Janie and I are partial to a bit of Tennessee Williams. While this early play is not one of his great plays, it shows all the signs of an emerging great playwright and was a thoroughly enjoyable evening at the theatre.
A very strong cast and production from a regional source; the Royal & Derngate Northampton.
We were very keen on the idea of this one and booked a preview.
We are glad we did; the play was enjoyable, agonising and thought-provoking in equal measure.
Partly about the domestic and interpersonal aspects of ageing, the play also takes on questions of government policy around ageing, including social care and the potential for robots to provide same.
I make it sound a bit “everything but the kitchen sink” on the topic, because in a way it was, but in a good way. The themes do more or less come together into a coherent whole and there is an element of comedic romp about the play which allows room for some forgiveness.
One really excellent thing about the Almeida is the quality of on-line resource they put up for the productions, with lots of information about the play, the creatives involved in the production, plenty of pictures and links to many reviews (the favourable ones of course).
The other really excellent thing about the Almeida is the quality of stuff it puts on. This play/production was no exception.
Ödön Von Horváth (imagine answering the “how do you spell it?” question with that name) has long fascinated Christopher Hampton. This seemingly small canvas German play, about the moral consequences of covering up the true reason for a deadly train crash, is in reality a pre-war allegory with the wilful blindness that led to Nazi power.
It was an especially good evening in the theatre; Janie and I both remember it fondly well. I also recently (when we saw The Ferryman) remembered that we had seen the excellent Laura Donnelly before, but didn’t at the time connect it with this play/production.
I only vaguely remember this creepy play/production. It had a fine cast and I think we felt that it was all very well done but we found the play a bit impenetrable.
I recall being most impressed by the performances and the production. Also, the play did its job of getting me and Janie talking about its big issues for the rest of the weekend. Yet this didn’t feel like premier league David Hare to me; I felt there was something lacking in the play.
Sarah Hemming in the FT clearly liked it a lot, comparing it favourably with The Vertical Hour as drama (whereas I would say that The Vertical Hour worked better for me as drama) – click here to read what she wrote;
It was that sort of play/production – influential people were supposed to talk about it but not all that many people got to see it. Janie and I saw a preview, so had every right to wax lyrical from an informed perspective and from the outset.
What good news for everyone that Janie and I tend to keep our counsel to ourselves on such matters.
We are both very keen on Arthur Miller and thought we would probably enjoy one of his rarely performed early works.
We went to the second preview of this production, so possibly didn’t get it at its absolute best.
While we enjoyed the play and production, with some of its parable qualities reminding us of great Miller plays, I would suggest that the play is not a great Miller play and the production was not one of the Donmar’s greatest productions. The acting was superb, as we pretty much expect at the Donmar, the cast mostly unfamiliar folk to us.
We’re very fussy when it comes to the Donmar these days, as we find that Covent Garden location so awkward, but on balance we certainly felt that this was a worthwhile trip.
We thought this might be a good one. That’s why we made the rare decision to book the Royal Court for a Friday evening.
We were not disappointed.
The story is simple enough; a young Indian girl in Mumbai has been videoed by her boyfriend having sex with him and the video inadvertently goes viral, ruining the youngsters lives; in particular hers and those of her family.
Lots of big modern issues in there. We found the play intriguing and disturbing. The production was very well done.
I have liked this play ever since I read it, hundreds of years ago…well, soon after doing Andorra by Max Frisch at school. This production at the Royal Court Theatre, performed in rep alongside Rhinoceros which we saw a few weeks earlier, promised a fresh translation and another chance to see up and coming young star Benedict Cumberbatch before he became too famous to watch.
We both really enjoyed this production. It isn’t one of Janie’s favourite plays, but the translation and production were indeed fresh. Will Keen was excellent as Biedermann.
We also both remeber it quite well, 25 years later. That might have a fair bit to do with the superb cast: Mark Rylance, Harriet Walter, Imelda Staunton and Oliver Cotton. The production was directed by Matthew Warchus. We didn’t recogognise his name then but we certainly do now. Here is the Theatricalia entry for this one.
Yasmina Reza (as translated by Christopher Hampton) was all the rage in the English speaking world back then. This was our fourth go at one of hers – Art having been the piece that kicked off the Reza fashion…
Anyway, apart from Art, with thought Life x 3 to be the most interesting and memorable of Reza’s works.
Again we went to a preview, so we were ahead of the critics. What did they think? Here’s Charles Spencer who seemed pretty impressed with it, at least as entertainment if not as profound drama:
Anyway, The National obviously felt the urge to have another go at Hamlet less than 12 years later, with Simon Russell Beale, Peter McEnery, Sara Kestleman and Denis Quilley to name but a few.
Janie remembers being impressed by the acting, but still not really relating to or engaging with Shakespeare. I remember feeling that I had probably previously seen the best production of Hamlet I was ever going to see, despite thinking that this was pretty darned good; especially Simon Russell Beale’s performance.
Very good indeed.
That’s what I wrote in my log.
But you don’t want to listen to us. Here are some reviews. First up – Nicholas de Jongh, who also liked Simon Russell Beale more than he liked the production
Similarly, our friend Michael Billington applauds SRB’s performance and John Caird’s directing of it, but feels that the production strips out the big picture political aspects of the play:
Janie noted in her diary that the play ran for 3 hours and fifteen minutes, so I’ll guess that she was grateful for John Caird’s cuts of the political elements – goodness knows how long the play would have taken in John Caird’s hands if we’d also had the Fortinbras sub-plot to deal with.
Still, to summarise the critics – they warmed to the production almost exclusively because of Simon Russell Beale’s quality. I’m surprised that no-one gave their review the headline, “Saved By the Beale”. They missed a trick there.
