It was only a week ago that I was chatting to my parents about how I often end up only going to see what the majority consider to be "good" productions, usually due to limited amounts of time and money. I even went as far as saying: "I want to see something truly horrific once in a while". Whilst it was not truly horrific, it was definitely not good. Here is my review, which you may observe is a lot shorter and (hopefully) more proffesional than usual:
“Tell Me on a Sunday” was a title that I had heard a lot, but did not really know much about. When the current UK tour, starring Claire Sweeney, rolled into town, I decided to give it a go. If I’m honest, I was a little disappointed. Having adored the intimacies of C Soco’s production of “The Last Five Years” in Edinburgh, I was expecting a similar experience. However, the show seemed lost on the stage, and the set seemed too overcrowded. Sadly, this resulted in me feeling as though I was a mere onlooker.
I have never understood Andrew Lloyd-Webber’s appeal as a composer, and the score only confirmed this for me. The lyrics by Don Black were alright, but lacked the subtle wit and ambiguity that could have really set the piece on fire.
I knew little of Claire Sweeney’s career before, other than re-runs of “60 Minute Makeover”, so I had no idea what to expect. She did a good job, with fairly consistent vocals and believable acting. At times, thpigh, she seemed to lack energy and was drowned out by the (excellent, if a little loud) band on several occasions.
Overall, I am rather indifferent to the production, although I did rather enjoy Tamara Harvey’s inventive direction...
**
Oh dear, I hope I haven't been too harsh...
Thursday, 28 October 2010
Sunday, 24 October 2010
A very modern Hamlet
At what point is one able to consider themselves to be a Shakespearean? Going to see this production of “Hamlet” has marked an exciting new era in my theatregoing life. Instead of choosing to go and see a Shakespeare because I thought I should, as was the case with “Macbeth” way back in May, I actually went to see “Hamlet” because I really wanted to. I even read the play by myself prior to attending, which could be considered insignificant, for I read plays all the time. However, for me, this is extraordinarily significant because, up until now, I had put off reading Shakespeare, mainly because of the way it’s always been read at school. Now, though, I am a true Shakespeare convert. That rather expensive copy of “King Lear” I purchased almost a year ago may finally get read now.
Anyway, I had never seen a production of a Shakespeare play outside of the Globe or another open air venue until yesterday. Strangely, I managed to forget it was Shakespeare as I watched. Considering that the play was written to be performed on an almost bare stage with no artificial lighting or sound design, the production seemed to fit the piece remarkably well. What helped was that it was not done in period dress – it was also the first time that I had ever seen one of Shakespeare’s plays lifted out of the Jacobean era. This just goes to show how any piece of literature, provided it is about people, can be relevant to life in the twenty first century. In fact, any piece of literature is relevant, because ever piece of literature is about people. Even if a story is not about human beings, it must have character and relationships in some way. All stories are written by humans, therefore these characters will have the characteristics of humans, because we know of nothing else. I am not sure this really makes sense, but just recently I have become fairly interested in philosophy.
I think I will now start the actual review, after that rather peculiar interlude. The production was sold out, which shows the true selling power of Shakespeare, even in today’s financial climate. As previously mentioned, the first thing that struck me about the production was the lighting and sound design; many of the scene changes were punctuated by loud blasts of music, and the ghost of Hamlet’s father looked eerily realistic, thanks to the lighting design. The set was simple, it did not remain static, but the same pieces were moved throughout the show, if that makes sense. I am not sure what I think about the set, in some ways I liked the way it visually represented changes of scene, but at the same time part of me couldn’t help feeling as though it was not really necessary, for at points some of the action seemed to become lost.
The production was directed by Nicholas Hytner, who is also artistic director of the National. I really am starting to love his work, and thought that the staging was perfect. What I have noticed, both in this and in “The Habit of Art”, is that he has a really good way of making you care about as many characters as possible.
I had only read the play once and not in great depth, but now, after seeing the play, I want to read it and analyse it again and again. This is partly due to the interpretations of the characters by the cast, which helped make the play interesting throughout. At three hours and forty five minutes, it was probably the longest play that I have ever sat through, but I did not become bored or even look at my watch once.
I enjoyed Rory Kinnear’s portrayal of Hamlet. Having heard his name a lot, but never actually seen him in anything, my expectations were not disappointed. He portrayed the vulnerable side of the character very well, which evoked much empathy in me.
Ruth Negga brought an excellent energy to Ophelia, and stole the stage each time she was on it, making me wish that Ophelia had more lines. I had not really noticed her character through reading the play, but now I feel like I understand it a lot more.
Overall, the whole cast gave very enjoyable performances, working well as an ensemble whilst standing out as individuals. If I were not gradually trying to cut down the length of my reviews, I would write more. Seeing this production makes me wish that I had seen more Hamlets and knew the play in greater detail, because only then would I be able to make truly informed comments concerning interpretation. I am really looking forward to seeing another production of “Hamlet”, and possibly studying it in my second year of A Level studies.
Anyway, I had never seen a production of a Shakespeare play outside of the Globe or another open air venue until yesterday. Strangely, I managed to forget it was Shakespeare as I watched. Considering that the play was written to be performed on an almost bare stage with no artificial lighting or sound design, the production seemed to fit the piece remarkably well. What helped was that it was not done in period dress – it was also the first time that I had ever seen one of Shakespeare’s plays lifted out of the Jacobean era. This just goes to show how any piece of literature, provided it is about people, can be relevant to life in the twenty first century. In fact, any piece of literature is relevant, because ever piece of literature is about people. Even if a story is not about human beings, it must have character and relationships in some way. All stories are written by humans, therefore these characters will have the characteristics of humans, because we know of nothing else. I am not sure this really makes sense, but just recently I have become fairly interested in philosophy.
I think I will now start the actual review, after that rather peculiar interlude. The production was sold out, which shows the true selling power of Shakespeare, even in today’s financial climate. As previously mentioned, the first thing that struck me about the production was the lighting and sound design; many of the scene changes were punctuated by loud blasts of music, and the ghost of Hamlet’s father looked eerily realistic, thanks to the lighting design. The set was simple, it did not remain static, but the same pieces were moved throughout the show, if that makes sense. I am not sure what I think about the set, in some ways I liked the way it visually represented changes of scene, but at the same time part of me couldn’t help feeling as though it was not really necessary, for at points some of the action seemed to become lost.
The production was directed by Nicholas Hytner, who is also artistic director of the National. I really am starting to love his work, and thought that the staging was perfect. What I have noticed, both in this and in “The Habit of Art”, is that he has a really good way of making you care about as many characters as possible.
