36 posts
|
Post by etceteranz on Jan 28, 2017 10:43:33 GMT
Saw the first preview last night.
Story of two writers from two different type generations being stuck alone at a writing hideaway during a blizzard with no communications and the evolution of their relationship.
At first glance, I came out of the play thinking, 'so what?', however, i peeled back the layers a bit, the play is quite smart in communicating how two generational lives can come together and evolve. The final scene was evil as it left me wondering what decision she would finally make.
The play does have a lot of extended sex scenes, including pants being ripped off. Theo James gets completely naked with his modesty saved by a seashell.
As for a preview, the scene transitions were clunky, the first one took so long that Theo shouted "theres a lot going on stage right now" before quickly shutting up i think when he realised he could be heard. The interval went for 30mins instead of 20.
All in all, an o.k play. I wouldn't rush back (unless i wanted to see Theo in his birthday suit again) haha!
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 28, 2017 12:25:42 GMT
The play does have a lot of extended sex scenes, including pants being ripped off. Theo James gets completely naked with his modesty saved by a seashell. Booked. 'nuff said. |
|
1,064 posts
|
Post by bellboard27 on Jan 28, 2017 19:22:57 GMT
his modesty saved by a seashell. Hoping for his sake it's giant clam rather than penny oyster. Matron, the screens! A winkle surely? |
|
5,795 posts
|
Post by mrbarnaby on Jan 28, 2017 20:40:53 GMT
I am so booking this now.
|
|
36 posts
|
Post by etceteranz on Jan 30, 2017 20:21:39 GMT
it was more a sea shell CONE...so not too small hahaha
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 31, 2017 8:17:20 GMT
For me, the most notable thing about this play was not the sea shell (it's a decent-sized one, fear not) but the cushions. During one scene in act two, a character threw a cushion on the floor. The cushion then stayed on the floor for most of the rest of the act until the final scene - hopefully not too much of a spoiler to say that clearly a significant amount of time has passed, maybe a year, maybe two - when the other character finally picked it up and replaced it, only for the first character to throw another cushion on the floor not thirty seconds later. I spent most of the act wondering why no one had picked the damn cushion up, especially when the final scene commenced, and then I spent the end of the play ABSOLUTELY OUTRAGED by the characters' COMPLETE disregard for cushions. Honestly, it's worse than cats.
|
|
3,557 posts
|
Post by showgirl on Jan 31, 2017 8:32:38 GMT
So there really are only two in the cast? Sigh.... I expect some will castigate me for bemoaning this, but I really don't like plays with so few people in them - not much better than a one-person show, which I always avoid. Plus the Downstairs productions have always had more.
Of course I do know it is no measure of the writing, acting, directing, etc, but it somehow feels inadequate and makes me squirm.
|
|
1,064 posts
|
Post by bellboard27 on Jan 31, 2017 9:51:39 GMT
I spent the end of the play ABSOLUTELY OUTRAGED by the characters' COMPLETE disregard for cushions. Honestly, it's worse than cats. The wanton disregard for soft furnishings in general is a major issue ruining modern British theatre. "Scatter cushions" - that's an adjective, not a command! |
|
1,103 posts
|
Post by mallardo on Jan 31, 2017 15:38:05 GMT
For me, the most notable thing about this play was not the sea shell (it's a decent-sized one, fear not) but the cushions. During one scene in act two, a character threw a cushion on the floor. The cushion then stayed on the floor for most of the rest of the act until the final scene - hopefully not too much of a spoiler to say that clearly a significant amount of time has passed, maybe a year, maybe two - when the other character finally picked it up and replaced it, only for the first character to throw another cushion on the floor not thirty seconds later. I spent most of the act wondering why no one had picked the damn cushion up, especially when the final scene commenced, and then I spent the end of the play ABSOLUTELY OUTRAGED by the characters' COMPLETE disregard for cushions. Honestly, it's worse than cats.
You know, of course, Baemax, that everyone from here who sees this production will now be fixated on that cushion. Can the play overcome it?
|
|
3,557 posts
|
Post by showgirl on Jan 31, 2017 16:08:33 GMT
It's the reference to cats which is puzzling me: Baemax, do you mean "it's worse than (something in) Cats" i.e. the musical - and if so, what?
Or "it's worse than (the treatment of) cats" and if so, which cats, where?
Or is this one of those impenetrable in-jokes like the inevitable questions about nudity, stage height, etc?
|
|
5,795 posts
|
Post by mrbarnaby on Feb 1, 2017 7:23:49 GMT
That's a disgraceful way to treat a cushion. I'm starting a March "CUSHIONS MATTER"
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 1, 2017 8:12:51 GMT
It's the reference to cats which is puzzling me: Baemax, do you mean "it's worse than (something in) Cats" i.e. the musical - and if so, what? Or "it's worse than (the treatment of) cats" and if so, which cats, where? Or is this one of those impenetrable in-jokes like the inevitable questions about nudity, stage height, etc? It's more "it's worse than (living with) cats", as most of the cats I've lived with have had an extremely casual attitude to my belongings and the places where I think they should be. |
|
3,557 posts
|
Post by showgirl on Feb 1, 2017 8:19:02 GMT
It's the reference to cats which is puzzling me: Baemax, do you mean "it's worse than (something in) Cats" i.e. the musical - and if so, what? Or "it's worse than (the treatment of) cats" and if so, which cats, where? Or is this one of those impenetrable in-jokes like the inevitable questions about nudity, stage height, etc? It's more "it's worse than (living with) cats", as most of the cats I've lived with have had an extremely casual attitude to my belongings and the places where I think they should be. Ah, now I get it - thank you for explaining, Baemax. Never tried living with a cat as I'm allergic to them; cushions I simply beat into submission. Seeing the play Saturday so looking forward to observing what you've mentioned. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 3, 2017 20:44:16 GMT
I'm half way in. Theo is gorgeous with a capital GORGEOUS. Lovely arms. Emilia Fox should not speak with an American accent. She's quite wooden so far.
