|
|
Post by firefingers on Mar 19, 2018 18:09:19 GMT
Not knowing Howard's End is an asset, rather than a burden with this play. If you know it, it just makes the whole thing a bit more tedious as you tick off the characters/doubles. In fact, is say you don't need knowledge of any of the sources, direct or otherwise, noted in this thread to follow the plays. I'm keen to experience The Inheritance on some level but not sure now, after very good but not mindblowing word of mouth,that I want to use up two out of my 3 theatre slots on it. Would it be daft just to book Part 1 only and then go to see Absolute Hell at the NT instead of Part 2?! Interesting both Inheritance and Absolute Hell share both the lighting designer and the sound designer. |
|
3,578 posts
|
Post by Rory on Mar 19, 2018 19:00:28 GMT
nash16 I'm keen to experience The Inheritance on some level but not sure now, after very good but not mindblowing word of mouth,that I want to use up two out of my 3 theatre slots on it. Would it be daft just to book Part 1 only and then go to see Absolute Hell at the NT instead of Part 2?! Hi Rory I think your plan is a great idea. Then at least you'll have had an experience of it and can give an opinion. Part 1 has more going on and the ending is the highlight of both parts. Watching it you'll get to see great acting and great direction, if not a great story. But in seeing Absolute He'll you WILL get a great story. (And hopefully acting and direction too). Thanks - your response is really helpful to me. My overall impression is that it is a very good production with superb acting, directing, set and lighting but that it could do with a good edit, and that Part 1 is perhaps the better of the two. That might do me, because I wouldn't mind catching Absolute Hell too in my limited timeframe! |
|
3,040 posts
|
Post by crowblack on Mar 19, 2018 20:18:25 GMT
took away a lot of engagement with it It was the other way around with me - I'm not a middle-aged gay man and the society presented onstage, made up entirely of toned young gay men (and a couple of older ones) was a bit Saudi-Arabian in its exclusion of women, even of men with different body shapes - Redgrave as the lone 'Smurfette'. Viewing it as a 'modern AU Howards End slash fanfic' made it less alienating than it might otherwise have been. |
|
3,040 posts
|
Post by crowblack on Mar 20, 2018 13:54:03 GMT
I have to say, though, am very uncomfortable with the erasure of women in a story that's supposed to be about contemporary America and based on a novel centred around female protagonists. Even Wilcoxes' offspring are here presented just as two heterosexual men - the daughter has been erased.
It is a bit like those Ikea catalogues for the Middle East market - lovely houses but with no women, no mothers, no daughters, just fathers and sons.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 20, 2018 14:54:48 GMT
I'm seeing part one of this tomorrow, I may have to brush up on Howards End before then.
I might try to read the book or watch the film too if I get a chance.
Fnar.
|
|
5,159 posts
|
Post by TallPaul on Mar 20, 2018 16:22:27 GMT
^ I've been waiting and waiting, so thanks for not disappointing me @ryan .  |
|
3,040 posts
|
Post by crowblack on Mar 20, 2018 18:30:44 GMT
There was a news story in 2012 that women had been airbrushed from the Saudi Arabia Ikea catalogue - I don't know if they're back in now! |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 20, 2018 18:50:18 GMT
It is a bit like those Ikea catalogues for the Middle East market - lovely houses but with no women, no mothers, no daughters, just fathers and sons. I thought the IKEA catalogue was universal. Well, if they take that attitude, it's just another penny in my "grudge bank" against them. There was a fascinating (no really) series on recently about IKEA and how they adapt their floor plans/styles for each individual market so I assume that the catalogues are also produced regionally (admittedly the documentary wasn't SO fascinating I made a point of watching every episode and taking notes) |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 20, 2018 19:23:46 GMT
^ I've been waiting and waiting, so thanks for not disappointing me @ryan . One aims to please. Give Joe Public what they want. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 21, 2018 14:19:01 GMT
There was a fascinating (no really) series on recently about IKEA I saw it, BBC 2, after "Back In Time For Tea." I thought they said it was universal on that, and it was the stores they adapted. The second and third episodes were quite interesting. Ack well in that case what do I know? (I only saw snatches of it when I came in from choir on a Monday!) |
|
5,707 posts
|
Post by lynette on Mar 21, 2018 17:18:15 GMT
I thought the IKEA catalogue was universal. Well, if they take that attitude, it's just another penny in my "grudge bank" against them. There was a fascinating (no really) series on recently about IKEA and how they adapt their floor plans/styles for each individual market so I assume that the catalogues are also produced regionally (admittedly the documentary wasn't SO fascinating I made a point of watching every episode and taking notes) They took people off the cover photo in one episode. I thought of the 'market' then. Weird. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 22, 2018 10:10:55 GMT
Well. I was a mess. And had Joely Richardson not been crying in the seat in front of me also, she would have told me to pull myself together too. I thought it was smashing and I just adored the 'Howards End' influences. Some of it is incredibly funny and sassy ( ali973 would be in sass heaven) and then it can break your heart the next. The cast is glorious, absolutely glorious. And hot. Really hot. The cast is terrific as a whole but special mention has to go to Andrew Burlap as Toby who could be thoroughly unlikeable in the wrong hands but played by Andrew you can't help but still like him even though he says and does some horrible things and especially to Kyle Soller who is absolutely adorable and gives quite the most wondrous performance as Eric. You just want to give him a big hug and have him as your friend. I just thought he was absolutely magnificent. There are some key standout moments, a fabulously filthy and funny sex scene between Toby and Eric, the second from Paul Hilton as Walter, the third from Samuel H. Levine (lovely in a pair of shorts and knee high socks) as Adam and especially the very end of the show. I cried, Joely cried, everyone cried. It was quite the most heartbreaking and yet overwhelmingly lovely of scenes. That finale alone was worth the ticket price. I can't wait for part two now. |
|
1,088 posts
|
Post by andrew on Mar 22, 2018 11:04:29 GMT
I've learned my lesson not to leave massive gaps in between two part shows. After being at the second preview of part 1 I've waited weeks for part 2, but tonights my moment. Very excited...