I had only read the play once and not in great depth, but now, after seeing the play, I want to read it and analyse it again and again. This is partly due to the interpretations of the characters by the cast, which helped make the play interesting throughout. At three hours and forty five minutes, it was probably the longest play that I have ever sat through, but I did not become bored or even look at my watch once.
I enjoyed Rory Kinnear’s portrayal of Hamlet. Having heard his name a lot, but never actually seen him in anything, my expectations were not disappointed. He portrayed the vulnerable side of the character very well, which evoked much empathy in me.
Ruth Negga brought an excellent energy to Ophelia, and stole the stage each time she was on it, making me wish that Ophelia had more lines. I had not really noticed her character through reading the play, but now I feel like I understand it a lot more.
Overall, the whole cast gave very enjoyable performances, working well as an ensemble whilst standing out as individuals. If I were not gradually trying to cut down the length of my reviews, I would write more. Seeing this production makes me wish that I had seen more Hamlets and knew the play in greater detail, because only then would I be able to make truly informed comments concerning interpretation. I am really looking forward to seeing another production of “Hamlet”, and possibly studying it in my second year of A Level studies.
Friday, 15 October 2010
An update
The other day, I suddenly realised that I had not posted a single word since seeing "Into the Woods". Since then, you will be pleased to hear that my love of Sondheim has managed to grow even more, if that were possible.
The neutral title of this post is mainly because it will be about a number of things, although I could of course write a whole book on why I love Sondheim. The first exciting thing that I have to write about is that I received a personal letter from Jenna Russell, just days after "Into the Woods" played its final performance and closed the season at the Open Air Theatre. In case you did not know, Jenna played the Baker's Wife in the production, although she had also played Cinderella in the Donmar's production a number of years ago. Her performance was the highlight of the evening for me, so I decided to write her a letter. You can not imagine how overjoyed I was when I received a two page, handwritten reply. I don't really want to share the contents of the letter on here, but I will say that she took the time to answer every question that I asked. I am now an even bigger fan, and am looking forward to seeing her in "Season's Greetings" at the National, which will also be the first play by Alan Ayckbourn that I will have seen.
Speaking of the Donmar, I still haven't been there, but I am eagerly anticipating the day that I finally go. By the time I am in the position to buy tickets, they are always sold out. Hopefully in the near future I will be able to try for dayseats. The next production, King Lear with Derek Jacobi in the title role, is looking more and more apealing, especially after my experience at "Shakespeare for Breakfast".
A few weeks ago, news about Michael Grandage's departure as artistic director of the venue broke. I can not really formulate an opinion about this, having never been to the Donmar myself, but it is clearly one of the most important theatrical venues in the world, and it will be interesting to see how his succesor performs.
Finally, I went to see the Icelandic production of "Faust" at the Young Vic. This was almost two weeks ago now, so the moment has really passed for me to write a proper review. However, I do have some thoughts, which I thought I would post directly onto my blog.
I was not paticularly looking forward to it, having tried to read the play in its English translation and failing miserably. It was the longest and most complicated play that I have ever attempted to read, so in the end I just gave up, for I was almost oblivious to what was going on.
My hopes of one day reading the play in its original language gone, I decided to go with an open mind, and actually had such an enjoyable afternoon. It was unlike anything that I had ever seen before. The plot was stripped to its bare minimum, and used the "play within a play" concept that I had so enjoyed in "The Habit of Art". The production was set to rock music, as well as a psychedelic set and lighting. The main unique feature was the large net, suspended above the heads of the audience, which was often used by the actors. There were several loud shocks, as well as visual ones, which kept me on the edge of my seat at all times.
Whilst the performance was visually spectacular and a lovely way to spend an afternoon, I did not really feel anything for any of the characters, although it's worth noting that Faust's lovely closing monologue was ruined by someone's mobile phone going off. Overall, I think I would recommend the production to other people for the sheer originality of the staging and adaptation. I would be interested in seeing other shows of this genre, to see how they compare.
In the future, I really will try and keep my blog updated on a more regular basis. I really do enjoy writing, it's just that sometimes school and work gets in the way....
The neutral title of this post is mainly because it will be about a number of things, although I could of course write a whole book on why I love Sondheim. The first exciting thing that I have to write about is that I received a personal letter from Jenna Russell, just days after "Into the Woods" played its final performance and closed the season at the Open Air Theatre. In case you did not know, Jenna played the Baker's Wife in the production, although she had also played Cinderella in the Donmar's production a number of years ago. Her performance was the highlight of the evening for me, so I decided to write her a letter. You can not imagine how overjoyed I was when I received a two page, handwritten reply. I don't really want to share the contents of the letter on here, but I will say that she took the time to answer every question that I asked. I am now an even bigger fan, and am looking forward to seeing her in "Season's Greetings" at the National, which will also be the first play by Alan Ayckbourn that I will have seen.
Speaking of the Donmar, I still haven't been there, but I am eagerly anticipating the day that I finally go. By the time I am in the position to buy tickets, they are always sold out. Hopefully in the near future I will be able to try for dayseats. The next production, King Lear with Derek Jacobi in the title role, is looking more and more apealing, especially after my experience at "Shakespeare for Breakfast".
A few weeks ago, news about Michael Grandage's departure as artistic director of the venue broke. I can not really formulate an opinion about this, having never been to the Donmar myself, but it is clearly one of the most important theatrical venues in the world, and it will be interesting to see how his succesor performs.
Finally, I went to see the Icelandic production of "Faust" at the Young Vic. This was almost two weeks ago now, so the moment has really passed for me to write a proper review. However, I do have some thoughts, which I thought I would post directly onto my blog.
I was not paticularly looking forward to it, having tried to read the play in its English translation and failing miserably. It was the longest and most complicated play that I have ever attempted to read, so in the end I just gave up, for I was almost oblivious to what was going on.
My hopes of one day reading the play in its original language gone, I decided to go with an open mind, and actually had such an enjoyable afternoon. It was unlike anything that I had ever seen before. The plot was stripped to its bare minimum, and used the "play within a play" concept that I had so enjoyed in "The Habit of Art". The production was set to rock music, as well as a psychedelic set and lighting. The main unique feature was the large net, suspended above the heads of the audience, which was often used by the actors. There were several loud shocks, as well as visual ones, which kept me on the edge of my seat at all times.
Whilst the performance was visually spectacular and a lovely way to spend an afternoon, I did not really feel anything for any of the characters, although it's worth noting that Faust's lovely closing monologue was ruined by someone's mobile phone going off. Overall, I think I would recommend the production to other people for the sheer originality of the staging and adaptation. I would be interested in seeing other shows of this genre, to see how they compare.
In the future, I really will try and keep my blog updated on a more regular basis. I really do enjoy writing, it's just that sometimes school and work gets in the way....
