2,706 posts
|
Brexit
Dec 12, 2018 18:53:26 GMT
sf likes this
Post by Cardinal Pirelli on Dec 12, 2018 18:53:26 GMT
The last thing that should be allowed to happen is to let something take place because people are tired and bored. This is our lives, our future and the way that our nation will be perceived for decades. If anyone is bored of what is at stake then they need to get a grip.
|
|
2,706 posts
|
Brexit
Dec 12, 2018 18:08:38 GMT
Post by Cardinal Pirelli on Dec 12, 2018 18:08:38 GMT
I think that parliament still has a majority for a few things although they only exist if party lines are crossed. Pretty definitely there is a majority to extend the Article 50 deadline, quite probably a majority to put the vote for deal/no deal/revoke to the electorate and, maybe more tenously, to immediately revoke Article 50, let the dust settle and work out what to do next without disaster looming so close.
I imagine that May will only go if she loses the vote.
|
|
2,706 posts
|
Post by Cardinal Pirelli on Dec 10, 2018 19:47:41 GMT
I think it's likely that if we had a different electoral system, the Tories would have split by now into an anti-Europe and a pro-Europe grouping (who would operate in alliance for most of the time). The same split exists in Labour but to a lesser extent. Where Brexit has absolutely floundered is that we have no mechanism for cooperation across party boundaries and structuring political debate in any other way. Labour is seeking a General Election but that is meaningless when both parties have a similar position on Brexit - negotiated deal - leaving voters who want either extreme, a no-deal exit or to remain, nowhere to go. I can't help feeling that a major realignment of British politics is underway, but it's difficult to see how that can be accomplished in our current electoral system. It's true that other electoral systems have their flaws too - see the rise of National Rally in France, or Five Star and the League But what we have now isn't working, and it's difficult to know how it can move forward without cracking completely. The outcomes have been somewhat softened in other countries by the need for coalition or run off elections which do not favour extremists. My fear is that the UK system is the most prone to electing majority governments which do not have the support of a majority in the country. It’s still hypothetical but a populist demagogue with barely 30 percent of the vote could be thus elected and have sweeping powers.
|
|
2,706 posts
|
Post by Cardinal Pirelli on Dec 10, 2018 19:14:49 GMT
As well as Noel Edmonds (see above), another reason that we are watching a car crash is our electoral system. First past the post with a winner takes all outcome is supposed to provide ‘strong government’, which has until recently merely meant that parties without a vote majority were able to govern as though they had. Now that FPTP is failing to even do that, requiring coalitions and compromise, our ill equipped political system is collapsing in on itself.
More logical systems, where votes relate to seats, result in that need for consensus and negotiation; not getting all that you want being the inevitable outcome. The referendum was seen by some as winner takes all but that would never be a sustainable outcome so the EU, being used to consensus etc. has helped to turn the division that the vote showed into an agreement that reflects that division. They have that experience which our system has withheld from us and the outcome of negotiations shows that - not substantially favouring one grouping or another.
Politicians and many (most?) voters cannot cope with that, however, and that lack of experience in this type of politics dooms us to disaster. That the first coalition in living memory saw both participants vilified and one nearly destroyed by voters just helped to confirm to politicians that compromise would be their downfall. The horrifying percentage who would support a no deal Brexit is further proof; they would wilfully destroy the country to make a political point rather than acknowledge their weak mandate.
So here we are, no compromise, disaster beckons.
|
|
2,706 posts
|
Post by Cardinal Pirelli on Dec 9, 2018 15:27:34 GMT
I still have six or seven shows to see before the end of the year, so I'm holding off until 2018 is done and dusted.
6% of the year is plenty of time to be newly surprised, amused and thrilled.
|
|
2,706 posts
|
Post by Cardinal Pirelli on Dec 7, 2018 12:37:33 GMT
The original production of Mame looked fabulous and the score is wonderful. But there is a problem with a title song, set in a plantation, that is proceeded with "you've done more for the South than Robert E. Lee" and a lyric that goes "You make our cotton easy to pick, Mame". Also 'The South Will Rise Again' or references to the Cakewalk being danced again (something created and danced by slaves). Maybe they'll confront the bigotry and wealth gained off the back of slaves in the production but it would be difficult to try and ignore it.
