|
Post by orchidman on Mar 28, 2024 22:42:51 GMT
If you enjoyed Eddie Murphy in Norbit then the Theatre Royal Haymarket has just the show for you.
It's a superficial take on the novel shrilly and irritatingly directed and hammily overacted that overstays its welcome by approximately 1 hour and 59 minutes.
To preserve a sunny perspective on our species it is necessary to assume the critics were paid off as part of the business plan.
Do not pay the hard currency they are charging, do not pay soft currency either. Abysmal.
|
|
|
Post by orchidman on Feb 16, 2024 23:30:23 GMT
Perhaps one day soon a playwright will realise which side of the political divide in the West is currently most aggressive in its efforts to suppress free speech and truth. That day is yet to come.
The framing device(s) of this play makes very little sense if you actually think it through but fortunately for all involved in this production the people who are clever enough to do that thinking aren't likely to expend their mental energy attending or pondering a play on this meagre intellectual level.
Most of the greatest artists across human history until very recently would have agreed with the artistic ideals expressed by Celik. It is clear that Sam Holcroft does not want to us agree with him. She is not one of the greatest artists in human history.
|
|
|
Post by orchidman on Feb 5, 2024 23:51:56 GMT
A very good play but I think it falls short of being great. Jez Butterworth is not a writer blessed with real intellectual depth, and yet he can make that feel irrelevant with his big strengths of energy and atmosphere. The Hills of California isn't as vital as Mojo, Jerusalem or The Ferryman.
Partially that's because this feels like a mish-mash of things we've seen before, and sometimes seen before once or twice too often.
It takes a little too long to get going and then when Laura Donnelly shows up again towards the end you feel it should kick into top gear and it doesn't quite get there.
I would have liked the grown-up Joan to appear earlier and to be more reflective, she was the character who had the potential to give the play oomph.
It's amusing but not hilarious, touching but not emotive, inventive but not inspired.
It's still going to be one of the best new plays of the year and a must-see for any serious playgoer. At 54, and without being prolific, maybe Jez Butterworth will have one more big play in him, maybe not. It's a young man's game.
|
|
|
Post by orchidman on Jan 20, 2024 17:03:36 GMT
Isn't there also an issue in that the longer a that's is seen to be failing, the less likely the top writers and actors are going to want to be associated with it? For example, how on earth is Hampstead supposed to attract great writers from around the world who would look at this report and want nothing to do with the place? They have gone from producing a bunch of failing writers whose names I can't remember to new plays by Richard Bean, John Logan and Christopher Hampton and revivals from Tom Stoppard and Stephen Adly Guirgis. Top writers aren't afraid of failure and being named in some silly report.
|
|
|
Post by orchidman on Dec 22, 2023 15:15:39 GMT
Annie Baker is one of those writers who should be made to write one well-made play to test if she could actually do it. What makes Picasso interesting is that he could paint beautifully but chose to pursue other lines of enquiry. Whereas Damien Hirst has a few good ideas but can't actually paint. I would suspect Baker is somewhere nearer to Hirst.
What we have here is the technique of opening with a very boring first 10 minutes so that the less boring minutes that follow feel more compelling and entertaining than they actually are. But it's less boring than The Flick because it doesn't go on all night.
It is a well-realised portrayal of contemporary American nihilism but it offers no exit ramp, or even the promise of one, which is surely the true calling for a contemporary American artist.
|
|
|
Post by orchidman on Dec 22, 2023 15:06:14 GMT
Even despite Hampstead going back to proper plays by proper writers on their main stage, yet again the Downstairs play is better than the main stage offering. This play could do with the cast size allowed to Rock 'n' Roll, and has a lot more going on intellectually, which is damning evidence that Stoppard was over the hill by 2006.
It's true this doesn't quite hang together, the Stalin subplot or at least the portrayal of it is the bit to axe, and this would thus allow a deepening of the central couple's portrayal while taking the running time down and removing the need for an interval.
Of the cast of three Esh Alladi isn't great but he isn't helped by having to give a hammy lecture at the start of the play, from which he never quite shifts into a more natural mode.
|
|
|
Post by orchidman on Dec 22, 2023 14:52:53 GMT
It feels like they should be paying David Mamet royalties for this, it's pure Mamet straight through.
You wonder about the development of the project because it's a play which would only work with bona fide star power in the lead but it's not strong enough material to be confident it will attract that kind of star.
Not sure if it would be preferable to see Woody Harrelson in a proper play or in this one where he really gets to chew the scenery. It's a surprisingly thankless role for Andy Serkis, it's somewhat surprising he would take this on.
You will enjoy yourself if you go in expecting nothing more than a star vehicle, and Harrelson has tangible star power. I would say he's great value but I've seen the prices they are trying to charge.
|
|
|
Post by orchidman on Dec 6, 2023 2:03:47 GMT
This is bad; twee with shallow storytelling, subpar dialogue and lyrics, and music that is entirely forgettable.
