|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 12, 2017 13:11:46 GMT
Highly recommended
I didn’t actually think much of the staging
A bit budget and naff
But the acting and play are simply delicious
|
|
1,503 posts
|
Post by foxa on Dec 13, 2017 8:54:24 GMT
I enjoyed the experience of this: the pre-show installation; the use of a space with which I was unfamiliar at the Royal Court ; the cameras; the twisted use of Christmas; the free mulled wine, etc. There was a familiar motif in the writing which I'm tired of the: {Spoiler - click to view}
Senseless murder of young women.
but some actual tension was created in the first section of the piece. The second section lost my interest a bit and then the third was just bonkers
Overall recommend. |
|
38 posts
|
Post by quine on Dec 13, 2017 12:12:22 GMT
Completely agree with you Foxa!
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 13, 2017 14:53:53 GMT
Fox’s, I also agree with everything you say, although I think the bonkers third part was my favourite bit.
|
|
1,503 posts
|
Post by foxa on Dec 16, 2017 9:53:35 GMT
They have released a few tickets for tonight's (Saturday's) performance. If you move quick...https://royalcourttheatre.com/book/?eID=99773
|
|
1,260 posts
|
Post by theatrelover123 on Dec 17, 2017 21:48:15 GMT
EASILY one of the worst shows I have seen this year (maybe for a few years). Tedious, nonsensical, script gibberish, didn't care about characters or what was going on, staged like a cheap student production in Edinburgh. Disappointing
|
|
1,064 posts
|
Post by bellboard27 on Dec 19, 2017 20:04:31 GMT
I liked this quite a lot, though not madly enthusiastic. But thanks @parsley for the recommendation. Interesting use of the space in the performance room, outside the windows of the space and in other rooms via camera. I do recommend a good look round the installation beforehand - props, sets, set-ups for the production to come. In reply to foxa{Spoiler - click to view}
There are two killings - of a woman and a man, so I think the woman writer has made it a bit more balanced Overall, I can see this would not appeal to everyone and would put off some. |
|
1,503 posts
|
Post by foxa on Dec 19, 2017 20:13:54 GMT
{Spoiler - click to view}
Wasn't the idea that the men preyed on lonely women - they described in detail how to go about doing it and the implication was that this was something they did regularly? Whereas wasn't the killing of the man a one-off in reaction to something? I know a woman wrote it so I wasn't saying it was sexist - just something I've seen a lot of. Just like someone who said they were tired of scripts (regardless if they are written by a man or woman) where a woman's actions were dictated by their having been abused as a child...surely there must be something else that can happen to women besides being abused or murdered ;-) Yeah but.... |
|
1,064 posts
|
Post by bellboard27 on Dec 19, 2017 20:23:19 GMT
{Spoiler - click to view}
Wasn't the idea that the men preyed on lonely women - they described in detail how to go about doing it and the implication was that this was something they did regularly? Whereas wasn't the killing of the man a one-off in reaction to something? I know a woman wrote it so I wasn't saying it was sexist - just something I've seen a lot of. Just like someone who said they were tired of scripts (regardless if they are written by a man or woman) where a woman's actions were dictated by their having been abused as a child...surely there must be something else that can happen to women besides being abused or murdered ;-) Yeah but.... {Spoiler - click to view}
You might be right. However, I am not even sure if the characters are who they were portrayed as, as there is a discussion of whether there is any distinction between individuals, who characters think they are and a gender swap that I think is more than using which actor is available. So, I wonder if the gender point is more fluid. I fully agree with your point on woman as victim for other productions, just this one seems less clear in that regard! |
|
1,503 posts
|
Post by foxa on Dec 19, 2017 20:52:55 GMT
Possibly, Bellboard - I hadn't thought of it quite like that. But (Sorry for those of you who haven't seen this, I can't think how to discuss this without spoilers...) {Spoiler - click to view}
You may be right that the playwright was more consciously commenting on gender roles - I have to say, I didn't get the point of the female actor switching to playing a male role for a while - that was a section of the play that lost me a bit. However, in the two first sections her main roles were victim and cheating wife, neither of which had any agency. The woman character was killed because of who she was, a lonely woman, whereas the man was killed because of what he did (have a conflict with another man.) Then the weird panda (?) characters came on and it seemed all humans were their prey - or at least their food stuffs (okay, you can see I struggled a bit with meaning here)....It's very possible it was tongue-in-cheek/ironic (and I did like some of the first section and I wasn't bored) but when she was killed, I felt like, 'oh, this again.' Meh. |
|
1,064 posts
|
Post by bellboard27 on Dec 19, 2017 21:10:30 GMT
Also sorry about the spoilers! {Spoiler - click to view}
I agree and there is danger in digging too deep and finding what is not actually there. Just on the cheating wife - the scene with her lover seemed largely what one might expect. But when back with her husband, the implication (in the conversation about sharing secrets) is that he knows all about it and there is something more going on. What I have no idea, as I don't think this point seemed to go further in the play. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 22, 2017 14:08:17 GMT
To respond to Foxa and Bellboard, the lengthy handwritten chunk of Sylvia Plath -I think it's displayed beside the entrance to the exhibition of Relics - seemed to me to set the issues you're talking about firmly in the mind before seeing the play.