|
|
2,706 posts
|
Post by Cardinal Pirelli on Dec 6, 2018 18:04:19 GMT
I'm not clever enough to know not to book a Neilson play during previews, so I'm at this tonight. I'm not at all squeamish but will ensure I've seen it on a full stomach so I can feel as nauseated as the average person. This old thread about Unreachable gives some idea as to what can sometimes happen. www.theatreboard.co.uk/thread/820/unreachable-royal-court-matt-smith?page=2It’s just his working process (which, unsurprisingly, isn’t really given much prominence in advertising). I love seeing work being tried out and tweaked as it reaches an audience but others may want to be sure that they are getting a finished product (see also Sylvia).
|
|
2,706 posts
|
Post by Cardinal Pirelli on Dec 6, 2018 17:53:13 GMT
Unfortunately no Fun Home and Marc Antolin. Most of my other nominations got through though. Fun Home’s absence is just one of the laughable choices made which render the whole thing pointless. In fact (as Hamilton was in my 2017 list) not one of the shows in the new musical category mirrors mine (my own end of year roundup coming, somewhat unsurprisingly, after the actual end of the year).
|
|
2,706 posts
|
Post by Cardinal Pirelli on Dec 6, 2018 15:07:07 GMT
I got in to book in the first 5 minutes and there was very little left for the 6/7 dates I looked at I drew 59 in the line and there was a very good choice on the date I looked at - except that front rows only had 4 pairs (I assume others were being held back). Did look in again about 5.30pm and there were only singles at the sides for almost all dates. Again, I assume the next ballot will see more released. My guess is that returns will be held for the day seats line in the end. That would be the sensible way, I think. One thing that does surprise me is the pricing. I paid £23, which didn't appear as a price at other times. Seems to be multiple ones in operation, most odd. Putting them as day seats would again exclude those not near London. I doubt they’d try and court further controversy so will put them onsale to everyone instead.
|
|
2,706 posts
|
Post by Cardinal Pirelli on Dec 6, 2018 1:22:55 GMT
Anthony Neilson's 'contemporary reimagining' of Edgar Allan Poe's Tell-Tale Heart had it's first preview tonight. The first comments from twitter are an interesting, if mixed, bag. A few walk-outs and very negative tweets; a few positive comments; and a note about how horrific it is. Apparently an audience member threw up! Intriguing. Given Neilson’s method of writing I’m surprised that anyone would book for an early preview. #seeitafteropeningnight
|
|
2,706 posts
|
Post by Cardinal Pirelli on Dec 5, 2018 23:04:02 GMT
Gross und Klein was, of course, done in a translation by Martin Crimp. I’d call it a good play rather than a great one as its deep delve into post war European alienation (not the Brechtian mistranslation type) is maybe better suited to art film. One review referred to Wim Wenders which I think is a good comparison. It was the dialogue in translation that I thought made it work but Blanchett suited it well.
|
|
2,706 posts
|
Post by Cardinal Pirelli on Dec 5, 2018 22:23:43 GMT
Rename the categories ‘most popular xxx’ and at least they would have a degree of honesty.
|
|
2,706 posts
|
Post by Cardinal Pirelli on Dec 4, 2018 12:31:53 GMT
I guess this means that there is a danger of balloons flying into the audience? Or can an allergic reaction to latex be triggered just by looking at them rather than touching them? It's the latter. The Almeida received a complaint during the run of Hamlet from someone with an allergy to latex so severe that just seeing the balloons had triggered it. I asked at the box office about it when I saw Hamlet in its final week and the warning was up. I taught someone a few years ago who couldn't go into certain areas because of the danger of breathing problems and anaphylactic shock.
|
|
2,706 posts
|
Post by Cardinal Pirelli on Dec 3, 2018 23:23:44 GMT
Compilation choreographer shows like Fosse or Jerome Robbins’ Broadway, a higher rate of chorus numbers and many of them showstoppers. Given the dance style and its stress on the body and potential wear and tear I’d go for Fosse.
|
|
2,706 posts
|
Post by Cardinal Pirelli on Dec 2, 2018 16:12:24 GMT
If the play is any good, will likely be revived fairly quickly to make sure the wave of publicity can be ridden, a good play will transcend the performers and will continue to live on as in Love a favourite from last year which is now being televised and changing the cast in The Ferryman did not diminish the fact that it is a good play worth seeing whoever the talented cast are. Crimp's plays do not get transfers, if you miss them you miss them. It could easily be over a decade until they get professionally produced elsewhere. It took probably his best known play 'Attempts on her Life' a decade to get to the National, for example (in a Katie Mitchell production which I loved but which left a large number of the audience nonplussed, given the absence of any plot and lack of characterisation). It's probably on the old board but the fulminating against 'In the Republic of Happiness', his most recent postdramatic play was something to behold! Again, I loved it (although the production by Dominic Cooke I found to be a bit too staid), Crimp just appeals to my own tastes.