Sunday, 29 August 2010
Sondheim in the Park
With this entry, I have absolutely no idea where to start. I had wanted to see a Sondheim show for over a year, ever since I stumbled across clips of Patti LuPone in the recent Broadway revival of “Gypsy”. Although Sondheim only wrote the lyrics for “Gypsy”, I was immediately transfixed. By this time, the London revival of “A Little Night Music” had closed, and there was no other Sondheim to be seen. Instead, I busied myself with acquiring as many cast recordings of Sondheim shows as possible. It didn’t take me long to realise that I loved Sondheim. The way the lyrics could be interpreted in so many different ways was the first thing I noticed. Even after several repeat listenings I kept hearing something new, which was the second thing I noticed. The third thing I noticed was that there seemed to be a point to absolutely every single lyric. It was almost as though Sondheim is to musicals what Shakespeare is to plays.
This year being the year of Sondheim’s 80th birthday, I realised that there would probably be a chance to see a Sondheim show. There seemed to be several one off concerts, and of course “Passion” at the Donmar, which is impossible to get tickets for. What I really wanted was to see one of his musicals in performance. My patience was rewarded when I found out that Regent’s Park Open Air Theatre was producing “Into the Woods” as their closing musical for the season. I had loved seeing “The Crucible” earlier in the year, so I immediately started pestering my Dad to book tickets. My patience (and indeed, my persistence) was rewarded, and the tickets were purchased.
There was still the worry, though, that the rain would prevent me from seeing my first Sondheim. Luckily, although there was a shower when we were standing in the queue, then another shower whilst we were eating the expensive yet incredibly tasty barbeque, the third and final shower, which started five minutes before the performance and only continued to the end of the prologue, was the last for the evening. I could hardly believe my luck, although it is a testament to the wonderful performance that I stopped thinking about the rain the moment that the last droplet had fallen.
On a humorous side note, the members of my nuclear family who I was accompanied by had given me the strangest looks and even laughed when I told them of my plans to bring a bin liner for my seat, in case it was wet, and a further one to cover my legs in case it rained. Funnily enough, they were begging me for half of my seat liner to cover their damp seats when we arrived. Due to being a quite nice, if opinionated, person, I decided to share. Regrettably, though, on future occasions they will have to provide their own.
“Into the Woods” was the first ever Sondheim show that I had listened to, after blindly grabbing the first CD I saw in Dress Circle with his name on. I loved it from the moment I listened to it. I think this cast recording was really what sparked my interest in Broadway as a whole, because after hearing Bernadette Peters’ voice my research around her, followed by all the shows she has been involved with, became furtive. Anyway, I pretty much know most of the songs by heart, so was really looking forward to finally hearing them performed live. Of course, I had previously heard “Agony” and “Children Will Listen” on the BBC Sondheim prom, the former of which was performed by Daniel Evans and the rather delectable Julian Ovenden, who was my second theatre love, after Gavin Creel. The latter, performed by Maria Friedman, moved me to tears, so I was hoping that Hannah Waddingham’s version would do the same. The real reason for mentioning the Sondheim prom was that another of the principals, Jenna Russell, plays the Baker’s Wife, and I had fallen in love with her voice. I wished at that point that I had known about Sondheim in 2007 when I was thirteen, because then I would have gone to see “Sunday in the Park with George”.
Now, I have made an executive decision to actually start writing about last night’s show. Directed by Timothy Sheader, who is also the artistic director of the venue, the production used the concept of the narrator being a young boy who imagines the story and plays it out with toys, whilst it takes place around him. The ending was also slightly different to how it has been in other productions, but I don’t want to spoil it for people who haven’t yet seen the show. This change to the ending tied the show up well, and made for an ending with much more of a lasting impact than when an adult narrator is used. The other directorial decisions around staging were inspired, for designer Soutra Gilmour had created intricate scaffolding that would never fit into a traditional promescium theatre. This made some of the short appearances by characters, where they sometimes only sing one line before leaving, much more fluid. Then there was the natural backdrop of trees that really did make you feel as though the characters were going into the woods. Overall, the staging was probably the most exciting that I have ever seen, since there was always a lot to look at and new things happening, which added to the magic of the piece.
The costume design was brilliant, except for certain aspects, namely Cinderella’s dreadlocks, which were questionable. The giant, voiced by Judi Dench, was a magnificently unconventional creation which really was in the sky. I can’t really imagine going to a matinee and seeing the show when it was light, because the lighting design was extremely effective, sometimes leaving certain parts of the stage completely dark, despite some of the actors still being on the stage in these parts, to allow us to focus on other things.
Having listened to the cast recording so many times, I wondered how I was going to react to hearing completely different voices. Luckily, Gareth Valentine’s arrangement seemed to be quite different, and sounded entirely different in the open air. It was a bit of a shock to the system to hear British accents instead of American at first, but by the end I had concluded that I quite preferred it with British accents, because the “character” voices seemed to be more prominent and effective than they do with an American dialect.
“Into the Woods” has a book by one of Sondheim’s most frequent collaborators, James Lapine. The libretto is one of the cleverest that I have ever encountered in a musical, and provided plenty of jokes, some of which were very obvious, but also plenty that required thinking about to be fully absorbed.
Like most musicals, “Into the Woods” has two acts. The first act concentrates on the retelling of several classic fairytales. The stories are intertwined by the Baker and his wife, a fictional couple who are trying to have a child, so head into the woods to find a red cap, a cow as white as milk, a golden slipper and hair as yellow as corn. Act One is fun and humorous, but Act Two is where the story becomes darker. Themes of adultery, control, sacrifice and self doubt and awareness lead us into a poignant ending, which I will admit resulted in me crying, twice. The first time was at “No More”, and the second time during “Children Will Listen”. The reason for the tears is because the woods are not just trees; they are, in fact, a metaphor for life.
As fantastic as the production was, it would not have succeeded without an amazing cast. Luckily, what I have decided is one of my favourite casts ever, were on hand. I had previously seen Hannah Waddingham perform a solo cabaret at a small theatre, so was aware of her vocal prowess, but it was only after seeing her playing the Witch that I realised the true extent of her acting talent. Mark Hadfield’s portrayal of the Baker was the first thing that moved me to tears. His presence was enough to make us feel as though it was his and his wife’s story, which of course it is. He was the character I most felt for at the end of it all. Helen Dallimore portrayed a wonderful, if slightly vocally weak Cinderella, and it was amusing to see how she has not found time to update her resume to include “Too Close to the Sun”. As “Into the Woods” is, like “Les Misérables”, essentially an ensemble piece built around one central story, it is difficult to stand out, but my personal favourite performance was Jenna Russell as the Baker’s Wife, who seemed to inhabit her character perfectly and steal every scene she was in. Another stand out was Beverly Rudd’s Little Red Riding Hood. Initially, I found the overall interpretation of this role awkward, but once I got into it and I saw how her character fit into the whole story, I realised how talented she was, even if the way she was playing her was a little obvious.
