154 posts
|
Post by cherokee on Feb 14, 2019 14:08:38 GMT
controversially perhaps, Jonathan Bailey. Maybe his performance has become broader as time has gone on, but he was so massively OTT and hysterical, I didn't believe in him for a moment. Plus he whispered so many of his lines I missed most of them. Yes, on a second viewing the other week, I can confirm that the adorable Jonathan Bailey's performance has become much more manic and his whispering of some of the dialogue was completely lost. The only performance in the show that is substantially different from how it was at the start. Not as effective IMO. Must have directorial approval I assume. He did get huge laughs and exit applause. Yes the audience lapped him up on the night I saw it too. I just didn't feel the same way.
|
|
154 posts
|
Post by cherokee on Feb 14, 2019 13:41:24 GMT
I thought this was a really interesting production. Fascinating to see how the gender swaps changed the dynamic between Bobbie and the other characters. Knowing the original script pretty well, it was interesting to compare.
For instance in the original, all the wives fancy Bobby but the husbands are all tolerant of this, and exhibit a mixture of envy for his single/playboy lifestyle and encouragement that he should settle down with his own partner. Whereas in the Elliot version, the wives feel far more threatened by single, attractive Bobbie when their husbands flirt with her. To the point where Joanne actually offers her husband to her as a sexual partner so that she can maintain some level of control over the situation. I found myself thinking: I suspect the wives (particularly Sarah and Jenny) would gradually ease Bobbie out of their lives. And as a result, I didn't get a sense of Bobbie having any genuine female friends in her life. Her best friend is a gay man.
The scenes with the boyfriends were interesting too. There were very few dialogue changes, but lines that made the character of Kathy sweet and old-fashioned made Theo dull and unadventurous and lines that in Marta's mouth were eccentric and kooky, became plain obnoxious in PJ's. Very interesting to compare and contrast. (Though I didn't think it was necessary to make PJ English and found that a bit of a distraction. No English person would say "off of the train"...)
I thought Rosalie Craig was very good, and Patti LuPone just outstanding. Boy can that woman time a line! Richard Fleeshman was very sweet with an incredible body!!
The weak links I thought were Mel Giedroyc (gurning and unsubtle - just as she was in 'Much Ado about Nothing' at the Rose Kingston) and, controversially perhaps, Jonathan Bailey. Maybe his performance has become broader as time has gone on, but he was so massively OTT and hysterical, I didn't believe in him for a moment. Plus he whispered so many of his lines I missed most of them.
On the whole a very strong ensemble piece: 4 stars rather than 5 due to those two dud performances.
|
|
154 posts
|
Post by cherokee on Oct 6, 2018 8:37:02 GMT
The reviews seem largely to be based on whether or not the reviewer thinks Brexit is a good idea.
|
|
154 posts
|
Post by cherokee on Aug 31, 2018 9:56:43 GMT
What about Andy Nyman? He was in Assassins at the Menier so he's worked for them before. Have you got next week’s lottery numbers please? Ha! I wish. I was just thinking of Jewish actors of the right sort of age: plus he's done a musical at the Menier before and was very good in it.
|
|
154 posts
|
Post by cherokee on Aug 19, 2018 12:56:57 GMT
I thought this was well performed and nicely produced. And great that Above the Stag are now giving their cast microphones, which always scuppered their musicals at the old venue.
My only reservations are about the piece. It seems weirdly conservative and slightly reactionary:
Not all LGBT men are looking to settle down in a conventionally romantic 'happy ending' and I found it a little judgmental regarding anyone who didn't. Plus making the token older guy the villain with the sexual kinks... I'd hope they'd be promoting a healthier, more inclusive attitude towards LGBT men's sexuality.
|
|
154 posts
|
Post by cherokee on Aug 19, 2018 12:51:30 GMT
What about Andy Nyman? He was in Assassins at the Menier so he's worked for them before.
|
|
154 posts
|
Post by cherokee on Aug 18, 2018 7:56:14 GMT
I agree that when understudies go on there should be an announcement and signs in the foyer. However, having seen the show, Colin Haigh is a non-speaking character who appears as part of the ensemble of elderly patients, so you won't have missed any of the text, and the only change would have been one less 'body' in those group scenes.
