|
|
Post by oxfordsimon on Mar 2, 2024 20:38:52 GMT
Not the longest first half that I can recall
Years ago there was an almost full text Hamlet touring with Stephen Dillane, Donald Sinden and Gwen Taylor in the cast. The interval was 150 minutes in...
I remember leaving the theatre after 11pm
** A quick Google reminded me that this was 1994/5 and directed by Peter Hall
|
|
|
|
Post by alessia on Mar 2, 2024 20:51:40 GMT
It was good and liked the acting and love Ian Mckellen but as predicted I left at the interval- couldn’t face the journey home so much later. It was more humorous than I expected- never seen this before nor was familiar with the play but read a synopsis before so got the gist. It’s worth seeing, even if you just stay for ‘only’ two hours 😅
|
|
5,688 posts
|
Post by lynette on Mar 2, 2024 21:13:27 GMT
Sorry, being very thick here, but what exactly is this? Is it Henry IV parts 1 and 2 all one evening? God help us. Or edited or what?
|
|
|
|
Post by oxfordsimon on Mar 2, 2024 21:20:16 GMT
Sorry, being very thick here, but what exactly is this? Is it Henry IV parts 1 and 2 all one evening? God help us. Or edited or what? The full text of both plays would be a little over 5 hours. So this is a light trim rather than a radical gutting! |
|
3,528 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by Rory on Mar 2, 2024 22:45:57 GMT
Not the longest first half that I can recall Years ago there was a almost full text Hamlet touring with Stephen Dillane, Donald Sinden and Gwen Taylor in the cast. The interval was 150 minutes in... I remember leaving the theatre after 11pm ** A quick Google reminded me that this was 1994/5 and directed by Peter Hall Yes, it ran at the Gielgud and as I recall, Sir Donald took his leave before the curtain call, and who could blame him? |
|
|
|
Post by dr on Mar 2, 2024 23:10:01 GMT
I found this rather great tonight. It's a long evening, and there are some clear issues that will be ironed out in previews - scenes dragging, cues poorly placed, and so on. But for the most part, it succeeds in making the plays feel fresh and relevant. It is, as noted above, much more humorous than perhaps expected, with McKellen being genuinely hilarious in most of his scenes. Toheeb Jimoh is as excellent here as he was in Frecknall's Romeo and Juliet, bringing a boyish energy and charm to Hal. The set design is excellent and inventive in its use of space; the sound design is particularly successful in underpinning the whole event.
It feels properly epic, and you do fall in love with these characters. It certainly sags in the second part, where the action seems inconsequential and the dialogue a little flat, but when it picks up in the third part, it is most certainly worth it - emotional and poignant.
I'd give it four stars now, but could see it moving to five with time. It won't be for everyone - total purists and total haters will find many flaws. But it'll be amongst the most accomplished, stylish, creative revivals playing in the West End when it opens.
Act 1: 18:35-20:26
Act 2: 20:50-22:23
|
|
|
|
Post by vandemonium on Mar 3, 2024 2:27:27 GMT
May well be a lot of doubling beyond the announced roles. The Welsh scenes are great and should be retained. I recall I had Glendower double with at least two bishops and a rogue or two so for those of you who've seen it, did Icke retain the Welsh scenes, with the great Hotspur / Glendower banter (Henry IV pt I, act 3 scene) ? |
|
|
|
Post by dickb on Mar 3, 2024 14:06:24 GMT
As a fully paid-up member of the "Don't Mess With Shakespeare" club there are obvious aspects of this production which grated, not least the modern dress and weapons (which make nonsense of lines like "Put up your swords). The minimalistic set didn't impress either. Like many others, we had had enough by the interval and went home. At that time we thought there was only another hour to go - glad to learn it was even longer. McKellen of course was excellent, and I'm pleased to have seen at least some of his Falstaff. But I think the production will need some serious rework before it gets to the West End.
