the whole damn play was pretty shit if you ask me, for goodness sake i couldn't even keep awake. what an awful production. fair enough theatre is full of exaggeration and predictable storylines, but thats whats so great and exciting about it. i got no joy from watching this mess what so ever. - joella
12 Jan 09
Well David Walliams certainly deserves all the criticism he gets here. He's bloody awful and comes dangerously close to spoiling the beautifully balanced performances of Bradley and Gambon when he opens his mouth. Why on earth was he cast in the first place? Was it to pull in a new audience? Whatever the reason he has denied the chance for a young, TRAINED, actor to get a break - unforgivable! I still can't rate Pinter as highly as the literati do, but never the less I really enjoyed this production of one of his better plays, apart from, that is, Mr Walliams feeble effort. But what a joy it was to watch Gambon's Hirst seemingly to physically grow younger in the second act with a bravura performance which must surely put him in the running for an award this year. And, similarly, but in reverse Bradley's Spooner goes from arrogant loquaciousness in the first act to taciturn humility in the second. A masterclass in acting from these two. Pinter ought to have scrapped the two minor characters and simply made it a two hander. It's a sell-out show, but if you can get a return go and see it for Gambon and Bradley alone, you won't be disappointed. I have given it five stars for them alone. - rds
02 Jan 09
Along with Gareth James and the West End Whingers I just don't get Pinter. Perhaps I'm stupid but I prefer my plays to have some semblance of a story. Instead we get the usual speechifying which might mean something but probably doesn't and the oh-so familiar sinister air of some unspoken threat. There's no arguing that the performances of Gambon and Bradley are remarkable and this is presumably something about memories and declining circumstances but I've seen it all before and must learn never to subject myself to it ever again. - David Baxter
02 Dec 08
Overly hyped unfortunately. Gambon and Bradley great; Walliams just confirms that he's no actor... - Quentin
27 Oct 08
Extra star if waxwork Walliams were replaced. Bradley and Gambon superb. Intermittently gripping.Only for Pinter fans. - JOHN RAYMOND
21 Oct 08
A bewildering evening but that was to be expected. David Bradley and Michael Gambon get to the heart of the matter but though still is confusing you are aware of witnessing great acting. Just don't ask too many questionss of what it was about. David Walliams unfortunately looked very uncomfortable and while his character can bear this, his stiff delivery and demeanour was distracting. He's also unfortunately too type cast from Little Britain to really take on this. Perhaps musical theatre is more his forte? A grumbly very confused audience left the theatre at the end with many like me I'm sure feeling we had witnessed "actors doing theatrical things" somewhat indulgently in the name of art whilst we were in the real world. - Stuart
10 Oct 08
ALTERNATELY GRIPPING AND IRRITATING - SOME OF THE LONGEURS HAVE VAGUE SIGNIFICANCE - WITH THREE BRILLIANT CONFIDENT PERFORMERS PLUS THE UNFORTUNATE DAVID WALLIAMS DESPERATE FOR STRAIGHT RECOGNITION AND ESCAPE FROM THE CRUDE VULGARITIES OF HIS PRIME ASSOCIATION WITH TV OBSCENITIES. HE FAILS. HOW DID HE GET CAST BY THE BRILLIANT GOOLD? BRADLEY IS BRILLIANTLY THE TRUE LEADING CHARACTER WITH FIVE TIMES MORE TO DO THAN THE VERY IMPRESSIVE GAMBON. FRAGMENTS OF PLOT ALTERNATE WITH SURREALISM, MOST OF IT ENTERTAINING. STIFF DRINK THEN SEE IT.THEN HAVE ANOTHER AND IT MAY BECOME CLEARER.ONLY IN THE THEATRE... - ALEX GREEN
09 Oct 08
Good play ruined by the stunt casting of yet another comedian who can't act. - joesmith