|
Post by parsley1 on Jan 11, 2024 21:02:47 GMT
Yes unfortunately she isn’t the best person for the job
I am unsure why she has this post
|
|
|
Post by toomasj on Jan 11, 2024 21:19:41 GMT
3* from Arifa in the Guardian, who seems to have been the only critic who liked it within reason. This Is the same star rating she gave Sunset Boulevard', Vanya and Next To Normal Forgive me if I stop listening to her now 😂 Seriously? 😦 Admittedly I haven’t seen this play, but I remember the absolute rage I felt when reading The Guardian’s review of “Next to Normal”. Formerly a beacon of class in the arts journalism world with some of the greatest theatre critics the country has ever known, they’ve really lost their way. I simply don’t think Arifa has a clue what she’s talking about. She seems to miss the most blatant subtext in pieces, but bizarrely finds meaning when there is none. It’s like GCSE level analysis of text and performance. I always come away more confused than when I started reading.
|
|
282 posts
|
Post by kyvai on Jan 11, 2024 22:08:16 GMT
Well, we went to see this tonight, booked yonks ago on the strength of it being Catherine Tate and a ghost story. I’d skimmed the odd whisper of it being rubbish so avoided reviews as best I could.
It was just…..well it happened, but I couldn’t tell you what the story actually was. There was no narrative to follow, no stakes to care about, no conflict to resolve. People walked on and off stage and talked to each other about “what was going on”, a couple of things actually did “go on”, but mostly it was just people talking, telling you about things that had happened rather than showing you things happening, IYSWIM?
I’m really confused as to why Catherine Tate has done this play. She’s a cracking actor and this gave her nothing to do apart from say “my kids” and “it’s my house” in various ways. I mean she did that fine, but the initial gag of her neighbour coming in and her doing a jump scare response was the peak of her performance, for the rest of the play, she was just there.
The set was visually impressive, but the upstairs section was largely out of view. My partner and I being children of the late 70s/early 80s did enjoy the period-appropriate set dressing. My mum had that laundry basket and the old branding on the quality street tin was spot on.
2* from me, because the effects were good, and the performances were fine, but unfortunately there was just no story for them to actually perform 🤣
|
|
1,217 posts
|
Post by nash16 on Jan 11, 2024 23:59:43 GMT
3* from Arifa in the Guardian, who seems to have been the only critic who liked it within reason. Can we rename her “A-threestar” please? That’s all she ever gives. Even to this.
|
|
7,051 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by Jon on Jan 12, 2024 1:19:33 GMT
Arifa liked this? She normally hates everything.
|
|
|
Post by sph on Jan 12, 2024 3:46:12 GMT
To those questioning why Tate has signed up to this job when surely there must be "better roles" out there for her, I wonder if perhaps you are underestimating how brutal the industry can be, even when you are considered famous or established as a performer.
Certainly Tate is very talented and has a large following, but there's a limited amount of new plays/TV roles out there and she has to still compete with other actresses of equal stature withing her casting bracket. If a play comes along that sounds like it has a good premise (which, in theory, this one probably did), and there's nothing else being offered to you this year, I guess you take it.
There are many famous actors out there who do take a job that isn't the best use of their talents if they've had a somewhat dry year. I'm not saying for sure that's what has happened here as I don't know her personally, but being famous doesn't mean the best roles are always going to land in your lap.
|
|
|
Post by mattnyc on Jan 12, 2024 5:44:38 GMT
I think it’s also fair to say that nobody really ever signs on for a project they think will be ripped to shreds by both audiences and critics. I’d be very interested to know what Tate especially, saw in this project.
|
|
|
Post by toomasj on Jan 12, 2024 6:36:28 GMT
She did a run in Assassins at the Menier who pay very modestly, so she obviously isn’t averse to doing theatre generally, even fringe work. And at that time her stock and fame was considerably higher with the TV show. Maybe she just really fancied doing a new play?
|
|
|
Post by partytentdown on Jan 12, 2024 8:10:42 GMT
On paper it was probably an attractive gig right? Fun story, good co-star, a tryout close to home then a run in the West End? Sounds like a good job to me. Maybe she signed up before the script was finished...
|
|
7,051 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by Jon on Jan 12, 2024 15:11:04 GMT
I wouldn't be surprised if Catherine Tate just fancied doing a play and this came along. Look at Lyonesse which had big names in it as well and on paper should have been a critical success but it ended up being a stinker.
Have to admit, Catherine Tate is clearly committed as she's doing a lot of press for it, anyone else would have refused.
|
|
|
Post by andbingowashisname on Jan 12, 2024 15:36:31 GMT
Have to admit, Catherine Tate is clearly committed as she's doing a lot of press for it, anyone else would have refused. I'd say it is highly likely that her contract includes a slice of the box office, so such commitment might not be particularly altruistic.
|
|
76 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by sophia on Jan 12, 2024 16:49:52 GMT
|
|
7,051 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by Jon on Jan 12, 2024 17:00:30 GMT
£600k would be a lot of one person. I wonder if she meant £60,000 a week which is still a lot for one person.
|
|
5,139 posts
|
Post by Being Alive on Jan 12, 2024 17:21:50 GMT
This show doesn't have the budget to pay her 60k a week. The headliners at the Palladium are getting something like that a week in a 2000+ seat house!
|
|
|
Post by sph on Jan 13, 2024 2:57:30 GMT
Have to admit, Catherine Tate is clearly committed as she's doing a lot of press for it, anyone else would have refused. I'd say it is highly likely that her contract includes a slice of the box office, so such commitment might not be particularly altruistic. A "name" star is often contracted to do press for the show also.
|
|
4,977 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by Jan on Jan 13, 2024 8:31:18 GMT
There are many famous actors out there who do take a job that isn't the best use of their talents if they've had a somewhat dry year. See also David Threlfall who at one stage had the same high profile as Catherine Tate. Sorry to see him associated with this apparent turkey.
|
|
|
Post by sph on Jan 16, 2024 2:04:27 GMT
I just saw that too! Surely not? I mean maybe that's what she's getting paid for the entire run all together and she means she gets paid it as a weekly salary? So if it's 20 weeks for example that's £30k per week?
|
|
282 posts
|
Post by kyvai on Jan 17, 2024 6:06:05 GMT
Is £30k/week a realistic salary for an A-lister in the West End? Still sounds mahoosive to me but I think perhaps I am completely unaware of the scale these people operate on.
|
|
|
Post by sph on Jan 18, 2024 4:01:08 GMT
Is £30k/week a realistic salary for an A-lister in the West End? Still sounds mahoosive to me but I think perhaps I am completely unaware of the scale these people operate on. For a name guaranteed to sell out a show it potentially can be, yes. But I just suggested 20 weeks at £30k as a feasible way of dividing £600k. I don't know the actual duration of her contract.
|
|
180 posts
|
Post by bee on Feb 25, 2024 12:10:33 GMT
I saw this yesterday. I guess it probably helps going in with low expectations, but I actually thought this wasn't so bad. As has already been said, there's not lot goes on for the first two-thirds or so, in a sense the same course of events get repeated a number of times, but I can't say I was bored. I thought the acting was generally of a high standard with Ella Schrey-Yeats chewing the scenery pretty impressively as Janet. Eventually a bit of back story emerges and we get an explanation for why Maurice is so interested in the case, but unfortunately there's no real resolution, it just sort of ends.
Audience seemed to like it, enthusiastic applause at the end.
|
|