5,593 posts
|
Post by lynette on Sept 30, 2018 13:44:52 GMT
The very best part cut, I mean one of the very best bits in all the canon when a guy refuses to bow to authority and they can do nothing about it. Shows up the hollowness of all totalitarian regimes in a farcical way and creates a wonderful moment. Oh well. I always say Shakespeare can take everything chucked at him.
|
|
|
Post by Boob on Sept 30, 2018 14:19:55 GMT
wannabedirector - are you Josie Rourke?
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Sept 30, 2018 14:22:47 GMT
Barnadine doesn't appear in the cast list - so I suspect that plot line has gone in order to get to 90 minutes Oh. That is one of my favourite characters.
|
|
2,706 posts
|
Post by Cardinal Pirelli on Sept 30, 2018 15:06:46 GMT
Wish I'd booked now. Comparing productions is always interesting and here you get to do it at the same performance.
|
|
1,189 posts
|
Post by theatrelover123 on Sept 30, 2018 16:00:10 GMT
They do the play twice? The whole play? Please clarify. Ta Yeah, in a revised, probably hugely cut, 90 minute version. Then the roles swap and the play is performed again but in modern dress. So is it each Act 90 minutes? Making the whole thing about 3 hours 15?
|
|
|
Post by wannabedirector on Sept 30, 2018 17:22:47 GMT
wannabedirector - are you Josie Rourke? Haha I wish!
|
|
|
Post by wannabedirector on Sept 30, 2018 17:24:05 GMT
Yeah, in a revised, probably hugely cut, 90 minute version. Then the roles swap and the play is performed again but in modern dress. So is it each Act 90 minutes? Making the whole thing about 3 hours 15? Yep exactly, came to a little bit less then that yesterday, was out by 10:35 ish so each act is a tiny bit less then 90 minutes. The signs in the foyer said 3 hours 10 minutes including interval but that seems a little generous.
|
|
1,189 posts
|
Post by theatrelover123 on Sept 30, 2018 17:30:53 GMT
So is it each Act 90 minutes? Making the whole thing about 3 hours 15? Yep exactly, came to a little bit less then that yesterday, was out by 10:35 ish so each act is a tiny bit less then 90 minutes. The signs in the foyer said 3 hours 10 minutes including interval but that seems a little generous. Oh there's just no need for that
|
|
186 posts
|
Post by argon on Sept 30, 2018 21:05:46 GMT
The entire play is retold again, which I didn’t find repetitive at all, although I can see that some might see it that way. I saw it that way, I had a thought I was in Punxsutawney minus Bill Murray. I would have preferred to have seen the second version ( H Atwell plays the Deputy) but as a full version of the play.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 3, 2018 23:33:06 GMT
I saw this on Monday
And left at the interval
Jack Lowden was horrific
The text is so truncated it’s ridiculous
Hayley Atwell is good
Everyone else in it is a no one in terms of both reputation and acting talent
The staging is dull
I much preferred
The M4M
At Young Vic And the all time best Complicite at the NT
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 4, 2018 0:03:49 GMT
Had never seen Measure for Measure before, now I’ve seen it twice in one evening! The characters of Angelo and Isabella switch roles just before the interval, the names of their characters remain Angelo and Isabella, the characters just trade places with Isabella becoming the deputy and Angelo the novice. The entire play is retold again, which I didn’t find repetitive at all, although I can see that some might see it that way. Admittely, I sighed when I first saw period dress, but I really enjoyed the first retelling in its original genders, but I much more enjoyed the modern dress second half. I don’t know if this is because I now knew the play better, whether they were better suited to their characters in the second half or that I’m just more inclined to modern dress. Either way, both Atwell and Lowden brought different things to both their characters, something that I found interesting, in that the second half with Atwell as the deputy felt in ways more about sexual tension than the Lowden deputy, which for me felt more about exerting power rather than pure lust and desire. I found it also was a very thought provoking piece for me, especially in the wake of the Kavanaugh testimony in the US earlier this week. It seems to be a true Me Too play, despite the fact Shakespeare wrote it as a comedy more than four hundred years ago. I honestly thought the entire thing was great, and although the gender swap can be seen as a bit of a gimmick I think it worked really well and you learnt a lot about the characters by doing it this way. Atwell and Lowden give strong performances, as do the rest of the cast. I’d strongly recommend if you can get tickets, it’s a very good piece of theatre. Amazing how opinions can vary I thought it was one of the most poorly cast Shakespeare plays I have ever seen Not helped by being hacked apart And at under 80 mins There is nothing for anyone to develop character wise
|
|
|
Post by ATK on Oct 8, 2018 11:14:47 GMT
Can someone who’s seen it please say which side of the theatre the blocking favours? Donmar shows always seem to have actors facing one side of the stage far more than the other, so seating on the sides is a real gamble.
