Synopsis A media lecturer and his female protégé find some deteriorated Hitchcock footage in the basement of a Spanish villa. It would appear they had discovered some early rushes but what film were they for and who is the mysterious blonde? Hitchcock Blonde is not a play about Alfred Hitchcock. But he may however make a cameo appearance. The Blonde will remove most of her clothing. Of the less familiar characters, one is likely to amuse, the other will behave appallingly.
Note: The following review dates from April 2003 & this production's original run at the Royal Court.
Terry Johnson is clearly a bit of a film buff. Having, in recent years, written and directed Cleo, Camping, Emmanuelle and Dick about the Carry Ons then adapted and directed The Graduate, his latest offering by its very title identifies itself as another stage/screen amalgamation.
Hitchcock Blonde spools out two (in fact two-and-a-half) story lines which gradually and intriguingly converge. In the present day, Hitchcock-obsessed lecturer Alex, with blonde undergraduate Nicola in tow, escapes to a Greek villa to pore over contents from the Gainsborough Studios library. Amongst these dusty remains, they discover some early Hitchcock footage from 1919 and set about piecing together what they suspect to be the rushes of a film called The Uninvited Guest. But just who does that title refer to?
In the second thread, it's 1959 and Alfred Hitchcock himself is holding auditions for Janet Leigh's Psycho shower-scene body double. This blonde is desperate to get away from her abusive husband and live the Hollywood dream. Her story turns into the stuff of Hitchcock's movies.
William Dudley's high-tech design incorporates a proscenium arch chalked up like a zoom lens, video expanses of the Mediterranean and recurring film footage of the lost frames (plus a clever little shower surprise of his own). The stage moves effortlessly from 1959-99 and back again, thanks to a hydraulic central platform and stagehands dressed in macs and berets like old-style cameramen.
The performances are strong all round. David Haig as the despicable Alex is unnervingly likeable, Fiona Glascott's Nicola both brash and fragile. William Hootkins - who gives a superbly lippy Hitchcock impression, all enigma, enunciation and dover sole - meets his match in Rosamund Pike's confused mystery blonde.
Despite some extremely funny moments, Hitchcock Blonde is ultimately a very dark play. Johnson enforces, through the characters of Hitchcock and Alex, the idea that men (at least these men) are only interested in unattainable women. "I've always preferred anticipation to the actual event," says the academic, while Hitchcock appears disappointed to find his new actress only blonde "to a point".
In both cases, when presented with real women - who must prove, all too dangerously, that they're made of flesh and blood - the men lose interest. Is the Uninvited Guest reality, shattering the veneer of beauty and idealism so aptly depicted by the silver screen? It's interesting, too, that, in a piece dissecting the male gaze, a scene with female nudity (pre-guessed thanks to a camera ban) is eagerly awaited.
Although a few scenes might have been best left on the cutting room floor, any flabbiness doesn't detract from Johnson's achievement: a play that engages, entertains and stimulates. It's a thing nearly as rare as a natural blonde.
The set design and amazing visual effects were awesome ... the plot was moving and interesting. The three storylines kept my mind running and interested. But what the heck was with the blonde's accent?? So not southern American ... it was damn distracting. Overall, see it, its surely entertaining. - USER: Whatsonstage.com (212.42.181.81)
23 Sep 03
Absolutely dire. Walked out at the interview. Badly acted and boring. - USER: Whatsonstage.com (164.36.141.145)
08 Sep 03
A good play with some great central performances from Haig and Glascott. The biggest problem for my was the very odd accent of the "Blonde", which also lead to this loss of some of the dialogue. Still a worthwhile theatre trip. - USER: Whatsonstage.com (194.200.154.253)
03 Sep 03
Rosamund Pike gave me the creeps in the James Bond movie, one of the coldest looking actresses I've ever seen. I suppose they thought she was like Hitchcock's favourite Grace Kelly which is why she got cast but the whole experience of watching her gave me the chills. - USER: Whatsonstage.com (164.36.141.145)
29 Aug 03
Bloody Rubbish,Pike cant act her way out of a paper bag,wasnt bad I suppose at RC prices but at £37.50, Forget it! - USER: Whatsonstage.com (217.36.117.39)
19 Jul 03
Not a bad play but, in my opinion, highly overrated. Johns just doesn't seem to have figured out how to make the two plots coordinate in as witty or revealing a way as the play's structure requires. And from the moment when Nicola gives up her resistance, that relationship descends into obvious cliche. First-rate performances, but I expected more from the script. - USER: Whatsonstage.com (132.162.40.214)
18 Jul 03
What a superb play. I was sore that I missed the original run at the Royal Court, so I was delighted that it came back for a second run.
One of the real strengths of the play is the way that it makes use of Hitchcock's own way of working: we get the McGuffins, the sudden shock, the dramatic revelation. But it's also good to see someone tackle the darker side of Hitchcock - he may have been a great director, but he was a seriously flawed human being (perhaps that should be because he was a flawed human being).
The best part of the evening is the quality of the acting: David Haig is great as the lascivious, double-dealing Alex, there's a superb Hitchcock impersonation from Willian Hootkins, and Rosamund Pike has just the right blend of vulnerability, sensuality and ambition in a difficult role.
The standout performance, however, is Fiona Glascott's Nicola. I'd never heard of this actress before, but she's utterly compelling in a part that requires her to shed her coat of confidence and self-awareness to reveal the sensitive (and damaged) young woman inside.
Praise too for William Dudley's set and video design - bet that's an award-winner at the end of the year. - USER: Whatsonstage.com (213.120.117.40)
29 Jun 03
Shame Whats on Srage were too lazy not to review this great play again as it has changed a lot since it reveiwer saw it and it now only 2hrs 30 mins long and not 3hrs as stated in Hannahs review and only has the 1 interval and many other things have changed. - USER: Whatsonstage.com (205.188.209.140)
26 Jun 03
Excellent. Acting was superb. The three hours just flew. Very clever play. - USER: Whatsonstage.com (195.102.142.238)
24 Jun 03
Saw this at the Royal Court. Even though it doesn't entirely work, you have to admire it's ambition and originality. Hitchcock is very well captured (particularly in profile), there are some great lines and it races along and never lags. Terry Johnson is a great writer and a good director but he should get others to direct his own plays - TWO great minds could probably have produced something very special indeed. - USER: Whatsonstage.com (212.211.99.17)
Opened 17 Dec 1888. 959 seats. [Bought from Andrew Lloyd Webber and now owned by Broadway producer Max Weitzenhoffer and Nica Burns. Society of London Theatre member.
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 Ticket Discounts.