294 posts
|
B
Sept 27, 2017 9:44:22 GMT
Post by dani on Sept 27, 2017 9:44:22 GMT
This play by Guillermo Calderon has its first preview tomorrow. I'm interested to hear people's thoughts about it, as I'm going later in the run.
|
|
5,707 posts
|
B
Sept 28, 2017 20:56:46 GMT
Post by lynette on Sept 28, 2017 20:56:46 GMT
Can you tell us where it is on?
|
|
|
|
B
Sept 28, 2017 21:22:00 GMT
via mobile
Post by Deleted on Sept 28, 2017 21:22:00 GMT
At the Royal Court.
|
|
294 posts
|
B
Oct 3, 2017 15:08:21 GMT
Post by dani on Oct 3, 2017 15:08:21 GMT
I've read the reviews today and am not feeling very excited about seeing it. Mainly 3 stars, but cagey 3 stars, and some 2s (Telegraph, ES). There's also a 1 star pan from Mark Shenton, who doesn't seem to have proof-read his review, as he says that "Hard though it is ever to justify the potential taking of innocent lives, there's not even a solid moral undermining to what they hope to achieve" and "Of the cast of four, the three protagonists spend a big chunk of the play with their faces masked to each other and us, which makes their acting a whole lot interesting to watch."
|
|
562 posts
|
B
Oct 16, 2017 23:02:56 GMT
via mobile
MrBunbury likes this
Post by jadnoop on Oct 16, 2017 23:02:56 GMT
I found this quite interesting & enjoyable, if strange, frustrating & opaque in parts. The references to Harold Pinter crossed with Four Lions that some reviewers have said sounds about right to me. And, like the recent The Caretaker and No Mans Land, while I found it amusing there were some audience members who seemed to find it absolutely side-splitting.
The play is mostly about the different and changing motivations that revolutionaries/terrorists have; and my feeling was that while the play sympathises with some of the protagonists ideas, it also highlights the contradictions and hypocrisy involved. The funniest bit is a segment that echoes the 9/11 conspiracy skit by The Onion from a few years ago.
For me the most interesting topic was the question of what happens to people who have spent a significant portion of their life growing up preparing for some big revolution that never actually happened, or has been lost. I wonder if the play might connect better in places where this sort of thing is a bigger part of the recent history.
The performances seemed pretty good; even with the main actors in masks for much of the first half, and I thought the staging of the finale was surprisingly tense.
3 stars seems about right.
|
|
1,064 posts
|
B
Oct 17, 2017 12:35:42 GMT
via mobile
Post by bellboard27 on Oct 17, 2017 12:35:42 GMT
I enjoyed this as a comedy (first two thirds of the play), but less so the more serious conclusion discussing motivations etc.
|
|
406 posts
|
Post by MrBunbury on Oct 17, 2017 13:47:59 GMT
I found this quite interesting & enjoyable, if strange, frustrating & opaque in parts. The references to Harold Pinter crossed with Four Lions that some reviewers have said sounds about right to me. And, like the recent The Caretaker and No Mans Land, while I found it amusing there were some audience members who seemed to find it absolutely side-splitting. The play is mostly about the different and changing motivations that revolutionaries/terrorists have; and my feeling was that while the play sympathises with some of the protagonists ideas, it also highlights the contradictions and hypocrisy involved. The funniest bit is a segment that echoes the 9/11 conspiracy skit by The Onion from a few years ago. For me the most interesting topic was the question of what happens to people who have spent a significant portion of their life growing up preparing for some big revolution that never actually happened, or has been lost. I wonder if the play might connect better in places where this sort of thing is a bigger part of the recent history. The performances seemed pretty good; even with the main actors in masks for much of the first half, and I thought the staging of the finale was surprisingly tense. 3 stars seems about right. It is very interesting that you say "I wonder if the play might connect better in places where this sort of thing is a bigger part of the recent history" because that was exactly the aspect that has struck me most after seeing the play and promoted some discussion with other audience members. Coming from left-wing Italy, the idea of revolution and fight against government is something I am familiar with because it is part of the inherited cultural milieu of the '70s. A romantic yet admittedly ambiguous view of revolution, even more when it comes to South America, is something that regularly comes up in conversation with my friends. So I could somehow empathize with the characters of the play because they sounded like several of my friends (within limits), and I found the play funny despite the obvious dark side. Yet, other members of the audience who were English found the characters unrelatable and could only see them under a negative light, which probably is the perfectly understandable consequence of the fact that here in England the recent history and political background is quite different from Italy. So I really think that the play might work better in other countries: to be honest, I am not sure that opening the play in London gave it the best chance as much as I enjoyed it. |
|
