Andrew Scott's Hamlet (Almeida)

[Steve]

Saw this tonight. A muted, poetic, poignant, intimate rumination on life and, particularly, death, this is among the best Hamlets I have seen!

Spoilers follow. . .

The production poster of Andrew Scott's Hamlet, open-eyed in an open coffin, blue satin sheets reflecting blue across his face, as red flowers and flames emblazon the black jumper covering his chest, perfectly captures the mood of this production.

Scott's Hamlet rages red internally, but all his actions are tempered by a calm blue thoughtfulness, that is rooted deeply into the production as a whole.

Icke magnifies the contemplative and poetic power of this production by using all characters periodically as sentinels, silently observing the actions of other characters, which technique gives multiple meanings to many scenes, as we perceive them through the eyes of all the carefully positioned watchers. Characters who are not in a scene, on the page, nonetheless appear in scenes serving their function as sentinels, hugely enriching an audience experience, where we too are observing silently, and see ourselves reflected.

Such reflections occasionally become literal, as when audience members are caught on camera, and displayed on a big screen. Unlike other Icke productions, where surveillance has been a threatening presence, here surveillance serves as the ultimate sentinel, a transmitter and recorder of truth, including closeups and freeze frames of faces of the actors.

The intimacy of the Almeida is paramount. Actors can speak in a whisper and still be heard, so the rise and fall of emotions can be more sensitively calibrated than in bigger theatres, such as the Barbican barn of Benedict Cumberbatch or even the Cambridge Theatre cave of David Tennant.

Indeed, Tennant's astonishing and excellent stint as Hamlet can be most usefully compared with this production, as he is an actor with a similar electric wired range to Scott. Tennant gave us "antic disposition" that was so electric and so wired that Scott could easily have seen it as his duty to try to outdo Tennant in total manic energy output. This could have been disastrous in a tiny space like the Almeida, where such an effort would come across as shrill and off-putting overacting. But instead, Scott does the opposite: conforming to Icke's hushed, delicate and caring vision by muting his performance, treading sensitively and lightly through Shakespeare's poetry as if ballet-dancing on pins, where pins are words, and every one can Pr**k.

This is a magnificent cast across the board. Angus Wright once again gives us his oh-so-real matter-of-fact delivery, that makes Claudius' malevolence commonplace, universal and inevitable. Juliet Stevenson gives us the most touchy-feely of Gertrudes, at once motherly and loving but equally desperate and needy. So too with Peter Wight's Polonius, at once a buffoon as well as a loveable warm and tender father. Jessica Brown Findlay's Ophelia is infinitely touching not only because the actress exquisitely expresses Ophelia's hurt, but also because Icke finds ingenious ways of enriching her early scenes such that her initial bond with Hamlet is greater and richer than we are used to.


All the characters are like this, multifaceted and well-rounded, without a hint of exaggeration. All the characters' arcs are poetically linked in Icke's well-orchestrated, plaintive dance of death.

It is Andrew Scott who holds the poetry together, Icke's ultrasensitive onstage avatar. Sometimes he seems to move in slow motion, sometimes he explodes, but the sensitivity and depth of Icke's vision always remains intact, right up to it's supremely moving ending.

I'm only glad I've another ticket to see this production after it beds in, and before it moves somewhere where it's incredible intimacy will be lost. This is a Hamlet for the ages. For me, anyway.

5 stars.

[crowblack]

(Spoilers!)

SPOILER: Click to show

I saw this on Tuesday and really enjoyed it. I'm not a big fan of the play itself, but once it got going - I felt it took a while to get from 33 to 45rpm - it was excellent. If you really love the play as a play I imagine you'll be delighted with the full length, but I thought it could do with some pruning, especially at the start and the very end (btw, I had checked the running time a couple of days earlier, so was prepared for that). Andrew Scott was brilliant, enthralling, Ophelia had me in tears and there was some excellent support (and an interesting dynamic with a female Guildenstern), though I was less keen on Claudius and Horatio. The stage is low (and I had a front row seat - fab!) and it felt very intimate. Set-wise it was stylishly Scandi-noir, and maybe a nod to 'Festen' (appropriately, given that film's nods to Hamlet), and worked really well.