I enjoyed the whole experience of the installation and the play but, for me, the direction was unsuccessful. Glancing through the playtext afterwards - I look forward to reading it properly later - it seems quite meticulous and precise in the detail of the action. But I found the production to be too much of a blur so that I didn't identify that characters were transforming but wrongly interpreted it as the actors transitioning between scenes. Also, I think I was probably so overloaded with the scale of the installation that I overlooked small crucial prop and scenic details in the play.
I see that Julia Jarcho herself directed the premiere production by her own theatre company. So it seems a bit perverse to introduce her play to the UK in such a different production. I'd have preferred it if Sam Pritchard and Chloe Lamford had collaborated with a writer to make a show, and if Julia Jarcho had separately been invited either to supervise a UK production or presentation of Grimly Handsome or to make or co-produce, a new show here.
I feel a bit mean saying all this because I do see this use of The Site as a major step forward for the Royal Court. Did anyone here see any of the new work shown there in the summer by Chloe Lamford and a series of writers? I wish I had!
|
|
3,040 posts
|
Post by crowblack on Dec 22, 2017 14:39:43 GMT
I saw this a week or so ago and enjoyed it, though I agree on the central section - it lost me a bit. It was still unforgivable for the man next to me - centre front row and a couple of feet from the actors - to be flipping through his playtext and looking at his watch, though! He was in a reserved seat and it's the second time in the last couple of months a London reserved-central-front-row-seat-man has behaved like this (maybe it's the same rude idiot?)
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 22, 2017 14:57:47 GMT
I saw this a week or so ago and enjoyed it, though I agree on the central section - it lost me a bit. It was still unforgivable for the man next to me - centre front row and a couple of feet from the actors - to be flipping through his playtext and looking at his watch, though! He was in a reserved seat and it's the second time in the last couple of months a London reserved-central-front-row-seat-man has behaved like this (maybe it's the same rude idiot?) I think This and goats and Imperium Were the best things I saw this year And on reflection I also very much enjoyed more than I thought Suppliant woman All impressive |
|
1,260 posts
|
Post by theatrelover123 on Dec 22, 2017 15:04:19 GMT
I saw this a week or so ago and enjoyed it, though I agree on the central section - it lost me a bit. It was still unforgivable for the man next to me - centre front row and a couple of feet from the actors - to be flipping through his playtext and looking at his watch, though! He was in a reserved seat and it's the second time in the last couple of months a London reserved-central-front-row-seat-man has behaved like this (maybe it's the same rude idiot?) I think This and goats and Imperium Were the best things I saw this year And on reflection I also very much enjoyed more than I thought Suppliant woman All impressive Completely disagree with what you say They are terrible choices They all involve death Goats die The Empire died People get killed in GH You have no taste, parsley Can't believe you could choose those When people around the world are starving And people are scraping together money just to live Theatre is not the answer The scum of the earth were sitting around you Jeez How does that medicine taste, parsley?  |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 22, 2017 15:15:20 GMT
I think This and goats and Imperium Were the best things I saw this year And on reflection I also very much enjoyed more than I thought Suppliant woman All impressive Completely disagree with what you say They are terrible choices They all involve death Goats die The Empire died People get killed in GH You have no taste, parsley Can't believe you could choose those When people around the world are starving And people are scraping together money just to live Theatre is not the answer The scum of the earth were sitting around you Jeez How does that medicine taste, parsley? Oh Have you seen all these shows then? I wasn’t aware you had been to Imperium |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 22, 2017 15:27:07 GMT
Imperium was decent, Goats was disappointing, Grimly Handsome was basically fine. I'd find it a pretty disappointing year if those three were my highlights. Suppliant Women was good though, I'll give you that.
