Post by mkb on May 22, 2022 0:19:54 GMT
I haven't disliked a Mike Bartlett play before; I usually find him pretty agreeable; so I was surprised to discover I didn't enjoy his Cock. (Maybe his outpourings have improved over the years?)
If there's one prejudice I'll admit to, it's an impatience with people who can't make a decision. To have a whole play centred around one such individual was not going to end well.
Friday evening didn't even start well. The absence of an interval meant no fluids from mid-afternoon, so instead of enjoying a glass of wine in the bar, I was in my seat forty minutes early, finding myself unable to escape a soundtrack of excruciating, modern r'n'b numbers that, for me, was akin to listening to finger nails down a blackboard. This, and thirst, put me in a downer before the show had even begun.
The sightlines from the centre of row F in the Circle were excellent. The view of the bare set was less promising. There was to be no scenery and no props. Character actions, including sitting down, standing up and undressing, were signalled by an annoying head twitch, not unlike Greg's in Nighty Night albeit speeded up. Characters spinning at various speeds in concentric circles on the stage floor similarly added nothing: it even distracted me from the dialogue at times.
As acted/directed, there was no chemistry between John and his boyfriend, and it seemed a no-brainer that he should ditch him. John's dilemma is not to decide whether he is gay or bisexual -- he's self-evidently bisexual -- but which of two people to choose, both of whom he professes to love. The gender of those people was largely irrelevant.
An irritation for me was the decision to play the two male leads with slightly camp affectations. Why is it so rare for homosexual men to be portrayed on screen/stage in a manner where you wouldn't suspect their sexuality from their mannerisms and way of speaking? No wonder so many gay men are stuck in self-denial when they never see any rôle models they can relate to. (It took me until the age of 18 to accept I was gay, despite knowing I was attracted to other blokes, mainly because I knew I was nothing like any of the gay men I saw on telly.)
There was a natural break half-way through, presumably where an interval was originally intended, and the second act was more enjoyable than the dull, humourless scenes that preceded it. (I say humourless, but there were lots of girlie giggles at every reference to sex and sexuality, as though these were somehow still shocking.)
The second-half dinner-table scene -- sans table, sans chairs -- had the feel of a translated French play: there was a slight cultural dissonance. I wasn't sure why: possibly bad direction.
The stylised "movement" between scenes jarred mildly, sometimes crossing the line between evocation of a feeling and pretentiousness.
By the end, I was questioning what Bartlett's point had been. I had no answer.
Two stars.
Running time: 20:06-21:45
There was a break at 21:00 where an interval would have slotted in nicely. This would have suited the seven people in the Circle who took toilet breaks, despite the idle threat of no readmission. The area around me was more akin to a bar what with all the people clinking glasses as they topped up from ATG's overpriced bottles.
If there's one prejudice I'll admit to, it's an impatience with people who can't make a decision. To have a whole play centred around one such individual was not going to end well.
Friday evening didn't even start well. The absence of an interval meant no fluids from mid-afternoon, so instead of enjoying a glass of wine in the bar, I was in my seat forty minutes early, finding myself unable to escape a soundtrack of excruciating, modern r'n'b numbers that, for me, was akin to listening to finger nails down a blackboard. This, and thirst, put me in a downer before the show had even begun.
The sightlines from the centre of row F in the Circle were excellent. The view of the bare set was less promising. There was to be no scenery and no props. Character actions, including sitting down, standing up and undressing, were signalled by an annoying head twitch, not unlike Greg's in Nighty Night albeit speeded up. Characters spinning at various speeds in concentric circles on the stage floor similarly added nothing: it even distracted me from the dialogue at times.
As acted/directed, there was no chemistry between John and his boyfriend, and it seemed a no-brainer that he should ditch him. John's dilemma is not to decide whether he is gay or bisexual -- he's self-evidently bisexual -- but which of two people to choose, both of whom he professes to love. The gender of those people was largely irrelevant.
An irritation for me was the decision to play the two male leads with slightly camp affectations. Why is it so rare for homosexual men to be portrayed on screen/stage in a manner where you wouldn't suspect their sexuality from their mannerisms and way of speaking? No wonder so many gay men are stuck in self-denial when they never see any rôle models they can relate to. (It took me until the age of 18 to accept I was gay, despite knowing I was attracted to other blokes, mainly because I knew I was nothing like any of the gay men I saw on telly.)
There was a natural break half-way through, presumably where an interval was originally intended, and the second act was more enjoyable than the dull, humourless scenes that preceded it. (I say humourless, but there were lots of girlie giggles at every reference to sex and sexuality, as though these were somehow still shocking.)
The second-half dinner-table scene -- sans table, sans chairs -- had the feel of a translated French play: there was a slight cultural dissonance. I wasn't sure why: possibly bad direction.
The stylised "movement" between scenes jarred mildly, sometimes crossing the line between evocation of a feeling and pretentiousness.
By the end, I was questioning what Bartlett's point had been. I had no answer.
Two stars.
Running time: 20:06-21:45
There was a break at 21:00 where an interval would have slotted in nicely. This would have suited the seven people in the Circle who took toilet breaks, despite the idle threat of no readmission. The area around me was more akin to a bar what with all the people clinking glasses as they topped up from ATG's overpriced bottles.