|
|
154 posts
|
Post by cherokee on May 7, 2018 10:28:40 GMT
Chess is a conundrum. This production doesn't solve it and I'm not sure it's even possible too. Yes, the score is wonderful. But the story remains as dissatisfying as when I first saw it twenty years ago. A bunch of horrible, self-involved people that you don't care about. Who cares whether Freddie or Anatoly wins? They're both pretty obnoxious. And the love story seemed slighter in this version than ever. We spend more time watching them playing chess than we do falling in love, and it's not helped by the fact that Janson and Ball are a pretty unlikely romantic couple to begin with. Freddie is such a horrible character, and his songs are pitched so high, that you just want him to go away. And it's not helped by Tim Howar gurning away, acting badly and looking exactly like Harry Enfield playing Smashie or Nicey. By the time we're asked to feel some sympathy for him in 'Pity the Child' it's too little too late. Michael Ball sings nicely - although he got a few of the lyrics wrong when I saw it, nothing major but when you know the score backwards it shows. Cassidy Janson is good too: but Florence appears so late in the story, and with one of her numbers having been given to Svetlana, she doesn't feel like the main character any more. (Reflected in the fact that she doesn't get the final bow either.) Which leaves you wondering who exactly you're supposed to be rooting for. I was relieved Alexandra Burke didn't get too self indulgent with vocal flourishes a la X Factor, but I still think she was miscast. And what had she done to annoy the costume designer? That rust coloured jumpsuit she wore at the end was horrible! Philip Brown has a good voice but he can't act either and his speech impediment was distracting.
So overall I wasn't overly impressed with the cast or the story. The Bangkok scene was dated and cliched too. And there are also concerns over yellow face. Although again I have some sympathy: what can a director do there? Hire 15 Asian ensemble members for one song? Cut the second most famous number in the show?
Still it's a big spectacle and in spite of my seeming to slate it, I thought the plethora of 2 star reviews was a little harsh. I'd have gone for 3 stars purely for the score. The ensemble did great work too.
|
|
154 posts
|
Post by cherokee on Apr 30, 2018 10:51:27 GMT
Apr 28, 2018 19:12:03 GMT 1 jasper said: It had real cakes. During the performance the plate of cakes were dropped much to the amusement of the cast who struggled to keep straight faces. This happened when I saw it too. I assume it's supposed to happen. Particularly as there were a series of lines around it which I don't think were ad libbed!
|
|
154 posts
|
Post by cherokee on Apr 2, 2018 17:56:56 GMT
Oh God - Angus Wright - the dullest actor in the world - is in this. I'll be staying away.
|
|
154 posts
|
Post by cherokee on Apr 1, 2018 10:13:28 GMT
I enjoyed this - whilst at times finding it a bit self-indulgent, mawkish and definitely over long. (It could and should have ended about half an hour sooner than it did.)
I thought the cast were great but I kept being pulled out of it by the fact two of the three leads seemed so obviously miscast. Andrew Burnap was charismatic and very funny but far too young and far too beautiful for Toby; and Samuel H Levine looked too old. The scenes between them were out of kilter because I never bought the idea that Toby was ten-fifteen years older than Adam and Leo.
|
|
154 posts
|
Post by cherokee on Jan 30, 2018 16:34:59 GMT
, the drag shop scene was just too drawn out and boring I found the whole "Legend of Loco Chanelle" sequence one of my favourites. It set up a lot of the situation to come, too, as did the rest of the scene. Wonder what I saw that others didn't? Would also point out that on Saturday afternoon a cover was playing Hugo, so maybe that helped? Yes I think the problem with that scene is Phil Nichol. He's just completely miscast and the show dips whenever he comes on. It should be this big, fabulous, show-stealing role, and he looks completely uncomfortable in the part. His accent is all over the place - Yorkshire via Liverpool, Ireland and Newcastle; and he doesn't convince as either gay or a drag queen. I don't think there's anything wrong with the scene or the song. It's just the actor.
|
|
154 posts
|
Post by cherokee on Nov 24, 2017 17:10:18 GMT
But polytechnics were abolished in 1992. Are their productions set in the early 90s or something? If they're supposed to be set in the present, it just doesn't make any sense and smacks of smugness, laziness and lack of research.
|
|
154 posts
|
Post by cherokee on Nov 23, 2017 22:57:55 GMT
Even the "Cornley Polytechnic" feels like lazy, hackneyed comic shorthand. There haven't been polytechnics for 25 years!
|
|
154 posts
|
Post by cherokee on Nov 23, 2017 14:52:53 GMT
Having never seen any of their stuff before, I tuned into last year's Peter Pan Goes Wrong. I lasted about ten minutes - I found the whole thing OTT, irritating and unfunny. I can only assume it works better in the theatre.