[alexandra]

Loved it (apart from not being able to hear quite a bit of it, especially from Ophelia; if you're at the back I reckon you wouldn't hear much at all, apart from Hamlet, Gertrude and Polonius) UNTIL the end. Andrew Scott is magnificent, as are Juliet Stevenson and Peter Wight; it's a very psychological, vulnerable Hamlet. But that ending spoiled it for me. I was distracted and unmoved, and I hardly even noticed one of the only unsullied relationships in the play, between Hamlet and Horatio, at the end because I was too busy [serious spoilers coming up]

SPOILER: Click to show

wondering why Hamlet didn't have a watch so when he went to hand it in to the Ghost like all the others he didn't have one on - unless that was a prop misfunction the night I saw it. And whilst all the other reconciliations were fine, I didn't want Claudius and Hamlet to reconcile; Claudius is an evil bastard. And surely Gertrude should have danced with Old Hamlet at the end, not Claudius. And "The rest is......." seemed way too much like an undergraduate joke to me.

However, one absolutely wonderful innovation was

SPOILER: Click to show

having Hamlet and his father able to touch. Never seen that before in all my Hamlets, and the hug brought tears to my eyes in a way that the ending absolutely didn't. /spoiler]

All in all, Scott is a great Hamlet, and I very much enjoyed the production until the end.

[alexandra]

Apparently I have seen that innovation before. Never done so movingly, though.

[Rory]

It appears that the Apollo would be the only theatre available for a relatively direct West End transfer. I hope it happens!

[dave72]

Does the announced production of The Philanthropist at Trafalgar Studios (April 3 - July 22) suggest that Hamlet will *not* be transferring there immediately after its Almeida run, as previously speculated? Or is it going to another theatre? Anybody know? (mrbarnaby?)

[alexandra]

I wonder actually whether the ending is still evolving night to night at the moment. I wouldn't be surprised; it didn't seem quite right to me. Does what I said about it seem familiar to others who've already seen it? (please use spoiler brackets)

[Kenneth_C]

Feb 23, 2017 15:32:44 GMT Rory said:

It appears that the Apollo would be the only theatre available for a relatively direct West End transfer. I hope it happens!

I am trying to keep a slot open during my May trip to the UK, but it is becoming increasingly difficult to do so.  I sure hope there is word soon.

[Rory]

With the announcement that Cat on a Hot Tin Roof will start at the Apollo on 13th July, there is now a 9 week gap at that theatre between 6th May and 8th July. Hamlet could still go there.

[Deleted]

There are a few tickets for tonight and tomorrow available online if you're quick, including some of the reasonably priced "slightly restricted" ones

[Deleted]

I'm in the second interval now. It's that long it needs two intervals. I think Robert Icke has spent all his budget on getting Andrew Scott. He's had to use the Oristeia set again. Nice to see that he's into recycling.

Goodness knows who thought Jessica Brown Findlay's hairdon't was a good idea. Should have gone to Specsavers. Makes her look like Rita Ora. Yes, it's that nasty.

Juliet Stevenson is marvellous. Glorious voice.

Heavens, 'Hamlet' is a dull play though innit.

[popcultureboy]

From a time perspective, they don't need that second interval. A 90 minute second half is totally viable, and having another 15 minute break just half an hour after an almost 2 hour first act is really odd. It's a shame it has to be there for set reasons and can't be shortened or got rid of.

I enjoyed it hugely up to the play within a play. It then started to go a little wonky, and the final hour devolved into an absolute garbage fire. A lot of that was down to pacing, but some of the directorial choices were, well, not great. I'm going again in April, so will be interested to see how it evolves. I DID have massive audibility issues from six rows back in the stalls though. If this is transferring to a West End house, they will really need to speak up.

[theatrefan77]

Glad to know it wasn't just me. At times I was really struggling to hear the actors. Thought I was going deaf. Andrew Scott was almost inaudible at times. He really need to project his voice better. You get the feeling that he was acting just for the people in the front row, maybe it was because he spotted Vanessa Redgrave there.

