Telling the legendary tale of King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table, and their quest for the Holy Grail, Monty Pyton's Spamalot features a chorus line of dancing divas (and serfs), flatulent Frenchmen, killer rabbits and a legless knight. From the screenplay of the Pythons' film Monty Python and the Holy Grail by Graham Chapman, John Cleese, Terry Gilliam, Eric Idle, Terry Jones and Michael Palin.
The West End christened its newest theatre on Sunday (17 February 2008) with the opening of Brief Encounter, Kneehigh Theatre’s adaptation of David Lean’s classic 1945 film, at The Cinema, Haymarket. The multimedia stage adaptation celebrated its opening night at the same address where the film premiered over 60 years earlier.
The Haymarket venue originally opened in 1926 as a theatre before being converted into a Cineworld cinema complex. The cinema chain, which runs 73 venues across the country, is co-producing the new stage show, which is currently booking to 22 June 2008, with West End impresarios David Pugh and Dafydd Rogers.
Based on a combination of Noel Coward’s screenplay and his original 1935 one-act stage play, Still Life, Brief Encounter is adapted and directed by Kneehigh artistic director Emma Rice and stars Naomi Frederick and Tristan Sturrock as Laura and Alec, the infidelity tempted couple immortalised on screen by Celia Johnson and Trevor Howard, as well as Amanda Lawrence and Stuart McLoughlin.
Critics found it difficult to agree on the overall success of this “somewhat odd hybrid”. While some hailed it as an “unexpectedly enjoyable success” in “artfully straddling stage and screen”, others felt it was “a bit much”. Detractors had a particular problem with an aerial scene involving characters hanging from chandeliers which was viewed as an “especially vulgar mistake” that came “at the cost of the quiet integrity” of the piece. However, there was much general praise for a “superbly acted” production that employs “good use of some of some of Coward's superb songs” and Neil Murray’s impressively “dreamstruck” designs. All in all, the conclusion was that this is “a valuable theatrical Encounter.”
Michael Coveney on Whatsonstage.com (five stars) - “At a time in our theatrical history when the interaction between successful movies and their new stage versions is often cynically, lazily and unimaginatively prosecuted, this stunning alliance … will prove a famous landmark in the new hybrid genre … Emma Rice and her design team led by Neil Murray and Malcolm Rippeth go to the heart of Noel Coward’s emotional story of impossible love in a railway station buffet and make genuine theatrical whoopee with its romanticism and social setting … The water of Laura’s childhood sneaky after-hours dips with her sister floods through the show: we see Frederick on film swimming sensually underwater like a liberated mermaid, and the impassioned wash of Rachmaninov’s concerto rolls in with cinematic waves, finally taken up by Frederick herself at the onstage piano which has served throughout as the buffet counter weighed down with Myrtle’s scones and rock cakes. It is all brilliantly done and superbly acted by the riveting central duet: Naomi Frederick is confirmed a shining new star with this performance, and Tristan Sturrock projects the right blend of strong magnetic force and furtive sexuality. This totally unexpected addition to the West End list deserves all the popular success that is surely coming its way”.
Michael Billington in the Guardian (three stars) – “Emma Rice has … come up with a multimedia show staged in a West End cinema; and, while the result has all the frenzied inventiveness one associates with her Kneehigh company, it also emerges as a somewhat odd hybrid …The basic story remains … but Rice has added any number of other ingredients … It all becomes a bit much … While it is good to hear some of Coward's less familiar songs, such as the raucously rude ‘Alice Is at It Again’, it creates a mood more akin to that of his music-hall skit, ‘Red Peppers’, than Still Life. Even the use of filmed inserts to show Laura's secret yearning to be a liberated creature of the sea slightly misses the point: the pathos of Lean's film and Coward's play springs from the very fact that intense, inner feelings can never be fully expressed ...Yet, although the show is overloaded, Rice uses the stage with imaginative freedom … Even if Naomi Frederick and Tristan Sturrock cannot hope to compete with our movie memories of Celia Johnson and Trevor Howard, they both give thoroughly decent performances. But, in this democratic version, it is the minor characters who come off best: especially Amanda Lawrence as a station-buffet menial with her own secret dreams and Tamzin Griffin as her hoity-toity, slyly suggestive boss. In the end, the show friskily demonstrates Kneehigh's skill but at the cost of the quiet integrity that makes the original Brief Encounter so peerlessly moving.”
