|
|
Post by Forrest on Jan 31, 2020 19:47:17 GMT
I had the feeling this would divide audiences, and judging by the board, I was right. I loved it, actually much more than I expected to. Rough was lovely and funny, a great start to the evening, but Endgame, for me, was an absolute gem. I've read some Beckett, but not this play in particular, and while I have never seen his work on stage before (as far as I can remember), I knew his writing was my cup of tea. I was one of the people who found the play largely hilarious - Beckett's humour is exactly the kind I like, halfway between being genuinely laugh out loud funny and making you feel bad that you are laughing because the joke is always at someone's expense and it is rather brutal. Which is why the play also felt devastatingly sad at the same time. Everyone in that home lives, or better to say exists (for living is hardly a word for it ), in a world of vast nothingness. Nothingness surrounds them literally, but each one of them is also drowning in it, personally, since they have so little joy to hold on to. And they are all so troubled and so utterly unhappy in their little fortresses of solitude, and that makes that line Steve had already quoted - that nothing is funnier than unhappiness - the perfect short summary of the play. Hamm's humanity is most compromised, he acts as their tormentor, but there are tiny, barely noticeable sparkles of something else in him too. He blames all of the world for his misery, but still longs to have something more, and though he tries, it's like he doesn't remember how to find joy in anything any more. Daniel Radcliffe's Clov is so endearingly obedient, despite the fact that Hamm's behaviour both infuriates him (but he bottles it up most of the time) and makes him long for some recognition and appreciation, which made me literally giggle with joy in those moments when he allowed himself a few brief escapes into quiet rebellion. (My favourite thing was when he nonchalantly kicked the dog, barely noticeably. It was one of those moments when I wanted to give him a hug.) Johnson's character is the most gentle one, clinging hopelessly and helplessly to the love he has for the person next to him who is disappearing, but also to the illusion of a normal life and a normal family. He struck me as both a symbol of gentleness fading away in a brutal world, discarded as unnecessary, as well as of one whole generation of romantics driven by different principles dying out. Basically, I wanted to simultaneously laugh and cry watching it most of the time. Maybe I just read too much into it, but I thought it was amazing. Cumming's performance was the absolute standout. Radcliffe was, perhaps, the weakest point: I did feel for his Clov, but somehow didn't find myself thinking: I can't wait to see this man on stage again. His performance felt well rehearsed, but not overly honest and a little restrained. (Maybe I just have brutally high expectations, but I love it when magic happens on stage, and I didn't get that from him.) Oh, and that set was terrific - beautifully simple and surreal at the same time. Those tiny windows in that enormous room - that are paradoxically the only source of any light and excitement - and the (dirty-pastel) look of everything being seemingly normal, yet strange, like a surrealist painting. |
|
2,339 posts
|
Post by theglenbucklaird on Feb 2, 2020 9:56:44 GMT
This wasn't for me and I should've known but it's hard to resist £10 tickets. I thought the first part was unnecessary. I would rather not "waste" 25 mins plus 20 mins break on it. Endgame was well played all around it's just not my kind of a play. Not the sort of doom I want on a miserable January day. The chap next to me fell asleep. My partner didn't like it at all and asked me never to book Becket again. I was already feeling a little blue and now I woke with a stinking bad mood and I yet to tell my partner next week's theatre In the NT will be 4 hours long.😭😭😭 This. My wife insisted rather than asked though. 'Juliet Stephenson or Cummings, I don't care. Please no more Beckett'. Cummings was really good though |
|
3,320 posts
|
Post by david on Feb 3, 2020 12:02:42 GMT
Could someone from the admin team ( BurlyBeaR) please remove my notice posted on the notice board as the ticket has now been collected. Thanks. |
|
19,788 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Feb 3, 2020 12:50:38 GMT
Could someone from the admin team ( BurlyBeaR ) please remove my notice posted on the notice board as the ticket has now been collected. Thanks. Done that 🙂 |
|
|
|
Post by floorshow on Feb 8, 2020 19:03:04 GMT
Outstayed it's welcome by 15-20 mins, became increasingly ponderous for no good reason.
Liked it before the energy in the room dropped off - was a satisfyingly bleak and painful situation.
Radcliffe was enjoyably physical, Cumming stumbled over his lines a few times in Rough, which was a surprise. V good hand acting from Horrocks. Certainly not a must see though.
|
|
215 posts
|
Post by frosty on Feb 9, 2020 9:19:36 GMT
Absolutely hated this...incomprehensible nonsense, would have left if it didn’t mean disturbing people. I can’t understand why anyone who manages to get that incredible cast in one building would give them this stinker. Definitely not for me.... I try to look for something good in everything, but couldn’t find it here. If youngsters were drawn here because of Daniel Radcliffe, I think they would be put off theatre for life! Thankfully we saw The Visit afterwards, which was amazing.
|
|
|
|
Post by theoracle on Feb 9, 2020 14:30:22 GMT
I didn't love this but I didn't hate it either. I enjoyed Alan Cummings' performance very much in both plays and Daniel Radcliffe was certainly on good form throughout the evening. Endgame and Rough seem to compliment each other very well and this production really captures the surrealism and nihilism that is so present throughout Beckett's work. I think it was great to see many more younger faces at a Beckett but I don't think these were the plays to try to make Beckett more mainstream. Endgame certainly felt like it was longer than 90mins but it had its moments. 4/5 from me.
|
|
1,287 posts
|
Post by theatrefan77 on Feb 9, 2020 15:27:09 GMT
I loved it. Went on Friday and thought both Cumming and Radcliffe were excellent. Endgame is such a wonderful play anyway, pure nihilism.
