|
Post by Jan on Nov 20, 2023 7:56:30 GMT
So many lines from Lear, Gloucester and Kent focus on (old) age, and the contrast between what you see and what you hear is particularly jarring One good rule of thumb for casting in King Lear is that Gloucester should be played by an actor who would be entirely suitable in all ways to play Lear himself but who simply lacks the profile to be cast as Lear. Kent is a tricky one, I saw McKellen himself fail in that role, gender swapping it here didn't do much one way or the other.
|
|
|
Post by cavocado on Nov 25, 2023 21:17:53 GMT
This was such a wasted opportunity. I couldn't see any reason for squeezing it into 2 hours, but so much was lost by doing that. I felt unmoved by scenes which I'd normally find gut-wrenching. I don't think that was due to bad acting, more that there was no time to give weight to what was happening and being said, no time for the audience to think.
An actor in his 60s is not too young to play Lear, but playing him with vigour and a lack of physical vulnerability for much of the play didn't work for me.
Of the younger actors Corey Mylchreest as Edmund and Deborah Alli as Goneril were the standouts.
I'd give it 2.5 stars. It was certainly no worse than a lot of recent Globe and RSC output, but someone else directing (with a slower pace) and more depth and experience in the supporting cast could have made this a 4 star production.
Looking forward to seeing what Danny Sapani (age 53) and Yael Farber do with the play at the Almeida next year.
|
|
2,529 posts
|
Post by n1david on Nov 27, 2023 19:06:21 GMT
Offering a couple of freebies to this on Wednesday night - please see post in Noticeboard.
|
|
|
Post by jr on Nov 29, 2023 21:28:25 GMT
Saw today's matinee. Quite boring.
I wanted to ask: both Branagh and, at times, other actors mark their R's quite strongly. Is that any particular accent? An affectation? A way of delivering the verse?
|
|
2,761 posts
|
Post by ceebee on Nov 29, 2023 22:29:56 GMT
Saw today's matinee. Quite boring. I wanted to ask: both Branagh and, at times, other actors mark they R's quite strongly. Is that any particular accent? An affectation? A way of delivering the verse? It's what some call the RADA "R".
|
|
|
Post by Fleance on Nov 30, 2023 1:59:51 GMT
So many lines from Lear, Gloucester and Kent focus on (old) age, and the contrast between what you see and what you hear is particularly jarring One good rule of thumb for casting in King Lear is that Gloucester should be played by an actor who would be entirely suitable in all ways to play Lear himself but who simply lacks the profile to be cast as Lear. Kent is a tricky one, I saw McKellen himself fail in that role, gender swapping it here didn't do much one way or the other. Michael Bryant comes to mind, in my first Lear (NT), with Anthony Hopkins. Bryant was a great Gloucester. I saw that McKellen Kent as well (Brian Cox as Lear), don't remember much about it.
|
|
1,177 posts
|
Post by joem on Dec 4, 2023 23:04:36 GMT
I have no doubt that Kenneth Branagh is a well-meaning guy (despite being a Tottenham fan) and that helping out RADA was one of the driving motivations behind this production BUT I have to say it ends up feeling like very good youth theatre rather than the loftier heights you expect to be reached in a West End production.
The cuts made to the text mutilate the play, all it does is cut down the running time but even then a couple of the key pathetic (in the right sense) speeches are delivered rather briskly by Wor Ken instead of milking them for dramatic effect. Branagh's Lear looks too young and spry to be retiring from tyranny and his fall makes him petulant rather than tragic. Unsympathetic casting doesn't help either, I am very relaxed with flexibility in this but seriously, what did we gain by having a female actor play Kent? Sum total: a cheap laugh from the audience when she declares "I'm a man!".
I don't want to knock it too much because I think the idea comes from a good place but Branagh surrounded by students in a chopped-up text doesn't sound great and ended up being deficient. I don't think someone new to the play would have got what it's about and that's a shame because it might dissuade them from going back to the theatre or to Shakespeare.
3/5 if I'm generous.
|
|
2,761 posts
|
Post by ceebee on Dec 5, 2023 7:20:58 GMT
I have no doubt that Kenneth Branagh is a well-meaning guy (despite being a Tottenham fan) and that helping out RADA was one of the driving motivations behind this production BUT I have to say it ends up feeling like very good youth theatre rather than the loftier heights you expect to be reached in a West End production. The cuts made to the text mutilate the play, all it does is cut down the running time but even then a couple of the key pathetic (in the right sense) speeches are delivered rather briskly by Wor Ken instead of milking them for dramatic effect. Branagh's Lear looks too young and spry to be retiring from tyranny and his fall makes him petulant rather than tragic. Unsympathetic casting doesn't help either, I am very relaxed with flexibility in this but seriously, what did we gain by having a female actor play Kent? Sum total: a cheap laugh from the audience when she declares "I'm a man!". I don't want to knock it too much because I think the idea comes from a good place but Branagh surrounded by students in a chopped-up text doesn't sound great and ended up being deficient. I don't think someone new to the play would have got what it's about and that's a shame because it might dissuade them from going back to the theatre or to Shakespeare. 3/5 if I'm generous. King Lear supports Spurs? Well who knew. Nothing can come of nothing...
|
|
1,177 posts
|
Post by joem on Dec 5, 2023 7:29:35 GMT
I have no doubt that Kenneth Branagh is a well-meaning guy (despite being a Tottenham fan) and that helping out RADA was one of the driving motivations behind this production BUT I have to say it ends up feeling like very good youth theatre rather than the loftier heights you expect to be reached in a West End production. The cuts made to the text mutilate the play, all it does is cut down the running time but even then a couple of the key pathetic (in the right sense) speeches are delivered rather briskly by Wor Ken instead of milking them for dramatic effect. Branagh's Lear looks too young and spry to be retiring from tyranny and his fall makes him petulant rather than tragic. Unsympathetic casting doesn't help either, I am very relaxed with flexibility in this but seriously, what did we gain by having a female actor play Kent? Sum total: a cheap laugh from the audience when she declares "I'm a man!". I don't want to knock it too much because I think the idea comes from a good place but Branagh surrounded by students in a chopped-up text doesn't sound great and ended up being deficient. I don't think someone new to the play would have got what it's about and that's a shame because it might dissuade them from going back to the theatre or to Shakespeare. 3/5 if I'm generous. King Lear supports Spurs? Well who knew. Nothing can come of nothing... Odd I know... he should be supporting Newton Heath maybe?
|
|
2,761 posts
|
Post by ceebee on Dec 9, 2023 21:29:53 GMT
Enjoyed the matinee today. Pace less frenetic than earlier in the run. Thoroughly enjoyed it.
|
|
1,868 posts
|
Post by Marwood on Jan 1, 2024 23:43:54 GMT
Its transferring to The Shed in New York in ‘Fall 2024’ if anyone is interested (I saw it advertised while seeing Here We Are there last week)
|
|