|
|
382 posts
|
Post by stevemar on Mar 5, 2024 14:09:16 GMT
On the other hand I have just been called by box office telling me they are giving me a better seat because the director needs to sit on my front row seat 🤣 apparently I now have a premium seat. I’ve just been called to move two rows back from front row as the director has requested the prompt sits in my seat.😂 |
|
|
|
Post by alessia on Mar 5, 2024 15:19:58 GMT
On the other hand I have just been called by box office telling me they are giving me a better seat because the director needs to sit on my front row seat 🤣 apparently I now have a premium seat. I’ve just been called to move two rows back from front row as the director has requested the prompt sits in my seat.😂 It's rather annoying. I wasn't happy with the seat they gave me, it was way too far back for my liking. BUT if you have two rows back it's still a good one. They put me in row H. |
|
382 posts
|
Post by stevemar on Mar 5, 2024 15:45:09 GMT
I’ve just been called to move two rows back from front row as the director has requested the prompt sits in my seat.😂 It's rather annoying. I wasn't happy with the seat they gave me, it was way too far back for my liking. BUT if you have two rows back it's still a good one. They put me in row H. Oh, they appeared to give me a choice to move or not - I was asked and told about the replacement seat and they mentioned they were calling round other people too, so it’s a shame it may not have been presented as a choice to you. As it happens, my seat appears to be in the slightly ridiculous £167 category - alas they didn’t offer me the champagne/lounge and nibbles! |
|
|
|
Post by alessia on Mar 5, 2024 16:33:35 GMT
It's rather annoying. I wasn't happy with the seat they gave me, it was way too far back for my liking. BUT if you have two rows back it's still a good one. They put me in row H. Oh, they appeared to give me a choice to move or not - I was asked and told about the replacement seat and they mentioned they were calling round other people too, so it’s a shame it may not have been presented as a choice to you. As it happens, my seat appears to be in the slightly ridiculous £167 category - alas they didn’t offer me the champagne/lounge and nibbles! It's completely my fault for not asking- they just said we are moving you to a £200 seat, don't worry it's a great one blah blah. I trusted them and didn't ask where it was...they didn't say it was a choice though, it was either you move or you have your money back sort of thing |
|
382 posts
|
Post by stevemar on Mar 5, 2024 21:25:48 GMT
I’d been looking forward to this when I booked, but was less and less excited by the time of going tonight.
Maybe it was just me being tired, but I found this rather pedestrian and was disinterested. Having checked, the last production of Henry IV I saw was Michael Gambon at the National in 2009. It’s not a play which I like that much as I am less than sympathetic to Falstaff’s character, but I wanted to give it another go.
Pluses: Toheeb Jimon brings energy as Hal. No popcorn to be seen this time in the auditorium, Parsley!
Minuses: No real pace except at the end of the first half. No particular vision with this mostly modern production, some “background” music/beats which adds nothing in Falstaff’s tavern scenes and overused brown curtains. The actress playing Mistress Quickly was not great.
Sadly, I’ve seen Sir Ian McKellen give better performances in Mother Goose, Enemy of the People, the Cut and Hamlet.
I do hope this does well in London, but I had hoped that Robert Icke could bring something urgent and fresh.
It wasn’t for me and I left at the interval to avoid a midnight arrival at home. In fairness this was an early performance so it might bed in better.
