An Enemy of the People - Duke of York's Theatre

[blaxx]

Feb 22, 2024 22:02:39 GMT theatreliker said:

Intrigued to see this next week.
Sorry, what are audience members saying in the Q&A? Any questions about ATG booking fees?

The questions are related to the situation of the play, nothing specific to start directing the dissatisfaction at ticket prices.

[mrbarnaby]

Feb 22, 2024 22:02:39 GMT theatreliker said:

Intrigued to see this next week.
Sorry, what are audience members saying in the Q&A? Any questions about ATG booking fees?

Post of the year!

[David J]

Good lord

There’s a four star production here…when they’re doing the play

This production is trying too hard to be modern, relevant and immersive by doing what Ivo Van Hove and other known directors have done better

The music jams go on too long, the immersion breaking is out of place, the scene transitions go on too long, and in setting up the town hall scene the whole schtick the young guy does had me cringeing

There’s changes the translation does that are interesting, particularly giving the wife more agency.

Matt Smith…I don’t know. I don’t know whether it’s him or the way he’s directed but he doesn’t show enough drive as Hugh Bonneville or Alex Kingston did. It’s like he doesn’t care enough about the publication of his report

[David J]

The second half was stronger with less gaff. Rolled my eyes at the load of present day references Matt Smith rounded off in his speech but he delivered it with alacrity

Didn’t mind the q&a either with many audience members giving their views. But it does against the outcome where the townsfolk turn against Stockmann. And it made the paint episode so out of left field as a consequence

Ending was abrupt

I feel that amongst this great play is a load of ideas Thomas Ostermeier threw together and what you get is a hand-fisted hodgepodge of a production that I have seen done better by other directors

3.25 stars

[moelhywel]

I have just posted a ticket for sale for the matinee on Wednesday, includes a programme voucher.

[Afriley]

I really enjoyed this. Not usually my genre but it was dynamic, fun, and well-acted.

The political messaging isn’t nuanced, true. And I agree it’s somewhat strange that despite the entire audience (more or less!) agreeing with the doctor, the end happens the way it does.

Today Smith ended the audience contribution after someone said “The whole world needs the doctor” - a nice (if unsubtly punny) end to the scene.

Overall I did not expect to enjoy it as much as I did due the genre being so outside my usual area of interest but hey, nice to be surprised!

[prefab]

I just got back from the Saturday matinee, and I loved it. Okay, I had some little critiques. As previous posters have said, the whole paintball scene doesn't really make sense when the practically the whole audience is agreeing with Stockmann (as mine did). And Matt Smith's rant against neoliberalism in the second act is brilliantly written and performed, but bears almost no relation to the aloof man of science Smith was portraying in the first act; it felt like he must have spent the interval getting a personality transplant.

But I've seen so many boring Ibsen productions on the London stage--and even a boring sequel to Ibsen by Lucas Hnath--that I was amazed they managed to make Enemy of the People feel so alive. I think they did a very good job of stripping out the stodgy 19th century Norwegian reserve of the characters and replacing that with characters that felt relatable in a 21st century British context and still made sense within this plot. I thought it had a great energy, and the performances got me to care about the Stockmanns.

[aspieandy]

Pleasant enough bun fight.

Eloquent speakers. One asked about justifying the ticket prices to attend this event

Kiss felt a little random.

Checked Wiki: Ibsen wrote the play 140 years ago. 40 years before universal suffrage in the UK. Man had game.

[john64]

Saw this last Friday evening. Prefab's review above sums it up perfectly, particularly the point about the Town Hall sequence. The audience are obviously with Stockmann but the paintball action that follows tells you the direct opposite. Typically of this director, flashes of originality and vision are cancelled out by, well, some silly ill- advised stuff. (The ambiguous ending for example)
Performances are excellent, but as ever Paul Hilton as Stockmann's older brother is the stand-out.
Finally, thanks to the lady next to me in D row who thought it was OK to eat a box of crisps throughout Act 1 and then with supplies replenished repeat the fear during the second half. Still, the theatre was quite warm so the draught from her constantly moving arms and hands was quite welcome. Unlike the crunching.

[4thwall]

2 x Olivier nominations for this. Paul Hilton and Priyanga Burford for supporting performances. Well deserved I thought when I saw the show last night. Matt Smith gives a very committed performance too. Would recommend.