|
|
154 posts
|
Post by cherokee on Nov 8, 2017 19:01:17 GMT
I'd be interested in seeing this, but I spent an excruciating evening at the Donmar a few years ago watching Pirandello's Henry IV, because the frequency of James Lance's hissy 'S' hit my nerves like nails down a blackboard. I couldn't put myself through that again no matter what!
|
|
154 posts
|
Post by cherokee on May 9, 2017 7:03:27 GMT
Along with Angus Wright, I found Barnes-Worell gave the weakest performance in Hamlet, so maybe he wasn't given the option! (Although why the Almeida would promptly hire him again is a mystery.)
|
|
154 posts
|
Post by cherokee on Mar 7, 2017 23:28:51 GMT
I enjoyed this a lot, principally down to the brilliant Andrew Scott, who is never anything less than fascinating to watch. And I liked the ending: I found it rather touching.
Juliet Stevenson was good and Peter Wight's Polonius was delightful, but ye Gods Angus Wright is a dull actor. His entire performance is a mumbly monotone where he just sounds like he's reciting lines without investing any meaning in them: save for a couple of times when he gets angry. Elliot Barnes-Worral as Horatio was another weak performance in a generally very strong cast: although a bit more volume from some of them would have helped. I was in Row F of the Stalls and struggled to hear some of the lines: God knows how the back of the Circle managed.
(On a baser note, Luke Thompson makes a very sexy Laertes too - and he has lovely calves!)
Main thing though was that I wasn't bored. And at 4 hours that's no small achievement - principally due to Scott, I have to say. He elevates a 3 star production to 4 or 5 stars, in my opinion.
|
|
154 posts
|
Post by cherokee on Feb 10, 2017 11:44:33 GMT
Tried to see if there was any day seats or anything they could offer for a matinee today on the off chance. Sad state of affairs when they can only offer top price seats and would rather not sell a ticket at all than discount it. On a matinee I reckon you'd have a good chance of getting upgraded if you bought a £20 Grand Circle ticket.
|
|
154 posts
|
Post by cherokee on Jan 4, 2017 17:45:51 GMT
And I know I'm being pedantic here, but polytechnics haven't actually existed for years, have they?
|
|
154 posts
|
Post by cherokee on Jan 4, 2017 15:18:58 GMT
I'm afraid I abandoned ship after 10 minutes. Maybe it worked better on stage but the massive OTT performances really put me off and got on my nerves. Didn't work for me at all. And I'd really been looking forward to it as I've yet to see any of their productions.
|
|
154 posts
|
Post by cherokee on Dec 20, 2016 9:28:54 GMT
I have conflicted views on the issue of the Print Room casting.
If we insist that the cast should all be Chinese actors, does that therefore mean we can only produce Jesus Christ Superstar with an entirely Hebrew/Israeli cast (with a couple of Italians to play Pilate and the Romans)? That Medea and any Greek tragedy must be performed by only those of Mediterranean origin?
Ironically, there are numerous productions of Aladdin going on up and down the country at the moment, but nobody is protesting that these casts on the whole do not feature Chinese performers.
Also, did I miss a meeting? Since when did 'yellow face' get redefined? Like 'black face', it has always meant using make up techniques to transform Caucasian features into those of another ethnicity, in a stereotypical and offensive way. It now means White actors playing Chinese characters because some people say it does?
I'm also a bit suspicious of Andrew Keates' histrionic response to this. The cynic in me can't help wondering if one motivation for his outrage is his forthcoming production "Chinglish" in March which is cast with Asian actors and will undoubtedly benefit from some of this publicity.
Having said that, the Print Room dropped a real clanger equating English with White. Unbelievable that nobody checked that statement and advised them that that would be digging them further into a hole.
My main concern is that we're heading towards a situation where due to activism from minority groups who rightly feel under represented in the Arts, we have strident voices insisting that actors can and should only play parts that equate to their own personal experiences or cultural or gender backgrounds. So only gay actors can play gay parts, only trans actors trans parts, etc.
