|
|
Post by Jan on Mar 4, 2022 7:01:44 GMT
Standard 2* restores my faith in critics. The fact it's only become the mainstream interpretation in recent years doesn't change that, and it's more than reasonable to present the scene that way. Agree. This is a non-issue though, no-one at all has suggested the scene shouldn't be presented in that way if the director wants, just as over the past 50 years no-one at all has said the final scene in Measure for Measure shouldn't be presented in exactly the same way which also appears to go against the text, so much so that that has now become the standard way to present it. I'm surprised that Webster is even trying to justify it by saying (very implausibly) it might have been done that way originally, he should have just said "Well this is the way we're doing it" (I assume in response to some straw man question about some non-existent people who might object). |
|
4,156 posts
|
Post by kathryn on Mar 4, 2022 9:18:31 GMT
. But women getting married off for political alliances, or as the spoils of war has always been exploitative. The fact it's only become the mainstream interpretation in recent years doesn't change that, and it's more than reasonable to present the scene that way. Unfortunately it's fair to say many men then, and too many now, think sexually manipulative behaviour is heroic. I don’t think it’s at all the case that women getting married off for political alliances is only seen as exploitative in modern times. I think Shakespeare quite deliberately writes the Henry-Katherine scenes like something out of Much Ado specifically because he is painting Henry as a hero and he needs to soften the perception of the real event in order to support that portrayal. That’s why we have the English lesson scene - it’s saying to the audience ‘it’s ok, she really wanted to marry him all along - look she is deliberately learning English and making sexual wordplay in the process’. Playing it as unromantic and uncomedic plays against the obvious intent. It’s compelling and it works - I found it a very effective scene. But not all of the changes that played against intent did work. |
|
|
|
Post by oxfordsimon on Mar 4, 2022 9:35:42 GMT
One of the reviews said that the Chorus occasionally speaks Mandarin rather than the original text...
Now the purpose of the Chorus is to set the scene, to comment on the action/characters, to introduce, to elucidate.
I don't see how shifting some of the lines into Mandarin helps that. Even with surtitles that doesn't feel inclusive or illuminating.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Mar 4, 2022 10:20:50 GMT
One of the reviews said that the Chorus occasionally speaks Mandarin rather than the original text... Now the purpose of the Chorus is to set the scene, to comment on the action/characters, to introduce, to elucidate. I don't see how shifting some of the lines into Mandarin helps that. Even with surtitles that doesn't feel inclusive or illuminating. The Mandarin didn't have surtitles. |
|
4,156 posts
|
Post by kathryn on Mar 4, 2022 11:02:07 GMT
I am not entirely sure from memory, but I thought the mandarin lines were when the actor was playing one of the ‘boy’ characters, rather than Chorus.
Of course what with not understanding the mandarin and not a lot of distinction between how the actor played the parts, it’s easy to mix the two up.
It would make more sense for a lowly ‘boy’ to be an immigrant or from an immigrant family.
Of course we have had interpretations where Chorus has been merged with ‘boy’ - I am not quite sure if that is what was intended.
|
|
|
|
Post by jojo on Mar 4, 2022 14:25:10 GMT
The explanation I read was that as 'boy' she was a British Chinese person who like many British Chinese people today, speak Mandarin at home and with family. Reverting to Mandarin for a few exclamations was to reveal her state of mind. However, when some non-English dialogue is translated I can understand people might go looking for them for all of the non-English lines, then wonder if they've missed something.
|
|
wick3
Auditioning
live in USA but travel to London just to watch live theatre!
|
Post by wick3 on Mar 6, 2022 0:01:20 GMT
Just saw this play today and the 3 hours went by quickly for me. Mind you I had never seen a theatre production of Shakespeare’s Henry V before and am a Kit Harrington fan. I’ll admit I probably wouldn’t have watched this play during my London trip unless I was a fan of the actor cast for Henry V.
I got emotional during the St Crispins day speech given what’s happening in Ukraine but felt it ended so quickly (didn’t even see his men cheer him on after giving the speech but instead another character entered and the battle began.) I wish the director let the soldiers cheer Henry on after giving that famous speech.
