The play forces you as a British person to look at our relationship with monarchy. It is very clever in the way the central thought is not explicit but implicit within the epic story. France and America at that time responded to radical ideas. Why didn't Britain and is our system of Monarchy one we have really thought about in depth? Paine's ability to be radical and humane was made clear. It was a production that sinks in later rather than at the time. The cast were lacking in energy and verve on the evening I went, although the principals had clear characterization. The singing was weak and need much more attention. - hilary
12 Sep 09
What a let down: this show promised so much and delivered so little. The play was overblown, confusing to all but expert Tom Paine-ites. The character of Paine was given little room for development - and there were very few moments of passion and conviction. The direction was astonishingly wooden and there were very few moments of pure theatricality. What a let down. - Mike Levy
12 Sep 09
I disagree that Griffiths' socialism is, as you say, out of step with our time. In the current world crisis, the interest in socialism has never been greater worldwide. The interest in Paine and his writing is commensurate with that revival. - Carolyn
07 Sep 09
For me, both halves of the play lacked any sense of character development, not just the second half. There was virtually no drama, tension or suspense to speak of in what could have been a vastly dramatic play, and it was without any insight into one of history's most influential and dynamic characters. An opportunity missed. - Carl