There was nearly a “hail” moment (torrential rain whist watching Macbeth at the Globe, May 2010) during my favourite song from the musical, “Giants in the Sky”, when just as the song drew to a close a helicopter zoomed overhead, which would have made for an awesome finish. The unique surroundings, particularly the rustle of the trees, went a long way in convincing me that this is one of the best productions that I have ever seen.
For once, a moment that I had waited for and anticipated for such a long time did not disappoint me. I can now say “Into the Woods” is one of my favourite musicals, and that I would rush to any future production, which would hopefully explore another, completely different way of staging this wonderfully unique piece. Now, I am just hopeful that the rumoured Chichester Sweeney Todd production starring Michael Ball, and the mentioned revival of Follies at the Haymarket directed by Trevor Nunn will come off next year.
This year being the year of Sondheim’s 80th birthday, I realised that there would probably be a chance to see a Sondheim show. There seemed to be several one off concerts, and of course “Passion” at the Donmar, which is impossible to get tickets for. What I really wanted was to see one of his musicals in performance. My patience was rewarded when I found out that Regent’s Park Open Air Theatre was producing “Into the Woods” as their closing musical for the season. I had loved seeing “The Crucible” earlier in the year, so I immediately started pestering my Dad to book tickets. My patience (and indeed, my persistence) was rewarded, and the tickets were purchased.
There was still the worry, though, that the rain would prevent me from seeing my first Sondheim. Luckily, although there was a shower when we were standing in the queue, then another shower whilst we were eating the expensive yet incredibly tasty barbeque, the third and final shower, which started five minutes before the performance and only continued to the end of the prologue, was the last for the evening. I could hardly believe my luck, although it is a testament to the wonderful performance that I stopped thinking about the rain the moment that the last droplet had fallen.
On a humorous side note, the members of my nuclear family who I was accompanied by had given me the strangest looks and even laughed when I told them of my plans to bring a bin liner for my seat, in case it was wet, and a further one to cover my legs in case it rained. Funnily enough, they were begging me for half of my seat liner to cover their damp seats when we arrived. Due to being a quite nice, if opinionated, person, I decided to share. Regrettably, though, on future occasions they will have to provide their own.
“Into the Woods” was the first ever Sondheim show that I had listened to, after blindly grabbing the first CD I saw in Dress Circle with his name on. I loved it from the moment I listened to it. I think this cast recording was really what sparked my interest in Broadway as a whole, because after hearing Bernadette Peters’ voice my research around her, followed by all the shows she has been involved with, became furtive. Anyway, I pretty much know most of the songs by heart, so was really looking forward to finally hearing them performed live. Of course, I had previously heard “Agony” and “Children Will Listen” on the BBC Sondheim prom, the former of which was performed by Daniel Evans and the rather delectable Julian Ovenden, who was my second theatre love, after Gavin Creel. The latter, performed by Maria Friedman, moved me to tears, so I was hoping that Hannah Waddingham’s version would do the same. The real reason for mentioning the Sondheim prom was that another of the principals, Jenna Russell, plays the Baker’s Wife, and I had fallen in love with her voice. I wished at that point that I had known about Sondheim in 2007 when I was thirteen, because then I would have gone to see “Sunday in the Park with George”.
Now, I have made an executive decision to actually start writing about last night’s show. Directed by Timothy Sheader, who is also the artistic director of the venue, the production used the concept of the narrator being a young boy who imagines the story and plays it out with toys, whilst it takes place around him. The ending was also slightly different to how it has been in other productions, but I don’t want to spoil it for people who haven’t yet seen the show. This change to the ending tied the show up well, and made for an ending with much more of a lasting impact than when an adult narrator is used. The other directorial decisions around staging were inspired, for designer Soutra Gilmour had created intricate scaffolding that would never fit into a traditional promescium theatre. This made some of the short appearances by characters, where they sometimes only sing one line before leaving, much more fluid. Then there was the natural backdrop of trees that really did make you feel as though the characters were going into the woods. Overall, the staging was probably the most exciting that I have ever seen, since there was always a lot to look at and new things happening, which added to the magic of the piece.
The costume design was brilliant, except for certain aspects, namely Cinderella’s dreadlocks, which were questionable. The giant, voiced by Judi Dench, was a magnificently unconventional creation which really was in the sky. I can’t really imagine going to a matinee and seeing the show when it was light, because the lighting design was extremely effective, sometimes leaving certain parts of the stage completely dark, despite some of the actors still being on the stage in these parts, to allow us to focus on other things.
Having listened to the cast recording so many times, I wondered how I was going to react to hearing completely different voices. Luckily, Gareth Valentine’s arrangement seemed to be quite different, and sounded entirely different in the open air. It was a bit of a shock to the system to hear British accents instead of American at first, but by the end I had concluded that I quite preferred it with British accents, because the “character” voices seemed to be more prominent and effective than they do with an American dialect.
“Into the Woods” has a book by one of Sondheim’s most frequent collaborators, James Lapine. The libretto is one of the cleverest that I have ever encountered in a musical, and provided plenty of jokes, some of which were very obvious, but also plenty that required thinking about to be fully absorbed.
Like most musicals, “Into the Woods” has two acts. The first act concentrates on the retelling of several classic fairytales. The stories are intertwined by the Baker and his wife, a fictional couple who are trying to have a child, so head into the woods to find a red cap, a cow as white as milk, a golden slipper and hair as yellow as corn. Act One is fun and humorous, but Act Two is where the story becomes darker. Themes of adultery, control, sacrifice and self doubt and awareness lead us into a poignant ending, which I will admit resulted in me crying, twice. The first time was at “No More”, and the second time during “Children Will Listen”. The reason for the tears is because the woods are not just trees; they are, in fact, a metaphor for life.
As fantastic as the production was, it would not have succeeded without an amazing cast. Luckily, what I have decided is one of my favourite casts ever, were on hand. I had previously seen Hannah Waddingham perform a solo cabaret at a small theatre, so was aware of her vocal prowess, but it was only after seeing her playing the Witch that I realised the true extent of her acting talent. Mark Hadfield’s portrayal of the Baker was the first thing that moved me to tears. His presence was enough to make us feel as though it was his and his wife’s story, which of course it is. He was the character I most felt for at the end of it all. Helen Dallimore portrayed a wonderful, if slightly vocally weak Cinderella, and it was amusing to see how she has not found time to update her resume to include “Too Close to the Sun”. As “Into the Woods” is, like “Les Misérables”, essentially an ensemble piece built around one central story, it is difficult to stand out, but my personal favourite performance was Jenna Russell as the Baker’s Wife, who seemed to inhabit her character perfectly and steal every scene she was in. Another stand out was Beverly Rudd’s Little Red Riding Hood. Initially, I found the overall interpretation of this role awkward, but once I got into it and I saw how her character fit into the whole story, I realised how talented she was, even if the way she was playing her was a little obvious.
