Lemons Lemons Lemons - Harold Pinter / Manchester / Brighton

[BurlyBeaR]

🍋🍋🍋🍋🍋Opens tonight.
Poll open! 🍋🍋🍋🍋🍋

[alessia]

Jan 13, 2023 10:08:40 GMT drmaplewood said:

£25 offer on TodayTix today

I noticed. Glad of it, Hopefully I'll manage to catch it once during the run...

[mrbarnaby]

Very keen to see this, but am absolutely not paying all that money for a show that last an hour.

[Steve]

Jan 18, 2023 20:16:02 GMT mrbarnaby said:

Very keen to see this, but am absolutely not paying all that money for a show that last an hour.

This production doesn't, in fact, last an hour: it's a solid 95 minutes based on tonight, so you'll get an extra 35 minutes for your money lol. That is by design, rather than just a feature of it being an early preview, as the signs around the theatre all say "95 minutes without an interval." I think it's been reworked significantly by the author.

I absolutely LOVED the show tonight! I laughed and I was moved to tears.

Two wonderful, teasing, vulnerable, humorous performances, that completely convey the value of communication, words and love itself.

Some spoilers follow. . .

Great love stories generally work better for being denied something. Frequently, that thing is life itself, as in "Romeo and Juliet," or any number of operas that have one of the lovers collapse with tuberculosis, choking out one last magnificent aria as they do.

Even great happy love stories are enhanced by some great lack (eg Darcy's lack of tact and humility vs Elizabeth Bennett's lack of money and opportunities).

Often we set love stories in historical periods where there was some great lack: eg gay or interracial love stories when horrible laws made things illegal and dangerous.

In this love story, the period is the future, and the illegality pertains to speaking more than 140 words per day.

It is of course a gimmick of a premise, that only holds up through a wilful suspension of disbelief on the part of the audience. For example, if it is ok to tap morse code on the floor, why not just learn British Sign Language and say whatever you want? Why even enact such a silly law in the first place?

If you let the gimmickiness get to you, you will be like a person who watches "Back to the Future" and says it's no fun because time loops make no sense. I'd say just run with it lol.

I did, and Aidan Turner and Jenna Coleman are so incredibly precious together in this, their relationship chemistry adorably believable and believably adorable, with Turner's rising playful cadences perfectly balanced by Coleman's equally playful mimicking caustic rejoinders.

Class imbalances, money imbalances, and Orwellian political imbalances, specified by the script, build insecurities and vulnerabilities into these two characters that make you doubly root for each of these playful witty people, and even more for a potential love match that might salve these deficiencies and create a more perfect romantic whole.

Scenes that involve fulsome playful banter become poignant in the knowledge that the word-denying law will take this all away. And scenes that follow the law become poignant for awareness of the banter that is no longer possible. And by intercutting such scenes in a nonlinear way, we are always heartbreakingly aware of all of it.

And, as if by magic, small things like cheeky wordless gesturing glances (Turner) and nose twitching playfulness (Coleman) are magnified into the potential of a great love.

The whole non-linear, flashing from scene to scene, shape of the play is similar to Nick Payne's "Constellations," and this show captures the magic of that play's sense of life's infinite possibilities.

This being an early preview, Turner forgot his lines once, and repeated a scene, and never has such a thing felt so perfectly part of the concept (words proscribed by memory are as much a denial of something wonderful as words proscribed by law) that the magic of the concept felt enhanced by the moment.

I expect that it has been hard for the actors to learn this ever-expanding play, as it is still listed as 75 minutes running time on the ATG website, and it was fully and intentionally 20 minutes longer than that in tonight's preview.

I wouldn't lose a single extra precious word. Wonderful, and I'd love to see it again in a more mature form after press night. 4 and a half stars from me.

[Mark]

No luck with rush first thing when it opened. However checked a few mins ago and it said available and I was able to get a front row seat. Theatremonkey lists these as in person dayseats but I’d guess they didn’t have a line at the box office, and so released them to todaytix.