I saw recently the movie Joker and made me think a lot about Beckett, he probably would have enjoy it.
Love Beckett's work. Sometimes I don't fully understand it but find it nonetheless fascinating. This kind of play is not for everybody, but people who enjoy Beckett's work will probably love this production of Endgame.
|
|
2,058 posts
|
Post by Marwood on Feb 9, 2020 19:30:17 GMT
I went through a period of seeing a fair bit of Beckett on the West End stage in what seems like a lifetime ago now (Eh Joe, Krapps Last Tape and All That Fall) : it was the lousy version of Godot I saw at the Barbican with Hugo Weaving that put me off seeing any more productions of his work for a long time (I loved the Ian McKellen/Roger Rees version of that so it’s not like I went in unguided): yes Beckett isn’t going to be to everyone’s taste so I can understand people wondering ‘WTF is going on?’but I am SO looking forward to seeing this next week it’s unreal.
|
|
87 posts
|
Post by greenswan on Feb 12, 2020 13:57:28 GMT
Slightly belatedly as life and work intervened - I saw this on Saturday courtesy of the ticket from david.
Unfortunately this proved quite conclusively that I don’t get on with Beckett. Probably my last attempt. The first piece is rightfully obscure in my opinion but at least short. Endgame felt endless - boring and not funny for most of it. The acting - Cummings good, Radcliffe ok.
Toilet queue situation dreadful, seat was great - C11. I’d imagine the corresponding seat on the other side would be even better as the bins are on the left.
|
|
2,058 posts
|
Post by Marwood on Feb 15, 2020 16:54:25 GMT
I liked Karl Johnson in this, and Daniel Radcliffe was rather good too (I don’t know if it was intentional but looking at the way he fell down the ladder near the end, I can picture him becoming a cropper by the end of its run) but overall I can’t say I was that impressed: the whole production just felt a bit heavy handed and a slog to sit through (not helped by the four buffoons sat behind me whispering through the WHOLE f***ing play: no it’s not f****ing Harry Potter, if you don’t know what the f*** is going on or don’t like it, bugger off to a pub or your Quidditch club and moan about it there (rant over)
|
|
2,058 posts
|
Post by Marwood on Feb 16, 2020 15:46:46 GMT
Not relevant to the production, but what is going on with the state of Alan Cumming’s legs? I get paranoid about showing my pasty white legs off when I go anywhere remotely sunny, but here he was, with possibly the skinniest legs in existence (the memory I shall take away from this was two uncooked strands of spaghetti): my legs are like Cristiano Ronaldos compared to those 😝 (to tell the truth, the thought of how he maintains that ‘fine level of physique’ gave me more to ponder than the actual play)
|
|
2,859 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by couldileaveyou on Feb 16, 2020 16:01:06 GMT
Not relevant to the production, but what is going on with the state of Alan Cumming’s legs? I get paranoid about showing my pasty white legs off when I go anywhere remotely sunny, but here he was, with possibly the skinniest legs in existence (the memory I shall take away from this was two uncooked strands of spaghetti): my legs are like Cristiano Ronaldos compared to those 😝 (to tell the truth, the thought of how he maintains that ‘fine level of physique’ gave me more to ponder than the actual play) Uhm I'm pretty sure the legs you see are fake, his real legs are hidden in the chair. |
|
99 posts
|
Post by emilytemple on Feb 18, 2020 10:09:21 GMT
this proved quite conclusively that I don’t get on with Beckett. Probably my last attempt. The first piece is rightfully obscure in my opinion but at least short. Endgame felt endless - boring and not funny for most of it. The acting - Cummings good, Radcliffe ok. I can’t say I was that impressed: the whole production just felt a bit heavy handed and a slog to sit through Both these are my sentiments after my visit this afternoon too. Oo as far i remember you had famous Stalls Q35? View from that on this was ok or rather difficult Also i noticed mr. Racliffe do stage door A. Anyone know if Alan Cumming as well B. I remember SD in old vic You need show your Play Ticket from same day Sd. Show e Ticket on your phone could work as well? On need to be print? |
|
|
|
Post by floorshow on Feb 18, 2020 12:26:45 GMT
Show e Ticket on your phone could work as well? On need to be print? When we passed the queue it looked like you had to show 3 Harry Potter bobble heads each. Disappointing lack of Bond/X Men merch for AC to sign - nerds are so fickle. |
|
99 posts
|
Post by emilytemple on Feb 18, 2020 12:40:50 GMT
I remember the last time I was sd with Radciffe people next to me were surprised that I did not have a merchandiser from Potter to sign but some photo of him( no hp )
My friend who going on this rather on collects autographs on programs or art if she want "do" sd
if you go to see a play with an actor associated with a fandon and this can make you return to the theater on different play, why not. Like in my case
