This topic is locked
If I tell you that the one moment of dramatic tension came when the ASM came on and told us that they were having to stop the show for a few minutes because of technical difficulties, then you will understand that this play isn't very good. I honestly thought for a second that stopping the show was part of the play and said to myself, hey this is looking up, we are going to have some cutting edge audience engagement here...sadly I was wrong. They adjusted one of the traps that had failed to shut and continued.
This play is set after some conflict involving Russian soldiers, one of whom survives terrible injury and returns home to his small town where - guess what- it is cold, there is corruption of petty officialdom, the chief of police is a violent sword-obsessed nutter and his wife has taken up with another bloke and his little son thinks he is dead.
It is really a school play and I say this not intending to insult schoolchildren; what I mean is that it addresses issues which it would be fruitful to discuss with children of say GCSE age. It would be better as a satirical cartoon such done these days in book form.
It has not enough content and too much, oh too much, messing about making a point about the undermining erosion of western culture in a society bereft of direction and stripped of its morality. There is very little language in it, I mean good writing; there are a few good jokes a la Laurel and Hardy. There is a bit of swearing so I wouldn't advice young kids to see it. There is a scene in a sauna in which the chief of police scratches his intimate parts - daring theatre, eh? - and tells us how he shagged a girl for an hour and forty minutes. There is a good scene between the hero and his estranged wife which could be the basis of a decent play.
Darrell D'Silva plays the police chief and thank goodness for that. Without him, the show would deflate like a punctured balloon. He keeps it in the air. But it is a cartoon caricature that he has to play. Christine Entwisle plays a femme fatale aide to the mayor, a part which is an insult to her abilities as an actress but, I know, she has to work. She has terrific shoes to wear - black satin killer heels. Perhaps she is going to be allowed to keep them.
The best thing about this play is that it is keeping 19 actors off the dole plus the techies. They all try their best with skillful acting and effects.
And now if I also tell you that the play is 2 hours 10 WITHOUT AN INTERVAL ....it was supposed to be an hour 40 but apparently on the first run they discovered that it took longer. So we are talking serious self indulgence here on the part of the director, Anthony Neilson who thinks that this is worth the RSC regular punters sitting through without a wee or a drink. Not to mention the tourists..
This is high summer season in Stratford, Bank Holiday coming up, one of our premier theatre companies and a town full of people with a bit of spare cash and a whim to see a play. There were plenty of empty seats, in fact the theatre was the emptiest I've ever seen it so the posters are not luring people in.
But why this material at all? Didn't Shakespeare write enough? Didn't Marlowe and the others give us a bit of choice?
I am very disappointed with this play and the fact that the RSC which I support with money and my mouth should be offering this second rate play at this time.
The Drunks RSC it would help if you were...
#2
|
|
Promote to Article
Couldn't agree more about 'a clunker right from the start' and 'a Michael Boyd vanity project'. Why does the RSC have to shoot itself in the foot? As another contributor says, this is the height of the tourist season and Stratford is full of visitors. Why cannot the RSC put on something the punters actually want to see. The Russian season - who bloody cares? It is just the most colossal yawn.
