Anyone seen the Donmar's production of Ivanov yet, currently in previews? If so, tell us about it.

I haven't seen it yet, and I'm looking forward to going. But there's an awful review up on theatremonkey by someone who left half way through. (Not the Monkey's own review.)

Do we have any more positive reactions to this production?

Just read the theatremonkey review and the punter seems to have had a bad seat and couldn't hear which is odd because the Wyndhams is tiddly. I checked my tix and they are row B so I should be ok! Have they changed the seating? I know they have done some redecoration , the pics were on another thread.

The seats themselves were changed just a few years ago and I think have been removed and replaced. The configuration has changed however - the spacing has increased a tad and the centre aisle has been abolished in the stalls. The dress I think is much the same but I believe the upper and/or balcony has been marginally reconfigured.

5 stars from Billington.





http://theseeingplace.blogspot.com/

I'm in the balcony for this one, so I hope it's been improved!

Never trust a reviewer who leaves at the interval.

It appears this show is so popular that even the BBC news article is more about the reviews than the play itself.

Guess I might not be going to that wedding after all...

There's another review at my website - http://mrgdavies.com/theatrereviews.aspx

It's outstanding . Quite, quite brilliant

Very cosy in the stalls ~ ie not much room at all! It was warm there the night I went which was nice (for me) so I didn't mind too much when a tall man sat directly in front of me ~ thankfully (for me) it's a high stage (felt sorry for A row) so I could just see some middle action above his head but as most of the action is to the sides I was fine.
As for the rest of the theatre ~ nice new carpets, wallpaper, seats etc.
As for the production ~ FABULOUS. Malcolm Sinclair and Gina McKee outstanding as were pretty much all the cast except perhaps Andrea Riseborough who I wasn't sure about ~ she was charming in the first act but then her impetuous nature bothered me in the second... everyone else seemed to work well together as a team but she did not... still early days...

Oh dear, I'm in row A. And not just for this production. Why, of why can't Delfont Macintosh manage to have an online ticket selling facility that lets you choose your own seat when so many other theatres are capable of this? Even the RSC has finally installed such a system. A high stage you say? Wonder what my chances are of actually seeing anything that happens onstage at all then, I'm only 5'3". Maybe I should just sell my tickets to this one, 12th Night and Hamlet and cut my losses.

I don't understand - if you're offered seats in row A, can't you reject them and ask for others?

I too have seats in row A for Twelfth Night....am now a bit worried! Felt rather chuffed at having nabbed them!

No, you can't, not when you buy online, all that happens is that you get offered the exact same seats again.

You need to add more tickets then remove the ones you dont want.

Is Row B ok? Taking friends, would hate to have lousy seats.

Oh, is that how you work around it? Amazingly antiquated system in any case. And I refuse to believe that it actually chooses "best available", I think it just starts from one end of row A and works its way across that one, then row B and so on all the way to the back of the stalls. I booked on the first day of booking, looking for just ONE ticket for this one, so it's not like it was impossible due to some need to find a large block of seats (I did exchange my original ticket for another performance due to scheduling problems, but they were both seats in row A for some reason).

If it does turn out that row A is in reality restricted view when they've sold them at full price I will be the angry woman that you'll see in the foyer, making a big scene.

Booking online? How's this for a rogueish idea - phone the box office, talk to a real person, and ask for a row you like?

I use Venue Master - software (by Ticketmaster) and if you have the automated best seats availible it picks the next availible free seat, it always makes sure that there are no single seats left and only doubles are left - which means usually if you pick 1 ticket you are given the worse 'best choice' seat - obviously the operator should personally pick the best seat and override the automated system (very easy to do) but from my experience they usually don't - ive never had a problem with getting great seats with See Tickets though.

I was right at the end of row B last night and was a bit worried when I saw the position but it was absolutely fine - a good view, not restricted at all. I've got row A seats for some of the others and, having seen the set up, I'm pretty sure the view will be ok, though of course a few rows back would be better.
Superb evening in every respect, go and see if you possibly can.

Well I booked so long ago, I think the actors should invite me up on the stage. Talk about having faith. Anyway, looking forward to a great production- going on Saturday.

Well, that made me laugh aloud and I feel the same. I'm going to the Saturday matinee with the whole family - can't even remember where we are sitting - but it's not row A or B of the stalls.

I think if you are A row bring a cushion with you esp if you have a short upper body... I am not kidding when I say it is a high stage. B looked fine to me as you are that much further back. I agree with charging less for a restricted view but the trouble is the top price is already quite a modest £32.50 as it's Donmar (studio) prices.

All good in theory, but not really practical when you live abroad and tries to buy tickets on the first day of booking when you can expect endless phone queues. It'd only call the box office as a last resort and I wouldn't even try to do that on the day that booking opens.

Anyone have any info on return tickets? I'm going into London at the end of october (from abroad) and I know that there are standing room tickets but is is also worth q-ing for returns? Or are there daytickets available? Thanks for the info!