As many of his plays are written as 'open texts' then the director/author dynamic is what makes the production. The Mitchell aesthetic combined with Crimp is a perfect match, as was the case with Mitchell's coruscating 'Cleansed' by Sarah Kane (Crimp being maybe the closest writer to Kane), which left me a gibbering wreck with its violence and 'total theatre' approach. Mitchell's theatre vocabulary (others would dismiss them as gimmicks) such as live film, hyper-naturalised performances rubbing up against anti-naturalistic elements allied to a text that allows the director to be an equal creator of the production is potentially dynamite.
Charles Spencer wrote this in the Telegraph about the Mitchell/Crimp Attempts on her Life revival 'I suspect that the reason he's never had an enduring hit after 25 years is that his writing has an off-putting coldness, and an ironic, self-advertising cleverness, that proves ultimately repellent. I fundamentally disagree but he reflects a large part of the audience, I imagine.
|
|
2,706 posts
|
Post by Cardinal Pirelli on Dec 2, 2018 11:30:48 GMT
Furthermore, I'll say again that I'd really rather not have "names" either dominating a production or the audience. Yes, it's great knowing that cast members have done good work in the past but the better-known and more recognisable actors are, the harder it is to suspend disbelief, and as for the prospect of fans possibly not observing theatre etiquette - well, the combination is enough to put me right off. I thought they were on the right side of things with Network, as the balance between name and availability was there. They’ve vastly miscalculated this time, though. The only comparable PR disaster I can think of is The River at the Royal Court Upstairs, another publicly subsidised theatre which decided to trumpet exclusivity as a marketing tool. Never a good look when it comes time to look at renewing public support.
|
|
2,706 posts
|
Post by Cardinal Pirelli on Dec 1, 2018 15:08:56 GMT
Hamlet is usually referred to as the leading actor's play. Shakespeare probably big enough not to mind. It's usually 'The Cumberbatch (or whoever) Hamlet', so equal billing. TV and film are even worse though and, save for a few like Mercurio, writers can be totally passed over.
|
|
2,706 posts
|
Post by Cardinal Pirelli on Dec 1, 2018 12:03:05 GMT
I’ve sent an email to the NT suggesting that some understudy performances would be a way of ameliorating the problems of access that they are having.
Not much use to me as the only days I can make are already scheduled but it would help others.
Most people here, I think, are savvy enough to know if Crimp/Mitchell are their sort of thing and it would give people interested in the play* and director a chance to maintain that interest.
* Twitter commenters referring to ‘the Cate Blanchett play’ being particularly irksome, it’s a Martin Crimp play! Nobody went on about Hamlet being the Andrew Scott/Benedict Cumberbatch play did they?
|
|
2,706 posts
|
Post by Cardinal Pirelli on Nov 30, 2018 17:23:22 GMT
It's not six yet so I still have hope and am regularly checking my phone. My options for dates are so limited but they include midweek matinees so maybe they might have tickets left or (at least) day tickets if I camp out from the early hours. I haven't missed a new Martin Crimp play here for over two decades.
|
|
2,706 posts
|
Post by Cardinal Pirelli on Nov 30, 2018 0:40:26 GMT
It’s what the whingers were asking for, I like story arcs but there was a lot of moaning about them. Having more standalones does hinder development but they are getting the strongest audience figures since 2012. A lot of the ITC shows in the sixties were even less connected, watching something like The Avengers now is quite an alien experience (no pun intended). It's a bit harsh to dismiss as whingers and moaners those of us who aren't keen on story arcs or at least aren't fussed about them. It's a perfectly valid position (although not what I personally look for in television drama). I'm just saying that removing story arcs and lack of character development go hand in hand.
|
|
2,706 posts
|
Post by Cardinal Pirelli on Nov 29, 2018 21:36:43 GMT
That was a good one by the standards of this series, but it's really becoming obvious now how poorly developed the companions' characters are, not to mention their relationships with the Doctor. You could pretty much drop any three random people into the companion roles in that episode and nothing substantive would have changed. And I have no idea at all who they are to the Doctor, which is a stark contrast to all the other companions since 2005. Something interesting about this series is that they've been shifting the episodes around quite a lot in the running order. Demons of the Punjab was originally episode 9, Kerblam was 8, Witchfinders was 6 and next week's was 7, the fact that they can swap one for another just shows that there's been very little meaningful character development over the course of episodes and effectively each week they press a big reset button and every character returns back to how they were before. It’s what the whingers were asking for, I like story arcs but there was a lot of moaning about them. Having more standalones does hinder development but they are getting the strongest audience figures since 2012. A lot of the ITC shows in the sixties were even less connected, watching something like The Avengers now is quite an alien experience (no pun intended).
