562 posts
|
Post by jadnoop on May 10, 2019 10:33:02 GMT
The Royal Ballet's current triple bill includes Crystal Pite's fantastic Flight Pattern from a couple of years ago. If anything, it was even better than I remember it. Last time we were sat high up, and this time we splashed out for orchestra stalls tickets which I'm sure helped. The piece was moving, emotional, beautiful and the new perspective just amplified everything, providing a sense of the layers of dancers that wasn't visible from up high, and giving an overwhelming sense of scale to the sets and lighting. I'm still decompressing from this, and can't recommend it enough.
The rest of the triple bill was mixed for me: I enjoyed most of the pieces in Within the Golden Hour, but I really wasn't keen on Medusa.
|
|
562 posts
|
Post by jadnoop on May 6, 2019 21:34:24 GMT
Sadly, it feels like Game of Thrones is ending in a similar way to another recent HBO powerhouse; The Wire. By no means bad -this might be a great season in another show- but as the culmination of a fantastic decade-long story this feels a bit rushed and ultimately a little unsatisfying. For most of the previous series it's felt like characters' actions were the result of their acting on their own motivations and self interest which has made the story feel so unpredictable and exciting; this season the primary driver for many seems to be to serve the mechanics of the overall plot. Still, I'm still largely enjoying it and holding out hope that this all comes together.
|
|
562 posts
|
Post by jadnoop on May 6, 2019 15:48:17 GMT
For anyone still interested in Anna, it's worth intermittently keeping an eye out on the NT website during office hours. Tickets are very limited (even for the Dorfman), but returns do go up occasionally. I just swapped some tickets for some returns that popped up, and there were some other seats online last week.
|
|
562 posts
|
Post by jadnoop on May 6, 2019 11:42:11 GMT
If you started hanging about in real life with people with dodgy politics you’d rightly expect to be exposed to their views and propaganda. It’s just the same with the internet. If you put it out there you’ll get something back. Every action has a reaction etc. If people learned this and stopped exposing themselves to strangers, whether individuals or organisations, things would change. Sadly the genie is probably too far out of the bottle now As someone with very little social media presence, I agree with you in principle. However, I think the unfortunate reality of modern life is that it's next-to-impossible to be truly anonymous online. If you have a gmail account, use google (rather than, say, duckduckgo), use amazon, youtube, google maps, have a smart phone, etc. all these things are providing information on the type of person you are, what you like, listen to, watch, buy, where you go and the other people you're linked to. And while you might avoid actively linking these accounts, the underlying companies probably know more than you'd like because those connections are easy to make and very difficult to untangle. Still, I guess what we have to worry about is nothing compared to what the next generation will since, by-and-large most of us lived most of our lives before social media (or even the internet) became a thing.
|
|
562 posts
|
Post by jadnoop on May 6, 2019 11:04:04 GMT
I'm currently debating whether to catch this before it ends. I've heard many people say that the original production a few years ago was good and very scary. I understand that the scariness is down to sudden loud noises- is that right? Are there many of these? Sorry, just read your message, so not sure if it's too late, but here's my two cents in case you're still considering going (spoiler-free): The play has a reasonable amount of tension-building set up for each short story. This is done predominantly through a mix of the story itself, lighting, and a (great) soundscape. Whether or not you find this silly fun, a little unnerving, or outright scary is probably down to your tastes/temperament. Aside from this, yes, there are a few quiet-quiet-BANG moments that are structurally very similar to what you get in a lot of modern mainstream horror movies. If you want to know specifically how often this occurs then: You essentially get 4 of these moments; one at the end of each short story segment. Ultimately, my feeling is that if you're comfortable with a funfair ghost train ride then you'll be fine.
|
|
562 posts
|
Post by jadnoop on Apr 28, 2019 12:14:03 GMT
Saw this yesterday, and I thought it was good, but perhaps not quite great. It felt like the theatre equivalent of an Oscar contending drama: top notch acting by a starry cast, first rate set, costumes, etc but ultimately perhaps not hugely exciting.
