|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 12, 2016 16:21:16 GMT
I'm just going to toss dignity to one side and start the queue myself. If I'm properly by the door, then any loiterers won't be my problem. And hopefully the others at the performance I've booked will be newcomers to the venue anyway and will go to the cloakroom and the bar and hang around a bit before realising that's what I'm doing.  |
|
5,795 posts
|
Post by mrbarnaby on Feb 12, 2016 17:14:20 GMT
£35 is a rip off for this uncomfortable venue. And you have to suffer the indignity of scrumming for a seat. Count me out .
|
|
4,970 posts
|
Post by Phantom of London on Feb 12, 2016 18:18:09 GMT
Anyone know the website where I can buy tickets please?
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 12, 2016 18:20:25 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 12, 2016 20:35:19 GMT
I genuinely don't get the James Norton adulation. He's the guy everyone went nutty for in War & Peace, right? I'm sure he's a lovely chap, and I'm equally sure he wouldn't fancy me either - but I have to say, my pulse rate remains resolutely normal whenever I see him on screen. He was terrific in Journey's End, and he was the best thing about The Lion in Winter, and I've been waiting four years for him to decide maybe he's established well enough in TV to take a break to do a play again without having to restart his TV-ladder-climb from the bottom. He's also delightful in Grantchester and awful (the character, not the performance) in Happy Valley. For me it's just a long-awaited opportunity to see a very good actor at work, and I'm sure there must be a few others. Although judging by this thread, maybe not quite as many as I'd've thought? Actually I read an interview the other week where Norton's nan (I think) reckons his appeal must be based in the period costumes 'cos when she's just sitting in a room with him, he looks perfectly blandly ordinary to her. So if you don't see the appeal, you're not alone at least. Tee hee, me and his granny. Poor bloke! |
|
4,970 posts
|
Post by Phantom of London on Feb 12, 2016 23:56:14 GMT
Thanks and very much appreciated for that all booked up now, going to see Sunset Boulevard and this on the same day. i see the theatre is in Charing Cross Road but where abouts? |
|
4,970 posts
|
Post by Phantom of London on Feb 12, 2016 23:58:44 GMT
I saw James Norton in Happy Valley the first series after my mum took the box set on holiday and the 1st series was excellent, looking forward to seeing the second now.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 13, 2016 0:00:58 GMT
Thanks and very much appreciated for that all booked up now, going to see Sunset Boulevard and this on the same day. i see the theatre is in Charing Cross Road but where abouts? Near Foyles I think |
|
4,970 posts
|
Post by Phantom of London on Feb 13, 2016 0:46:44 GMT
Thanks again.
|
|
781 posts
|
Post by rumbledoll on Feb 13, 2016 8:06:15 GMT
Well, I must say I didn't get the swooing over Norton either (judging mostly from glimses of him here and there) till the day I saw Death Comes to Pemberley. Maybe it's just period costumes indeed (cheeky gran of his!  ) but suddenly I though "this chap has charisma in bucketloads pouring through the screen". Somehow it doesn't reach you in static or straight away but the more you see of him the more you get drawn. Yet to catch War & Peace (shame on me, Russian girl!  ) but I'm already envy you guys, who will get a chance to see James on stage and in such a tiny venue. These dates most unfortunately fall in between my London visits.. |
|
2,740 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by n1david on Feb 13, 2016 8:23:23 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 13, 2016 8:49:12 GMT
Very conveniently right next door - excellent for a browse round if you are early, and Foyles have a rather nice café on the 5th floor. |
|
181 posts
|
Post by caa on Mar 25, 2016 9:45:54 GMT
Just had an email to say its one hour and 50 minutes (including a 20 minute interval)
|
|
64 posts
|
Post by Squire Sullen on Mar 25, 2016 23:40:18 GMT
Have none of us seen this yet? Catching up on Happy Valley and keen to hear reports on this..
