1,292 posts
|
Post by mkb on Jun 4, 2023 16:55:38 GMT
Little thing : I bought a programme which has a couple of interesting articles in it but it was difficult to understand who was who in the minor roles. Little pics with name and role and also a teeny bio would have been nicer than the full splurge imo. And of course although they had tow bios of guys who were in the original, it would have been nice to know more about all of them. The NT programmes always have a lot of interesting content, and are good value, especially with the 10% Amex discount, but I'm with you on the bios. You see an actor listed alphabetically and then wonder, well which one was he/she?, and you have to search through various pics, which are nearly always on different pages to try to work it out. Please put a colour pic next to each cast member. And, this applies to all theatres, please use narrower columns for the bio text so that you can then list each production from the actor's CV on a separate line. Trying to scan lists on prose format across long lines is not so easy.
|
|
1,292 posts
|
Post by mkb on Jun 4, 2023 17:27:24 GMT
I saw this from the front row of the stalls at the matinée the Saturday before last. Before the start, I much admired the chutzpah of the lady just behind who tapped the lad to my left on his shoulder announcing he was far too tall and would he mind slouching throughout. Only the very elderly could get away with that, and she did, and he duly obliged.
How much of what Jack Thorne has written is authentic from the secretly recorded rehearsal tapes, and how much is artistic licence, I don't know. I do know that reality is often less credible than fiction. In any case, it matters not much. What we have is absolutely riveting from beginning to end. I was mesmerised.
Everyone on stage is at the top of their game, as, presumably, were the characters they are playing. Some veer more towards interpretation rather than impersonation. I was surprised to see so many in this thread favouring Gatiss's Gielgud over Flynn's Burton. While both exhibit masterly mimicry, Flynn blew me away. It was as if he was inhabited by the ghost of the Welshman.
Act 1 builds gradually, and then Act 2 nails it. A simple tale of two artists -- three if you include "Uncle Will" -- all flawed humans in their own way, demonstrates how human artistic endeavour can be so enlightening and richly rewarding for both performer and viewer.
Yes the finale may be emotionally manipulative -- what great drama isn't guilty of this? -- but I was willingly taken along for the ride.
Five stars.
Act 1: 14:24-15:40 (9 minutes late starting; unexplained) Act 2: 16:00-17:05
|
|
|
Post by sfsusan on Jun 5, 2023 22:40:15 GMT
Then as soon as Zadok the Priest started up I literally shook my head thinking, well that’s cheap. But it worked. The National Theatre old school Faithful stood instantly a la Pavlov’s dog. I saw this tonight and the standing ovation (or even just applause) didn't happen at Zadok the Priest but at the curtain call. Also, maybe it's because I'm an American, but I don't understand why that anthem would trigger an automatic standing ovation. (I know its association with the recent Coronation, but don't see any parallels within the play, other than the brief reference Gielgud makes to using it as a pacing cue. And I don't see that tie-back triggering an ovation.) I had trouble understanding many of Burton's speeches (Shakespearian or not). I think in some of the scenes he wasn't necessarily meant to be understood because he was drunk, but if the line for the ladies' loo hadn't been so long, I was going to request the closed captioning glasses at the interval. But when he gives Gielgud his 'To Be' speech.... wow!
|
|
3,102 posts
|
Post by Rory on Jun 6, 2023 19:25:20 GMT
Does anyone know if the transfer Baz said was very likely to be happening at the Noel Coward is still going ahead, now that 'The Ocean at the End of the Lane' is going there from 11th Oct - 25th Nov?
|
|
1,184 posts
|
Post by joem on Jun 6, 2023 20:12:25 GMT
I enjoyed this but ultimately it is a slight play about the theatre made more intriguing by the on-stage portrayal of three important actors (in different ways).
