|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 7, 2016 0:16:08 GMT
Would Amadeus be part of that list or is it still worth seeing the play?
|
|
1,088 posts
|
Post by andrew on Sept 7, 2016 1:18:42 GMT
I had to give up on the McKellen TV play it was so dull. Trying to decide if this is worth trying it in the flesh.
|
|
2,859 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by couldileaveyou on Sept 7, 2016 5:38:46 GMT
One of those rare plays where the film version (not that recent TV version) is better than any theatre version. Glengarry Glen Ross is another. Trainspotting, OFOTCN, Goodnight Mr Tom, Cat on a Hot Tin Roof, 12 Angry Men, Shawshank Redemption, Breakfast at Tiffany's, My Fair Lady, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, Grease, Cool Hand Luke, Brassed Off, To Kill a Mocking Bird.
Came up with those in one minute, don't think that statement works Jan
I'd really like to hear how the Cat on a hot tin roof is better than the play and My Fair Lady is better than Pygmalion... |
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Sept 7, 2016 6:34:35 GMT
Would Amadeus be part of that list or is it still worth seeing the play? The film of Amadeus was significantly different to the play. I saw the original production, it has several theatrical moments simply not captured on film. On my previous post, to clarify, I meant something that was written as a play and subsequently became a film. |
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Sept 7, 2016 6:35:49 GMT
I had to give up on the McKellen TV play it was so dull. Trying to decide if this is worth trying it in the flesh. Yes it was. I don't quite know why. I put it down to poor direction from Richard Eyre. The film with Tom Courtney/Albert Finney is much better. |
|
2,339 posts
|
Post by theglenbucklaird on Sept 7, 2016 18:34:35 GMT
Trainspotting, OFOTCN, Goodnight Mr Tom, Cat on a Hot Tin Roof, 12 Angry Men, Shawshank Redemption, Breakfast at Tiffany's, My Fair Lady, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, Grease, Cool Hand Luke, Brassed Off, To Kill a Mocking Bird.
Came up with those in one minute, don't think that statement works Jan
I'd really like to hear how the Cat on a hot tin roof is better than the play and My Fair Lady is better than Pygmalion... Love Paul Newman's go at Cat on a Hot Tin Roof, what stage version have you seen that was better? I'll be honest, never seen My Fair Lady. Threw that one in thinking of McCutheon version a few years back. |
|
1,061 posts
|
Post by David J on Sept 10, 2016 19:54:29 GMT
Interval at Richmond Theatre right now
Don't know what to think of it this
Reece Shearsmith is getting good laughs as Norman, whilst Ken Scott brings poignancy as the ageing Sir
For the 1st act this is best friend trying to get ageing actor onstage, the play. Gets a little repetitive with Sir going back and forth between breaking down in despair and adamancy that he'll go on, whilst struggling with his Alzheimer's
|
|
1,061 posts
|
Post by David J on Sept 10, 2016 21:26:49 GMT
Picked up for a short while when the play became King Lear Goes Wrong. Then it was back to business as usual
Everyone telling Sir should stop. His wife getting sick of performing with him, reminiscing of a better life. Sir and Norman recounting stories. Norman saying "my friend..." half a dozen times. Norman loving sir despite getting short thrift. Aspiring actress being felt up by Sir (and the strange thing was she couldn't even tell why he was doing it till Norman gave her a good talking to)
Liked the WW2 aspect drawing connections between the storm scene and the bombings that went on during the performance, enlivening sir to perform. Then it went away without consequence
Good acting, nice scenery. But nothing I haven't seen before. Highlight would be Shearsmiths big moment at the end
Felt a bit long too. What was it with those scene transitions to just a few minutes later in the same King Lear scene? They could have flowed better
|
|
527 posts
|
Post by Hamilton Addict on Sept 10, 2016 21:38:45 GMT
David J I was as at The Dresser tonight as well, I think this is the first time I've been at a show whilst being in the theatre with a fellow forum member (well, since I've joined)! I need to buy a Theatre Board badge! 
|
|
314 posts
|
Post by macksennett on Sept 11, 2016 7:02:52 GMT
Hi guys, what was the running time last night please?
|
|
527 posts
|
Post by Hamilton Addict on Sept 11, 2016 7:15:59 GMT
Hi guys, what was the running time last night please? 2 hours and 45 minutes. Act one and act two are an hour and a quarter each plus a twenty minute interval. I thought it was good, because the acting was great, but it went on for far too long! |
|
1,582 posts
|
Post by anita on Sept 11, 2016 9:30:31 GMT
I was there yesterday afternoon.
|
|
314 posts
|
Post by macksennett on Sept 12, 2016 20:50:06 GMT
Thanks Hamilton Addict - that's a great help.
|
|
923 posts
|
Post by Snciole on Sept 14, 2016 11:05:53 GMT
I went to see this yesterday and it is long but never feels it. Strong performances but I was mainly wonderign why it was selling so badly. I managed to convince my boyfriend to come along due to comps but as star names go this is quite up there. Is it a play people are no longer familiar with?