I wish the OV website would take a different approach to content-warnings. The notes about what happens, unavoidably displayed on the site, are arguably spoilers. The Royal Court is much better on this in my opinion, giving a separate page/ phone number for audience members to be able to check for specifics if they choose to.
|
|
562 posts
|
Post by jadnoop on Apr 23, 2019 22:48:07 GMT
The ingredients were there, but I really couldn't get into this. It felt like a show carefully constructed to tick all of the quirky visual, audio, story & character cliches of modern indie cinema & tv, but missing the heart that sits within the best of those films & shows. In my opinion this got nowhere near the quiet melancholy beauty of something like Detectorists.
|
|
562 posts
|
Post by jadnoop on Apr 20, 2019 0:55:46 GMT
Does the ROH put returns back on their website? I would like to see Billy Budd and have only one possible date in mind. Yes, returns go onto the website. From what I’ve seen, returns don’t go online at a specific time (eg first thing in the morning each day), so tickets can appear online at pretty much any time during office hours. One thing I’ve noticed is that the page for the show doesn’t always seem to be in sync with the specific day ticket sales page. So, for instance the page listing all performances might say that 3 tickets are available between £X and £Y, but when you click onto the seat selection page there might be 5 tickets for sale. So if you’re limited to a single date anyway, it’s probably worth checking the specific page (eg go directly to this page www.roh.org.uk/events/37259/tickets instead of this one www.roh.org.uk/mixed-programmes/within-the-golden-hour-medusa-flight-pattern ) Also, they do Friday Rush, so that’s probably worth trying too: www.roh.org.uk/events/friday-rush
|
|
562 posts
|
Post by jadnoop on Apr 19, 2019 11:04:12 GMT
I definitely agree that lots of change needs to come from ourselves, but for what it's worth it's very unlikely that we're going to reach a point at which every home has own local generation. Certainly we're not going to reach a point at which every premises is self sufficient in the foreseeable future. Just in practical terms, the density of housing in cities means that it makes more sense in terms of space, efficiency and costs to have larger scale renewables rather than small-scale generation on every building (think, for instance, about the available physical space for PV or Solar Hot Water panels to be installed per household in blocks of flats compared with houses). The other issue is the stability of the grid: Already the mains is worried about premises selling excess electricity back to the grid. Further, as the grid becomes less carbon intensive (coal power stations > gas > renewables) then technologies that have been traditionally used other fuels are incentivised to switch to electricity (household heating and cars for instance).
Don't get me wrong, I'm not suggesting that small scale renewables isn't going to be an important part of the future, just that this can only be a part of the solution.
In terms of stuff like heating outdoors, it's absolutely true that this sort of thing is very wasteful. However, this is just a drop in the ocean and, if the aim is to have a substantial reduction in the energy we consume (and the emissions caused by that energy), then those little things can only ever be a small part of a much bigger picture. As David Mackay said about "every little helps", if everyone does a little, we achieve a little.
|
|
562 posts
|
Post by jadnoop on Apr 18, 2019 16:20:17 GMT
There's something so childishly pedantic about comments of this sort echoed through this thread. As though someone can't have a problem with climate change unless they only eat what they grow, walk everywhere, and sew their clothes out of fabric found in dumps. I mean, how can they protest climate change while sitting their and exhaling carbon dioxide, those hypocrites! I'll bet they even let out the occasional fart. And if those who take such a judgmental view on others took the same level of pedantry on themselves, I very much doubt they'd come off well. It's pretty much impossible to be a part of modern western society without some of your money going towards things you hate. I don't agree, sorry. I believe here a strong case of practise what you preach should apply, at least with the basics like bottled water. Some things we have a choice on, others we can not dictate. We can't change the chemical compound that we produce as a function of breathing, but we can change the amount of resources we use on a daily basis - and that is what this protest is about. Changing our habits in a way that could help prevent (or at least reduce) ecological destruction. I'll happily admit I'm flawed in many ways, but that doesn't stop me from having an opinion. Clearly, the comment about breathing & farting was a joke. My point is that how much you 'practice what you preach' isn't a question of absolutes. You might consider that bottled water is one of "the basics", but someone else might draw the line somewhere else. They might think that public transport, recycled clothing, buying locally grown food, or not supporting certain multi-nationals is "the basics". Neither argument is objectively wrong, not least because how much anyone is able to change their behaviour is entirely dependent on circumstances (as illustrated by kathryn ). Turning 'caring about something' into a game of one-upmanship rather than trying to engage with the topic is silly and unending, since there's always someone else who could argue that your actions to be hypocritical and unsubstantial. It brings to mind this wonderful sketch from The Simpsons
|
|
562 posts
|
Post by jadnoop on Apr 18, 2019 13:59:16 GMT
The protesters are now glued to Jeremy Corbyn's fence. Where is he now going to sit? Indeed. Spot anything rather ironic? Perhaps some environment friendly, reusable bottled water may have been a better choice for refreshment. There's something so childishly pedantic about comments of this sort echoed through this thread. As though someone can't have a problem with climate change unless they only eat what they grow, walk everywhere, and sew their clothes out of fabric found in dumps. I mean, how can they protest climate change while sitting their and exhaling carbon dioxide, those hypocrites! I'll bet they even let out the occasional fart. And if those who take such a judgmental view on others took the same level of pedantry on themselves, I very much doubt they'd come off well. It's pretty much impossible to be a part of modern western society without some of your money going towards things you hate.
