4,593 posts
|
Post by Someone in a tree on Mar 2, 2018 10:21:56 GMT
Booking was painless this morning
|
|
277 posts
|
Post by fossil on Mar 2, 2018 10:29:18 GMT
150 in the queue. Less than 10 minutes then quick and easy booking. Loads of seats available including the £25 end of row seats.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 2, 2018 10:49:53 GMT
Got my tickets... Allelujah!
|
|
1,866 posts
|
Post by Marwood on Mar 2, 2018 11:04:53 GMT
No sign of any £15 front row seats on the dates I looked at, but got a £25 row A seat near the end of July.
|
|
367 posts
|
Post by MrBunbury on Mar 2, 2018 11:51:12 GMT
I got a £15 front row seat for the end of August, just before my birthday :-)
|
|
7,505 posts
|
Post by alece10 on Mar 2, 2018 13:36:39 GMT
Thanks for heads up just got some £40 seats for 2nd preview. Gallery 2. Never been to this theatre before so hope they will be ok.
|
|
1,330 posts
|
Post by CG on the loose on Mar 2, 2018 20:47:39 GMT
Thanks to all for the flurry of comments, had completely forgotten about public booking and am happy to have nabbed a bargain front row seat for my first visit to the venue.
|
|
1,197 posts
|
Post by theatrefan77 on Mar 3, 2018 1:23:25 GMT
Booking was quick and easy today. Picked the date I wanted and everything was sorted in under five minutes
|
|
3,472 posts
|
Post by showgirl on Mar 3, 2018 6:08:07 GMT
I rather missed out due to Friday being one of the regular days when I can't book until the evening so most of the cheap seats close to the stage had gone and as evening perfs don't start until 7.45 pm (why?!), it had to be a matinee for me (and why are they so early? 2.30 pm on Sats isn't the best but 2 pm midweek is worse as it limits what you can do beforehand), so availability meant going fairly late in the run.
After my unstable experience at Young Marx with one of the cheaper end-of-row seats, I opted instead, at the same price, for row A in the stalls but had to settle for being well to the side. Hope I don't regret booking ahead this time...
|
|
1,016 posts
|
Post by andrew on Mar 3, 2018 9:44:14 GMT
Want to book, need to book, dying to book, no rota past May, can't book, shouldn't book, might book anyway...
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 3, 2018 9:50:42 GMT
Want to book, need to book, dying to book, no rota past May, can't book, shouldn't book, might book anyway... God I remember those days What you need to ask yourself Is what sort of job Means you can’t plan ahead more than 2 months at a time And if that’s how you want to have to spend the rest of your days Planning plays around a rota 🤮
|
|
1,907 posts
|
Post by sf on Mar 3, 2018 21:51:13 GMT
I rather missed out due to Friday being one of the regular days when I can't book until the evening so most of the cheap seats close to the stage had gone and as evening perfs don't start until 7.45 pm (why?!), it had to be a matinee for me (and why are they so early? 2.30 pm on Sats isn't the best but 2 pm midweek is worse as it limits what you can do beforehand), so availability meant going fairly late in the run. After my unstable experience at Young Marx with one of the cheaper end-of-row seats, I opted instead, at the same price, for row A in the stalls but had to settle for being well to the side. Hope I don't regret booking ahead this time... Also didn't manage to book yesterday morning; I'd have liked one of the £15 seats at the front or in gallery 1 but they were gone; second choice was a folding seat, and there were plenty of those, but there was also one - just one - proper stalls seat at one end of the centre block in row A. So I'm pleased. Weekday matinee, but I'm OK with that - it's a straight shot on the tube from Euston to London Bridge.
|
|
1,936 posts
|
Post by wickedgrin on Mar 4, 2018 15:23:42 GMT
Seem to remember The Habit of Art was pretty dreadful too Oh yes, indeed. I seem to remember commenting to my theatre companion at the time that had the play been submitted to the NT without the "written by Alan Bennett" it would never have got produced.
|
|
2,706 posts
|
Post by Cardinal Pirelli on Mar 4, 2018 17:50:43 GMT
Seem to remember The Habit of Art was pretty dreadful too Oh yes, indeed. I seem to remember commenting to my theatre companion at the time that had the play been submitted to the NT without the "written by Alan Bennett" it would never have got produced. Good job it got all those five and four star reviews then. More complex than your average Bennett play and knowing a bit about Arden and Britten would be pretty useful but far superior to most. People, his next play, wasn't as good really. I hope that this is a much better swansong (not that it has to be and it seems as though he still has the compulsion to carry on).
