562 posts
|
Post by jadnoop on Oct 24, 2018 10:54:47 GMT
And I would like to see him Direct an actual new play/ piece of writing By somone else Didn't he direct The Red Barn at the National a couple of years ago? That borrowed liberally from the aesthetic of classic film noir but I thought it was pretty interesting to be honest.
Admittedly that had pretty middling reviews, but IMO that was at least partly down to the decision to market it as some sort of exciting pyschological thriller rather than as a slow-burn drama.
|
|
5,022 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by Jan on Oct 24, 2018 10:57:29 GMT
'But Ibsen was a better dramatist than Icke and, since we see this play so rarely, I feel audiences deserve the real thing rather than this parasitic rewrite.'
How very paternalistic of old Mikey to graciously tell audiences what they deserve to see. The Almeida has done plenty of literal unadorned Ibsen (mostly directed by Richard Eyre) so maybe there are some in the Almeida audience who'd like to see something different ? The play is not done that rarely anyway, I can think of three other London productions in my time. |
|
5,022 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by Jan on Oct 24, 2018 10:59:28 GMT
And I would like to see him Direct an actual new play/ piece of writing By somone else Didn't he direct The Red Barn at the National a couple of years ago? That borrowed liberally from the aesthetic of classic film noir but I thought it was pretty interesting to be honest.
Admittedly that had pretty middling reviews, but IMO that was at least partly down to the decision to market it as some sort of exciting pyschological thriller rather than as a slow-burn drama.
He directed that "Mr Burns" thing too. Up until the recent past there were plenty of very good directors who hardly directed new plays at all, Adrian Noble, Trevor Nunn, Greg Doran, it's not a problem. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 24, 2018 11:59:24 GMT
Didn't he direct The Red Barn at the National a couple of years ago? That borrowed liberally from the aesthetic of classic film noir but I thought it was pretty interesting to be honest.
Admittedly that had pretty middling reviews, but IMO that was at least partly down to the decision to market it as some sort of exciting pyschological thriller rather than as a slow-burn drama.
He directed that "Mr Burns" thing too. Up until the recent past there were plenty of very good directors who hardly directed new plays at all, Adrian Noble, Trevor Nunn, Greg Doran, it's not a problem. The Mr Burns Which got one star reviews? It is my opinion Icke prefers dividing audiences Rather than uniting them And his method is to stage things Which aren’t very good I also find his work much more pretentious Than for example Katie Mitchell Probably as he has a massive complex about his Nothern Working class background And trying to over compensate And this is so pathecially transparent In every show he directs |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 24, 2018 12:22:51 GMT
How very paternalistic of old Mikey to graciously tell audiences what they deserve to see. The Almeida has done plenty of literal unadorned Ibsen (mostly directed by Richard Eyre) so maybe there are some in the Almeida audience who'd like to see something different ? The play is not done that rarely anyway, I can think of three other London productions in my time. Yes, there's the Barbican and Donmar productions in the last 15 years, Lyric Hammersmith and Phoenix Theatre in the 80s (found here - theatricalia.com/play/3ht/the-wild-duck) and I'm sure there are others. |
|
382 posts
|
Post by stevemar on Oct 24, 2018 12:33:51 GMT
4 stars Whats on Stage
4 stars The Times
And.. Parsley is in somewhat in agreement with Billington. Makes me wonder, have we even seen them in the same room at the same time?
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 24, 2018 12:39:57 GMT
How very paternalistic of old Mikey to graciously tell audiences what they deserve to see. The Almeida has done plenty of literal unadorned Ibsen (mostly directed by Richard Eyre) so maybe there are some in the Almeida audience who'd like to see something different ? The play is not done that rarely anyway, I can think of three other London productions in my time. Yes, there's the Barbican and Donmar productions in the last 15 years, Lyric Hammersmith and Phoenix Theatre in the 80s (found here - theatricalia.com/play/3ht/the-wild-duck) and I'm sure there are others. The barbican staging was wonderful And had a balance between Comedy and drama Another thing about Icke Is he takes himself so seriously I have never seen any humour Or wit In his shows He drains them of joy |
|
|
|
Post by Fleance on Oct 24, 2018 12:55:59 GMT
Looking forward to seeing The Wild Duck, which sounds fascinating. I saw Peter Hall's production with Alex Jennings, David Threlfall, and Nicola McAuliffe at the Phoenix in 1989 -- a good production. The programme has some interesting essays about Ibsen and the play.
