134 posts
|
Post by romeo94 on Mar 31, 2022 22:27:39 GMT
I didn't understand the set at all. Also, the shape of it looked as if it was built with the Almeida in mind rather than the Old Vic. The writing (and indeed some of the performances) were very clunky.
|
|
5,185 posts
|
Post by Being Alive on Mar 31, 2022 22:54:56 GMT
Interesting idea, not well executed.
As other have said Bertie is terrific and the physical transformation is so extreme I forgot it wasn't trump after about 39 seconds. I liked Tamara Tunie a lot as Kamala, but thought Lydia Wilson weak and disengaging.
Overall I just found it very meh - at the end of Act 1 I was very much 'this is not good' although they largely won me back in act 2 (terrific scene between trump and Harris that really moved it up a gear). Final scene 50 shades of whackadoodle. Total lost me. Bartlett was sat behind me and I wanted to turn round and go 'eh?!'
Critics will not be kind, and it's a shame as I think there is a good idea somewhere in there. Bartlett just hasn't found it, or needs more time. It felt like a first workshop more than a finished piece to me. Too many threads that seemed to be important in Act 2, never mentioned again in act 2.
|
|
|
Post by mrnutz on Apr 1, 2022 8:50:06 GMT
I was supposed to be seeing this tomorrow but unfortunately COVID had other plans for me.
Sounds like I might have dodged a bullet, though still keen to see Carvel's performance. A clip or two would be fine...
|
|
1,485 posts
|
Post by mkb on Apr 2, 2022 9:57:42 GMT
I thought the cast, including two understudies, were excellent, with the exception of Carvel. His is a very good performance, just not the right performance. He -- or the director, maybe -- has gone for a skittish comic-book Trump rather than the full horror of the real-life version. His intonation is too high pitched, and, despite the prosthetics, he looks far too young (at least from the third row).
As with King Charles III, there is much to admire in this Shakespearean tragedy especially Bartlett's clever use of language. Where The 47th differs is that the drama is less interesting, and the villains are ones we've already had our fill of. Trump words and deeds that still shock and make one recoil, are diminished when a small number in the audience emit silly giggles as if this were a trivial sitcom.
With tightening of both acts down to an hour apiece, this would be a four-star play; as it stands during previews, it's three-star, but still a must-see.
The protruding circular stage is high to accommodate a revolve that adds little during its occasional use. I would have preferred a static lower stage. From the centre of Stalls row J, I could just see the sloping surface.
Act 1: 19:34-20:45 Act 2: 21:02-22:12
Note to Old Vic management: 15 minutes is too short, rushed and stressful for the interval, especially with your toilets.
|
|
|
Post by mrnutz on Apr 4, 2022 8:59:08 GMT
This is heavily discounting on TodayTix for 24 hours.
|
|
|
Post by partytentdown on Apr 4, 2022 9:04:19 GMT
This is heavily discounting on TodayTix for 24 hours. And this is why I'm just going to stop buying tickets for stuff the second they go on sale. These £20 ones are better than mine which cost £50+ each. It's hard to stay loyal to the individual venues/box offices when almost everything ends up doing this a few weeks later.
|
|
|
Post by mrnutz on Apr 4, 2022 9:06:51 GMT
This is heavily discounting on TodayTix for 24 hours. And this is why I'm just going to stop buying tickets for stuff the second they go on sale. These £20 ones are better than mine which cost £50+ each. It's hard to stay loyal to the individual venues/box offices when almost everything ends up doing this a few weeks later. Old Vic do no-questions-asked refunds via credit vouchers, if you wanted to...
|
|
|
Post by partytentdown on Apr 4, 2022 9:54:17 GMT
And this is why I'm just going to stop buying tickets for stuff the second they go on sale. These £20 ones are better than mine which cost £50+ each. It's hard to stay loyal to the individual venues/box offices when almost everything ends up doing this a few weeks later. Old Vic do no-questions-asked refunds via credit vouchers, if you wanted to... God point!