|
|
5,593 posts
|
Post by lynette on Oct 8, 2018 12:38:42 GMT
80 minutes? I thought it was 90. Can you confirm P, ta
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 8, 2018 12:42:47 GMT
The website says that the running time is 2 hours and 40 minutes including a 15-minute interval. I will be there tonight. I shall confirm later.
In honour of the switching gimmick, I shall have a glass of white wine before the show and change to a glass of red wine for the interval. Yes, I mix. That's just how I roll.
|
|
1,848 posts
|
Post by NeilVHughes on Oct 8, 2018 12:50:46 GMT
@ryan two glasses of wine at the Donmar!
Pushing the boat out for a Monday, still recovering from the price shock of ordering a large Red earlier in the year.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 8, 2018 16:46:10 GMT
The website says that the running time is 2 hours and 40 minutes including a 15-minute interval. I will be there tonight. I shall confirm later. In honour of the switching gimmick, I shall have a glass of white wine before the show and change to a glass of red wine for the interval. Yes, I mix. That's just how I roll. So very method of you ... going all in!
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 8, 2018 17:21:56 GMT
So very method of you ... going all in! Always. In fact, that reminds me of a summer I once spent at Lambeth Palace as an intern. Golden days . . . .
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 8, 2018 18:12:15 GMT
80 minutes? I thought it was 90. Can you confirm P, ta Signs say 80 minutes then a 15 minute interval then 70 minutes.
|
|
5,593 posts
|
Post by lynette on Oct 8, 2018 20:57:57 GMT
Thank you Ryan.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 8, 2018 22:09:39 GMT
Yup. Out by about 10:10. Or 22:10 if you want to get all naval about it. Although to be fair you could quite easily skip the second half and be out by 20:50.
|
|
4,038 posts
|
Post by kathryn on Oct 9, 2018 8:59:38 GMT
Oh dear. I'm taking my Mum to this! Oh well, I guess she's she's seen enough good stuff now that a dud production won't put her off for life....
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 9, 2018 9:43:35 GMT
Well. I rather enjoyed the first half. It's all tights and velvet shorts and zips by in about 80 minutes. That should be a requirement for all Shakespeare plays from now on. I could have quite easily done without going through the entire thing again in the second half in modern dress though. It was like being in a Shakespeare induced Groundhog Day. I can see what they were trying to do and the audience does react differently to the same thing being said or done by a man and a woman however I thought it was all a bit cack handed and so obviously played/directed so that you would react more favourably when Isabella was the corrupt official rather than Angelo. However Hayley Attwell was rather lovely I thought and there's a fabulous bit towards the end of the first act when {Extremely Lowden & Incredibly Close} . . the Duke makes his proposal to Isabella and she approaches him and screams. It's lit like a scene from a horror film and it gave my goosebumps goosebumps . . It was the best bit in the whole show. Jack Lowden was great in the first act with his man bun and his tights, all villain-like stroking his beard, not playing for sympathy (which Hayley does when she becomes the official in the second act) but wasn't so successful in the second act. Mainly because they made him play Angelo as a weak-willed coke addict who spends all of his time clapping his hands when they aren't stuffed into his skinny jeans pockets. His tattoos were especially shiny too. I think they were transfers. Jackie Clune makes the most of walking across the stage and sitting at the back and there's some lovely Tom Dixon-esque lights on show too. Still could have done without the second half though.
|
|
|
Post by asfound on Oct 9, 2018 9:53:26 GMT
(however I thought it was all a bit cack handed and so obviously played/directed so that you would react more favourably when Isabella was the corrupt official rather than Angelo). This was bang on my main issue with it. I don't think you can really call it a commentary or subversion on gender roles and expectations when they are playing the same roles so completely and obviously differently. It was all getting very dull about a third of the way through the second half, I would have left if I wasn't near the middle of a row. I would much rather have seen a more fleshed out, unabridged first half to be honest.
|
|
1,848 posts
|
Post by NeilVHughes on Oct 12, 2018 22:05:12 GMT
Excellent traditional rendition, the plight of Isabella rightfully prescient.