Overall my experience was positive and am glad it’ll be recorded at some point to reach a wider audience. The French and Mandarin didn’t bother me since I already didn’t understand some of the Shakespearean English words. The actors’ gestures, facial expressions, etc made up for it so I understood the overall plot and most of the jokes.
|
|
|
|
Post by interval99 on Mar 15, 2022 16:39:20 GMT
Donmar have just emailed advising extra tickets available including the 24th March when they are filming the show for the NT (no so) live cinema showing on April 21st
They are advising filming will be 360 and there is a chance audience members will appear in the broadcast film.
Maybe a chance of a cameo for any London based members
|
|
2,496 posts
|
Post by zahidf on Mar 15, 2022 17:07:50 GMT
I really enjoyed this last Sat. Im ambivalent towards the play itself but i found this interesting, especially the stuff hinting at Henry not necessarily being a force for good
I thought the way they started it was really good as well, helped keep the change in Henry more to the fore
|
|
|
|
Post by jojo on Mar 16, 2022 13:55:28 GMT
I know there is an old joke, usually at the expense of Americans, about not being able to watch Henry V because they've not seen parts 1-4 yet. But I think it's smart to assume the audience hasn't recently watched the Henry IV plays and to therefore incorporate a bit from Henry IV to make this a more complete story and to give better context to the changes in Henry's mentality.
|
|
|
|
Post by sfsusan on Mar 17, 2022 23:27:50 GMT
This time we at least got some of it delivered in what ? Mandarin ? Japanese ? The Mandarin was surtitled tonight. I liked (and understood) this more than I expected. I thought the dual roles would be confusing, but they're really not. Especially with using French in the scenes in the French court, which clearly signals these are now different folk. Given current events, there is something very unsettling about being faced with people in uniforms charging the audience with raised guns. Just to note, the content advisory on the Donmar's website sort of downplays one of the more shocking events on stage, {Spoiler - click to view}
and in fact, calls it a 'suicide', which it most certainly is not. |
|
37 posts
|
Post by theatreman on Mar 19, 2022 1:59:27 GMT
A week production in the verge of amateurish. Some performers are very weak but the biggest problem is the directing. Kit Harington is fine but can't save it. I attended the performance on 15th. The actress playing Katharine sprained her ankle during the performance, while she was appearing as a soldier in a "choreographed" war scene. Just before the last scene, Kit Harington came on stage and announced that due to her accident the role of Katharine in the last scene would be played by her understudy.
|
|
904 posts
|
Post by lonlad on Mar 19, 2022 11:30:42 GMT
>> A week production in the verge of amateurish.
!!!!
The Katherine by the way (who was/is excellent) is going to be Laurey in Oklahoma! at the Young Vic.
|
|
|
|
Post by c4ndyc4ne on Mar 19, 2022 16:45:41 GMT
>> A week production in the verge of amateurish. !!!! The Katherine by the way (who was/is excellent) is going to be Laurey in Oklahoma! at the Young Vic. She and the show are excellent. Hope she recovers quickly given Oklahoma rehearsals! |
|
|
|
Post by jojo on Mar 30, 2022 9:29:12 GMT
This has now been recorded for the NT Live on 21st April, and we've got a trailer.
Most reviews were very positive, especially for Harington. Even Shenton had to admit he was very good and not just a pretty face just a few days after doing a blog complaining that a rival reviewer was only gushing about it because of celebrity culture.  I think it was the writer for the Independent who put it well in saying reactions to modern Shakespeare are a bit like a Rorschach test. We are as much influenced by our own expectations as we are by what's in front of us, and that's fair. They'll be very relieved they went with the 'perhaps invading a neighbouring country means we're not the good guys' vibe. |
|
202 posts
|
Post by harry on Mar 30, 2022 20:52:16 GMT
I saw this yesterday. I thought the show was great, and really no weak link in the cast and a special shout-out to the understudy playing Katherine who was excellent without any caveats. I found the whole thing flew by without any longeurs despite its length. I think it’s the 3rd time I’ve seen the play (I remember a Propeller production at Hampstead and a Jude Law one in the West End, with, I think Jessie Buckley as Katherine - if I’ve seen others I don’t remember them!) and this was certainly the one I enjoyed the most and made most sense to me.
|
|
|
|
Post by cavocado on Apr 6, 2022 10:08:37 GMT
I thought this was just okay.