|
|
|
|
Post by parsley1 on Mar 5, 2024 21:33:58 GMT
Clare Perkins was dreadful as Mistress Quickly
Her diction is appalling
She was apparently a hit in Wife Of Willesden
Generally the more I reflect on it
The more it becomes a disappointing experience
The constant drawing back and forth of the curtains was quite cheap
And they were a particularly nasty colour
|
|
|
|
Post by parsley1 on Mar 5, 2024 21:37:24 GMT
Fascinating the number of interval leavers here
I do hold that Ivo Van Hove can do longer shows with way more engagement and concept
The issue is that Robert Icke
Was never half as smart as he thinks himself to be
In this show though even his trademark conceit usually bordering on arrogance is missing in action
Odd
|
|
|
|
Post by parsley1 on Mar 5, 2024 21:44:52 GMT
I do wonder
If most Shakespeare tragedies have had their day
And if there IS nothing urgent to add anymore
|
|
382 posts
|
Post by stevemar on Mar 5, 2024 22:01:54 GMT
Clare Perkins was dreadful as Mistress Quickly Her diction is appalling She was apparently a hit in Wife Of Willesden Generally the more I reflect on it The more it becomes a disappointing experience The constant drawing back and forth of the curtains was quite cheap And they were a particularly nasty colour I would have to agree with you about Mistress Quickly (Ian McKellan spoke over her a number of times), and the curtains were dire - surely black would have worked better (well anything other than brown). The brick wall also seemed to hark back to the Almeida. The moving bar with brief lines of narrative was the most promising aspect, I think this was used in the Oresteia (or at least a countdown). And yes, most of Robert Icke’s trademarks were missing. Haha, maybe I wanted sliding/frosted glass screens, digital clocks and cameras! |
|
382 posts
|
Post by stevemar on Mar 5, 2024 22:09:19 GMT
I do wonder If most Shakespeare tragedies have had their day And if there IS nothing urgent to add anymore Just my personal opinion that the history plays aren’t really for me, unless there is a big character and someone I can empathise with or somehow relates to one’s own frailties or motivations, or are so power hungry to bring real drama. Alas, Falstaff doesn’t do that for me, and Hal’s relationship with him seemed more dismissive here. I do have to base this just on part 1 though. |
|
|
|
Post by clarefh on Mar 7, 2024 15:07:12 GMT
Hello all - I have a ticket for this on the notice board for tomorrow ( Friday). Ticket is stalls N6 - £55 face value but I’m open to any offer tbh ( have managed to get a ticket for the Manon at the Royal Ballet which I just can’t resist - and the acts are all less than an hour 😁)
|
|
4,020 posts
|
Post by Dawnstar on Mar 7, 2024 17:37:15 GMT
( have managed to get a ticket for the Manon at the Royal Ballet which I just can’t resist - and the acts are all less than an hour 😁) Though the curtain call is bound to be longer tomorrow as it's Alexander Campbell's farewell performance. |
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Mar 7, 2024 22:38:54 GMT
I thought this was OK. A bit pedestrian and low energy which from Robert Icke was disappointing. Like the Fiennes Macbeth it was badly under cast in the supporting roles.
Owen Glendower and the Welsh scenes totally gone from Part 1 but the bulk of the cuts in Part 2. The death of Flastaff bit from Henry V inserted at the end.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Mar 7, 2024 22:45:13 GMT
May well be a lot of doubling beyond the announced roles. The Welsh scenes are great and should be retained. I recall I had Glendower double with at least two bishops and a rogue or two so for those of you who've seen it, did Icke retain the Welsh scenes, with the great Hotspur / Glendower banter (Henry IV pt I, act 3 scene) ? No. All gone. |
|
52 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by westendgirls on Mar 7, 2024 22:59:10 GMT
Just back from seeing it tonight. Didn’t know what to expect but enjoyed it (I am no Shakespeare expert so don’t have much to compare it to)
What was very frustrating was the number of people that casually walked in during the first 5 minutes. Whether they didn’t give an announcement in the bar/foyer that the show was about to start, I don’t know but it was a significant number in the upper circle. I don’t think it was the 6.30 start, which very nearly caught us out, as most people had drinks and bottles of wine so obviously had arrived on time
It was very distracting and resulted in me not hearing most of the coronation scene due to the noise
|
|
1,828 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by Dave B on Mar 7, 2024 23:36:34 GMT
18.30 until 22.20. Interval at 20:26, pause at 21:30.