Charles Spencer in the Daily Telegraph - “This theatrical adaptation of Coward's Brief Encounter turns out to be an unexpectedly enjoyable success … Though Emma Rice has left her distinctive fingerprints all over the piece, she treats Coward's clipped, restrained, touching love story seriously … Naomi Frederick proves a cherishable successor to Celia Johnson as Laura, capturing the character's cut-glass accent, gnawing guilt and sudden surges of passion with a lovely sincerity, freshness and moral decency … Tristan Sturrock is actually more persuasive than Trevor Howard in the role of the doctor who catches her heart … The production makes good use of some of some of Coward's superb songs and light poems while the comic characters in the station café perform amateur variety numbers between scenes. Don't worry - there's lashings of Rachmaninov, too … Some of the physical theatre routines don't work - the sequence when Alec and Laura swing from chandeliers to suggest their passion is an especially vulgar mistake - but it is hard to resist the comic performances of Tamzin Griffin as Myrtle, that ‘refained’ gorgon of the refreshment room, the gawky Amanda Lawrence as her bullied but resilient assistant Beryl, and Andy Williams, who is particularly touching as Laura's husband … Far from being the crude hatchet job I'd feared, the show largely proves a witty and sympathetic homage to Coward's unforgettable portrayal of English reserve and romance.”
Nicholas de Jongh in the Evening Standard (four stars) – “Rice's production and adaptation, sensibly faithful to the film rather than Coward's short play Still Life, never mocks or caricatures the would-be, guilty lovers or the inherent improbability of their frustrated romance, which could have been simply consummated in a hotel. Neil Murray's dream-struck, expressionistic design solves the problems posed by myriad locations … Rice's relish for theatrical pyrotechnics does sometimes become a flamboyant distraction from the main event … And Coward's working-class romancers, Tamzin Griffin's aspirant Myrtle, Amanda Lawrence's Beryl and Stuart McLoughlin's gormless Stanley are played rather too broadly for conviction. Yet the production eloquently catches the repressed, self-destructive aspect of mid-Forties, middle-England sexuality. Coward's beautiful songs, often sung with pathos on the banjo, are threaded through the action to enhance the lovers' jolting sense of sadness … Frederick's fine Laura reeks of disappointment though she lacks Celia Johnson's devastating sense of grief. Sturrock's extraordinarily powerful, love-lorn GP struggles to keeps his emotions under drapes and finally sings ‘A Room With a View’ in tones of hopeless yearning. A valuable theatrical Encounter.”
Paul Taylor in the Independent (three stars) - "Kneehigh's production, adapted and directed by Rice, switches between live action and film footage, and between moods of clipped, clenched pain and wild music-hall exuberance in order to dramatise the passion heaving under all that middle-class restraint, and in order to contrast the anguished and thwarted love between the duty-bound central duo (beautifully played by Naomi Frederick and Tristan Sturrock) with the slap-and-tickle high-jinks of two other couples among the rail staff (Tamzin Griffin very funny as the ‘re-fayned’ Myrtle and Andy Williams pulling off a droll double as the randy station master and as Laura's pipe-smoking bore of a spouse). The production eloquently underscores the action with a selection of aptly chosen Coward songs ... We are given access to Laura's dream world via film sequences that depict her as a sea creature swimming freely in dark waters. You might have thought that such devices – which include the very Kneehigh scene of elation communicated through surreal dangling suspension from restaurant chandeliers – would defuse the charge from the couple's pent-up spoken exchanges, whose power resides in eloquent repression. But this Brief Encounter manages to have the best of several worlds in an experience that is all the more effective for artfully straddling stage and screen”.
