137 posts
|
Post by jason71 on Oct 9, 2016 8:55:03 GMT
This opened a couple of days ago. Has anybody seen it yet?
|
|
39 posts
|
Post by cropley on Oct 10, 2016 20:55:11 GMT
|
|
441 posts
|
Post by theatreliker on Oct 10, 2016 21:58:47 GMT
|
|
39 posts
|
Post by cropley on Oct 10, 2016 22:03:47 GMT
|
|
39 posts
|
Post by cropley on Oct 10, 2016 22:05:05 GMT
Don't know why it's not working
|
|
4,799 posts
|
Post by The Matthew on Oct 11, 2016 5:00:06 GMT
It looks like a botched click-tracking framework. Copy the text (not the link) and paste it into the address field of your browser.
|
|
39 posts
|
Post by cropley on Oct 11, 2016 6:18:33 GMT
|
|
39 posts
|
Post by cropley on Oct 11, 2016 6:19:03 GMT
Oh I give up. You can all look yourselves on Time Out
|
|
4,799 posts
|
Post by The Matthew on Oct 11, 2016 6:27:13 GMT
I meant: everyone else copy the text and paste it. ProBoards is changing the link to use its own link-tracker and it isn't working. http://www.timeout.com/london/theatre/oil
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 11, 2016 7:46:39 GMT
'......and the award for Most Riverting Thread goes to....'
|
|
1,465 posts
|
Post by foxa on Oct 11, 2016 7:48:35 GMT
Ugh - the readers' preview reviews are pretty damning (out of 4 reviews two said they walked out and only one gave it as high as 3 stars.) I'm going to see this on Saturday - rather wish I wasn't as I'm going with someone who gets very exasperated if they don't like the play. But maybe it will miraculously improve - I rather like the epic idea of it (it apparently bravely skips centuries) and there is a good cast. I'm wondering if it will be a bit of a 'Blurred Lines' experiment (which I quite liked but divided opinions.)
|
|
|
Post by Honoured Guest on Oct 11, 2016 8:17:51 GMT
Gas
|
|
923 posts
|
Post by Snciole on Oct 11, 2016 10:23:39 GMT
Ugh - the readers' preview reviews are pretty damning (out of 4 reviews two said they walked out and only one gave it as high as 3 stars.) I'm going to see this on Saturday - rather wish I wasn't as I'm going with someone who gets very exasperated if they don't like the play. But maybe it will miraculously improve - I rather like the epic idea of it (it apparently bravely skips centuries) and there is a good cast. I'm wondering if it will be a bit of a 'Blurred Lines' experiment (which I quite liked but divided opinions.) I am going on Saturday too (alone so I can just sigh at myself when it is terrible) I am going for Duff but she's made some weird theatre choices recently, which is a shame because she is usually the strongest link in weak plays.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 11, 2016 10:58:54 GMT
Oil be going to see it next week.
I thank you.
|
|
1,465 posts
|
Post by foxa on Oct 11, 2016 13:47:18 GMT
Ugh - the readers' preview reviews are pretty damning (out of 4 reviews two said they walked out and only one gave it as high as 3 stars.) I'm going to see this on Saturday - rather wish I wasn't as I'm going with someone who gets very exasperated if they don't like the play. But maybe it will miraculously improve - I rather like the epic idea of it (it apparently bravely skips centuries) and there is a good cast. I'm wondering if it will be a bit of a 'Blurred Lines' experiment (which I quite liked but divided opinions.) I am going on Saturday too (alone so I can just sigh at myself when it is terrible) I am going for Duff but she's made some weird theatre choices recently, which is a shame because she is usually the strongest link in weak plays. Snicole - I'll try to remember to wear my TB badge so if you see me please come and say hello. I'll be with the man who looks like he'd rather be at home reading a history book. Can't miss us.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 11, 2016 18:47:31 GMT
I am also going this Saturday and am looking forward to this even if it has currently got mixed opinions. A thing I would like to add is I have just got a nice informative email from Almeida about my visit which I have personally not go from other theatres that much. It is a nice addition and mentions price of programmes, where it ias and food and drink.
|
|
1,465 posts
|
Post by foxa on Oct 12, 2016 7:44:54 GMT
OMG - I actually had a dream about the play last night - I dreamt we were late getting back from the interval but when we arrived back in the auditorium all the rest of the audience was dressed in harlequin outfits. So on Saturday night robadog and snicole beware!
|
|
1,465 posts
|
Post by foxa on Oct 12, 2016 7:46:02 GMT
I hasten to add I have not seen this play just in case anyone browsing through this thread thinks that the above post is an actual review. ;-)
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 12, 2016 17:50:40 GMT
Ginger usher is on tonight
Lovely deep voice
Regarding the play Odd
Something not right
A 1900 start
For a show that's 2H 40M
With a first half of 90M Interval of 20M
Leaving only 40M
Evidently this was envisaged as something much more ambitious and things didn't quite work out
|
|
137 posts
|
Post by jason71 on Oct 12, 2016 19:42:27 GMT
I wonder what happened to the *epic* play
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 12, 2016 20:57:25 GMT
I wonder what happened to the *epic* play It's amazing The best new play I have seen for years Clever In the vein of Chimerica Earthquakes in London Etc. Wonderful A proper ambitious story Please see it Ignore Time Out posters comments It's a free magazine made with recycled paper Not worth even wiping your bum with And I doubt serious arts patrons refer to it
|
|
721 posts
|
Post by Latecomer on Oct 12, 2016 21:02:06 GMT
I wonder what happened to the *epic* play It's amazing The best new play I have seen for years Clever In the vein of Chimerica Earthquakes in London Etc. Wonderful A proper ambitious story Please see it Ignore Time Out posters comments It's a free magazine made with recycled paper Not worth even wiping your bum with And I doubt serious arts patrons refer to it Excellent, due to see it soon and loved Chimerica and Earthquakes in London!
