|
|
Post by vickyg on Feb 8, 2023 17:05:33 GMT
I'm down in London for the weekend just before this finishes, and am currently watching the ticket sites for this. On the day and time I could make it, and at the price I am willing to pay, my options are Stalls: O7 (behind pillar) or Q7, or Dress Circle D2 or E3. I have consulted Theatre Monkey's site, the theatre's own website (which is useless for the Q seat), and Seat Plan, and I am none the wiser as to which of these may be 'best'. The O seat looks OK view wise, but I suspect may have terrible legroom? Can anyone offer any thoughts? Thanks  I was sceptical of my C28 (end of aisle) seat in the dress circle yesterday at £30 because I have had experience in the Garrick of having literally two thirds of the stage obscured but I was pleasantly surprised. I had good leg room (plenty of space left and I'm often crushed at a longer legged 5'7) and could see everything except, I think, for one person for about 1 minute. I was on the opposite side to the dress circle seat you mention but I can't see that it would be any worse over on that side. |
|
395 posts
|
Post by lichtie on Feb 8, 2023 20:17:22 GMT
I'm down in London for the weekend just before this finishes, and am currently watching the ticket sites for this. On the day and time I could make it, and at the price I am willing to pay, my options are Stalls: O7 (behind pillar) or Q7, or Dress Circle D2 or E3. I have consulted Theatre Monkey's site, the theatre's own website (which is useless for the Q seat), and Seat Plan, and I am none the wiser as to which of these may be 'best'. The O seat looks OK view wise, but I suspect may have terrible legroom? Can anyone offer any thoughts? Thanks
O7 is fine - it's the row behind the one with the pillar and there's a very small gap between the seats in row N (7&8) which actually means there's a bit of leg-space if you can claim it from your neighbour.
|
|
|
|
Post by starlight92 on Feb 8, 2023 21:06:37 GMT
I sat in O7 as well and the pillar isn't in the way at all, makes it a great deal!
|
|
287 posts
|
Post by singingbird on Feb 9, 2023 8:12:07 GMT
I really thought this was bad, unfortunately. It felt like a quickly created and ill-thought-through jump on the gender identity bandwagon, and I expected a great deal more from such an acclaimed and experienced creative team.
I spent a good while about ten years ago working on adapting Orlando for a stage production that never went anywhere, so I know the book well and have thought a lot about how to adapt it. One of the challenges is its episodic nature, and my feeling is you have to work hard to emphasise the emotional threads that run through it - the ecstasy but also the loss and inevitable continual mourning - that comes from living forever while all around you dies or falls away. This production simply had no heart - it just skipped lightly but meaninglessly through half a century and left us feeling 'so what?' Sometimes Orlando was in love with someone, but we never knew why or really believed they were in love. Sometimes Orlando was bored, and so largely were the audience. So much was pruned out. Removing characters and incidents isn't a problem. Removing the soul and poetry, on the other hand, just leaves a dry husk of a story.
The script tried to capture the playful intertextuality of the novel but just sounded clumsy. Jokes fell flat and random references to films, plays etc felt shoe-horned in. Anachronisms felt awkward rather than clever. It indulged in the kind of meaningless excesses that are fun for student companies taking a show to Edinburgh but really have no place here. Why have all these Virginia Woolfs? And yet make them all look like dowdy spinsters? What is it saying, other than 'look at us, being experimental'?
I also found a lot of the acting unbearably mannered. It was all 'look at us, doing our acting'. I didn't believe anything I saw. Such a wasted opportunity.
|
|
904 posts
|
Post by lonlad on Feb 9, 2023 11:42:52 GMT
Anyone know if Emma Corrin is back in the show? Interesting that their similarly non-binary understudy, Oliver Wickham, is the older of Janie Dee's two children (and was in the very original cast, I believe, of SIX).
