230 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by hal9000 on Jul 9, 2016 17:17:45 GMT
This is one of the new Shakespeares that fit into my tight schedule in London in Late Sep and Mid Oct and as I am coming from Australia my fingers are crossed!
Thanks to the fine folk on the Summer Globe thread I decided on this over Two Gentlemen of Verona in the Sam Wanmamaker Threatre only because my upper balcony ticket for that performance would have been standing, at the very back, on the far side with my sight blocked by a Candelabra directly in front of me.
|
|
2,058 posts
|
Post by Marwood on Jul 9, 2016 23:15:27 GMT
Hope you enjoy it - I'm going next month, the reviews I've seen have been less than glowing but I'm hoping I will get something out of seeing it.
|
|
230 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by hal9000 on Jul 10, 2016 21:59:32 GMT
Fingers crossed - I've never seen a MACBETH.
|
|
208 posts
|
Post by argon on Jul 10, 2016 22:33:44 GMT
Ray Fearon and Shakespeare are simply not compatible, well not at this current time at least.The porter scene dragged the production up slightly but not enough to stop me leaving at the interval. Then faced with France V Portugal it was a case of the lesser of the two evils for the most boring event of the night.
|
|
1,061 posts
|
Post by David J on Jul 10, 2016 22:41:08 GMT
Ray Fearon and Shakespeare are simply not compatible Including this? |
|
208 posts
|
Post by argon on Jul 11, 2016 9:29:53 GMT
[/quote]Including this?
Well mark Antony suits him more than Macbeth, he spent most of the time wuth a facial expression like a growling dog. Maybe he was just following direction from Iqbal Khan.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 11, 2016 9:39:25 GMT
I liked him as Macbeth. One of the (many) problems with Macbeth for me is that I studied it at school and it has some very famous lines, so it can all too easily fall into a boring declamatory style, feeling less like people living a story and more like a dramatic reading from the Penguin Book of Quotations. I was however very able to believe Ray Fearon's Macbeth as actually being a person - he even made "Banquo" sound like someone's name rather than a character in a play. (Also if you're as shallow as I am then it's worth noting that he is EXCEPTIONALLY HANDSOME and some of the costumes do very little to undermine this.)
I mean, I have issues loving Macbeth at the best of times, so if it's a play you're rarely dissatisfied by then we're clearly coming at it from opposite directions. But even so I can admit there are flaws in this production and the new things they try don't necessarily work. However I did find a lot to love about it, and Fearon's performance isn't one of the stickier areas for me.
|
|
81 posts
|
Post by addictedtotheatre on Jul 13, 2016 18:06:11 GMT
Ray Fearon puts the Mmmm in Macbeth, but I found the production unengaging.
And why was the music amplified but the actors not miked?? Really hard to catch some of the text sometimes.
|
|
230 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by hal9000 on Sept 27, 2016 16:43:33 GMT
Ray Fearon is a sight for sore eyes.
The use of the child was interesting - or could have been. The kid was so utterly lovely that the audible cooing of the audience echoing about the joint distracted most scenes the kid appeared in.
Also liked the Porter.
|
|
1,236 posts
|
Post by nash16 on Sept 30, 2016 0:07:31 GMT
Ray Fearon is a sight for sore eyes. The use of the child was interesting - or could have been. The kid was so utterly lovely that the audible cooing of the audience echoing about the joint distracted most scenes the kid appeared in. Also liked the Porter. Eyes, yes. Ears, NO. WHY DOES RAY SHOUT EVERYTHING ALL THE TIME? |
|