Gielgud v Burton is a clash more interesting in the mind than in the flesh because Gielgud was by nature a fighter. So the occasional barb hits home but he is best operating from a distance whilst Burton (drunkenness permitting) is more of a close fighter. Thorne has to bring in other issues to pad the play out and in the end it does move along pleasantly and gives us some laughs and some interesting, subtle, dramatic moments. Nothing new of course, we all know about Burton's drink problem and the volcanic nature of his relationship with Taylor is hinted at here. Gielgud's problems with the law, cottaging etc, are also well known and were well presented in "Plague Over England". I have to say that good as Gatiss is, Michael Feast was perfect, especially in his capturing of Gielgud's voice, in the latter play.
|
|
|
Post by c4ndyc4ne on Jun 6, 2023 20:49:17 GMT
Does anyone know if the transfer Baz said was very likely to be happening at the Noel Coward is still going ahead, now that 'The Ocean at the End of the Lane' is going there from 11th Oct - 25th Nov? Ocean is only doing a slender run so that might just be to pad the time before all the cast are available. Mark Gatiss' interview with the evening standard podcast recently seemed to suggest it was looking likely.
|
|
994 posts
|
Post by nash16 on Jun 6, 2023 20:52:16 GMT
I fear you have taken what I wrote a bit too literally. What I meant to infer was that, even with the slight ness of the play prior, adding the rousing Zadok the Priest at the end, in this year of Coronation, seemed designed to prompt a SUBSEQUENT standing ovation at the curtain call, with the music, in a way, hypnotising an audience into forgetting what had come before. It really irked me. Then as soon as Zadok the Priest started up I literally shook my head thinking, well that’s cheap. But it worked. The National Theatre old school Faithful stood instantly a la Pavlov’s dog. I saw this tonight and the standing ovation (or even just applause) didn't happen at Zadok the Priest but at the curtain call. Also, maybe it's because I'm an American, but I don't understand why that anthem would trigger an automatic standing ovation. (I know its association with the recent Coronation, but don't see any parallels within the play, other than the brief reference Gielgud makes to using it as a pacing cue. And I don't see that tie-back triggering an ovation.) I had trouble understanding many of Burton's speeches (Shakespearian or not). I think in some of the scenes he wasn't necessarily meant to be understood because he was drunk, but if the line for the ladies' loo hadn't been so long, I was going to request the closed captioning glasses at the interval. But when he gives Gielgud his 'To Be' speech.... wow!
|
|
|
Post by jr on Jun 6, 2023 21:49:30 GMT
Just out of this. Long and boring. I save Mark Gatiss. Middlebrow nothingness. Don't even feel like writing in more detail. 2 stars.
|
|
|
Post by Forrest on Jun 7, 2023 16:58:26 GMT
I love how polarising this seems to be! :)
I must admit I loved it: mostly, admittedly, for Mark Gatiss, who I would happily watch read the ingredients list off a can of soup, and would still, without a doubt, find it enjoyable. Perfect casting and an incredible performance in my book. But I also really enjoyed the meta-side to it: the world of creating a play caught on stage, the little glimpses of insight into the rehearsal process, the struggles of the artists surrounding who they want to be and who they really think they are... I genuinely did think it was wonderful.
I am too young to be truly invested in the real-world relationship between the two protagonists, so I almost feared that I wouldn't have anything to hold on to, but I was delighted to have been proven wrong.
|
|
382 posts
|
Post by stevemar on Jun 7, 2023 20:11:19 GMT
Quite a few dates on sale now (having been all sold out) - including those illusive £20 stalls seats.
|
|
3,102 posts
|
Post by Rory on Jun 7, 2023 22:55:16 GMT
Saw the matinee today and I'm firmly in the 'loved it' camp. Brilliantly acted, stylish, elegant and in turns moving and gripping. I thought Johnny Flynn pretty much nailed Burton's voice. Gatiss was just superb as ever.
|
|
4,599 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by Mark on Jun 7, 2023 22:58:05 GMT
Saw the matinee today and I'm firmly in the 'loved it' camp. Brilliantly acted, stylish, elegant and in turns moving and gripping. I thought Johnny Flynn pretty much nailed Burton's voice. Gatiss was just superb as ever. Was there too and totally agree. Mesmerising at times. Front row was wonderful. Gatiss delivering an award worthy performance. Flynn too. Just great.
|
|
3,102 posts
|
Post by Rory on Jun 7, 2023 23:01:49 GMT
Saw the matinee today and I'm firmly in the 'loved it' camp. Brilliantly acted, stylish, elegant and in turns moving and gripping. I thought Johnny Flynn pretty much nailed Burton's voice. Gatiss was just superb as ever. Was there too and totally agree. Mesmerising at times. Front row was wonderful. Gatiss delivering an award worthy performance. Flynn too. Just great. I really, really liked it. One of the best things I've seen in a long time. Quite moved by the end.