|
|
|
|
Post by londonpostie on Feb 9, 2023 11:46:55 GMT
I really thought this was bad, unfortunately. It felt like a quickly created and ill-thought-through jump on the gender identity bandwagon, and I expected a great deal more from such an acclaimed and experienced creative team. I spent a good while about ten years ago working on adapting Orlando for a stage production that never went anywhere, so I know the book well and have thought a lot about how to adapt it. One of the challenges is its episodic nature, and my feeling is you have to work hard to emphasise the emotional threads that run through it - the ecstasy but also the loss and inevitable continual mourning - that comes from living forever while all around you dies or falls away. This production simply had no heart - it just skipped lightly but meaninglessly through half a century and left us feeling 'so what?' Sometimes Orlando was in love with someone, but we never knew why or really believed they were in love. Sometimes Orlando was bored, and so largely were the audience. So much was pruned out. Removing characters and incidents isn't a problem. Removing the soul and poetry, on the other hand, just leaves a dry husk of a story. The script tried to capture the playful intertextuality of the novel but just sounded clumsy. Jokes fell flat and random references to films, plays etc felt shoe-horned in. Anachronisms felt awkward rather than clever. It indulged in the kind of meaningless excesses that are fun for student companies taking a show to Edinburgh but really have no place here. Why have all these Virginia Woolfs? And yet make them all look like dowdy spinsters? What is it saying, other than 'look at us, being experimental'? I also found a lot of the acting unbearably mannered. It was all 'look at us, doing our acting'. I didn't believe anything I saw. Such a wasted opportunity. Interesting. Thanks for taking the time and trouble. |
|
287 posts
|
Post by singingbird on Feb 9, 2023 12:11:07 GMT
Anyone know if Emma Corrin is back in the show? Interesting that their similarly non-binary understudy, Oliver Wickham, is the older of Janie Dee's two children (and was in the very original cast, I believe, of SIX). She was on last night. |
|
|
|
Post by alessia on Feb 9, 2023 12:58:58 GMT
I really thought this was bad, unfortunately. It felt like a quickly created and ill-thought-through jump on the gender identity bandwagon, and I expected a great deal more from such an acclaimed and experienced creative team. I spent a good while about ten years ago working on adapting Orlando for a stage production that never went anywhere, so I know the book well and have thought a lot about how to adapt it. One of the challenges is its episodic nature, and my feeling is you have to work hard to emphasise the emotional threads that run through it - the ecstasy but also the loss and inevitable continual mourning - that comes from living forever while all around you dies or falls away. This production simply had no heart - it just skipped lightly but meaninglessly through half a century and left us feeling 'so what?' Sometimes Orlando was in love with someone, but we never knew why or really believed they were in love. Sometimes Orlando was bored, and so largely were the audience. So much was pruned out. Removing characters and incidents isn't a problem. Removing the soul and poetry, on the other hand, just leaves a dry husk of a story. The script tried to capture the playful intertextuality of the novel but just sounded clumsy. Jokes fell flat and random references to films, plays etc felt shoe-horned in. Anachronisms felt awkward rather than clever. It indulged in the kind of meaningless excesses that are fun for student companies taking a show to Edinburgh but really have no place here. Why have all these Virginia Woolfs? And yet make them all look like dowdy spinsters? What is it saying, other than 'look at us, being experimental'? I also found a lot of the acting unbearably mannered. It was all 'look at us, doing our acting'. I didn't believe anything I saw. Such a wasted opportunity. I've not read the book so can't judge on that, but what you say about the shallowness and your comment on jumping on the gender bandwagon resonates with me too - and I'm glad I am not the only one not seeing the point of the multiple Woolfs. Baffled it got so many starry reviews tbh. |
|
|
|
Post by cavocado on Feb 9, 2023 16:26:40 GMT
I spent a good while about ten years ago working on adapting Orlando for a stage production that never went anywhere, so I know the book well and have thought a lot about how to adapt it. One of the challenges is its episodic nature, and my feeling is you have to work hard to emphasise the emotional threads that run through it - the ecstasy but also the loss and inevitable continual mourning - that comes from living forever while all around you dies or falls away. This production simply had no heart - it just skipped lightly but meaninglessly through half a century and left us feeling 'so what?' Sometimes Orlando was in love with someone, but we never knew why or really believed they were in love. Sometimes Orlando was bored, and so largely were the audience. So much was pruned out. Removing characters and incidents isn't a problem. Removing the soul and poetry, on the other hand, just leaves a dry husk of a story. This is very well put and identifies why it was so hard to feel emotionally engaged with this play. |
|
|
|
Post by NorthernAlien on Feb 10, 2023 12:45:39 GMT
I sat in O7 as well and the pillar isn't in the way at all, makes it a great deal! I have booked O7 - thanks for the advice |
|
183 posts
|
Post by bee on Feb 12, 2023 0:10:43 GMT
I thought this was dreadful. It did nothing to make you care about the characters. Actually, there were no actual characters, it was just a bunch of people on a stage saying stuff. As an earlier reviewer said, it felt like something that had been thrown together for the Edinburgh Fringe.
