1,064 posts
|
Post by bellboard27 on Nov 26, 2016 17:26:57 GMT
Also just out of Red Barn also. What couldileaveyou said!
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 26, 2016 17:35:04 GMT
Well. I spent most of it wondering whether I liked Mark Strong with hair or not.
I like the 60s movie look and I actually did find it rather tense up to the end which I thought was a big let down. The framing was good and I do love that Lyttleton Theatre wide-screen curtain so nice to see it working hard for its money. The staging was very clever.
Good performances all round and nice to see Elizabeth Debicki giving her Night Manager performance another outing.
|
|
2,389 posts
|
Post by peggs on Nov 28, 2016 13:12:38 GMT
Well. I spent most of it wondering whether I liked Mark Strong with hair or not. I thought his hair in this a very strong reason for not having a fling with him Ryan, I too spent quite a lot of time pondering it though  |
|
4,153 posts
|
Post by kathryn on Nov 28, 2016 14:04:35 GMT
Good performances all round and nice to see Elizabeth Debicki giving her Night Manager performance another outing. Haha! Yes, we thought that, too. We wondered why she'd decided to play a character so similar (only with less depth) so soon, but I imagine it doesn't seem soon to her. I'm pretty sure you need to be in the front stalls to appreciate her performance - it was fairly subtle. Friend who saw it recently was back of stalls was not impressed by her. |
|
524 posts
|
Post by callum on Nov 28, 2016 23:06:08 GMT
Enjoyed it a lot. Flew by and lack of interval very fitting. Was sadly in the circle slips (just missed out on front row stalls in day seat queue) so couldn't appreciate what's been said about Debecki on here. However I still found her very competent but Hope Davis really stood out for me. The nuance and tone of her vocal performance was phenomenal, really quite affecting. Also makes you wonder how Mark Strong has devoted himself so much to bit-parts in movies as he's such a terrific stage actor, though I suppose it just shows what a versatile performer he is.
Obviously I agree with the cinematic qualities and think that his resulted in perhaps the most visually elaborate play I've ever seen. The country house and Mona's apartment were equally lush and opulent and baroque - really something to behold. Reminded me slightly of the way Hangmen was presented.
Reading the mixed reactions on here definitely made me enjoy the play a lot more, would love to see it again but from front stalls.
|
|
141 posts
|
Post by Mr Crummles on Dec 19, 2016 12:36:27 GMT
Very eerie and atmospheric play. I felt it to be about the type of destructiveness a relentlessly unforgiving superego can bring about. How falling short from what people believe they should expect from themselves can lead to devastating consequences. Mark Strong’s seemingly suave character, Donald Dodd, feels miserable because of how he sees himself and, especially, how he feels everyone else sees him.
The story is told as a thriller, in a very cinematic style, and things never quite happen the way you expect, but somehow events culminate to a very inexorable, unavoidable and unstoppable climax, almost as harrowing and intense as Iphigenia’s death in Icke’s own Oresteia. Mark Strong is very good and Hope Davis is just brilliant. I'm really glad I saw it.
|
|
2,452 posts
|
Post by theatremadness on Dec 30, 2016 23:58:59 GMT
Saw this tonight completely last minute. £5 standing at the back of the circle (I've stood for Les Mis before so 1hr50 wasn't going to be much of a struggle!). The effect of the technical side of the play was really outstanding from that far back, though it was balanced with not getting any nuances of facial expressions. Sound design also was a treat from back of the circle.
I'm a bit fickle in the sense that if there's anything vaguely impressive happening on stage, I'll be a sucker for it. LOVED the cinematic quality, the wide-screen framing which was massive yet claustrophobic at the same time and the ridiculously quick set changes. I'm sure if I'd paid £65 to sit in the dark and listen to pre-recorded vocals, maybe I'd be a bit miffed, but I didn't, so I wasn't.
Mark Strong really is a terrific actor, no less so are both Elizabeth Debiki and especially Hope Davis, her dead-pan drawl both hilarious and frightening at the same time. The play itself - well it's not the best I've ever seen. I couldn't say I was totally gripped from start to finish, nor was it continuously tense. In fact, nothing much physically happened at all, and I was a little disappointed by this as even though it's billed as a psychological thriller (which there's no doubt it is!), when you're told 'no re-admittance is allowed due to the tense nature of the play', you do start to conjure up your own conclusions as to why this could be - so I guess I have myself to blame!
Yes, not all of the script was terrific or completely natural, but I felt the cast managed to pull most - not all - of it off. It was pretty cool both to look at & as a piece of theatre, and I was a fan of the ending, but if the play itself had totally matched the brilliant aesthetic, then we'd be onto a real winner here.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 13, 2017 9:00:35 GMT
Wasted nearly two hours of my life at this last night. Yet another one where I got to the ending and thought: " Really?" I'm not sure what was psychological or thrilling about it. {Spoiler - click to view}
It seemed like a fairly straightforward story about a guy who either deliberately put his cheating friend in a position to die, or who took advantage of the fact that chance had put the cheating friend in that position. And then he killed his wife because she realised what he'd done (and he realised his life had been a humdrum waste). Which is fine, and interesting, but hardly psychologically thrilling. I kept trying to spot where the twist was going to be, but it turned out there wasn't one. |
|
1,103 posts
|
Post by mallardo on Jan 13, 2017 9:42:18 GMT
I don't think the show makes any claims to be thrilling. It's a show about the density of motives and relationships and the atmosphere thus created and as such I thought it was brilliantly realized. I found it hypnotic. Sorry you didn't go for it, jeanhunt.
|
|
2,048 posts
|
Post by Marwood on Jan 13, 2017 10:43:42 GMT
The sign put up outside the theatre informing people there was no interval, and no re-admittances due to the 'tense' nature of the play, have been misleading to say the least.