|
|
562 posts
|
Post by jadnoop on Apr 16, 2019 17:24:01 GMT
Wow, I thought this triple bill was simply fantastic.
Broken Wings definitely felt a little long, but I still enjoyed it as a whole. Nora was also great too, but the standout for the night was definitely Rite of Spring: moving, exciting, unnerving, beautiful. Wow, I can't wait to see it again. And I definitely agree about the setting of the stage (putting down and levelling the soil). I felt this approach really built anticipation, and increased the feeling of ritual in a way that doing it behind a curtain simply wouldn't have.
I'm glad that ENB are bringing back Akram Khan's Giselle later in the year. Can't wait.
|
|
562 posts
|
Post by jadnoop on Apr 16, 2019 17:16:53 GMT
For those looking to go to Diary... it might be worth reading this thread in the ballet forum when choosing seats. The sightlines at the Linbury are pretty poor in places, and that thread has a decent number of responses about good & bad areas.
|
|
562 posts
|
Post by jadnoop on Apr 16, 2019 16:49:28 GMT
I have the strength in me to see religion as a sham and indeed a shameful money making exercise and nothing to do with religion and having buildings of grandeur.. You can acknowledge that climate change is an issue, and still fly. You can acknowledge that British imperialism is a problem and still go to the British Museum. You can have problems with Wagner and still listen to Wagner's Ring cycle. You can acknowledge that slavery is terrible and still accept that the pyramids are important. You can think that Scientology is bad, and still go to see Tom Cruise's new film. And you can think that the church's sexual abuse is attrocious while also acknowledging that some of their monuments are hugely important. The world is a complex place, and convincing yourself that the cultural & historical significance of a building that's centuries old can simply be boiled down to an argument of 'religion = bad' isn't a sign of 'strength'. Everyone has the point at which they draw the line, but acting as though this is simply a question of absolutes is silly.
|
|
562 posts
|
Post by jadnoop on Apr 5, 2019 11:22:03 GMT
I really love horror films, and had never seen a horror play, so I went to see Ghost Stories with pretty high expectations. In the end it was good fun, if a little disappointing. The acting was decent, and the three short stories that form the play's bulk were fun, if built around quite over-used horror tropes. The problem for me was in the wider framing. With the auditorium's dressing, and with the play opening in a brilliant, playful fourth-wall breaking way, I was hoping for, and expecting, something inventive that really played with the medium. But aside from some fantastic audio, the effects & ideas felt oddly pedestrian. Even going so far as to have a giant rubber monster fall from above with a bang. Towards the end of the play, the story shifts direction (albeit into another horror cliche), and there was a commotion at the back of the theatre as one audience member was making noise, and another grumbled at them to shut up. At that point I got excited that something really interesting might happen: something that couldn't exist in another artform. But nope, it was just a case of poor audience behaviour. Perhaps in the end the real problem is that my expectations were wrong. This isn't Rosemary's Baby or Don't Look Now, or the other 'serious' horror classics that it visually references. And it's not an ideas-driven piece that plays with the medium. Instead this is the ghost train in a funfair. There's nothing wrong with that (and like I said, ultimately I had fun), but I wanted something more unexpected. It made me jump, but it didn't make me think
|
|
562 posts
|
Post by jadnoop on Mar 30, 2019 20:47:10 GMT
Now I know it's hard to be level headed with the media whipping everyone into a frenzy but you have built up something like a conspiracy theory untroubled by facts or evidence. Tempting as it might be to join the outrage bandwagon to feel like a part of something, it's important to take a step back and be objective. Lol. The idea that this is simply an objective question of 'facts and evidence' and the way that you dismiss others' views in such a condescending manner says more about you than it does of anyone else, or the issue at hand. The reality is that, whether you consider this season as 'just another season' or as part of the last few decades at the NT isn't simply a question of objective 'facts or evidence', but a subjective reflection of how you put this season into the wider context, and how you feel about the NT's statements. Further, condescendingly suggesting that anyone worried about diversity is simply naively whipped up by the media or blindly joining some outrage is one thing. But it's inevitably those who shout "It's just one (more) all-male season, calm down, there's no conspiracy here" that are the first who can't comprehend any explanation other than tokenism/SJW or "diversity for it's own sake" whenever the stars align in a different direction. For example, your statement that "What is the purpose of having all women of colour, other than as a marketing gimmick?" in the discussion about Richard II at the Globe. If you're unable to even comprehend any possible artistic reason for such a choice, then perhaps you're not as coolly objective as you'd like to be. The demographics of the population mean precisely nothing in a niche like playwriting. Sure, except that the people who want to go into a field now are partially a reflection of the people that they saw in that field before. So the notion that fewer people in one demographic might *currently* be interested/applying to join a topic isn't in-and-of-itself proof that everything is fine. Of course, one might discuss whether or not it makes sense to have a 'goal' for the demographics of the population of every, say, career to reflect the overall population, but again that's not simply about objective 'facts or evidence' but also a question of the society that we want.
