|
Post by Jan on Feb 5, 2024 16:57:58 GMT
I think they're speculating that Kwame might be stepping down as AD. I don’t ever think he found his footing For a start there have been huge gaps in programming and I don’t know why this has been the case There used to be a good and regular schedule in the Main House as well as Maria and The Clare with a wide variety of shows The plays which have been staged during his tenure have been received coolly at best I think personally the current AD is distracted with political sentiment and posturing rather than showcasing quality work I used to go a lot during the David Lan era but Kwame totally changed the programming and I've only been once during his entire reign - I'm not the sort of audience he was aiming for and that's fine. But I get the impression he's been trying to programme in a bit more broadly popular way more recently - maybe due to commercial constraints - and the recent Pinter tempted me back. On Romola Garai, having read the backstage story on the McKellen "King Lear" and her antics in that company it doesn't particularly surprise me she's bailed on this one if something better came along. Obviously if it is due to illness (which they might not disclose) I'm doing her an injustice.
|
|
|
Post by matildaswinton on Feb 5, 2024 19:33:12 GMT
I don’t know anything about her behavior in previous work, but I saw her in Indian Ink in New York about 10 years ago and thought she was excellent. Was looking forward to a new stage role for her! Still, excited to go considering the rest of those involved.
I do have my 1st preview tickets still up for grabs on the notice board, at a great price. I have already rebooked for a later date.
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Feb 6, 2024 14:32:57 GMT
BTW if Kwame is stepping down they should do whatever it takes to replace him with Robert Icke.
|
|
|
Post by partytentdown on Feb 20, 2024 13:32:49 GMT
If anyone goes to this in the next few days, please can you post the running time? Thanks
|
|
|
Post by jamiet on Feb 20, 2024 13:51:28 GMT
On the pre-show information it says 1h40 no interval.
|
|
|
Post by partytentdown on Feb 20, 2024 14:34:24 GMT
On the pre-show information it says 1h40 no interval. Thanks!
|
|
1,187 posts
|
Post by theatrelover123 on Feb 20, 2024 21:41:07 GMT
Saw this tonight. 100 mins bang on.
|
|
4,448 posts
|
Post by Being Alive on Feb 20, 2024 22:16:01 GMT
Thought it was pretty good as well.
Not the play I was expecting but a very enjoyable and thought provoking one nonetheless.
All cast very strong - laughs and drama done equally well.
Strong 3 for now, 4 once they've had a bit more time.
|
|
1,187 posts
|
Post by theatrelover123 on Feb 20, 2024 22:19:10 GMT
Enjoyed it. Good cast. Play funny and interesting in places. Strong opening night. My only gripes were that there were a few too many absurdist/unexplained/boundary pushing parts that jarred. I felt like they should have gone all the way or cut them.
|
|
986 posts
|
Post by nash16 on Feb 20, 2024 23:29:28 GMT
BTW if Kwame is stepping down they should do whatever it takes to replace him with Robert Icke. They definitely won’t want to do that.
|
|
986 posts
|
Post by nash16 on Feb 20, 2024 23:30:06 GMT
Saw this tonight. 100 mins bang on. Thank you for this. Going Saturday night, but was worried how late it was going to go.
|
|
4,448 posts
|
Post by Being Alive on Feb 20, 2024 23:34:34 GMT
BTW if Kwame is stepping down they should do whatever it takes to replace him with Robert Icke. They definitely won’t want to do that. Please for the love of god don't do this.
|
|
748 posts
|
Post by rumbledoll on Feb 21, 2024 6:08:35 GMT
BTW if Kwame is stepping down they should do whatever it takes to replace him with Robert Icke. Oh wouldn’t it be quite something! I’d probably need to move to London for that I’d take Icke in any form and shape but I am not sure he would want to be an Artistic Director.. Maybe I’m wrong.