|
|
100 posts
|
Post by noboiscout on Apr 4, 2022 10:04:02 GMT
I quite liked it. Bertie in particular was brilliant. Very similar in writing style to King Charles III, almost imitating Shakespeare as a “Future History” play. I feel that Bartlett could have dug deeper, but in all honesty this play is very much a play of today and has a limited expiry date. It’s certainly a possibility that some of the events in this play could come about. I thought at the outset that this was going to grate, when I heard the Shakespearean rhyming. Then I settled in and really began to enjoy it. I didn't find the humour to be overdone, though I can understand others not liking it. The problem with Trump and what is happening with politics in the USA and elsewhere, is that if you don't laugh, you will cry. I liked all the cast, and even though I am far from a fan of Shakespeare, enjoyed spotting the references to various plays - King Lear? Macbeth? Overall 4*
|
|
520 posts
|
Post by anthony on Apr 4, 2022 11:31:46 GMT
Seeing this tonight and quite excited!
|
|
1,107 posts
|
Post by alicechallice on Apr 4, 2022 12:08:19 GMT
I was there Saturday and would echo the previous posters who liked it. Not quite as subtle in its punches as KCIII (if you can call that subtle) and I’m not sure how much the critics will like it but it was really entertaining. Carvel was a marvel.
|
|
5,185 posts
|
Post by Being Alive on Apr 4, 2022 14:21:00 GMT
I've been mulling this over pretty continuously since Thursday and I still can't decide if I liked it or not!
|
|
520 posts
|
Post by anthony on Apr 4, 2022 22:50:45 GMT
I think I really enjoyed it. Think. I'm not entirely sure that you need to make Trump into a caricature. He's already so ridiculous, that it wasn't needed and I'd say even took away from some moments. I think it missed the characterisation of the Trumps quite a few times and there were a couple of loose ends in Act 1 - what did Jill Biden do that was so shocking that the mere threat of it causes Lady Macbethesque sleepwalks for Biden, for example?
Carvel was wonderful, though. We were in the Baylis Circle and honestly, he looked so much like Trump it was scary.
|
|
5,185 posts
|
Post by Being Alive on Apr 4, 2022 23:50:31 GMT
what did Jill Biden do that was so shocking that the mere threat of it causes Lady Macbethesque sleepwalks for Biden, for example? From what I understand, nothing. The paranoia for Biden was enough and they're trying to hint at fake news and rumour (I think that's what they were getting at anyway?)
|
|
520 posts
|
Post by anthony on Apr 5, 2022 8:21:40 GMT
what did Jill Biden do that was so shocking that the mere threat of it causes Lady Macbethesque sleepwalks for Biden, for example? From what I understand, nothing. The paranoia for Biden was enough and they're trying to hint at fake news and rumour (I think that's what they were getting at anyway?) Perhaps. Guess I just assumed that the Shakespeare references would be deeper than that. Lady M's sleepwalking is a symptom of her guilt, so assumed it would have been deeper, but oh well.
|
|
377 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by jr on Apr 7, 2022 21:49:18 GMT
Terrible play. I did not like the play, direction (very slow despite movement and noise) or acting. Walked out afer the first act. I didn't leave earlier because I had to make people stand up and would disturb them.
Predictable, unfunny and preachy. Have a ticket to see Scandaltown, hope that one is better...
|
|
3,578 posts
|
Post by showgirl on Apr 8, 2022 4:26:27 GMT
Sorry to hear that, jr, and disappointing as I was considering seeing both this and Scandaltown, but waiting for the reviews. I'm keener on the sound of Scandaltown but have never been a huge fan of Mike Bartlett and thought Love, Love, Love, which everyone else raved about as usual, over-rated and I couldn't sit through the whole of Charles III. Let's hope Scandaltown turns out to be better.
|
|
|
Post by theoracle on Apr 8, 2022 7:33:18 GMT
Well, that was a pretty surreal evening. As other have said, Bertie Cavell’s transformation into The Donald is pretty uncanny and it’s quite unnerving watching the way he moves across the stage. More unsettling however are probably the scenes featuring the notorious Qanons - the movement direction heightening the demonic essence of the movement. I’m not sure how I feel about Mike Bartlett’s writing though still - he has great ideas but the way he infuses Shakespeare and takes pop culture references into his work, always feels more textbook than a moment of genius. Nevertheless, it was absolutely brilliant to be back at the Old Vic, having not visited since Endgame pre-pandemic. The auditorium was fully charged by electric performances from the cast, expertly directed by Rupert Goold. It’s a pinch of salt sort of show I would say - there are deeply engaging moments where you’re locked in suspense or laughing at the comic elements but it also slows and takes some time to pick back up again in parts. It’ll be interesting to see how history continues to unfold and how prophetical this show is too.
|
|
5,185 posts
|
Post by Being Alive on Apr 9, 2022 14:15:49 GMT
This review better than I was expecting (apart from the Telegraph but Cavendish doesn't seem to like anything these days) - it definitely seems to have moved on a lot from the early preview I saw.
|
|
2,389 posts
|
Post by peggs on Apr 9, 2022 21:22:01 GMT
Quite an odd mix of an evening, funny, deeply unsettling both in Bertie Carvel's portrayal (I did a double take as didn't immediately realise it was even him) and in the possible future that might still await us, a wander via various Shakespeare plays, a few odd moments when I rather zoned out.
