Richard III - Almeida

Whenever Playbill publishes their "upcoming Broadway shows" articles, Master Builder is always mentioned in the "no dates or theatre confirmed" section, so it's likely they'll fit that around Ralph's commitments to Richard III and directing the Nureyev film and the availability of a suitable Broadway house for it, I would think. 

I'm seeing Richard III this week, I'm very intrigued by the negative opinions on here, I must say.

Well, I quite enjoyed it. Maybe it helps to have lowered expectations?

Vanessa Redgrave is curiously underpowered as Margaret, compared to the other actresses, who were all making the most of their lines. I enjoyed the women's scenes generally, and liked that we got a little more out of some of the supporting cast then is often the case - in some productions you barely get to know a character before they die.

I felt the rape was unnecessary, and took away the implication that Richard was too deluded by that point to know he's being lied to. In this it feels like she is just saying it so she can escape.

Presumably Jonathan Pryce's Lear, originally at the Almeida and available for download, was filmed outside the theatre. Which raises the question: if in-theatre broadcasts are technically too difficult to arrange at certain theatres, couldn't productions be arranged to be brodcast live from another venue with a live audience either during or immediatley after the theatre run? Appreciate there will be production and set design issues, but is an in-theatre vibe absolutely essential for these broadcasts? It was interesting that Branagh opted for a more cinema-styled broadcast of R and J - black and white and in cinemascope. Maybe this is the direction the broadcasts will go. There is certainly enough audience demand and its a vita new direction for cinema which is in a far from healthy state.

I think he said in an interview that Fiennes suggested it. The way it was worded sounded as if it certainly wasn't director-led.

Oh really ? I'm a good guesser aren't I. I'll tell you now that the Antony & Cleo he has taken to the NT next year has the capacity to be more boring than this.

I've seen Fiennes quite a lot in Shakespeare and other things. He doesn't have much of a gift for comedy and in this production he didn't have enough charisma to connect with the audience (despite all that pointing), to make them guiltily complicit in his villainy,  so R-III is not really a part for him. SO it was just OK. Best production I've seen was the McKellen one, Sher was good in the role too in a feeble production.

On another point I see Goold isn't directing anything else there for about a year at least - what is he doing instead ?

PEDANTRY CORNER actually the point of Love's Labour's Lost is that no one ends up with anyone PEDANTRY OVER AS YOU WERE.

He's recently played a series of comic movie roles, including The Grand Budapest Hotel, A Bigger Splash and Hail, Caesar!

Exactly. I was qualifying Jan Brock's "He doesn't have much of a gift for comedy" by reminding that may apply to stage but not to cinema.

He's done a fair amount of comedy on stage - he was very funny in God of Carnage for example. For the RSC he did Love's Labour's Lost and the ingenue in Man who Came to Dinner. I'm surprised he hasn't done more though

He was the guest star on press night IIRC 

Because played by a 'warmer actor' it's more threatening, sinister, scary? Am seeing this on saturday so can't yet comment but was curious if that was what you meant.