522 posts
|
Post by theatreliker on Apr 24, 2022 20:17:48 GMT
I believe there is an archive recording
|
|
3,040 posts
|
Post by crowblack on Apr 24, 2022 22:28:00 GMT
This is going to be an unpopular opinion but no one has the right to see theatre either live or filmed and if Rylance doesn't want Jerusalem to be filmed then we have to respect his wishes. We, as taxpayers, helped create this play and hundreds of others by funding those involved through the creative process and their development and training, so I do think, if that's the system we agree to have for arts funding and support in this country, that end product should be made available to as many people as possible ("The real star of the Tony theatre awards? The British taxpayer" - piece on Jerusalem, Guardian June 2011). |
|
|
|
Post by cavocado on Apr 25, 2022 8:32:12 GMT
I agree it's an elitist attitude. Of course a filmed performance is no substitute for seeing it live, but for many people it's all they are able to see. The Royal Court, which originated the show, is part funded by us, and the reason this has been revived is because the accolades and awards it's won have made it a cultural phenomenon, so the decision not to film it shouldn't be down to one actor. Archive recordings are usually very limited in quality, single camera, and mostly for academic use. High quality streamed performances, NT Live, etc help keep theatre alive as an artform and give it a wider reach. Someone should have a word with Mark Rylance.
|
|
904 posts
|
Post by lonlad on Apr 25, 2022 10:26:16 GMT
Good luck. Sir Mark is not someone with whom one easily "has a word" - he has a will of ramrod steel.
|
|
7,192 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by Jon on Apr 25, 2022 11:40:09 GMT
We're opening a massive can of worms by saying that just because a theatre company is funded by ACE that their work should distributed for free or at a low cost. There are many theatres which are funded by ACE who don't film or distribute performances of their work but no one seem to be badgering them.
|
|
3,040 posts
|
Post by crowblack on Apr 25, 2022 13:25:04 GMT
We're opening a massive can of worms by saying that just because a theatre company is funded by ACE that their work should distributed for free or at a low cost. There are many theatres which are funded by ACE who don't film or distribute performances of their work but no one seem to be badgering them. Most productions of the last decade that have been regarded as significant and/or have big star names have been made available in cinemas, online (NT Live, including archive recordings), broadcast on BBC TV and radio, Sky Arts, Youtube, Instagram, or through streamers like Amazon Prime, and on a special schools service. Other popular and significant plays, like War Horse, Barbershop Chronicles and Curious Incident, have toured. Jerusalem is hailed by some as 'the greatest play of the century' so far, and a major, must-see 'state of the nation' piece, but one which most of the nation won't get to see, even though their taxes helped its creation. It is a hard to maintain position in the current climate, with so many other theatres making work available, without coming across as elitist and exclusionary and sits oddly with theatre people's general left-of-centre politics and belief that what they are doing is of wider cultural significance, and not just for middle class Londoners with deep pockets. |
|
531 posts
|
Post by wiggymess on Apr 25, 2022 14:17:04 GMT
I wonder if we'll ever move on from this generalisation of people who go to the theatre in London as middle-class Londoners with deep pockets. It's a lazy generalisation I'd say.
I don't happen to be any of those 3 things and find it ironic that those accusing others of snobbery are so easily dismissive of the wide variety of people who like to go and watch theatre.
Have you ever thought that maybe this sort of high horse attitude might be counter productive? You are telling people who go to see plays like this that they are part of the problem. Nice.
I'm not defending some of the frankly ludicrous pricing, far from it. I just think it's daft to go after people who happen to watch theatre in London (often, like I do, sitting in heavily discounted/cheaper seats).
