|
|
Post by julia432 on Oct 6, 2024 10:22:15 GMT
I agree, word on the grapevine is that its not been the happiest production so wonder if press were delayed because of it. Normally, well these days, press get access about 3 days before the official opening night but don't think that happened here which may mean press had to be rebooked for tonight / tomorrow. I might be wrong but it is highly unusual to have an embargo for so long after the official press night. I’ve heard rumours of this too. Not good. Can I I ask what the rumours are people are hearing? Is it cast gelling or just pressure? I know one of the leads had emergency operation so I’m that may have put strain on or is it something different? |
|
1,873 posts
|
Post by Dave B on Oct 6, 2024 10:30:04 GMT
Might be difficult for J Smith Cameron to act realistically as a such a wife if she has a panto paycock to play against. I havent seen it, I'm just going on what others are saying about Rylance's portrayal. I think this is very true. I think Hilton makes it look easy because Joxer can play opposite a panto Captain Boyle but that J Smith Cameron's Juno and the other - straighter played - characters really suffer. I come back to my early thought about cohesion. Rylance's Paycock is in a different play (a panto), Hilton's Joxer can bridge the gap but others can't. And I'm not at all down on Rylance like some, I think his Rooster is astounding and I liked him a lot in Semmelweis. Given the changes which to my mind are pretty extensive - including a new ending - at what point should this be billed as Matthew Warchus After Seán O’Casey (or similar wording)... |
|
|
|
Post by oxfordsimon on Oct 6, 2024 10:50:29 GMT
O'Casey is still in copyright so any changes to the text will have to have been approved by the agents/estate
|
|
|
|
Post by lookingatthestars on Oct 6, 2024 10:54:58 GMT
Might be difficult for J Smith Cameron to act realistically as a such a wife if she has a panto paycock to play against. I havent seen it, I'm just going on what others are saying about Rylance's portrayal. I think this is very true. I think Hilton makes it look easy because Joxer can play opposite a panto Captain Boyle but that J Smith Cameron's Juno and the other - straighter played - characters really suffer. I come back to my early thought about cohesion. Rylance's Paycock is in a different play (a panto), Hilton's Joxer can bridge the gap but others can't. And I'm not at all down on Rylance like some, I think his Rooster is astounding and I liked him a lot in Semmelweis. Given the changes which to my mind are pretty extensive - including a new ending - at what point should this be billed as Matthew Warchus After Seán O’Casey (or similar wording)... Oh there's a different ending! Could I ask please what they have done in this production? I'm intrigued. Many thanks. |
|
395 posts
|
Post by lichtie on Oct 6, 2024 12:05:59 GMT
I think this is very true. I think Hilton makes it look easy because Joxer can play opposite a panto Captain Boyle but that J Smith Cameron's Juno and the other - straighter played - characters really suffer. I come back to my early thought about cohesion. Rylance's Paycock is in a different play (a panto), Hilton's Joxer can bridge the gap but others can't. And I'm not at all down on Rylance like some, I think his Rooster is astounding and I liked him a lot in Semmelweis. Given the changes which to my mind are pretty extensive - including a new ending - at what point should this be billed as Matthew Warchus After Seán O’Casey (or similar wording)... Oh there's a different ending! Could I ask please what they have done in this production? I'm intrigued. Many thanks.
{Spoiler - click to view}
Rather than scrabblng around for a dropped sixpence, Boyle roots up the floorboards to find a gun, which he accidentally shoots Joxer with. Curtain down.... |
|
|
|
Post by aspieandy on Oct 6, 2024 12:27:54 GMT
Can I I ask what the rumours are people are hearing? Is it cast gelling or just pressure? I know one of the leads had emergency operation so I’m that may have put strain on or is it something different?
Wasn't aware off anything being off at the matinee yesterday. Seemed to be very much in synq.
As to Juno, no she isn't played as a nag. Her lazy, drink-sodden husband tries to portray her as such.
Apropos of not much, I am now intruiged by the Hitchcock film from 1930.
|
|
121 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by jake on Oct 6, 2024 13:28:56 GMT
Can I I ask what the rumours are people are hearing? Is it cast gelling or just pressure? I know one of the leads had emergency operation so I’m that may have put strain on or is it something different?
Wasn't aware off anything being off at the matinee yesterday. Seemed to be very much in synq.
As to Juno, no she isn't played as a nag. Her lazy, drink-sodden husband tries to portray her as such.
Apropos of not much, I am now intruiged by the Hitchcock film from 1930.