|
|
3,102 posts
|
Post by Rory on Jun 7, 2023 23:05:50 GMT
They were filming it today and the cameras took up quite a bit of space. My original seat in Row H became restricted view so I was offered alternative dates after I had booked, but to be fair the NT found me another really good seat in Row E of the stalls when I said I couldn't do the other dates.
|
|
|
Post by mrnutz on Jun 8, 2023 9:13:23 GMT
NT now charging £99 top price for this - think that's the most expensive ticket I've ever seen there!
|
|
|
Post by frauleinsallybowles on Jun 8, 2023 10:44:19 GMT
Has anyone done Friday rush for this/know where the available seats would be located? I'm hoping to try my luck and snag a good seat but not sure how difficult it'll be to get
|
|
4,599 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by Mark on Jun 8, 2023 10:46:40 GMT
Has anyone done Friday rush for this/know where the available seats would be located? I'm hoping to try my luck and snag a good seat but not sure how difficult it'll be to get I got £20 front row through Friday rush. There was £10 seats rear circle.
|
|
486 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by drmaplewood on Jun 8, 2023 11:11:24 GMT
Has anyone done Friday rush for this/know where the available seats would be located? I'm hoping to try my luck and snag a good seat but not sure how difficult it'll be to get Did it last week, by the time I got through the queue there were only £10 seats in the back two rows of the circle but those seats were fine (and a steal for £10)
|
|
|
Post by sfsusan on Jun 8, 2023 18:36:53 GMT
... adding the rousing Zadok the Priest at the end, in this year of Coronation, seemed designed to prompt a SUBSEQUENT standing ovation at the curtain call... Yes, I've been told before that I sometimes take things too literally. I wonder what they would use if this ended up being staged in New York?
|
|
75 posts
|
Post by adolphus on Jun 8, 2023 23:39:47 GMT
... adding the rousing Zadok the Priest at the end, in this year of Coronation, seemed designed to prompt a SUBSEQUENT standing ovation at the curtain call... Yes, I've been told before that I sometimes take things too literally. I wonder what they would use if this ended up being staged in New York? Quite. The play was written and developed before the Queen's death. The music is referenced in the text with good dramatic reason, and I'm glad they kept it. Its offensive to suggest it was inserted at a late stage to generate a cheap audience reaction.
The music is bye the bye anyway. The acting and the script, particularly the focus on the father/son experience for actors tackling Hamlet, merited full applause.
|
|
|
Post by nottobe on Jun 9, 2023 22:46:23 GMT
Saw this tonight and I'm in the camp that didn't like it. I'll admit I was interested in this because of the creative team and while I have seen a few Hamlets,I didn't know anything about this production or really too much about the stars it was about other than the basics of their celebrity.
I found it to be quite boring and not a story that is worth telling. The structure became very ploddy as repetitive, and the stakes where never that high. I know I was excited to see it but that was more to do with the hype because the story itself has nothing new or exciting or necessary to say. I liked Gatiss and Flynn, less convinced on Middleton. I especially liked Alan Corduner but that was more so because I was glad to see him onstage.
Technically it was a fine play but I was let down. For me the highlight was the two Coward songs
|
|
2,353 posts
|
Post by zahidf on Jun 15, 2023 9:32:32 GMT
|
|
|
Post by londonpostie on Jun 15, 2023 9:55:30 GMT
NT: more transfers than Chelsea.
|
|
3,102 posts
|
Post by Rory on Jun 15, 2023 10:01:38 GMT
At the Noel Coward 9th December 2023 - 23rd March 2024
|
|
|
Post by artea on Jun 30, 2023 23:53:15 GMT
An opinion ... 2 stars only from me ... so no need to read on. Act 1 is just a soporific series of scenes that may have happened over the course of the NYC Hamlet rehearsal period. A scene from day 1 is followed by a scene from day 2 is followed by a scene from day 3. We're told each time a new day begins. That's as exciting as it gets for quite some time. It's irritating; gauche. And so it goes - nowhere really - until the final scene of the half: Gielgud alone. The first scene of Act 2 (Gielgud and Taylor - by far the best 2 actors in it) is the best thing in the play. It's the only one with wit and life and more than one good laugh; it has a spark and good writing. Sadly, Burton only comes to life, forgetting he's drunk for a moment to deliver a superb, transfixing so intelligent to be or not to be. For almost all the play, his voice is irritating; plain wrong, without charisma, without power. Certainly not SRB or Alan Howard or Richard Burton. The To be or not to be speech delivers another problem: it's brilliant and this play suffers in comparison. The play also suffers by the blasting of brilliant classical music into the auditorium to do emotional heavy lifting. Not just Zadok the Priest (there to impress that what you have just seen must be as brilliant as that - it isn't) but also JS Bach's Goldberg Variations, used throughout, particularly the Aria. It's a disadvantage to know Hamlet. The rehearsals for the early Act 1 Hamlet scenes are feeble. Most of the cast are given almost nothing to do so why are they there? Why give them tiny bits to do when what they are given is weak? There's the occasional arty tableau of the cast at the start of a scene, usually a party if I recall correctly, but they're perfunctory. Cut-outs are used to open scenes but they were much more dramatically used and filled the stage in David Hare's gripping The Red Barn, Lyttleton, 2016. I have no idea why this was produced. It represents what Norris came to get rid of: dead white men going on and on about themselves. {Spoiler - click to view}After the final image of the play, the first with dramatic epic lighting, shape movement and shadow, I wished I'd just seen Hamlet but without this Burton, and not waded through this half-baked simulacrum.