[maggiem]

Thanks for this review Steve. I'm going to see it in Manchester, and I'm really looking forward to it now!

[Mark]

I REALLY enjoyed this!!
It’s a great play, expertly performed. Definitely a play that makes you think - you kinda do just have to roll with it and not look too hard for metaphors as to what is happening.
Very similar to constellations in form, but I enjoyed this a whole lot more.

[alessia]

Jan 20, 2023 10:24:33 GMT Mark said:

No luck with rush first thing when it opened. However checked a few mins ago and it said available and I was able to get a front row seat. Theatremonkey lists these as in person dayseats but I’d guess they didn’t have a line at the box office, and so released them to todaytix.

In case people are wondering where the rush tickets are, I have just managed to get one in stalls row F - the seat next to mine is on sale on ATG for £125 :-O unbelievable. 

[edi]

I liked it but didn't love it. I suppose I found the relationship arch a little too familiar and some of the conflicts too stereotypical. But enjoyable anyway.

[alessia]

I thought this was lovely. Like others above already said, you do have to suspend your logical brain from asking questions and just follow but if you manage that, it is very good; I found the relationship relatable (the cheese grater part I completely got) and the two actors are incredibly sweet together.
As for the seats, if like me you are short, there are quite a few scenes when they are sitting down, so unless you are in the front 2 rows, anybody sat in front will be in your sightline. I suppose that's always the case but I noticed it more as I don't usually go for the mid stalls seats / so called 'premium' ones- I certainly would not choose to at the Pinter (not that I could ever afford to sit there again anytime soon unless with another rush ticket lol)

[mrbluesky]

Absolutely loved this! Two brilliant actors who were able to convey so much through so few words! Will definitely be trying to get a return visit in!

[jm25]

Pretty solid. Good performances from the two leads and the show wouldn’t work at all without them and their very believable relationship. The timeline jumping about took a bit of getting used to (hadn’t read much about the plot beforehand!) and the main concept of the play, whilst interesting, did start to wear a bit thin for me by the end. I enjoyed it for what it was but I don’t think I’d have wanted it to go on for any longer than it did!

I got Rush tickets in the stalls (not without some difficulty!) and it reminded me why I usually go for front row seats where I can. The rake in the Pinter is pretty poor so, as Alessia has said, be prepared to have lots of heads in your way! But would still rather have put up with that than paid the prices they’re charging 😂

[matty]

I really enjoyed this tonight. Took a while to get into it and once I had suspended belief and ignored some of the flaws with the story and the counting I thought it was a great 95 minutes.

Aiden Turner and Jenna Colman had excellent chemistry and delivered it all so well.

I was sat in the Royal Circle and it did remind me why I hate the Harold Pinter Theatre, straight-backed seats with ni legroom for tall people.

[greenswan]

Quite enjoyed it last night - 3.5 stars based on the acting. I don't find the suspension of disbelief the play asks for that outrageous, no more than any dystopian novel or film requires. Could perhaps be shortened a little, it takes a long time to reach the conclusion once the concept is played through.

Fair warning about B1 in the Dress Circle - there's a pillar intruding from the side, so if you're of moderate height it will be actively painful. View is great though. Managed to get a single rush ticket through TodayTix at 11.25, so perhaps they were shifting some individual leftover seats.

[alessia]

Jan 25, 2023 22:08:34 GMT jm25 said:

I got Rush tickets in the stalls (not without some difficulty!) and it reminded me why I usually go for front row seats where I can. The rake in the Pinter is pretty poor so, as Alessia has said, be prepared to have lots of heads in your way! But would still rather have put up with that than paid the prices they’re charging 😂

Hear hear. I would always sit front row if I could! I can't believe the mid stalls cost that much with the view being so mediocre

[mkb]

I cottoned on pretty quickly that the play's device was so full of logical holes, that it was necessary not to question it but to indulge this ultimate constraint on free speech, to see what the exploration revealed about the human condition. Unlike Nick Payne's very different Constellations, to which Five Lemons has been compared, the answer is not very much.

