63 posts
|
Post by pledge on May 2, 2024 8:27:06 GMT
Anyone taken the trip to Richmond to see this yet? As a cricket lover I'm intrigued, but the reviews so far (Grauniad excepted) aren't encouraging...
|
|
1,867 posts
|
Post by Dave B on May 2, 2024 8:35:47 GMT
Yup, from my recent post in the brief reviews thread.
Test Match - Orange Tree.
Not really about cricket but pulls in too much about the rules of cricket. Very much a play of two halves with the first, modern day, half being quite funny. The second half, in Calcutta in the 1700s leans heavily into farce and I found it to struggle to hold together. The ending just arrives and feels unformed. Cast are all excellent though.
Two and a half stars.
|
|
63 posts
|
Post by pledge on May 5, 2024 16:13:34 GMT
Took a punt on this and wish I hadn't bothered. The first half is basically just soap-level squabbling ("There's something you need to know"/Why are you looking at me like that?") but the second half...it was so naff I just had to look away in embarrassment. It was like fourth-formers improvising with a dressing up box...absolutely zero dramatic content until the end, when a Portentous Stranger comes on to deliver the Authors Profound Message, just to make the audience feel guilty. Two and a half stars is exceeding generous...
|
|
|
|
Post by lt on May 14, 2024 10:24:36 GMT
My hopes were not high for this having seen the response to the production.
But firstly, the acting from all the cast was excellent, and the blocking and staging worked very well.
The script is not so strong. In the first half, set during the present day in a rain delay of an international cricket match, the Indian and English team chat about a wide range of topics and it feels that a myriad of social issues is being rammed into 40 minutes without a clear sense of where the play is headed. So although there are scenes that work within the play, overall it feels a little unsatisfactory, and the ending of part one is deeply implausible.
Part two, set in Calcutta in the 18th century, satirises the story of the East India Company through two of its administrators based in India and has a sort of Blackadder feel. I actually preferred the second half, largely due to the acting of Bea Svistunenko, who has excellent comic timing and facial expressions, and it also felt as if this had more of a narrative. However, as the second half progresses, the narrative becomes more and more unbelievable. And the satire is not subtle and sometimes so broad, it misses its mark entirely. It is also an overly simplistic telling of history, for example it tells the story of the key Bengal famine, in which climate and a smallpox epidemic played a critical role, but omits these facts entirely, and lays the full blame for the famine on the British. So while it seems likely the British were culpable for aspects of the famine, they were not solely responsible. Like so many things, the truth is rather more complicated.
Finally, towards the end, there is an attempt to connect the two halves of the play together but they do feel very different, and I don't really feel that worked.
For me so far not a great year at the Orange Tree, I've seen three productions - Northanger Abbey, Uncle Vanya and this, and have found them all disappointing. Whereas, the last three productions I saw in 2023 at the OT were She Stoops to Conquer, which I thought was terrific; and That Face and The Circle which I also enjoyed.
|
|
20 posts
|
Post by ploverlover on May 17, 2024 20:55:35 GMT
I saw this yesterday and think lt sums things up pretty perfectly above.
Some good performances … and some cringey overdoing it. A few chuckles here and there and left me with a few things to think about.
First part threw in too many issues that were taken no further which was frustrating. Stronger second half and the interaction between Bea Svistunenko and Haylie Jones was fun to watch.
Not great, but not terrible either. It’s a 3 from me.
|
|
