2,348 posts
|
Post by zahidf on Feb 1, 2024 15:23:10 GMT
Another iconic disabled character is Dr Strangelove - Steve Coogan and Armando Iannucci better start writing their justification essays now, unless they intend casting a disabled actor in the lead of their musical. I dont think there is any indication Strangelove will be in a wheelchair for the new play. though i reserve the right to have a go if he is! Id say his disability in the film isn't really as inherently a part of the character and the themes of the film as Richard the Third's disability is for the plot of his story ( as the play is written). The character of Strangelove is a minor character as well in terms of screen time
|
|
|
Post by oxfordsimon on Feb 1, 2024 16:28:13 GMT
Much will depend on the adaptation of Strangelove. If they retain the original tripling of roles, then there will be less pressure to ensure that Strangelove be played by an actor with a disability.
But if they split out the roles, then they should face the same questions.
Strangelove as a character has a very clearly identified condition - alien hand syndrome. It is absolutely there is the writing. It cannot easily be ignored.
However with Shakespeare, you have far greater freedom to reshape the text to suit each production.
|
|
4,451 posts
|
Post by Being Alive on Feb 1, 2024 16:41:39 GMT
Meanwhile the Globes social media channels are full of videos of dogs wearing ruffs. Vibes 😂
|
|
3,927 posts
|
Post by Dawnstar on Feb 1, 2024 18:20:14 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Feb 1, 2024 18:33:26 GMT
No. Apparently acting isn't about pretending according to someone quoted in that: "But this idea that acting is about pretending is not the case, I would argue. Acting, theatre, is about authenticity; it’s about believability. It’s the same for Black and ethnic characters: it’s about an authentic voice.” So it seems the Globe are doubly wrong for also casting a woman in the role - a bit odd for the Guardian to promote that line but there you are.
|
|
230 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by aspieandy on Feb 1, 2024 19:32:15 GMT
Apropos of very little; I'd pay proper pound notes to see Elizabeth I played by a male at The Globe.
|
|
|
Post by oxfordsimon on Feb 1, 2024 21:18:27 GMT
The idea that Richard III is a study in realism and psychological truth is just misunderstanding the play. It is not a representation of Elizabethan attitudes towards disability.
It is a piece of populist propaganda.
I don't understand what the cry for authenticity in casting leads anyone to think that this character can only be played by someone with any physical disability. True authenticity would suggest only actors with an serious but not massively impairing form of scoliosis may apply.
There are some productions that will wish to place a focus on disability and others that won't. Both are legitimate routes to take.
But we cannot start accepting casting limits being imposed by vocal lobby groups.
|
|
3,927 posts
|
Post by Dawnstar on Feb 1, 2024 21:33:29 GMT
No. Apparently acting isn't about pretending according to someone quoted in that: "But this idea that acting is about pretending is not the case, I would argue. Acting, theatre, is about authenticity; it’s about believability. It’s the same for Black and ethnic characters: it’s about an authentic voice.” So it seems the Globe are doubly wrong for also casting a woman in the role - a bit odd for the Guardian to promote that line but there you are. If no pretending is permitted in acting then no-one could play Richard III, or any other characters in the play, because there are no actors alive now who were also alive in the 15th century!
|
|
851 posts
|
Post by bordeaux on Feb 1, 2024 23:52:11 GMT
The idea that Richard III is a study in realism and psychological truth is just misunderstanding the play. It is not a representation of Elizabethan attitudes towards disability. It is a piece of populist propaganda. I don't understand what the cry for authenticity in casting leads anyone to think that this character can only be played by someone with any physical disability. True authenticity would suggest only actors with an serious but not massively impairing form of scoliosis may apply. There are some productions that will wish to place a focus on disability and others that won't. Both are legitimate routes to take. But we cannot start accepting casting limits being imposed by vocal lobby groups. Propaganda for what, though? If it's for the Tudors then it isn't very successful. Richard III is one of the most compelling characters in stage history. I've seen Anton Lesser, Ian McKellen, Ciaran Hinds, Kevin Spacey, Ralph Fiennes and the Propeller and Shakespeare at the Tobacco Factory versions and I can remember something about each Richard. But Henry VII - I can't even remember any of their faces. Henry VII belongs to the boring characters who are left on the stage at the end when the exciting characters are dead. That's not propaganda - Shakespeare is showing us that we are rather thrilled by dangerous unpredictable leaders, that our feelings are more complicated than simply wanting good governance. Read Emma Smith's brilliant essay on the play in her book on Shakespeare.
|
|
809 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by ladidah on Feb 2, 2024 8:18:23 GMT
There will certainly be a lot of pressure on Terry to excel in the role now, it will be under a microscope.
|
|
|
Post by cavocado on Feb 7, 2024 10:28:20 GMT
Re the BSL aspect of Antony and Cleopatra, I see that all performances are captioned. Has anyone been to a captioned performance there? Where do they put the caption screens? Are they visible to all areas of the theatre or just front-facing (top price) seats and groundlings?
|
|