3,478 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by showgirl on Jun 3, 2016 4:39:23 GMT
I think you will, Peggs, and without even needing to lower your expectations. I went all the more intrigued owing to the earlier, unfavourable comments here, but to hear the audience engaging and responding, you would never have known that some had written it off. Plus, the bloggers seem to rate it higher and more positively than do the professional critics, which may be a good sign, or at least a reaction more akin to that of a paying member of the public.
|
|
3,478 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by showgirl on Jun 3, 2016 12:08:28 GMT
4 stars from the Guardian, a little late to the party.
|
|
18,837 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Jun 4, 2016 15:26:38 GMT
DuchessConstance is right, it's just "hyper-awareness." Very sad that something which really is nothing to worry about, suddenly becomes - in the mind of an innocent observer - "Oh, that is a worry because a pervert might be in the audience and get a thrill from it." Not a criticism of DC's posting, just a deep sadness that we have lost a sense of proportion even as we strive (rightly) to protect. Give it a few years, the kid will be suing the producers for "exploitation".
|
|
1,064 posts
|
Post by bellboard27 on Jun 12, 2016 9:42:32 GMT
Saw this yesterday and, having gone back over this thread, I find myself fully agreeing with the major issues in the writing raised by DuchessConstance on 30 May. So I won't repeat.
On another point, what proportion of plays, films, etc., are based around writers as characters? Sometimes I sink in my chair when I find a main character is yet another writer. I know the first advice writers are given is 'write about what you know', but one hopes they can get beyond knowing about writing!
|
|
1,103 posts
|
Post by mallardo on Jun 12, 2016 11:22:31 GMT
On another point, what proportion of plays, films, etc., are based around writers as characters? Sometimes I sink in my chair when I find a main character is yet another writer. I know the first advice writers are given is 'write about what you know', but one hopes they can get beyond knowing about writing! Like everyone else, what interests writers most is themselves.
|
|
211 posts
|
Post by peelee on Jun 13, 2016 0:57:44 GMT
In this play one character being a writer does essentially explain the social and work circle in which he met his wife, an actress. I think she says she likes the villa they are holidaying in because it's somewhere that her husband can write with little distraction and where she can learn her lines.. Early on, her husband refuses to discuss his writing with one of the visitors to the villa despite the latter's persistent curiosity. Years pass and some mention of his writerly success or failure is made, as slight exposition and to indicate the passing of time and the personal transformations undergone.
In 'Apologia', another of this writer's plays, a character has written a memoir, but that relates to the life she has lived and what another character will say they think of that life. I liked the performed production but have forgotten some characters in 'The Faith Machine', though recall that somewhere in it a Greek island features. These sorts of characters and locations variously feature as significant or incidental factors. So in new play 'Kenny Morgan', for instance, one character being a famous writer is integral to the story and the social world being depicted, whereas in the recent 'Lawrence After Arabia' one character's fame as a writer, he being George Bernard Shaw, helps explain and assist what else playwright Brenton wants to do in the play. All different again from 'Seminar', a a recent play at Hampstead, which really was about writing as an occupation.
|
|
1,179 posts
|
Post by joem on Jul 8, 2016 21:57:48 GMT
Well I'm late to this one but was pleasantly surprised.
It's a clever enough play which inverts the paradigm of the first half in the second and ends up making us feel (or trying to) that we might all be guilty of something (a la An Inspector Calls) through commission or omission.
The Ben Miles character, who I think we have to loathe, turns out to be rather more ambiguous than at first glance. Whereas the Pippa Nixon actress character - who really is totally anal and unglamorous and hard to see as an actress - is...insufferable.
I'd forgotten how poor the sightlines were in the galleries here. I now have an intimate acquaintance with the hairlines of all actors involved and the top of Elizabeth McGovern's blonde wig.
|
|
2,389 posts
|
Post by peggs on Jul 9, 2016 23:14:25 GMT
Thought this was a bit rushed, unfinished, clumsy, kind of like it hadn't quite developed all it's ideas so they became squashed in the second half in an attempt to draw it to its conclusion with some rather speechy sections where an idea or view had to be put across but in a rather obvious way. Think there were some rather bad reviews on here for this and so had lowered expectations but then assumed having done so that i'd be pleasantly surprised. I mean it was easy watching just could have been more I thought, felt like too early a version so was disappointed that it wasn't more.
