A Very Very Very Dark Matter - new Martin McDonagh

Thought it implied his plays were London centric rather than just the arbitrary fact that he lives in London so therefore shouldn't write about certain things.

He is a middle aged white male Londoner working in the arts and Hollywood. I don't think people "shouldn't write about certain things" but it's HOW they write about them that's the issue here. If you see the play I think you'll see what I mean - arguing about it when you haven't is a bit pointless.

For the record, I bought tickets for this play the day they came out. I have enjoyed McDonagh's previous work and was really looking forward to this. It sounded potentially great. It even has Tom Waits in it (not live, obvs). But - argh.

There's a expression used by Mark Kermode about storylines dealing with particular issues - have they earned it? Have they earned the pass to tackle something in the way that they do at this point in a drama. Generally, now, it's considered, at best, a form of tourism if someone from a socially privileged group decides to tell a story focusing on those who aren't, particularly at a time when people - including writers - from those marginalised groups are demanding the right to speak for themselves. In this case, the treatment is particularly crass - it's like something from a 70s or 80s comedian. I don't think McDonagh is racist, but he is very insensitive and shallow here, and judging by Twitter reactions - scathing last night - this may be a bit of a Morrissey moment for his fans, in which I include myself. This play foregrounds all of the issues I have had with his previous work without the quality of writing or wit to redeem it.

I don't know where you are from, but the worldview and opportunities of someone from London are very different from someone who grew up or lives outside it. In the context of this play - and in the place where it is being staged - as with the criticism levelled at him for his depiction of rural Ireland or the US, it's something that feels relevant.

I lived in London full time for 15 years, studied there, worked there, I have close family there, many friends there etc.... 

Anyway, it'll be interesting to see the reviews. 

I saw this last night (preview 3).My overriding thought is that it felt very preview-y, timing a bit off in places, too-slow and noisy set changes, slightly tentative and under-powered performances. But I can also see that a lot of that may well tweak up and this could be a hit by the time the reviewers are in.

What I'm interested in is people's objection to the content. Minor spoilers...

Bonkers means mad, surely?

There’s a problem with discussions about theatre, at least early in a run. When few people have seen something then there isn’t much of a knowledgeable discussion to be had. Sadly, I booked for this in January, so I wont get to make a meaningful contribution until it’s nearly over.

Sounds like they may have cut a fair bit already - it was a few mins late starting on Friday but I think it still ran over 1hr30.

Oh dear oh dear oh dear. I’m afraid it reminded me of Tarantino’s Pulp Fiction, but without any verve or energy.  It was controversial in 1994, and tying it superficially to the Belgian Congo in 2018 isn’t going to make it any more palatable.  The scenes in London were marginally preferable, but only because  I see what he was trying to do, but it wasn’t sophisticated or (in my opinion) very intellectually interesting. I may be too North American to get this, but I can pretty much promise that it will never, ever transfer to New York in its current form.

What the hell did I just watch

Hmm, what to do, to see this or The Wild Duck?