|
|
2,706 posts
|
Post by Cardinal Pirelli on Nov 28, 2018 20:31:23 GMT
He will now be doing theatre reviews for the Sunday Times, apparently... So is Christopher Hart out? It’s difficult to work out which of the two is the most obnoxious but, just possibly, it’s the only paper (or its daily edition) where Letts might be a slight improvement. Both of them together would be like nightmare version of the Muppets’ Statler and Waldorf.
|
|
2,706 posts
|
Post by Cardinal Pirelli on Nov 26, 2018 21:02:33 GMT
Bobby, as a male, hits something like top G or A which, if she was just singing up an octave would be very high for a female and probably beyond all but the most extreme belt (I’m pretty sure Evita gets close). To get a similar vocal weight you might need to take it down a fourth or fifth. So they are changed but lowered in comparison to the male version. Yeah, but she's singing at a higher pitch than any male Bobby therefore it's a higher not a lower key. It's all relative. Pitch and key are not equivalent.
|
|
2,706 posts
|
Post by Cardinal Pirelli on Nov 26, 2018 19:19:27 GMT
I'd imagine the keys for Rosalie have been raised rather than lowered. Unless she's a natural baritone! Bobby, as a male, hits something like top G or A which, if she was just singing up an octave would be very high for a female and probably beyond all but the most extreme belt (I’m pretty sure Evita gets close). To get a similar vocal weight you might need to take it down a fourth or fifth. So they are changed but lowered in comparison to the male version.
|
|
2,706 posts
|
Post by Cardinal Pirelli on Nov 26, 2018 11:22:17 GMT
I agree it's off-putting. Sounds like the sort of thing you'd see on an 80s LP along with a pic of David Sylvian staring at a wall. I'd meant to say I'd just seen this and found it very funny. At a stretch, it could also be a very stark piano & vocal piece by Peter Hammill. Big fan of David Sylvian (& Japan) here, a musician who's done some brilliant and groundbreaking work. Gone to Earth has to be one of my favourite albums ever. Okay, his most recent work is basically rattling some tins in a creaky shed but it's still David Sylvian, so that's fine by me!
|
|
2,706 posts
|
Post by Cardinal Pirelli on Nov 24, 2018 12:49:40 GMT
As suggested there is a real problem of people going because they think it’s a traditional musical. It clearly isn’t and, as with much of Chavkin’s other work, very much sui generis. It is also not a play with music either, or a concert.
The musicals became a feature during the Eyre regime, not the Nunn one, preceded by Eyre’s own Guys and Dolls during the Hall era. There was also the Sunday In the Park With George that fitted in well. Then came the era that is referenced in the above post. During that time Hytner’s Carousel stood out alongside some decent Sondheims.
Nunn then put on even more commercial fare such as Oklahoma (nicely done), a sparkling Candide and diminished artistic returns with those after. The economics forced them into it but I’m glad they stopped and did the shows which needed the oxygen instead such as Jerry Springer and London Road.
|
|
2,706 posts
|
Post by Cardinal Pirelli on Nov 22, 2018 22:31:13 GMT
It appears that the level of membership that would get you access is £1500 (£1000 for those 45 and under). I’d be surprised if many of us could afford that sort of money.
|
|
2,706 posts
|
Post by Cardinal Pirelli on Nov 22, 2018 18:43:17 GMT
Loved today, damp and mizzly with hills and all around ahrouded in grey.
Like being in a gothic novel.
|
|
2,706 posts
|
Post by Cardinal Pirelli on Nov 22, 2018 12:13:05 GMT
Site already fallen over, the error message I get says 'backend is unhealthy' which would seem to suggest a trip to the Doctors.
|
|
2,706 posts
|
Post by Cardinal Pirelli on Nov 21, 2018 11:43:51 GMT
This is on the front page of the telegraph today. So now we’re going to be in the pot with those who otherwise wouldn’t have given a damn about seeing it. If they’d just sold it as normal then it would still sell out but the audience would be more like its natural one. Seeing as I could get two tickets on the off chance that I win and would only get one, is there anyone else in a similar position who might want to pair up? If they only allow for two tickets on the same performance it might be difficult, though. I’m aiming for 19th February or possibly 26th January (preference for matinee but can do evening as well).
|
|