Overall I enjoyed this but didn't love it. For me is a 3 and 1/2 stars production, potentially 4 if it improves before the opening night. The 3 hours 50 minutes should be reduced at least by 20 minutes to improve the pace and one interval should be enough.

Juliet Stevenson was superb IMHO and also quite liked Jessica Brown Findlay in spite of the horrible hair.

[Deleted]

For me Juliet Stevenson and Luke Thompson took the acting honours in this. Andrew Scott does some lovely hand acting though for fans of that.

It's a strange one. Some bits are really rather marvellous and then there's a load of terribly dull stuff and there's a lot I'd have cut though. There really is no excuse for the running time.

[n1david]

If you're going today, leave extra time as Upper St is closed due to a police incident - so no buses, and if you're walking from Highbury and Islington you can't walk down Upper St. Police say will be closed all day.

[crowblack]

Feb 23, 2017 17:46:33 GMT alexandra said:

I wonder actually whether the ending is still evolving night to night at the moment. I wouldn't be surprised; it didn't seem quite right to me. Does what I said about it seem familiar to others who've already seen it? (please use spoiler brackets)

I don't know how to use spoiler brackets, but I agree about the ending.

SPOILER: Click to show

Maybe reading 'Five Go Off to Elsinore' as a kid has stopped me from ever taking the ending seriously, but in this staging I liked the device of having them walk into the backstage afterlife - it seemed quite poetic and solved the problem of a stage littered with corpses, though the 'paying the ferryman' business with watches etc. seemed a bit unnecessary, as did Hamlet's more physical 'second' onstage death. I think they could have cut Horatio (he was weak throughout) and Fortinbras, too - they drained a bit of the power and poetry from the last few minutes, I thought. 

[MrBunbury]

Feb 25, 2017 10:30:52 GMT @ryan said:

For me Juliet Stevenson and Luke Thompson took the acting honours in this. Andrew Scott does some lovely hand acting though for fans of that.

It's a strange one. Some bits are really rather marvellous and then there's a load of terribly dull stuff and there's a lot I'd have cut though. There really is no excuse for the running time.

I agree completely. There were some nice elements and Juliet Stevenson and Luke Thompson were excellent. Andrew Scott is good too with his peculiar accent and I don't mind that he waved his arms (but I am Italian, so for me that is what you do when you speak :-)). But there were parts that really dragged along and it did not help that I could not hear very well from the circle (and an old flame was sitting not far with a new boyfriend while I was alone… How horrible when that happens!! I need to get an inflatable theatre friend for these occasions...). On the plus, there were Hope Davis, Robert Icke, Elizabeth Debicki and Tim Pigott-Smith behind me when I was collecting my ticket. Overall it was an interesting evening but probably I would not give it more than three starts out of five.

[foxa]

I was there last night too! The important stuff: Have I missed it or has someone already remarked on the new seats at the Almeida? No more two-seat benches, but slightly more padded single seats - much more comfortable. We were in Row F in 11 and 12 (£10) and F12 for this production has to be one of the best bargains around. No real obstruction (F11 does a pillar pretty centrally placed to deal with) and a moment of eye contact with Scott during a soliloquy. Be still my beating heart.

Last night was a starry night: Vanessa Redgrave was a few rows in front of us and Bill Paterson over to our right a bit. Think Clive Merrison was there too.

I enjoyed it more than MrB or Ryan - my impressions probably closer to Steve's.