|
|
5,597 posts
|
Post by lynette on Jul 1, 2023 20:38:05 GMT
Harsh but not untrue
|
|
3,482 posts
|
Post by showgirl on Jul 2, 2023 2:58:31 GMT
My former OH and I saw this yesterday, not exactly together (we had booked separately) but from adjacent rows in the cheap front stalls.
I found it a little slow to get going but was distracted (see below), though once it did, I was increasingly riveted as, I could see, was he. I did think it was largely a 2-person play with a big supporting cast and that Janie Dee was wasted - though always good to see her - and we agreed that Johnny Flynn didn't look too like Richard Burton but Mark Gatiss was spellbinding and very moving at times.
Behaviour by a fellow audience member did however seriously affect my attention and enjoyment during the long first half, as there were 2 very tall young chaps in the row in front. One of them wasn't so much in my line of vision and kept still anyway, but the one who was moved his head constantly from side to side; he didn't even stay in the same position for 10 seconds as I begain to time him. Goodness knows how he thought anyone behind could see and wouldn't be driven mad by such constant movement, but I didn't do the same or the person behind me would have suffered, too. Instead, at the interval, I spoke to the Box Office and FOH staff who agreed I could move to an empty aise seat in the second row, from which I had a clear if oblique view and could really focus on the play. I wish I had had the nerve to tap the culprit on the shoulder and ask him to keep still, but I always fear others' reaction even if they are in the wrong.
Hitherto I've always booked the rearmost row available of the 4 front rows and a seat on or as close to the aisle as possible but after this experience, I shall instead aim for the front.
Only the second play by Jack Thorne I had attended and imo infinitely superior to the lacklustre "Winston", the first half of which I had seen the week before.
|
|
|
Post by sfsusan on Jul 4, 2023 11:30:45 GMT
... the one who was moved his head constantly from side to side; he didn't even stay in the same position for 10 seconds as I began to time him. I wonder if the person in front of him was blocking his view, causing him to reposition constantly to follow the movement on stage. Is there a good solution in that situation? (I'm asking because I've been in that situation and tried to minimize my own head movement, but doing so sacrifices my own view in favor of the person behind me.)
|
|
3,482 posts
|
Post by showgirl on Jul 5, 2023 3:15:49 GMT
sfsusan It may well have been the case that the metronomic movement of the chap in my eyeline was due to the person in front of him blocking his view - though he was so tall that it's hard to imagine that he couldn't simply see over. But as you suggest, if everyone thus affected swivelled about constantly, there'd be a domino effect rippling back through the rows. Oddly the very cheap front 4 rows of the Lyttelton stalls not only lack the normal slight rake found further back but if anything, seem to slope slightly downward from the front; something for me to bear in mind in future. So alas I have no answer other than to beware in future and look out for opportunities to swap seats. Nevertheless I found the play well worth seeing and am offering (see Noticeboard) a stalls ticket for the matinee of Saturday 15 July, should anyone be interested.
|
|
1,018 posts
|
Post by andrew on Jul 8, 2023 22:16:53 GMT
OK sure but like what an incredibly well executed ending. An iconic ending. It reminded me a little bit of Exit The King, where even if you hated what came before it (as I did with ETK), you couldn’t help by being utterly beguiled by the final few minutes of the play. It was beautiful.
And I liked the rest of it too but, seriously, what a fantastic ending.
Five stars just for the ending.
|
|