Was I in the same audience as you tonight Lynette?
I thought the production was fantastic - thought all the cast were excellent, a bit too much "directed" comedy, but overall really, really good. And great design too (didn't like the first act set, but the rest was much better).

So Row B in the stalls was ok but I would have preferred further back; frankly row A isn't so good, no way you could see their feet which might not sound too bad but...I don't know why it is like that - have they raised the stage? There is a wooden edge which looks like it might have raised the stage a bit. Frankly Jenny if you have row A for all the shows, I would see if you can change them.

Great ensemble piece, all the quality of a Donmar, lighting, sets, costume etc..the acting superb all round. Lucy Briars good, Sylvestra Le Touzel super, all the women in fact especially excellent. Kenneth Branagh made it look easy, he balanced between likeable and despicable as I think the part demanded. I was impressed by the translation which never jars. And it is very funny.

I thought the translation did occasionally jar, Lynette. It seemed like everyone was basically ignorant of psychological illnesses but then the young girl used the phrase "nervous breakdown" which I thought was annoyingly contemporary. There were a few things like this.

I was amused by the curtain, which has the titles of all the shows in the Donmar Wyndhams season. Multipurpose!

I was in Row B of the Grand Circle which is further back than I would usually go for, but was actually fine for this production (when booking seats for this season I went for the second band of prices for all the shows except for Judi Dench's when I splurged on top price stalls seats, Row D - the box office person said 'Dame Judi will be pleased.') Row A Stalls didn't look great and I saw one guy at the end of the row holding his ears - I think a speaker was blasting away in his ear as well.

I thought Kevin McNally was superb! For me, the stand out performance. Also liked Gina McKee. Thought the Third Act set and acting particularly excellent.

It wasn't the translation exactly, but a lot of the references to financial difficulties were getting knowing laughs from the audience.

I agree Josh, first act set a bit bare but the other acts, really great. I noticed 'nervous breakdown' but you know I wonder if Stoppard who is Mr Language after all, didn't think this through and maybe they said stuff like this...I loved the character of Sasha; Andrea Riseborough played just right, getting the modern teenage rebel and the repressed young woman doing her duty stuff. I loved her and everyone watch out for the super little touches of when she apes her mother, as a joke and the way she stands.

After the show some people were staying in their seats - was this a chat to the actors thing?

i sat on raw B and you have to be careful with the spittles of the actors
well, i love chekov and i love branagh, so the play was perfect for me. but there are two things that annoyed me a little: the acting of Andrea Riseborough (she seemed to me an amateur actress amongst great performances of the rest of the cast) and why it has to be so funny? chekov is always sad! it's ok to have funny bits but the end has to finish in a dramatic crescendo and the play didn't have one... (except the very end, of course).

You didn't think the end of Act 3 was dramatic? And unbearably sad?

Well, I've already exchanged my ticket for Ivanov due to a scheduling problem, so don't want to make a problem requesting another exchange, but if it turns out to be as bad as you all suggest I will most certainly be making a huge fuss about it when I see it, and also demand to get my tickets for the other two changed.

sorry to be pedantic but you cannot FINISH in a DRAMATIC CRESCENDO. Why do people constantly misuse this word?

A huge thumbs up for Ivanov. Having seen many of the Donmar's recent productions with some varied results, this raises the bar (yet again).

I was very impressed with Kenneth Branagh's performance, but also Gina McKee bringing out the tragedy in her character. Malcolm Sinclair, Lorcan Cranitch and Kevin McNally were excellent, with richly comedic performances where their characters might appear farcical with lesser actors or direction. Andrea Riseborough I thought was very good - a difficult part but bringing the despair, joy and impetuousness to her character to life. Tom Higgleston as the "honest" doctor came across well in a mostly unsympathetic part.

I think it was the self awareness of the characters that was so well played and directed. I do find that when there are so many 5 star reviews, this does create usually unsustainable expectations, but not the case here.

This was a very funny production, with some startling changes in tone to heartbreaking tragedy, with Ivanov and his perception of the world falling apart. Good sets and atmospheric.

We were in row C - the view was fine. A little bit looking up, but not uncomfortably and more than compensated by the close view of the tears in some of the scenes and to a lesser extent, the whiff of the cigar smoke.

I could have just said "electrifying", but wanted to say more.

I believe that Russian productions of all the plays tends to emphasise the comedy, the elegiac/respectful tone of typical UK productions is possibly just a local affectation ?

I thought the direction of this fairly weak play was brilliant. One thing Michael Grandage is really excellent at is casting - this is something of a virtuous circle as the more success he gets the more he can attract good actors to play supporting roles - I doubt Gina McKee would have turned out just to look wan for anyone else. THis followed the trend of some of his other productions (eg. Wild Duck) by being almost perfectly cast throughout.

