Untitled Fuc* M*ss S**gon Play - REX Manchester / Young Vic

Well, as you've helpfully suggested that this isn't aimed at the "concession crowd", maybe I should simply stay in my theatrical lane and stick to fodder more suitable for seniors - whatever that might be.

We get to see:

MEO

and

AND

as well as the back of the picture frame. I hope it isn't yet another R&J

The world really doesn't need any more productions of that for a while

Not sure whereabouts in my post I was whingeing about any of the things you suggest. Several of us have commented on the perhaps awkward/confusing/unhelpful title, so I put my hand up to being amongst them.

I have not complained about the format as I've yet to see the play; what I did say was that it was unclear to me what to expect and that from experience, I prefer not to be equally clueless by the time I've seen a production. Some of us here have limited time and other resources and don't want to waste those on something which might prove unedifying - and it's perfectly normal to ask all sorts of questions about productions in general of those who have seen them, eg running time, whether there's any audience participation, etc.

So thank you for your own helpful responses to my points and for informing me that I am "comfortably ignorant"; at least I've learned something, as you advise.

I'm not whingeing about the title. As a sometime writer myself I am curious about its impact. It's an unusual, very atypical, spiky title - very noticeable but also potentially offputting to some. In my experience, the more youth-oriented or punky plays at the RX are staged in the studio space which it easily packs out. I'd like to see it but my health isn't good at the moment and a combi of that plus the shocking state of public transport (had several experiences pre lockdown of trains home from mancs being cancelled) means I haven't managed to make it to any of the shows I've booked since lockdown ended, when I used to see several plays a month. 

Oof. First half of this is pretty good and funny; second half does the thing way too many American plays about race do — spend an hour lecturing you on a point that takes about 2 minutes to understand. A shame, because the point would have been made much more effectively if it just ended after the first “act”.

Went to see it.
Found it pretty tedious.
There was about 10 good minutes about 2/3 of the way through.
If there'd been an interval I'd have left.

It just didn't feel like it had anything to say, other than a provocative title.

And I really don't get the Mei Mac hype - I found her incredible tedious in Totoro, and fairly annoying here

Saw this recently and when the Young Vic announced their season, this was the play which I really wanted to book for.

I really enjoyed it. The only thing I think could have been cut was that speech towards the end. It dragged and dragged and dragged. I think the point could have been made in half the time and still have commanded attention.

The set was well executed but the poor stage management team did have their work cut out, didn’t seem the easiest to manoeuvre. At one point it got stuck.

Performances all brilliant (I’m personally a fan of Mei Mac!) however the narrator stole the show - would always book for anything she’s in now, based on her performance.

So glad I managed to catch this.

This was ok.

The deconstruction of "Madam Butterfly" and "South Pacific" was great fun, and Rochelle Rose was a fantastic narrator, making hay out of every line, but this got repetitive fast, and "Fairview," at this same address, covered similar ground so much more incisively.

Some spoilers follow. . .

I loved the in-your-face title, but seeing the actual play, it felt a bit disingenuous, as it didn't really have much to say about the Engineer, who is the quintessential character in "Miss Saigon," with the other characters having been cribbed from Madam Butterfly. This is far closer to being "Untitled F--k Madam Butterfly" than the title used.

Further, "Fairview" played this same address not so long ago, and every chapter (it was in 3 segments) of that was an absolute revelation for me. The final chapter of Fairview forms the conclusion of this play, done here with less drama and bite,

The opening was reasonably funny, and superbly caustic, but when the play (deliberately) started repeating itself, once again, it again felt a little disingenuous, in that it seemed to imply that there were tons of shows using these same racist tropes, but then didn't name most of them.

It has always struck me that the absolute lack of representation for Asian characters of all backgrounds, in Western entertainment in all media, has been a terrible problem, but watching this, you'd believe that there were countless such shows, albeit inadvertently racist ones. Thus, the show seems to distract from a greater problem by pointing out a different one.

Also missing from the show is any consideration of how popular Asian shows of many backgrounds are now with Western audiences. From Japanese animes and movies (eg Death Note, the whole Miyazaki oeuvre) to South Korean TV series (eg Squid Game, All of Us are Dead), Western audiences are absolutely loving such shows. To what degree does this amount to representation? The lack of any such consideration makes the play feel a little dated.

I would have found it interesting to know how Western financiers, like Netflix, influence the content of Eastern shows like Squid Game, whether such influence is good or bad or negligible? But this show is more interested in critiquing product of the past than speaking to now.

Also, although I found it very amusing, I wondered whether the persistent skewering of white women in this show (Jennifer Kirby's smug babysnatching villain got the biggest boos the night I saw it) was almost letting white men off the hook lol (though Tom Weston-Jones's mashed up nonsense talk was acidly funny).

Anyway, the show's first half hour hits hard, and Rochelle Rose is a charismatic star! 3 and a half stars from me.