurt if the coin toss isn't "real"? Williams/Stevenson aren't historical queens either, we're still not going to walk out in disgust upon realising they're acting like they are even though they're modern day actors. If it's just another element to the performance, like the fake corpsing in Hairspray, most people won't realise because most people will only be seeing it once. Just another level of theatrical artifice that hurts no one.
|
|
1,064 posts
|
Post by bellboard27 on Dec 4, 2016 11:01:17 GMT
Yeah, I'd assume they're removing the random element while in previews to ensure both combos get a decent amount of stage time. We should definitely all make a point of reporting back after press night though. Although tbh, what does it hurt if the coin toss isn't "real"? Williams/Stevenson aren't historical queens either, we're still not going to walk out in disgust upon realising they're acting like they are even though they're modern day actors. If it's just another element to the performance, like the fake corpsing in Hairspray, most people won't realise because most people will only be seeing it once. Just another level of theatrical artifice that hurts no one. Sorry. It's the thin end of the wedge. If we accept this behaviour, before long actors will be making the whole thing up.
|
|
|
Post by Honoured Guest on Dec 4, 2016 11:24:40 GMT
Although tbh, what does it hurt if the coin toss isn't "real"? Exactly! Acting is quite common in the theatre, so I've been told.
|
|
923 posts
|
Post by Snciole on Dec 5, 2016 10:07:51 GMT
The system not falling over is a good start but the queue system is still ridiculously frustrating. I am probably not missing much but keen to Carmen Munroe!
|
|
4,028 posts
|
Post by kathryn on Dec 5, 2016 10:39:25 GMT
The email alert thing hasn't worked for me so far, and apparently my wait time hasn't changed in the last half hour, which is a bit worrying. But not completely falling over is a start.
Seriously, number of people ahead of me in the queue has gone down, but my estimated arrival time on the website keeps getting later.
|
|
923 posts
|
Post by Snciole on Dec 5, 2016 12:44:15 GMT
I got on eventually and there are tons of £10 seats left, which I wasn't expecting. Better but needs works as it is clear many in the queue probably don't even buy tickets.
|
|
4,028 posts
|
Post by kathryn on Dec 5, 2016 14:01:54 GMT
Yes, me too. I wet for an £18 ticket in the end - lots of them left too. I think having to re-set passwords was probably slowing everyone down. Hopefully most people won't need to do that again.
|
|
2,502 posts
|
Post by n1david on Dec 5, 2016 18:00:07 GMT
Better but needs works as it is clear many in the queue probably don't even buy tickets. I suspect this is the 'multiple device' trick - being in the queue on a phone, a tablet, a laptop, the partner's laptop,.... For anything which puts you in a random place in a queue, it makes sense to hedge your bets...
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 5, 2016 18:45:07 GMT
Just got 2 £10 tickets for the last matinee which should be exciting and am very excited as it is one more thing for 2017,Did anyone else have any trouble booking with credits cards on I pads or any other device of is it just me.
|
|
1 posts
|
Post by flip18 on Dec 5, 2016 18:45:11 GMT
Managed to get a £10 tkt for the final matinee just now. Checkng this morning it told me I was 609 in the queue so I decided to give it a miss, glad I checked again now
|
|
81 posts
|
Post by addictedtotheatre on Dec 6, 2016 9:41:43 GMT
Saw this last night (Mon 5/12) - Lia Williams called the toss 'Heads' - she won and played QE1.
This is a very fine production. The text is clear, the direction urgent and so the three and a quarter hours rushes by. All the supporting players are excellent, and Juliet Stevenson is her usual high standard. However, Lia Williams gives a monumental performance, just extraordinary. I'd go so far as to say that this is one of the most impressive feats of acting I've seen in the last few years.
|
|
1,181 posts
|
Post by theatrelover123 on Dec 7, 2016 23:45:43 GMT
This was a stunning production. Loved it. Will write more later
|
|
103 posts
|
Post by sondheimhats on Dec 8, 2016 0:15:47 GMT
Does anyone know if Stevenson has played Elizabeth and Williams play Mary yet? Between the reports here, and those of some friends I know who have seen it, i haven't heard anybody mention seeing that pairing. Curious...