We are very much in emperor's-new-clothes territory, and I'm sure there will be much pseudo-intellectual discourse venerating the quality of the cloth.

The creatives involved have presumably recognised there is something awry, as the running time has been chopped to precisely 80 minutes. I was grateful it was not longer, but I did wonder what was in the excised 15 minutes.

Aidan Turner is the better and more believable of the two performers, but, from my front-row-stalls vantage point, I was not buying the chemistry between the two characters. I think this was down to direction. They barely ever touch. Maybe that was the point, but, if so, they not only inhabit an unrecognisable world, their behaviour, as a romantically-involved couple, is entirely unrelatable too.

Meanwhile, a giant, rear, curved wall of shelving units, stuffed with household paraphernalia and replete with flashing strip lighting, gives way in the final third to kitchen utensils et al suspended in the air. If there were an award for most pretentious set design, this would be a contender. Heaven knows what it was meant to signify.

Strictly for die-hard fans of the stars only.

Two stars.

One act: 19:48-21:08

[mrbarnaby]

Jan 28, 2023 22:45:59 GMT mkb said:

I cottoned on pretty quickly that the play's device was so full of logical holes, that it was necessary not to question it but to indulge this ultimate constraint on free speech, to see what the exploration revealed about the human condition. Unlike Nick Payne's very different Constellations, to which Five Lemons has been compared, the answer is not very much.

We are very much in emperor's-new-clothes territory, and I'm sure there will be much pseudo-intellectual discourse venerating the quality of the cloth.

The creatives involved have presumably recognised there is something awry, as the running time has been chopped to precisely 80 minutes. I was grateful it was not longer, but I did wonder what was in the excised 15 minutes.

Aidan Turner is the better and more believable of the two performers, but, from my front-row-stalls vantage point, I was not buying the chemistry between the two characters. I think this was down to direction. They barely ever touch. Maybe that was the point, but, if so, they not only inhabit an unrecognisable world, their behaviour, as a romantically-involved couple, is entirely unrelatable too.

Meanwhile, a giant, rear, curved wall of shelving units, stuffed with household paraphernalia and replete with flashing strip lighting, gives way in the final third to kitchen utensils et al suspended in the air. If there were an award for most pretentious set design, this would be a contender. Heaven knows what it was meant to signify.

Strictly for die-hard fans of the stars only.

Two stars.

One act: 19:48-21:08

I’m pretty sure the set is supposed to suggest, ya know- their lives. Crazy huh?

I enjoyed it but only for the performances. It’s a very slight play- and one that doesn’t even fully explore its intriguing set up.

Aiden turner is truly terrific though. Funny, adorable, hot. Jenna Coleman is very good too. I agree though that their lack of warmth with each other- tenderness etc is a real problem. It all feels like an exercise in Acting rather than being absorbing or moving.

[alessia]

I see that the press reviews are in and mostly 3 stars, which I think is fair

[imstillhere]

I caught this a few days ago. It's a strong play but an early play and I can't help but think this should have been revived by somewhere like the Donmar instead and not placed in the West End. It doesn't feel right being in a Harold Pinter and heightens the plays' flaws instead of its strengths. (It reminds me a lot of the Foxfinder West End situation)

[thistimetomorrow]

I quite enjoyed this. Thought Aidan and Jenna had great chemistry and the premise was interesting. I did get distracted during scenes thinking that surely that's over his word limit though.

[l0islane]

Feb 5, 2023 17:05:04 GMT thistimetomorrow said:

I quite enjoyed this. Thought Aidan and Jenna had great chemistry and the premise was interesting. I did get distracted during scenes thinking that surely that's over his word limit though.