|
|
7,192 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by Jon on Apr 25, 2022 14:25:16 GMT
I wonder if we'll ever move on from this generalisation of people who go to the theatre in London as middle-class Londoners with deep pockets. It's a lazy generalisation I'd say. I don't happen to be any of those 3 things and find it ironic that those accusing others of snobbery are so easily dismissive of the wide variety of people who like to go and watch theatre. Have you ever thought that maybe this sort of high horse attitude might be counter productive? You are telling people who go to see plays like this that they are part of the problem. Nice. I'm not defending some of the frankly ludicrous pricing, far from it. I just think it's daft to go after people who happen to watch theatre in London (often, like I do, sitting in heavily discounted/cheaper seats). Jerusalem's success has also ploughed money back to the Royal Court for new work and I imagine this run will be just as beneficial. The Ferryman which was also very successful didn't get any sort of livestream, NT Live etc or toured so it's not entirely true that every successful show in London had a further life in the regions. The River, another Jez Butterworth play didn't even get a West End run. |
|
3,040 posts
|
Post by crowblack on Apr 25, 2022 14:25:18 GMT
I wonder if we'll ever move on from this generalisation of people who go to the theatre in London as middle-class Londoners with deep pockets. It's a lazy generalisation I'd say. I don't happen to be any of those 3 things and find it ironic that those accusing others of snobbery are so easily dismissive of the wide variety of people who like to go and watch theatre. It is a widely-held belief: just look at the online reaction to the ticket prices of shows, or threads about 'etiquette', especially in the US. Many of my friends do not go to the theatre, even though I do my best to inform them about how to find cheap tickets or access performances. They think it's stuffy and stuck up and expensive, very public school, very Oxbridge/Russell Group. Theatre in Liverpool or Manchester feels different (lots more school parties, for example), but in London it is very striking to get to Euston and then travel through a very diverse city and then get into a theatre building and it's largely middle class RP-accented white people with conversations in the interval like something from a Posy Simmonds cartoon. Even something like the mixed sex toilets now de rigueur in London theatres highlights their lack of diversity: these are toilets women and men from some religious and cultural groups now cannot use, but that fact hasn't been thought about or flagged up from within theatre. |
|
531 posts
|
Post by wiggymess on Apr 25, 2022 14:36:01 GMT
I wonder if we'll ever move on from this generalisation of people who go to the theatre in London as middle-class Londoners with deep pockets. It's a lazy generalisation I'd say. I don't happen to be any of those 3 things and find it ironic that those accusing others of snobbery are so easily dismissive of the wide variety of people who like to go and watch theatre. It is a widely-held belief: just look at the online reaction to the ticket prices of shows, or threads about 'etiquette', especially in the US. Many of my friends do not go to the theatre, even though I do my best to inform them about how to find cheap tickets or access performances. They think it's stuffy and stuck up and expensive, very public school, very Oxbridge/Russell Group. Theatre in Liverpool or Manchester feels different (lots more school parties, for example), but in London it is very striking to get to Euston and then travel through a very diverse city and then get into a theatre building and it's largely middle class RP-accented white people with conversations in the interval like something from a Posy Simmonds cartoon. Sorry but that's nonsense and you're just perpetuating it. Of course theatre has a long way to go in terms of diversifying its audience and reaching people who don't regularly attend plays but you're picking and choosing the wrong theatre buildings then. Maybe you should attend plays that attract the audiences you're after. And let's just ignore the proven fact that it's incredibly difficult and financially unviable for a show like this to tour. It's just unrealistic. |
|
3,040 posts
|
Post by crowblack on Apr 25, 2022 14:42:54 GMT
you're picking and choosing the wrong theatre buildings then. Maybe you should attend plays that attract the audiences you're after. If you're at a loose end you can nip back through my previous posts over the last few years to see the range of theatres I attend. I was talking about the impression theatre can give. The point of my post (please reread it) was that many theatres HAVE made the effort to reach out by putting their work online or in cinemas to try to reach those who find theatre inaccessible or intimidating. Holding out against that in this day and age is 'surprising'. And who knows, maybe they'll surprise us yet, with a recording or NT Live. I live in hope. |
|
531 posts
|
Post by wiggymess on Apr 25, 2022 14:56:18 GMT
you're picking and choosing the wrong theatre buildings then. Maybe you should attend plays that attract the audiences you're after. If you're at a loose end you can nip back through my previous posts over the last few years to see the range of theatres I attend. I was talking about the impression theatre can give. The point of my post (please reread it) was that many theatres HAVE made the effort to reach out by putting their work online or in cinemas to try to reach those who find theatre inaccessible or intimidating. Holding out against that in this day and age is 'surprising'. And who knows, maybe they'll surprise us yet, with a recording or NT Live. I live in hope. Please let's not do the whole "it's not my opinion it's what everyone else is thinking" malarkey. You've expressed your opinion that theatre is "largely middle class RP-accented white people with conversations in the interval like something from a Posy Simmonds cartoon." And I'm saying I think it's lazy and too much of a broad brush opinion of theatregoers when you're trying to make a valid point about people feeling excluded. It's a self fulfilling prophecy. When I was younger you wouldn't have been able to drag me into a theatre because I had the same fears. Reading your post would have only made me more certain of those opinions. It's off putting being told you're something you're not. It takes one example as the rule and ignores all the efforts of other theatres to actually make a difference. Out of interest do you know which show is playing just next door? |
|
531 posts
|
Post by wiggymess on Apr 25, 2022 14:59:32 GMT
