2,743 posts
|
Post by n1david on Jul 11, 2017 16:15:15 GMT
Short run, and no opportunity to build on positive press from Edinburgh (of course, the converse is also true if it bombs in Edinburgh). Unlikely to transfer I'd have thought.... So an intriguing proposition... but I'm on holiday during the entire run so at least that decision is taken for me!
|
|
747 posts
|
Post by Latecomer on Jul 11, 2017 16:17:23 GMT
I'm sorry I don't think Ayckbourn can do future very well....and his recent plays have been pretty dire.On the other hand it is lovely to see something I DON'T have to book!!! It has a certain pleasure all of its own!
|
|
3,040 posts
|
Post by crowblack on Jul 14, 2017 15:42:20 GMT
Brother and sister Elihu (Jake Davies) and Soween (Erin Doherty) Erin Dohery is a wonderful young actress, captivating in Wish List and, on a much bigger stage, in Junkyard - I've just booked to see her as Rachel Corrie at the Young Vic in October, and will try and see this (though I don't like the Old Vic as a space - too big and expensive!). I'm not familiar with Jake Davies, but he was in Yen and has a long CV already. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 14, 2017 16:13:03 GMT
He is entertaining
But hardly the most sophisticated of writers
|
|
3,040 posts
|
Post by crowblack on Jul 14, 2017 16:47:10 GMT
But hardly the most sophisticated of writers Yeah, I'm thinking that, and the Old Vic, which is a horrible theatre space, but Erin Doherty is on my 'ones to watch' list, so I might. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 14, 2017 16:58:14 GMT
Ayckbourn may tend to write about unsophisticated people (at least when in his comedy of manners mode) but that is very different to being an unsophisticated writer. The complexity of his situations, his playing with time and location (even, with House and Garden, merging two plays into one story) makes him the equal of most, maybe even Stoppard, whose dialogue and structure can often seem to overwhelm character and situation.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 14, 2017 16:58:16 GMT
But hardly the most sophisticated of writers Yeah, I'm thinking that, and the Old Vic, which is a horrible theatre space, but Erin Doherty is on my 'ones to watch' list, so I might. 👀 |
|
3,040 posts
|
Post by crowblack on Jul 14, 2017 17:18:28 GMT
I've been rooting through old diaries and stuff this spring - I've been making 'actors who I'll watch stuff for' lists since I was in junior school, though back then it was mainly horror and Clint Eastwood. |
|
562 posts
|
Post by jadnoop on Aug 9, 2017 2:20:59 GMT
First performance of Part 1 was tonight. From a quick scan of the early twitter comments so far, it seems fairly evenly split between 'terrible' and 'great'. One did mention interval (and mid-performance) escapes though, so doesn't bode well.
|
|
578 posts
|
Post by michalnowicki on Aug 9, 2017 12:16:53 GMT
I'm seeing it next week, I'll let you know my thoughts.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 9, 2017 12:48:45 GMT
First performance of Part 1 was tonight. From a quick scan of the early twitter comments so far, it seems fairly evenly split between 'terrible' and 'great'. One did mention interval (and mid-performance) escapes though, so doesn't bode well. I can only find three tweets, two very good, one not. What phrase should I be searching for? |
|
562 posts
|
Post by jadnoop on Aug 9, 2017 12:55:59 GMT
First performance of Part 1 was tonight. From a quick scan of the early twitter comments so far, it seems fairly evenly split between 'terrible' and 'great'. One did mention interval (and mid-performance) escapes though, so doesn't bode well. I can only find three tweets, two very good, one not. What phrase should I be searching for? #TheDivide seems to be the main one. Not lots, but if you sort by latest going back to yesterday early evening probably gives tweets from around ten people. I don't know quite what the Edinburgh Festival audiences are normally like, and not clear on what the reference to 'choristers' is for this play, but this photo on the left looks pretty disheartening if it reflects the audience turnout... the photo on the right looks like a member of the performance, but the one on the left looks like an audience-perspective(?) |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 9, 2017 13:05:45 GMT
Aha, the obvious one to search for! Thanks.
|
|
3,558 posts
|
Post by showgirl on Aug 12, 2017 9:18:16 GMT
The British Theatre Guide critic has given this 2 stars; I only skimmed the review as what I did see was depressing, including words such as "ponderous".
|
|
3,040 posts
|
Post by crowblack on Aug 12, 2017 9:36:23 GMT
The gist seems to be that it would be a better play if much shorter, though it does praise the performances. I'd like to see it but as a marathon and in such an expensive venue it's beyond my budget and sofa-surfing abilities at the moment. Erin Doherty is at the Young Vic in October in the Rachel Corrie play and I'll be seeing that - she really is excellent.
