To Have and to Hold - Hampstead Theatre

What a horrible title and even worse artwork!

If this is going to be better than a titter titter joke about getting old but remaining sarky, coming to terms with old age etc…please let me know.

This is a hard one to sum up.

First of all I would have to say it’s terrifically entertaining - for most of the play there’s a laugh on average every 10 seconds - and I’m really pleased I saw it this afternoon but really it doesn’t go anywhere and any depth, which I think Bean was striving for, doesn’t really happen. Most of the laughs are provided by the razor-sharp delivery of the double act between Alun Armstrong and Marion Bailey; also Adrian Hood as Rhubarb Eddie is fabulous. I found Hermione Gulliford and Christopher Fulford as the son and daughter much less convincing.

There is an important plot development at the end but it’s all a bit lame.

Maybe Bean needs the structure of an existing play, as in One Man and Jack Absolute, upon which to hang his sparkling dialogue.

I was also at the Saturday matinée, and concur with the previous two posts.

The whole is lacking a narrative structure, and, despite the title, the play is less about a bickering old Yorkshire couple who tolerate one another but may or may not still have mutual affection but certainly have mutual dependency, and more about how neighbours can provide the support mechanisms that absent and less caring grown-up children who have moved away fail to provide.

Well almost.

The feel is more Ayckbourn than anything Bean has written before. The humour is at the level of ITV sitcom (and that's a bad thing, in case it's not clear), and the odd chortle is only because the lines are expertly delivered by Marion Bailey and Alun Armstrong as the ageing seniors. Adrian Hood as a caring local also excels.

As the cantankerous, 91-year-old, former copper, Armstrong has a number of monologues to deliver that recount his exploits in the Constabulary of this village of Wetwang -- yes it really exists -- and the nearby town of Driffield. These are meant to provide fascinating and poignant glimpses into human foibles, but, despite being perfectly performed, they drag in act one and only come alive in act two.

I notice that Richard Wilson and Terry Johnson are now billed as co-directors. If I'm not mistaken, the latter and Richard Bean were comparing notes as we exited. I hope ill health does not account for Wilson's absence.

With some major surgery to the first half, the injection of more jokes, and I would have come away feeling considerably more sated.

Three stars.

Act 1: 14:36-15:48
Act 2: 16:10:17:01
Note: this preview was running 11 minutes longer than advertised.
Note 2: the Hampstead is to be thoroughly commended for offering a free drink to everyone who booked before this performance was re-categorised as a preview. Other theatres should take note.

Hampstead Theatre is my local theatre and it's only a comfortable 15-20 minute walk away and I was considering seeing this. In fact I actually got a promotional flyer in the post, so all of your reviews have really helped in terms of what to expect.

The early comments here had given me some idea what to expect when I saw this on Saturday and although I enjoyed it and thought the cast were good, it was indeed like a longer episode of a sitcom, so good as its popularity must be for Hampstead Theatre's finances, I'm left wondering what Richard Bean was aiming for and why the theatre programmed this, which seems quite out of keeping with its usual varied range of more challenging new plays, revivals of modern classics and new work from abroad? Not that they have to adhere to any particular genre or style, but is this a blip or a sign of things to come? And is Richard Bean softening and becoming more sentimental in middle age?

Ive seen a review referencing 'homophobic slurs' throughout the show. Is that right? Sounds odd in this day and age

Ah yes, i remember that at the time. I guess that was specifically about immigration, so i guess racist language is part of that story, whereas this is supposed to be a wacky sitcom

The only thing I can think of is when the father says something about you can't use the word 'queer' and the son tells him that it's an acceptable term now. I think it was a lame joke about the elderly not being up to date with terminology rather than a 'homophobic slur'.