Shocking, compelling and utterly plausible, this is exactly what new writing should be about. Sarah Frankcom's assured production fairly leaps off the stage at you, and the young cast are magnificent. Unmissable and enthralling. - ajh
26 Sep 09
I've seen a few things in London this week which have just gone straight through me and haven't been worth reporting about, but last night we a brilliant new show which I'd highly recommend.
The Lyric Hammersmith is a fantastic venue in London with an admirable remit - to produce work that is thought provoking, entertaining, messy, contradictory, and diverse - with a strong ethos on new young actors. Indeed, last night's teenage cast were excellent and included The Boat That Rocked’s Tom Sturridge and The Inbetweeners' bully Henry Lloyd-Hughes. The Lyric's audiences are young as well with about 80% being made up of local school and college students.
The show is set in a private school in Stockport and focuses on a group of students - one's a self harmer, one's a geek, one's good at sports, one's a bit of a loner etc etc. It's very much an exploration of stereotypical adolescent issues with a big twist towards the end which is quite harrowing.
They did a question and answer session after the show last night but we had to rush for our train. However, there's a question I'd love to have asked which although directed at the cast, would have really been aimed those in audience (the school groups) who left me feeling a little uncomfortable.
My question would have been - whilst I fully understand the gasps of shock and horror from one of the school groups in the audience when self-indulgent 6th former Lily explained she's scared of black people - why did the very same group collectively wince and turn their heads and make noises to show their utter disgust at a mildly gay themed scene? Surely that's acknowledging one form of prejudice is abhorrent whilst displaying prejudice towards another group simultaneously? I really wanted to tackle them on this. I'd have taken to the stage myself just to get to the bottom of it.
Anyway, please try and catch this show if you can. The young cast deserve successes with it.
5 *****
- James
25 Sep 09
I detested Harper Regan and Pornography wasn't much better but good reviews (and a £10 ticket) persuaded me to give Simon Stephens' latest play a try and on balance I'm glad I did. It's true that a story of a misfit teenager gunning down his school-mates is becoming cliched, but the relationships, unrequited lust, bullying, sarcasm and occasional mutual support are well conveyed. Punk Rock also shares with The History Boys the misapprehension that teenagers converse in elevated terms about life's great mysteries. Like the brilliant Spring Awakening, also seen here, most of the cast are making their professional debuts and in some cases it shows. Jessica Raine's NT experience is evident and Katie West is most impressive in a relatively understated role - she looks and sounds like a real teenager. Punk Rock (another stupid title) is Stephens' best work to date, but my bar is not set particularly high on that score. - David Baxter
24 Sep 09
I'm not sure that Simon Stephens has anything original or profound to say here - Gus van Sant's beautiful film Elephant covered similar ground years ago. A play needs to be incredibly tight if it's to run for nearly two hours without an interval, but I was checking my watch too often. There are a few scenes of well-calibrated tension, though, and the cast are all excellent, so it's not a total waste of time. - Rupert
23 Sep 09
I wasn't entirely taken in to begin with, I must admit. I am not the biggest fan of this type of theatre but the last few scenes made the whole thing more than worthwhile. It was astounding. The believeability of Tom Sturridge was brilliant especially as I think that part would have been so easy to overact. - Natalie
20 Sep 09
I must say I disagree with those who find "Punk Rock" cliched. True, we are only permitted to witness those highly charged moments in the lives of these young students, but that does not diminish the validity of those moments. Nor did I find that the dialogue "stretched plausibility. . .too clever and too slick" (see Gareth James' commments). The dialogue and events could easily have been taken verbatim from my own private high school experience. If my nieces and nephews are to be believed, this type of dialogue happens daily. Was it predictable? Yes, especially given the escalation of youth violence in educational settings, but that does not diminish the truth of what was spoken on stage. Perhaps that is what makes the play so difficult to view; it is not characture in the least but rather allows the viewer to witness the reality of teen converstaion, conflict and power struggles in the raw situations in which they occur. Was it good theatre? Well, while it lacks a certain element of surprise, it certainly gives the audience something to talk about on the way home. - Richard Piatt
16 Sep 09
I really don't have the words to express how I feel about this. The cast and director both struggled valiantly with a script that simply ins't worthy of production. The characters had no depth and no attempt was made to explain their motivations. The awful scene prior to Chadwick's much lauded apocalyptic diatribe proved the last straw. Comparisons with Dawson's Creek, Skins, and Hollyoaks all ring true, albeit the worst parts of each. - Owen
15 Sep 09
Truly awful, pointless and cliched. The worst thing I have ever seen at the theatre (and I go to the theatre on average two or three times a week). The cast were not at all bad on the whole, just a shame they had been given such mindless drivel to work with. Actually had to walk out half an hour from the end, as couldn't bear any more of its simplistic, pathetically caricatured guff - so, to be fair, I can't say for certain that the last half hour was as shockingly awful as the rest of it. - Matt
15 Sep 09
Well done to all for bringing this to the stage and with a top draw A cast of young talent.
One of the best plays of the year and Manchester theatre goers book now.
This has a lot to say and a real punch! so beware however some small parts do not ring true and the title is so wrong - misleads..... - jamie tate
10 Sep 09
I was captivated and intrigued by this play for the whole 120 minutes unbroken running time, yet somehow it didn't quite hang together. I'm sure playwright Simon Stephens is more atune to the behaviour and speech of 'A' level students in a North West independent school, but they stretched plausibility for me - the speeches and rants were just too clever and too slick and therefore somewhat unbeievable. That said, the prodcution is impeccable and the young cast is astonishingly good. Tom Surridges makes one of the most assured stage debuts I have ever seem. Even though I left the theatre not fully satisfied, I had been provoked and prodded and made to think. This is a very welcome intelligent drama and it's thrilling to be sitting in a young audience who seemed to both identify with and appreciate it. I wish I could have seen stuff like this at their age! - Gareth James
10 Sep 09
Best thing i've ever seen at that theatre: really powerful without being sensationalised. It is very intense- almost need a holiday after seeing it but can't recommend this enough. Spends just the right amount of time building each characters personality and setting the scene which makes its conclusion feel all the more realistic and meaningful.SEE IT NOW - Tom Pringle
