|
Post by Jan on Sept 13, 2017 19:20:47 GMT
Yeah that King John. Controversial. Or terrible. Happy to hear about her growing family. It wasn't really controversial, it was just stupid. Wasting 4 minutes having the cast sing a karaoke version of an Abba song stops the action and illuminates nothing about the play so what was the point of it ? Just camp window dressing to amuse people who didn't want to be there in the first place. I think Doran is just old and tired and has no new ideas, the RSC has become to seem very old fashioned under his reign when they should be at the leading edge of Shakespeare interpretation. I really wish he wouldn't be so parochial and invite some distinguished foreign directors to come and shake the place up a bit. I mean why aren't the RSC on the van Hove bandwagon ?
|
|
5,585 posts
|
Post by lynette on Sept 13, 2017 21:04:15 GMT
But LLL and the so called LLW were bang on the money. Luscombe being a little old fashioned and crucially commercially savvy.
|
|
18 posts
|
Post by lucky700 on Sept 13, 2017 22:22:47 GMT
But LLL and the so called LLW were bang on the money. Luscombe being a little old fashioned and crucially commercially savvy. Caught onto the Downton Abbey zeitgeist. It was a sure fire hit in that climate. If they do a Game of thrones inspired Macbeth well, I am sure that would be endlessly successful too. He isn't having the best of runs. A lot of what I have seen since LlL and LLL just hasn't been very interesting.
|
|
1,093 posts
|
Post by samuelwhiskers on Sept 13, 2017 22:54:25 GMT
I loved that King John a lot and it stayed with me, so count me in the yay camp.
|
|
|
RSC 2018
Sept 13, 2017 23:10:46 GMT
via mobile
Post by oxfordsimon on Sept 13, 2017 23:10:46 GMT
The Doran regime seems hell bent on producing versions of the plays that can be released on DVD to supercede the BBC versions that have been selling for years.
Middle of the road. Not too challenging. Not too innovative.
Safe in many ways but dull.
It has not been a golden age.
|
|
77 posts
|
RSC 2018
Sept 13, 2017 23:19:17 GMT
via mobile
Post by tributary on Sept 13, 2017 23:19:17 GMT
Agree, oxfordsimon.
And really, Lynette, re LLL and LLW? Is that how you like your Shakespeare? Hammy, shouted, camped up just to the tipping point into panto, stripped of darkness and danger, and dressed up like a chocolate box.
I thought, in case it isn't clear, that they were unforgivably conservative and boring. The night I saw it at the Haymarket, the school party in front of me were so bored they started throwing crisps at each other.
|
|
5,585 posts
|
Post by lynette on Sept 13, 2017 23:50:08 GMT
Er, I like my Shakespeare all sorts of ways. LLL brought back to life a play that had been in the doldrums for generations. I had only seen one other production of it and that was RSC and with Joseph Fiennes. He was the best bit in it! I like my Shakespeare to make sense ( ergo Aberg making the Bastard in KJ a woman wasn't to my taste nor was Meckler's stick version of R&J) and I like my Shakespeare to be well, I can't think of another word right now and this one will sound pretentious - honest. So I liked RIII with Greg Hicks in Deptford and I loved Hytner's Othello which was certainly the best of that play I've seen and in my top 5 of all Sh prods. And I liked the all gal stuff at the Donmar. I also liked Brooks's MND with the red feather all those years ago. I liked that collapsing chair AYLI at the NT. I liked the Ant and Cleo just now at the RSC. I like the Henry IVs and V the film version with SRB and TH. You wanna chuck another production at me and ask if I like it? I've seen most of them.
|
|
|
RSC 2018
Sept 14, 2017 0:53:57 GMT
via mobile
Post by oxfordsimon on Sept 14, 2017 0:53:57 GMT
LLL from that pairing was a joyous production. Far stronger than the Tennant one of a few years before.
The Much Ado, on the other hand, was one of the weakest versions I have seen on a professional stage. It was full of crass attempts at humour and lacked the real emotional heart that the play needs.
I still believe that Luscombe spent all of the rehearsal time on the first because it is the more difficult text and assumed that Much Ado would just take care of itself.
It really didn't. The Benedick gulling scene was full of pork pie gags. The Watch scenes were more painful than usual and the relationships between the classes confused. Add to that a post war setting that was ignored after the second scene and you end up with a production that was superficial. It got laughs and was held up as a success but it was still a weak version of the text.
|
|
|
Post by Honoured Guest on Sept 14, 2017 1:01:15 GMT
I still believe that Luscombe spent all of the rehearsal time on the first because it is the more difficult text and assumed that Much Ado would just take care of itself. That might possibly have been the case with the original Stratford production, but surely not with the Chichester revival?