As for the comment about a rigged coin toss not hurting anybody: true, it wouldn't HURT anybody. But if it is rigged, it's somewhat disingenuous, which is just irritating in its own rite. Plus, if the pairings are planned in advance, it would be nice if they made that public so audience members could return to see the other pairing if they so choose.
|
|
1,181 posts
|
Post by theatrelover123 on Dec 8, 2016 0:23:44 GMT
Yes Stephenson was Elizabeth and Williams was Mary tonight. It felt like the natural way round to me.
|
|
884 posts
|
Post by lonlad on Dec 8, 2016 1:07:42 GMT
I like "in its own rite" :-)
|
|
|
Post by Honoured Guest on Dec 8, 2016 9:34:44 GMT
Surely they need to prepare both versions equally, and so to have the same number of previews of each version? Which can only be achieved by scheduling the casting during previews?
|
|
81 posts
|
Post by addictedtotheatre on Dec 8, 2016 12:41:21 GMT
Yes Stephenson was Elizabeth and Williams was Mary tonight. It felt like the natural way round to me. Strange - I saw it with the roles swapped from what you saw and I thought it was a perfect fit. Shows just how good they each are.
|
|
2,502 posts
|
Post by n1david on Dec 8, 2016 19:06:30 GMT
I wonder how this will be reviewed? Will the press have to take their chances like everyone else, which means that different reviews might have different actors in the parts?
Can't remember if they reviewed both versions of Frankenstein, but at least they were scheduled performances. Wouldn't surprise me if some of the 'early press' preview performances might also be fixed in order to give critics the chance to see both versions.
But very promising on these early comments that both versions are sounding strong...
|
|
371 posts
|
Post by popcultureboy on Dec 8, 2016 23:56:23 GMT
Frankenstein had two consecutive press nights, one for each pairing, and reviews were embargoed until after night two. But that whole run was scheduled, there was no coin toss element to it. Who knows what they'll do for the press performances here.
|
|
117 posts
|
Post by ldm2016 on Dec 8, 2016 23:58:37 GMT
For those interested, tonight Stevenson called heads and played Elizabeth...
So, the play.
It speaks absolute volumes about the performances given by Williams and Stevenson and the amazing story at the centre of the play that the occasional odd casting, a terrible wooden performance and humour injected into the most ridiculous places in the play fails to detract from what is a wonderful night's theatre.
Stevenson and Williams are simply the best they have ever been and, in all probability, the best they ever will be. They are truly sensational.
Tickets are scarce but will appear and I recommend that anyone able to buy one does.
|
|
2 posts
|
Post by jennyk on Dec 9, 2016 1:36:50 GMT
I will be going to see this, it sounds really good. Does anyone who's seen it have any comments on the music? Apparently Laura Marling did the music and as a fan of hers I was wondering what it was like and how it contributes to the play. Thanks :-).
|
|
1,181 posts
|
Post by theatrelover123 on Dec 9, 2016 8:27:56 GMT
I will be going to see this, it sounds really good. Does anyone who's seen it have any comments on the music? Apparently Laura Marling did the music and as a fan of hers I was wondering what it was like and how it contributes to the play. Thanks :-). I don't remember there being much music at all tbh - apart from a song at the end which was.....Nice.
|
|
1,181 posts
|
Post by theatrelover123 on Dec 9, 2016 8:28:37 GMT
For those interested, tonight Stevenson called heads and played Elizabeth... So, the play. It speaks absolute volumes about the performances given by Williams and Stevenson and the amazing story at the centre of the play that the occasional odd casting, a terrible wooden performance and humour injected into the most ridiculous places in the play fails to detract from what is a wonderful night's theatre. Stevenson and Williams are simply the best they have ever been and, in all probability, the best they ever will be. They are truly sensational. Tickets are scarce but will appear and I recommend that anyone able to buy one does. Who did you think gave a terrible wooden performance? Who did you think was cast oddly?
|
|
117 posts
|
Post by ldm2016 on Dec 9, 2016 9:05:36 GMT
For those interested, tonight Stevenson called heads and played Elizabeth... So, the play. It speaks absolute volumes about the performances given by Williams and Stevenson and the amazing story at the centre of the play that the occasional odd casting, a terrible wooden performance and humour injected into the most ridiculous places in the play fails to detract from what is a wonderful night's theatre. Stevenson and Williams are simply the best they have ever been and, in all probability, the best they ever will be. They are truly sensational. Tickets are scarce but will appear and I recommend that anyone able to buy one does. Who did you think gave a terrible wooden performance? Who did you think was cast oddly? I personally thought that Rudi Dharmalingam was an odd choice for the role and I thought Alan Williams as Talbot was absolutely awful at times.