|
|
2,452 posts
|
Post by theatremadness on Jan 13, 2017 11:40:41 GMT
Yeah I agree about those signs, they are a little misleading. But there was never any reason to believe there would be a twist? So if you're going in with pre-conceived ideas of a massive twist apropos of not much, it surely can't be the plays fault that it doesn't have one? It never did! But yes, I'm also sorry it felt like a wasted time, awful feeling to have in a theatre especially with no interval.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 13, 2017 13:09:23 GMT
Well...if I watch a thriller/psychological thriller, I expect a twist. Just like if I watch a crime drama (and a psychological thriller is arguably one form thereof), I expect a twist. It's an expectation based on crime fiction fandom over nearly 30 years. Which was why I kept thinking, "Wow, the twist in this is really well hidden, I wonder what it can be...oh right, there isn't one. So it's basically just a drama then?"
It ran in my mind the NT billed it as a thriller - but I can't check because whenever I try to access the Red Barn page, I'm put in a queue for Friday Rush. That'll be thanks to their 'helpful' website redesign!
|
|
816 posts
|
Post by stefy69 on Jan 13, 2017 13:16:40 GMT
Well...if I watch a thriller/psychological thriller, I expect a twist. Just like if I watch a crime drama (and a psychological thriller is arguably one form thereof), I expect a twist. It's an expectation based on crime fiction fandom over nearly 30 years. Which was why I kept thinking, "Wow, the twist in this is really well hidden, I wonder what it can be...oh right, there isn't one. So it's basically just a drama then?" It ran in my mind the NT billed it as a thriller - but I can't check because whenever I try to access the Red Barn page, I'm put in a queue for Friday Rush. That'll be thanks to their 'helpful' website redesign! Just checked the e-mail from the National Theatre when booking opened for this and it says : "David Hare's new psychological thriller " |
|
2,452 posts
|
Post by theatremadness on Jan 13, 2017 13:24:22 GMT
Oh yes it was definitely advertised as a psychological thriller, but in my head that didn't necessarily translate as "there will be a twist", I thought it would be more mind-games. But then again I've not had nearly 30 years of crime fiction fandom so you arguably have a lot more experience & knowledge of the genre than I do!
|
|
1,064 posts
|
Post by bellboard27 on Jan 13, 2017 13:45:14 GMT
Is not having a twist a twist?
|
|
117 posts
|
Post by ldm2016 on Jan 13, 2017 13:58:59 GMT
Is not having a twist a twist? Why does anything need a twist anyway?
|
|
1,103 posts
|
Post by mallardo on Jan 13, 2017 14:01:25 GMT
What constitutes a "twist"? Did we see the ending coming? Some here have said they did but I didn't. It came as a surprise to me even though the play prepared me for it. I think The Red Barn lived up to its billing.
|
|
2,452 posts
|
Post by theatremadness on Jan 13, 2017 14:11:06 GMT
Is not having a twist a twist? Love this!! And well put mallardo - much better than I could've. And I totally agree! |
|
3,557 posts
|
Post by showgirl on Jan 13, 2017 14:42:00 GMT
I saw the matinee performance yesterday and perhaps because the reports had been quite polarised, meaning I went without high hopes or particular expectations, I found it quite sufficiently absorbing for the cost and time.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 13, 2017 16:17:53 GMT
don't think the show makes any claims to be thrilling. Just checked the e-mail from the National Theatre when booking opened for this and it says : "David Hare's new psychological thriller " I think The Red Barn lived up to its billing. ? ? ? You just said you were unaware of this billing. Which particular billing are you now professing to think was lived up to? |
|
1,103 posts
|
Post by mallardo on Jan 13, 2017 18:30:51 GMT
Thriller is a generic term we all know. A category of work. It does not necessarily imply "thrills" but it does imply tension and suspense which The Red Barn has in spades.
But you already knew this.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 13, 2017 19:37:16 GMT
Totally understand what you mean, mallardo, but for me it just never scaled those heights. Felt more like a pretty straightforward midlife crisis drama to me, unfortunately.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 13, 2017 23:42:33 GMT
Thriller is a generic term we all know. A category of work. It does not necessarily imply "thrills" but it does imply tension and suspense which The Red Barn has in spades. But you already knew this. "Brexit means Brexit" is a political slogan we all know. It does not necessarily imply "exits" but it does imply tension and suspense which The Post Reforendum has in spades. But you already knew this. |
|
155 posts
|
Post by synchrony on Jan 17, 2017 22:43:13 GMT
I saw the final show this evening and thought it was sooo tedious. I liked the staging, which is new for me, but that was pretty much it. I'm surprised by the praise for the sound as both my friend and I struggled to hear a lot of the dialogue, and the phone call voices, although much louder, were warped. Found the slow airy-fairy 'deep and meaningful voices irritating and the dialogue stilted - as others have said, who speaks like that?! I wasn't at all in suspense and had little sympathy or interest in the characters. Wouldn't recommend, but it was the last night so.... Audience reaction seemed polite. {Spoiler - click to view}
What I found most interesting was thinking about whether Ingrid actually drove her husband to his breakdown by watching and judging him all the time. I was predicting that Don would kill himself by jumping off the same rock as Ray, and that the twist would be that the two women were actually evil and deliberately driving their husbands to suicide. That would have been better imo ;-)
Also found it interesting to think about whether the two women were equally as culpable as Don. After all, they just sat in the house. Why is that any better morally than sitting in the barn? |
|
5,688 posts
|
Post by lynette on Jan 17, 2017 23:19:51 GMT
I like your version...would have gone to see that. 😂
|
|
