Cock - Ambassadors Theatre

Perhaps there's no single answer as to why Egerton left. There are 'personal reasons' that might be battled through if the production had won universal critical love - but it didn't, so he didn't.

At the end of the day though, they're a business and have followed the Government guidelines all the way through. The guidance is no longer to isolate, so they no longer need to offering refunds for people doing so.

Sorry if that sounds harsh or unsympathetic, I work in a theatre and we've stopped doing refunds as isolation is no longer a thing. We can't afford to keep refunding people - it's just not financially viable as a long term solution...where does it end?

Yes, the socially responsible thing is to isolate, but theatres can't be expected to continue operating on a loss (because offering a credit/exchange last minute - most likely on the day - is most likely losing income as trying to resell on the day will be slim).

I know it's probably not the popular opinion but there has to be a point where we start functioning under normal circumstances again. Like, do we do this every winter? As that's going to be one of the worst times for it all I'm sure - so do theatres operate on a refund/credit basis from November to Feb every year? Sorry I'm not trying to to be difficult, I just don't see at what point we return to normal if not now

I don't know...I think ots pretty poor. If the personal reasons were the job itself then really he should have stuck it out. Its a short term commitment. If its a potential physical and/or mental health issue then he was right. He did fsint on stage and any employer would insist you are checked out. They may well have discovered a physical isdue or advised him against emotional stress.

Thanks, Burly and inthenose. I don’t understand why a load of tickets is suddenly available for the date (maybe Taron’s guests?!) but it is what it is!

I enjoyed this a lot. The play itself is quite limited, but Mike Bartlett I believe wrote it more as a “concept play” focussing on the dilemma and situation, rather than the actual real characters/relationships. A bit like his “Bull”, where the characters are subservient to the points being made.

I thought all the actors were good, but Jade Anouka outstanding. I do like Jonathan Bailey rather a lot from his previous work, and though his character was rather unlikeable, he certainly brought a wonderful muscularity to his performance. I’m afraid I did think once or twice how Taron Egerton would have played M.

I agree that the play really isn’t that funny, but I have seen it advertised as “hilarious” and those words were used on the Radio 2 interview with Johnny Bailey, so much so that the almost non-stop laughter in parts of the stalls seem to be catching… Witty maybe, and one scene between John and W was very amusing.

I actually enjoyed the extra movement sections - they broke up the scenes well and were kind of different, and emphasised the artificially of the situation or even how we are not in control really, who knows? I think Marianne Elliott has once again done a great job, and brought something different to the play, whilst remaining faithful to it. Good staging and revolve (I believe the original stage directions are for no props or scenery).

I watched this in 2009 originally with Ben Whishaw, Katherine Parkinson and Andrew Scott in a tiny wooden “cockpit” in the round at the Royal Court Upstairs. I have to say, I couldn’t remember much of the play other than the general situation. At that staging, they simply had a stage operator pressing a ding/buzzer to denote the end of each scene, which emphasised the artificial situation. It was quite interesting reading these old reviews given how things have moved on since 2009.

www.theguardian.com/stage/2009/nov/18/michael-billington-review

www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/theatre-dance/reviews/cock-theatre-upstairs-royal-court-london-1825738.html

4 stars.

To be quite honest if someone had signalled to me that I could leave an hour in I probably would’ve done… if only to get out of the increasingly-uncomfortable seat I was in!

And then there were two (of the original cast)

The production at the Minerva at Chichester a few years ago was certainly NOT shouty! It had a quiet sincerity which made for heartwarming, memorable production. With its provocative title, it was a brave play to stage in conservative Chichester but that risk was rewarded with large, appreciative audiences

It's either been directed that way, or the cast are choosing to play it that way. Having shouty scenes is not a problem, but the play has to wax and wane a bit, there needs to be quieter moments, characters with different moods on display. There wasn't a lot of that going on until JB gets a bit more pensive at the end for a few moments. The 'M' character never gets such a reprieve.

I have to say I saw this last night and was not convinced. For me the strongest bits were between Johnathan Bailey and Jessica Whitehurst, great chemistry together despite being the understudy. I was not as convinced by Joel Harper-Jackson at all, to me his lines where only ever exclaimed and I wanted more emotional depth. The production as a whole just lacked emoitinal depth and subtlety for me.

I never saw the original but listened to the radio version of it a short time ago and enjoyed it a lot so would recommend anyone to listen, as personally it is superior to this. soundcloud.com/delilahdevinkaufman/bbc-radio-3-presents-mike?in=user797490451/sets/reading

Well this was disappointing tonight. Although it provoked a lot of discussion between us after the show, most of that was about how differently this performance was played compared to the original production. The original was in a very small, intimate space and amplifying the production to a West End theatre (albeit a small one) has I think coarsened the show. All of the characters were drawn 'bigger' and some of the changes, like JB's vamps to the audience were cheap and drew people out of the situation making it clear that this was a 'performance'. Although JHJ did a decent job, I could never believe the relationship between John and M. Jessica Whitehurst equally did a decent job but I didn't feel that she had the playfulness and the calculation to properly counter the character of M, although I agree her chemistry was great with JB.

I'm aware that I'm damning this by comparison with the original which not many people were lucky enough to see, but it's the memory of that show that led me to pay £125 for a too-close stalls seat to see the original cast. And maybe they'd have nailed it better than the cast I saw, or maybe they'd have been directed the same way, but a play that I remember as being very powerful and nuanced doesn't quite work in this environment. I still think that the 'dinner party' scene has some great writing, but I can quite understand why people who are new to the play aren't impressed. Looking forward to listening to the radio play tomorrow to see what I make of that, but of course part of the joy was the very subtle playing by a top-class cast.