Whilst obviously you hope anyone in Henry Fraser's situation is able to still find meaning and purpose in their life, if you want me to believe that someone this profoundly disabled would come to stop wishing their injury hadn't happened then you are going to have to actually deal with the realities of it and not pretend that they are still as attractive to the opposite sex as before, or that in the long term their artless paintings are likely to represent anything more than a pleasant hobby.
Could also have done without the reminder of this country's cringeing and cringe-worthy feelings towards its mediocre healthcare system.
It is all a good encapsulation of how we have imported American schmaltz and superficiality and their 'let's pretend' spirit without beginning to match their 'can do' spirit and its associated economic might. So we are supposed to pretend this third-rate piece is somehow of the same calibre of the American competition.
It does mean you can go along and sit in the round in Soho to watch people smiling and clapping along, and to all appearances finding this false and crass spectacle to be somehow life-affirming, and in that flurry of activity you can feel a little of the soul and dignity of this once magisterial nation dying.
|
|
|
Post by orchidman on Nov 12, 2023 13:35:08 GMT
I am shocked, shocked to hear intimations that a writer of vapid, unfunny and overlong plays has not hit theatrical gold with a play inspired by a reality TV show from 2011.
There's simply no way the Royal Court could have predicted this.
|
|
|
Post by orchidman on Sept 21, 2023 18:09:36 GMT
A review which describes a character in a play from 1913 as a "proto-Marxist". Marx died in 1883. Say what you will about the Grauniad but this is the kind of thing their writers used to know about.
|
|
|
Post by orchidman on Jul 31, 2023 22:10:13 GMT
It's not the leading lady or the director, it's the play
Should be 90 minutes tops but even then there's nothing to actually care about
It's just so old-fashioned in its sensibility
Note to producers: do not resuscitate
|
|
|
Post by orchidman on Jul 26, 2023 14:53:51 GMT
The only improvement that could have been made would be more of a nod to the unsavoury side of England fans during Southgate’s tenure. The rioting and violence of thousands who forced their way into Wembley for the Euro 2020 final, for example (I was there - it was appalling). Also the fact that while more level headed football fans totally acknowledge the progress made, even after the France defeat, he receives a huge amount of criticism and calls to go from people who despise him for his political and moral views as much as anything else. No, football fans who like winning don't like Southgate because he has an incredible track record of losing going back to 1996. After that he then lost the two major finals he reached as a player, one as captain. Then as England manager he has had a very strong squad at his disposal with players drawn from the best league in the world under the best club managers and he has had incredibly good luck with the opposition he has faced and the good fortune to effectively be the host nation of the 2021 Euros. And yet he always finds a way to lose. In the knock-out stages of the 2018 World Cup the first decent side he faced was Croatia and he managed to lose despite taking the lead and despite having a much stronger bench when it went to Extra Time. In the knock-out stages of the 2021 Euros he is lucky enough to play an even poxier side in the semi-finals, Denmark, and at home, and still can't beat them in normal time. Then facing a very average Italy side and despite again taking the lead he manages to lose a final at Wembley, despite again having a much stronger bench when it went to Extra Time. Then in the 2022 World Cup he finally faces a decent side earlier in the Quarter Finals and despite France missing key players they get him beat in normal time with that 36-year-old superstar of world football Olivier Giroud landing the killer blow. Some sportsmen are winners and some are losers. Southgate is a loser. He has always been a loser. But he has done a great PR job to convince the FA to continue to pay him £5 million a year to lose. It is a sign of the decline of our country and its spirit that we champion a guy for being nice despite him being the exact opposite of what is needed in his role. Because the purpose of sport is to win. And winners win and losers lose. That's the brute truth which a nice boy like James Graham can't or won't tell you.
|
|
|
Post by orchidman on Jul 21, 2023 22:14:42 GMT
If you think Mark Rylance is a genius then I guess you will enjoy yourself.
If you think he's a great actor with terrible literary judgement then you will have to try not to laugh at this mess.
It's sad to see him and a cast of over 20 deployed so badly on a big stage.
Whilst it is an interesting historical story there is no evidence here that it is good material for a play and plenty of evidence that the makers didn't have much confidence in it themselves as they resort to gimmickry to pad it out to an unnecessarily long running time.
|
|
|
Post by orchidman on Jul 10, 2023 22:02:01 GMT
First half isn't very good, second half is shockingly bad.
It's honestly embarrassing to produce this on a major stage while deliberately inviting comparisons to both Clybourne Park or A Raisin in the Sun when its place is more than one level beneath.