|
|
5,022 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by Jan on Oct 24, 2018 13:18:48 GMT
He directed that "Mr Burns" thing too. Up until the recent past there were plenty of very good directors who hardly directed new plays at all, Adrian Noble, Trevor Nunn, Greg Doran, it's not a problem. The Mr Burns Which got one star reviews? It is my opinion Icke prefers dividing audiences Rather than uniting them And his method is to stage things Which aren’t very good I also find his work much more pretentious Than for example Katie Mitchell Probably as he has a massive complex about his Nothern Working class background Katie Mitchell hasn’t got any discernible sense of humour at all (one of your complaints about Icke). She also very rarely directs any classic plays so we can’t compare her work with anyone else - the one and only time she directed Shakespeare it was (typically) one part of Henry VI - how pretentious is that ? Icke takes on the established classics like Hamlet and Mary Stuart that Mitchell avoids. Also, at least the audience can see and hear what’s happening in an Icke production, something Mitchell struggles with. |
|
2,496 posts
|
Post by zahidf on Oct 24, 2018 13:23:33 GMT
I forgot Icke did Mary Stuart: that was excellent.
I'm a big fan of his Wild Duck, but I can understand why some people wouldn't like it. Saying that, Billington was being, well, Billington about it!
|
|
904 posts
|
Post by lonlad on Oct 24, 2018 13:49:06 GMT
Saw it last night and was absolutely blown away -- its innovations are clear as a bell and always in the service of a larger point about human malignancy and the acting is tremendous throughout: right up there with Icke's best work and, for me, streets ahead of both HAMLET and MARY STUART. Billington's review is so predictably head-in-the-sand that I laughed out loud while reading it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 24, 2018 15:24:17 GMT
As I said
I did not not mind this “version”
Asides from the awful acting from the leads
Indeed I thought it was badly
Cast in general
Only Lyndsey Marshal was very good
And her father in law
The child was particularly bad
The piece gathered momentum towards the end
But at nearly 3 hours
It had nowhere near as much impact
At the version at the Barbican
Which was only 80 mins
Sometimes less is more
Icke tends to get carried away for no reason
And he would do much better
In condensing his thoughts and processes
And leaving out things
About 1/2 an hour of the Almeida version is good theatre
The rest is superfluous
My issue is the director will be become synonymous with this sort of indulgent “version” and “adpatation” of great plays
Many people won’t know the original works at all
And likely won’t have seen any other translations of them
And I feel upset they might go away
Knowing only the Robert Icke version of “after” that play which is often so far removed from what it was supposed to be
The fact that he “adapts” and embellished AND directs
Doesn’t help matters
Can’t see the wood for the trees and all that
😰
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 24, 2018 15:25:56 GMT
The Mr Burns Which got one star reviews? It is my opinion Icke prefers dividing audiences Rather than uniting them And his method is to stage things Which aren’t very good I also find his work much more pretentious Than for example Katie Mitchell Probably as he has a massive complex about his Nothern Working class background Katie Mitchell hasn’t got any discernible sense of humour at all (one of your complaints about Icke). She also very rarely directs any classic plays so we can’t compare her work with anyone else - the one and only time she directed Shakespeare it was (typically) one part of Henry VI - how pretentious is that ? Icke takes on the established classics like Hamlet and Mary Stuart that Mitchell avoids. Also, at least the audience can see and hear what’s happening in an Icke production, something Mitchell struggles with. I think Mitchell is a lot more respected As a director Has a huge body of work to her name And pioneered many techniques in theatre She had also successfully directed opera I have never had issues hearing her shows As I have two ears She is also a lot more interesting than Icke |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 24, 2018 17:25:25 GMT
I have seen a few 5* reviews, which I think the production deserves. Read a great review by Helen Lewis in New Statesman which makes me want to see it again. Poor Michael Billington. I understand his anger: I felt exactly the same way when Rolf Harris was accused of...well, you know. My childhood!
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 24, 2018 18:28:49 GMT
So. Two minutes to go and we've still not been allowed in to sit down yet. I think the duck is having a moment.