|
|
|
|
Post by alexandra on Mar 26, 2016 0:05:44 GMT
Yes. It's an intense piece about the dangerous effect emotionally connected human beings can have on each other, with catastrophic consequences. Not for the faint hearted and there's one particularly gruesome scene, which if you're in the front row is a tad stomach churning (not helped by one of the characters throwing up). The acting from all concerned, especially in the three main roles, is superb. And as one character succumbs to suggestion, you feel yourself doing the same - everyone's skin was crawling. Serious, but great fun (apparently for the actors too - Norton beaming ear to ear at the end).
|
|
923 posts
|
Post by Snciole on Mar 26, 2016 12:50:42 GMT
Any nudity or dogs?
|
|
1,502 posts
|
Post by foxa on Mar 26, 2016 23:05:59 GMT
Show Report:
Running Time: 1 hour 50 minutes (one interval)
Refreshments: There's a bar with themed cocktails. We had a very good and generous Bathtub Lemonade (£9.50) - it was huge so we shared one. Glasses of wine are £5.50. Think the only snacks were gourmet popcorn
Dogs: None, alas, but many imaginary insects/bugs. We were all itching at the end of it.
Nudity: Surprise here - none. Underwear kept on. Think this was a smart choice - everything would have become about that rather than the superb acting.
Seats: We opted for the last row (fourth row) quite central behind the coffee maker table and these were great - don't think we missed anything. We were about half-way in the queue, so it wasn't hard to get good seats. There was a little queue jumping, etc., which was annoying, but there are a lot of good seats so don't worry too much. Note: They thoughtfully put cushions underneath some of the less forgiving chairs so check to see if there is one under yours if you are suffering.
Audience: Rather adorable. Very friendly and chatty beforehand, during interval and afterwards, perfectly tuned in and attentive during. I'd book them again.
Performances: Superb rapport between Kate Fleetwood and James Norton - they are so attuned to each other and this gets more exciting and intense as the evening goes on. They surpassed my already high expectations.
Take away message: What I got, is that it is about the alienation that the dispossessed and lonely can feel, how they try to make sense of the nightmare their lives have become, even if their answers are mad and they are making connections that don't exist. I wasn't entirely sure what was in their heads and what was really happening at a couple of points towards the end. It felt to me very much a young man's play (It was Letts' second play, written when he was 30) - full of anger, absurdity, violence with rare odd lyrical moments.
Recommendation: Go see it.
Final tip: The bar is open after the show. Good for star-spotting.
|
|
1,103 posts
|
Post by mallardo on Mar 27, 2016 2:11:49 GMT
Underwear? Wrong. There's a reason they have to strip off. To not do it undercuts the play.
|
|
1,502 posts
|
Post by foxa on Mar 27, 2016 10:36:52 GMT
I'll be interested if you think that after seeing this production. You might be right (you frequently are) but IMO, it would have been an unneeded distraction - the play and performances are raw enough without it. It's staged with the audience on all sides and really close, so the actors would have been exceptionally vulnerable and I would have sat there worrying about some idiot trying to take photos of Norton's willy or making exploitative comments about Fleetwood's anatomy rather than just concentrating on the play. Look at how nudity has dominated the discussion of other plays/films - even a quick shot of Hiddleston's bottom makes the internet/tabloids go crazy.
|
|
433 posts
|
Post by DuchessConstance on Mar 27, 2016 10:49:26 GMT
I haven't seen this, but the previous production at Found111 did have nudity and it was pretty intense in such a very intimate space.
|
|
1,103 posts
|
Post by mallardo on Mar 27, 2016 13:06:46 GMT
I'll be interested if you think that after seeing this production. You might be right (you frequently are) but IMO, it would have been an unneeded distraction - the play and performances are raw enough without it. It's staged with the audience on all sides and really close, so the actors would have been exceptionally vulnerable and I would have sat there worrying about some idiot trying to take photos of Norton's willy or making exploitative comments about Fleetwood's anatomy rather than just concentrating on the play. Look at how nudity has dominated the discussion of other plays/films - even a quick shot of Hiddleston's bottom makes the internet/tabloids go crazy.