And on this evidence can't help but wonder why the incompetent playwright Kwame Kwei-Armah dislikes the work of highly competent playwright Bruce Norris.
|
|
|
Post by orchidman on Jun 22, 2023 13:34:05 GMT
From Deadline's story on Sarah Snook doing Dorian Gray. My emphasis. If anyone is wavering on seats, it might be worth deciding sooner rather than later. Don't believe the hype!
|
|
|
Post by orchidman on Jun 13, 2023 19:41:02 GMT
Not sure whether we should have a moratorium on swear words in play titles or if it should be allowed to continue as a strong signal to potential ticketbuyers that the writer is neither big nor clever.
|
|
|
Post by orchidman on May 7, 2023 11:47:23 GMT
It's doing good box office with some big names but is predictably one of those things in which a second rate writer leans on a first rate writer in an attempt to elevate themselves.
At least people paying the top prices are getting a big cast, high class production of the sort the National should be able to deliver more often.
The actors in the smaller roles have an easier time of it with less to compare themselves against. In the leads, Mark Gatiss is irritating because that's all he knows. Tuppence Middleton isn't Elizabeth Taylor because that's impossible. Johnny Flynn makes it worth watching because he's Johnny Flynn.
If you can't tell the difference between the first rate of the second rate and the actual first rate then you will have a first rate evening. Just remember to forget that Jack Thorne is Jack Thorne, a writer of no genuine depth or insight.
|
|
|
Post by orchidman on May 6, 2023 14:14:24 GMT
This is worth seeing if you want to see a production of The Vortex, hard to believe there will be a better one in the next 15 years.
|
|
|
Post by orchidman on May 1, 2023 21:53:42 GMT
Parade is an emotive musical about people pretending that a man likes 13 year olds. MJ is a hit-packed musical that pretends the opposite.
|
|
|
Post by orchidman on May 1, 2023 21:48:13 GMT
"I'd rather be a good liver than have one"
This is a well-written play although I'm not sure the Zeller-esque unreliable memories really justified their inclusion.
The leading man is irritating as said above. Why are so many male leading parts at present written and acted as complete drips? We possibly needed to see his paintings to really believe the relationship. There was definitely an element of: "Is she really going out with him?"
|
|
|
Post by orchidman on Mar 1, 2023 18:19:33 GMT
This is a good play and probably only got on at the National because it flies over Rufus Norris's head. But whilst acknowledging that, Simon Stone should have had the confidence to write his own work rather than leaning on the work of others which results in the very weak ending here.
Janet McTeer's character is too resourceful and the world has changed too much for it to end like that.
|
|
|
Post by orchidman on Feb 27, 2023 14:02:24 GMT
I'm shocked, shocked to discover that The Guardian is not a serious newspaper
|
|
|
Post by orchidman on Feb 6, 2023 22:15:37 GMT
Virginia Woolf adapted by and for people who have never read Virginia Woolf
The critics whose 4 and 5 stars adorn the facade have once again embarrassed themselves
|
|
|
Post by orchidman on Feb 1, 2023 13:59:34 GMT
This is classy for a touring production.
Not as good as the film but solid and the lead actors do a good job, in particular Ben Onwukwe filling Morgan Freeman's big shoes in what was perhaps Freeman's best screen role.
Worth seeing if you haven't seen the film for awhile and would enjoy seeing the story with an appreciative audience.
|
|
|
Post by orchidman on Jan 20, 2023 23:14:33 GMT
Oh, boy. After managing to open Cabaret with two of the three main parts miscast, Rebecca Frecknall tops herself with a full house.
Admittedly it's hard to cast Stanley given the feminisation of leading men in the past 75 years but still.
It feels like a school play where you put the one pupil who can act in the main role regardless of suitability.
With the lack of chemistry in the cast and the bare staging it could hardly be less atmospheric. Is Frecknall aware this is a play performed properly by Anderson and Kirby in recent memory?
If this mess goes to the West End it is the sort of production which puts casual theatre goers off for years. At least at the Almeida with Mescal's box office appeal it is only playing to theatre devotees and his fans.
|
|
|
Post by orchidman on Jan 7, 2023 13:16:05 GMT
She doesn't look anything near 33 and even if she did a woman of 30 in 1947 was something different to a woman of 30 in 2023.
|
|
|
Post by orchidman on Dec 27, 2022 0:57:43 GMT
Michael Potts steals the show if they can bring him with it
|
|
|
Post by orchidman on Dec 17, 2022 2:56:30 GMT
Very average play, beginning to feel dated. One of those pieces that gets called a dramedy because it's neither dramatic or funny enough. Ending is very weak.
Strange choice to revive this, The Humans was successful (and much better) but not so successful as to make Karam into a box office draw in the UK.
|
|
|
Post by orchidman on Dec 15, 2022 19:47:03 GMT
Jerusalem was the only 5 star play in London this year which is depressing.
Cabaret is now better without Eddie Redmayne.
The Piano Lesson on Broadway the best new production of the year even if it's still a revival.
|
|
|
Post by orchidman on Dec 15, 2022 19:39:41 GMT
Give me a proven classic with an actor of presence over the current standard of new plays any day
|
|