There was nearly a “hail” moment (torrential rain whist watching Macbeth at the Globe, May 2010) during my favourite song from the musical, “Giants in the Sky”, when just as the song drew to a close a helicopter zoomed overhead, which would have made for an awesome finish. The unique surroundings, particularly the rustle of the trees, went a long way in convincing me that this is one of the best productions that I have ever seen.
For once, a moment that I had waited for and anticipated for such a long time did not disappoint me. I can now say “Into the Woods” is one of my favourite musicals, and that I would rush to any future production, which would hopefully explore another, completely different way of staging this wonderfully unique piece. Now, I am just hopeful that the rumoured Chichester Sweeney Todd production starring Michael Ball, and the mentioned revival of Follies at the Haymarket directed by Trevor Nunn will come off next year.
Thursday, 26 August 2010
"This is theatre, darling!"
As some will be able to discern from the title, I went to the National Theatre for the first time yesterday to see Alan Bennett's most recent play, "The Habbit of Art". This is my review, but I fear that once again I have reverted back to my uninformative ramblings:
Irritatingly, I had applied for Entry Pass, the National’s scheme which allows those of us between the ages of 15 and 25 to purchase a ticket for each show for just £5, a week before going on holiday. When I decided to venture to the National for the first time, a decision which I made the day before going on holiday, the card had not yet arrived. I wanted to have it all arranged before I went away, for I had decided to go on the day after results day, which was just two days after my return from Edinburgh, so I went onto the National’s (rather confusing, might I say) website, and picked “The Habit of Art”. After smugly buying a ticket for £16.50, instead of the usual price of £44 for that section, due to the fact that I am under 18, I was pretty annoyed when I arrived back from holiday to find my Entry Pass membership card on the doormat. Still, that just gives me an excuse to go to the National as much as possible now!
I had heard great things about this play, and the fact it was returning to the National for a second season said something to me. Plus, I have vivid memories of sitting in several year nine English lessons whilst the rest of the class became depressed by Sylvia Plath’s musings (they all blamed our teacher for that), analysing my Mum’s tatty old A Level poetry texts, which happened to consist partly of the complete works of WH Auden. Thinking of myself as some Auden expert (I’m really not, these days I cannot name a single one of his poems, even the one I read yesterday!), I decided that “The Habit of Art” was an obvious choice. Realising that neither of my parents would be particularly interested in the play, I was trusted to do what I had been lusting after doing for almost a year: I was allowed to go to London on my own, on the understanding that I walked straight from Waterloo East to the National, texted my Dad when I arrived, collected my ticket, texted my Dad again, ate a baguette in the cafe, then went straight to the bookshop, went to the auditorium and texted my Dad when I was in my seat. The latter failed, however, because my phone seemed incapable of texting in the auditorium, so I had to make a sneaky phone call, much to the annoyance of the old ladies club in front of me. I know there were big signs up saying that mobiles had to be switched off before entering the auditorium, but it was still fifteen minutes until the start time, and it was a necessary evil to guarantee future solo visits to the Southbank.
“The Habit of Art” was a fascinating experience for me. Not only was it my first time at the National, where I was excited to see that they too provide free cast lists in the nature of Broadway’s playbills, but it was also my first experience of seeing a piece which uses the concept of a play within a play. I really enjoyed this, particularly because it offered fascinating insights into the rehearsal process and indeed how difficult actors can be to work with. It also reminded me how similar much of the drama we see on the stage is to true life.
Written by Alan Bennett, “The Habit of Art” is predominantly a comedy, although when one looks closer it is possible that it is also a drama, for the insight it offers into the characters, and indeed the ending, is thought provoking and intriguing. I don’t really know much about Alan Bennett, or his work, other than that I rather enjoyed the film adaptation of “The History Boys” until the rented DVD decided to stop working halfway through. Now, I am intrigued and want to start reading some more of his plays, after I’ve read my lovely new Büchner anthology, “King Lear”, “Othello” and my borrowed Shaffer and Ibsen collections. Oh, and that degree level German play, which I only have the German language version of. Anyway, we’ve now established that the text was very good, and will probably become one of my favourite modern plays.
The plot focuses on Auden’s relationship with Britten and several “Rent Boys” (who are actually “Rent people”!) during his time as the poetry don at Oxford. That is the plot of the play that the actors are rehearsing within the play; the actual play focuses on a day’s rehearsal where the company decide to run the play in the director’s absence. Here we witness a tale of artistic struggle and self dissatisfaction, on top of the plot in the aptly named “Caliban’s Death”. Throughout, there are many humorous references to Shakespeare’s “The Tempest”, which add to the fun and authenticity of it being a real rehearsal room.
Nicholas Hynter, who is of course artistic director of the National, also directed the play. I had never seen anything directed by him before, because a) I hadn’t been to the National, and b) I wasn’t born when “Miss Saigon” opened, and I was nine when it closed. I really enjoyed the staging, I thought the set, which was static, was intricate yet simple, and that the entire space was used really well. The comedic lines were all very impactive, as were the more serious aspects, for instance the closing scene.
The lead role of Fitz/Auden was played incredibly well by Desmond Barrit. Admittedly, I do have a soft spot for the grumpy old man role, and he did this to perfection. It sort of reminded me of Peter O’Toole’s character in Venus (2005). Malcom Sinclair provided the Britten for his Auden, and whilst the performance was pleasant, it was maybe a little forgettable amongst the rest of the cast. Matthew Cottle’s Humphrey Carpenter was hilarious, and the Donald side of his character was one of the highlights of the show. Overall, though, my favourite performance came from Selina Cadell as Kay/Stage Manager. She was both comedic and touching, and seemed to hold the piece together. I also had a soft spot for Simon Bubb as the long suffering author. He actually reminded me of Dominic Cooper, which was a bit strange because as many people know I’m not exactly the biggest fan of Dominic Cooper’s acting.
Overall, Act One was probably a bit too slow, because all of the main character developments appeared to happen in Act Two. “The Habit of Art” is a modern play which I feel, unlike “ENRON”, could have a number of different incarnations in the future, for because it is a play within a play, it could be set within any era. I wonder if the site-specific jokes concerning the National and Olivier will change as the play goes on tour?
