1,863 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by NeilVHughes on Feb 3, 2020 12:36:24 GMT
“How can I leave with the bed unmade and
The curtains lopsided.
What kind of person does that make me?
A mess.
A chaotic…
Not fit for work.
Not fit to be a mother.”
Viv has lost a shoe. They’re her work shoes, her weekend shoes, her only pair of shoes, and she doesn’t know what to do.
The curtains are falling, her foot is bleeding, and she’s starting to feel a little overwhelmed.
But all will be well in the world once she finds that missing shoe.
“It’s incredibly hard isn’t it. To stay afloat.
It’s incredibly hard not to sink to the bottom.”
Kayla Meikle and Katherine Parkinson have been cast in the world premiere of Shoe Lady by E.V. Crowe, directed by Vicky Featherstone.
#ShoeLady runs in the Jerwood Theatre Downstairs March 4 - 21.
A surprisingly short run, plenty of tickets when I booked just now but don’t expect it to stay like that for long.
|
|
1,865 posts
|
Post by Dave B on Feb 3, 2020 14:33:23 GMT
Quite fond of the Royal Court's Monday offers but none of the Mondays during this run work for us. So some cheap seats on a Saturday night will have to do.
|
|
2,761 posts
|
Post by n1david on Mar 4, 2020 21:09:10 GMT
Another short one... RCT website updated to say 65 minutes, no interval.
|
|
423 posts
|
Post by schuttep on Mar 5, 2020 11:48:39 GMT
I'm seeing this tomorrow. And just noticed the Royal Court photo on its website and e-mail advertising it was taken on my local high Street!
|
|
2,059 posts
|
Post by Marwood on Mar 7, 2020 20:51:20 GMT
Wasn’t too impressed with this to be honest: I’m grateful it only ran for just over an hour because it started to seriously drag after 20 minutes or so : I won’t be totally negative, I kind of enjoyed the song (and calling it dance is maybe being too generous) bit on the travelator near the end and the cast were all ok (for want of a better word) but I’m glad I limited my spending on this to a front row seat on the balcony rather than splurging on stalls.
|
|
|
|
Post by rosencrantz on Mar 7, 2020 20:52:50 GMT
Thought this was dreadful. No idea how this one got programmed.
|
|
2,761 posts
|
Post by n1david on Mar 8, 2020 1:03:58 GMT
I saw this Friday night and didn't quite know what to make of it, but wasn't very impressed. It's maybe trying to be a bit Brechtian in terms of the lead character's situation, and her stylised interactions with other characters. It's a great performance by Katherine Parkinson - it has to be, it's entirely her show - but the play really didn't hang together for me. It's still a preview, maybe it will gel, maybe I just didn't get what it was trying to do, but I was quite glad when the 65 minutes came to an end. (Agree with Marwood that the song/dance was rather fun though) |
|
1,865 posts
|
Post by Dave B on Mar 8, 2020 8:46:45 GMT
We saw this last night and left quite underwhelmed. Katherine Parkinson is great and there are some great ideas in here but it doesn't really come together at all. A good portion of our tube ride home was spent discussing if we'd missed something big and just didn't understand what was going on...
It's clear there's already been some changes, the final scenes order has changed quite a bit from the programme/playtext so it could well be still undergoing some work.
|
|
|
|
Post by Forrest on Mar 8, 2020 10:20:42 GMT
I was so sad to have missed out on the Friends tickets for this, but I feel I should regret it less after reading your opinions.
Disappointed to hear it's not good though, because I think both Katherine Parkinson and Tom Kanji are such wonderful actors, it's a shame if the play isn't making the most of having such talented people on board.
|
|
|
|
Post by vickyg on Mar 9, 2020 9:24:47 GMT
I saw this on Saturday evening and was also not sure what to make of it at the time. After a couple of days to think though I am struck by how sad it was. The ridiculousness showed how close to the edge she was. It was essentially a one person show even though there were others in the cast and Katherine Parkinson was really great. I initially booked because I had seen and loved her in Home I'm Darling (I haven't seen anything she's been in on tv) and there's no doubt she's excellent. I sort of feel this really only worked to the extent it did because she is so good.
