44 posts
|
Post by Hana PlaysAndParasols on May 20, 2016 10:22:40 GMT
A number of people have posted here to say that they enjoyed this even though it didn't work. Folks, if you enjoyed it, it worked. Not necessarily, maybe those people expect not only "fun" but also some sort of substance from a theatre experience. (I sadly didn't get either in this case) |
|
1,103 posts
|
Post by mallardo on May 20, 2016 11:31:17 GMT
A number of people have posted here to say that they enjoyed this even though it didn't work. Folks, if you enjoyed it, it worked. Not necessarily, maybe those people expect not only "fun" but also some sort of substance from a theatre experience. (I sadly didn't get either in this case)
But enjoyment is enjoyment, never mind breaking it down into categories. It's a positive overall feeling. So why do so many people tell us they enjoyed it but didn't think it was any good? Seems like they feel guilty about enjoying it.
|
|
44 posts
|
Post by Hana PlaysAndParasols on May 20, 2016 12:30:17 GMT
Not necessarily, maybe those people expect not only "fun" but also some sort of substance from a theatre experience. (I sadly didn't get either in this case)
But enjoyment is enjoyment, never mind breaking it down into categories. It's a positive overall feeling. So why do so many people tell us they enjoyed it but didn't think it was any good? Seems like they feel guilty about enjoying it.
You have a point there, it might be a bit of a "guilty pleasure" thing. But as in other such cases (a bad romcom or something), you can be passively entertained enjoying it at the moment but you realize it didn't stimulate you intelectually. So the overall feeling is mixed. I don't know, maybe someone will elaborate on their experience. I just wanted to point out that sort of having a good time doesn't automatically mean it was a good production because theatre has multiple social and cultural functions - so it is right to evaluate your experience on multiple levels and expect more. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 20, 2016 12:38:49 GMT
I can enjoy something while still recognising that it is technically bad, just as I can recognise that something is technically good but be bored witless by it. I don't like the idea of guilty pleasures, I think we should be allowed to enjoy what we enjoy without being made to feel bad because of it, but I also don't like the idea that if you liked something it was completely fine and only if you disliked it are you allowed to call it bad.
|
|
44 posts
|
Post by Hana PlaysAndParasols on May 20, 2016 12:50:20 GMT
Totally agree with you Baemax, I didn't mean to say you should feel guilty, I thought that was the expression people use to describe their own feeling if it's split like that. (In my language we don't have this expression at all btw)
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 20, 2016 12:52:03 GMT
Oh, I agree with you entirely, no one should have to feel guilty, and I think your language is incredibly sensible if it doesn't have an equivalent for "guilty pleasure". I'm just stropping about semantics, that's all.  |
|
2,058 posts
|
Post by Marwood on May 20, 2016 13:06:37 GMT
A question about front row seats - I'm going next Friday, sitting front and centre, am I likely to get splattered? I wasn't planning on wearing anything flashy/expensive, but not planning on wearing a plastic poncho or a boiler suit either.
Regarding 'guilty pleasures' I seem to be the only person in the whole of London who enjoyed The Mentalists last year, so it's obviously Diff'rent Strokes for different folks when it comes to this, I'm taking all of the remotely negative comments with a pinch of salt.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 20, 2016 13:14:09 GMT
I'd be VERY surprised if you got spattered. If you're worried, you could wear dark clothes, but Jamie Lloyd productions never spatter as much as they should. Front row of Richard III, where they specifically warned that spattering would happen, and I got NOTHING.
|
|
330 posts
|
Post by charliec on May 20, 2016 13:29:35 GMT
A question about front row seats - I'm going next Friday, sitting front and centre, am I likely to get splattered? I wasn't planning on wearing anything flashy/expensive, but not planning on wearing a plastic poncho or a boiler suit either. Regarding 'guilty pleasures' I seem to be the only person in the whole of London who enjoyed The Mentalists last year, so it's obviously Diff'rent Strokes for different folks when it comes to this, I'm taking all of the remotely negative comments with a pinch of salt. I was front row seat 2 last night and I got splattered by a tiny bit of stuff that when dried it brushed off. Think is may have been a paper/ water type mix. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 20, 2016 17:41:32 GMT
Don't worry about splatterage. You'll get a prime view of Kit-off in his pants and his peachy bottom.
I think that will suffice.
|
|
4,156 posts
|
Post by kathryn on May 21, 2016 20:32:18 GMT
Saw the matinee today - from the front row, which is an excellent place to see it from because you can still see Fit Kit's facial expressions when his hair has fallen across his face, which happens a lot in the second act and must be annoying up in the circles. You do get slightly restricted views due to the TV and a coffee table at some points, but being close enough to see Fit Kit's appendix scar makes up for that.
No splattering, but I did get pointed at by Jenna during the medley and Fit Kit kicked the devil's cheques from the stage to us at curtain call, so we have a nice souvenir (payable to 'A Rich Person' for £250m, dated 6/6/16).
We thoroughly enjoyed it, even though we thought the nudity at the start a bit gratuitous and pointless, and that the modern middle section doesn't really add much to Marlowe's text (apart from the chance to make jokes about David Cameron and Donald Trump). The flashiness is a bit shallow, but it's certainly doing its job of attracting s younger audience.