I think more should be done across the board to increase diversity across the spectrum in the theatre, but it's difficult to do this when drama schools are increasingly the preserves of the white middle classes, and minority ethnicities are under represented. Piling in on one unfortunate show and pillorying them is not entirely helpful.
|
|
154 posts
|
Post by cherokee on Oct 13, 2016 7:42:14 GMT
Video for this has been uploaded:
Looks fun.
|
|
154 posts
|
Post by cherokee on May 20, 2016 16:26:45 GMT
Given how many freebies theatres do tend to give out, this does seem a little tight-fisted of the NT. Will they be charging the great and the good for their partners? I doubt it. To be fair, even cast members don't get freebies. They're allocated two tickets each for Press Night but they have to pay for them. They're not comps. If the cast don't get freebies, it seems fair that reviewers' mates have to pay as well.
|
|
154 posts
|
Post by cherokee on Feb 23, 2016 10:33:53 GMT
One of my friends worked on the production and says that's bollocks. Which bit, Duchess, the bit about using an earpiece, the bit about him "giving his all, ready to faint," or did you mean that his readiness to faint was down to his pants being too tight? Clarity, please? BTW, I don't think he did use an earpiece, as his "to be, or not to be, cab to the airport for Mrs Jones, 16 Wellington Street, that is the question" came out loud and clear. And on earpieces, I challenged the PR at the Walliams "Dream" about his seeming to have something in his ear, and she was really uppity about it. I'm not suggesting he needed to be prompted on every single line. Presumably he was able to learn some of it at least.
|
|
154 posts
|
Post by cherokee on Feb 23, 2016 10:32:57 GMT
I'm not sure having an argument about the possibility of this ear piece is going to prove at all productive - it's not like it's going to be your usual exchange of opinions where both sides of the debate get to hear and understand more about each other's viewpoint and although everyone comes out believing the same as they believed when they went in it was still a good discussion, is it? It's going to descend very quickly into "well, I know someone on the production who said there definitely was an ear piece" and "well, I know someone on the production who said there definitely wasn't an ear piece", and most people will never know which is true (though they'll have their suspicions and/or preferences), and ultimately I'm pretty sure it doesn't actually matter, so. I don't know, have the argument if you want, I guess, but no one's going to be convincing anyone of anything, are they? I was shown a photo of Cumberbatch signing autographs at stage door after the show where you could clearly see that it was still in his ear. I'll see if I can dig it out and find it.
|
|
154 posts
|
Post by cherokee on Feb 22, 2016 19:01:36 GMT
Sorry, I know Cumberbatch only won due to the sheer number of his fans, but I don't think I can let the comment above that he wore an earpiece go unremarked upon - it's patent nonsense. Oh it's been a very well-kept secret but plenty of industry people know about it. All the cast and crew were aware that he had a bit of help.
|
|
154 posts
|
Post by cherokee on Feb 22, 2016 11:47:47 GMT
Benedict's speech though. OMG. Can't remember the last time an audience laughed so hard! Are they told ahead of time? I noticed very few of the unsuccessful nominees seemed to be in attendance. That speech was hysterical, it just went on and on and on. I presume it was intentional
I really don't think it was, unfortunately!
|
|
154 posts
|
Post by cherokee on Feb 22, 2016 11:46:45 GMT
Not a bad evening.
I was disappointed that Mel Giedroyc didn't host again. She was brilliant last year - just naturally funny. Steve Furst has his moments but I think he has a bitterness and a slightly nasty streak that isn't all shtick and is occasionally a bit off-putting.
Sarah Hadland was great though - very funny and self-deprecating. The running gag about her appearance in Cats went down really well. Really didn't warm to Janie Dee though. She seemed very insincere and hard. One of those actors who wants to make it all about her. Preeya Kalidas was sweet if a bit unremarkable - although I'll admit I was flagging by then.
Performances were OK on the whole. Jenna Russell was wonderful; Pixie Lott distinctly less so. And if those are really the two best songs from Mrs Henderson Presents God help them! So boring... Just dreadful. Matt Henry was great and I enjoyed the Something's Coming quartet. Though someone should have advised Alison Jiear against wearing those trousers. They really did not do her any favours at all!!
The awards themselves were pretty predictable: usually going to the biggest name in each category with the biggest online fan base. Benedict Cumberbatch's win was particularly egregious. Getting a best actor award when he didn't know his lines and had to rely on an earpiece throughout the run. Fair enough if you're Angela Lansbury and in your nineties but not for a young man playing Hamlet. And his acceptance speech was just embarrassing. People began laughing at the sheer length and self-indulgence of it. Presumably he has no one around him to advise him to keep it brief.
The finale of "One Day More" was spine tingling as always. A fun night out but it does highlight which luvvies take themselves far too seriously!
|
|