There were some parts that I didn't understand such as the curtain floating around her and ending up on her head and some parts need to get slicker as there is some complex prop work, but in general this is the type of thing I expect to see at the Royal Court. Stuff which is a bit 'out there' and I haven't really seen anything similar before.
|
|
3,040 posts
|
Post by crowblack on Mar 9, 2020 10:06:15 GMT
The Royal Court does seem to be having a poor run at the moment.
|
|
1,499 posts
|
Post by Steve on Mar 9, 2020 19:54:39 GMT
This is a bemusing absurdist expressionist critique of consumerism, mostly a monologue, in which a woman's societal status crashes in the absence of a shoe. I liked it, but I didn't love it, because it repeats itself, and lacks the genuine surprises to convert smiles to laughs. Some spoilers follow. . . Katherine Parkinson is perfectly cast, and brilliant with it, as she is an expert at conveying disappointed enthusiasm, with a lilting voice that always starts with an ascending burst of excitement, that inevitably judders into descending ennui. She plays a woman so shallow that her self-esteem is based on shopping at Waitrose, rather than Tescos, and who obsesses about clothing and fabric to fill her happiness void. So when she loses a shoe, it's the end of her world. . . which is expressionistically highlighted with spotlights and personal travelators amid an endless droning monologue of discontent, in which other people are mere props, of less real value to her than the shoe she is so desperate to recover. EV Crowe has always focused on status, and the loss of it, in her plays, which have historically appeared in the Royal Court Upstairs: such as "Kin," where schoolgirls scrap for status, or "Hero," where being gay might limit a heroic teacher's status, or "The Sewing Group," where technology can buy an imagined status in a technological dream. Here, the focus is on how shallow our dreams of status are in a consumerist society, how hollow our lives are, that they implode so easily with the loss of the tat and stuff we own.
It's all about Parkinson's precious silver shoe, and how her life collapses without it. It IS funny, and it IS unique, and I won't forget the image of a plaintive spotlit Parkinson moaning about her shoe, but it doesn't really build, as the ennui extends from Parkinson's world to the audience's experience. This might be the whole point of the play, but it's too hollow a depiction of hollowness to really burn us too deeply. Funny in patches, memorable in patches, Parkinson is wonderful! 3 and a half stars.  |
|
|
|
Post by Forrest on Mar 9, 2020 22:34:48 GMT
Steve, thank you for this. If your review hasn't managed to tempt me into seeing this, I will simply assume it's really not for me. (Your reviews have the same effect most of the time that Marc Brenner's photos do: if they don't tempt me into thinking I have to see something, it usually ends up being an underwhelming experience if I do decide to go. If Brenner cannot make it look beautiful, inviting and exciting, I am usually not wrong to assume that the play might be alright, but it won't be great.)
|
|
|
|
Post by vickyg on Mar 10, 2020 9:16:39 GMT
This is a bemusing absurdist expressionist critique of consumerism, mostly a monologue, in which a woman's societal status crashes in the absence of a shoe. I liked it, but I didn't love it, because it repeats itself, and lacks the genuine surprises to convert smiles to laughs. Some spoilers follow. . . Katherine Parkinson is perfectly cast, and brilliant with it, as she is an expert at conveying disappointed enthusiasm, with a lilting voice that always starts with an ascending burst of excitement, that inevitably judders into descending ennui. She plays a woman so shallow that her self-esteem is based on shopping at Waitrose, rather than Tescos, and who obsesses about clothing and fabric to fill her happiness void. So when she loses a shoe, it's the end of her world. . . which is expressionistically highlighted with spotlights and personal travelators amid an endless droning monologue of discontent, in which other people are mere props, of less real value to her than the shoe she is so desperate to recover. EV Crowe has always focused on status, and the loss of it, in her plays, which have historically appeared in the Royal Court Upstairs: such as "Kin," where schoolgirls scrap for status, or "Hero," where being gay might limit a heroic teacher's status, or "The Sewing Group," where technology can buy an imagined status in a technological dream. Here, the focus is on how shallow our dreams of status are in a consumerist society, how hollow our lives are, that they implode so easily with the loss of the tat and stuff we own.