The character isn't that much of a nag - more a harassed wife who knows that disaster looms if her husband's wildest excesses aren't kept in check. The title is surely a reference to Greek/Roman mythology. He's a 'paycock' not just because he struts around town but because Juno's eyes are on him all the time. In my memory, both Sinead and Niamh Cusack (different productions of course) brought out the change in Act 2 Juno - who is much more laid back on account of she thinks she's married to a monied man rather than a penniless wastrel. Smith-Cameron's reading didn't seem to make much of that contrast. The sense at the end of Act 3 that Jack is utterly lost if Juno leaves him was also far more striking in other productions. Mind you, I can't say too much. Having read the spoiler above, I'm wondering how I failed to spot a changed ending. Was it because the 'slightly restricted view' from the back of the stalls was more restricted than I thought? Was it my fading eyesight? More likely, I'd just switched off by then - just waiting to be told what a terrible state of chassis the world was in, ready to engage in polite applause and wondering how long before the pubs shut. |
|
2 posts
|
Post by romoladesloups on Oct 6, 2024 14:53:24 GMT
I saw this today and thought it was excellent. The tonal shift came directly from the characters and the situation. You do have to mentally leave behind the play as written and previous productions and approach it as a separate entity but I tend to do that with everything anyway. Mentally leave behind the play as written?  ? Yes. As I said, approach it as a separate entity. I don't particularly want to post spoilers |
|
|
|
Post by max on Oct 6, 2024 18:04:49 GMT
Can I I ask what the rumours are people are hearing? Is it cast gelling or just pressure? I know one of the leads had emergency operation so I’m that may have put strain on or is it something different?
Wasn't aware off anything being off at the matinee yesterday. Seemed to be very much in synq.
As to Juno, no she isn't played as a nag. Her lazy, drink-sodden husband tries to portray her as such.
Apropos of not much, I am now intruiged by the Hitchcock film from 1930.
It was even done as a musical! - 'Juno' (1959) - written by composer Marc Blitzstein (of the Brecht/Weill influenced 'The Cradle Will Rock') and Joseph Stein who wrote the book for 'Fiddler On The Roof'. An unlikely adaptation property but intriguing. |
|
|
|
Post by aspieandy on Oct 6, 2024 18:38:13 GMT
Wasn't aware off anything being off at the matinee yesterday. Seemed to be very much in synq.
As to Juno, no she isn't played as a nag. Her lazy, drink-sodden husband tries to portray her as such.
Apropos of not much, I am now intruiged by the Hitchcock film from 1930.
It was even done as a musical! - 'Juno' (1959) - written by composer Marc Blitzstein (of the Brecht/Weill influenced 'The Cradle Will Rock') and Joseph Stein who wrote the book for 'Fiddler On The Roof'. An unlikely adaptation property but intriguing.
Sounds like a job for Shane McGowan* to get his tooth/teeth into .. perhaps with Kirsty MacColl* as Juno.
* God rest them
|
|
|
|
Post by johnjohotspur on Oct 6, 2024 19:22:33 GMT
Interesting to read the diversity of views of the current production. Having seen a few Junos over the years imho this is a really good one. Great reaction from the audience yesterday. Changed ending makes no sense at all. Other than that the Boyle/Joxter clowning around is played up a bit but not as much as being suggested by others. It’s true to text of the play (apart from the ending). Credit to the cast even in the minor roles. All excellent. Just one opinion though.
|
|
77 posts
|
Post by avfan on Oct 6, 2024 19:52:26 GMT
I’ve heard rumours of this too. Not good. Can I I ask what the rumours are people are hearing? Is it cast gelling or just pressure? I know one of the leads had emergency operation so I’m that may have put strain on or is it something different? Disharmony in the cast, issues with the design and just a pretty fractious rehearsal process and tech by all accounts. There was talk of delaying the press night at one point. |
|
|
|
Post by julia432 on Oct 6, 2024 19:57:10 GMT
Can I I ask what the rumours are people are hearing? Is it cast gelling or just pressure? I know one of the leads had emergency operation so I’m that may have put strain on or is it something different? Disharmony in the cast, issues with the design and just a pretty fractious rehearsal process and tech by all accounts. There was talk of delaying the press night at one point. Oh wow. Thank you for the update. That’s crazy |
|
3,597 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by Rory on Oct 6, 2024 20:05:39 GMT
Oh there's a different ending! Could I ask please what they have done in this production? I'm intrigued. Many thanks.
{Spoiler - click to view}
Rather than scrabblng around for a dropped sixpence, Boyle roots up the floorboards to find a gun, which he accidentally shoots Joxer with. Curtain down.... That is ludicrous. |
|
|
|
Post by beanbag85 on Oct 6, 2024 20:41:58 GMT
I saw this last night and it ran very well with an excellent response from the audience at the end
|
|
|
|
Post by lookingatthestars on Oct 6, 2024 21:08:23 GMT
Oh there's a different ending! Could I ask please what they have done in this production? I'm intrigued. Many thanks.