“Goodness Gracious Ni” read a typical headline in the build-up to Sanjeev Bhaskar’s inheritance of King Arthur’s crown. And it’s a big crown to fill – after Tim Curry, Simon-Russell Beale and Alan Dale, Bhaskar is the man charged with taking it over the finish line as Spamalot enters the twilight phase of its West End run.
But, rest assured Python fans, it’s retiring with dignity. Granted, Bhaskar is not the strongest singer, nor does he always look entirely comfortable under the endlessly expectant gaze of a West End audience, but what he does bring is a sense of rough-and-ready charm, a suitably fresh and cavalier approach to a role that has to be taken by the scruff of the neck.
Bhaskar revealed in the run-up to playing King Arthur that his wish is to make people forget the fact he is Indian, and only in doing that would he fully be doing his job. There are the occasional nods to Goodness Gracious Me - the mention of “chuddies” for example feels rather pantomimic and unnecessary – but besides this it’s very much business as usual as he cavorts through numbers such as the brilliantly kitsch “Find Your Grail”, “I’m All Alone” and the crowd-pleasing “Always Look on the Bright Side of Life”.
But a leader is only as strong as his army, and Bhaskar has some serious heavyweights on his side. As Sir Dennis Galahad and Prince Herbert’s Father, Michael Xavier shows real comic dexterity, displaying both foppishness and bluster with consummate ease. Special mention must also go to Gerard Carey as a perfectly cast Prince Herbert and Haydn Oakley, standing-in as the sexually confused Sir Lancelot.
As The Lady of the Lake, and the only female on stage who gets to do anything more than a scantily-clad high-kick, Nina Soderquist is a triumph. The winner of a Swedish reality show entitled ‘West End Star’, she’s a busty, vamp-ish, powerhouse of a leading lady who more than merits her place. The only shame is that, as acknowledged by writer Eric Idle in the song “The Diva’s Lament”, she really doesn’t have much to do after the interval.
Of all the big-hitters in the West End, it’s a pity we’re losing Spamalot. It’s slick, it’s witty, and in Bhaskar, it has found another capable King. One moment towards the end endorses this more than any other. When his servant Patsy reveals that he’s Jewish, and Arthur enquires why he hadn’t said this before, Patsy replies “well it’s not the sort of thing you say to a heavily armed Christian”. The roars of laughter said enough – Bhaskar has done his job.
- Theo Bosanquet
NOTE: The following THREE STAR review dates from January 2007 and this production's earlier cast, with Simon Russell Beale as King Arthur.
Simon Russell Beale has played Hamlet, Richard III, Brecht’s Galileo, Uncle Vanya, and Konstantin in The Seagull. To this impressive roster of roles he can now add King Arthur in Spamalot, prancing on to the Palace stage oblivious to all absurdity and keeping good time to the hoof-clicking sound of invisible coconuts.
He took over the role on Broadway last year from the physically satisfied Tim Curry, whose benign silliness he does not attempt to replicate. Instead, Russell Beale plays Arthur for delightful real, as if he actually believed what was happening in the show and could somehow make some contribution towards its serious intent. He participates in this madcap lunacy with a glazed smile and touching belief in its emotional dishonesty.
It must be a funny thing, playing a king and assuming a dignity and status for which you are completely unqualified. This is how Russell Beale plays King Arthur and, in fact, exactly how he played Richard III, a performance once memorably described as a peculiar love child of Pere Ubu and Gertude Stein. Although King Arthur lops off a few (other knight’s) limbs in the forest, he is not really a psychotic mass murderer. The alarming truth of Russell Beale’s performance is that he would quite happily be so, should the opportunity arise. Instead, there are songs to be sung and moves to be executed.