What I thought:
Scott is such a charismatic, quick-witted actor - I loved this performance. He plays it as a broken man, perhaps someone who was always a bit of an outsider, a bit damaged. But there were some rough bits - sections that didn't feel fully realised, a few clear errors (stepping on someone's line towards the end, for example) so I think it will just get better/deeper. His 'to be or not to be' was the best I've ever seen. While watching it, I didn't want to breath.
I also loved Jessica Brown Findlay's Ophelia. She was superb as Sonya in Uncle Vanya and is again remarkable in this. She is an exceptionally beautiful actress, who fights against her beauty (perhaps the explanation for the odd hair colour) but I find her raw/exciting as an actress as if her nerve-endings are exposed at all times. Towards the end, she reminded me a bit of Denise Gough - high praise. She, Luke Thompson and Peter Wight made a believable family - the siblings rolling their eyes at the father's advice, joining in with a particularly familiar line, but fond and physical with each other. I agree with those above who single Luke Thompson out - I've never seen him before, but he was great - the way he received the news of Ophelia's death...I also think this was my favourite ever Juliet Stevenson performance.
The use of screens worked well - I loved the ghost beckoning - that gave me chills.
The two intervals made the weaker middle section stand out as not as strong as the rest of the play and I wasn't keen at all on Claudius. His big soliloquy (which isn't a soliloquy in this) was a bit of a mess (the woman behind me whispered loudly, 'well that didn't work at all.') Horatio went for nothing, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, as well - I almost wondered if having all of Hamlet's friends be so weak was to emphasise how isolated he was, or maybe they just weren't up to much.
But even given those caveats, I'd still go for 5* for this. Scott tied with Sheen as my favourite Hamlet and this production was more coherent than the Young Vic one, so yes, go, see it and sit close if you can.

[MrBunbury]

Feb 25, 2017 13:10:25 GMT foxa said:

I was there last night too! The important stuff: Have I missed it or has someone already remarked on the new seats at the Almeida? No more two-seat benches, but slightly more padded single seats - much more comfortable. We were in Row F in 11 and 12 (£10) and F12 for this production has to be one of the best bargains around. No real obstruction (F11 does a pillar pretty centrally placed to deal with) and a moment of eye contact with Scott during a soliloquy. Be still my beating heart.

Last night was a starry night: Vanessa Redgrave was a few rows in front of us and Bill Paterson over to our right a bit. Think Clive Merrison was there too.

I enjoyed it more than MrB or Ryan - my impressions probably closer to Steve's.

What I thought:
Scott is such a charismatic, quick-witted actor - I loved this performance. He plays it as a broken man, perhaps someone who was always a bit of an outsider, a bit damaged. But there were some rough bits - sections that didn't feel fully realised, a few clear errors (stepping on someone's line towards the end, for example) so I think it will just get better/deeper. His 'to be or not to be' was the best I've ever seen. While watching it, I didn't want to breath.
I also loved Jessica Brown Findlay's Ophelia. She was superb as Sonya in Uncle Vanya and is again remarkable in this. She is an exceptionally beautiful actress, who fights against her beauty (perhaps the explanation for the odd hair colour) but I find her raw/exciting as an actress as if her nerve-endings are exposed at all times. Towards the end, she reminded me a bit of Denise Gough - high praise. She, Luke Thompson and Peter Wight made a believable family - the siblings rolling their eyes at the father's advice, joining in with a particularly familiar line, but fond and physical with each other. I agree with those above who single Luke Thompson out - I've never seen him before, but he was great - the way he received the news of Ophelia's death...I also think this was my favourite ever Juliet Stevenson performance.
The use of screens worked well - I loved the ghost beckoning - that gave me chills.
The two intervals made the weaker middle section stand out as not as strong as the rest of the play and I wasn't keen at all on Claudius. His big soliloquy (which isn't a soliloquy in this) was a bit of a mess (the woman behind me whispered loudly, 'well that didn't work at all.') Horatio went for nothing, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, as well - I almost wondered if having all of Hamlet's friends be so weak was to emphasise how isolated he was, or maybe they just weren't up to much.
But even given those caveats, I'd still go for 5* for this. Scott tied with Sheen as my favourite Hamlet and this production was more coherent than the Young Vic one, so yes, go, see it and sit close if you can.

Glad you enjoyed it, Foxa. I had not named Peter Wight in my previous comment but he was the best Polonius I have seen. I always struggle with Shakespeare not being a native English speaker, so my impression of the play is somehow marred by the distance the language produces in me (not helped by the fact I could not hear particularly well). It was my first time in the circle since normally I am like you behind a column in the stalls. Maybe that did not help either. I still recommend the production: the fact that not everything worked for me does not mean others can fully enjoy it.

