19,659 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on May 18, 2017 23:41:12 GMT
Oh god yes it was a coughing bonanza at the end? Imelda will be introducing cough tests next to go alongside her no ice rule! Actually, while it was very intense just like seeing it live, the cinema broadcast definitely alters how one perceives the show. When Imelda acts, she acts for the theatre. That's to say that she is extremely exaggerated, animated and shouty. This works brilliantly in the theatre and makes her the star she is, but with cameras up close (and with subconscious comparisons to screen acting), she might come off as hammy or over-the-top. I found the same with the recorded version of Gypsy. Heresy, I know. So pleased you said this. |
|
225 posts
|
Post by madsonmelo on May 19, 2017 0:55:21 GMT
It's really hard to put screen acting in comparison to theater, it's literally two really different things, especially in this role.
Also, I met a woman at Glass Menagerie and she saw Uta Hagen doing this and for her, Taylor was all about scream, and while I disagree with her, I have to say that Imelda was a tour-de-force.
|
|
|
|
Post by dee on May 19, 2017 4:21:55 GMT
Oh god yes it was a coughing bonanza at the end? Imelda will be introducing cough tests next to go alongside her no ice rule! Actually, while it was very intense just like seeing it live, the cinema broadcast definitely alters how one perceives the show. When Imelda acts, she acts for the theatre. That's to say that she is extremely exaggerated, animated and shouty. This works brilliantly in the theatre and makes her the star she is, but with cameras up close (and with subconscious comparisons to screen acting), she might come off as hammy or over-the-top. I found the same with the recorded version of Gypsy. Heresy, I know. I thought that loud cough was in my theatre (I just got home a few hours ago from seeing it in the States). Makes me happy that I shared the experience (five hours later!) with all of you who went. I've never seen this play nor the film so it just blew me away. I agree that Imelda can come off a bit OTTon screen, but her acting is so brilliant it doesn't bother me. I did notice the difference between live Gypsy and recorded Gypsy, though. The whole ensemble was terrific - I came back feeling so excited about how much theatre can move me. It is long, but I'd possibly see it again if I had the chance. |
|
|
|
Post by katurian on May 19, 2017 6:23:39 GMT
I saw this through NTLive too and wow, I was rather stunned into silence by the end!
I haven't read or seen the play or film before, so this was all new to me. I didn't know where it was going to go (except increasingly badly for all the characters!) and the deft intelligence, sparking humour and sharp points of the script were superb. The whole production was! This is a static one room play of the kind that can only succeed by pairing great writing with great acting, and the ensemble were terrific. In particular I was moved throughout by Conleth Hill. I felt I followed him most throughout the play, and he has such a seamless way of moving between humour and tragedy in a second. I loved George's development from defeat and passive aggression to a growing volatile anger of life still left in him yet.
Fab, couldn't fault it, wish I could see it again!
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 19, 2017 8:31:40 GMT
Oh and that bloke in the stalls in the white vest. I mean, a white vest? For the theatre? 
Thank god it wasn't just me!!! I sat there and caught myself saying "Do people not dress for the theatre any more?!"
|
|
781 posts
|
Post by rumbledoll on May 19, 2017 9:10:12 GMT
Can somebody please comment on the running time of the show (NTLive, including features)? Thanks!
|
|
578 posts
|
Post by michalnowicki on May 19, 2017 9:34:44 GMT
Can somebody please comment on the running time of the show (NTLive, including features)? Thanks! It started at around 7pm with the presenter giving a brief overview, then there was a short video about the author, the play started at around 7.30pm and I think I left the cinema at 10.20pm |
|
524 posts
|
Post by callum on May 19, 2017 11:46:33 GMT
I'm not saying that Imelda is a bad screen actress, simply that personally if I'd have seen the cinema broadcast only and not the play in person, I'd probably come away thinking she was a total ham. But, obviously, she isn't. Just pointing out the inherent problem with filming a play. If that makes sense.
|
|
19,659 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on May 19, 2017 19:02:18 GMT
Do you think Mike Leigh based Abigail's Party on this? Or at least had it in mind?