I wonder if we'll ever move on from this generalisation of people who go to the theatre in London as middle-class Londoners with deep pockets. It's a lazy generalisation I'd say. I don't happen to be any of those 3 things and find it ironic that those accusing others of snobbery are so easily dismissive of the wide variety of people who like to go and watch theatre. Have you ever thought that maybe this sort of high horse attitude might be counter productive? You are telling people who go to see plays like this that they are part of the problem. Nice. I'm not defending some of the frankly ludicrous pricing, far from it. I just think it's daft to go after people who happen to watch theatre in London (often, like I do, sitting in heavily discounted/cheaper seats). Jerusalem's success has also ploughed money back to the Royal Court for new work and I imagine this run will be just as beneficial. The Ferryman which was also very successful didn't get any sort of livestream, NT Live etc or toured so it's not entirely true that every successful show in London had a further life in the regions. The River, another Jez Butterworth play didn't even get a West End run. I'm sure I remember seeing that he gave The Ferryman a run at Royal Court first as returning a favour for producing his earlier work? Knew he had a banker and let the Court benefit from it too before it hit the West End. Nice idea- would like to see it more. |
|
7,192 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by Jon on Apr 25, 2022 15:02:51 GMT
I'm sure a lot of theatres would love their work to go to more audiences but sometimes it is just not financially viable to tour a production or even to livestream it. The Donmar for example can justify Henry V for NT Live but that's because it has a big name actor in Kit Harrington starring in to recoup or make a profit but Marys Seacole isn't likely to get the same treatment.
|
|
7,192 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by Jon on Apr 25, 2022 15:04:57 GMT
I'm sure I remember seeing that he gave The Ferryman a run at Royal Court first as returning a favour for producing his earlier work? Knew he had a banker and let the Court benefit from it too before it hit the West End. Nice idea- would like to see it more. IIRC The Ferryman was commissioned by Sonia Friedman but they premiered it first at the Royal Court. Probably a favour for The Royal Court as they'd get a cut of the royalties but also meant they could make changes before the West End run. |
|
3,040 posts
|
Post by crowblack on Apr 25, 2022 15:25:25 GMT
Please let's not do the whole "it's not my opinion it's what everyone else is thinking" malarkey. You've expressed your opinion that theatre is "largely middle class RP-accented white people with conversations in the interval like something from a Posy Simmonds cartoon." And I'm saying I think it's lazy and too much of a broad brush opinion of theatregoers when you're trying to make a valid point about people feeling excluded. It's a self fulfilling prophecy. When I was younger you wouldn't have been able to drag me into a theatre because I had the same fears. Reading your post would have only made me more certain of those opinions. It's off putting being told you're something you're not. It takes one example as the rule and ignores all the efforts of other theatres to actually make a difference. Out of interest do you know which show is playing just next door? I did not say it's 'what everyone else is thinking'. I said it's the impression many have of London theatre. I grew up between two Northern, largely working class cities and the social differences between theatregoing in Liverpool or Manchester compared to London was and still is striking and can still be intimidating, and that's reflected in conversations around it in life and online. I'm a part of the DANC community (whose organisers Triple C got a very-well-earned BAFTA yesterday) and that is a community dedicated to increasing access to the arts, particularly theatre and TV. Ironically, lockdown finally pushed theatres into making work accessible to many who could not access it physically before, and we are hoping through streaming and the like, that will continue. |
|
531 posts
|
Post by wiggymess on Apr 25, 2022 15:34:20 GMT
Please let's not do the whole "it's not my opinion it's what everyone else is thinking" malarkey. You've expressed your opinion that theatre is "largely middle class RP-accented white people with conversations in the interval like something from a Posy Simmonds cartoon." And I'm saying I think it's lazy and too much of a broad brush opinion of theatregoers when you're trying to make a valid point about people feeling excluded. It's a self fulfilling prophecy. When I was younger you wouldn't have been able to drag me into a theatre because I had the same fears. Reading your post would have only made me more certain of those opinions. It's off putting being told you're something you're not. It takes one example as the rule and ignores all the efforts of other theatres to actually make a difference. Out of interest do you know which show is playing just next door? I did not say it's 'what everyone else is thinking'. I said it's the impression many have of London theatre. I grew up between two Northern, largely working class cities and the social differences between theatregoing in Liverpool or Manchester compared to London was and still is striking and can still be intimidating, and that's reflected in conversations around it in life and online. I'm a part of the DANC community (whose organisers Triple C got a very-well-earned BAFTA yesterday) and that is a community dedicated to increasing access to the arts, particularly theatre and TV. Ironically, lockdown finally pushed theatres into making work accessible to many who could not access it physically before, and we are hoping through streaming and the like, that will continue. That's fine and I applaud those efforts. But my point is I find it counter productive for you to make sweeping statements about London theatre audiences, because as we've established, they don't stand up to scrutiny and can come across as lazy and ignorant when you ignore large swathes of people, especially those who feel aggrieved at being described in incorrect terms. If you really want to make a change you have to understand who/what your real target is and not alienate people who see theate in London (whether they fit into your narrow category or not) because that's too broad a brush- they are not your enemy. Congrats on the award, an excellent achievement. |
|
3,040 posts
|
Post by crowblack on Apr 25, 2022 15:57:06 GMT
This is getting very off topic but please reread my original comment. It was making the point that many London theatres are making their productions more accessible to a more diverse audience through broadcasts. I wish Jerusalem's team would join them, and I hope at some point they do.