|
|
1,936 posts
|
Post by wickedgrin on Mar 4, 2018 18:28:48 GMT
Good job it got all those five and four star reviews then. Of course, because it was "written by Alan Bennett" - National Treasure at the National Theatre! More complex than your average Bennett play and knowing a bit about Arden and Britten would be pretty useful but far superior to most and yes, as you imply my knowledge of Arden and Britten is fairly basic, but then I believe a play should not rely on the audience to have prior knowledge of subjects discussed. Of course, Art is subjective and that is the magic of it.
|
|
2,706 posts
|
Post by Cardinal Pirelli on Mar 4, 2018 19:20:56 GMT
Good job it got all those five and four star reviews then. Of course, because it was "written by Alan Bennett" - National Treasure at the National Theatre! More complex than your average Bennett play and knowing a bit about Arden and Britten would be pretty useful but far superior to most and yes, as you imply my knowledge of Arden and Britten is fairly basic, but then I believe a play should not rely on the audience to have prior knowledge of subjects discussed. Of course, Art is subjective and that is the magic of it. Critics liked it, you didn’t, but they didn’t warm to his next play whereas maybe some people preferred that. There is no conspiracy here, the world is full of too many of such theories at the moment.
|
|
5,585 posts
|
Post by lynette on Mar 4, 2018 20:27:06 GMT
It's all about the movie now isn’t it? Whatever this will be is probably already optioned for a film version. Am I being cynical? Personally I didn’t like his last two offerings much. But at his best he has a wonderful 'ear' and being about old 'uns this might be one of his best.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 5, 2018 9:37:43 GMT
I liked The Habit Of Art. I seem to recall John Heffernan played a rather lovely chair. People wasn't great but it killed a couple of hours.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 5, 2018 9:47:38 GMT
I (whisper it) liked People. It wasn't his best but it was witty, had a point and had some great performances. Also I share his opinion that other people ruin things, so he was very much preaching to the converted.
|
|
7,505 posts
|
Post by alece10 on Mar 5, 2018 10:32:15 GMT
I (whisper it) liked People. It wasn't his best but it was witty, had a point and had some great performances. Also I share his opinion that other people ruin things, so he was very much preaching to the converted. I liked it too.
|
|
211 posts
|
Post by peelee on Mar 5, 2018 15:56:57 GMT
I'm pleased this new play by Alan Bennett is to be staged at the Bridge Theatre.
I liked People, though unlike some upthread I like people, and saw it on a cinema screen where from an audience standpoint it worked well. And The Habit of Art was interesting enough for me to see it twice at the National Theatre. As Bennett is naturally funny and thought-provoking, even if that seam of melancholy in his writing-mind remains as thick as ever, this forthcoming play of his may well have all that in it as well as some laughs.
I checked last week and tickets seemed available for various dates and times, so I'll be buying two or three for myself and friends in the next few days.
|
|
7,505 posts
|
Post by alece10 on Mar 18, 2018 8:58:47 GMT
Anyone who has booked for this, have you received your tickets yet? I booked a couple of weeks ago but not received anything. Wondered if the Bridge is one of those places that sends tickets out nearer the time.
|
|
3,069 posts
|
Post by Rory on Mar 18, 2018 9:06:55 GMT
Nearer the time I suspect. I booked my ticket for the Martin McDonagh when booking opened and still haven't received it yet.
|
|
382 posts
|
Post by stevemar on Mar 18, 2018 9:56:33 GMT
Anyone who has booked for this, have you received your tickets yet? I booked a couple of weeks ago but not received anything. Wondered if the Bridge is one of those places that sends tickets out nearer the time. I’m assuming you didn’t choose (or accidentally choose and miss them) the pdf ticket option, in which case the tickets were sent by email almost instantly?
|
|
851 posts
|
Post by bordeaux on Mar 18, 2018 10:15:30 GMT
Seem to remember The Habit of Art was pretty dreadful too Oh yes, indeed. I seem to remember commenting to my theatre companion at the time that had the play been submitted to the NT without the "written by Alan Bennett" it would never have got produced. Is that a problem? It seems to me that if your previous play was as good and as successful as The History Boys, if you have an outstanding record of four decades of wonderful writing behind you, then you deserve to have your next play put on even if it isn't as good as your best. Many theatre-goers will want to see even minor Alan Bennett and even minor Alan Bennett is better than no Alan Bennett in many people's view. The same is true of Stoppard and Frayn. That level of achievement does make your late work (even if on first sight it doesn't look that good) worth putting on. The same is true of publishing. If Hilary Mantel or Philip Roth wrote something their publisher didn't like, I still think they should publish it because any publisher should take the view 'we publish authors, not books' i.e. when you're dealing with writers with that amount of talent, then it's worth taking a risk on stuff not many people will like.