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 19, 2017 19:03:51 GMT
No.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 19, 2017 19:40:50 GMT
It reminded me of God of Carnage in a lot of ways. Had never seen the play or film before I saw this production.
|
|
19,659 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on May 19, 2017 20:22:20 GMT
fortunately I don't care what you think. But thanks for your input. |
|
1,217 posts
|
Post by nash16 on May 19, 2017 23:38:44 GMT
I thought he was mocking the person having the prolonged coughing fit but it was hard to tell. He did. It was a brilliant moment. I'm surprised he didn't stop and stare at the guy. It sounded like very forced, purposefully loud coughing from high up in the theatre. No attempt to cover their mouth or exit for goodness sake. |
|
2,302 posts
|
Post by Tibidabo on May 20, 2017 14:06:43 GMT
Actually, while it was very intense just like seeing it live, the cinema broadcast definitely alters how one perceives the show. When Imelda acts, she acts for the theatre. That's to say that she is extremely exaggerated, animated and shouty. This works brilliantly in the theatre and makes her the star she is, but with cameras up close (and with subconscious comparisons to screen acting), she might come off as hammy or over-the-top. This makes such sense. Just pointing out the inherent problem with filming a play. If that makes sense. And this is why I have never been to a live screening. I know I shouldn't criticise what I haven't tried, but I am very reticent to go to one. Whilst some might say it's better than nothing if you can't get to see the performance live, I actually question if it is. I would hate anyone to come away with an incorrect hammy impression of Imelda - or indeed any other actor. (However, I know so many people go to these and enjoy them immensely and I wouldn't want to diminish their enjoyment.) Do you think Mike Leigh based Abigail's Party on this? Or at least had it in mind? Wow - that's food for thought! There are so many parallels - in particular the question that's been asked on here several times - why don't the guests just go home? There's obviously something inherent in us to witness others' lives played out, however macabre they might be! But I agree BB - they way Mick Leigh's stuff is devised it does seem likely that Virginia Woolf may have come up several times during the making of Abigail's Party. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 20, 2017 16:22:02 GMT
I think I might day seat for Thisbe on the Chong night but does anyone recommend a time to go. I want to go a bit earlier so I can get a ticket but what are queues normally night in closing nights?
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 20, 2017 16:39:10 GMT
Re Tibidabo's post above - I see a lot of theatre and opera that way and can honestly say that actors looking hammy or shouting isn't a problem. I can see how it might have seemed to have that effect in this production, but to be honest, for me it was pretty shouty in the theatre, too.
|
|
617 posts
|
Post by loureviews on May 24, 2017 21:06:41 GMT
Saw this from the front row this afternoon. Intense stuff, brilliantly played, especially by Conleth Hill. Imelda was excellent too.
I love the play, a real emotional rollercoaster. As well as a fair amount of passive smoking and a fast travelling bit of Staunton spittle.
|
|
617 posts
|
Post by loureviews on May 25, 2017 11:49:32 GMT
Review, from my blog:
It must be Edward Albee year around the Haymarket area of London, with both The Goat, or Who is Sylvia? and this play, Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf?, running in high profile revivals within a few yards of each other.
This is by far the better known of the two plays, perhaps due to the 1966 film featuring Richard Burton and Elizabeth Taylor as George and Martha, and it is wearing its years well, with its cat and mouse domestic power games and the young guests trapped like rabbits in headlights, appalled but almost unable to get up and leave.
In this production Imelda Staunton plays Martha, a sarcastic, gin-swilling, braying, frustrated, pathetic shadow of the girl she must have been during the war years in which George courted her. Now she – as she admits in one revelatory moment – repels his kindness, attention and love with insults, clawing, and hatred.
Conleth Hill is absolutely superb as George, who has been squashed and silenced for so long that the bitterness has grown and simmered under a sad surface. He’s a man who perhaps once had ambition to lead and rule, but the years have got to him. Six years younger than Martha, he looks fifteen years older, with a careworn air and a resignation to the life fate has dealt him.
Into their gameplay come a young biologist who has recently joined the college, a blond muscleman who has a clear career trajectory and a healthy dose of contempt for those around him, and his mousy wife who drinks to mask her unhappiness at being unable to conceive or cope with the social demands of her world. Luke Treadaway plays the young blade Nick who is played to perfection by the older couple as they have done so many times before; while Imogen Poots is tragically wan as his constantly upchucking wife, Honey, who has a love for brandy which might yet turn her into a Martha.
