Reader Reviews
Hitchcock Blonde (Royal Court - Jerwood Theatre, West End)
Back to Show Details| Score | Comment | Date |
 | This is spoiler-free. I found Terry Johnson's Hitchcock Blonde a hugely depressing experience. Though this is not its intent. I was depressed that there are so many exciting writers with things to say who will not get their work onto the most coveted stage for new writing in this country because it has been squandered on this high-budget three-hour play about nothing. Throughout these three hours, I wondered what Johnson was trying to write. By its third act, the writing flounders everywhere, trying to snatch any resonance from increasingly sensational, illogical twists. Expectation certainly damages it; you would hope a play, in which two people's relationship while examining a lost Hitchcock film comes to echo those of the director and his leading ladies, would richly capture the notoriously unusual aura, the traction, which reverberates around Hitchcock's femme fatales and his cold adulation of them. But the play often slides away from its focus material, devolving into sitcom chatter. I was agog to note that one entire scene Terry Johnson has already delivered as part of another play - the National Theatre's Chain Play, Oct 2001 - which goes to show how arbitrary its content is. Even when he's on his subject matter though, it's very hard to believe that Johnson's sense of Hitchcock goes beyond the very basic of an old man who contrived sticky ends for the beautiful woman he perved after. I got the impression that Johson had only seen Psycho, Vertigo and The Birds, three films from a massive oeuvre, and had perhaps seen them very little at that, because he doesn't even attempt to address the incredible psychological depths which Hitchcock loaded not just into these films but many others, and furthermore the deeper psychological complexities which exist in these films despite Hitch's intentions. The character of the Hitchcock expert simply doesn't ring true because he has no deep thought on the director's films; describing Vertigo as "a symphony of life and loss", he sounds like any layman whose picked up a soundbite from the nearest copy of Halliwells Film Dictionary. More unbelievable yet is the clueless student, not helped by a stunningly one-note performance delivered at a shout So. Every. Line. Is. Rendered. A. Bit. Like. This. Rosamund Pike comes off as best of a bad lot, but even she seems desperately restricted in what should have been a smouldering scene wherein she tells her husband about her day as a body-double on the Psycho shoot. I wondered if it was wise to let the writer direct this production; the direction seems non-existent, which renders his hollow writing all the more naked. It is an exasperatingly inconsequential piece of theatre. I found myself drawn only to the visual gimmicks (the tiniest of swimming pools onstage, and a shower scene stolen directly from DV8 Physical Theatre's QEH show of 1999). I am posting this outside of the 'Hitchcock Blonde spoiler' thread because I want chiefly want to recommend those who have not seen the play that you would find more reward in taking yourself to see a classic Hitchcock film instead. They tell us more about Hitchcock than this play does, but moreover, they tell us the things about behaviour and relationships and psychology that slip straight out of the grasp of Johnson's play. Please, Directors of the Royal Court, give a genuinely thoughtful, deserving play your resources. - USER: Whatsonstage.com (80.193.222.20) | 17 Apr 03 |
| Original, funny, thoughtful and very clever. It combines cinema technique with theatre beautifully and unobtrusively - it's use of projection techniques, lighting and music are superb. Saw it Friday 11th April and thought all performances were excellent - probably improved since it opened. Highly recommended. - USER: Whatsonstage.com (62.252.0.5) | 11 Apr 03 |
| Plenty of twists and turns to keep you guessing in this impressively-staged production. The first act sets everything up, the plot thickens in the second and you're dying to see the loose ends tied up by the third. Admittedly, it's about 15 minutes too long, but that's a minor quibble. The cast is very good - headed by David Haig and Rosamund Pike... and William Hootkins' performance as Hitchcock is one to savour. Remember to hand your bags in to the cloakrooms before you go in. Probably not so much to do with the war and security measures... I think the management is keen to ensure that nobody takes any sneaky shots of Ms Pike in that key scene... Andrew B - USER: Whatsonstage.com (193.130.127.205) | 08 Apr 03 |
| I am really tempted to see the play again... and I think it would do very well if it transferred into the West End.. The story was very intriguing as we tried to guess what was really happening across the three timelines 1999, 1959 and 1919. I thought David Haig was fantastic in the play as was Rosamund Pike... but we thought that Fiona Glascott gave a horrible shoutey performance.. was she doing this to show the character as being slightly unstable... hard to decide since it came across as a mess... The staging was fantastic and extremely inventive too.... - USER: Whatsonstage.com (213.86.234.1) | 07 Apr 03 |
| I saw this on Friday night with the Whatsonstage.com group outing. It is a tremendous play. Very inventive, possibly a bit too long but it didn't seem it. - USER: Whatsonstage.com (80.193.222.20) | 07 Apr 03 |