|
|
1,064 posts
|
Post by bellboard27 on Dec 22, 2017 15:47:45 GMT
To respond to Foxa and Bellboard, the lengthy handwritten chunk of Sylvia Plath -I think it's displayed beside the entrance to the exhibition of Relics - seemed to me to set the issues you're talking about firmly in the mind before seeing the play. I enjoyed the whole experience of the installation and the play but, for me, the direction was unsuccessful. Glancing through the playtext afterwards - I look forward to reading it properly later - it seems quite meticulous and precise in the detail of the action. But I found the production to be too much of a blur so that I didn't identify that characters were transforming but wrongly interpreted it as the actors transitioning between scenes. Also, I think I was probably so overloaded with the scale of the installation that I overlooked small crucial prop and scenic details in the play. I see that Julia Jarcho herself directed the premiere production by her own theatre company. So it seems a bit perverse to introduce her play to the UK in such a different production. I'd have preferred it if Sam Pritchard and Chloe Lamford had collaborated with a writer to make a show, and if Julia Jarcho had separately been invited either to supervise a UK production or presentation of Grimly Handsome or to make or co-produce, a new show here. I feel a bit mean saying all this because I do see this use of The Site as a major step forward for the Royal Court. Did anyone here see any of the new work shown there in the summer by Chloe Lamford and a series of writers? I wish I had! The quote from Plath does help. Thanks for reminding me as it did strike me beforehand, but I was not thinking about it afterwards! On the summer shows, I went to B.S. by Nathaniel Martello-White (there is a thread on this). This just used the performance space itself (a bar was set up in one of the other rooms). I don't know about the other productions. I like the use of the additional spaces in GH (before and during the show). I would be happy for more of this, but only if it is done creatively and does enhance the show/experience. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 5, 2018 16:00:22 GMT
What was difficult about Grimly Handsome? Three scenes, one with men preying on a young woman, one about detectives and their immediate circle on what appeared to be the same case and a coda of animals, making the analogy clear as to the nature of the previous. If anything I was disappointed it was so clear, I’d been led to believe it was going to be ‘Lynchian’, someone whose surrealist and dream imagery is far more of a challenge. It was fine for what it was, I suppose. Your summary of Grimly Handsome seems extraordinarily reductive! Personally, I found Grimly Handsome, which I mostly enjoyed watching from moment to moment, to be probably the most difficult theatre I saw last year. So I read the text afterwards and then decided it was even more difficult than I first thought, and I understood that I could not "get" it and made a note not to see anything else by the writer, in the same way as I never now see anything directed by Katie Mitchell. You didn't mention that one character transforms into another, and back again. Or that each character in each of the three scenes is also in some way a specific character in the other two scenes. I'd have preferred to have seen this play directed by the writer, who directed the premiere production, because that would have guaranteed the source of everything the audience was experiencing. Another confusion (one of many) was why the "handsome" character wasn't handsome. And why did one of the three actors announce each of the three sections, instead of using the video screens? I've given this experience enough time to start reading reviews and features without spoiling my original experience. This was DIFFICULT! |
|
1,260 posts
|
Post by theatrelover123 on Jan 5, 2018 16:54:46 GMT
I still think this was hands down the worst show I saw last year. And I 'got it' all ;(
|
|
3,040 posts
|
Post by crowblack on Jan 5, 2018 17:20:21 GMT
Well, I rather enjoyed it - I hadn't read anything on it beforehand, because I like to see if a play can stand on its own two feet, and I found it interesting. It did lose me during the second section, but the performances and staging were engaging, and I'm glad I saw it.
|
|
