Reader Reviews
The Lover (The Harold Pinter Theatre (formerly The Comedy Theatre), West End)
Back to Show Details| Score | Comment | Date |
 | God oh God!! Let me say I am a big fan of Harold Pinter, I am firm in the belief that he is possibly the greatest living playwright. This production of his brilliant short plays was slow, labourius and definately not worth the price of the ticket. Richard Coyle seemed uncomfortable and had a very dodgy posh accent. Maybe I saw an off night but I saw no chemistry in the Lover and the Collection, which isnt a long play, seemed like it lasted two hours. Dull. - James | 10 Apr 08 |
| Great performances from Richard Coyle and Tim West, otherwise..... - Joesmith | 07 Feb 08 |
| Have to say I agree with KJC. I love Pinters work but its the writing that takes the audience on a strange and often very funny journey. RDS believes that Coyles "staccato Pinteresque sound" is the proper way to interpret the text. I found it excluded any chance of us hearing a conversation between the characters and therefore left me cold. It’s a shame as the rest of the cast were playing it straight rather than Coyles attempt to artificially create an atmosphere. In the end Pinter writes plays he wants people to see and enjoy not revere as some mysterious artwork. - LCA | 30 Jan 08 |
| I think KJC misses the point I loved the monotony of Richard Coyle's delivery, that stacato, Pinteresque sound. I have already said something about these plays under "The Collection" listing so I'll keep this brief. Pinter is as surreal with words as Dali was with paints. Where Dali twisted reality through oils on canvass Pinter does it with sounds on stage - he's far more satisfying seen than read. One either loves or hates him. He makes us, the audience, work at it and that's where some find it hard to cope. Having to think when all we want to do is sit back and be entertained! Well, fair enough, but sometimes it is wonderfull to make that effort, even if we're none the wiser at the end, the journey can be a very enjoyable one. - rds | 29 Jan 08 |
| I made a New Year resolution to see no more Pinter. 21 days later, someone offered me a free ticket, so I broke it. I wish I hadn't. - GarGar | 24 Jan 08 |
| Neither of these plays represent Pinter's best works, or anything near it. Both were originally written specifically as television screenplays, which later transferred to stage, and this is evident from the number of brief scenes, some with little or no dialogue, and the episodic nature of the narrative (originally accomodating commercial breaks.) That said, there should be enough entertainment, and laughs, in both pieces (each concerning the issue of adultary) to provide a full evening. Whilst this double bill benefits from exceptional design by Soutra Gilmour and some extraordinarily effective lighting (by Jon Clark) and music (by Ben and Max Ringham) what really lets it down is the central, one-note performance by Richard Coyle in both plays. Each and every line is delivered with the same clinical monotone, with scant regard for the performances of the other actors or the nature of the text itself. There is no reaction to anything with which is presented - it appears to be more a premeditated line-reading than a performance. It is particularly galling that once the evening moves on to the second play, "The Collection", Coyle delivers exactly the same performance as he did in "The Lover", seeming to believe that the spectacles he has accquired in the interval will provide distinction enough between his roles. Which is a great shame, because in "The Lover", Gina McKee struggles gamely to do the work of two actors, and "The Collection" boasts a superb masterclass in how it SHOULD be done by the exemplary Timothy West, supported by a very fine performance by relative newcomer, Charlie Cox. - KJC | 24 Jan 08 |