{Spoiler - click to view}
Rather than scrabblng around for a dropped sixpence, Boyle roots up the floorboards to find a gun, which he accidentally shoots Joxer with. Curtain down.... Thanks! This sounds interesting. I guess you'd have to have seen the prouction for this to make sense. |
|
|
|
Post by aspieandy on Oct 6, 2024 21:14:03 GMT
<<<< SPOILER >>> The ending is a challenge but its choice by people who have been professional theatrical artists for decades so, maybe, they have an idea. The weapon is easy to explain - brought into the house and hidden by the son, presumably the previous year. Boyle's subsequent ineptitude and stupidity needs no explaining. There is violence throughout the play (physical and emotional) – arguably the core theme is violence. Perhaps Warchus and Rylance wanted Boyle to lose not only his son, daughter (+ grandchild to be) and wife but also his best friend. The peacock left entirely alone. Maybe it seemed incongruous to Warchus and Rylance to not follow through on the leading theme and story arcs. Perhaps O'Casey lived in time when the public had had enough of violence (Civil War / WW1) and needed hope and optimism (Depression).
By accentuating the peacock, secure in his pomp, maybe the 'new' ending explains Act 1.
I have no idea .. but there are reasons to think O'Casey’s original ending is a product of its time and commercial expediency rather than his art.
It's interesting to mull this stuff over, isn't it - why would they have made that choice, and that choice, etc? Seems quite a call to me to be quick to judge people like Warchus and Rylance.
|
|
1,873 posts
|
Post by Dave B on Oct 6, 2024 22:02:43 GMT
Seems quite a call to me to be quick to judge people like Warchus and Rylance. Who would you suggest instead? I don't see a new author or adaptor credited so I assume (fairly I think) it is direction from Warchus in how the cast perform their roles and changes to the text. |
|
|
|
Post by aspieandy on Oct 6, 2024 22:09:53 GMT
It's art so maybe not think of it as immutable. It's creativity; no one thinks of Shakespeare or Checkov as fixed .. that seems to be a rule made up on the internet last week. Reinterpretation/new relevance is the lifeblood.
Weirdest thread since Cherry Orchard.
|
|
1,873 posts
|
Post by Dave B on Oct 6, 2024 22:22:11 GMT
Guess we did find Warchus now!   |
|
|
|
Post by aspieandy on Oct 6, 2024 22:24:53 GMT
sigh *disappointing*
|
|
905 posts
|
Post by lonlad on Oct 7, 2024 0:08:12 GMT
Flat-out pans so far from Times, Telegraph, Whatsonstage .... 3 stars from (yawn) The Guardian, Arts Desk, i Newspaper and Indy.
I would give it one -- an actual travesty. Interesting that most critics seem not even to notice or care that the ending was rewritten. Anyway, this is possibly the worst set of reviews for a Rylance-related production ever since he directed the unspeakable Old Vic Much Ado back in the day with Vanessa Redgrave and James Earl Jones. I'll never forget Michael Billington's one star review of that one.
|
|
5,951 posts
|
Post by mrbarnaby on Oct 7, 2024 7:13:10 GMT
Weirdly I don’t think they read as pans at all. Bizarrely there is praise for Rylances performance which I can’t get my head round. Maybe he’s now reached the point where no one dare say he’s actually bad in something.
I can see this struggling to sell now, it’s hardly set the box office alight as it is.
|
|
3,597 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by Rory on Oct 7, 2024 7:34:08 GMT
4 stars from Time Out.
|
|
|
|
Post by parsley1 on Oct 7, 2024 8:02:37 GMT
Weirdly I don’t think they read as pans at all. Bizarrely there is praise for Rylances performance which I can’t get my head round. Maybe he’s now reached the point where no one dare say he’s actually bad in something. I can see this struggling to sell now, it’s hardly set the box office alight as it is. Mmmh “ It’s a deep disappointment on every level, a reminder that star dust can sometimes cloud the picture rather than illuminate it” “Mark Rylance and J Smith Cameron fail to spark” “ Sometimes plays, like baking, go wrong. The recipe carefully assembled to produce the perfect sponge falls flat as a pancake. This production of Sean O’Casey’s Juno and the Paycock is a case in point” “ Yet the result is a horrible melange. Everyone on stage seems to be performing in a different version of the play, there is no chemistry, little sense of purpose” “Mark Rylance, a quicksilver but collegiate actor at his excellent best, sadly continues his recent slide into mannered self-parody as Juno’s feckless husband ‘Captain’ “ “ She shines – and outshines Rylance” “ That means he frequently pulls focus unnecessarily in a scene with his clowning, and undermines some of the darker material” “Mark Rylance is so over the top he could be auditioning for Mrs Brown’s Boys” “The actors gurning leering performance makes it hard to take Warchus’ production seriously” “At one point, he gurns, tongue-out, towards the irresistible sausages, which he has earlier refused, cooking on the hearth. Impressive physical comedy, perhaps, but it seems out of place in a play that Casey called a tragedy in three acts” |
|
? 
