4,156 posts
|
Post by kathryn on Apr 25, 2018 20:08:35 GMT
the men had to be the female parts But the female roles back then were played by teenage boys, not middle-aged men as in Rylance's productions. I presume Othello would have been a white man blacked up - that would never be acceptable these days. I believe the theory is that the performances of female roles would not have been particularly naturalistic at the time, hence the very stylised performance style and the amount of cross-dressing and gender-bending in Shakespeare’s plays, which wink pretty directly at the audience’s knowledge that the ‘women’ are actually male It absolutely worked in context for me - it was honestly hilarious and yet touching all at the same time. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2018 21:00:51 GMT
I've never been particularly enamoured by Rylance. That said I want to see him live at some point. I had a ticket to see Nice Fish... There was a moment at the end of that where he transformed, physically, into an old woman. Took my breath away, one of my favourite theatre moments of all time. Of course we are all forgetting his very finest work, as the voice of Flop, in Bing. |
|
5,707 posts
|
Post by lynette on Apr 25, 2018 21:59:54 GMT
But the female roles back then were played by teenage boys, not middle-aged men as in Rylance's productions. I presume Othello would have been a white man blacked up - that would never be acceptable these days. I believe the theory is that the performances of female roles would not have been particularly naturalistic at the time, hence the very stylised performance style and the amount of cross-dressing and gender-bending in Shakespeare’s plays, which wink pretty directly at the audience’s knowledge that the ‘women’ are actually male It absolutely worked in context for me - it was honestly hilarious and yet touching all at the same time. I dunno about the boys playing girls back in the day. I've seen a boys' school performance of Othello and it was absolutely convincing. I have no doubt that boys played women very well and with no nod and a wink. This wouldn’t take away from the way it does your head in when thinking about say Rosalind or Viola as I’m sure Shakespeare was aware. His challenge to our concept of sexuality is still valid, more so if the performances are convincing. |
|
4,156 posts
|
Post by kathryn on Apr 25, 2018 22:15:40 GMT
I’ve no doubt. But we know performance styles have changed considerably over time - they even changed within the 20th Century. It’s not a case of performers not being capable of giving what we consider ‘naturalistic’ performances, just that styles and conventions were different.
|
|
472 posts
|
Post by mistressjojo on Apr 26, 2018 1:30:15 GMT
Mark Rylance. He just doesn't do it for me. I didn't see Jerusalem, and I've booked for Othello hoping to be converted but thus far he's always been a blind spot for me. I thought he was miscast in Wolf Hall (actually, most of the casting in that was weirdly off) and those all male Shakespeares he did just struck me as misogynistic and greedy (he's not a smooth-chinned teenager so there was no 'historical recreation' justification). His comments on the Today programme this week haven't helped. I saw him years ago in La Bete, and he just annoyed me. Although that could easily have been the play itself. Since then I encountered him at last year's Shakespeare in the Abbey and was far more impressed. |
|
952 posts
|
Post by vdcni on Apr 26, 2018 7:20:25 GMT
I've only seen Rylance in two roles - Jerusalem where he was pretty ordinary but then I wasn't a huge fan of the play, a unpopular opinion in itself! - and Twelfth Night where I thought he was terrible, no attempt to explore the character at all - just a comedy turn. If you want to do that in Twelfth Night then there are male characters you can play or hell just put on a Panto if you want to play the Dame, it was about that subtle. It just felt like denying an actress a job for the sake of it - not helped by Johnny Flynn and Stephen Fry also being awful in that production.
And then there's his ridiculous theories as to Shakespeare's authorship.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 26, 2018 7:30:27 GMT
I've seen an amateur production of Jerusalem that confirmed two things to me: 1) the writing is absolutely strong enough to stand on its own without Rylance's help, but also 2) Mark Rylance really did do a terribly good job in it. I don't think he has an incredibly wide range, and I'm not a fan myself, but when he's in the right role, he's pretty great, and - if nothing else - he seems to understand theatre audiences and connect with them in a way that a lot of other actors just can't.
I don't even mind his stance on the authorship question, 'cos frankly if you told me he was really several woodland creatures standing on each other's shoulders and wearing a trenchcoat, I'd believe you.
Other people who are less off in a world of their own should know better than to push the frankly idiotic idea that Shakespeare couldn't possibly have been Shakespeare though...