I'm hearing talk of pancakes and hoisin sauce.
|
|
5,022 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by Jan on Oct 25, 2018 7:01:33 GMT
Katie Mitchell hasn’t got any discernible sense of humour at all (one of your complaints about Icke). She also very rarely directs any classic plays so we can’t compare her work with anyone else - the one and only time she directed Shakespeare it was (typically) one part of Henry VI - how pretentious is that ? Icke takes on the established classics like Hamlet and Mary Stuart that Mitchell avoids. Also, at least the audience can see and hear what’s happening in an Icke production, something Mitchell struggles with. I think Mitchell is a lot more respected As a director Has a huge body of work to her name And pioneered many techniques in theatre She had also successfully directed opera I have never had issues hearing her shows As I have two ears She is also a lot more interesting than Icke Nicholas Hytner gave her the boot from the NT because he tired of her self-indulgence in staging things that sections of the audience couldn’t see or hear properly. Just curious, but you always go to opening nights for these things, are you getting complimentary tickets ? |
|
902 posts
|
Post by bordeaux on Oct 25, 2018 7:43:26 GMT
Oh dear. Icke’s agent won’t like that. He's probably resigned to it. Billington gave both Hamlet and Mary Stuart three stars, also eccentrically. |
|
5,022 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by Jan on Oct 25, 2018 7:49:52 GMT
Oh dear. Icke’s agent won’t like that. He's probably resigned to it. Billington gave both Hamlet and Mary Stuart three stars, also eccentrically. Did he ?! How odd. Billington normally adds an extra star to any production of Schiller (part of his decades-long campaign to get more classic European drama on) so that is a low rating for Mary Stuart. I’m seeing this one next week, Icke’s best production for me so far was Uncle Vanya so probably this is right up my street. |
|
2,496 posts
|
Post by zahidf on Oct 25, 2018 7:53:34 GMT
He's probably resigned to it. Billington gave both Hamlet and Mary Stuart three stars, also eccentrically. Did he ?! How odd. Billington normally adds an extra star to any production of Schiller (part of his decades-long campaign to get more classic European drama on) so that is a low rating for Mary Stuart. I’m seeing this one next week, Icke’s best production for me so far was Uncle Vanya so probably this is right up my street. www.theguardian.com/stage/2016/dec/16/mary-stuart-review-juliet-stevenson-lia-williams-almeida
This line is interesting
'But other aspects of the staging are questionable. Schiller was a student of realpolitik, and one of the play’s great scenes shows the duplicitous Leicester trying to talk his way out of his proven commitment to Mary. John Light is a good actor, but what should be a masterclass in machiavellian subtlety is played melodramatically with everyone shouting and Elizabeth circling the stage as if it were a racetrack.'
Like with his review of Wild Duck, though not as strongly put, he seems to think Icke puts too much frills on the adaptation and isn't presenting it how the original would have done so
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 25, 2018 9:39:03 GMT
Well. Normally something like this would send me running for the bar and I normally like a corset and a few wigs with my Ibsen but I found myself rather enthralled. It all starts with a bit of a TED Talk about lies which was nice and there's a bit too much talking into the microphone to the audience ("Hello, I'm a character in an Ibsen play", "I didn't say that at all", "He really does look dreadful", "I rather fancied some crispy duck as it happens", that sort of thing) but once it all gets going it all rather zips along. Not much of a set really, just an old sink and a table for the most part, BUT . . . {Duck Off}
. . . there's a wonderful reveal of the attic towards the end which is really rather beautiful . . . . . . which drew gasps. Gasps I tell you. The thing I found so emotional about it though is that it's just so devastatingly sad (I've never seen the play before). The cast on the whole were glorious I thought and they all had such wonderful voices. Really, genuinely beautiful voices. I could have quite happily listened to them doing it as a radio play. I thought Edward Hogg was absolutely sensational myself, the forced happiness and then the absolute despair were heartbreaking and matched by Lyndsey Marshal. Rick Warden was also terrific as was Nicholas Farrell. Kevin Harvey has a voice that's like being covered in melted Galaxy chocolate but I can honestly say that I don't think I've hated a character as much as I did Gregory. What an absolute . . well I can't say it. Full credit to Harvey for not trying to make him all sympathetic though. The devastation he wreaks is unforgivable. There's a bit of a false ending to act one though. You think it's done and you clap but there's a little bit more so don't rush out for an ice cream straight away. Stay for the interval if you can as Gina and Hedwig change the set, roll out a carpet and do a bit of hoovering. I'm not sure if that counts as child labour? There is a duck though (thankfully) but it makes a fleeting appearance, like Judi Dench in 'Shakespeare in Love'. Like DJD, it stole the show. Although it didn't seem particularly wild. Perhaps it used to be in its youth but has mellowed. Like Toyah Willcox. |
