|
|
Post by lolli on Dec 13, 2016 22:03:04 GMT
What an indulgent play. Much more fun for the actors than the audience - except those fairly far up themselves!
|
|
378 posts
|
Post by Ade on Dec 13, 2016 22:12:31 GMT
What an indulgent play. Much more fun for the actors than the audience - except those fairly far up themselves! Have to say while I completely agree that it's an indulgent play, I did quite enjoy it tonight. But then I'm always a fan of anything a bit bleak. |
|
|
|
Post by Coated on Dec 14, 2016 0:05:12 GMT
I'm a bit baffled by this, mainly why no one ever encouraged Pinter to apply his witty word smithery to an interesting plot.
I rather enjoyed the performance, but would happily never see the play again.
|
|
1,103 posts
|
Post by mallardo on Dec 14, 2016 8:23:49 GMT
Everyone is taking it far too seriously. Pinter never dealt in actual plot in his plays, he simply developed situations. This one is (to me) about clinging to life via the creative uses of memory. And it has the bonus of being very funny.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2016 9:02:58 GMT
Everyone is taking it far too seriously. Pinter never dealt in actual plot in his plays, he simply developed situations. This one is (to me) about clinging to life via the creative uses of memory. And it has the bonus of being very funny. Indeed, to quote my friend who stayed for a post show talk "Turned out it was far less complicated than I was making it" |
|
32 posts
|
Post by deadyankee on Dec 14, 2016 21:21:11 GMT
Everyone is taking it far too seriously. Pinter never dealt in actual plot in his plays, he simply developed situations. This one is (to me) about clinging to life via the creative uses of memory. And it has the bonus of being very funny. Indeed, to quote my friend who stayed for a post show talk "Turned out it was far less complicated than I was making it" Indeed. The post show comments from McKellen were that it was a play about two strangers getting pissed and that's as complicated as it gets. |
|
7 posts
|
Post by johnv47 on Dec 16, 2016 8:45:35 GMT
"And the award for Most Acting goes to... "another example of the anointed doing what they like and people falling for it. Turgid, indulgent and overblown. Emperors new clothes.
|
|
1,064 posts
|
Post by bellboard27 on Dec 16, 2016 11:24:53 GMT
In today's Times Ann Treneman lists this as one of her 10 best plays of 2016
|
|
1 posts
|
Post by star76 on Dec 20, 2016 20:10:57 GMT
I saw Betrayal in the Crucible a year or two ago, with John Simm and Ruth Gemmell, and it was fascinating and compelling. Last night... well, I liked the tree design, and Damian Moloney's shoes. And I can tell you there are 144 small squares in the wall panelling. I can back up your counting too! I saw the play a couple of times during its Newcastle run and was fairly disappointed. On the first showing I though both Stewart & McKellen were quite weak, and struggled to hear what they were saying, particularly in the first act. The acting was better the 2nd time around, but I found it hard to concentrate on the play itself (I knew it wasn't going to be an 'easy watch') and started counting the squares in the wall panelling. Lovely set and great background sound though... The rest of the audience loved it though - the theatre was packed to the rafters (on the Saturday matinée people were standing in the foyer asking if other theatregoers had any spare tickets they weren't using) and there were standing ovations at the end. Kudos to the cast members for attempting to sign autographs at Stage Door despite the pouring rain! Running time is a precise 2h 4min including the 20-minute interval. Shame that in November on two different nights Mr Stewart was not able to come out and sign some autographs, but the rest of the cast could. Leaves a big hole in my program. But enjoyed the play none the less. |
|
|
|
Post by lolli on Dec 20, 2016 22:58:50 GMT
One could even call it a self-aggrandising cash-in.
|
|