The caveat is that I did feel really ill and was losing a running battle with the braying woman behind me who was alternating kicking me with chatting to her friend 'oh the shutters are now blue' 'aren't the children well behaved', why do people think their companion can hear but no one else can? Or do they not give a damn? And frankly in the second row with a set that close why don't they realise forget me the actors can probably hear too. These things probably didn't help me be more positive. Will see what I think in the morning and when i've got back over other's thoughts.
On the upside despite starting late and then going back on late, the speed of the clockrooom staff was such that it mitigated all the people who seem determined to stand and block doorways so I made me train without having to resort to attempts at running.
|
|
81 posts
|
Post by addictedtotheatre on Jul 12, 2016 9:11:39 GMT
Finally got around to seeing this, and I don't understand the hate directed at it. Yes, it is schematic and inconsequential but the roles were well-written and I was genuinely intrigued by what was going to happen next.
It'll never be on anyone's top 10 list (unless they've only seen ten plays) but compared to some of the dreck I've seen at the Cottesloe\Dorfman it made for a pleasant evening out.
|
|
227 posts
|
Post by barelyathletic on Jul 14, 2016 10:30:58 GMT
Saw this last night and thought it was very good. The writing was interesting and compelling, and the acting generally very strong (Surprised that I really liked the kids who were very natural and believable and not, as I expected, annoyingly stage school). Elizabeth McGovern struggles a little perhaps with her big monologue but is otherwise very watchable, a loose cannon but also vulnerable. Pippa Nixon is excellent (as you'd expect) as the supposedly liberal voice of conscience who comes spectacularly undone, and Ben Miles is absolutely terrific. His transformation (both in character and physicality) in act two, once the years have taken their toll, was very well performed. When I first read this I instantly saw John Hamm (that would have been a coup) in the role so, was somewhat surprised by the casting. But he really does give one of the best performances I've seen in a while. Charismatic and flawed and slightly dangerous. I can see why some might think the play a bit clunky but I thought it made some interesting points about imperialism, power and responsibility, all wrapped up in a believable and quietly compelling relationship drama (about both marriage and friendship). All in all I think the critics were less than generous. It may not be the subtlest of pieces but its ideas and characters make for a compelling two hours and one that is finally quite moving. Credit also to Simon Godwin and Hildegard Bechtler for a very atmospheric production.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 27, 2016 22:40:14 GMT
Oh dear, it felt like there was a much better play waiting to claw its way out here, if only Harvey had had more interesting people to bounce off... His character was absolutely fascinating and even in the few moments he seemed to be genuine, I didn't trust him an inch! Elizabeth McGovern was good fun too, and my word, what a beautiful figure she's got!
Out of interest, does Sam Crane usually get applause when he does the calisthenics bit? He seemed to be having a bit of difficulty getting up from the push-ups tonight, which drew laughs and applause from the audience (which he acknowledged with an 'I know, I'm working really hard up here' sort of look). The rest of the cast also seemed to crack up along with the audience, especially when he then got into position to do sit-ups and paused again to summon up the strength to do them...? Maybe it always happens but it certainly felt pretty genuine!
In other news, I believe my side view seat in the pit has now qualified me to write an ode to Ben Miles' back muscles...so it wasn't an entirely wasted evening. ;-)
|
|
433 posts
|
Post by DuchessConstance on Jul 28, 2016 6:38:59 GMT
Didn't happen when I saw it.
|
|
521 posts
|
Post by danielwhit on Aug 4, 2016 16:00:29 GMT
I haven't read through this thread but having seen this afternoon I came out thinking "Clybourne Park rehash". The script is shoddy and simplistic, you don't therefore care for the characters. The actors generally do a good job with what they've got but it just felt as if the writer had seen Clybourne and decided to imitate in Greece with the problem being caused by the Americans.
It's just too rambling and badly focused, too many loose strands ticking over which aren't resolved and felt as if they came from a random plot generator to provide context to a story.
It's a shame the National is coming out with this type of stuff whilst the excellent Young Chekhov trilogy is happening just the other side of Drum Road. New theatre is great, but not when there's no point to it..
|
|