A pointless modern gender swapped rendition, which is the point, the plight of Angelo is ridiculous due to our continued bias to the traditional therefore expected male sexual behaviour.
I’m sure nearly every man in the Donmar would not have had second thoughts in accepting Isabella’s proposition, or maybe it was just me.
|
|
2,349 posts
|
Post by zahidf on Oct 12, 2018 22:22:24 GMT
Hmmm. I may just see the first act then tomorrow
|
|
966 posts
|
Post by alicechallice on Oct 12, 2018 23:55:46 GMT
I’m sure nearly every man in the Donmar would not have had second thoughts in accepting Isabella’s proposition, or maybe it was just me. When she's Hayley or when she's Jack?
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Oct 22, 2018 22:26:45 GMT
I quite liked this. The Primary School Version first with half the lines cut leaving only the plot but that meant one or two points were very clearly highlighted, then an even shorter gender-swapped version. The gender swapping didn’t change much for me, the play was still the play with the same themes, but it highlighted one or two things, for example making the bed trick even more dubious than it is already.
|
|
5,593 posts
|
Post by lynette on Oct 24, 2018 21:55:09 GMT
I liked this too! I was pleasantly surprised that the two version version didn’t irritate me. I would like to have seen much more of the bawds who were terrific in both parts. Loved them. It certainly highlights that power is problematic.
|
|
4,038 posts
|
Post by kathryn on Oct 27, 2018 20:34:21 GMT
Oh Monkey, did we miss you? Was there this afternoon and also saw medallion hit the floor - it looked like the prop broke rather than the deliberate book-drop.
I was rather surprised, after hearing so many complaints about the modern take, by how well I thought it worked. You really do have to take it as one piece instead of 2 separate versions - the first half could be taken as a stand-alone but the second is cannily cut and directed and couldn’t really work as a stand-alone. It is very much in conversation with the the first half. I liked the different nuances in performance that the modern setting brought out - particularly from the Duke.
What this production really brings out - primarily through the way it has been cut - is that the Duke is the one with the power, and in some respects whether it is Angelo or Isabel being corrupted by their new-found role is irrelevant. The rot starts from the head, and it is the Duke who is cruelly pulling everyone’s strings - with no self-examination or awareness of how he is abusing his power, and no remorse. Is Angelo any more likely to be happily married to Mariana than Isabel is to Frederick? They are both forced marriages, and the bed-trick involves very dubious consent from them.
Having said that, I thought Hayley Atwell and Jack Lowden were both rather wonderful in their dual roles.
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Oct 28, 2018 9:16:30 GMT
What this production really brings out - primarily through the way it has been cut - is that the Duke is the one with the power, and in some respects whether it is Angelo or Isabel being corrupted by their new-found role is irrelevant. The rot starts from the head, and it is the Duke who is cruelly pulling everyone’s strings - with no self-examination or awareness of how he is abusing his power, and no remorse. Is Angelo any more likely to be happily married to Mariana than Isabel is to Frederick? They are both forced marriages, and the bed-trick involves very dubious consent from them. One thing the cutting also brings out very clearly (which is sometimes a bit opaque) is that early on we are told the Duke's motivation for leaving: he has allowed Vienna to become corrupt and has been complicit in it - he's part of the problem. Because of this he's sub-contracting the clean-up to Angelo who is the one person who seems not to have been corrupted. By the end when the Duke sees it hasn't worked he just reverts to type. The low-life scenes (heavily cut here) running in parallel show that in fact the Duke is as much of a bawd and a pander as Lucio.
|
|