[mkb]

I was also present last Friday night, never having seen this particular Ibsen before, and I was left hankering for the original text.

Good performances all round and a convincing updating to a more recent era could not solve the problem that the arguments evinced by Dr Stockmann at the Town Hall are naively simplistic and a huge leap from his expressed opinions before that point. I didn't raise my hand when asked if I agreed because, while the sentiments were well meant (apart from advocating exterminating people, which I took as anger boiling over and not meant seriously), I had lots of "yes, but" issues.

The subsequent discussion was a little tiresome and I couldn't wait for the cast to get back to the play. All six audience members spoke incredibly eloquently with what, at any other time, would be interesting points, and all were on different aspects. I am firmly in the camp that some at least of these contributions had to have been pre-prepared. The paintballing was just stupid.

To be fair, my judgement of the night was impaired by being in a foul mood thanks to the idiocy that led to full-price Band A seats in Stalls row A being denied even the most rudimentary of legroom. It seems the mackintoshes mentioned upthread have been replaced by black tarpaulins that are unfurled from the bases of rows AA, BB and A during the paintball throwing. These are housed in three large wooden boxes that run along the whole length of each row immediately behind the row in front. There's no space to put your legs under the seat in front, and you have a few inches less room than if you were merely restricted by the back of the seat in front as in the Circle. Complaints to front of house elicited sympathy and nothing else other than a suggestion to email a complaint. Set designers and directors who have no empathy for the people that actually pay to see their work should be shot, and I'm sure Dr Stockmann would agree!

Three stars.

Acts 1-3: 19:33-20:47
Acts 4,5: 21:09-21:52

[lynette]

Honestly this sounds like Satre’s definition of hell.

[critchyboy]

Went to the matinee performance this afternoon and really enjoyed rhe show.

I found it to be an intense and - at times - hilarious afternoon in the theatre.

The first act - stutters occasionally - but sets the scene of the seeking of truth against the microcosm of small town political corruption.

In the second act, the audience are invited into the Town Hall as Matt Smith delivers a political diatribe against the crooked political and sociological systems that keep people in their place and the folk at the top, at the top. We are, all guilty of partaking in a system which is unjust, cruel and abhorrent.

The audience are then invited to respond first, by show of hands and then by engaging in dialogue with the characters. And yes - I got the chance to speak and was quizzed on my views by one of the cast!!

I think I agree with a poster from above that Matt’s brought forth lots of yeses but all some yes, buts.

Fascinating show - well worth a visit if just to see Smith on blistering form in the second act.

I’d give it 4 stars.

[theatrelover123]

The plant was sat near me in the Stalls the other night. He made a point of shouting out something early to let the cast know where he was. And then he was the ‘last’ person to speak, giving quite an eloquent diatribe, which the cast then used as the point to move on. I’m sure many of the audience didn’t twig but it was quite apparent.

[david]

A few thoughts from last nights viewing. It was certainly an engaging watch with a fantastic cast and getting one of the £40 tickets for the stalls I certainly got value for my ticket but having had a chance to have a think about it overnight, I didn’t think that all the creative choices worked for me. The music bits whilst nice (I hadn’t heard Matt sing prior to last night so was impressed with his vocals) I think could of either of been shortened or cut completely without any detriment to the show. Also the paint balls at the end of the Town Hall scene for me were a bit pointless and again could have been cut. Of the two Acts, Act 2 was definitely the stronger and much better paced. 

For me, Matt was at his best during his speech in the Town Hall scene. The subsequent audience debate threw up some interesting points from the along with some comical ones. This bit I thought worked well in the context of the play and was well managed by the cast to ensure that it flowed smoothly and everyone who wanted to speak got a chance to do so. Though I did wonder how many of the contributions were from genuine theatre goers rather than from actors sat in the audience.

For the rest of the cast both Paul Hilton and Jessica Brown Findlay were the standouts. Also a shout out to the dog who certainly got a nice reception from the audience.

Compared to my last Ibsen (the SRB one at the Bridge), I found “Enemy” a far better watch even if some of the creative choices and more modern references in the script were maybe questionable. 