|
|
|
Post by raiseitup on Feb 21, 2024 9:30:21 GMT
I'm afraid I didn't get on with this so well last night. I thought the concept was an interesting one but found the script lacking, the constant breaking of the fourth wall unbearable, the absurdist elements totally unwarranted and its arguments well-trod and delivered more like a Ted Talk than a play.
|
|
|
Post by ThereWillBeSun on Feb 23, 2024 9:15:53 GMT
@jan : I saw that King Lear had no idea there were issues! I saw Romala in The Writer and thought she was brill. I was tempted by this play but I have to be a lot more picky with shows now...
|
|
3,070 posts
|
Post by Rory on Feb 23, 2024 9:27:24 GMT
Not much early buzz or feedback on this, surprisingly.
|
|
986 posts
|
Post by nash16 on Feb 23, 2024 10:30:22 GMT
Not much early buzz or feedback on this, surprisingly. Angus Wright. Black slashed boxer briefs sole attire. Nightclub scene. It’s getting hard to move past and write about the rest of the play given that all three elements listed above happen at the same time on the Young Vic stage in this. The rest of the play is 1hr 40minutes of arguing & a mix of marriages and rebound relationships that are all illogical. The sympathy of the play lies heavily, and sadly only, with one character, which makes it a play we’ve seen countless times before. Even if the initial debate is fun.
|
|
|
Post by partytentdown on Feb 23, 2024 11:11:11 GMT
I have to admit this slightly lost me last night. There was an interesting debate about art Vs artist buried in quite a lot of surreal nonsense that went over my head. I guess the fact it's translated also added to the slightly stilted feeling of the script. I came out more baffled than satisfied but maybe that's the point. One man in the balcony guffawed loudly after almost every line as if to remind us that he understood what was going on.
|
|
|
Post by wannabedirector on Feb 23, 2024 12:11:57 GMT
I saw the first preview on Tuesday and my overwhelming thought was that this is Brandon Jacobs-Jenkins’ “Appropriate” but recast to Germany (and with a much more on the nose inciting incident) and played for laughs. The tone is confused, only added to by some of the textual and directorial choices, in lighting, music, movement. So many muddled messages in there that not one sticks. Still, it’s a wild, crazy evening.
|
|
1,197 posts
|
Post by Steve on Feb 24, 2024 23:37:23 GMT
Still, it’s a wild, crazy evening. I love that line! That's why I loved this tonight, because it's a "wild and crazy evening" where I had no idea where it was going, my eyes popping, teeth gritted, the non-realistic mysterious bits rubbing up chaotically against the grubby materialist provocative comedy bits to make a proper theatrical experience, all acted by a fantastic cast. Some spoilers follow. . . This is like Macbeth's witches brewed a play that mixes Yasmina Reza's consideration of the subjective value of Art in "Art," Lilian Hellman's consideration of the power of greed in "The Little Foxes," with a bit of Brecht and a pinch of Hitler. Obviously, it's the pinch of Hitler that rankles. . . On the "MJ the Musical" thread, we've been fretting about how much we do or don't care that MJ (who can't personally benefit from our ticket money) may have done some very bad things, even though his music is a glorious dance party. Similarly, do we care that the most impressive sequence in "Apocalypse Now," uses the grand, frightening and astonishing "Ride of the Valkyries" by Wagner, a massive antisemite, or is it ok cos he's dead? Well, Hitler's dead too, and his art isn't as good as Wagner's, so his art is the apotheosis of cases involving whether art is tainted by the evil of its creator, and the set-up in this play is that the painting Daddy left John Heffernan's Philipp and Dorothea Myer-Bennett's Nicola might be by Hitler, and certain buyers might pay a premium for the Hitler name. To sell or not to sell? Are the buyers suckers whose money it's ok to take, or are you tainted by evil for taking the money? There are lots of twists and turns as the other characters push and pull the owners of the painting in lots of ways, and it's at once very uncomfortable to watch but also great fun not knowing what's going to happen. . . At times, I worried that the distinction between stereotypical things the characters were saying, and what the playwright believes, might be crumbling (for example, like anybody else, not all Jews stereotypically believe the same things about "Palestine," or any other issue, and it's unfair to suggest otherwise), however, I think the character/playwright line ultimately stayed safely separate, despite my teeth fraying at times lol. One of my very favourite moments in the play, towards the end is very Wagnerian (gulp), both mischievous sendup and absurd homage, and it gives Heffernan, at his most hilariously banal, and Myer-Bennett, at her most frenziedly wired, a "wild and crazy" theatrical moment that made the whole play immediately unforgettable. With a steely Jenna Augen pleading passionately against the amorality of filthy lucre, Angus Wright at his most Bond-villain camp, Jane Horrocks successfully cast against type as pure evil and Gunnar Cauthery as a supremely entertaining comedy dolt, this wild and crazy evening surely deserves 4 and a half stars from me.
