220 posts
|
Post by benny20 on Mar 27, 2019 22:14:06 GMT
The reduction in the seating in the stalls has been planned since booking opened. It is also planned for a few other plays such as Rotterdam. I personally think it is a good idea for some plays, actors not miced up etc
Really, some of these plays are playing too big a venue but I'm glad to see them
However,didn't enjoy Glengarry that much...
|
|
19,793 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Mar 27, 2019 22:26:25 GMT
Yes it was nice to see then not mic’d, does a curtain make that much difference to the voice projection though? It would have been very effective in a small venue in the round I think. The sets were superfluous to the action really. You could do that with a table and a chinese lantern for Act 1 and a desk and a filing cabinet for Act 2. It didn’t really seem to merit the trouble they went to. benny20 weren’t you at the Bridgewater? Have you moved to ATG now? Tell me to mind my own business if you want I won’t be offended 🙂 |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 28, 2019 8:38:12 GMT
Yes it was nice to see then not mic’d, does a curtain make that much difference to the voice projection though?
It would have been very effective in a small venue in the round I think. The sets were superfluous to the action really. You could do that with a table and a chinese lantern for Act 1 and a desk and a filing cabinet for Act 2. It didn’t really seem to merit the trouble they went to. benny20 weren’t you at the Bridgewater? Have you moved to ATG now? Tell me to mind my own business if you want I won’t be offended 🙂 Yep it does. I did leave feeling the play itself was underdeveloped but was thinking given its 'success' on Broadway and West End I must be wrong. Personally would have liked to have seen some bigger arcs in some of the characters and a either better conclusion or a more dramatic end. I guess the big flashy set was to make up for the defectiveness in the writing. |
|
1,133 posts
|
Post by Stephen on Apr 14, 2019 0:11:29 GMT
Paid £13 for the matinee of this today. A good deal for a rear stalls seat.
I found the play to be funny and very well acted. I enjoyed Nigel Harman and Mark Benton. Thin plot and nothing is properly wrapped up. It's short though and made for an easy watch.
3 stars
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 28, 2019 22:36:00 GMT
Saw this on Friday - quite a disappointment. The person that decided an interval after half an hour should be strung up. Everyone around us were confused about what was going on and turned to us for guidance. It was so jarring (interval, not advice). By the time the 2nd half gets into a swing, it’s the end! I understand the theatre need to make money with interval drinks but if it’s at the cost of the audience being confused/bored then it’s really artistic bankruptcy.
At least Nigel is still pleasant on the eye, if not the ear.
First post over and out!
|
|
374 posts
|
Post by popcultureboy on Apr 28, 2019 22:56:22 GMT
The person that decided an interval after half an hour should be strung up That'd be David Mamet. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 28, 2019 23:08:29 GMT
The person that decided an interval after half an hour should be strung up That'd be David Mamet. Aw right. Thought maybe it was supposed to be straight through. Interesting that he would want it so jarring. The film was flipping fab! What would be be the reason for having an interval so soon (other than set change etc)? Is there an artistic reason? |
|
374 posts
|
Post by popcultureboy on Apr 29, 2019 7:02:22 GMT
The film was reworked from the play to make it longer (Alec Baldwin's addition, for example) and the film still isn't very long. I think it is purely the set change which necessitates the interval, though having seen something like Hangmen do a complete set change in moments, it's probably possible now to do away with the interval on this and find ways to make it work without one.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 29, 2019 8:40:28 GMT
I felt like the interval was deliberate to emphasise the difference in styles. The incredibly short first half consists of duologues, sometimes almost monologues as characters bear themselves. Whilst the second half is full cast action. I think running straight from three duologues in series into the 'action' may have been even more jarring than having the interval. As others have said, technical restraints may have also implicated themselves.
|
|
5,159 posts
|
Post by TallPaul on Apr 29, 2019 9:27:02 GMT
There's a crude joke to be made about characters 'bearing' themselves on stage, but I refuse to sink to the same level as @theatremonkey. 😉
|
|
5,159 posts
|
Post by TallPaul on Apr 29, 2019 9:58:51 GMT
Even in the internet age, I'm sure there are many who would pay good money to watch *it* live. We're back to immersive theatre again. 🙂 |
|
1,863 posts
|
Post by NeilVHughes on Apr 29, 2019 10:38:22 GMT
When I used to to do twitter thoughts after a play I sated that the interval was unnecessary and spoilt the flow as as soon as I had settled into the play it came to an abrupt halt.
Surprisingly got a reply from one of the actors stating that the interval was a mandatory requirement.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 29, 2019 17:12:43 GMT
That's interesting! If he wanted an interval maybe he should have written a longer play  Although it has been performed without an interval .... |
|
