|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 22, 2016 19:51:40 GMT
My review of Ivanov: only slightly better than The Seagull.
*yawns* *cries*
|
|
781 posts
|
Post by rumbledoll on Aug 22, 2016 23:16:03 GMT
Sorry to hear that, jean.. I guess you either relate to it or you don't.. I felt so strongly and emotionally about all three (esp Seagull and Ivanov), but I can't explain exactly what you are missing - it's just there waiting to be discovered. Or not.
Gonna give Platonov a try?
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 23, 2016 8:22:25 GMT
In for a penny, in for a pound, rumbledoll - so I'll be there on Thursday, daring Platonov to complete the boredom hat-trick. ;-)
To be fair, I did enjoy Ivanov more than The Seagull. I thought Streatfeild's performance really went up a notch when he had something to actually work with (the angry scenes with the doctor and with Anna, the bit where Sasha throws herself at Ivanov). And Peter Egan was brilliant again. The supporting characters were very funny. The doctor was fascinating. I would have given anything to see more of Nina Sosanya's character.
But yet again we had that whole central borefest of 'my life is so terrible, I don't know what to do, oh it's so agonising, don't even talk to me because you might for a moment relieve the sheer tedium of my terrible life - and did I mention what a terrible thing life is?' Aarghhh!! Go and try being a serf, mate!!
There was one point where Sasha said to her Dad, 'You don't know what I've been through!' and I was vividly reminded of watching young, beautiful, vital Gina Beck in that Jacques Brel show, coming out on stage and singing the umpteenth song about how sad and old her character was and how it would be better to die. And I just wanted to laugh. I mean, come on Sasha, you put the tin lid on a failing marriage and ensured a sad and lonely woman died an even sadder and lonelier death. But do, please, tell me again what you've been through...
It was interesting to hear 'superfluous man' mentioned. It popped into my head as a concept as I was watching The Seagull, but I didn't think the period was quite right for it. But one of our Russian number can let us know about that, I'm sure! All I know is I had way more fun reading about Lermontov's Pechorin than watching any of this lot. At least he had the good grace to have a couple of interesting adventures along the way...
On the way back up the road to the station, a couple in front were having a heated discussion about whether that line (you know the one, I don't want to type it) meant Ivanov was a complete rotter or just really, really peeved. And it felt more involving than most of what I'd just seen on stage!
|
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Aug 23, 2016 8:49:28 GMT
One thing common to millionaire Sir David Hare's versions of these plays is that every rich character is loathsome and without any redeeming features, it is not so clear cut in Chekhov's versions.
|
|
781 posts
|
Post by rumbledoll on Aug 23, 2016 14:02:41 GMT
Jean, I wonder what would happen if you decided to do three play day lol) They might have driven you to the point that you'd rather get your gun loaded than continue ))
I understand what you are talking about.. Sometimes I think Chekhovian charaters kill themselves just out of boredom.. It could seem they do not know the REAL suffering. As for Ivanov I do believe in this days and age he would be diagnosed with mild (or majoy) depressive disodrer.. and Streadfeild's performance made me feel sympathy towards him. Anna obviously is a victim, a cusualty, and I thought Sasha was less likable than in the book but I enjoyed Olivia playing her with dominant tone as she drugged Nikolay into the relationship he never intended to have.
Yes, "superfluous man" was more related to the middle 19th century literature.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 23, 2016 18:35:17 GMT
Ha ha, I'm not sure I'd need to load a gun - I think my pulse might just stop from the overdose of boredom!
Yes you're right, of course, these days Ivanov would be diagnosed with some type of depressive disorder. And I did try to care about him on that level. When Streatfeild addressed the audience directly I felt a better connection with what Ivanov might be experiencing. But the sense of dramatic inertia was just too strong in the many repetitive conversations with other characters.