|
|
638 posts
|
Post by andrew on Feb 18, 2020 14:49:12 GMT
Both these are my sentiments after my visit this afternoon too. Oo as far i remember you had famous Stalls Q35? View from that on this was ok or rather difficult Also i noticed mr. Racliffe do stage door A. Anyone know if Alan Cumming as well B. I remember SD in old vic You need show your Play Ticket from same day Sd. Show e Ticket on your phone could work as well? On need to be print? Radcliffe "stagedoors" inside the foyer and you have to queue on the side of the building and show your ticket. Alan Cumming comes out from the actual stage door on the other side. |
|
376 posts
|
Post by sherriebythesea on Feb 19, 2020 12:43:47 GMT
I’m not sure what to even think of this. My first Beckett play. Karl Johnson was wonderful, Alan over the top and I thought Radcliffe mis-cast. I would have taken a miss on this except cast sounded so strong
|
|
5,707 posts
|
Post by lynette on Feb 19, 2020 20:15:28 GMT
I’m not sure what to even think of this. My first Beckett play. Karl Johnson was wonderful, Alan over the top and I thought Radcliffe mis-cast. I would have taken a miss on this except cast sounded so strong It isn’t his best. |
|
1,863 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by NeilVHughes on Feb 22, 2020 22:12:09 GMT
Absolute brilliance, Becket’s appreciation of silent comedy emphasises the absurdity of their narrative.
For me there is no more liberating a playwright than Beckett, we live our lives caged by a narrative of our own writing, once grasped life becomes much simpler, seeking meaning where there is none is the root of a lot of our personal angst.
The only judge and jury on our lives is ourselves, thinking otherwise takes you into thr Kafkaesque nightmare of Rough.
As Annie Baker put it in The Antipodes, the foundation of our personal cells (expectation of order) are cast when we get these words in the ‘right’ order
time, upon, a, once
|
|
2,859 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by couldileaveyou on Feb 24, 2020 0:32:31 GMT
I saw it a couple of weeks ago and LOVED it, I thought it was wonderfully staged and impeccably acted by each of the four cast members. Johnson and Cumming are getting a lot of love - and rightly so - but personally I was very moved by Jane Horrocks, whom I had previously seen (and disliked) in King Lear at the same venue. I have read several Becket's plays but it was my first time seeing one - well, two - on stage and I was amazed by how much funnier they are. I watched the matinee before heading to the Dominion for Prince of Egypt and it's astonishing how Richard Jones achieves more with three white walls than Stephen Schwartz' son does with a budget of millions.
|
|
|
|
Post by londonpostie on Feb 27, 2020 22:33:28 GMT
the context felt Cold War era, infused with The Goons and French avant-garde. So very 1950s, which is not surprising .. Beckett is different gravy, isn't he. These universal themes laid bare, prodded, dissected. I came out thinking of Larkin's This Be the Verse (' ... you mum and dad'). Excellent cast, excellent everything.
|
|
196 posts
|
Post by rockinrobin on Mar 1, 2020 13:37:50 GMT
I think Alan Cumming is brilliant in it - but being trapped in a chair like this for over an hour must feel a bit uncomfortable!
|
|
|
|
Post by londonpostie on Mar 1, 2020 13:57:37 GMT
Not his actual legs, surely.
|
|
105 posts
|
Post by youngoffender on Mar 7, 2020 20:48:15 GMT
Comparing this with fading memories of the only Endgame I have seen before, Matthew Warchus's 2004 production at what was then the Albery, I think Alan Cumming misses some of the pathos that Michael Gambon's lugubrious voice brought to Hamm, and Daniel Radcliffe can't match Lee Evans as Clov for vaudeville physical comedy - but this is still a very creditable job, boosted by great turns from Karl Johnson and Jane Horrocks as the bin-bound oldsters. The script is surely among Beckett's funniest, despite its bleakness, and I much prefer it to Godot. Inevitably, the torpor and repetition start to become enervating by about an hour in, particularly after a drink at the interval, but the longeurs are the point - if Hamm's frequently expressed wish for it all to end isn't shared by the audience before it actually does, then you could argue that the production isn't working.
I knew nothing of Rough for Theatre II, but it seems well paired. Both pieces seem to me to be putting us figuratively within a very troubled head, where inner voices compete to torment and comfort with the power of language. This is emphasised by the parallel designs, both with the outside world upstage, and furnished to suggest facial features from within (e.g. the pair of fluttering 'lamps' of Rough and the two high windows of Endgame).
And those are definitely not Cummings' legs! Adding to the music hall aesthetic, I think they are going for the look of a 'Lord Charles'-style ventriloquism act where motionless legs are draped sinisterly in front, and it's only the top half that moves.
|
|