Oh me too! I also got distracted judging what they were using words for ("pass the salt"??! Surely you'd just point?! 😄). I also kept thinking they should try and learn sign language!

[Deleted]

The New York Times review (gift link) is generally positive, if slightly underwhelmed:

"This is good, clean fun — neither terribly profound nor terribly clever, but entertaining nonetheless."

[joem]

Knew nothing about this beyond that it wasn't The Lemon Trilogy and was rather appalled at the prices - although not quite as appalled as with prices for The Unfriend - but having time for a matinee today forked out for some lesser stalls tickets. Spread the cost, or persuaded myself I was doing so, by going to the Vaults in the evening.

I really enjoyed this, suspended disbelief and bought into the unbelievable - but certainly metaphorically credible - premise. After all we have had basic human freedoms restricted in recent memory which would have been thought impossible a few years back, so this is just a little leap further. Whilst it is an examination of relationships, or a relationship, I find the question of what to do in the face of basic freedoms being curtailed - protest, find ways around or acquiesce??? - rather more interesting and relevant.

I think Jenna Coleman has a flair for comedy. Would love to see her explore/exploit this (the way we are being exploited by West End prices).

[caa]

Jan 29, 2023 22:57:55 GMT mrbarnaby said:

Jan 28, 2023 22:45:59 GMT mkb said:

I cottoned on pretty quickly that the play's device was so full of logical holes, that it was necessary not to question it but to indulge this ultimate constraint on free speech, to see what the exploration revealed about the human condition. Unlike Nick Payne's very different Constellations, to which Five Lemons has been compared, the answer is not very much.

We are very much in emperor's-new-clothes territory, and I'm sure there will be much pseudo-intellectual discourse venerating the quality of the cloth.

The creatives involved have presumably recognised there is something awry, as the running time has been chopped to precisely 80 minutes. I was grateful it was not longer, but I did wonder what was in the excised 15 minutes.

Aidan Turner is the better and more believable of the two performers, but, from my front-row-stalls vantage point, I was not buying the chemistry between the two characters. I think this was down to direction. They barely ever touch. Maybe that was the point, but, if so, they not only inhabit an unrecognisable world, their behaviour, as a romantically-involved couple, is entirely unrelatable too.

Meanwhile, a giant, rear, curved wall of shelving units, stuffed with household paraphernalia and replete with flashing strip lighting, gives way in the final third to kitchen utensils et al suspended in the air. If there were an award for most pretentious set design, this would be a contender. Heaven knows what it was meant to signify.

Strictly for die-hard fans of the stars only.

Two stars.

One act: 19:48-21:08

I’m pretty sure the set is supposed to suggest, ya know- their lives. Crazy huh?

I enjoyed it but only for the performances. It’s a very slight play- and one that doesn’t even fully explore its intriguing set up.

Aiden turner is truly terrific though. Funny, adorable, hot. Jenna Coleman is very good too. I agree though that their lack of warmth with each other- tenderness etc is a real problem. It all feels like an exercise in Acting rather than being absorbing or moving.

Agree with both comments I do think it feels exposed for what it is in the Harold Pinter, its not the worst play I have seen but it doesn't really go anywhere 

[theatremiss]

Well that’s 1hr 25 mins of my life I’ll never get back. How to make a 1 act play go on for an eternity. I get the blah, blah, blah limiting word usage but I found it all so tedious. Tbf neither actor put in a bad performance, but I really didn’t care for either of their characters. The thing that kept me the most occupied was listening to 4 drunk women further down my row commenting on Aiden Turner, they were of a certain age and despite their ovaries having packed up decades ago, I think they were trying to jumpstart them by drooling over Turner. Plus the fact they were quaffing wine by the bottle full and being very noisy and giggling over doing so. I physically couldn’t reach them otherwise I would have given them a poke, but about 10-15 mins from the end some bloke sat behind told them to be quiet (only an hour late) which made them giggle before going quiet for the last part. Oh what a joy this evening was.