[foxa]

Absolutely, Mr. B. Also having an old flame nearby wouldn't help! I am a native-English speaker and have been going to Shakespeare plays forever, yet I still have a slight panic in the first five minutes of a Shakespeare production thinking am I going to understand this - even with plays I've seen a lot. And there was a fair amount of garbling/breaking up of lines. My husband, who knows the play better than I do, claims there were some made up lines and an addition of the word 'rambunctious' at one point. Who knows.

[Squire Sullen]

Feb 25, 2017 13:10:25 GMT foxa said:

But even given those caveats, I'd still go for 5* for this. Scott tied with Sheen as my favourite Hamlet and this production was more coherent than the Young Vic one, so yes, go, see it and sit close if you can.

I was there last night too (first post on here in a while, I had such a dud run of theatre that I took three months off). And Foxa has eloquently summed up pretty much all of my thoughts, although I was more of a fan of Angus Wright, who was threatening enough for me. Plus I'm such a Peep Show fan that seeing the guest star from my favourite eipisode on stage always gives me a thrill.

Scott was sensational as expected, he does have a unique charisma, and the cast for me were staggering good, particular Scott, Brown Finlay and Stevenson (on a side note, has she aged a day in the last 25 years?). Granted I've only seen four Hanlets which is paltry compared to most on here, but these easily superseded the Sheen/Young Vic production as my favourite. So well done that I got totally lost in it and forgot I knew how everything turned out.

Full five stars from me - and an important step in restoring my faith in theatre.

[bellboard27]

Pleased to hear about the new seats. My derrière is now a lot perkier at the prospect of four hours at the Almeida.

[altamont]

The box office is saying it is now running at 3.45 - with the first part 1.45, the others 35 and 55 minutes.

[Deleted]

I saw hamlet last night and for me it was a mixed bag.
I was quite excited about this production as the cast seemed really old as well as the creative team and I really loved Mary Stuart .
i was sat right at the back of the stalls so after reading your comments it made be a bit anxious by verbally I could hear basically everything quite well and the only parts that were mumbled did no really effect me and made it sound like what they were saying was more realistic however the problem with sitting at the back is that I could not see the screen at the back or only just the bottom of it. I could see it on the screen on the side but I had to keep looking in two direction. The idea for them was good  but they did not seem   very practically and you could tell that  the creatives maybe did not sit towards the back in rehearsals. 
Now to the actual show. I have to agree with others that other parts were really good but the more boring long scenes outnumbered the good ones. I liked the modern premise and the set and costumes were very old. I like doing the use of the screens a lot. For me the cats were good but sometimes a bit meh. I do not know hamlet too much so I went in blind.
I liked Juliet Stevenson but having seen her as Mary she just didn't hit the mark, I think it was the character itself but I did like her.
Angus wright as Claudius just did not seem evil enough to me. I didn't believe he would kill a man and he just appears to resite his lines.
Peter Wight was good as polonious and seemed like a nice fatherly figure. I also thought Luke Thompson as laertes was aslo good. For me one of the better ones was Jessica brown Findlay was one of the better ones  and liked her change from vulnerable to mad. The rest of the cast were good but only in it for small amounts and I got a bit cinfused with all of them.
And finally  we have Andrew Scott. He was very good as hamlet and played mad very well but I does seem bit typecast for him playing mad character and I would have maybe liked to see something differnt. I also didn't get why he was the only one with an Irish accent it did t really make sense.
it was too long. They could have edited out some of the duller scenes like the ones with the players could have been a little shorter as they were not really important.
I did like the transitions and the use of the screens especially in the start and end and when you saw things in the background of a scence. The folk backing music was odd but I did like it and when I read the programme and it said a Laura marking song I was a bit worried admit I did not like the one in Mary Stuart but luckerly it made more sense in this.
if you do see this and can still get a ticket I would recommend you sit front saw as you are sometimes in the action.
overall I did enjoy it but am not a Shakespeare lover and for me Mary Stuart was a tough act to follow. I would give it 3.5 out of 5.

[Deleted]

Another sort of unrelated thing but I I think it is just me being grumpy, there were people cracking up with laughter in this and it got really annoying and things that were possibly a little funny but not as funny as the audience suggested. Maybe it's just because I don't get Shakespeare .