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Sept 14, 2017 6:02:31 GMT
Agree, oxfordsimon. And really, Lynette, re LLL and LLW? Is that how you like your Shakespeare? Hammy, shouted, camped up just to the tipping point into panto, stripped of darkness and danger, and dressed up like a chocolate box. I thought, in case it isn't clear, that they were unforgivably conservative and boring. The night I saw it at the Haymarket, the school party in front of me were so bored they started throwing crisps at each other. I liked LLL and MA in general but agree that they descended into pantomime at points (the hiding in the Xmas tree stuff), they were not the best versions of the two I have seen. However, I'm not sure Luscombe deserves all the praise/blame - it was Greg Doran who specified these two plays had to be done together and set either side of WW-I, that was the brief Luscombe was handed. I would have thought it was quite unusual at the RSC for a director to be told exactly what setting they have to use for a play.
|
|
1,093 posts
|
Post by samuelwhiskers on Sept 14, 2017 11:17:34 GMT
I loved the chocolate box LLL and I also loved the OTT 80s King John, and I've loved productions ranging from the very traditional (Globe pre-Rice) to the very modern and radical (Joe Hill-Gibbens YV work). People like a range of stuff, it mainly depends on whether it's done well.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 14, 2017 19:49:51 GMT
I loved the LLL/LLW too. Not everything needs to be high class intellectual stuff. The staging was beautiful, the music was gorgeous, the chemistry between Ed Bennett and Michelle Terry was fantastic. The hammy comedy was just the right side of too far, for me, and I just found it massively enjoyable.
Anyway, I'm looking forward to some of the new stuff, especially the Eccleston Macbeth. Romeo & Juliet I can take or leave, the casting will make my decision whether to go or not.
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Sept 16, 2017 13:25:34 GMT
Doran's decision choose Troilus and Cressida for his first go at 50/50 male/female casting seems like an odd choice, it is a play very much about a lone woman in an oppressively all-male military environment. It was a distinguished director - Peter Stein I think - who identified the key scene as being the one where Cressida arrives in the Greek camp and immediately "they all want to f*** her". Well, let's see how he casts it.
|
|
Xanderl
Member
Not always very high value in terms of ticket yield or donations
|
Post by Xanderl on Oct 23, 2017 10:51:58 GMT
Public booking opened today. Nice and painless experience!
Macbeth seems to be selling very well. The booking page for this warns "Please note that this production will emphasise the more disturbing psychological themes in Macbeth and as such may be unsuitable for a younger audience."
Only booked for that and Fantastic Follies of Mrs Rich.
Judging by the page for Merry Wives of Windsor it will be a modern version inspired by The Only Way is Essex.
|
|
299 posts
|
RSC 2018
Oct 23, 2017 18:39:44 GMT
via mobile
Post by macksennett on Oct 23, 2017 18:39:44 GMT
I booked for Miss Littlewood - a great booking experience, no technical glitches. I looked at Macbeth but high ticket prices put me off - for now at least.
|
|
137 posts
|
RSC 2018
Oct 24, 2017 11:14:13 GMT
via mobile
Post by jason71 on Oct 24, 2017 11:14:13 GMT
Found out yesterday that Macbeth is going to be done without an interval. I'll wait for the moaning about this to commence
|
|
Xanderl
Member
Not always very high value in terms of ticket yield or donations
|
Post by Xanderl on Oct 24, 2017 12:07:02 GMT
Interesting! The 1970s Trevor Nunn / Ian McKellen / Judi Dench version was 2 hours 15 minutes with no interval. Also the 2000 Anthony Sher version was 2 hours 10 straight through.
Moaning probably justifiable in this case (depending on the eventual running time) unlike Follies although on the other hand it may make life easier for travelling back from Stratford afterwards!
|
|
|
Post by oxfordsimon on Oct 24, 2017 12:37:40 GMT
It actually doesn't make getting back from Stratford any easier by train
Your options are 21.39 or 23.15
So your only hope for getting the 21.39 one is for it to be a 7pm start - and as evening shows are 7.15pm starts for this production, I would resign yourself to a bit of a wait... or hope for a tight 2 hour run time and a taxi waiting to get you to the station!
|
|
1,119 posts
|
RSC 2018
Oct 24, 2017 16:20:59 GMT
via mobile
Post by martin1965 on Oct 24, 2017 16:20:59 GMT
Excellent! Macbeth is shortish and def suits being done straight through.