I wonder whether coming so soon after The Handmaid's Tale helps or hinders it?
|
|
562 posts
|
Post by jadnoop on Aug 12, 2017 13:20:17 GMT
Ugh, the reviews for this are so disappointing.
I know that the general early consensus here seemed to be somewhere between negative and indifferent, but it seemed right up my alley; a dystopian sci-fi setting, an outline that -if treated appropriately- could have been interesting nuanced and thought-provoking, intriguing rehearsal photos, and the mentions of Margaret Atwood George Orwell & Aldous Huxley.
In the end, despite some excitement, I decided to take heed of the negative comments here, and hold off on booking for the Old Vic until the early reviews came out. Definitely thankful that I did now, so thanks everyone.
|
|
3,040 posts
|
Post by crowblack on Aug 12, 2017 14:11:10 GMT
I've just read The Stage review and the whole concept/plotline/ending really does sound very dated in its view of sexuality, and at a time when this is such a live issue.
|
|
181 posts
|
Post by caa on Aug 13, 2017 18:52:54 GMT
I've just read The Stage review and the whole concept/plotline/ending really does sound very dated in its view of sexuality, and at a time when this is such a live issue. The stage review has the following paragraph: "The Divide raises so many questions. The chief one being had no one actually read it before deciding to put it on? And did they not notice how regressive the whole thing was? Or question whether it was necessary for it to go on for so long? Length alone does not make for event theatre. By the end The Divide feels like a feat of endurance more than anything else". |
|
1,245 posts
|
Post by joem on Aug 13, 2017 21:15:51 GMT
I will make up my own mind on this if and when I am able to see this. But I don't get all this Ayckbourn-hate, sometimes I think he is being penalised for being so prolific and/or successful.
Throughout his career he has often demonstrated rather more subtlety than he is credited for and as a master of his craft a lot of aspiring playwrights would do well to note his often imaginative use of a stage. There is far more to drama than two guys talking earnestly to each other across a stage.
When I was a teenager I rather resented Ayckbourn and thought he was one step up from "Carry On". Luckily, I grew up. Long may he continue.
|
|
578 posts
|
Post by michalnowicki on Aug 13, 2017 21:47:04 GMT
I will make up my own mind on this I'm with you on that. I don't know Ayckbourn, I am not familiar with his work, but I know from my own experience that I didn't enjoy things that had good reviews and I loved things with bad reviews. As for the length, it would be hypocritical of me to moan about it, given I sat through both parts of Angels in America on one day. I will be interested to read what other members of theatre board will think about the play once they see it. As for now, I will wait until Wednesday (Part 1) and Thursday (Part 2). |
|
1,936 posts
|
Post by wickedgrin on Aug 14, 2017 0:04:49 GMT
He is rather too prolific an author in IMHO. I think he has written over 70 plays and quite honestly only a handful can be considered successful - how many of the 70 can you actually name? I always think of the plays as - oh that's the one in the kitchen, in the garden with the pond, in the garage with the car, on the boat on the river etc. Certainly a lot of his "hits" were early in his career - Relatively Speaking, The Norman Conquests, Bedroom Farce, A Chorus of Disapproval, A Woman in Mind etc. I would argue that nothing written since 2000 (in the last 17 years ) has echoed his early success.
His future plays - was it Communication Doors with the time travel? - was so full of plot holes that it made no sense at all.