|
|
2,389 posts
|
Post by peggs on Oct 12, 2016 21:32:36 GMT
It's amazing The best new play I have seen for years Clever In the vein of Chimerica Earthquakes in London Etc. Wonderful A proper ambitious story Please see it Ignore Time Out posters comments It's a free magazine made with recycled paper Not worth even wiping your bum with And I doubt serious arts patrons refer to it Oh Parsley and I was just starting to feel better about the potential threat of working meaning I couldn't use the ticket I have and now I have to see it to see what you liked!
|
|
1,465 posts
|
Post by foxa on Oct 12, 2016 21:46:12 GMT
I liked 'Earthquakes' so fingers crossed for Saturday night - thanks for the update, Parsley.
|
|
103 posts
|
Post by sondheimhats on Oct 12, 2016 22:39:03 GMT
Saw it tonight with my university class, and it produced a lot of divided opinions. Probably 2/3 of us loved it and the other 1/3 hated it (a rough estimate). It's occasionally messy and occasionally preachy, and in general the 1st half is stronger than the 2nd, but I can forgive all of that because I found it be incredibly fascinating and mostly very well-done. Anne-Marie Duff does an excellent job, as does the whole cast. This show definitely won't be for everyone, but for what it's worth, I think it was great.
|
|
|
Post by Honoured Guest on Oct 13, 2016 9:12:37 GMT
This show definitely won't be for everyone, but for what it's worth, I think it was great. Janice? Oil give it foive.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 15, 2016 22:16:32 GMT
Just got back from this evenings perforemance and I can say I really enjoyed it. This was clever and a great new piece. I really liked the sound design and the way the actors were at the side of the stage and how it was just all put together. All the performances especially Duffs and Kettles were great , just check this play out.
|
|
983 posts
|
Post by nash16 on Oct 15, 2016 22:20:29 GMT
Saw this last night. Disappointed as it seemed to be the same issue highlighted, and then put on repeat in seemingly random time periods, including those future in the second half. Anne Marie Duff is always watchable but she is, as someone else pointed out, making duff choices recently. Cracknell throws everything at it with Mortimer design wise, but it's like Drink It In The Congo: we get the message early on, go somewhere with it: neither play does.
|
|
1,465 posts
|
Post by foxa on Oct 16, 2016 9:28:52 GMT
My opinion is probably influenced by my companion who announced it 'one of the most irritating plays I've ever seen.'
As Nash16 says the first half is set in the past (1880s, 1908, 1970s) and the second half in the future. I found the first two scenes intriguing and unpredictable. The first scene is lit almost entirely by candle light. From Row H in the stalls it was quite murky and I would imagine the back of the circle it would really be hard to watch. But they created another world and a cold inhospitable environment. The second scene had that awkward thing of an adult playing a young child, but once you got over that, it was an interesting situation - a young wayward woman in Iran with her child looking for adventure - and I particularly liked Anne-Marie Duff in that scene. The third scene lost me entirely - I thought it was ghastly with some really poor attempts at humour (at least I think that's what that on table sex scene was.) At the interval I heard the man in front of me say ,'Well the jury's out. It may be one of those plays where it all comes together in the second half.' The second half began with a weak scene but the last one was, to me, fascinating - I love that sort of dystopian stuff.
My disgruntled companion said: 'Really, really mediocre acting. At least you could see the third scene. Very preachy. Pretentious.' He does have a point on the pretentious stuff - I thought I might like the mic interludes/narration but actually laughed at the 'A woman is on a plan, fly fly fly fly, a stewardess offers her an iced drink as an unmanned airplane drops bombs below' etc. Ditto the dialogue lines 'You're alone' 'But alive.'
The takeaway for me: Our dependency on oil is understandable (established in first scene) but destructive and the playwright aligns this with a woman's need for freedom (not sure I entirely got this connection.)
Last night it was two hours forty including a 20 minute interval (7 p.m. start out at 9.40.)
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 24, 2016 9:07:10 GMT
Oh Anne-Marie. Such a lovely, intelligent, watchable actress but this is a bit . . what's the word? . . . frustrating. The first half is much better than the second and yes, it has an ambition to it but some of it is just so clunky. Although at least the microphone narration between scenes keep you entertained because they're so cringingly awful. I also thought the third scene (set in the 70s) was an outtake from 'Jumpy' and half expected Tamsin Grieg to jump on stage and whip the scene away from AMD. I think it goes downhill massively in the second half. Like foxa above, I'm not sure I quite got the connection between the dependency on oil and a woman's need for freedom because some of it was just so incoherent at times and then at others it was nicely done, I think the scale of what the writer wanted to do just couldn't be translated to the page or the stage. If the author had just focused on one I think she could have created an interesting play but it seemed like her need to stick the two together by hook or by crook meant that some of it just didn't really work for me.
AMD was marvellous though and she really does have a wonderful charisma and presence on stage, I think she'll continue to be one of our most interesting stage actresses. I found Yolanda Kettle as the various daughters to be different degrees of cliche though.
My spirits almost lifted towards the end when AMD and Kettle put on fat suits and I thought we were either going to get some sumo wrestling or a tribute to French & Saunders' fat old men but also no. The play just goes on. And on.
|
|