Maybe I should take Jan Brock's advice and see an original Chekhov. Mind you, I'll need a year or two to boost my Russian skills first! ;-)
|
|
747 posts
|
Post by Latecomer on Aug 23, 2016 19:17:30 GMT
Ok Jean, compare notes later. I'm doing the all three on one day... Are you going 3rd Sept? Peggs and I are also there!  Would be lovely to meet the legend that is Lynette at some point! |
|
781 posts
|
Post by rumbledoll on Aug 23, 2016 19:22:14 GMT
Ha ha, I'm not sure I'd need to load a gun - I think my pulse might just stop from the overdose of boredom! Yes you're right, of course, these days Ivanov would be diagnosed with some type of depressive disorder. And I did try to care about him on that level. When Streatfeild addressed the audience directly I felt a better connection with what Ivanov might be experiencing. But the sense of dramatic inertia was just too strong in the many repetitive conversations with other characters. Maybe I should take Jan Brock's advice and see an original Chekhov. Mind you, I'll need a year or two to boost my Russian skills first! ;-)
No, you really shouldn't. You won't believe how gloomy it is staged here.. I mean no humour WHATSOEVER - just 'drama-drama can't you see it's high DRAMA'. But people here tend to like it for the reason I cannot explain. And if you will hear a person laughing during it you'd be told to shut up. Happened to me once (is wasn't Chekhov, 1900 in fact which is a tragic comedy for god's sake and it WAS funny!)
I love British productions of Russian classics (same with Three Days in The Country last year) that they try to bring up all the humour and at least give a bit of comic relief. As intentse as Ivanov is some scenes there are pure farce and I like it better that way.
I agree that Hamlet-like monologue Geoffrey gives front stage really benefits from him making eye contact with audience members. One line also is stuck in my head and just wouldn’t go away. Remember, in the heat of argument with an uninvited guest when he’s being accused of a race for the money and considering Anna’s fail to provide it he’s said to be in pursue of Sasha and her *possibly* generous dowry.. the look of disbelief on Ivanov’s face when he turns around and almost with the chuckle he replies: do you REALLY think human beings are THAT simple? I just wanted to say back to him: Oh, my poor dear Nikolay Alekseevich. Some people really are so simple you would not believe... Point is I can relate to a lot of things Chekhovian charaters are saying but I agree it's sometimes repetetive especially across Ivanov & Platonov.
Good luck with boosting your Russian! I admire you - must be hell (I do realise it's a very diffucult language to learn). Do you mind me asking is it for business purposes or just sport?
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 23, 2016 22:43:56 GMT
Ha ha, I'm not sure I'd need to load a gun - I think my pulse might just stop from the overdose of boredom! Yes you're right, of course, these days Ivanov would be diagnosed with some type of depressive disorder. And I did try to care about him on that level. When Streatfeild addressed the audience directly I felt a better connection with what Ivanov might be experiencing. But the sense of dramatic inertia was just too strong in the many repetitive conversations with other characters. Maybe I should take Jan Brock's advice and see an original Chekhov. Mind you, I'll need a year or two to boost my Russian skills first! ;-)
Good luck with boosting your Russian! I admire you - must be hell (I do realise it's a very diffucult language to learn). Do you mind me asking is it for business purposes or just sport?
I did a languages degree and Russian was one of the languages - but I haven't used it in 18 years so I've forgotten it all, sadly (apart from, bizarrely, the first four lines of a Pushkin poem that begins 'Ya vas liubil'). We cheated and read the literature in translation at uni, though. I think I'd still be piecing together the Dostoevsky now if we'd read it in the original! On the evidence, I reckon I'm more of a Gogol person than a Chekhov person. |
|
2,740 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by n1david on Aug 24, 2016 10:22:44 GMT
I attended the three-show day last Saturday. Seeing all three in a day was certainly a “theatrical event”, in terms of bums-on-seats marathon, but I wasn’t convinced that there I appreciated was the synergy between the plays that the NT or Chichester intended. It was a very different theatrical event from, say, The James Plays or The Coast of Utopia (which were obviously designed to be seen as parts of a whole).