I felt the ending lacked something - I was expecting him to have a moment of clarity right at the end and the audience were unsure when to clap.
|
|
1,103 posts
|
Post by mallardo on May 21, 2016 23:14:42 GMT
Interesting. I thought the audience hesitation at the end was due to the long fade out. But I thought the final image was haunting and quite perfect.
|
|
4,156 posts
|
Post by kathryn on May 22, 2016 9:24:26 GMT
Yes, definitely due to the long fade out. The glowing light from the Mac on stage meant it was never quite blackout - they need to fiddle with the sleep mode on it to get it to turn off sooner.
I just wanted it to end a bit more crisply - the rest of the production is so punchy that I was expecting something else to happen.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 22, 2016 15:37:46 GMT
Can I just clarify something about the ending... {Spoiler - click to view}
In Marlowe's original text Faustus is dragged to hell. In this production he is left dancing onstage with Wagner dead on the bed. Is that supposed to be his descent into hell? |
|
1,103 posts
|
Post by mallardo on May 22, 2016 16:38:24 GMT
That's how I would see it, mrmusicals. Minus the descent part.
|
|
4,156 posts
|
Post by kathryn on May 26, 2016 19:54:57 GMT
I think I want to know who you are and what your connection is with the production?
You don't have permission to publish some of the credits, so I take it this is not an official programme.
|
|
2,058 posts
|
Post by Marwood on May 29, 2016 14:44:50 GMT
Saw this Friday and have to say, while I didn't find it as bad as some of the people have said it is, I can't say I was impressed either. The whole thing seemed to be one big loud car crash, Jamie Lloyd needs to lay off the music and flashing lights in future, he seems to wheel out the same 'tricks' in every play he directs- I didn't think there was any need for the nudity (why the man and woman appeared in the buff for the first 10 minutes then changed into underwear for the rest of the play, who knows), the black vomiting (and the less said about the truffles and caviar 'joke' the better) and I'm still not sure why 90% of the cast spent pretty much all of their stage time in dirty undies.
Harington, Russell and Masson all acquitted themselves well - I have to say Jenna's singing bit was the highlight and that only lasts 10 minutes or so (but has no relation to the rest of the play whatsoever) but I just found the whole thing a bit - well rubbish is a bit harsh , but average is maybe being a bit generous. Not the worst thing I've seen in recent months but I couldn't find much to recommend this.
|
|
2,058 posts
|
Post by Marwood on May 29, 2016 21:20:19 GMT
Saw this Friday and have to say, while I didn't find it as bad as some of the people have said it is, I can't say I was impressed either. The whole thing seemed to be one big loud car crash, Jamie Lloyd needs to lay off the music and flashing lights in future, he seems to wheel out the same 'tricks' in every play he directs- I didn't think there was any need for the nudity (why the man and woman appeared in the buff for the first 10 minutes then changed into underwear for the rest of the play, who knows), the black vomiting (and the less said about the truffles and caviar 'joke' the better) and I'm still not sure why 90% of the cast spent pretty much all of their stage time in dirty undies. Harington, Russell and Masson all acquitted themselves well - I have to say Jenna's singing bit was the highlight and that only lasts 10 minutes or so (but has no relation to the rest of the play whatsoever) but I just found the whole thing a bit - well rubbish is a bit harsh , but average is maybe being a bit generous. Not the worst thing I've seen in recent months but I couldn't find much to recommend this. Oh, and there is no excuse for using a swanee whistle in a drama, none whatsoever.  |
|
|
|
Post by welsh_tenor on May 30, 2016 11:00:56 GMT
Just booked a ticket for this in June, can't wait to see it after hearing rave* reviews!
*cue sarcasm...
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 30, 2016 19:43:46 GMT
I was quite enjoying this until they stopped doing Doctor Faustus and did a load of old sh*te by someone else. It's a school night so think I will Do A Parsley.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 30, 2016 20:06:33 GMT
I was quite enjoying this until they stopped doing Doctor Faustus and did a load of old sh*te by someone else. It's a school night so think I will Do A Parsley. Honoured good sir X |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 30, 2016 20:25:53 GMT
If the modern section had been improvised by a bunch of drama students who thought they could do better than Marlowe I would have cut them some slack, but in this case I won't.
And I enjoyed most of Jamie Lloyd's other recent productions
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 31, 2016 7:04:09 GMT
Offer on timeout
£49.50 reduced to £25
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 31, 2016 10:28:54 GMT
It's interesting the reactions that this gets. I went last night and really really really enjoyed it! I think the device of bringing it out of original "Faustus" and creating a more modern celebrity element which he gets by using the pact he made, is pretty clever if not on the nose. I don't really understand the problem with nudity that some folk have. I did get a little lost at points but the whole tone and performances kept me engaged and connected throughout. I'd definitely recommend and it's something I've never seen before, refreshingly different. I think my issue with the nudity was that it wasn't Kit-off. Apart from a rather delightful bum. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 31, 2016 10:31:31 GMT
My issue with the nudity was that it didn't really DO anything. It wasn't entirely gratuitous in that it was there solely to titillate the audience, but I still can't figure out why it was there (unless it was literally just about Jamie Lloyd going "oooooh, naked people, I'm so EDGY"), so it was still entirely gratuitous.
|
|