To conclude, I would like to say that the Lyttelton has some of the best theatre seats ever, purely because I was in row R and under the circle, but there was no obstruction by the circle overhang and I had a fantastic view. The seats were also gigantic, but I fear that they were actually just normal size, and I have been spending too much of my theatre-going time at the Menier.
****
Irritatingly, I had applied for Entry Pass, the National’s scheme which allows those of us between the ages of 15 and 25 to purchase a ticket for each show for just £5, a week before going on holiday. When I decided to venture to the National for the first time, a decision which I made the day before going on holiday, the card had not yet arrived. I wanted to have it all arranged before I went away, for I had decided to go on the day after results day, which was just two days after my return from Edinburgh, so I went onto the National’s (rather confusing, might I say) website, and picked “The Habit of Art”. After smugly buying a ticket for £16.50, instead of the usual price of £44 for that section, due to the fact that I am under 18, I was pretty annoyed when I arrived back from holiday to find my Entry Pass membership card on the doormat. Still, that just gives me an excuse to go to the National as much as possible now!
I had heard great things about this play, and the fact it was returning to the National for a second season said something to me. Plus, I have vivid memories of sitting in several year nine English lessons whilst the rest of the class became depressed by Sylvia Plath’s musings (they all blamed our teacher for that), analysing my Mum’s tatty old A Level poetry texts, which happened to consist partly of the complete works of WH Auden. Thinking of myself as some Auden expert (I’m really not, these days I cannot name a single one of his poems, even the one I read yesterday!), I decided that “The Habit of Art” was an obvious choice. Realising that neither of my parents would be particularly interested in the play, I was trusted to do what I had been lusting after doing for almost a year: I was allowed to go to London on my own, on the understanding that I walked straight from Waterloo East to the National, texted my Dad when I arrived, collected my ticket, texted my Dad again, ate a baguette in the cafe, then went straight to the bookshop, went to the auditorium and texted my Dad when I was in my seat. The latter failed, however, because my phone seemed incapable of texting in the auditorium, so I had to make a sneaky phone call, much to the annoyance of the old ladies club in front of me. I know there were big signs up saying that mobiles had to be switched off before entering the auditorium, but it was still fifteen minutes until the start time, and it was a necessary evil to guarantee future solo visits to the Southbank.
“The Habit of Art” was a fascinating experience for me. Not only was it my first time at the National, where I was excited to see that they too provide free cast lists in the nature of Broadway’s playbills, but it was also my first experience of seeing a piece which uses the concept of a play within a play. I really enjoyed this, particularly because it offered fascinating insights into the rehearsal process and indeed how difficult actors can be to work with. It also reminded me how similar much of the drama we see on the stage is to true life.
Written by Alan Bennett, “The Habit of Art” is predominantly a comedy, although when one looks closer it is possible that it is also a drama, for the insight it offers into the characters, and indeed the ending, is thought provoking and intriguing. I don’t really know much about Alan Bennett, or his work, other than that I rather enjoyed the film adaptation of “The History Boys” until the rented DVD decided to stop working halfway through. Now, I am intrigued and want to start reading some more of his plays, after I’ve read my lovely new Büchner anthology, “King Lear”, “Othello” and my borrowed Shaffer and Ibsen collections. Oh, and that degree level German play, which I only have the German language version of. Anyway, we’ve now established that the text was very good, and will probably become one of my favourite modern plays.
The plot focuses on Auden’s relationship with Britten and several “Rent Boys” (who are actually “Rent people”!) during his time as the poetry don at Oxford. That is the plot of the play that the actors are rehearsing within the play; the actual play focuses on a day’s rehearsal where the company decide to run the play in the director’s absence. Here we witness a tale of artistic struggle and self dissatisfaction, on top of the plot in the aptly named “Caliban’s Death”. Throughout, there are many humorous references to Shakespeare’s “The Tempest”, which add to the fun and authenticity of it being a real rehearsal room.
Nicholas Hynter, who is of course artistic director of the National, also directed the play. I had never seen anything directed by him before, because a) I hadn’t been to the National, and b) I wasn’t born when “Miss Saigon” opened, and I was nine when it closed. I really enjoyed the staging, I thought the set, which was static, was intricate yet simple, and that the entire space was used really well. The comedic lines were all very impactive, as were the more serious aspects, for instance the closing scene.
The lead role of Fitz/Auden was played incredibly well by Desmond Barrit. Admittedly, I do have a soft spot for the grumpy old man role, and he did this to perfection. It sort of reminded me of Peter O’Toole’s character in Venus (2005). Malcom Sinclair provided the Britten for his Auden, and whilst the performance was pleasant, it was maybe a little forgettable amongst the rest of the cast. Matthew Cottle’s Humphrey Carpenter was hilarious, and the Donald side of his character was one of the highlights of the show. Overall, though, my favourite performance came from Selina Cadell as Kay/Stage Manager. She was both comedic and touching, and seemed to hold the piece together. I also had a soft spot for Simon Bubb as the long suffering author. He actually reminded me of Dominic Cooper, which was a bit strange because as many people know I’m not exactly the biggest fan of Dominic Cooper’s acting.
Overall, Act One was probably a bit too slow, because all of the main character developments appeared to happen in Act Two. “The Habit of Art” is a modern play which I feel, unlike “ENRON”, could have a number of different incarnations in the future, for because it is a play within a play, it could be set within any era. I wonder if the site-specific jokes concerning the National and Olivier will change as the play goes on tour?
To conclude, I would like to say that the Lyttelton has some of the best theatre seats ever, purely because I was in row R and under the circle, but there was no obstruction by the circle overhang and I had a fantastic view. The seats were also gigantic, but I fear that they were actually just normal size, and I have been spending too much of my theatre-going time at the Menier.
****
Tuesday, 24 August 2010
I was in Edinburgh.... (Part Two)
Well, I now know my GCSE results, and I'm so pleased with them. I couldn't have wished for better results really.
Now, back onto topic. I must say that I have been fascinated with the concept of playbills ever since I begun to visit the Broadway section of broadwayworld.com. It's such a great idea to have a free cast list/synopsis, because whilst I would still buy the programme in most cases, it gives some audience members an invaluable source of information which they might not want to pay for. This became apparent to me in Edinburgh, where at each show, bar one, we were effectively provided with a playbill. I think it would be such a good idea if all theatres in London were to do this.
Anyway, I will now continue my reviews, using the playbills which I hadn't unpacked yesterday:
Plague! The Musical, C Venues ***1/2
I chose this because several people had recommended it to me on numerous occasions. It was the one show of the day that was exactly how I thought it would be. There was just the right amount of humour, although much of the plot did not really concern the plague, so the latter part of the show felt a little rushed. It was lovely to hear an original musical which has not been performed in town as of yet, and the up-tempo songs worked extremely well, especially with the choreography. However, I felt that the piece lacked some really powerful big ballads that would touch the emotions.