As an extra, the ability to preorder the programme (which upon collection seems to be the smallest programme currently going in the WE) when booking for the show was a nice touch and very much welcomed. 

[solotheatregoer]

I really enjoyed this tonight. Standout for me was Priyanga Burford whose comedic timing during the Q&A was spot on. Some really ridiculous comments made tonight from the audience which I won’t go into here but some completely missed the point of the whole play and went on random rants about completely unrelated topics.

Nice to see Nigel Lindsay on stage again but would have loved to have seen more of him. Also, what was the point the dog?

I didn’t realise the first three rows of the stalls had covers to pull over during the paint ball scene. A few members of the front row got hit badly and Matt was very apologetic at the end. Again, not sure what the point was of this either.

Four stars.

This rounds out my theatre week in London. I always feel a bit glum when my time in London is over. There’s so much talent in the West End and looking forward to my next shows. Thankfully not too long to wait for Swan Lake in April.

[barelyathletic]

Hated this. Maybe I wasn't in the right mood but I thought it was a horribly shallow, trite, 'look at me I'm a director' disembowelling of a great play. It put my back up from the start with the cringe inducing songs completely interrupting the flow of the drama and wasn't helped at all by the Matt Smith groupies giggling inanely at every line. The performances were all just okay and the set was awful. My full grumpy old man persona kicked in after the interval. If I wanted to watch Question Time I'd fall asleep on the sofa in front of the TV at home and not pay £50 for the non-pleasure. Even the dog couldn't save it for me. Ah well. Swings and roundabouts. Good that the theatre was sold out and everyone else around me seemed to be having a great time. I guess. Next!

[Oobi]

Not really sure how I felt about this.

I hadn't seen any productions of this play before, but nonetheless, the updated parts of the material were screamingly obvious. Did anyone seriously buy that this friendgroup would form a band? What the hell was that dog for? What the hell was the pseudo-standup routine at the end of Act 1 for? What the hell was that kiss for!? Weird, weird choices made by the creative team.

(In contrast, when I saw The Doctor back in 2022, literally nothing gave away that it had been adapted from a 1912 play.)

And while the audience participation was interesting, it ultimately belies the central theme of the play. How can we as an audience buy into Stockman's ostracization when canonically, we the people wildly applauded his speech? A cleverer modern adaptation would've tied this into the play; maybe Stockman gets what he wants, the people listen, but then the baths close and he's jobless and miserable. This would've acknowledged the changing attitudes of society while still highlighting the flaws of Stockman's character. This version, in stroking the audience's egos while vilifying a small cast of easily-identifiable "elites", completely dodges the anti-democratic message of the original play and turns it into a simple black-and-white morality tale.

Let's say... 5/10? I liked the performances, and I can definitely see the skeleton of a great work beneath all the "reimagined" bits. But I think they should've either chosen to change less or change far, far more.

[bordeaux]

I thought this was tremendous. The updating, both by Duncan Macmillan and Thomas Ostermeier, worked for me - this seemed a highly plausible situation with believable characters and dilemmas. The town hall bit did drag a little - the brutal truth is that people in the audience have less of interest to say than Ibsen or Macmillan do - but I liked the way it returned to the real drama at the end.

I've seen the play twice before - an excellent David Thacker production of the Arthur Miller version at the Young Vic with Tom Wilkinson in the late 80s and the rather overblown one (too much going on on stage, too many bystanders) which Trevor Nunn did with Ian McKellen at the start of his NT tenure. I'd love to see Ostermeier do more - I missed the Hamlet and Richard III when they were over here.

Good to have read the mix of positive and negative reviews here before going - it means one's expectations are tempered and I wasn't expecting to enjoy it as much as I did.

[kyvai]

I really enjoyed this tonight. I wasn’t familiar with the original play before going in other than the themes/broad description of the setting and premise. We were in row BB - splash zone - which was fun! The cover really didn’t interfere significantly with legroom btw, you can just pop your feet up on it, it’s fine. We each had a few specks of paint on our faces/hair that we noticed on the way home but it’s not permanently staining or anything. I felt like it was almost an Easter Egg nod to Matt Smith in the American Psycho adaptation.

