Has anyone else been to see this yet? I went last night, and thought it was chronically bad. It looks really cheap and nasty, there's some revolving sets on it which made Too Close To The Sun look slow, and despite really wanting to like Anna Friel, I found her performance to be flat, devoid of any charisma and ultimately very disappointing, not even random nudity (both male and female) could save it.

The best thing about it was the cat.

PS I've been a bit more eloquent about it here (but not much): http://oughttobeclowns.blogspot.com/2009/0...t-tiffanys.html

I'd be interested to hear what anyone else thought.

I saw a preview of Breakfast at Tiffany's on Saturday evening and have to disagree with some of your comments.

I think the set and costumes by Anthony Ward are wonderful a Tiffany blue sky and costumes evoking a very stylish 40s period – Anna Friel looks fantastic in her frocks! I think the two fire escapes are great – a sort of West Side Story meets Oklahoma. I guess as it's a preview, that their still making some changes to get the show right.

The choreography (by Wayne McGregor) is stylish and chic but I'm surprised that they employed a choreographer to work on a play – there are only about three dance numbers.

I found it a little difficult to hear Anna when she was on the walkway at the back of the stage, but she has a fantastic voice and sings three songs – People Will Say We're in Love, Speak Low and some folk song I hadn't heard before.

The Theatre Royal have gone all out on this – there's a great supporting cast James Dreyfus who is brilliant as Holly's agent; Dermot Crowley as Mr Bell. It's a very entertaining evening and although they need to take some time off the first half, I think by the time it opens this will be a real hit.

I actually loved the cat too – I didn't think it was real at first but in the scene when Holly kicks it out, I was moved to tears!

Oh how my heart skipped a beat when I heard this was coming to the Haymarket, and oh how my heart sank as I was leaving the theatre last night after one of the previews.
This could have been sooo good, but everything about it was distinctly average. I never really rated Anna Friel as an actress and last night proved to me why. The role of Holly is too big for her. With a setting of 1940s New York, the set could have been so glamorous, sumptuous and evocative. Instead all we get is two domineering stairwells rotating constantly that did nothing for me. And what is the West End's obsession with fake snow lately? Hamlet, The Shawshank Redemption, and now here? And as for the audience, I felt like I was in a doctors waiting room with all the coughing, sneezing and sniffing, I actually felt sorry for the actors. Even Joseph Cross disrobing didn't get me excited (oh ok maybe just a little ). Only see if you can get cheap tickets.

In my view a totally pointless adaptation. It looks cheap, is too episodic and the actors are too lightweight. One laugh - when Joseph Cross took his kit off in Act 2 an old lady shouted out "I'm going to be sick".

Suggest you rent the DVD and make a donation to a cat welfare charity rather than pay to see this one.

Shame - I was looking forward to it.

[quote name='hildyesterhazy' date='Sep 15 2009, 05:59 PM' post='87340']


Hmm...someone seems to be involved with the prod (note hild's joining date!).

Disappointing production, but then yet ANOTHER film-stage. It did try and be different, by adapting from the novella rather than the film, but still. Uncharismatic leads: why were they cast? It's coming to something when the mad lady from upstairs has the most stage presence and makes you sit up and want to be involved. Saw an early preview too, but if you haven't (and if it hasn't been cut) look out for the "horse riding in Central Park" scene...OMG, what were they thinking?!?! Also, the nudity was NOT a surprise: I don't know why I got this feeling, but in act one i thought "I bet Friel gets her kit off", and voila. Then Joseph Cross went full frontal in act 2... Cheap tricks though. No passion, no drama...what's the point?

Yikes, this is horrid. Clunky and so miscast. Poor old Anna Friel. I'm sure she's lovely but who let her be exposed like this. It's a bit like watching a school play....

I have to disagree. Was Mr/Mrs/Ms Apples at the same play? It's previewing so, even allowing for that, I found both Miss Friel and Mr Cross rather wonderful. He's a talent, she is mesmerising. Especially in the tricky second act. She's not Audrey Hepburn, nor should she be (read the novella!) nor is he George Peppard (he's a great deal more sensitive). The programme quotes Capote on the film and he wasn't keen on it. This is, to my mind, a faithful and moving version of a rather sad, but compelling and moving story.

The nudity? not gratuitous at all. Read the book.

As for the setting, it's stylised and a mere backdrop to the performances and on those terms works very well.

I'm not sure I would read your full review as eloquent: more bitchy perhaps?

I saw a preview today. I was totally entertained and thought Anna Friel in particular was excellent. After the show I saw Anna Friel talking to friends and she said she felt the performance today was far more snappy. I would love to see it again and I think by press night they will have a winner. No, its not like the film - Thank God

loved it! very impressed by both the leads

thought it was very amusing when during the central park scene the wooden boat chugged across the stage, and kept stuttering, and then stopped and was retrieved by the long arm of a stage manager!

This production seems like a lame attempt to write a cod Tennessee Williams play based on Capote's novella.

The performances are universally flat, and Joseph Cross's Alabama accent is anything but. (I lived there for 18 years - help!) Anna Friel, who I have enjoyed on stage many times has no spark, life, or even sex appeal as Holly, despite her well trumpeted nude scene.

Worst of all was the set. Anthony Ward and Sean Mathias have both spent aeons in New York. The two revolve are meant to be New York fire escapes. But they are painted white, and built like cruise ship ladders, not fire escapes - making me wonder why this was Anything Goes with no music.

Ms. Friel's blonde hair (wig?) is painful to behold, and the whole evening is still-born - and as far as I can tell, beyond saving.

I agree with the previous post. Truly shocking and terrible direction; it is a bad production top to bottom, and at times even embarrassing. I have never heard such a tepid response at the curtain call. I really felt for the cast, who are doing their best against terirble odds.

Maybe learn to spell Jane?

I saw it the other night and it got a great reaction from the audience. If you forget its the film, then theres much to enjoy. The set I thought was simple and elegant and they used the Tiffany Blue quite wittily and not in an obvious way.

Maybe learn grammar, phil. "theres"? Maybe you should apologise to Jane.

And I think Phil meant to type "it's" rather than "its" as well - but then again I don't know what "If you forget its the film" is supposed to mean, so I can't be sure.

I haven't seen the play because I thought the film was very overrated, with a totally miscast Audrey Hepburn and a ghastly Mickey Rooney, giving an extraordinary cringemaking performance as a Japanese man. What was originally a delightful novella was overblown into a rather flashy Hollywood romantic comedy, which only really came alive whenever the marvellous Patricia Neal appeared, bringing a welcome astringent quality. The leading actor, whose name escapes me, gave one of the dullest performances imaginable.

So, is the play a stage version of the film or the book, both of which were totally different?

George Peppard

Am sure it's a play of the novella having watched it. A bit darker than the film. The "guests" who are commenting on this thread are having me in stitches: I think we should guess what link they have with the production, or which cast member fan club they belong to, because they can't possibly have seen the "play" we all have! I pray it gets good reviews, but I fear the worst.

Not a film or play that appeals to me but having seen some of the hard work that has gone into putting it on in the excellent Theatreland series on Sky Arts I do hope it is more of a success than early reports here intimate.

Am glad it isn't just me having a hard time believing that people actually enjoyed it! I particularly liked the one to referred to me as being bitchy: she says bitchy, I say honest!

I hope that they have looked at the play during the preview period and thought a bit about what they could maybe do something to address some of the issues mentioned on here. I have no desire to see it fail, but there's work to be done for sure.

This is one of those plays that might have been better returning to the stage as a musical, so the songs could cover the appaling lapses and gaps in the production.