|
|
2 posts
|
Post by jennyk on Dec 10, 2016 15:58:36 GMT
I will be going to see this, it sounds really good. Does anyone who's seen it have any comments on the music? Apparently Laura Marling did the music and as a fan of hers I was wondering what it was like and how it contributes to the play. Thanks :-). I don't remember there being much music at all tbh - apart from a song at the end which was.....Nice. OK, thanks for the reply . From reading around it does seem like only one Marling song at the end. It will be nice to hear it anyway .
|
|
998 posts
|
Post by David J on Dec 10, 2016 21:05:06 GMT
Liking this. Not setting me alight so far
Lots of debating whic usually I love. A big audience reaction at a line about a majority decision doesn't make it right
Lots of expositioon I felt
|
|
998 posts
|
Post by David J on Dec 10, 2016 23:36:01 GMT
The best moments for me were the Elizabeth I scenes, especially the political debates. Juliet Stevenson gives a powerhouse of a performance as the steely queen
And that's where I felt Friedrich Schiller's strengths lay
The Mary Stuart scenes are where we see the personal side to her and they're not bad. Lia Williams certainly gave a sincere and sometimes passionate performance. But I thought it was telling that after a slow 35-40 minute first scene, the energy suddenly went up when Juliet Stevenson and the nobles arrived.
The dialogue I felt can plod a long, especially at the start when it's dumping so much information in these debates. Then again I only looked at Mary Stuart during primary school and have only a general idea about her and the circumstances of her execution. But still I've seen plays with historical matter I know little about that had me engaged.
I didn't think the 3 hour and 5-10 minute running time was needed. There were moments I felt could be trimmed down. There's the moment where Elizabeth finally has to make the hard decision, and right afterwards the play has to make what feels like a scenes worth of her persuading her secretary to pass it on. Even though it comes back to bite at the end it just delays further what is a foregone conclusion. The tone even felt off where just before we had a serious and poignant moment went straight into a humorous moment as we see this secretary react to this responsibility he has been landed with.
|
|
1,175 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by joem on Dec 11, 2016 0:58:03 GMT
Good production but I was expecting more. Strong performances from the two leads but some of the staging decisions weakened the evening for me.
It could have been trimmed down a bit more. The decision to perform it practically in the round meant some odd sightlines, including long periods of watching Ms Stevenson's backside and, later on, having her completely blocked by old man Talbot in a scene where she wore her full virgin queen regalia, The climactic scene between the two queens where they lie down on the stage was lost to me. I don't know if they kissed or what they did. I couldn't see. The music was strange. A plau is not a film and does not require background music, let alone the uncomfortable humming noise (a bit like what I imagine tinnitis might be like) which was kept on throughout the interval.
I don't know if the script had been tinkered with to make it relevant to our times. If so, they shouldn't have. The play was not written with Brexit in mind. It's getting a bit tiresome for every bloody play to be Brexit-pointed actually. This led to inappropriate audience laughs, which I can't help feeling some of the cast contributed to by pointing lines.
Finally, on the negative side, I don't see why this production was done in modern dress. Added nothing unless the whole point was the pointless updating.
I actually enjoyed this but it was almost depsite the production and largely due to the fine perforamces of Stevenson and Williams.
|
|
1,465 posts
|
Post by foxa on Dec 11, 2016 10:37:57 GMT
We were there last night and really liked it. I agree with the comments above that it could have been trimmed a little (15 minutes I would have said.) It was Juliet as Elizabeth and Lia as Mary Stuart and that felt about right. Unlike some posters above, I really liked the supporting performances (with one notable exception) and thought most of the staging effective (again with one notable exception.) An advantage of the modern dress was that you could differentiate more clearly between Elizabeth's advisors and foes: Talbot played as a rumbled Kenneth Clark type; Burleigh, a Machiavellian, polished, besuited career politician; the French ambassador was like a younger, better looking Michael Gove. We enjoyed finding modern relevances - the majority isn't always right line; the expectations of a woman in power. I liked Rudi Dharmalingam as Mortimer - it's a great part and he was energetic and unexpected - a little ludicrous at times but in sort of a pleasing way - with the abandon of someone who would throw himself into such an ill-fated conspiracy. I thought John Light gave a very uncomfortable performance as Leicester - there was anti-chemistry between him and Stevenson and if they gave 'bad sex' awards for stage work, their giggle-inducing encounter would qualify. He acted a lot with his hands in his pockets. Then he would suddenly shout. Didn't get it. But in the relatively small role of Davidson, David Jonsson (a 2016 RADA graduate, I note) was wonderful. Has hardly anything to do for most of the play and then two good scenes - the first of which was one of my favourite in the play. The staging of the ending was very powerful with excellent use of the revolve, costumes and music. 4*
|
|