|
|
|
|
Post by partytentdown on Apr 25, 2022 16:09:53 GMT
I remember being the only person in the world who didn't get on with this the first time round, so I've booked myself a stalls box seat to see if my older, wiser self (!) appreciates it more this time round. Each performance seemed to have a handful of box seats (side view) and that was about all that's left.
|
|
|
|
Post by catcat100 on Apr 25, 2022 20:55:02 GMT
Saw this on Friday and although good, I wasn't totally bowled over by it.
Think a couple of the characters who impact the last 10-15 mins don't have their story developed enough so not really prepared for what happens. Might try to see it again just in case I missed something which is a definite possibility.
When I brought my programme the bar lady said I had a special one, and lo and behold when I looked at the cast list, found it had been signed by some of the cast inc Mark Rylance. Not certain how many of these there were but its a nice touch.
|
|
247 posts
|
Post by barelyathletic on Apr 26, 2022 9:34:16 GMT
Saw it last night and it's a tremendous bit of theatre that feels every bit as fresh and original as it did thirteen years ago. Rylance is as astonishing as ever, a truly landmark powerhouse performance and unlike anything else he has ever done, however brilliant he has been.
Is it the greatest play of the 21st century? Well, that's always going to be up for debate but it is a gloriously rich piece of writing, funny, powerful and hugely engaging over it's nearly three hours run time (not that it felt anything like that). Some of the younger cast are maybe not quite yet up to top gear yet but I'm sure they'll get there, and it's really really lovely to see members of the original cast back in fine fettle, McKenzie Crook, Gerard Horan and Alan David among them, and finding new depths in their characters.
Age has not withered them or the play. If anything, it gives Jerusalem a stronger veneer of pathos and sense of regret for the passing of time that possibly makes it an even more glorious theatrical experience than before. Absolutely unmissable.
|
|
247 posts
|
Post by barelyathletic on Apr 26, 2022 9:37:16 GMT
PS. Can we have a banner rating for this please.
|
|
2,859 posts
|
Post by couldileaveyou on Apr 26, 2022 9:52:12 GMT
Saw it last week and enjoyed it a lot. I think the play is good and solid without being a miraculous piece of writing, but Mark Rylance is really in his own league here. Partly because in his latest performances in London (Farinelli, Othello, Nice Fish) he was just relying on his bag of tricks, this really stands out as a monumental performance. He is a fairly tiny and very sweet man, the way his body transforms during the show is amazing, and seeing the physical difference between him and Rooster as he "shrinks" back and becomes himself again at curtain call is really testament to the kind of artistic achievement he is managing here.
|
|
1,867 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by Dave B on Apr 26, 2022 10:50:03 GMT
I saw it last night and thought Rylance was phenomenal. I have not seen the original so I can't comment on that but the ages felt right - and sad, in particular for Ginger - here.
There is a lot in it and I really like that they leave a bunch of it up to you, still thinking about it all this morning.
|
|
3,040 posts
|
Post by crowblack on Apr 26, 2022 14:00:36 GMT
My brother enjoyed it, especially Mackenzie Crook and the dialogue of the young layabout characters who very much reminded him of his time spent in that part of the country in the 90s, but says he didn't understand why 'everyone was losing their s*** about it'. The person he was with was moved to tears by the ending.
|
|
