|
|
Post by greenandbrownandblue on May 14, 2024 5:50:36 GMT
Been thinking about Jamie Lloyd's trajectory. A few years ago, he used to be a go to for traditional, detailed revivals; the likes of Inadmissable Evidence, Passion, She Stoops to Conquer. Even his productions of new shows were fairly 'classic' - I'm thinking Spelling Bee and The Pride. Then he started the Jamie Lloyd seasons at Trafalgar, where his productions, whilst less naturalistic and traditional, were definitely not minimalist.
What was his first production with the stripped back, all wearing black, visible microphone approach? That's now his house-style, but it's quite a jump from his earlier work, and important to remember that his productions weren't always like that.
|
|
|
|
Post by asps2017 on May 14, 2024 6:51:49 GMT
When is press night?
|
|
|
|
Post by solotheatregoer on May 14, 2024 7:11:11 GMT
I don’t think JL has peaked. He’s had a good run of pretty much back to back productions, the majority of which have been very well received. This one just felt very routine to me. Yes they all had the standard JL elements but there was always something more beyond that to keep me engaged. There is nothing here. Couple that with a poor lead (sorry for the Holland negativity again) and you get what is actually a dull production in many parts.
He’s certainly churning them out recently. I would prefer he took some time away and gave himself a bit of a creative break. Or just get back to basics with a strong cast and focus on the text. This is why I liked The Seagull (seemingly more than most). Or maybe we’re all still under the Sunset effect. I have already booked to see this a couple of times in October and R&J does not even come close.
|
|
1,866 posts
|
Post by Dave B on May 14, 2024 7:23:22 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by craigbowker on May 14, 2024 8:29:11 GMT
I feel like the odd person out but I actually quite enjoyed Tom Holland's Romeo. I think he captured the intensity of living essentially in a gang war while moments of a young excited boy in love broke through the surface a few times in ways that felt natural, like he couldn't keep them bottled up. Much of the whispered moments come back to direction, so if you don't like that it probably won't hit with you.
It certainly wasn't my favourite Shakespeare production I've ever seen, but it was definitely good. I would happily see it again. Creative, artistic, intense, etc. I don't think Holland held it back at all.
One thing I like to consider is that the theatre going public is not a majority of regulars like us. More than half of the people who see this show will not know who Jamie Lloyd is nor what he has done before, so even if he has done something similar it will still be new to them.
|
|
75 posts
|
Post by claireyfairy1 on May 14, 2024 8:53:27 GMT
After Faustus bombed, Jamie Lloyd went small and immersive with the Pitchfork Disney and Killer at Shoreditch Town Hall, and they remain my very favourites of his. I am not averse to his west end shows - I thought Cyrano was amazing - but the temptation to rehash instead of reinvent is strong with him. The Seagull was the most boring follow-up to Cyrano imo. And Romeo & Juliet is one of the hardest Shakespeares to make work. I've never seen one I liked, even though I love it as text.
All that to say, I wish he'd revisit some of his old work and ideas because he is a great director that is maybe feeling pressured to recreate past successes. I look forward to seeing R&J though, I suspect it will bed in. It's a lot of pressure on Tom Holland and it will maybe take him time to find the rhythm and relax on stage.
|
|
19,793 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on May 14, 2024 8:59:44 GMT
What’s the bit on the roof all about then? (Use spoilers if it’s supposed to be a surprise).
|
|
|
|
Post by Afriley on May 14, 2024 9:35:50 GMT
What’s the bit on the roof all about then? (Use spoilers if it’s supposed to be a surprise). It’s after Romeo is exiled and gets news of Juliet. He’s smoking on the roof against a nighttime London skyline (which was pretty but yeah, didn't serve much purpose beyond that). Then he walks down into the theatre and, well, we all know how the play ends. |
|
1,499 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by Steve on May 14, 2024 9:36:48 GMT
I didn’t pay anywhere near £250 (despite being third row stalls) and knew I was going for 1. First preview Are you saying that you booked the first preview (Saturday) and were reseated to the Monday?