Lovely sausage rolls and salad at the Hampstead though.
And oh, those arms.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 3, 2017 22:59:02 GMT
Second half. It's like 'A Star Is Born' with books. Just without Babs singing 'Evergreen'. Or the perm.
Theo was the best. A bit of a douchebag but it's fair to say I think we all would.
Emilia. She's delicious. The American accent isn't.
|
|
1,103 posts
|
Post by mallardo on Feb 4, 2017 18:04:59 GMT
But didn't Emilia Fox do an American accent in Rapture, Blister, Burn, also at the Hampstead, a couple of years ago? I don't recall it being a problem then - or is she trying for something regional?
|
|
4,171 posts
|
Post by anthony40 on Feb 4, 2017 18:58:34 GMT
I must try and catch this before it ends.
The theatre is just a 20 min walk away from where I live.
|
|
8,096 posts
|
Post by alece10 on Feb 4, 2017 20:39:37 GMT
I must read things fully as I first read the title as "sex with strangers - Hampstead Heath" and thought well that's an interesting subject for a play.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 8, 2017 15:46:09 GMT
Why such harsh reviews
London theatre 2 stars
The stage 2 stars
Time out 2 stars
Guardian 2 stars
Telegraph 2 stars
FT 2 stars
Independent 3 stars
ES 3 stars
Hardly glowing and some of them read more like 1 star reviews
I didn't mind it although everything about it is mediocre and having only 2 characters is a fatal mistake
2 handers are so difficult and the material here is so generic I don't know what the playwright was thinking
Having even a third person would be so helpful
But the sex scenes are pathetically laughable and pitifully done
Like a channel 5 film
The sound and music choices also leave a lot to be desired
The actors are okay but I would not agree to be in such a weak play and would have thought they would have higher standards themselves
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 8, 2017 16:53:48 GMT
Why such harsh reviews London theatre 2 stars The stage 2 stars Time out 2 stars Guardian 2 stars Telegraph 2 stars FT 2 stars Independent 3 stars ES 3 stars Hardly glowing and some of them read more like 1 star reviews I didn't mind it although everything about it is mediocre and having only 2 characters is a fatal mistake 2 handers are so difficult and the material here is so generic I don't know what the playwright was thinking Having even a third person would be so helpful But the sex scenes are pathetically laughable and pitifully done
Like a channel 5 film The sound and music choices also leave a lot to be desired The actors are okay but I would not agree to be in such a weak play and would have thought they would have higher standards themselves OMG, I LOVE a Channel 5 sex scene - that is the only thing I've seen that made me want to see this play! |
|
4,970 posts
|
Post by Phantom of London on Feb 11, 2017 13:43:47 GMT
Why such harsh reviews London theatre 2 stars The stage 2 stars Time out 2 stars Guardian 2 stars Telegraph 2 stars FT 2 stars Independent 3 stars ES 3 stars Hardly glowing and some of them read more like 1 star reviews I didn't mind it although everything about it is mediocre and having only 2 characters is a fatal mistake 2 handers are so difficult and the material here is so generic I don't know what the playwright was thinking Having even a third person would be so helpful But the sex scenes are pathetically laughable and pitifully done Like a channel 5 film The sound and music choices also leave a lot to be desired The actors are okay but I would not agree to be in such a weak play and would have thought they would have higher standards themselves Those are indeed harsh reviews, especially in New York it got a New York Times Critic Pick. However the play had a good ending, but however the events that led up to that point were completely implausable and laughable, for instance; A gigolo biographical soft porn author ends up in a snow covered hotel in the middle of nowhere with no other guests except one person who happens to be another author, who has self esteem issues and wants no one else to see her work. Queue plenty of bonking. The poor seashell has now been dropped. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 11, 2017 15:34:48 GMT
A gigolo biographical soft porn author ends up in a snow covered hotel in the middle of nowhere with no other guests except one person who happens to be another author, who has self esteem issues and wants no one else to see her work. What exactly do you consider to be implausible? |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 12, 2017 11:14:18 GMT
A gigolo biographical soft porn author ends up in a snow covered hotel in the middle of nowhere with no other guests except one person who happens to be another author, who has self esteem issues and wants no one else to see her work. The two writers are in residence at a writers' retreat. IT WOULD BE IDIOTICALLY IMPLAUSIBLE IF THEY WERE NOT BOTH WRITERS. My capital lock was engaged accidentally, but I think appropriately. |
|
4,970 posts
|
Post by Phantom of London on Feb 12, 2017 18:16:17 GMT
WOULD A WRITER WHO HAS BASICALLY WRITTEN BIOGRAPHICAL PORNOGRAPHIC SMUT REALLY GO TO A WRITERS' RETREAT AND WOULD A WRITER WITH HER SELF DOUBTS GO TO THE SAME PLACE, TO BE CONFRONTED WITH HER PAST WORK.
My capital lock was engaged accidentally, but I think appropriately.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 12, 2017 22:45:09 GMT
"?" key not working?
|
|