I liked the concept, staging and design, especially the videos and pics projected onto the back wall - made the Salic law scene more enjoyable, and the Harfleur surrender very moving (and of course that part was all the more shocking because of Mariupol).The Falstaff backstory also worked well. The surtitles were okay.
But I thought Kit Harrington was disappointingly average and lacking in charisma. I liked him better in the early pre-war scenes and the later wooing scene, but he didn't convince me at all in the battlefield scenes or the big rousing speeches.
The supporting cast was mixed. I liked Kate Duchene, Danny Kirrane, Anoushka Lucas and a few others, but really disliked the chorus - terrible verse speaking and just very irritating. I agree with previous comments that it needed a more experienced Shakespearean actor in that role.
|
|
|
|
Post by floorshow on Apr 7, 2022 0:25:18 GMT
Saw this a couple of weeks ago and have struggled to identify why it felt a bit off pace in places.
I liked parts but the direction for the really big moments was off.
Raising him up on the catwalk for the one big speech that everyone knows is a good example of a poor decision - separating him and his eyeline from both the targets of the speech and physically moving him away from most of the audience. Why? It makes no sense, it just feels contrary for the sake of it.
|
|
|
|
Post by sfsusan on Apr 7, 2022 16:38:40 GMT
Saw this a couple of weeks ago and have struggled to identify why it felt a bit off pace in places. I liked parts but the direction for the really big moments was off. I don't think it helped that Harrington rushed some of those important speeches. (To the point where it was hard to understand him.) |
|
19,786 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Apr 20, 2022 16:21:08 GMT
In cinemas 21st April
|
|
|
|
Post by jojo on Apr 28, 2022 16:39:06 GMT
We caught the NT Live of this last week and loved it. I expected to enjoy it based on the reviews, but there's always a slight concern that people pretend to like anything Shakespeare, so it was a great relief to discover this was one of the genuinely excellent productions.
I didn't have the privilege to see this actually live, but I'm still going to say the NT Live people did a great job of making it work for the screen. We had the understudy, Diany Samba-Bandza instead of Anoushka Lucas for Katherine and Gower, which was a bit disappointing as I rate Anoushka, but Diany did a great job.
Kit was terrific, and carried us on a journey through Henry's changing approach to life and leadership. We were left in no doubt that Henry was a bit of a bastard by the end, but remained engaging. I know there were some concerns that playing the courting scene with flashes of Henry's aggression would spoil the fun. It didn't. It was nicely balanced and got a lot of laughs whilst maintaining the authenticity of what a modern audience understands to have coercive elements.
Kit seems a natural with the Shakespearean text, and I'd be keen to see him do more in the future. Some actors milk it a bit too much for my tastes and are all "Look at me, I. AM. DOING. SHAKE. SPEARE ... [pause for effect]", but I favour productions where you could easily forget they are speaking Shakespearean language after your brain settles into it.
Some reviews were sniffy about the supporting cast, but they worked well for me. In particular I was impressed by Melissa Johns (Mistress Quickly/Williams/Macmorris), Danny Kirrane (Pistol/Westermoreland) and Steven Meo as Llewellyn/Falstaff.
I know some people found the music and operatic singing a bit much, and maybe it was in the actual theatre, but I think I would have loved it and IMO it definitely enhanced the cinema experience. I suppose we're used to watching films with a soundtrack, and I had to remind myself that it wasn't action happening on stage to a soundtrack, but actual singers doing it live on stage.
I realise this is a bit late for most screenings, but I recommend trying to see it at the cinema if you can. I think there's a few encore screenings here and there.
|
|