I completely agree with Jan on 'bit pedestrian and low energy'. Ooof.
A couple of strong moments, Falstaff's there is your honour was good. Toheeb Jimon is good, I was a bit disappointed by him in Romeo & Juliet last year and thought this a much stronger performance, his final conversation with Falstaff in particular.
A few empty seats after the interval but it is probably worth noting that you've had a full play/story by then, it might make it easier for anyone wavering.
|
|
1,476 posts
|
Post by Steve on Mar 7, 2024 23:50:19 GMT
Saw this tonight and LIKED it. Dead sure it will tighten and improve a great deal by the time it opens in the West End. I felt the last third, after a pause, from 9:30pm - 10:20pm, was the most sustained effective sequence, firing on all cylinders. I thought Toheeb Jimoh was excellent as prince Hal. Some spoilers follow. . . We all know Robert Icke considers a lot of theatre "dead" (ie rote entertainment) and walks out of a lot of shows at the interval if he feels that way lol. So of course its ironic that people on the board are walking out at the interval of his play. Which is a shame, as I feel that it's after the interval that everything he's been building to comes alive. I recall how brutal and casually sociopathic Jude Law's "Henry V" was, and for me, this is that Henry V's origin story, in that it takes an especially ruthless look at the characters, whereby that famous monologue at the beginning of the play, in which Hal tells us exactly how cynical he really is (he's just playacting the dissolute for show and he's going full political as soon as it suits him, so everyone can acclaim his amazing supposed turnaround lol) is the anchor for Icke's take. Since Icke creates his productions like a sculptor, cutting away extraneous crap (like period costumes which don't relate to us now, for instance) and adding connective tissue where he thinks its necessary, it was always likely he'd want that speech to make sense if he left it in, and he does. As we live in a world where being politically in charge is a license to plunder, loot and self serve, it was always likely that Icke would create a similar world on stage, so that the production is relevant and alive rather than merely entertaining and "dead." An example of Icke hardening Hal's character is the opening vignette wherein Hal robs a cash register. Since this precedes his buddy, Poins's humorous robbery scheme, Icke is telling us, no, Hal isn't a charmer playing along with a funny scheme, he's in fact already a robber baron at his very core. And it's not just him. Ian McKellen's Hal is still played by Ian McKellen, so he's always going to be funny, but Icke excises romantic and/or funny scenes, retaining the more caustic cynical bits. For example, when his old friend, Justice Shallow shows up, they don't bond over funny sequences recruiting soldiers, instead the most romantic and elegaic speech of the play ("Chimes at Midnight") immediately cuts to a cynical monologue of McKellen's Falstaff, as a user, undercutting any romantic resonance of that speech. Indeed, the whole world of this play is "fake news" (the sequence of McKellen's medal-brandishing Falstaff celebrating his fake triumph is brilliantly done), propaganda (Jerusalem is roped in, as is the National Anthem) and political machinations (it all flows from that Hal speech). The confrontation between Hal and his father over the Crown (forget how heavy it is, me wants) is as primal and predatory, political and revelatory as I've seen. But to see it, you can't walk out at either interval. I expect Icke will carry on sculpting this production until, by it's April opening, it is as ruthless as that Jude Law "Henry V." I thought Toheeb Jimoh never puts a foot wrong, and is a compelling lead, charming but ruthless. I think McKellen's Falstaff is not as sentimental as previous Falstaffs (Simon Russell Beale's sentimental idealism in the Hollow Crown BBC productions actually made me cry lol), but McKellen lends his ruthless acquisitive Falstaff a bit of his own likeability and oodles of his humour. And I felt that Richard Coyle really met the challenge of that splendid scene he shares with Jimoh towards the end. All in all, I think this production has a 3 star beginning with a 4 star ending, but I expect it to be 4 stars all round by the time it hits the West End. 3 and a half stars from me for now.  |
|