Lovingly ripped off, as they say, from the 1974 movie Monty Python and the Holy Grail, Spamalot, by Eric Idle and composer John Du Prez remains a glorious medieval pantomime with nary a nod towards the serious musical theatre except when amateurishly ripping it off. The much vaunted Andrew Lloyd Webber spoof, “The Song That Goes Like This,” is so bad that only a tin-eared ignoramus would think it was a plausible satire. But it raises the roof and does so irresistibly when it changes key for no reason whatsoever.
The silly item is also sung, gloriously, by the imperious Hannah Waddingham, who turns out to be not only the Lady in the Lake, but also Arthur’s Lady Guinevere via a showcase musical comedy stint in Las Vegas. This sequence also involves a cheapo invocation of the Parisian sewers in Phantom of the Opera::, complete with guttering candles and a rickety gondola; even if you believe this scene to be one of the greatest in modern musical theatre (which I do), the send-up is absolute perfection.
With the return of Little Shop of Horrors and the transatlantic success of The Producers, musical theatre has rediscovered its comedy roots at last, while Les Miserables and Phantom have advanced the operatic seriousness of the art form. Russell Beale’s involvement does not lend the project of Spamalot any increased credibility – that would be the last virtue it seeks – but it does underline the democratic fervour of all great theatre, which is to make no divisions within cultural parameters and give people sitting out there in the dark a really good time to boot.
- Michael Coveney
NOTE: The following THREE STAR review dates from October 2006 and this production's original cast, with Tim Curry as King Arthur.
It’s an odd paradox that the peculiar Britishness of the Monty Python comedy show (which ran on television from 1969 to 1974) has underpinned a runaway Broadway smash hit musical while the “coming home”, as it were, to London feels like an over-stretched disappointment.
“Lovingly ripped off”, as they say, from the knowingly amateurish 1974 movie Monty Python and the Holy Grail, Spamalot – the knightly paradise where they eat jam a lot and, in the baby boom, push a pram a lot - is correctly assessed by its chief perpetrator, Eric Idle, who has written the book and lyrics, and some of the music (with composer John Du Prez), as a medieval pantomime. The hoardings outside the Palace proclaim the show to be in its 1,035th year. By the time you leave, it sure feels that way.
For Python nerds and geeks, all the best moments are here: a dozy King Arthur, “looking for men” (cue homophobic tittering), hoves into view on an invisible horse while his manservant bangs coconut shells together; a chain-mailed French taunter on the castle battlements declares “I fart in your general direction”; the giant knights in the tangled and very expensive forest say “Ni” and demand a shrubbery; the black knight is reduced to a livid torso in the limb-lopping duel; and the killer rabbit is seen off by the crudely blasphemous intonations of a mad monk.
One of the main jokes of the movie is the vigorous banishment of song and dance, especially when Prince Herbert thinks of love. Here, the quest for the Holy Grail becomes the search for a West End hit with a succession of big production numbers that marginalise the Herbert comedy. A sudden impulse to go to Camelot produces a big Las Vegas number that in New York was a flat-out funny Broadway show but in London seems a rather desperate attempt to have your musical comedy cake and eat it satirically at the same time.
The underlying premise, of course, is that hit musicals are essentially silly, insubstantial pageants. The most gorgeous gag is the first one of the show’s historical narrator being misheard in his request for a quick burst of merry England; instead, we get merry Finland and a stage full of yokels slapping each other with wet fish. In a piece that has only the defence of utter silliness to fall back on, the sillier things are the better.
It’s interesting that Idle first wanted to do a musical version of The Producers but was put off the scent by Mel Brooks who then did it himself. Where The Producers is smart and sassy, Spamalot is coarse and flabby. The parody of Andrew Lloyd Webber in “The Song that Goes Like This” is funny until you realise that, as a parody, it fails because it’s so less good than the alleged original.