Platonov made for a suitable starter, largely thanks to the superb (broad) acting of James McArdle. It’s all a bit chaotic, not surprising given the play’s origins, and the opening introduction scene drags for what seems like forever (“oh hello, let me just summarise who you are, your connection to the people already here and your key character traits”)… but ultimately I was won over.
Won over I was not by Ivanov. I can only agree with jeanhunt’s assessment above – I could not get on with any of these lead characters. I felt very sorry for Ivanov who I agree was suffering from what we would call depression today, and it was even more misunderstood then than now. I can appreciate Streatfeild’s acting, but every time he came to the fore my heart sank as he just wasn’t a character I wanted to spend time with. The party scenes were broadly filled with grotesques but ultimately at the heart of the play was this void of a man, and I spent rather a lot of the play willing it to its inevitable conclusion.
The Seagull is obviously the most “finished” of the works, having more evolved characters and a more sophisticated plot. This is impeccably acted – Anna Chancellor is a marvellous diva but without becoming a caricature, Peter Egan is excellent (as he is in Ivanov), but after several hours of angst I was left less than moved by the ending, and this is where I felt the three-show day ended up less than the sum of its parts.
Kudos to the cast which was excellent – would have loved to have seen more of Nina Sosanya who was luminous in Ivanov and perfect in Platonov; James McArdle shows his adaptability perfectly in the first two plays (even if the latter part is possibly one of the most thankless ever written). Streatfeild too shows his acting chops in turning his life around before The Seagull… Oh, and Des McAleer deserves credit for being unpleasant in an interesting variety of ways…
So… Glad I saw it, remain unconvinced by the marathon but pleased to have seen such quality of acting although it felt a bit like a Chekhov seminar than three plays constructed for enjoyment. Did prompt me to book for Wild Honey at the Hampstead though – I’ve seen it before, years ago, but will look at it with new eyes after this Platonov. Terrace special menu was perfectly timed and executed for the gap between Ivanov and The Seagull…
|
|
5,688 posts
|
Post by lynette on Aug 24, 2016 12:50:37 GMT
Nice review n1, thanks. I'm seeing this lot soon. I'm delighted that it ain't going to be like The James Plays because I, alone in this universe, think they were seriously overrated.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 25, 2016 20:08:45 GMT
FINALLY! A Chekhov play I've enjoyed. I feel like jumping on stage and hugging Platonov. (I am close enough to the stage to do this.)
Anyone else sat front stalls for this? The water on stage could smell fresher, I must say...
|
|
2,740 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by n1david on Aug 25, 2016 20:40:24 GMT
Anyone else sat front stalls for this? The water on stage could smell fresher, I must say... Given that the front row got splattered in Ivanov, be grateful you weren't sitting there for that as it may only have added to your discomfort... |
|
781 posts
|
Post by rumbledoll on Aug 25, 2016 21:10:53 GMT
Alas, Jean! So glad to hear that! I was front stalls for all three and it started smelling even in early August.. I fear for the those who'll be front row at the final performance in October... |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 26, 2016 11:57:57 GMT
Platonov is clearly the one of the three they're playing for laughs. I had no prior knowledge of this play, so I have no idea whether they have served it up within the bounds of acceptability or if they went totally over the top for laughs. But I don't much care either way, it's the only one of the three I can honestly say I enjoyed. And not just for the comedy - it felt like Platonov's gripes were much more directed against the world in general (which is easier to relate to) than inward-looking, as with the tortured characters in The Seagull and Ivanov.
It is arguably more the women's tragedy, of course. My main gripe would be that in the final moments, it was almost impossible to see the central tableau because of the blocking - very tall actor standing in front of the log somewhat hampered my view (and thereby the emotion) of the ending.