|
|
385 posts
|
Post by Ade on Mar 22, 2018 18:13:08 GMT
And had Joely Richardson not been crying in the seat in front of me also You must have been very nearly in front of me then as she was two rows in front and just to the left of me. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 22, 2018 22:37:20 GMT
And had Joely Richardson not been crying in the seat in front of me also You must have been very nearly in front of me then as she was two rows in front and just to the left of me. Oh no, what a shame we didn't know! I'll say this about Joely, she looks great and she loves her crisps. |
|
385 posts
|
Post by Ade on Mar 22, 2018 22:55:59 GMT
You must have been very nearly in front of me then as she was two rows in front and just to the left of me. Oh no, what a shame we didn't know! I'll say this about Joely, she looks great and she loves her crisps. I didn’t spot the crisps but I did spot the tears. And you’re right, she does look great. |
|
1,088 posts
|
Post by andrew on Mar 23, 2018 0:39:37 GMT
I completely understand all the criticisms that have been laid out in the reviews you guys have written of this. I've just had a re-read since coming home from part 2.
Nevertheless
I absolutely loved it. Start to finish, both parts, I loved it. I was sobbing by the end, I was still sobbing when the lights came up. I found the whole play funny, intelligent, magnificently acted, directed, lit, designed. It was firing on all cylinders.
Yes it was too long for what it was but I enjoyed every minute of it.
5 stars. 5 glittering stars. I even bought the programme (I never buy the programme). I may go again.
P.S. is there a Paul Hilton fan club I can join? He pops up in everything and is such a treat.
P.P.S. Did I mention how much I liked this despite it's flaws? I liked it a lot.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 23, 2018 1:30:56 GMT
I completely understand all the criticisms that have been laid out in the reviews you guys have written of this. I've just had a re-read since coming home from part 2. Nevertheless I absolutely loved it. Start to finish, both parts, I loved it. I was sobbing by the end, I was still sobbing when the lights came up. I found the whole play funny, intelligent, magnificently acted, directed, lit, designed. It was firing on all cylinders. Yes it was too long for what it was but I enjoyed every minute of it. 5 stars. 5 glittering stars. I even bought the programme (I never buy the programme). I may go again. P.S. is there a Paul Hilton fan club I can join? He pops up in everything and is such a treat. P.P.S. Did I mention how much I liked this despite it's flaws? I liked it a lot. Glad you enjoyed Although it has weaknesses I did love Kyle Soller And agree with Ryan you just want to hug his character I did see a few people Sniffling at the end From Vanessa Redgraves monologue onwards I don’t mean to Sound like a heartless bitch lacking any emotions But what did people exactly find moving about the plot? |
|
5,159 posts
|
Post by TallPaul on Mar 23, 2018 13:30:53 GMT
I'll say this about Joely, she looks great and she loves her crisps. Not during the performance, surely? Who does she think she is, Vanessa Redgrave's daughter! |
|
|
|
Post by Mr Wallacio on Mar 25, 2018 10:47:07 GMT
I saw the two show day yesterday. I was worried about the length going in, especially the length of the intervals from a purely ablutions POV but I needn't have worried in that regard.
Act 1 took a bit of time to settle into, but once this marathon settled in I was drawn in for virtually the whole 7 hours.
The end of act 1 was very powerful indeed as was the closing on a act 3.
