Nicholas

Quote

Thus in keeping with every review Letts ever writes then?

Nicholas, on 02 May 2013 - 12:02 PM, said:

Harriet Walter was Harriet Vane to Petherbridge's Lord Peter Wimsey. Bill Nighy had to push past me in a row once, long ago but never forgotten

Wonder if Henry Goodnan was flattered?

Carlos, on 06 April 2013 - 11:04 AM, said:

Your autocorrect is broken. It put "oddly" where you typed "more understandably than anything else in human history".

A lot of people who've previously visited the venue are still recovering from the resulting knee surgery.

What a horribly selfish turn this topic has taken. I often attend the theatre with a patent who suffers asthma. Theatres are old dusty buildings and a lot of the stalls sections are actually underground. Even the damp in the air that a person blessed with regular breathing would never notice can cause unintentional coughing fits. Consider the struggles of others before moaning about them.

Nicholas, on 01 March 2013 - 02:32 PM, said:

I totally get you about the fourth wall. Seeing people behind the actors doesn't bother me usually (the Donmar's my favourite theatre, and the Young Vic Hamlet one of my favourite plays last year, and they both staged on three sides), but for some reason last night they threw me out several times. The one you've mentioned - the girl's reaction to having brawlers nearly land on her lap that made everyone laugh - was one, the woman sipping wine like she was in her parlour while Lady Macduff was being brutally strangled directly in front of her was another, but there were others too. Plus the fact that a few of them left at the interval meant that there were glaringly empty seats.

Like you said, great to sit in, I'm sure - although the front row of the normal seats would probably be nearly as neat, and not risk the view being obstructed - but really kind of a distraction for everyone else.

Nicholas, on 01 March 2013 - 02:32 PM, said:

It's a Shakespeare thread. Yet I'm still sniggering immaturely. For shame.

exuberantlyblue, on 01 March 2013 - 01:25 AM, said:

Yes, that was me that said he was a bit shouty. In fact, I thought he was terrible until he was told about his family when there was a slight improvement, but just my personal opinion. He also got a round of applause mid show. I can't recall which speech it was but it was a patriotic one, so that might have something to do with it.

I posted a full week after I saw the play, and (possibly like Nicholas) on the day I was mostly "I'm not sure about this" in that it was quite unsubtle in places and I predicted (wrongly) that the critics would be divided with the direction choices rather than 4* mostly raves.

Also, as I have not seen the (£5!) programme, is there a particular reason for setting it in a dystopian Scotland (as opposed Scotland generally). I don't think they were trying to make a political point despite the obvious paralllels. What I mean, is did this ADD to the play and its understanding. Personally, I think the new context lost some of the original nobility of the play, so it seemed more like a lot of tribal warfare fighting over some scraps rather than the future of the country and power to unite it.

On the fire drill point, our matinee performance started 15 minutes late as the audience was held in the crowded foyer beforehand (not a fire drill though). I wonder also at the end of the play, some theatres let you exit through fire exits etc (usually you end up in some side street), but here the way out via one exit and one staircase was pretty slow and cramped also.

Saw this tonight, enjoyed it. I wish I'd been in the stage seats - they looked fun! But I was in the second-to-last row (row M) of the normal seats, and I can testify that you still get a great view from there. Also you don't have to worry about being in the blood splash zone.

Most of what I'd say has already been said - very gory, very intense, loooots of strobe lighting, great performances. As for Claire Foy, she wasn't my top favourite but I thought she held her own. One of the moments that will stay with me is when she leaned across a table to talk to her husband and in doing so put her hands straight down in the bloody slick that was currently on top of it. (In universe the blood wasn't real - part of a vision - but in the theatre it definitely was.) Eerie.

McAvoy does a really good job, I thought, although from Row M he wasn't completely recognisable, lol. But I've always thought of him as littler, somehow? And yet he inhabits that "bloody, physical warrior king" space entirely believably. If he didn't pull it off the play wouldn't work, but he does and it does.

The real standout performance for me was Jamie Ballard as Macduff - I see someone said he was "shouty" and maybe he was from close up but from Row M he was bang on perfect. Two women in the front row stage seats were surreptitiously wiping away tears.

Speaking of stage seats, they definitely get in on the action! I felt bad for one girl, she was just sitting there and then suddenly two fighting actors nearly toppled right into her lap. The look of terrified horror on her face made half the audience giggle (which kind of didn't work in the scene, oops). And then there was Lady Macduff's prolonged strangulation scene - with a lady in the front row contemplatively sipping away at her wine the entire gory time.

And yeah, five pounds for a programme. Highest I've seen in a while. It's got little blurbs about climate change turning Scotland into a wasteland and how art students and shoemakers can turn into mass-murdering dictators? Dunno, but it's not really worth 5 quid except for the collecting factor. Although at least one of the cast listed having received a WOS award.

Anyway, this isn't my favourite of Shakespeare's plays (and I'm not usually a big fan of gore) but I thought they did a great job with it. The porter scene didn't really work for me, but apart from that I liked their choices and didn't really notice any bad casting/acting.

Oh, one quick question - was what sounded like the fire alarm going off in the foyer for like 15 minutes before the show part of the experience? I.e., does it always do that, presumably to put you in the mood for apocalyptic scenes to come? Or was it just tonight?

Hee, hi! I don't think you were the annoying one - the people I was talking about on the other thread were behind me (so in Row N). And hey, cough sweets are never annoying.

I also like your version of what happened with the fire drill. I'm surprised they didn't make us all leave the foyer, though, if it was an actual drill - it was packed in there, and didn't feel entirely safe near the end (some smaller girls were getting shoved).

I agree with you about the witches. They fit the setting, I guess, but they didn't really do anything for me.

Nicholas, on 18 February 2013 - 03:47 PM, said:

You do realise that this is like meeting Royalty, only better, Nicholas?

Thanks for thoughts Nicholas...gave a great feel for the piece without spoilers! Looking forward to seeing it!

Nicholas, your review has inspired me.  I had seen it with KST as Anna and so right did it feel that I found it hard to imagine the roles being reversed.  Now i think I shall return to find out.

Still excited about this having seen it last year, when it was announced the only thing that appealed to me was that Harriet Walter was in it, but everything else was pretty much a turn off. I only saw it as I was offered a £10 seat and then was more bothered about not fainting and rolling into the action but this was Shakespeare as I hadn't seen it before. I've seen modern dress, I've seen great Shakespeare productions but probably none of them surprised me in such a positive way. It didn't work for everyone and there were bits I liked more than others but overall the impact was hard hitting and made me see a play that previously I really wasn't fussed about in a new way.