This is a wordy play, but one in which each word has weight and meaning, and the full effect is one of an emotional rollercoaster by the end of act three. Starting as something of a black comedy, there are laughs to be found through the earlier scenes (trying to identify a Bette Davis movie) which quickly turn into something much more uncomfortable with the arrival of the guests and the games people play. There was mainly pin-drop silence in the final scenes, which were beautifully done.
This is a sensational revival full of screams, shouts, spittle, smoking, sadness and occasional silence. James Macdonald directs with a sense of space and occasion, with the one living room set and a number of off-set locations (upstairs, the downstairs cloakroom, the kitchen). The language has perhaps been a little ripened since the original (the opening salvo to the young couple of ‘screw you’ has become rather stronger) but the meat of the piece is there.
I saw this from the front row so every nuance of gesture, reaction, or interaction was captured, giving the feeling that we were almost additional trapped guests ourselves. As an honest depiction of two marriages this play gives us much food for thought, conjuring up images of the youthful George and Martha before life and circumstance trapped them, and a vision into the future to what awaits Nick and Honey.
|
|
1,936 posts
|
Post by wickedgrin on May 25, 2017 13:56:15 GMT
I caught this for the second time yesterday in the last week of its run having seen an early preview performance.
The production has got even better if that were possible. The cast now completely imbued in their roles. They have sorted out Luke Treadaways blonde hair - now convincing. Although Imelda Staunton is superb for me the performance of the play is Conleth Hill in the more difficult role.
You could have heard a pin drop in the theatre in the final act. No coughing, no talking, no rustling of sweets - a testament to the company and the strength of the performances. 3 hours flew by yet again!
Plus I got a £20 rush seat from Today Tix on the front row of the stalls - usually £65. Bargain of the year ( or was that the £15 front row for 42nd St?)
|
|
617 posts
|
Post by loureviews on May 25, 2017 15:28:14 GMT
I miss all the rush seats LOL. I paid full price but it was definitely worth it.
|
|
578 posts
|
Post by michalnowicki on May 25, 2017 15:40:29 GMT
No coughing, no talking, no rustling of sweets Shame it wasn't the same during NTLive... |
|
2,389 posts
|
Post by peggs on May 25, 2017 20:25:06 GMT
Do you think Mike Leigh based Abigail's Party on this? Or at least had it in mind? You'd have been much more use than me last night BurlyBeaR when the man next to me turned and asked me that question and i had to admit to not having seen it. Am going to have to go back through the board and read everything and post proper thoughts later but this was great. Badly behaved audience, lots of knocking over drinks, odd laughs, people being very slow on turning off their glowing phones or having a bit of a chat. On stage brilliant and great end of row c seat thanks to theatremonkey? board tip off, all those months ago. |
|
19,659 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on May 25, 2017 21:58:18 GMT
Do you think Mike Leigh based Abigail's Party on this? Or at least had it in mind? You'd have been much more use than me last night BurlyBeaR when the man next to me turned and asked me that question and i had to admit to not having seen it. Thank god it's not just me!  |
|
2,389 posts
|
Post by peggs on May 25, 2017 22:11:29 GMT
His line of argument sounded plausible to my admittedly complete ignorance, I said i would check it out and give it some thought.
|
|
230 posts
|
Post by hal9000 on May 26, 2017 13:42:57 GMT
It's not coming here (Oz) until August so it will be interesting to see how the cougher etc plays out.
As for the other screenings I have seen I always feel, somehow, like I am watching "live theatre" as opposed to screen acting. The closest it comes to a screen experience is, weirdly enough, sitcom. Which is NOT a pejorative but reference the multi-camera style is an has a similar "immediate" effect on pace.
As for Staunton as a screen actor (as a total aside), she's witty and likeable but doesn't really have much natural command and is pretty schticky even in VERA DRAKE which was 50% good-natured bustling and 50% weepy silence. Then again, Mike Leigh does love his hams.
|
|