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 14, 2016 11:41:20 GMT
Did your boyfriend feel it?
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 14, 2016 11:46:39 GMT
The names are the main draw for me - though I haven't booked yet for the main London run.
I hadn't really heard of the play. And the advertising hasn't been that attractive, IMHO. Plus I get the impression Harwood wouldn't want any of my tainted, feminist money anyway. You know, seeing as I earned it myself and everything. So I'll probably have to get a bloke to buy my ticket, if I do go. ;-)
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 14, 2016 11:51:02 GMT
I've heard of the play and the cast, but the advertising seems to have been somewhat on the downlow. The out-of-London performances are a little out of the way for me too - I'd be willing to make the effort for something I really wanted to see, but not something I only sort of wanted to see. Also I'm with jeanhunt, if Ronald Harwood wants to go on record saying that women getting the opportunity to play a wider range of roles is 'stupid', then I'm happy to go on record saying I'll be saving my 'stupid' money for productions like the Donmar Shakespeare Trilogy instead.
|
|
2,058 posts
|
Post by Marwood on Sept 14, 2016 12:28:46 GMT
It's the cost of the tickets that has put me off, I like both Stott and Shearsmith as actors but not enough to pay the sort of money they're asking to see this, and I don't think either of them has the level of fame that would make tourists on holiday in London book to see this while they're here.
|
|
923 posts
|
Post by Snciole on Sept 14, 2016 12:30:21 GMT
Did your boyfriend feel it? You'd have to ask him, HG. I will see if I can get him to join the board. We both agreed Harriet Thorpe's bosom looked amazing. There was a man who fell asleep next to me (why his wife didn't slap him awake, I don't know) so I imagine he felt every last second of the 2hrs 45 mins. I can only assume that the Duke of York's is selling okay due to publicity but maybe it wasn't made clear it was touring. I forget not everyone is on boards/twitter etc to hear about local productions. I know Richmond is a venue I have avoided on the basis that it will be too long and awkward to get to but I wonder how those sorts of venues survive if they don't publicise themselves as alternative venues to west end shows. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 14, 2016 12:36:56 GMT
Yes, it does seem overpriced in Richmond. Maybe they didn't want to undercut the even higher West End price by too much? We will never know. This play has previously proved amazingly popular, so it could do so again this time.
|
|
3,575 posts
|
Post by showgirl on Sept 14, 2016 13:31:49 GMT
I considered going to Richmond but as it was a short run (though longer than their usual week) with high prices, compared to a longer run in the West End, I thought that if it did turn out to be well-reviewed, there was a good chance of offers. Plus though Richmond is fine for me and somewhere I do go quite a lot, it's always easier to fit a lot into a day in London if you don't have to spend some of it travelling to and from a suburb.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 14, 2016 14:52:07 GMT
Richmond is a town in the county of Surrey, and not a "suburb"!!!
|
|
950 posts
|
Post by vdcni on Sept 14, 2016 14:54:04 GMT
Did your boyfriend feel it? You'd have to ask him, HG. I will see if I can get him to join the board. We both agreed Harriet Thorpe's bosom looked amazing. There was a man who fell asleep next to me (why his wife didn't slap him awake, I don't know) so I imagine he felt every last second of the 2hrs 45 mins. I can only assume that the Duke of York's is selling okay due to publicity but maybe it wasn't made clear it was touring. I forget not everyone is on boards/twitter etc to hear about local productions. I know Richmond is a venue I have avoided on the basis that it will be too long and awkward to get to but I wonder how those sorts of venues survive if they don't publicise themselves as alternative venues to west end shows. Richmond normally advertises quite extensively locally - particularly to its mailing list. I can usually tell when something isn't selling there as I get loads of offers through the post but I don't remember seeing one for this other than the usual flyer. It's why I almost booked - though on the strength of the supporting cast rather than the lead two. |
|
|
|
Post by perfectspy on Sept 14, 2016 23:10:44 GMT
I saw this play on Tuesday night, I was very impressed.
|
|
423 posts
|
Post by schuttep on Sept 15, 2016 9:50:26 GMT
I saw this yesterday afternoon at Richmond on an ATG early bird offer ticket: £19.75 for the centre of Row C.
Another great reason to have an ATG membership.
Well acted and very funny - until the end when it is, of course, desperately sad.
Agree with vdcni re Harriet Thorpe's bosom. You could park a car on it.
|
|