There are times when Bertie Carvel is so good it rather shows up how other people are just pretending to be real life people, it was until the interval and talking to a neighbour that I discovered who the president I couldn't identify was. The set is a bit odd, in that it mostly seemly unnecessary to have the revolve and therefore be so high, I was row J and really wouldn't have wanted to be any closer. The movement, soundscapes, cross over from the real and possible is all cleverly done. It's like some surreal experiment when you know you're sat in a theatre and yet at times you're not entirely sure it's all make believe and what is happening on stage may have bigger implications than just on a few hours of your time.
So good and strange. I saw still in previews so from the sounds of reviews things might have changed so will go read a few and see if I can gauge what.
|
|
904 posts
|
Post by lonlad on Apr 10, 2022 8:25:54 GMT
That Telegraph review is spot on: Bartlett has become such a hack it's almost embarrassing. This latest effort is incredibly lazy, poorly structured, and totally out of touch with the zeitgeist which has been assuming for some time now that neither Trump nor Harris will be the next set of presidential nominees, which looks a lot more likely to be some Trumpster like de Santis up against god knows who, but not Harris who has eroded much of the good will that came with her VP appointment. Sad but true.
Anyway all that aside, just in stagecraft terms, it's a lousy play except for Carvel, who is amazing, truly.
|
|
|
Post by sfsusan on Apr 11, 2022 22:05:16 GMT
I can't figure out what the play is trying to do. It's not over-the-top enough to be satire* but not straightforward enough to be commentary. Bertie Carvel was amazing. The Ivanka character was odd... in the first act, she'd suddenly smile at inappropriate times, but that never seemed to lead anywhere in terms of her character. (I did get a kick out of the fact that the actress took the curtain call in slippers instead of the needle-heeled 6-inch stilettos she wore throughout the play.) I was expecting some {Spoiler - click to view} major twist/palace coup (a la William and Kate in King Charles III) and there are hints of something similar, but the hints are ambiguous and the action takes place off-stage, so it doesn't have the same impact. But I expected most of that from the comments and reviews. What I didn't expect was how painfully loud the sound was. Myself and the people on either side stuffed our fingers in our ears for the worst of it. And one of them turned to me later and said she was deaf, had taken out her hearing aids and it was STILL too loud! There are some unexpected, sudden loud noises, but most of it was just sound effects building to the end of a scene. *As said in a post above, Trump already is a caricature so you'd have to create something completely unhinged.
|
|
|
Post by orchidman on Apr 11, 2022 22:25:06 GMT
totally out of touch with the zeitgeist which has been assuming for some time now that neither Trump nor Harris will be the next set of presidential nominees, which looks a lot more likely to be some Trumpster like de Santis up against god knows who, but not Harris who has eroded much of the good will that came with her VP appointment. Not true, Trump is the clear 11/8 betting favourite to be the Republican nominee and his odds have shortened over the past 18 months, DeSantis is 5/1 second favourite. Harris has indeed weakened yet still second favourite for the Dems with Biden the favourite. But I do think I'm safe to assume you are right that the play is mediocre given it's written by Mike Bartlett.
|
|
904 posts
|
Post by lonlad on Apr 12, 2022 0:04:36 GMT
>> Not true, Trump is the clear 11/8 betting favourite to be the Republican nominee
Not a chance and the idea of Ivanka against Kamala is BEYOND lunacy. Or good theatre. Sorry, Mike, but there we have it.
|
|
5,020 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by Jan on Apr 12, 2022 14:45:19 GMT
That Telegraph review is spot on: Bartlett has become such a hack it's almost embarrassing. Such is his fame now that I imagine directors don’t challenge him in the way they do for other writers, and Rupert Goold in particular may be too close to him. For example Bartlett’s version of Vassa that Goold programmed at the Almeida was offensively bad, I can guarantee it wouldn’t have made it onto any London stage at all if it had been submitted anonymously. It happens - Nicolas Hytner grew rather over-indulgent of Alan Bennett over time for example.
|
|