|
|
562 posts
|
Post by jadnoop on Mar 29, 2019 9:47:21 GMT
I'm not keen on price rises but, as Xanderl has said, this looks like a shift to some premium priced seats rather than a wholesale price increase across the board, which doesn't strike me as that terrible. For what it's worth, while I feel that the National should be making theatre accessible to all by keeping prices down, the other side to that coin is that the cheaper the tickets are, the more that they will require taxpayers funding. This might be fine for many of us on the board, but I can imagine that scaling the issue up to how money should be distributed across the arts as a whole (as well as other sectors) is less straight forward. In terms of the upcoming shows, I'm eagerly awaiting Annie Baker's return with Antipodes.
|
|
562 posts
|
Post by jadnoop on Mar 8, 2019 17:07:03 GMT
I thought Satyagraha in 2017/18 felt pretty packed when I went, but I didn't look for tickets or deals late in the day, so I may be mistaken.
In terms of Einstein coming to London, would the venue be affected by the direction? Phelim Mcdermott directed Satyagraha & Akhnaten, as well as a few other things at the ENO, but presumably if Einstein on the Beach returns it would be directed by Robert Wilson, so I wonder if this would lean the production towards the Barbican. Although I don't know how these collaborative relationships work in the arts, so perhaps it wouldn't be a problem...
|
|
562 posts
|
Post by jadnoop on Mar 8, 2019 2:18:00 GMT
I thought it was great too, and I'm happy that ENO have had another commercial success on their hands (although definitely agree that the foyers were just too packed). Given how successful this and Satyagraha have been, hopefully it won't be too long until Einstein on the Beach returns to London (although IIRC that's been at Barbican rather than ENO).
Regarding the tempo, this production is definitely a tad slower than the recording from 1987, but I prefer this one to be honest. It might just be that I heard it at the ENO first, but the cd just feels a little rushed by comparison. They put one of the performances from 2016 on Radio 3, so I wonder if there's any chance that a recording could be properly released some day.
|
|
562 posts
|
Post by jadnoop on Feb 28, 2019 13:45:47 GMT
I suspect that I'm in the minority here, but if we're talking about 'bad manners' then I've gotta say that finding out that theatre-goers are going multiple times strikes me as slightly unsporting, given how limited the ticket availability is for this and how many people haven't been able to go even once.
Don't get me wrong, I agree that this is a play that will benefit from multiple viewings and I suppose it's nice that those who liked it most and made the effort (or have the most disposable income and flexible work schedule) have been able to grab a second ticket. However, while the online returns give everyone a chance, I feel that it would be fairer if those who missed out on the earlier ticket sales got a second shake at the stick over those who've been already. Or perhaps that's just me feeling bitter about only going once.