|
|
|
Post by greenandbrownandblue on Feb 25, 2024 9:09:41 GMT
I too was there last night. Thought it was very good indeed. The play says a lot - and yes, at times it might be a little didactic - but the arguments are clearly set out and it's incredibly topical. I looked to see when it was first announced, and it was July 2023; so before the horrific events of October 7th and the latest conflict in Gaza.
It's very funny, but there are lines which are really uncomfortable laughs - or you laugh because they're so uncomfortable.
As mentioned earlier in the thread, there are moments of expressionism/absurdism littered throughout. Most work well (and I didn't mind the fourth wall breaking), though I can't decide if the one involving Angus Wright's first appearance is a moment of genius or should be cut immediately.
Also, I would've liked a bit more of a resolution for Gunnar Cauthery's character.
But it's a brilliant, thought-provoking evening with a stellar cast and, most importantly, thoroughly enjoyable.
|
|
|
Post by alessia on Feb 27, 2024 7:08:40 GMT
One of my very favourite moments in the play, towards the end is very Wagnerian (gulp), both mischievous sendup and absurd homage, and it gives Heffernan, at his most hilariously banal, and Myer-Bennett, at her most frenziedly wired, a "wild and crazy" theatrical moment that made the whole play immediately unforgettable.
If you are referring to what I think you are, that scene had the opposite effect on me - I was enjoying the play ok up until then but that bit crossed a line for me. I had the wtf moment and my stomach turned a bit. I have no problem with absurd or crazy weird like the dance scene - I don’t know what it was about but whatever. But that scene towards the end with the siblings … a bit too much. I guess this was the point, to make the viewers deeply uncomfortable.
Was meaning to quote from Steve’s post above but my phone did weird things - don’t know how to fix sorry!!
|
|
1,465 posts
|
Post by foxa on Feb 28, 2024 14:15:34 GMT
Seeing this on Saturday.
Reviews that I've seen range from 2 to 4 stars - but at least doesn't sound boring.
|
|
4,448 posts
|
Post by Being Alive on Feb 28, 2024 16:22:25 GMT
I thought it was a solid 3 at the first preview, and would probably agree with the 4s by now as they've had a bit of time to settle
|
|
185 posts
|
Post by harry on Feb 28, 2024 17:05:02 GMT
I’m very much in the “not for me” camp. I think the play is very confused in its provocation. It seems to be about whether we can separate great art from an artist with abhorrent views… but the man we are asked to consider is not generally considered a great artist (as the play itself attests). I’d be far more interested in a play about the legacy of Wagner or Roald Dahl or one of the many other examples the play skirts over.
Or is it about the fact many humans lose any sense of morality when money is involved? But again if so there is surely a more relatable way of telling this story.
I don’t mind being prodded and provoked by ideas but this felt so far from anything grounded in truth that I just felt I was expected to laugh at unfunny “shocking” situations by a play that thought it was clever. And I don’t need literalism but I never felt I understood the rules of this world or and therefore couldn’t invest in any of the characters or their journeys.
