Player Kings - Wimbledon / MCR / Noel Coward / Tour

Saw this tonight and LIKED it. Dead sure it will tighten and improve a great deal by the time it opens in the West End.

I felt the last third, after a pause, from 9:30pm - 10:20pm, was the most sustained effective sequence, firing on all cylinders.

I thought Toheeb Jimoh was excellent as prince Hal.

Some spoilers follow. . .

We all know Robert Icke considers a lot of theatre "dead" (ie rote entertainment) and walks out of a lot of shows at the interval if he feels that way lol. So of course its ironic that people on the board are walking out at the interval of his play. Which is a shame, as I feel that it's after the interval that everything he's been building to comes alive.

I recall how brutal and casually sociopathic Jude Law's "Henry V" was, and for me, this is that Henry V's origin story, in that it takes an especially ruthless look at the characters, whereby that famous monologue at the beginning of the play, in which Hal tells us exactly how cynical he really is (he's just playacting the dissolute for show and he's going full political as soon as it suits him, so everyone can acclaim his amazing supposed turnaround lol) is the anchor for Icke's take.

Since Icke creates his productions like a sculptor, cutting away extraneous crap (like period costumes which don't relate to us now, for instance) and adding connective tissue where he thinks its necessary, it was always likely he'd want that speech to make sense if he left it in, and he does.

As we live in a world where being politically in charge is a license to plunder, loot and self serve, it was always likely that Icke would create a similar world on stage, so that the production is relevant and alive rather than merely entertaining and "dead."

An example of Icke hardening Hal's character is the opening vignette wherein Hal robs a cash register. Since this precedes his buddy, Poins's humorous robbery scheme, Icke is telling us, no, Hal isn't a charmer playing along with a funny scheme, he's in fact already a robber baron at his very core.

And it's not just him. Ian McKellen's Hal is still played by Ian McKellen, so he's always going to be funny, but Icke excises romantic and/or funny scenes, retaining the more caustic cynical bits. For example, when his old friend, Justice Shallow shows up, they don't bond over funny sequences recruiting soldiers, instead the most romantic and elegaic speech of the play ("Chimes at Midnight") immediately cuts to a cynical monologue of McKellen's Falstaff, as a user, undercutting any romantic resonance of that speech.

Indeed, the whole world of this play is "fake news" (the sequence of McKellen's medal-brandishing Falstaff celebrating his fake triumph is brilliantly done), propaganda (Jerusalem is roped in, as is the National Anthem) and political machinations (it all flows from that Hal speech).

The confrontation between Hal and his father over the Crown (forget how heavy it is, me wants) is as primal and predatory, political and revelatory as I've seen. But to see it, you can't walk out at either interval.

I expect Icke will carry on sculpting this production until, by it's April opening, it is as ruthless as that Jude Law "Henry V."

I thought Toheeb Jimoh never puts a foot wrong, and is a compelling lead, charming but ruthless. I think McKellen's Falstaff is not as sentimental as previous Falstaffs (Simon Russell Beale's sentimental idealism in the Hollow Crown BBC productions actually made me cry lol), but McKellen lends his ruthless acquisitive Falstaff a bit of his own likeability and oodles of his humour. And I felt that Richard Coyle really met the challenge of that splendid scene he shares with Jimoh towards the end.

All in all, I think this production has a 3 star beginning with a 4 star ending, but I expect it to be 4 stars all round by the time it hits the West End. 3 and a half stars from me for now.