It's all about Parkinson's precious silver shoe, and how her life collapses without it. It IS funny, and it IS unique, and I won't forget the image of a plaintive spotlit Parkinson moaning about her shoe, but it doesn't really build, as the ennui extends from Parkinson's world to the audience's experience. This might be the whole point of the play, but it's too hollow a depiction of hollowness to really burn us too deeply. Funny in patches, memorable in patches, Parkinson is wonderful! 3 and a half stars. Interesting to hear that the theme of many of the playwright's pieces is around status. This gives me a totally different perspective on the play which I took to be about mental illness and how someone so close to breaking point could be pushed over the edge by issues which to us are trivial but to her are insurmountable, with the treadmill showing the physical and emotional trudge through the day. I definitely agree that it's funny in places and Katherine Parkinson is great, but hearing that the subject matter is so shallow has rather taken the edge of it for me.
|
|
3,040 posts
|
Post by crowblack on Mar 10, 2020 10:27:19 GMT
If Brenner cannot make it look beautiful, inviting and exciting, I am usually not wrong to assume that the play might be alright, but it won't be great.) Agree on this: I think he's the best theatre photographer out there for capturing the essence of a show. |
|
1,499 posts
|
Post by Steve on Mar 10, 2020 16:19:17 GMT
This is a bemusing absurdist expressionist critique of consumerism, mostly a monologue, in which a woman's societal status crashes in the absence of a shoe. I liked it, but I didn't love it, because it repeats itself, and lacks the genuine surprises to convert smiles to laughs. Some spoilers follow. . . Katherine Parkinson is perfectly cast, and brilliant with it, as she is an expert at conveying disappointed enthusiasm, with a lilting voice that always starts with an ascending burst of excitement, that inevitably judders into descending ennui. She plays a woman so shallow that her self-esteem is based on shopping at Waitrose, rather than Tescos, and who obsesses about clothing and fabric to fill her happiness void. So when she loses a shoe, it's the end of her world. . . which is expressionistically highlighted with spotlights and personal travelators amid an endless droning monologue of discontent, in which other people are mere props, of less real value to her than the shoe she is so desperate to recover. EV Crowe has always focused on status, and the loss of it, in her plays, which have historically appeared in the Royal Court Upstairs: such as "Kin," where schoolgirls scrap for status, or "Hero," where being gay might limit a heroic teacher's status, or "The Sewing Group," where technology can buy an imagined status in a technological dream. Here, the focus is on how shallow our dreams of status are in a consumerist society, how hollow our lives are, that they implode so easily with the loss of the tat and stuff we own.
It's all about Parkinson's precious silver shoe, and how her life collapses without it. It IS funny, and it IS unique, and I won't forget the image of a plaintive spotlit Parkinson moaning about her shoe, but it doesn't really build, as the ennui extends from Parkinson's world to the audience's experience. This might be the whole point of the play, but it's too hollow a depiction of hollowness to really burn us too deeply. Funny in patches, memorable in patches, Parkinson is wonderful! 3 and a half stars. Interesting to hear that the theme of many of the playwright's pieces is around status. This gives me a totally different perspective on the play which I took to be about mental illness and how someone so close to breaking point could be pushed over the edge by issues which to us are trivial but to her are insurmountable, with the treadmill showing the physical and emotional trudge through the day. I definitely agree that it's funny in places and Katherine Parkinson is great, but hearing that the subject matter is so shallow has rather taken the edge of it for me.
Art has many meanings to many different people, and I LOVE your take!
Some spoilers follow. . .
It could easily be that everything we see is simply going on in her head.
Clearly, the heightened absurd "reality" of our heroine (eg: reporting her shoe missing at the police station, or being accused by a random of being a shoe thief) cannot be intended as documented reality.
