Reader Reviews
The Royal Family (Haymarket, Theatre Royal, West End)
Back to Show Details| Score | Comment | Date |
 | I must admit that I was driven to see The Royal Family simply by the fact that the marvellous Dame Judi Dench headed the cast and I was not dissapointed in that respect, Dame Judi was magnificnet, her sarcastic put-downs never failed to cause laughter and the part when she describes pre-performance nerves is rather touching and gives a glimer of insight into a character which is unfortunately, like all the others, rather 2dimensional in structure. The supurb cast do their best with what they have but what they have in the form of script, plot and storyline is remarkably flimsy. I did leave questioning why such top class performers agreed to star in such a tired empty story, however Judi Dench's performance does make up for it, just about. - USER: Whatsonstage.com | 19 Dec 01 |
| I have to admit that it was the cast that tempted me into seeing this show rather than the plot or reviews. Overall I quite enjoyed it. Act I was a bit slow but Acts II and III were much better and at times it was gloriously over the top and had a very touching ending. Judi Dench was good especially in the scene where she pretended to faint to stop her grand daughter giving up acting. She also had some great one liners. Harriet Walter was superb as the belle of broadway who tried to bring a bit of calmness to the family. Peter Bowles was very funny times. Unfortunately Julia McKenzie was sinfully underused and I am surprised she took such a small part. The evening was made worthwhile by Toby Stephens as the Hollywood star - he was a joy to watch and lit up the stage every time he appeared as a sort of Errol Flynn kind of character. I doubt the show would have lasted, or even opened, without such a star cast and the whole piece is very much character driven rather than plot driven and such a fine array of talent made the whole thing worthwhile. - USER: Whatsonstage.com | 10 Dec 01 |
| The problem is the creaky, old play in which not much happens. In Act I everyone screams a lot, but there's very little plot development. Things didn't get going until Act II, which was much better. Loved the cast, especially Peter Bowles, Toby Stephens and Harriet Walker. I'm an ardent Dame Judi fan but have seen her so much better in other performances. Another favourite, Julia McKenzie, really didn't have much to do. Would have loved this cast in another play about a real royal family called Crown Matrimonial, which I saw at the same theatre back in the 70's. - USER: Whatsonstage.com | 04 Dec 01 |
| Yes, I have to admit that the some American accents leave a lot to be desired but I cannot see how you could see this play and not be blown over by Dame Judi's stage presence; I have never been so drawn to an actress on stage. I can understand how the play could have gone (it needed the cast and director) but to say that it was a huge disappointment is beyond my sixteen year-old brain to comprehend. - USER: Whatsonstage.com | 12 Nov 01 |
| This is a very nice play with great acting!! Peter Bowles was brilliantly funny, Toby Stephens great. Judi Dench needed a bit of time to get going, but ones she did she was really good. The great set and costumes also made this a wonderful experiance. Only thing they could have done without is the American accent. - USER: Whatsonstage.com | 12 Nov 01 |
| For many years now, Judi Dench has been a national institution rather than an actress. It doesn't seem to matter whether or not the role suits her - the magic of her name puts bums on seats and ensures largely uncritical reviews. I haven't seen "The Royal Family" but I sympathise with those who have and were dissapointed; many years ago I saw Dame Judi as Mother Courage and thought she was hopelessly miscast (I can't remember anything about her performance, but I've never forgotten that of Zoe Wanamaker as her daughter Katrin). - USER: Whatsonstage.com | 08 Nov 01 |
| seldom have I agreed with theatre critics but have to this time - acting superb, costumes and set brilliant but what on earth was the director thinking to have this band of English actors slipping in and out of an annoying American/mid atlantic accent. I enjoyed the vening for the effort put in by the actors, not the play itself. - USER: Whatsonstage.com | 05 Nov 01 |
| I had one of the best theathrical experiences I've had for a long time!(An aesthetic comment, however!) Why did Toby Stevens (Anthony) wear black briefs under white trousers? Anyway, briefs in the 1920's would represent an anachronysm, - USER: Whatsonstage.com | 04 Nov 01 |
| A total disappointment and waste of a top class cast. The problem mostly rests with the play which is creaky to say the least. That doesn't mean that plays of this era and ilk are bound to fail. I could imagine plays like "The Man Who Came to Dinner" or "You can't take it with you" still being hugely funny but this one, despite the great cast, is just a big yawn. I think Peter Hall deserves all the blame. - USER: Whatsonstage.com | 04 Nov 01 |
| One of the most disappointing evenings I've ever spent in the theatre. Nice to look at, but not carefully directed and the actors did not convey a sense of joy in doing the show. In the end, I felt this was a cynical, "let's make some money" move on the part of many of the people involved. Such a staggering waste of talent! - USER: Whatsonstage.com | 04 Nov 01 |
| I disagree - I thoroughly enjoyed it. It's certainly not a profound play - it's largely a farce - but I much enjoyed the contrast between the hammy children on the one hand, played by Stephens (very funny) and Walter (whom I've always thought of as a rather contained and neurotic actress, but was very open and generous here), and Dench's matriarch who was the only one who really cared about acting and underplayed her role to great effect. Very entertaining and I, for one, did not have to fake my laughter. - USER: Whatsonstage.com | 02 Nov 01 |
| A total disaster. Whoever assembled the cream of English actors in such a bad play, should be banned from any West End theatre! I'm surprised Sir Peter Hall is associated with one of my most unpleasurable theatre visits for many a year. The only redeeming features about the production were the excellent set and costumes. - USER: Whatsonstage.com | 01 Nov 01 |
| Oh dear, what have they done? The Royal Family has a cast if not to die for then surely to rush to see but they have put together [in what looks like cynical haste] a dire play in a dire set with dire direction -Peter Hall, retire NOW - with our actors struggling to make overacting look chic. Judi does her thing - withering glances, perfect timing but is actually acting in her sleep. I hope the dosh pays for a nice holiday but she deserves better. Julia McKenzie wasted and Toby Stephens may have to redirect his career if he doesn't get a decent part soon. What do you lot out there think? Anyone else seen it? There was laughing in the audience but of the we - had -better- laugh -because -it -is -supposed- to- be funny variety - you know what I mean. - USER: Whatsonstage.com | 30 Oct 01 |
