Angela Thorne in Ring Round the Moon

Ring Round the Moon
Venue: Playhouse Theatre
Where: West End
Date Reviewed: 20 February 2008
WOS Rating:
Average Reader Rating:
Reader Reviews: View and add to our user reviews

The bittersweet plays of Jean Anouilh have lost whatever shaky foothold they once held in the British theatre, so Sean Mathias’ revival of this famous 1950 translation by Christopher Fry (first directed by Peter Brook, starring Paul Scofield) of one of the very best of them, does at least have a curiosity value. Does Ring Round the Moon stand up to modern scrutiny, for a start?

Enjoyable though the production is in parts, I’m not at all sure the answer comes as a positive. A pair of twins, Hugo and Frederic, one scheming and hedonistic, the other shy and forbearing, both played by the same actor – JJ Feild, best known to date for his television work, making his West End debut – are embroiled in a series of romantic liaisons by the light of a winter moon under the supervision of a wise old chatelaine.

Yes, I know. It sounds just like A Little Night Music, a show Mathias once directed at the National. It has the same sort of wry, cynical take on affairs of the heart and is, in a sense, set to music: the old lady, Madame Desmortes (Angela Thorne, evincing a wispy steeliness from the safety of her wheelchair) has issued invitations to a ball. The plangent music composed by Jason Carr wafts through the action.

The other guests include a parvenu chatterbox (brilliantly done by Belinda Lang, hardly drawing breath) and her beautiful daughter, Isabelle (pert newcomer Fiona Button), a dancer, who becomes the focus of the complots and the catalyst for change and resolution.

While Hugo manipulates Isabelle into a false relationship, she quietly falls in love Frederic. Mathias is not all that good at elucidating the details of the development, but they also involve a Jewish financier Messerschmannn (Leigh Lawson), and two vampish, disaffected society dames, India (Emily Bruni) and Diana (Elisabeth Dermot Walsh).

Colin Richmond’s setting is a rather functional conservatory, seemingly fitted out with a job lot of naked bulbs from Home Base, with sightlines that obscure Hugo’s extended occupation of a large window for about eighty customers in the left side stalls. The costumes, however, are where the money’s gone, conjuring the New Age designs of Dior and Balmain in shades of aubergine, mauve and discreet pink. JJ Field cuts a dashing figure in a midnight blue dinner suit, though his articulation is sloppy.

Kenneth Tynan described Oliver Messel’s design for the original London production as decorated in gossamer fired from an icing gun. This harsher visual treatment exposes the heartlessness of the play more effectively, and its class snobberies, without enforcing an argument for its magical qualities. The fireworks at the end are pregnant with foreboding, not jollity.

The highlights are the scenes staged as dance numbers (choreography by Wayne McGregor) and the sly exchanges between Madame Desmortes and her bird-like amanuensis (Joanna David) and between the butler Joshua (sepulchral, world-weary Peter Eyre) and everyone.

- Michael Coveney

Reader Reviews

Score	Comment	Date
	Actors not knowing lines, a set which is frankly embarrassing, music which does not fit the show and horrendous dancing combine to make this one of the worst shows I've ever seen. - PWH1980	23 Feb 08
	I loved it enough to see 3 times so far. The cast is outstanding, the music and dance routines just wonderful and the whole production just lifts you to another magical, glamorous and elegant world. Dont miss it, it's fabulous. - kls	22 Feb 08
	Fair comments perhaps from other reviewers here, but even so it still has a spring in it's step - and a slide to the foot, you have to see it to know! With such a talented cast it would have had to be dire not to succeed and this avoids that sorry fate altogether. 2½ hours flew around. I am tired tonight so can't be arsed to write much more other than to say if you want a light, bright yet thought provoking fun evening out go and see it you won't be disappointed! - rds	20 Feb 08
	incredubly poor production of an incredibly boring play, a shame really i dont think the west end really need this - bob	20 Feb 08
	I found this revival of limited interest. I had good memories of previous productions. The world has moved on however and to move the play into the post world war II period didn't help and why that austere conservatory set? It surely needed something delicate and frothy. Belinda Lang was excellent and I loved the dances but time hasn't treated this well. - Stuart	20 Feb 08
	Sure the production has style, but overall it's a lengthy, overcomplicated play with unstimulating attempts at acting - Eve	15 Feb 08
	I really love this play and was pleased to see it was being performed. The production was not bad, but I had one major gripe with it. Some bright spark moved the setting of the play from the early 1910s to 1947, and the only reason given for this was that the clothes in 1947 were nice. This seems to me a major mistake. The play is set very specifically pre-war. It is an era where social ettiquette, class and reputation are still important and the rich enjoy 'scandals' whilst trying to avoid being part of them. 1947 on the other hand was after two world wars, when France had been under occupation. The frivolity and innocence of the past is forgotten. By moving the play forward around 35 years it has made it look silly and if it was set in 1947, the character's attitudes would all be incredibly old fashioned, when in fact they are largely young, fashionable types. The era of the play is part of its charm, and vital to the way the characters behave. That said, there were good performances, especially Emily Bruni as Lady India who got the biggest laughs. Belinda Lang also gives a good performance as Isabelle's mother. I enjoyed the production, but would have loved to see it in the correct context. - T Rivers	15 Feb 08

Discuss this story with other theatregoers

Sign-up for our RSS Feed

Join our mailing list

Write a Review
Give us your opinion on this production, give it a score (1 is low) and a comment
Score:	1 - very poor23 - ok45 - superb
Comment:
Name:	Required, will appear on website
Email:	Required, will not appear on website
Confirm:	Please type in
	Please enter this number > SEVENTY-EIGHT < Just the two digits only, without any spaces.