So either it is all going on in her head (like you felt, and which take I like), or, as I felt, the heightened reality is a pisstake of the things we all value in life, of how we ourselves are assessed and valued by others, as well as a critique of of how close to the economic edge so many of us are, that one little thing can snap us.
I definitely found myself thinking of Mr. Micawber in David Copperfield, where he says "Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure nineteen six, result happiness. Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pound ought and six, result misery."
Basically, 2 silver shoes and a day at Waitrose, result happiness; 1 silver shoe, a bloody foot, and a Tesco's receipt, result misery. LOL.
I think both interpretations can be true at once, though the reason I favoured my interpretation is that if your take is true, then other than putting us inside the mind of a mentally ill woman, the piece goes nowhere, and says little about mental illness. About consumerism, and the value we place on things and each other, it says loads.
|
|
2,059 posts
|
Post by Marwood on Mar 10, 2020 19:28:09 GMT
2 stars from the Standard tonight, maybe a little bit generous but I can’t really argue with that.
|
|
|
|
Post by vickyg on Mar 10, 2020 23:21:34 GMT
Seems to be mainly 3* reviews from what I’ve seen which I think is very fair. All seem to have a slightly different take on the overall message of the play and all seem to praise Katherine Parkinson. It’s a very short run so it may be difficult, but I feel like I need to see it again with other perspectives in mind.
|
|
425 posts
|
Post by dlevi on Mar 12, 2020 23:13:39 GMT
I went to the matinee today and I have to say I found it boring and a waste of time. Ms Parkinson of whom I am a great fan, had no energy. Also, the play ended to total silence for at least 10 seconds until I started the rather lame ovation. Truly a waste of time on everyone's part.
|
|
202 posts
|
Post by harry on Mar 14, 2020 6:55:47 GMT
The Royal Court does seem to be having a poor run at the moment. Not really a fan of Shoe Lady either, but I don’t know that this comment is justified. Looking back through the last 6 months of shows on their website - Glass Kill Bluebeard Imp - big hit 4&5* reviews A History of Water in the Middle East - apparently great according to friends who saw it (I didn’t) plenty of 4* reviews On Bear Ridge - not really my thing, but done very well. A bit marmite with the critics but some 5* from big hitters. Midnight Movie - admittedly terrible by all accounts A Kind of People - a bit on the nose perhaps for my personal taste but really well reviewed by the biggies and seemed to attract (and be really enjoyed by) non-theatrey friends of mine for whom the Royal Court is not really on their radar usually All of It - not critically adored but easily my favourite show of 2020 so far. Scenes With Girls - great, fresh, well acted and really well reviewed. So to say this show is part of a poor run feels a little unfair. |
|
425 posts
|
Post by dlevi on Mar 14, 2020 7:00:17 GMT
Given the circumstances and my schedule I'll be really bummed if, after a lifetime of theatre-going the last show I ever see is "Shoe Lady.".
|
|
1,863 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by NeilVHughes on Mar 14, 2020 7:16:34 GMT
With Steve on this. A critique of consumerism the shoe indicative of the crutch of possessions. We are what we buy is the mantra most of us live by and only now is the link to our mental health being understood. Another play where the performance trumps the writing, sitting front row centre provided the perfect spot to appreciate the way Katherine Parkinson was able to manifest our absurd and comedic quest for a life defined through perceived status and possessions and its fragility. |
|
3,040 posts
|
Post by crowblack on Mar 14, 2020 9:36:46 GMT
Not really a fan of Shoe Lady either, but I don’t know that this comment is justified. For a writing-centred theatre, it has felt to me over the last few years that many of the pieces have been carried by the top-notch actors it generally manages to get, rather than the scripts themselves. The best things I have seen there have been co-productions with other venues. |
|
2,761 posts
|
Post by n1david on Apr 30, 2020 11:14:25 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by vickyg on Apr 30, 2020 12:19:26 GMT
Interesting. It says the plays were recorded in isolation as opposed to on stage/in rehearsals which I think will help Shoe Lady as there were a lot of gaps in dialogue (monologue) for movement and prop changes which will have been eliminated. I had a soft spot for this play so I'm interested to hear how it comes off. |
|