|
|
|
RSC 2018
Oct 24, 2017 18:03:55 GMT
via mobile
Post by Jan on Oct 24, 2017 18:03:55 GMT
Excellent! Macbeth is shortish and def suits being done straight through. Agree. I like Tempest straight through too. There was one famous John Barton production where they did Comedy of Errors and Titus Andronicus as a double bill with a single interval between them (I think It was those two plays).
|
|
|
Post by Honoured Guest on Oct 24, 2017 18:23:16 GMT
It was. Rumour (or publicity) had it at the time that the Dulux dog from Comedy of Errors trotted on stage during Titus Andronicus and ate the pies containing the family members.
|
|
1,119 posts
|
RSC 2018
Oct 24, 2017 19:09:58 GMT
via mobile
Post by martin1965 on Oct 24, 2017 19:09:58 GMT
Excellent! Macbeth is shortish and def suits being done straight through. Agree. I like Tempest straight through too. There was one famous John Barton production where they did Comedy of Errors and Titus Andronicus as a double bill with a single interval between them (I think It was those two plays). Seen a few Tempests dont recall one without an interval. Julius Caesar is of course the other biggie best done straight through.
|
|
5,585 posts
|
Post by lynette on Oct 24, 2017 21:37:09 GMT
I can’t recall seeing any without an interval. Maybe the Macbeth in German I once saw, the one with the chicken stabbing mentioned many times here..
|
|
587 posts
|
RSC 2018
Oct 24, 2017 21:42:00 GMT
via mobile
Post by Polly1 on Oct 24, 2017 21:42:00 GMT
The Donmar all female Tempest was straight through, as indeed was their JC.
|
|
5,585 posts
|
Post by lynette on Oct 24, 2017 21:44:10 GMT
The Donmar all female Tempest was straight through, as indeed was their JC. Ok, saw the JC. Obs didn’t bother me.
|
|
|
RSC 2018
Oct 25, 2017 3:31:52 GMT
via mobile
Post by Jan on Oct 25, 2017 3:31:52 GMT
Agree. I like Tempest straight through too. There was one famous John Barton production where they did Comedy of Errors and Titus Andronicus as a double bill with a single interval between them (I think It was those two plays). Seen a few Tempests dont recall one without an interval. Julius Caesar is of course the other biggie best done straight through. Just off the top of my head I think the Peter Hall/Michael Bryant Tempest has no interval. I just heard something about an old production of Tempest, it was outdoors beside an ornamental lake. At the end when Ariel is released he ran off across the surface of the lake, they’d rigged up some hidden stepping stones just below the surface. Imagine seeing that effect. Similar to that Almeida one where Ariel first emerged from the middle of an on-stage pool.
|
|
Xanderl
Member
Not always very high value in terms of ticket yield or donations
|
Post by Xanderl on Oct 25, 2017 5:42:00 GMT
The Old Vic Bridge Project Tempest had no interval
|
|
|
RSC 2018
Oct 25, 2017 6:48:51 GMT
via mobile
Post by oxfordsimon on Oct 25, 2017 6:48:51 GMT
Seen a few Tempests dont recall one without an interval. Julius Caesar is of course the other biggie best done straight through. Just off the top of my head I think the Peter Hall/Michael Bryant Tempest has no interval. I just heard something about an old production of Tempest, it was outdoors beside an ornamental lake. At the end when Ariel is released he ran off across the surface of the lake, they’d rigged up some hidden stepping stones just below the surface. Imagine seeing that effect. Similar to that Almeida one where Ariel first emerged from the middle of an on-stage pool. That was Coghill's production staged in the gardens of Worcester College just down the road from me here in Oxford. It is a wonderful setting and that production has gone down in local history. I think it was in the late 40s and people still talk of that moment
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 7, 2018 11:05:47 GMT
The Duchess of Malfi is fantastic. A real crackle of scandal before the interval. Act 2 quite literally a bloodbath. Strong performances all around, with Joan Iyiola outsanding as the Duchess. Amanda Hadinque as her waiting-woman also great - wily and compassionate. May well make a return visit in a few weeks for the open understudy rehearsal.
|
|
1,119 posts
|
RSC 2018
Mar 7, 2018 12:09:01 GMT
via mobile
Post by martin1965 on Mar 7, 2018 12:09:01 GMT
The Duchess of Malfi is fantastic. A real crackle of scandal before the interval. Act 2 quite literally a bloodbath. Strong performances all around, with Joan Iyiola outsanding as the Duchess. Amanda Hadinque as her waiting-woman also great - wily and compassionate. May well make a return visit in a few weeks for the open understudy rehearsal. Oh good, going on saturday week, love the play but was a bit nervous after the White Devil farrago a couple of years back.
|
|