Of course also his early plays were always "tried out" in Scarborough with an unknown cast and then transferred to London with a starry cast - was it the Norman Conquests that had Penelope Keith, Felicity Kendal, Richard Briers, Tom Conti in the original cast - all at the top of their game, imbuing the plays with their unique talents.
The Divide sounds awful!
|
|
3,558 posts
|
Post by showgirl on Aug 14, 2017 3:50:37 GMT
I'm certainly not an Ayckbourn-hater and indeed have loved productions of some of his plays. For instance, last year's version of How The Other Half Lives (touring again, but with a different cast) had me crying with laughter, and unlike wickedgrin, I also really enjoyed the most recent (Menier) verson of Communicating Doors. I'd seen both before and in the former case, possibly a couple of times, so I now think that the production can make a critical difference; also your own perspective, as this changes with age. But I do agree that he is possibly too prolific and I certainly don't really like his experiments with sci-fi, though when the time travel is from the present backwards (as in Communicating Doors and others), that does work for me.
I do want any new work of his to succeed, obviously, but also for plays to be staged only if they're ready and likely to appeal to an audience - not necessarily his regulars but any paying audience of reasonable size. Early comments sound as though this isn't the case with The Divide, though there is time for some tweaking if that's an option. Not sure whether this play is capable of salvage, however, based on reviews; Michael Billington actually gave it 3 stars, which is more than most, and seemed to be trying hard to be fair but what he wrote was still pretty damning.
|
|
578 posts
|
Post by michalnowicki on Aug 17, 2017 8:40:55 GMT
I've seen Part 1 last night and really enjoyed it. The acting is really top notch, but unfortunately the play feels long and I think that some bits could've been cut out. Nevertheless, I don't understand why it got bad reviews... Part 2 tonight, will share my final thoughts over the next few days.
|
|
578 posts
|
Post by michalnowicki on Aug 18, 2017 9:58:35 GMT
I've seen both parts now, so I'm ready to share my thoughts.
I love a good dystopia (oxymoron?). The world created by Alan Ayckbourne is interesting: there is the full segregation of sexes, with women living South of The Divide and men living North of it. Due to this, homosexuality is a norm and heterosexuality is a crime, with death being the punishment. Babies are born and raised in the South, with one woman taking the role of the Mother (Mama) and another taking the role of a Mother Father (Mapa). Pregnancies are achieved through artificial insemination and the seed is provided by the Council. Both sexes are taught of the superiority of men and inferiority of females. When you listen to it as an audience member, it leaves a terrible taste in your mouth. The Divide was created as a result of a plagues - a sexually transmitted disease carried by females (who are immune to its effects) which is deadly to males and at one point decimated their numbers.
The whole story is related as quotes from the diaries of two siblings: Soween (Erin Doherty) and Elihu (Jake Davies), through the minutes of Council meetings and letter exchanges. I think this was the first play I've seen, where everything was based on a sort of a reportage. It worked really well.
Erin Doherty gives a brilliant performance, with a candidness of a teenage girl. She's so human, so real. The way she stammers and holds back tears when talking/writing about being bullied. The way her eyes and face lights up every time she talks about how much she loves one of the characters. I feel like we can expect great things from Erin in the future. I will be definitely rooting for her. As for Jake Davies, he performs with a boyish charm, not really understanding everything that happens around him. His acting is really good, but for me, it was Erin's character (Soween) whom I felt for the most.
I felt like the play was too long, but I didn't feel bored. There are definitely some scenes that could be removed, but I am not a writer (as you can see from my blabber).
I really hope that Erin Doherty gets recognition for this role, even if people hate the play.
|
|
22 posts
|
Post by iamian on Aug 18, 2017 12:02:47 GMT
I saw both parts last week and the oddest thing was that for a 5 1/2 hour play the ending seemed rushed and not thought out. It leaves huge questions (and not in a good way) and ignores what I felt was the central concept in the whole play. the entire last half hour could be cut as it feels irrelevant to the rest of the story.
Its an interseting premise with a huge and obvious debt to The Handmaids Tale and there are some impresive performances, especially Erin Doherty. I wouldnt rush to see it at the Old Vic but if you're passing and have 5 1/2 hours to kill then drop in.
|
|