All of the performances were good, but my personal favourite (maybe even my favourite performance of the day) came from Lucyelle Cliff as Death/Polly. I thought her facial expressions and body language were extraordinary, and every time she was on the stage she commanded my attention.
Overall, Plague! The Musical was an enjoyable way to spend an hour and a half, and I can see why it enjoys the reputation it has at the fringe.
The Last Five Years, C aquila, ****
This was the venue that we had the shortest time to find (half an hour), and it also proved the most difficult to find. Luckily we arrived with ten minutes to spare, and then the show started a bit late.
The venue reminded me of the Menier inside, although the air conditioning was nowhere near as effective. At that point, I immediately regretted wearing a long sleeved, high necked dress made of blue lycra, leggings and Dr. Martens. Anyway, the seats were a lot more comfortable than those at the Menier, which made up for it.
I had been interested in seeing "The Last Five Years" ever since attending one of Hannah Waddingham's cabaret at Trinity, where she sung "Still Hurting" and spoke of Jason Robert Brown as though he is a skilled composer and lyricist in the way of Sondheim. I agree with this point. Having listened to the music beforehand, I noticed the same clever lyrics and marriage between the music and lyrics. It's rare to see a production of this in the UK - I believe the last proffesional one was at the Menier in 2006, so I took the chance to see this.
The show began at 10:30, so I was very glad that I had taken the chance to listen to and appreciate the lyrics beforehand, because by that time I was becoming quite tired. I really enjoyed the show, the small fourpiece orchestra were visible on stage, and it was just the thing I like: a small, intimate piece. Admittedly, it's the smallest cast that I've ever seen: just two people, however Benjamin Vivian and Kate Brennan were utterly compelling and really made me care about the characters. It was wonderful to see, and indeed to remember, that there are two sides to the story in every relationship.
So, that was my Edinburgh round-up. I definitely want to go again, and see many more different things. I foudn Edinburgh to be a unique place, where almost anything goes. Provided things are quality, no matter how different the ideas behind it seem it will probably find an audience in Edinburgh.
Now, back onto topic. I must say that I have been fascinated with the concept of playbills ever since I begun to visit the Broadway section of broadwayworld.com. It's such a great idea to have a free cast list/synopsis, because whilst I would still buy the programme in most cases, it gives some audience members an invaluable source of information which they might not want to pay for. This became apparent to me in Edinburgh, where at each show, bar one, we were effectively provided with a playbill. I think it would be such a good idea if all theatres in London were to do this.
Anyway, I will now continue my reviews, using the playbills which I hadn't unpacked yesterday:
Plague! The Musical, C Venues ***1/2
I chose this because several people had recommended it to me on numerous occasions. It was the one show of the day that was exactly how I thought it would be. There was just the right amount of humour, although much of the plot did not really concern the plague, so the latter part of the show felt a little rushed. It was lovely to hear an original musical which has not been performed in town as of yet, and the up-tempo songs worked extremely well, especially with the choreography. However, I felt that the piece lacked some really powerful big ballads that would touch the emotions.
All of the performances were good, but my personal favourite (maybe even my favourite performance of the day) came from Lucyelle Cliff as Death/Polly. I thought her facial expressions and body language were extraordinary, and every time she was on the stage she commanded my attention.
Overall, Plague! The Musical was an enjoyable way to spend an hour and a half, and I can see why it enjoys the reputation it has at the fringe.
The Last Five Years, C aquila, ****
This was the venue that we had the shortest time to find (half an hour), and it also proved the most difficult to find. Luckily we arrived with ten minutes to spare, and then the show started a bit late.
The venue reminded me of the Menier inside, although the air conditioning was nowhere near as effective. At that point, I immediately regretted wearing a long sleeved, high necked dress made of blue lycra, leggings and Dr. Martens. Anyway, the seats were a lot more comfortable than those at the Menier, which made up for it.
I had been interested in seeing "The Last Five Years" ever since attending one of Hannah Waddingham's cabaret at Trinity, where she sung "Still Hurting" and spoke of Jason Robert Brown as though he is a skilled composer and lyricist in the way of Sondheim. I agree with this point. Having listened to the music beforehand, I noticed the same clever lyrics and marriage between the music and lyrics. It's rare to see a production of this in the UK - I believe the last proffesional one was at the Menier in 2006, so I took the chance to see this.
The show began at 10:30, so I was very glad that I had taken the chance to listen to and appreciate the lyrics beforehand, because by that time I was becoming quite tired. I really enjoyed the show, the small fourpiece orchestra were visible on stage, and it was just the thing I like: a small, intimate piece. Admittedly, it's the smallest cast that I've ever seen: just two people, however Benjamin Vivian and Kate Brennan were utterly compelling and really made me care about the characters. It was wonderful to see, and indeed to remember, that there are two sides to the story in every relationship.
So, that was my Edinburgh round-up. I definitely want to go again, and see many more different things. I foudn Edinburgh to be a unique place, where almost anything goes. Provided things are quality, no matter how different the ideas behind it seem it will probably find an audience in Edinburgh.
Monday, 23 August 2010
I was in Edinburgh.... (Part One)
Alas, now I have returned home, and am in the comforts of my own bedroom. Still, it was a lovely weekend. On my return, there were two amazing things waiting for me that had come in the post.
First of all, there was a signed photo from Gavin Creel, who is currently playing Claude in "Hair" in the West End. It's so personal, because there are not only little doodles on the back of the headshot, but also a little note, since I sent the letter in April four days after the run began. Gavin is one of my favourite performers (ever since I saw him in Mary Poppins when I was thirteen) , and I was so happy to receive the autograph.
Secondly, my Entry Pass membership card from the National Theatre arrrived. This was a bit annoying, because I brought a ticket for "The Habit of Art" the day before going on holiday for £16.50. At least now it gives me an excuse to see loads more plays at the National, because the tickets will cost me just £5. I really like the look of Hamlet, or Danton's Death, but I don't think I'll have time to see the latter.
Now I've finished being excited about the post, I might actually start writing my Edinburgh reviews. I just made notes after the show, so I could remember things to write them properly now. These are short reviews, much shorter than my normal ones, but I hope they're good!
Shakespeare For Breakfast, C Venues, ****
I actually thought the promotional material was joking when I read that audience members would be provided with a free croissant and cup of coffee. So you can imagine my reaction when I arrived to find a croissant on my feet. There was a croissant on every seat, as a matter of fact, and there was a rather clever joke about this in the production. It made me wish that I hadn't eaten one at the hotel for breakfast.