Either way, in the (presumably unlikely) chance that this comes back to the NT, I hope they go with a lesser-name actress, in which case I'll be inline to see it again.
|
|
562 posts
|
Post by jadnoop on Feb 7, 2019 15:07:30 GMT
Following the 'advance members' sale this morning ANNA is now showing as completely sold out. Hopefully they've held back some seats for the public sale next week, as well as any for Friday Rush/day seats.
edit: Sorry, on further inspection it's not 100% clear. On the play page it's showing as sold out every day, but if you go to the actual individual day pages, it looks like June 6th and 12th have seats.
|
|
562 posts
|
Post by jadnoop on Jan 31, 2019 10:38:05 GMT
If you're still looking for Forza tickets, it's worth checking the production page as returns are going online sporadically already. Still not cheap, but one Kaufmann (but not Netrebko) day has a few seats again for instance.
|
|
562 posts
|
Post by jadnoop on Jan 31, 2019 10:22:18 GMT
A word of warning for those who want to see Anna, the role of listening devices during the performance seems to have resulted in a very reduced capacity and only the pit will be open. Most dates are already down to about 10-15% availability. Only the pit in the Dorfman?! Oof that's only around 150 seats per performance. I think (hope) they hold some seats back for each booking period, so when you say 10-15% availability presumably that includes any that haven't been put on sale yet.
|
|
562 posts
|
Post by jadnoop on Jan 30, 2019 10:10:18 GMT
Given the mostly negative comments I went with some trepidation but I thought it was pretty good to be honest. I wouldn't describe it as 'enjoyable', but I found it interesting, at times blackly funny, and with a dark, occasionally nightmarish atmosphere.
The tone, lighting and way that characters slid in and out of actors brought to mind David Lynch's wonderful low-fi Inland Empire. And the set balanced nicely between mundane real life (ikea furniture and Amazon delivery boxes) and absurd dream (the ever-present karaoke lights).
I'm sure that I didn't 'get' everything that was going on (and I haven't read Pamela). But I liked the layering of layering of gender/sexual relations commentary, with what could be the psycho-sexual roleplay of an upper middle class, right-leaning couple. For me, while it was initially jarring, the overly artificial staging and use of mics fit the theatricality of the play. Especially the wonderfully meta moments, such as Blanchett debating whether or not her thoughts & actions are controlled by a man: meaning Dillane but also Crimp.
All in all, while it felt 30 minutes too long, I'm really happy to have gone. If it wouldn't be unfair on those that couldn't go even once I think I'd try to get a ticket to go again.
Incidentally, I spoke with the box office and they said that the online sales of the last few days were because of higher-than-expected levels of returns. In future online vs in-person only returns sales will be done on an ad-hoc basis.
|
|
562 posts
|
Post by jadnoop on Jan 29, 2019 18:39:43 GMT
Does Mamet direct theatre regularly? I found most of his self-directed movies aesthetically supremely dull, but perhaps on the stage his simplistic style might work better.
|
|
562 posts
|
Post by jadnoop on Jan 29, 2019 13:17:47 GMT
"I mean, does this mean that anyone looking for tickets should be refreshing the site whenever possible during working hours on the off chance that a few tickets become available?" Yes. That is how you get tickets for any sold out production. Why should this be different? Because they explicitly said that they wouldn't do that for this play. And then they decided, without telling anyone, to go ahead and do it anyway. I mean, as it stands we don't even know if they are intending to continue with online retuns sales or if that was a one-off. Don't get me wrong, I think this online sales method is better for returns, but iny my opinion they need to be transparent about what they're doing if they're changing plans after going for such an unusual means of selling the original seats.
|
|
562 posts
|
Post by jadnoop on Jan 29, 2019 11:42:20 GMT
What on earth is NT's rationale for quietly throwing a few tickets onto the site? Don't get me wrong, I think selling remaining/returning seats online is great. But they should use some sort of formal system, like Friday Rush, rather than randomly passing out a few odd days without any notice. I mean, does this mean that anyone looking for tickets should be refreshing the site whenever possible during working hours on the off chance that a few tickets become available? I wonder if it was an IT/sales error or something, or perhaps testing the waters for a more formal online sale.
Anyway, best of luck to anyone still trying for tickets.
|
|
562 posts
|
Post by jadnoop on Jan 25, 2019 15:07:23 GMT
|
|
562 posts
|
Post by jadnoop on Jan 23, 2019 13:21:18 GMT
Really great news about Clarke Peters. Really regretting not going for the £10 tickets at the end of December now.
|
|
562 posts
|
Post by jadnoop on Jan 19, 2019 15:41:09 GMT
For anyone holding out for cheaper tickets. If you're under 30, a key worker or on JSA, a tweet just went out confirming that £15 tickets will start going on sale in Feb:
|
|