I genuinely think this could be the worst thing I've ever seen.
|
|
80 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by theatrekiwi on Feb 14, 2023 5:29:18 GMT
I genuinely think this could be the worst thing I've ever seen. It sure was this for me! |
|
4,987 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by Someone in a tree on Feb 14, 2023 6:58:25 GMT
If I hadn't seen Sylvia this would be the worst thing I had seen.
|
|
|
|
Post by NorthernAlien on Feb 14, 2023 16:40:26 GMT
What the heck is this 'check in online now' thing you have to do with this theatre? Is this a thing at Nimax venues? Is it a 'post-covid' thing? I've never had to do that before?
|
|
|
|
Post by alessia on Feb 14, 2023 16:58:21 GMT
What the heck is this 'check in online now' thing you have to do with this theatre? Is this a thing at Nimax venues? Is it a 'post-covid' thing? I've never had to do that before? Nimax been doing this for a while, I recall doing this for Jerusalem last summer |
|
19,780 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Feb 14, 2023 17:28:35 GMT
They should have an option ”mind your own business”  |
|
1,484 posts
|
Post by theatrefan62 on Feb 14, 2023 19:03:50 GMT
They should have an option ”mind your own business” What?! So you don't even get an eticket anymore when you pay, you have to wait until hours before the show. Ridiculous service. |
|
|
|
Post by NorthernAlien on Feb 15, 2023 11:02:26 GMT
They should have an option ”mind your own business” What?! So you don't even get an eticket anymore when you pay, you have to wait until hours before the show. Ridiculous service. Indeed not - I'm travelling for work from this afternoon, back late on Friday evening, and up at 4.45am on Saturday for the flight down to Stanstead. As I can't be guaranteed to sort out an e-ticket, I've opted for box office collection - I'm hoping it means I might actually get a physical ticket, you know, like we used to in The Good Old Days pre-pandemic! |
|
528 posts
|
Post by vabbian on Feb 17, 2023 18:20:01 GMT
Oh it is nice to come on here and find other people hated it too
I think the play tried to be too clever, but there was no depth, no character development
I love Emma, if she wasn't in it, I would probably give it a zero stars review
I think having 4/5 stars plastered outside the theatre is meaningless & misleading nowadays
Everyone and their mother seems to have a 5 star review
|
|
4,987 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by Someone in a tree on Feb 18, 2023 8:04:23 GMT
Could one of our fabulous mods put a pole on this thread, please & ta
|
|
19,780 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Feb 18, 2023 10:33:39 GMT
Poll added. Do your worst!
|
|
|
|
Post by theatregoer22 on Feb 18, 2023 12:28:27 GMT
I've rated it 3* largely because of Emma, who was great. Otherwise, as others have said, it was lacking in depth and felt a bit rushed. Still, when I exchanged my tickets for a different performance, Nimax gave me better seats than the ones I'd paid for (without charging me extra) so it wasn't all bad.
|
|
4,987 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by Someone in a tree on Feb 18, 2023 16:59:25 GMT
Poll added. Do your worst! Ta chuck |
|
|
|
Post by NorthernAlien on Feb 20, 2023 19:01:13 GMT
Well, I will never know how restricted or otherwise the view from seat O7 was - as I managed to nab an upgrade!
As I'd mentioned, I was collecting my ticket from the box office, and they upgraded me to G4 - a check on TheatreMonkey's site after the even reveals this to be exactly next to the Premium £100+ seats! So, *superb* seat for £45!
I thought this was... OK? I didn't mind the Greek Chorus of Virginias actually, I thought that was quite interesting, but it felt very episodic, and without an overarching narrative arc, and then it just sort of...ended?
Corrin was superb, as was Deborah Findlay.
And not the worse thing I saw this weekend, not by a long way...
|
|