Foxa, it's difficult to really talk about it here because it involves the plot in a major way. For me, the spiralling descent of the two protagonists must lead to a complete surrender to the idea that's driving them - until all they have left is their own skin. It's written that way and (virtually) always played that way. Ashley Judd and Michael Shannon got naked in the movie version. It's how the piece goes.
When I saw it a few years ago it was in a small black box theatre and the nudity was not distracting - it raised the level of intensity to where it had to be. The madness and vulnerability of the characters is the point, and it needs actors and a production that fully commit to that.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 27, 2016 13:26:51 GMT
At least three big assumptions there, none of which may be correct.
|
|
116 posts
|
Post by alexandra on Mar 27, 2016 16:56:56 GMT
Believe me, they are stripped back and vulnerable enough as it is, mallardo. It's in the acting. And, at the end of the front row, my head was a foot from Norton's groin quite frequently. I didn't need or want nudity.
|
|
1,475 posts
|
Post by Steve on Mar 27, 2016 23:05:30 GMT
Show Report: many imaginary insects/bugs. We were all itching at the end of it. Nudity: Surprise here - none. Underwear kept on. Think this was a smart choice Performances: Superb rapport between Kate Fleetwood and James Norton - they are so attuned to each other Take away message: What I got, is that it is about the alienation that the dispossessed and lonely can feel, how they try to make sense of the nightmare their lives have become, even if their answers are mad and they are making connections that don't exist. I wasn't entirely sure what was in their heads and what was really happening at a couple of points towards the end. Love your report, Foxa. Was at the same show, doing a War and Peace double, after seeing Dolokhov at the Hampstead. I also started itching, in multiple places, which I think was worse, on account of getting soaked by the rain outside. I agree with your take on the nudity. The story reason for nudity, for seeing skin, is covered by this production in a different (and shocking) way that left the audience gasping audibly. Of course, nudity would be a powerful way of covering the story point, as well as stripping the characters to their skin metaphorically, so to speak, but the detriment of having a uk tv superstar like James Norton bare all would run the risk of turning the plot into a sideshow. The space is so intimate that when Norton lay on the floor he was lying against me. Agree with your comment about the rapport between Norton and Fleetwood. The subtle increments by which their relationship strengthens over the course of the evening is the heart of the show, and portraying a mother, Agnes, who has lost her child, Fleetwood does wonderful work transferring the motherly instincts of her character to Norton's damaged and odd Peter Evans. Norton himself expertly balances his character's fundamental gentleness and decency with a dangerous unbalanced unpredictability, that is simultaneously endearing and frightening to watch. Alec Newman was thrilling in his supporting role as Agnes' brutish ex-husband, Jerry, and he sported the most convincing accent to boot. This is a wonderful intimate space, and on the strength of their first two shows, Found111 have created a must-see destination for truly weird unhinged characters interacting in a supercharged way in a super-small space. The electricity of the atmosphere of "The Dazzle," and now "Bug," is exciting, for the audience, and I think, for the actors as well. This play is not as moving as "The Dazzle" was, de-emphasising the tragic aspects of the plot, to focus instead on enticing the audience into the same agitated and excitable mindset as the play's central duo. If "The Dazzle" was a tragedy, this is a rollercoaster ride into derangement, it's deliciously disorienting, and I felt supercharged as I left the theatre. More please. 4 stars.  |
|
270 posts
|
Post by littlesally on Mar 28, 2016 13:27:37 GMT
Have tickets for this tomorrow. First time at this venue. Any hints/tips for queuing/getting 4 seats together? I hate unallocated seating.
|
|
) but suddenly I though "this chap has charisma in bucketloads pouring through the screen". Somehow it doesn't reach you in static or straight away but the more you see of him the more you get drawn.
) but I'm already envy you guys, who will get a chance to see James on stage and in such a tiny venue. These dates most unfortunately fall in between my London visits..