|
|
7,505 posts
|
Post by alece10 on Mar 18, 2018 11:38:33 GMT
Anyone who has booked for this, have you received your tickets yet? I booked a couple of weeks ago but not received anything. Wondered if the Bridge is one of those places that sends tickets out nearer the time. I’m assuming you didn’t choose (or accidentally choose and miss them) the pdf ticket option, in which case the tickets were sent by email almost instantly? No I paid an extra £1 for tickets to be posted. I have a hatred of e tickets as I like to keep proper tickets with my programme.
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Mar 18, 2018 14:10:13 GMT
Oh yes, indeed. I seem to remember commenting to my theatre companion at the time that had the play been submitted to the NT without the "written by Alan Bennett" it would never have got produced. Is that a problem? It seems to me that if your previous play was as good and as successful as The History Boys, if you have an outstanding record of four decades of wonderful writing behind you, then you deserve to have your next play put on even if it isn't as good as your best. Many theatre-goers will want to see even minor Alan Bennett and even minor Alan Bennett is better than no Alan Bennett in many people's view. The same is true of Stoppard and Frayn. That level of achievement does make your late work (even if on first sight it doesn't look that good) worth putting on. The same is true of publishing. If Hilary Mantel or Philip Roth wrote something their publisher didn't like, I still think they should publish it because any publisher should take the view 'we publish authors, not books' i.e. when you're dealing with writers with that amount of talent, then it's worth taking a risk on stuff not many people will like. The decision in practice is merely commercial. There are plenty of notable playwrights who struggled to get any new plays produced when they fell out of favour - Arnold Wesker and even Arthur Miller (in USA) are examples. Likewise there are actors in the same category - Sir Donald Sindon was one. On the other hand J.K Rowling had no problem getting her feeble little detective stories published and adapted for TV.
|
|
5,585 posts
|
Post by lynette on Mar 18, 2018 20:07:34 GMT
Who was it who submitted a novel with a name not her own and was rejected , then recognised? A few years ago now. I don’t mean JK who submitted her detective stories under another name and was then outed by a silly person. She was very cross. It is an interesting exercise. Same with all the celebrity books published , the children's novels and so on, not books about the celebrity's speciality. So same for plays. I’m sorry but I don't agree with you wickedgrin. If the book/play is not very good why should we asked to buy it? Harsh, yes, but we take the supermarket to task if the apples are rotten despite many years of good apple selling...
|
|
851 posts
|
Post by bordeaux on Mar 18, 2018 21:55:32 GMT
Who was it who submitted a novel with a name not her own and was rejected , then recognised? A few years ago now. I don’t mean JK who submitted her detective stories under another name and was then outed by a silly person. She was very cross. It is an interesting exercise. Same with all the celebrity books published , the children's novels and so on, not books about the celebrity's speciality. So same for plays. I’m sorry but I don't agree with you wickedgrin. If the book/play is not very good why should we asked to buy it? Harsh, yes, but we take the supermarket to task if the apples are rotten despite many years of good apple selling... Doris Lessing submitted something pseudonymously to her own publisher as if she were a first-time writer and it was rejected. It caused a bit of a scandal, though quite a few middle-aged writers write novels well below their best stuff, so it's not like someone rejecting The Golden Notebook or something. This is a charming article by the Jonathan Cape reader who rejected it, now himself a successful poet and novelist (and the son of the architect who designed the National Theatre), James Lasdun. www.newyorker.com/books/page-turner/doris-lessing-and-the-perils-of-the-pseudonymous-novel
|
|
211 posts
|
Post by peelee on Mar 19, 2018 9:14:53 GMT
Rowling's post-Harry Potter book, The Casual Vacancy, was far better than the Sunday night TV series confection of it with different ending. It was her first adult novel and, in grittier more perceptive style than TV managed, it showed more of her range.
I have read the first two of the 'Robert Galbraith'-written novels and liked them, though (having missed the first TV adaptation of them) I didn't much care for the recent TV adaptation of one of the later novels. It felt so squeezed and seemed to leave subplots hanging or characters unexplained with the over-all story, as if what had been scheduled as three episodes had been cut back to a two-parter.
|
|