|
|
Post by alessia on Jun 11, 2024 13:52:08 GMT
Mostly agree with the comments above. I went with a friend who is a PJ Harvey fan (I am not) and he 'got' immediately that the singing was supposed to be her style, but I felt that none of the performers had good enough voices- we did have the understudy for Lizzie last night but she really cannot sing, I was wondering how they all got the parts? As others have said, the only decent one in that respect is Bella.
I am no musical theatre expert and this one is clearly no traditional musical, I got that, but even I was expecting better singing across the board. I was literally cringing in the first 30 minutes...by the second half I accepted my friends view that it was all done on purpose (PJ Harvey style...but surely she's a much better singer than these people...?)
As for the rest, it is way too long but then it's hard to adapt Dickens and his never ending plots. The female characters are modernised (thankfully, as Dickens view of women is best left in the 19th century) and I loved the doll dressmaker Jenny, she had a few great lines and her delivery was spot on. I didn't mind the set. Overall not a great show and a lot of people left at the interval.
|
|
|
|
Post by artea on Jun 11, 2024 16:06:29 GMT
The NT brochure tells us by way of a teaser to London Tide: "A storm rages ... in the darkest part of the night". Sounds exciting but I didn't notice it. What actually happens is that a lot of people slowly line up at the front of the stage and a dirge emerges. This is going to be a story about London, we're informed. Right, ok, gosh. Get on with it then. But the dirge drags on. Dirge, dirge, dirge, it goes. Please stop. We're told again the thing about London. And again. It's DOA. The piece never recovers. The set consists of not much: a few lights go up and down, and some chairs and tables get moved around a bit. Nothing imaginative happens. It dirges along. Act 1 ends with a big reveal so predictable, it fell flat on its arse. Time to leave.
London Tide is head-numbingly dire: one of the most disappointing, most pointless, least dramatic productions ever put on at the NT, and a massive disservice to Dickens. A "propulsive thriller" says the NT brochure. No.
BBC radio drama is often considered to be a poor relation to live, visual theatre. London Tide is proof the opposite is often true. No BBC radio adaptation of any Dickens is as dull as this misguided, total waste of time; this duddest of Rufus Norris duds. Only an opinion of course, and quite harsh, but backed up by the many justifiably empty seats remaining in the Lyttleton even after a lot of papering. Sadly, and I don't feel good about it, zero stars.
|
|
1,503 posts
|
Post by foxa on Jun 13, 2024 14:04:58 GMT
I didn't hate this - I quite liked some of the performances. Tom Mothersdale and Bella Mclean were very watchable as Rokesmith and Bella; Jake Wood showed there was more to him than his Strictly salsa; always enjoy Peter Wight, Scott Karim captured Headstone's malevolence. I have never read Our Mutual Friend, so did wonder what was going to happen (though the big reveal was pretty obvious.) And, as others have mentioned, the lighting was splendid.
I'm just not sure why they staged it - possibly they wanted to say something about London (wasn't there a song which kept repeating London wasn't England?) or....actually I can't think what else. I didn't get on with the songs - unlike a musical where you can't wait for the next song, with this, it was more uh oh, another song - which will probably sound quite a bit like the last one and be staged down front staring at us. Inevitably, I suppose, when adapting such a big book there was a lot of exposition - I wonder if it would have been a more economic use of stage time to cut the songs and have more scenes where things happen.
However, I went on my own, so didn't feel responsible for anyone else's happiness, hunkered down and let the three hours wash over me. Also Bella's blue dress was lovely.
|
|
1,248 posts
|
Post by joem on Jun 15, 2024 22:41:55 GMT
"Our Mutual Friend" is for me the most mature work by Dickens, he'd trimmed some of the sentimentality and mawkishness which blemishes his novels, and the idea of a play celebrating London and the Thames will always be a selling point for me, so was quite looking forward to this.
However I think this production is essentially a flawed concept, too much music for a play and not enough music for a musical. And unfortunately whilst there are many actors who can hold a tune, there were a number of actors in this who struggle badly - especially since all the songs seem to be solos with little help available from the chorus. Taking into account the length of the performance you can't help but conclude that either most of (or all) the songs should have been excised and left it as a play or it should have been turned into (yet another) musical and cast accordingly.
As it is the plot zips along at breakneck pace - it's probably my favourite Dickens' novel but I still missed bits of it - which it has to do to leave time for all the songs. I quite like PJ Harvey, I think "Let England Shake" is a modern masterpiece, but I don't understand why the singers were asked to sing in her style rather than do the song in the best manner for themselves. Perhaps the answer is that they are actors, not singers, and therefore don't really have their own styles.
Not many people left, perhaps four or five, but the stalls would have been about two-thirds full.
|
|
1,827 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by stevej678 on Jun 16, 2024 8:08:45 GMT
Really enjoyed this last night. As a concept, I think it has a lot going for it and the fusion of Our Mutual Friend with PJ Harvey's music really worked. Ami Tredrea and Bella MacLean give captivating lead performances, while Ellie-May Sheridan impresses as Jenny Wren on her professional stage debut.
It's just baffling why they cast a play with a lot of music with a number of otherwise fine actors who can't sing particularly well. Bella Maclean stands out as the best vocalist. However, some of the male performers are pretty exposed in their solo numbers.
It's a shame because I thought there was otherwise so much to like here, from the use of the lighting rig to simulate the London tide of the title, to quite the coup de theatre with the revelation that ends act one. A mostly bare stage but no shortage of ideas. The three and a quarter hours running time flew by. If only there were stronger singers to do the songs full justice, this would be nudging five-star territory for me.
|
|
70 posts
|
Post by TheOneOnTheLeft on Oct 8, 2024 2:25:47 GMT
|
|
1,236 posts
|
Post by nash16 on Oct 8, 2024 2:42:02 GMT
|
|
