Just occasionally we see a play/production that really sticks in our minds, so much so that we are talking about it and/or referring to it for years afterwards,
It is set in a dystopian future in which many of the real things we cherish (such as trees) have gone but humans spend much of their time in virtual reality worlds.
The play grapples with some of the ethical issues we need to think through in this context; not least moral injury.
But this is no mere preachy issues play – it is a gripping drama too and you end up really grappling with many moral dilemmas in 80 minutes.
…it was a very pleasant surprise that Janie felt better and confident enough to try the theatre the very next day.
A very interesting play about climate change, questioning orthodoxies and asking awkward questions about the links between the politics, science and personal beliefs around climate change.
Janie said she didn’t feel 100% when she turned up at the flat, but I didn’t think too much of it, not even when she ate little at Harry Morgan’s before the show.
But about 40 minutes into the first half, she said to me, “I don’t feel well, I have to go to the cloakroom…you stay here”. So I sat out the first half, not really able to concentrate and dashed out as soon as I could, to find Janie sipping water and attentive staff letting me know that she seemed OK.
It was early in the run and Mike Leigh was there that evening. He kindly came up to us to ask if Janie was OK; I think he was relieved when he learned that she was merely poorly rather than someone who had walked out in shock or horror.
The play is strong stuff and it was a full-on production, but Janie is not the “fit of vapours at the sound of expletives” type.
The staff said we could of course go back in during scene breaks in Act Two if we wished, and/or watch the second act on the screen they use to monitor the show from outside, but frankly we simply wanted to wait until Janie felt well enough to go home and then go home.
I bought a copy of the play text so I could read and find out what happened afterwards.
It is a real shame that we more or less missed out on it. Still, it could have been much worse. Janie’s indisposition turned out to be slight and temporary – we were back to the theatre the next night.
We don’t book many classic revivals, but we tend to make an exception for Ibsen if it is a play one or both of us hasn’t seen before. Plus, if it is the Almeida, we tend to trust the place to deliver a classic well and with a modern enough feel.
As was the case with this superb production.
We were a little concerned that it might be a luvvie-fest for Gemma Arterton. But she proved well up to her task and the universally high-quality cast worked extremely well as an ensemble.
It was a well-pacey production; an-hour-and–three-quarters straight through, the extra pace worked well with this play. An object lesson for some of the ponderously long, drawn-out productions of early 20th century plays.
The reviews were pretty much universally good and most are linked through the above resource, but this search term – click here – should find reviews independently for you.
We are big fans of Mamet and also big fans of the Almeida, so Janie and I were really looking forward to this one.
We indeed got a fabulous production, wonderfully well acted, directed and produced. But we were less sure about the piece itself.
Of course with Mamet you get more twists and turns than a country lane. Of course you get even riper language than an expletive-filled debate at our place after Janie and I have both had a bad day. And of course, with Richard Bean in the driving seat for the play script itself, you get some lovely stage devices and coups de theatre.
But the piece itself, based on a 1980’s Mamet film script, seemed surprisingly slight and it was unusually easy to predict the twists. I suspect the film worked better, but I haven’t seen it.
Still, with Alleyn’s School alum Nancy Carroll heading up a pretty impressive cast, plus Django Bates providing the atmospheric jazz music, it was an entertaining evening to be sure. Janie enjoyed it thoroughly, but also claimed she let the plot wash over her.
Janie and I are very keen on Frank McGuiness’s plays and this one is a good example of why that is so.
It sounds like the scenario for so many Irish plays – a family gathers to celebrate a birthday in a remote cottage in the West of Ireland…just take my word for it that this one is/was special.
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.
The conceit of this play is basically a Maria Callas masterclass towards the end of the great diva’s life.
We saw this one on a Friday evening. This was a touring production by Theatre Royal Bath Productions that was starting off at Richmond for just a few days.
My log reads:
Janie got more out of this one than I did.
So there you have it.
I think I found the play not so interesting. The production did a pretty good job with the material, as I saw it. Jane Lapotaire played the lead and she was very watchable.
Here is a clip from the Surrey Herald as the productions et off on its merry way:
Blooming heck we were culture-vulturing that autumn. This was our third theatre visit in a week – on a Thursday evening, ahead of going to a food and wine fair the next day.
Worth it though. As I put it in my log:
Electric – excellent production. Worth moving ass on a Thursday for.
Nick Curtis wrote very highly of it in the Standard, reviewing it at Chichester. (We saw it at Richmond, on its way from the West Country to the Donmar.)