This years production was a re-telling of "King Lear", using the concept of as many reality TV shows as possible. I didn't really know what to expect, although part of me was a little disapointed that it wasn't a Shakespearean answer to "Forbidden Broadway". However, it was a highly amusing if a little repetitive production. Yes, some of the humour was a little too obvious, but innovative and interactive staging compensated for this. I would definitely go back and see another Shakespeare for Breakfast, for not only was it a great way to start the day, but I can now impress my new English teachers with my "in-depth knowledge" of "King Lear". Only joking, I'm actually going to try and buy the play text on Wednesday.
Down the Rabbit Hole, C Venues, *1/2
I was really looking forward to this, and I can officially say that it has to be the biggest disapointment of my life. Actually, "Wicked" was the definitive biggest disapointment, but this is definitely second to that.
It was not the fault of the cast, who all had great energy, body language and delivery. It was not the fault of the director, or the set designer, either. I think that it was a problem with the piece, as opposed to the production.
It lasted for only 30 minutes, but was meant to be 55, according to the leaflets and posters. There were several promising storylines but only one, paedophilia, was developed. All of the characters seemed to be written in the same way, and it was just so repetitive. Plus, the seats were really narrow and uncomfortable. This is coming from someone who only takes up a quarter of a bench at the Menier Chocolate Factory!
Spring Awakening *****
I had waited so long to see this, after having been denied a chance to see the West End production. All I can say is, in my opinion it is a lot better than most of the other current musicals in the West End, and I only wish more people had had the chance to see it.
Having read the original play by Wedekind, and listened to the cast recording, I was very familiar with the story, however nothing could have prepared me for the sheer scale of the energy and emotion in the production. By the closing scene I was in tears - it was probably the most moving experience that I have ever had at the theatre.
The score was sensational. Reminiscent of Rent, it is of course a rock musical. The setting of the play has been moved from the late 1800s in Germany to America, but this does nothing to hinder the story. The set is simple, yet complements every scene perfectly. The choreography fit the music perfectly, and the direction was something special - the idea of the young characters using handheld mikes when singing to convey how isolated and bereft of knowledge they are is incredibly effective.
The cast were all amazing. They managed to shine as individuals whilst being one of the best ensembles I have ever seen. Overall, I really hope that Spring Awakening gets another chance to be succesful in London. I think if the show were marketed correctly, and the tickets were not £55 for a decent view, as they were in the West End, then it would be incredibly succesful. We need to find a way of giving people the courage to try something new, instead of opting for what can almost be considered "a brand".
I'm now really tired, especially after almost twelve hours in the car today, and I want to try to get an early night before GCSE results tomorrow. I'll write my other two reviews tomorrow, possibly before I go to school?
First of all, there was a signed photo from Gavin Creel, who is currently playing Claude in "Hair" in the West End. It's so personal, because there are not only little doodles on the back of the headshot, but also a little note, since I sent the letter in April four days after the run began. Gavin is one of my favourite performers (ever since I saw him in Mary Poppins when I was thirteen) , and I was so happy to receive the autograph.
Secondly, my Entry Pass membership card from the National Theatre arrrived. This was a bit annoying, because I brought a ticket for "The Habit of Art" the day before going on holiday for £16.50. At least now it gives me an excuse to see loads more plays at the National, because the tickets will cost me just £5. I really like the look of Hamlet, or Danton's Death, but I don't think I'll have time to see the latter.
Now I've finished being excited about the post, I might actually start writing my Edinburgh reviews. I just made notes after the show, so I could remember things to write them properly now. These are short reviews, much shorter than my normal ones, but I hope they're good!
Shakespeare For Breakfast, C Venues, ****
I actually thought the promotional material was joking when I read that audience members would be provided with a free croissant and cup of coffee. So you can imagine my reaction when I arrived to find a croissant on my feet. There was a croissant on every seat, as a matter of fact, and there was a rather clever joke about this in the production. It made me wish that I hadn't eaten one at the hotel for breakfast.
This years production was a re-telling of "King Lear", using the concept of as many reality TV shows as possible. I didn't really know what to expect, although part of me was a little disapointed that it wasn't a Shakespearean answer to "Forbidden Broadway". However, it was a highly amusing if a little repetitive production. Yes, some of the humour was a little too obvious, but innovative and interactive staging compensated for this. I would definitely go back and see another Shakespeare for Breakfast, for not only was it a great way to start the day, but I can now impress my new English teachers with my "in-depth knowledge" of "King Lear". Only joking, I'm actually going to try and buy the play text on Wednesday.
Down the Rabbit Hole, C Venues, *1/2
I was really looking forward to this, and I can officially say that it has to be the biggest disapointment of my life. Actually, "Wicked" was the definitive biggest disapointment, but this is definitely second to that.
It was not the fault of the cast, who all had great energy, body language and delivery. It was not the fault of the director, or the set designer, either. I think that it was a problem with the piece, as opposed to the production.
It lasted for only 30 minutes, but was meant to be 55, according to the leaflets and posters. There were several promising storylines but only one, paedophilia, was developed. All of the characters seemed to be written in the same way, and it was just so repetitive. Plus, the seats were really narrow and uncomfortable. This is coming from someone who only takes up a quarter of a bench at the Menier Chocolate Factory!
Spring Awakening *****
I had waited so long to see this, after having been denied a chance to see the West End production. All I can say is, in my opinion it is a lot better than most of the other current musicals in the West End, and I only wish more people had had the chance to see it.
Having read the original play by Wedekind, and listened to the cast recording, I was very familiar with the story, however nothing could have prepared me for the sheer scale of the energy and emotion in the production. By the closing scene I was in tears - it was probably the most moving experience that I have ever had at the theatre.
The score was sensational. Reminiscent of Rent, it is of course a rock musical. The setting of the play has been moved from the late 1800s in Germany to America, but this does nothing to hinder the story. The set is simple, yet complements every scene perfectly. The choreography fit the music perfectly, and the direction was something special - the idea of the young characters using handheld mikes when singing to convey how isolated and bereft of knowledge they are is incredibly effective.
The cast were all amazing. They managed to shine as individuals whilst being one of the best ensembles I have ever seen. Overall, I really hope that Spring Awakening gets another chance to be succesful in London. I think if the show were marketed correctly, and the tickets were not £55 for a decent view, as they were in the West End, then it would be incredibly succesful. We need to find a way of giving people the courage to try something new, instead of opting for what can almost be considered "a brand".
I'm now really tired, especially after almost twelve hours in the car today, and I want to try to get an early night before GCSE results tomorrow. I'll write my other two reviews tomorrow, possibly before I go to school?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)