"I believe that Russian productions of all the plays tends to emphasise the comedy, the elegiac/respectful tone of typical UK productions is possibly just a local affectation?"
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I have never seen a Russian production of 'Ivanov', but did see the great John Wood in the leading role in a decent cast in a late 1970s RSC production and, such as it is, my memory is of its elegaic, respectful tone and thus not that memorable as time passed.

This 'Ivanov' is a serious play with comedy, brilliantly staged and performed, and thus a very satisfying theatre experience for actors and audiences alike.

I don't understand the kind of comment in one of the early posts on this thread about 'leaving early' according to a monkey in the theatre, a kind of inarticulate huff of a reaction to any play, never mind plain daft when presented with this magnificent play. I'd love to see it again and I'm not sure I won't if I can get hold of a ticket.

Chekhov criticised Stanislavski for turning his comedies into tragedies. As I read on a very good blog recently, "With Shakespeare you can choose among the plays, tragedy or comedy. But they don’t come in a mix. With Ibsen you get undiluted tragedy. But Chekhov sees the humour, or the moments of humour, within a tragic life; and he is ever aware of the tragedy in the comedy of everyday life."

Job

Not really true is it ? Merchant of Venice - one assumes originally it was seen as a comedy mostly, but it is now something between, likewise Taming of Shrew, All's Well, and some others - most relevantly Twelfth Night (next play for Michael Grandage to direct) - you could direct this as almost a tragedy (which is not the same as saying you could direct it to have no laughs in it at all, which is sometimes the case).

Ibsen - well yes, mostly tragic, with the notable exception of Lady From The Sea ?

I've always found Ghosts rather hilarious.

Did anyone who's seen this Ivanov see the Ralph Fiennes one at the Almeida a good few years back? That was very funny too in parts, as I recall - I think David Hare did that translation, and I remember Michael Frayn saying in a slightly sour grapesy way on the telly that it was Chekhov as he'd never seen it before. I haven't seen this one yet, but I can't imagine Stoppard being outdone by Hare in the joke stakes. Anyway, how do the two productions compare?

Oh, and The Master Builder is pretty funny too - all those phallic towers.

I didn't see that one. I bet Hare didn't do the translation though, just a version from a translation by someone else (same as for the Almeida "Platonov" a few years later). What gives Frayn's comments some weight, and what in my view makes his versions of the four major Chekhov plays the best there are, is that he really does do the translation too.

The Stoppard version in this production is very good, not for the purist but nicely in keeping with the production style.

This one is funnier. Ivanov almost a likeable chap and the Jewish thing not pointed up as much as it was at the Almeida in Hare's version. This production seems more like a completed play, I remember thinking that the Hare version was obviously early work.

Yes Jan, of course Hare worked from a literal translation and Frayn didn't, but I still thought his comments were rather sour. This one must be hysetrical if it's funnier than the Fiennes one - I found that one hilarious in places (I have a distinct memory of roaring at Bill Paterson). But it was also very dark. I hope Stoppard hasn't lost the darkness.

Back to the Shakespeare thing, you'll find that some of the Tragedies (like 'Romeo & Juliet') play as Comedies for quite a substantial portion of the play, only turning into Tragedy when people start dropping dead. Some of the Comedies (take 'Much Ado About Nothing' for example) take quite a nasty turn before they "all live happily ever after". Some plays, like 'Troilus & Cressida', could validly be described as Comedy or Tragedy depending on the approach you take. And what about the Histories, filled with both Tragic and Comic scenes? Does that "very good" blogger actually *know* Shakespeare? I mean, I'm still a newcomer, and even I can see the idiocy of saying they're either Tragedy OR Comedy and never the twain shall meet.

Hell, sometimes the only way you can tell the difference is the old maxim of if they all die, it's a Tragedy, if they all get married, it's a Comedy. And, as for every other example, it's by no means guaranteed.

Even Hamlet has several comical moments!

Those are really good points, and I agree with all of them - particularly Merchant (at least for modern audiences).

My original point was that Chekhov really ought to be humorous, and in the best productions he is. Declan Donnellan's Russian 'Three Sisters' a while back had some beautiful 'laugh-through-the-tears' moments, and ten years ago Adrian Noble's RSC 'Cherry Orchard' was brilliantly funny; yet the same director's po-faced 'Seagull' five years ago was dead on arrival.

Job

Hell, sometimes the only way you can tell the difference is the old maxim of if they all die, it's a Tragedy, if they all get married, it's a Comedy. And, as for every other example, it's by no means guaranteed.
[/quote]

And if they all turn out to be related to each other it's a Romance. Last scene of Cymbeline is hard to direct, so totally unlikely and absurd that it is almost impossible to direct it as anything other than farce (very tangentially I was reminded of this scene during the last scene of Ivanov), but Declan Donnellan managed to make it something more complex when he directed it.

Saw Ivanov last week - this is a brilliant play with an absolutely brilliant cast. Especially Kevin McNally was wonderful
BTW - does anyone know why Kenneth Branagh doesn't come out anymore after the show? I think he always used to do so - at least when he played in Edmond and Richard III...