Had to giggle at an older gentleman standing nearby at the interval, grumbling to his wife, "I don't know what all those women see in Platonov." I could have supplied plenty of helpful suggestions!
|
|
781 posts
|
Post by rumbledoll on Aug 26, 2016 13:56:26 GMT
Platonov certainly is a charmer but it doesn't give him a right to act like a dick (that's the problem since everybody's ready to forgive him anything). I liked this play less than other two because I think it's unfinished, a bit clumsy, chaotic and too hysterical towards the end. But Act 1 is a total delight!
|
|
141 posts
|
Post by Mr Crummles on Aug 26, 2016 14:22:20 GMT
Platonov reminded a lot of Norman, from Alan Ayckbourn's The Norman Conquests, a charming and witty brat, who, for all his wrongdoings and misdeeds, seduces the heart of all women around him. I thought James McArdle was excellent in the part.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 26, 2016 15:17:00 GMT
rumbledoll - you're right, of course, he treats the women abominably. But I know a guy a bit like that (not quite as extreme!) and I'm not sure he truly appreciates the disaster he leaves in his wake sometimes. Like Anna, intelligent women know they shouldn't feel drawn to him, but it's that charm that's deadly...
Mr Crummles - I haven't seen The Norman Conquests, but the description fits. I think McArdle's 'roughness round the edges' really helped with Platonov's appeal. There were elements of his reaction to things that struck me as very Scottish (aside from the obvious accent!), in particular the pricking of pomposity, which felt very natural to me - so maybe I didn't always judge Platonov as harshly as others might. I'm thinking especially of the way his head came up the moment the 'counterfeit count' walked in. Mine (50% Scots!) was doing much the same movement way down in Row C ;-)
|
|
781 posts
|
Post by rumbledoll on Aug 26, 2016 18:16:37 GMT
Haha jean - made me smile! I do love the way Scottish accents sound Funnily enough I remember one critic said reviwing this in Chichester that "what a great idea to do Platonov with a strong scottish accent!" (or smth along similiar lines) and I thought, judging on other things I saw Mr mcArdle in "Well.. he doesn't seem to be able to hide it anyway" - he wasn't trying too hard here, was he? )) But I do like it that way as I said ) |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 26, 2016 22:08:14 GMT
I think the only other thing I've seen him in was the James Plays, where I guess I was expecting the accent!
Glaswegian is particularly good for bringing pompous people down a peg or two. ;-)
Out of interest, does the school blackboard have a different word/drawing each show, or is it always a rabbit (krolik)?
|
|
141 posts
|
Post by Mr Crummles on Aug 27, 2016 8:47:36 GMT
He (James McArdle) was so different in Ivanov, as the gloomy, insufferably plain-speaking righteous doctor, that I might not have recognised him at all if it wasn't for the accent. I'm now beating myself for having missed the James trilogy.
|
|
781 posts
|
Post by rumbledoll on Aug 27, 2016 10:19:30 GMT
I think the only other thing I've seen him in was the James Plays, where I guess I was expecting the accent! Glaswegian is particularly good for bringing pompous people down a peg or two. ;-) Out of interest, does the school blackboard have a different word/drawing each show, or is it always a rabbit (krolik)?
I saw him in some things on TV and you can always bet there's Scottish accent on the menu
Seems to me it's always the same (judging on both our experiences & official pictures) and also half erased "съешь этих французских булок да выпей чаю" which got me in stitches 'cause it's a classic pangram for Russian version of Microsoft! ))) And the alphabet - it's not even complete lol...
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 28, 2016 12:46:46 GMT
I thought I'd spotted a few missing letters... Couldn't see the pangram from where I was sitting - mind you, the bunny picture was looking faded and dusty, so maybe they need to reapply some chalk!
|
|
781 posts
|
Post by rumbledoll on Aug 28, 2016 18:41:35 GMT
|
|
781 posts
|
Post by rumbledoll on Aug 28, 2016 18:46:05 GMT
Out of interest - the question for those who attended a hardcore marathon for this: Does the entire cast tend to take a bow at the end of the evening (after The Seagull)? When I was in, every single actor came to the last curtain call (to the standing ovation), but it was the press-night so I'm wondering whether they do it each Three Play Day.
|
|
Would be lovely to meet the legend that is Lynette at some point! 