The only weak point was probably Miss Redgrave. It was nice to see her on stage, but when compared to the other strong performances you've seen for the past 6 hours she is not on that level anymore. Saying that though she did improve the longer she was on stage, and she did have a long monologue, which is commendable anyone remembering a lot of lines in one go let alone someone who's 81 with a clear fragility to them now.
I'm so glad I took a chance on this play and I hope once it opens next week it gets the great reviews it deserves.
Full standing ovation at the end rightly earned. It would have gotten two if the cast had bowed after part 1.
|
|
406 posts
|
Post by MrBunbury on Mar 25, 2018 12:55:34 GMT
I completely understand all the criticisms that have been laid out in the reviews you guys have written of this. I've just had a re-read since coming home from part 2. Nevertheless I absolutely loved it. Start to finish, both parts, I loved it. I was sobbing by the end, I was still sobbing when the lights came up. I found the whole play funny, intelligent, magnificently acted, directed, lit, designed. It was firing on all cylinders. Yes it was too long for what it was but I enjoyed every minute of it. 5 stars. 5 glittering stars. I even bought the programme (I never buy the programme). I may go again. P.S. is there a Paul Hilton fan club I can join? He pops up in everything and is such a treat. P.P.S. Did I mention how much I liked this despite it's flaws? I liked it a lot. I saw both parts yesterday. I understand the criticism in the previous posts, but overall I found it a moving play with an excellent cast (in particular Kyle Soller, Andrew Burnap, and Samuel Levine). I liked the links to Howard's End and I identified in Eric (but maybe I am flattering myself). Part One was better for me: funny in many parts, but managing in a second to become harrowing. I cried for both Walter's monologue in act 2 and the beautiful ending which was so touching, and I absolutely adored Paul Hilton's performance (I am with you Andrew in this): he was the beating heart of the play and in a way he was present even when not on stage. Pity he is very little on stage in the part two. I went with Lucky Dip tickets (because I like living dangerously :-)) and I was in the second row of the stalls. |
|
2 posts
|
Post by gillianbird on Mar 25, 2018 13:07:13 GMT
Not quite a full standing ovation yesterday. I only stood up to put on my coat and escape as quickly as possible from this overlong, overwritten, self-indulgent, turgid, smug waste of a day. I saw the two show day yesterday. I was worried about the length going in, especially the length of the intervals from a purely ablutions POV but I needn't have worried in that regard. Act 1 took a bit of time to settle into, but once this marathon settled in I was drawn in for virtually the whole 7 hours. The end of act 1 was very powerful indeed as was the closing on a act 3. The only weak point was probably Miss Redgrave. It was nice to see her on stage, but when compared to the other strong performances you've seen for the past 6 hours she is not on that level anymore. Saying that though she did improve the longer she was on stage, and she did have a long monologue, which is commendable anyone remembering a lot of lines in one go let alone someone who's 81 with a clear fragility to them now. I'm so glad I took a chance on this play and I hope once it opens next week it gets the great reviews it deserves. Full standing ovation at the end rightly earned. It would have gotten two if the cast had bowed after part 1. |
|
|
|
Post by Mr Wallacio on Mar 25, 2018 15:35:11 GMT
Not quite a full standing ovation yesterday. I only stood up to put on my coat and escape as quickly as possible from this overlong, overwritten, self-indulgent, turgid, smug waste of a day. I saw the two show day yesterday. I was worried about the length going in, especially the length of the intervals from a purely ablutions POV but I needn't have worried in that regard. Act 1 took a bit of time to settle into, but once this marathon settled in I was drawn in for virtually the whole 7 hours. The end of act 1 was very powerful indeed as was the closing on a act 3. The only weak point was probably Miss Redgrave. It was nice to see her on stage, but when compared to the other strong performances you've seen for the past 6 hours she is not on that level anymore. Saying that though she did improve the longer she was on stage, and she did have a long monologue, which is commendable anyone remembering a lot of lines in one go let alone someone who's 81 with a clear fragility to them now. I'm so glad I took a chance on this play and I hope once it opens next week it gets the great reviews it deserves. Full standing ovation at the end rightly earned. It would have gotten two if the cast had bowed after part 1. Oh well, the majority enjoyed it even if you didn't. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 27, 2018 7:00:34 GMT
Not quite a full standing ovation yesterday. I only stood up to put on my coat and escape as quickly as possible from this overlong, overwritten, self-indulgent, turgid, smug waste of a day. There were multiple opportunities to leave before the end. What made you stay? I didn’t notice them barricading the doors when I was there. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 27, 2018 7:03:50 GMT
I notice it’s press night tonight. Could someone with more knowledge of this than me help me understand how it will be reviewed? Each part separately? It starts at 7pm so I am assuming it’s only part one tonight, but I can’t see a separate press night for part two.
Unless they really do barracade the critics in and make them pull an all-nighter?
What do we think the critical reception to this might be?
|
|