The heartlessness hits a low in the number about the necessity of having Jews in a show. But while this item scored hilariously in New York, you really need Mel Brooks to make the point funny enough not to be offensive. Tim Curry repeats his wonderfully relaxed performance as King Arthur, although I spent most of the evening looking forward to seeing Simon Russell Beale succeed him the New Year. And Hannah Waddingham is magnificent as the Lady in the Lake who transmutes into Guinevere for no reason at all.
This was dire. My friend and I sat through the first half just baffled at people around us who were laughing - although a few people were not, and I distinctly heard a gentleman in the row in front remark to the woman next to him, "This is rubbish" (although he used a word worse than "rubbish"). It is just not funny. The cast didn't look as if they cared any more. Quite the worst thing I have ever seen in the West End. We left at the interval. - LW
01 Jan 09
This was dire. My friend and I sat through the first half just baffled at people around us who were laughing - although a few people were not, and I distinctly heard a gentleman in the row in front remark to the woman next to him, "This is rubbish" (although he used a word worse than "rubbish"). It is just not funny. The cast didn't look as if they cared any more. Quite the worst thing I have ever seen in the West End. We left at the interval. - LW
01 Jan 09
Saw this again for the 3rd time on Saturday and totally enjoyed it once again. Have to say Sanjeev absolutely eclipsed Peter Davidson who I'd seen twice before and I thought he was great at the time. We neeed to see more of Sanjeev in the West End and in another musical please - his voice is really perfect for theatre. My only criticsm is that the indian references were really unecessary - he is totally believable as the king of the Britons and doesn't even look Asian from where I was sitting in the dress circle. The other actors were great although the best Lancelot I saw was in a previous version and that was Bill Ward who also did the funniest French castle keeper ever. Unfortunately, the lady of the lake who won the reality show in Sweden(?) wasn't a patch on the incredible Hannah Waddingham. But still, it's well worth seeing before it finishes in January :-) - Avril
30 Sep 08
Escapist and amusing, mostly, and I found the production values and the hardworking concentration of the cast much better than expected, particularly on the last matinee before a major cast change which is often an excuse for larking about (although were there really acrobatic frogs in the performance you saw?)
Casting seems to have settled down with fewer inadequate telly stars, and the ensemble gave 100%.
Oddly dissatisfying, as some other WoS member have commented, with the Jew number (I wonder how well it plays in New York) and the blatant crude stereotyping of gay Lancelot and Herbert - kind of proves how rooted in the past is "Pythonesque" humour.
- JohnnyFox
22 Jun 08
i'm sorry I originally gave this lower than a five. This show is wonderful and I'm sorry to see it is closing as I want to see it again and can't afford it just yet. I think they should tour with the show as it is one of the best musicals I have ever seen for colour, humour, audience interaction and entertainment. and a nice group of lads they were at the stage door too. - Melissa
10 Jun 08
Fantastic!!! My face hurt from laughing so much. My only criticism is that some of the plot transitions were awkward, but I suppose that can be said of most musicals. I would reccomend it to anyone with a decent sense of humour. - Alison Davidson
03 May 08
Boring and stupid attempt at entertainment. What were they thinking! I want my time back and that is the biggest insult one can provide. I'm DONE! - Gerard
28 Jan 08
Spamalot? It’s fantastic a lot.
There were two firsts for me on 25th January when I took my husband to see Spamalot at the Palace Theatre (West End). The first (ahem) first was sitting in the front row. The second first (yes I know it’s confusing but keep up) was the whole Monty Python thing.
It’s possible that I am the only living person (no, I’m not dead yet) with a sense of humour who has never seen The Holy Grail. Am I odd? Perhaps but then I’m not reviewing me.
In our vantage point at the front we could actually see the orchestra, a nice smiley bunch who teased each other whenever they were made reference to (which was quite a lot). They returned the compliment backstage admitting that they could hear my husbands laughter after each joke. ( Thank goodness it wasn’t his snoring!)