For me it’s a solid 4* performance but the only part I didn’t quite get - and maybe I’m overthinking/overinterpreting this, but, in the first act, a LOT of the delivery of lines feels more like monologue than dialogue, the timing was off and expression a bit lacking. Especially between Matt Smith and Paul Hilton, more so from Smith, it was like they weren’t actually reacting to what the other had said, they were just waiting for them to stop speaking so they could deliver their next line. These are GOOD actors, look at them go later on, that it must be a directorial choice to present their speech like that? Like in real life, people have already decided what their position is and what they’re going to reply no matter what the other person actually says. They’re not open to dialogue, they just want people to hear their story. It was more marked in the characters that are determinedly single minded. I hope that rambling makes sense.

I really enjoyed the set with it’s weird wall-breaking scene changes, and the “band practice” music sections made perfect sense to me - I recognised myself and my friends when we were in our mid-late 20s, newly minted professionals, highly educated and socially privileged, politically idealistic but socially naïve, still living a student lifestyle drinking and smoking and playing covers in a “band” despite having actual grown up commitments in our lives. The line about “you sound like an undergraduate” hit home! I figured they all knew each other since teenagers and finding themselves back in their home town as young adults, The Kiss made sense in that context - although it was kinda random that it had no ramifications and wasn’t referred to again. And it’s not based on anything in the original Ibsen?

It is a bit confusing that the “people” (audience) in the town hall scene are broadly if not overwhelmingly supportive of Stockmann but yet back in the reality of the play he’s hounded out of town. Too many idealistic liberals in the average West End audience! We had some interesting speakers though. A few were definitely genuine, one Ukrainian woman speaking was a little jarring. I also really wanted more exploration of Hovstad’s sharp about turn, but there’s just no time given to develop him.

A big thing that bugs me about plays like this, and A Mirror currently playing in the West End as well - we’re watching them and staging them in the U.K, where we’re completely free to do so and we find the communal artistic examination/exploration of corrruption entertaining. Wikipedia says that when this was staged Beijing in 2018 it was shut down after 3 performances because the audience used the town hall section to criticise the CCP and that just did not fly. For many other countries this sh*t is still real, so it feels a bit weird that for us it’s a jolly night out at the theatre?

Anyway all that said, solid 4* from me and I’d recommend to a friend, and now I want to track down other adaptations and read the original Ibsen as I did find the story and premise intriguing!

[mkb]

Mar 31, 2024 0:39:09 GMT kyvai said:

...We were in row BB - splash zone - which was fun! The cover really didn’t interfere significantly with legroom btw, you can just pop your feet up on it, it’s fine...

That's simply factually inaccurate, unless row BB is somehow different from row A.

If you drop a vertical line from the back of the seat in front to the floor, the front of your toes are at least six inches behind that point. You lose a good two feet of legroom, and is probably the least legroom I've encountered in any theatre ever.

If you do as you suggest and put your feet on top of the box, your feet are now about six inches off the floor with your toes pressed against the back of the seat in front. It's the least uncomfortable position, but it's still uncomfortable after a few minutes. For £95, and where you reasonably expected to be able to stretch your legs under the row in front, it's not on.

[kyvai]

Lol, I’m not making things up, it genuinely wasn’t a legroom issue for either of us!

Maybe it’s changed, it didn’t seem 6 inches high and it was a bit tucked under the row in front. I initially popped my bag on it as I was settling into my seat and the usher just asked that we don’t do that, so bag went under my seat and I alternated between popping my feet up on the box or tucked in, and when my feet were up they were nowhere near the middle of the seat back in front.

[iwanttix]

In row BB I didn't have an issue with leg room either.

Saw this last night and really enjoyed it. Matt Smith's speech was very powerful and I found myself wanting to clap several times (I didn't cos I have a crippling fear of drawing attention to myself). Lots of audience participation during the town hall scene, I wonder how much you get each show.

Strong cast all round.

[kyvai]

Ha we were in the same row last night! The town hall scene did feel quite lively didn’t it, some people really getting into it.

I’m afraid I’m the wag that offered “antidisestablishmentarianism” for the improv bit just before the interval. Sorry, 2 glasses of wine down and it just came out. I hate myself a bit haha.

[kyvai]

Maybe there’s a bit of a steeper rake between BB and A that makes the cover box take up more of the leg room?