|
902 posts
|
Post by bordeaux on Oct 25, 2018 9:57:07 GMT
He's probably resigned to it. Billington gave both Hamlet and Mary Stuart three stars, also eccentrically. Did he ?! How odd. Billington normally adds an extra star to any production of Schiller (part of his decades-long campaign to get more classic European drama on) so that is a low rating for Mary Stuart. I’m seeing this one next week, Icke’s best production for me so far was Uncle Vanya so probably this is right up my street. I hope you enjoy it. I won't get to see it unfortunately unless it has another life elsewhere, which is unlikely: how often do Ibsen plays transfer to the West End? It makes one realise how sensible the European system of long-term repertory casting is, though I fully understand that wouldn't work over here. Productions stay in the repertoire for years. |
|
406 posts
|
Post by MrBunbury on Oct 25, 2018 10:53:47 GMT
Well. Normally something like this would send me running for the bar and I normally like a corset and a few wigs with my Ibsen but I found myself rather enthralled. It all starts with a bit of a TED Talk about lies which was nice and there's a bit too much talking into the microphone to the audience ("Hello, I'm a character in an Ibsen play", "I didn't say that at all", "He really does look dreadful", "I rather fancied some crispy duck as it happens", that sort of thing) but once it all gets going it all rather zips along. Not much of a set really, just an old sink and a table for the most part, BUT . . . {Duck Off}
. . . there's a wonderful reveal of the attic towards the end which is really rather beautiful . . . . . . which drew gasps. Gasps I tell you. The thing I found so emotional about it though is that it's just so devastatingly sad (I've never seen the play before). The cast on the whole were glorious I thought and they all had such wonderful voices. Really, genuinely beautiful voices. I could have quite happily listened to them doing it as a radio play. I thought Edward Hogg was absolutely sensational myself, the forced happiness and then the absolute despair were heartbreaking and matched by Lyndsey Marshal. Rick Warden was also terrific as was Nicholas Farrell. Kevin Harvey has a voice that's like being covered in melted Galaxy chocolate but I can honestly say that I don't think I've hated a character as much as I did Gregory. What an absolute . . well I can't say it. Full credit to Harvey for not trying to make him all sympathetic though. The devastation he wreaks is unforgivable. There's a bit of a false ending to act one though. You think it's done and you clap but there's a little bit more so don't rush out for an ice cream straight away. Stay for the interval if you can as Gina and Hedwig change the set, roll out a carpet and do a bit of hoovering. I'm not sure if that counts as child labour? There is a duck though (thankfully) but it makes a fleeting appearance, like Judi Dench in 'Shakespeare in Love'. Like DJD, it stole the show. Although it didn't seem particularly wild. Perhaps it used to be in its youth but has mellowed. Like Toyah Willcox. Spot on review, Ryan. It must be one of the most negative plays I have seen. Gregory is absolutely hateful and Edward Hogg is excellent in portraying a man who goes to pieces.
P.S. I was there last night too (and I saw you dashing into the bar). |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 25, 2018 11:00:23 GMT
Spot on review, Ryan. It must be one of the most negative plays I have seen. Gregory is absolutely hateful and Edward Hogg is excellent in portraying a man who goes to pieces.
P.S. I was there last night too (and I saw you dashing into the bar). If there's a bar, I'll always dash to it. You should have said hello, I'm really quite lovely. Unless you cut in front of me at the bar of course. |
|
5,022 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by Jan on Oct 26, 2018 6:22:55 GMT
Did he ?! How odd. Billington normally adds an extra star to any production of Schiller (part of his decades-long campaign to get more classic European drama on) so that is a low rating for Mary Stuart. I’m seeing this one next week, Icke’s best production for me so far was Uncle Vanya so probably this is right up my street. I hope you enjoy it. I won't get to see it unfortunately unless it has another life elsewhere, which is unlikely: how often do Ibsen plays transfer to the West End?. Last was 2014 ? Almeida “Ghosts” to Trafalgar Studios. It went to New York too. Before that 2005? Almeida “Hedda Gabler” to Duke of York. (I’m only listing these to give you hope). |
|
902 posts
|
Post by bordeaux on Oct 26, 2018 7:01:40 GMT
I hope you enjoy it. I won't get to see it unfortunately unless it has another life elsewhere, which is unlikely: how often do Ibsen plays transfer to the West End?. Last was 2014 ? Almeida “Ghosts” to Trafalgar Studios. It went to New York too. Before that 2005? Almeida “Hedda Gabler” to Duke of York. (I’m only listing these to give you hope). Much appreciated! Thanks. |
|