As expected, with any musical, the show opened with a rip roaring song. The fish slapping, Finland song made the show an instant success for me and set the hilarity for the rest of the show. When 3 latecomers, who arrived halfway through the next scene, asked me if they had missed much, I felt hypocritical saying no as the colourful, silly opening was, for me at least, one of the highlights.
But there were lots of highlights. For hardened Python fans like my husband there were expected scenes - Bring out your Dead, Flying cows and vicious rabbits are the daft notions which have made Monty Python memorable. But even for me, a newcomer, the whole musical was fresh and entertaining. There are a few scenes and ideas that test the boundaries but, somehow, they get away with it!
Performances by Andrew Spillet as Patsy (who reminded me of comedian Lee Evans all evening), Robert Hands as Sir Robin and the marvellous Peter Davidson in the lead as King Arthur, who looked utterly handsome with a beard (another advantage of being in the front row!) were all hilarious. My husband and I were both in agreement that the actors portrayed the characters so well that in many scenes they could have almost been a young Palin, Cleese or Gilliam. Marin Mazzie added the glamour to the show and gave a stunning performance as the Lady of the Lake.
I spoke to them all after the performance and asked them if they had any comments for me. Rob Hands said that the audience had been exceptionally fantastic and they all agreed that it had been a special night which they had all enjoyed. So it was a great experience for everyone.
It’s not often I leave a performance feeling I want to see it again immediately. But with Spamalot I did. And while I’m not dead yet I’ll keep on singing the songs too!
- Melissa Roberts
28 Jan 08
I always find the Pythons very smug and self-righteous with their supposedly enlightened humour but good word of mouth encouraged me to give this show a chance. However I found its writing amateurish and its humour aimed at a generation older than mine. I got a good seat for £30 at the half-price ticket booth and the fact that the producers are willing to charge twice this amount for such peurile rubbish demonstrates their contempt for theatregoers. So does the souvenir brochure which had not been updated for the current cast. I saw it on the 10/01/08 and although Marin Mazzie is being advertised for this date the programme said Hannah Waddingham was appearing and no contradictory announcement was made. Whichever one of them I saw significantly outclassed the material they were performing. The rest of the cast were passable and the lavish sets and costumes helped disguise the banality of the content. Having said that, the rest of the audience seemed to love it but perhaps that is because many of them had been upgraded to the stalls from the balcony, which had been closed. - Scripps
13 Jan 08
Hmmmm I must say I was pretty dispointed with this one. I'd been wanting to see it for quite a long time and managed to get £30 standby tickets on the day in the dress circle.
The thing is, it should be funny, I was willing it to be funny but it just wasnt!
Hannah Waddingham was probably the only one I found genuinly amusing, she really goes for it in the role and isnt the slightest bit embarassed about what she's doing - if only the rest of the (male) cast could have been this good!
As Lancelot, Bill Ward managed to just about pull off his performance but I had a feeling this character could have probably been hilarious if it was played by the right kind of person. He did however, put his all into it and I did laugh in quite a few of his scenes.
I really felt Andrew Spillet as Patsy could have evoked a lot more sympathy for his character, it was a shame because there was potential to really feel for the poor guy who had to coconut it all night while still being an amusing performance.
The character of Sir Robin (Robert Hands) felt like the most wasted. I think I could have laughed all night if he'd just been played right.
Also, I'm not a dancer or have any training in such area but I noticed that every so often one or two of the female dancers were out of sync with each other. I dont think this was deliberate (especially because it happened more than once) and I found this a little unusual for a West End musical.
The major point though was the d.i.c.t.i.o.n - I simply couldnt make out what they were saying half of the time, especially in the fast paced songs where a lot of the comedy was. I must have missed so many jokes because it all just sounded like a whole load of nothing!
It's a shame, because if this had been done in the right way it could have been really funny. - K
Whatsonstage.com - Discount London theatre tickets, theatre news and reviews, Theatre videos, Theatre discussion, National Theatre Listings. Covering London's West End, all of Theatreland and all UK theatre. The best
for London Theatre Tickets Discounts.