|
|
3,040 posts
|
Post by crowblack on Apr 26, 2018 9:39:29 GMT
It’s not a case of performers not being capable of giving what we consider ‘naturalistic’ performances, just that styles and conventions were different. Those speeches about acting in Hamlet, where he talks about actors crying real tears - a rare thing even now - suggests they could be naturalistic (as do the texts themselves). he seems to understand theatre audiences I haven't seen Anthony Sher on stage in years but that was my impression with his style when I saw him way back when. I loved him on stage, but it didn't translate to the screen. I just don't find Rylance, on screen, charismatic or empathetic. There were a couple of scenes that worked for me in Wolf Hall but in the rest he seemed to be enigmatic to the point of monotony, a really odd casting in the role, and I loved the books. Maybe it's his shoe-button eyes - they just don't draw me in. Well, I've booked for Othello so maybe I'll be converted. |
|
|
|
Post by Mr Snow on Apr 26, 2018 9:44:53 GMT
Rylance was very good in his recent film roles like Dunkirk and Ready Player One. I thought he was terrible in Bridge of Spies, really annoying. Even before he opened his mouth he was ACTING! In film the craft needs to be invisible. |
|
4,156 posts
|
Post by kathryn on Apr 26, 2018 10:00:44 GMT
Those speeches about acting in Hamlet, where he talks about actors crying real tears - a rare thing even now - suggests they could be naturalistic (as do the texts themselves). Sure. But it’s also a list of complaints about acting that suggests they often weren’t! And when you compare Shakespeare’s work to that of his contemporaries - which rarely feature characters with the same degree of psychological realism as his, and are often downright ciphers or deliberate caricatures - you can see why that may have been. This is why Early Modern drama is so interesting still, and why ‘Original Practice’ is worth exploring - although these do appear to be unpopular opinions! |
|
3,040 posts
|
Post by crowblack on Apr 26, 2018 11:09:51 GMT
‘Original Practice’ is worth exploring - although these do appear to be unpopular opinions! It is - I like fruity Jacobean stuff which is so much better on stage than its rare outings on TV. My school drama teacher had us doing lurid Victorian melodramas like The Bells and The Ticket of Leave Man with Henry Irving gestures. I'm not sure why - given how rickety our school was they may have had the playtexts in the cupboard. Our Shakespeares were expurgated, the songbooks were from 1906 and Geography books full of places that no longer existed. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 27, 2018 10:54:21 GMT
I thought Don McLean sounded dreadful singing live on Radio 2 this morning, his voice is NOT sounding good right now. But Twitter seemed very excited to hear him, so into the Unpopular Opinions thread we go...
|
|
4,156 posts
|
Post by kathryn on Apr 27, 2018 11:31:55 GMT
At a certain point it would be kinder if agents of singers gently suggested they retire from live gigs. The voices of several beloved icons really have gone, and it's actually painful to listen to them.
|
|
3,040 posts
|
Post by crowblack on Apr 27, 2018 12:03:56 GMT
agents of singers gently suggested they retire from live gigs It's a shame some of them don't stop talking as well. Morrissey and that bloke from Smashing Pumpkins, I'm looking at you. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 2, 2018 15:38:20 GMT
I don't like Game of Thrones.
Let the bashing begin, I can take it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 2, 2018 15:54:22 GMT
I don't like Game of Thrones. I've never seen it. All I know about it comes from memes. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 2, 2018 15:56:51 GMT
If we were going to be bashing people for their unpopular opinions, then 1) I don't think we'd have a thread especially where it's accepted that people will be sharing their unpopular opinions, and/or 2) it'd be a LOT longer than 61 pages.
|
|
952 posts
|
Post by vdcni on May 2, 2018 15:59:36 GMT
I don't like Game of Thrones. Let the bashing begin, I can take it. I can see why people like it but I always found it half gripping and half a chore to watch. I stopped at the Red Wedding - It was such a downer I didn't feel like watching the next episode straight away and then never got around to watching it again. |
|
|
|
Post by d'James on May 2, 2018 15:59:58 GMT
I don't like Game of Thrones. Let the bashing begin, I can take it. I tried reading it but I got so bored. I don’t think it’s particularly well written and he waffles too much. He does have a good imagination though so I can see why it’s popular. |
|
494 posts
|
Post by ellie1981 on May 2, 2018 16:00:38 GMT
I don't like Game of Thrones. I've never seen it. All I know about it comes from memes. My flat mate is obsessed with it. It’s fine by me as she subscribed us to Now TV purely so she could have Sky Atlantic. I’ve never seen it and have no interest at all. It’s only irritating when groups of friends and colleagues get together to squeal about some new plot point, when all the shows I watch seemingly aren’t anywhere near as popular and I don’t have anyone to talk to about them. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 2, 2018 16:59:27 GMT
If we were going to be bashing people for their unpopular opinions, then 1) I don't think we'd have a thread especially where it's accepted that people will be sharing their unpopular opinions, and/or 2) it'd be a LOT longer than 61 pages. I know, it was a joke!  Bashing is what I get in real life when I say that! People take it as an offense. Like, come on, it's just a TV show. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 2, 2018 17:03:55 GMT
I don't like Game of Thrones. Let the bashing begin, I can take it. I got through one series then got bored of trying to work out whose tits and bits I was watching and not really caring who was or wasn't going to be in charge. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 2, 2018 17:16:59 GMT
I didn't even make it to the end of season one. Found the whole thing so freaking boring.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 2, 2018 17:22:13 GMT
I've never seen it. All I know about it comes from memes. My flat mate is obsessed with it. It’s fine by me as she subscribed us to Now TV purely so she could have Sky Atlantic. I’ve never seen it and have no interest at all. It’s only irritating when groups of friends and colleagues get together to squeal about some new plot point, when all the shows I watch seemingly aren’t anywhere near as popular and I don’t have anyone to talk to about them. Ugh, don't get me started on that. I hate it when you are having dinner or coffee or whatever with friends and they start discussing the latest episode. Shut up and start a conversation I can contribute to, thank you very much. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 2, 2018 19:51:07 GMT
I hate it when you are having dinner or coffee or whatever with friends and they start discussing the latest episode. What I hate more than that is when they try to convince you that you'll enjoy something because they enjoy it, and they just don't seem to understand that all those things they keep going on about that are so great are exactly the things that make it unwatchable for me. |
|
Bashing is what I get in real life when I say that! People take it as an offense. Like, come on, it's just a TV show.