I would say “at least it’s not boring” but I’m afraid I was rather bored (as was the person directly opposite me across the thrust stage in the front row doing the heavy eyelids… nodding dog… jerk awake routine!)
|
|
1,197 posts
|
Post by Steve on Feb 29, 2024 13:23:44 GMT
If you are referring to what I think you are, that scene had the opposite effect on me - I was enjoying the play ok up until then but that bit crossed a line for me. . . that scene towards the end with the siblings … a bit too much. I guess this was the point, to make the viewers deeply uncomfortable. Yes, that's the scene. I very much understand why you don't like it, and I'll say why I love it in spoilers:- In Wagner's Ring Cycle, his romanticism is taboo-busting, with not only the siblings, Siegmund and Sieglinde carried away with each other, but also Siegfried gets carried away with his Aunty Brunhilde. As the siblings cave into their greed for (and break their own moral taboo against accepting) antisemitic-fuelled money, they simultaneously plunge into the same taboo-busting incestuous romanticism Wagner indulged in. The suggestion the play makes is that the whole romantic movement in Western civilisation is psychologically unhinged at some level, and that seems a provocative and worthwhile thing to get audiences thinking about. It's like a little bonus easter-egg thought-provoking kick in the teeth for people who like the Ring Cycle lol. PS: As an interesting aside, Jon Snow and his Aunty Khaleesi, and the Lannister siblings, IN "Game of Thrones" all seem inspired by the Ring Cycle, and GRR Martin comes out on the side of judging their taboo-busting ways very harshly.
|
|
|
Post by alessia on Feb 29, 2024 15:50:02 GMT
Thank you! I am really bad at navigating this site so I don't know how to quote- But your response is very interesting and helpful. It definitely makes sense of that weird scene!
|
|
|
Post by vandemonium on Feb 29, 2024 18:46:57 GMT
If you are referring to what I think you are, that scene had the opposite effect on me - I was enjoying the play ok up until then but that bit crossed a line for me. . . that scene towards the end with the siblings … a bit too much. I guess this was the point, to make the viewers deeply uncomfortable. Yes, that's the scene. I very much understand why you don't like it, and I'll say why I love it in spoilers:- In Wagner's Ring Cycle, his romanticism is taboo-busting, with not only the siblings, Siegmund and Sieglinde carried away with each other, but also Siegfried gets carried away with his Aunty Brunhilde. As the siblings cave into their greed for (and break their own moral taboo against accepting) antisemitic-fuelled money, they simultaneously plunge into the same taboo-busting incestuous romanticism Wagner indulged in. The suggestion the play makes is that the whole romantic movement in Western civilisation is psychologically unhinged at some level, and that seems a provocative and worthwhile thing to get audiences thinking about. It's like a little bonus easter-egg thought-provoking kick in the teeth for people who like the Ring Cycle lol. PS: As an interesting aside, Jon Snow and his Aunty Khaleesi, and the Lannister siblings, IN "Game of Thrones" all seem inspired by the Ring Cycle, and GRR Martin comes out on the side of judging their taboo-busting ways very harshly. I saw in some reviews that there is a moment of "magical Realism" that's associated with this Wagnerian moment? Would you mind explaining that -- suitable hidden of course!!
|
|
185 posts
|
Post by harry on Feb 29, 2024 19:56:51 GMT
I saw in some reviews that there is a moment of "magical Realism" that's associated with this Wagnerian moment? Would you mind explaining that -- suitable hidden of course!! I’m not sure if this is what they meant but {Spoiler - click to view}whilst the siblings have an incestuous fumble, another character is locked in the bathroom, goes silent and when they open the door she has vanished into thin air. Whether that’s magical realism or just magic is for you to decide I guess!
|
|
|
Post by parsley1 on Feb 29, 2024 21:37:52 GMT
I can only imagine it is sheer stupidity
Or ignorance
Which made someone programme this into the main house
Most of the playwrights works have been at RC upstairs
It is not mainstream theatre
And looks and feels incredibly out of place in such a large space
Total cack handed lack of any actual theatre know how
|
|