If so, did they dynamically make you pay more than you initially paid, or did they allow you to swap for the price you initially paid?
|
|
|
|
Post by thedrowsychaperone on May 14, 2024 9:37:47 GMT
Lloyd's productions of "Urinetown" and "Assassins" are maybe my two favourite theatre experiences ever and they seem a MILLION miles away from his current productions - not necessarily in quality, but they were both fairly lavish productions in their own dark way, whereas now his calling card is minimalism so maybe he just found his preferred style after a few years
|
|
1,499 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by Steve on May 14, 2024 9:57:02 GMT
Been thinking about Jamie Lloyd's trajectory. A few years ago, he used to be a go to for traditional, detailed revivals; the likes of Inadmissable Evidence, Passion, She Stoops to Conquer. Even his productions of new shows were fairly 'classic' - I'm thinking Spelling Bee and The Pride. Then he started the Jamie Lloyd seasons at Trafalgar, where his productions, whilst less naturalistic and traditional, were definitely not minimalist. What was his first production with the stripped back, all wearing black, visible microphone approach? That's now his house-style, but it's quite a jump from his earlier work, and important to remember that his productions weren't always like that. As you say, in 2012, "She Stoops to Conquer" was traditionally dressed, though I thought there was nothing period about the portrayals, which were hilarious.
I think the 2013 Trafalgar Macbeth is a key turning point, as the designs were grey and simple and the set was tables and chairs. But I've never thought of Jamie Lloyd as a straightforward minimalist, as such, which wouldn't actually appeal to me if that was all he was doing, as something he does always hits you smack in the face (his expressionist side, maybe), and that Macbeth was soaked in mud and blood and dynamic violence in an intimate setting, so I felt then, as now, he pulls some things back to make other things more impactful.
In 2014, in the Trafalgar Richard III, the microphones showed up big time, but there, I felt, like in the later Evita, or with the recent use of screens in Sunset, Lloyd used them brilliantly thematically to showcase how propaganda works, and what a surveillance state feels like.
So for me, describing Lloyd as a "minimalist" misses most of the point, which is that he only pulls back extraneous nonsense like costumes if he's got some other visceral thing to make a production exciting.
I remember how with "Urinetown" in 2014, the consensus on the old Whatsonstage board was that he was NOT MINIMAL or subtle enough, that he had gone TOO FAR with all the blood and violence, that the blood and violence made it unfunny, and I was pretty much alone in loving it, and going multiple times, because I thought that if you have a society that even polices urination, then of course it would be super extreme, and I found it even funnier because of all the (satirical) blood and violence.
I remember how he orchestrated one of the most extreme theatrical moments ever, in 2017 in "Pitchfork Disney" at Shoreditch Town Hall, when he turned out the lights almost completely, and then had a roaring growling Seun Shote rampage through the thin space, chairs on either side, a huge figure in a barely visible gimp mask crashing noisily through the silence. The whole audience was either frozen stiff in fear or shrilly screaming and I myself could barely breathe for fear myself lol. Hit or miss, Jamie Lloyd is a theatrical treasure.  |
|
|
|
Post by Afriley on May 14, 2024 10:00:14 GMT
I didn’t pay anywhere near £250 (despite being third row stalls) and knew I was going for 1. First preview Are you saying that you booked the first preview (Saturday) and were reseated to the Monday?
If so, did they dynamically make you pay more than you initially paid, or did they allow you to swap for the price you initially paid?
Nah, my friend couldn’t go. She had a ticket for the 13th all along. |
|
7,189 posts
|
Post by Jon on May 14, 2024 10:01:04 GMT
Pinter at the Pinter and later Betrayal started his current style.
|
|
|
|
Post by 141920grm on May 14, 2024 11:09:27 GMT
never thought of Jamie Lloyd as a straightforward minimalist, as such, which wouldn't actually appeal to me if that was all he was doing, as something he does always hits you smack in the face (his expressionist side, maybe)
So for me, describing Lloyd as a "minimalist" misses most of the point, which is that he only pulls back extraneous nonsense like costumes if he's got some other visceral thing to make a production exciting. very much agreed, I think of his current house style as ‘monumental’ rather than simply ‘minimalist’- just that he achieves the ‘monumental’ by stripping works down to their essence, which consequently leads to a minimal set and design which serves that vision, rather than the other way round. having seen the show last night I can’t say this was life-changingly good, but it was certainly a memorable visual and auditory experience (shout out to the sound and lighting designers). as always set and video merged to present to us a more cinematic angle at times, and some of it was quite beautiful too. and I did enjoy the way space is represented or played around with- especially with the balcony scene- made me smile when I ‘got’ it the performers/performances are a whole other can of worms I shan’t get into! |
|
7,189 posts
|
Post by Jon on May 14, 2024 11:45:11 GMT
I've been thinking what plays could work in Jamie Lloyd's style and the one that came to mind is The Iceman Cometh where the minimal setting would enhance the piece although it would be a long evening.
|
|
8,162 posts
|
Post by alece10 on May 14, 2024 12:09:54 GMT
I've been thinking what plays could work in Jamie Lloyd's style and the one that came to mind is The Iceman Cometh where the minimal setting would enhance the piece although it would be a long evening. Maybe do it in one of those ice bars and everyone wears thick coats with hoods and gloves. |
|
8,162 posts
|
Post by alece10 on May 14, 2024 12:16:15 GMT
Not to divert the thread but I wonder when Jamie Lloyd went from having sets to no sets and cameras.
I only know him for musicals really but Assassins at the Menier and Urinetown (which I didn't realise he directed) certainly had sets. When did he start to go minimalist?
|
|
|
|
Post by Fleance on May 14, 2024 12:20:14 GMT
Not to divert the thread but I wonder when Jamie Lloyd went from having sets to no sets and cameras. I only know him for musicals really but Assassins at the Menier and Urinetown (which I didn't realise he directed) certainly had sets. When did he start to go minimalist? The stage was crammed with stuff for his productions of The Hothouse and Richard III. |
|
|
|
Post by nottobe on May 14, 2024 12:29:52 GMT
I would think Betrayal was the first production in his new 'style'. You can see how he slowly became more grungy with Evita then Cyrano and then all the recent shows.
|
|
369 posts
|
Post by Jonnyboy on May 14, 2024 12:30:23 GMT
I didn’t realise he directed Urinetown. Still possibly the worst thing I’ve ever seen in over 30 years of theatregoing! 😆
|
|
|
|
Post by craigbowker on May 14, 2024 14:00:30 GMT
I think it's silly when people say stuff like "Making Mantua the roof didn't serve a purpose" when the purpose is to literally make him feel far away and distant... like what happens in the story.
Having the Capulet's ball in the lobby bar again... made them feel separated and in different worlds... like what happens in the story.
The use of video CAN be cheap but Jamie Lloyd does it with purpose and an artistic eye. And I say this as someone who usually hates screens.
|
|
|
|
Post by blamerobots on May 14, 2024 14:09:27 GMT
I think it's silly when people say stuff like "Making Mantua the roof didn't serve a purpose" when the purpose is to literally make him feel far away and distant... like what happens in the story. Having the Capulet's ball in the lobby bar again... made them feel separated and in different worlds... like what happens in the story. The use of video CAN be cheap but Jamie Lloyd does it with purpose and an artistic eye. And I say this as someone who usually hates screens. I'm all for his gimmicks. Sunset's Strand walk had meaning to it, him literally going outside into London while singing a song about cutthroat industry and the stony-hearted bosses while standing outside the Savoy, and walking among passersby broke down the barrier between us and the performers. I mean, in Sunset the screen was used similarly to show how disconnected the people in the show are from each other, surely done purposely after the pandemic. Screens can both show us things and isolate us from others. That's his technique, I believe. To bring the audience and the actors together in an almost conversational way (hence all the facing outwards to an audience), to bring the topics outside of the theatre and not just keep them trapped in a boxed reality that ends when the show is over. Plus, it's just quite cool! |
|
|
|
Post by marob on May 14, 2024 14:18:04 GMT
Had a look at Wikipedia, and from what I’ve seen of his work I’d say The Homecoming in 2016 was where he started being more abstract. The set was just some poles making up the outline of a cube. Then Faustus bombed, but even after that there was Apologia which had a traditional kitchen set and was still using sets during Pinter at the Pinter. There was one of those with John Heffernan and Gemma Whelan that messed about with microphones, and another that had character that was just an audio recording of Michael Gambon. He ended that season with Betrayal and I think everything since then has been a variation of that.
|
|
|
|
Post by Seriously on May 14, 2024 15:53:37 GMT
So you go sit in a theatre and watch them acting somewhere else?
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 14, 2024 20:19:47 GMT
For goodess sake, there is no 'cost of living crisis' for people on the Magic Money Tree - last time I looked, residetial property in my former ward of Lambeth had increased 120% in 10 years. Average priced property went from £350K to £750K, in a time of near zero interest rates.
Vote Conservative: we will give you guaranteed property inflation.
They are literally retiring 10-15 years earlier than others, downsizing (or cashing in on the buy-to-let), and paying - for example - whatever they want for threatre. The crisis is a housing crisis. And also a crisis of inexperience - people promoted at work beyond their experience and ability becasue so many senior managers bailed out in their early-mid 50s. We see people paying these huge prices for theatre/concert tickets. But holidays cost a lot more some people possibly prefer to go to the theatre. We heard people moaning about the price of tickets from Taylor Swift to WWE back to Take That. But these shows seem to sell out pretty well. From the Bronx of Birmingham I notice that theatres are selling a lot more tickets than they did pre pandemic. Yet we hear about food banks, poverty etc so is the country becoming even more the haves and the have nots? |
|
