|
|
Post by oxfordsimon on Sept 28, 2017 22:26:09 GMT
What is it with Norris and Marber?
Surely there are more current writers who are capable of doing adaptations for the National. Marber has been significantly over-represented since Norris took over.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 29, 2017 11:11:00 GMT
Patrick Marber is both writer and director. There are few other such. Off the top of my head, only Emma Rice comes to mind.
|
|
898 posts
|
Post by bordeaux on Sept 29, 2017 12:04:51 GMT
Patrick Marber is both writer and director. There are few other such. Off the top of my head, only Emma Rice comes to mind. Simon McBurney. And he's an actor too, which would have saved money. And he's done Ionesco brilliantly before. |
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Sept 29, 2017 12:09:43 GMT
David Lan. Sir David Hare. Alan Aykbourn.
I saw a production of Exit the King years ago, in Hammersmith I think. At the interval it was Exit the Audience.
|
|
1,103 posts
|
Post by mallardo on Sept 29, 2017 12:18:31 GMT
Jeffrey Rush won a Tony Award for his performance in this on Broadway in 2009.
|
|
5,139 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by TallPaul on Sept 29, 2017 12:23:14 GMT
The other end of the scale, but John Godber also writes and directs.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 29, 2017 12:28:21 GMT
The other end of the scale, but John Godber also writes and directs. Yes, but not known for his adaptations of European classics. |
|
5,139 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by TallPaul on Sept 29, 2017 12:34:29 GMT
The other end of the scale, but John Godber also writes and directs. Yes, but not known for his adaptations of European classics. Very true, but I did say he was at the other end of the scale. I know which I'd rather see. That's why I'm off to Hull next Wednesday. |
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Sept 29, 2017 13:33:28 GMT
Harold Pinter was a writer/director too, as I recall he directed many of Simon Gray’s plays originally. The dread Peter Gill also. Not sure which of them was the best, Aykbourn probably, he really was a very good director of other people’s work.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 29, 2017 13:36:21 GMT
Conor McPherson tends to direct his own work too. Must say I'm not a *huge* fan of the idea, theatre is collaborative and writers benefit from directors who aren't too close to see when something isn't working.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Sept 29, 2017 13:52:00 GMT
Conor McPherson tends to direct his own work too. Must say I'm not a *huge* fan of the idea, theatre is collaborative and writers benefit from directors who aren't too close to see when something isn't working. Agree - But I was sort of assuming we were ignoring writers who only direct their own stuff. If we include them then there are a few more - Stephen Berkoff for example (probably because no other director would take it on). Athol Fugard. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 29, 2017 14:35:19 GMT
There's Kwame Kwei Armah who directs, writes and acts.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 29, 2017 15:18:25 GMT
Of the writer-directors listed above, I believe that only Alan Ayckbourn, Conor McPherson and John Godber regularly direct their own texts. And I'm not aware that any of them regularly writes adaptationns of classic texts and then directs them. So, I stick to my original hypothesis that the unique attraction of Patrick Marber to the NT programmers is his reputation as a stage director and his writing his own adaptations of classic texts to direct himself.
EDIT: Oh yes, and also Simon McBurney does it with Complicite, and Emma Rice sometimes, as I said. Does Ivo van Hove?
Sally Cookson directs adaptations which are devised by the Company, with the assistance of a Writer in the Room.
I think that this appeals to the NT now.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 29, 2017 15:25:27 GMT
Robert Icke does it a lot
|
|
1,081 posts
|
Post by andrew on Jul 21, 2018 6:17:53 GMT
Well nobody else is owning up to having seen this so I'll go first. I hated it. I really hated it. I didn't find it very funny, it failed to break through to anything deeper despite obvious attempts. The cast do what they can but I even got bored of Ifans' role by the midway point. If it had an interval I would have left.
What's even more of a crime (and it's a mild non-plot related spoiler coming up ahead) is that there is this a really beautiful use of the drum revolve at the end of the show, and the stagecraft of the final scene was top notch. As deputy director of the Drum Revolve Fanclub I felt I should cheerlead that. It's a shame it came at the end of such a stinker of a play. 1 star.
|
|
2,389 posts
|
Post by peggs on Jul 21, 2018 8:30:02 GMT
Had bad feelings about this but that review is a new low. Even worse than some of the previous poor offerings?
|
|
kps
Auditioning
|
Post by kps on Jul 21, 2018 9:04:37 GMT
I watched this last night. It was comfortably the worst piece of theatre I have ever had the misfortune to encounter.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 21, 2018 9:28:53 GMT
My friend saw this on Thursday
Her comments follow below
And based on these I didn’t attend
“
Don’t waste your time. Get a refund.
No themes. No story. Supposed to be absurdist. Was panto.
Best bit was that there was no interval. Glorious to be out at 915. And I liked the red death bridge.
I thought it was terrible but I can never judge what other people think of plays / films. Sometime people like stuff I think is objectively bad
I told u to go see the play. It is sh*t. But at least you would have seen for yourself it was sh*t and why u thought it was sh*t
“
Of course
Are her comments meaningless
As I have posted them on here?
Perhaps if I post the same comments on twitter
They become true
🤣🤣🤣
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 21, 2018 10:46:11 GMT
Supposed to be absurdist. Was panto Considering panto is one of the highest forms of theatre (and one of the most difficult to get right), that's a strange statement. I think perhaps in British culture Panto is considered as such Men dressing up as women And smutty jokes However in the wider cultural sphere I don’t think panto is necessarily up there With Mozart Shakespeare and others |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 21, 2018 11:46:05 GMT
Looks like yet ANOTHER mess
For Olivier
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 21, 2018 12:31:27 GMT
Oh yes it is! The cross-dressing is almost extinct now, and the smut (Clary and a few others aside) mostly excised. Culturally, it's many people's first - and only - exposure to live theatre, so there's a strong argument on that alone that it is of the highest significance. With its Italian roots, and remembering how Bill the Quill developed his plots, there's also a strong argument that the evolution, like Shakespeare is a unique cultural legacy. If you see enough panto and study it, there are tropes by which it can be measured in identical way to any other form of live performance. These elements have to be taken absolutely seriously and used with precision in the same way a choreographer will select an appropriate movement to match a musical theme. Get it wrong in panto or dance and it is instantly not just noticeable but the ruination of an entire production. No different to any other form of highest theatre, I'd say. Oh no it isn’t! Panto may have interesting roots but it has transformed through time into something quite different, hasn’t it? Even the youngsters in my family declined the offer of a panto last Christmas saying it was too childish. They chose to see a play instead: Daisy Pulls it Off, which they all loved. Okay so Daisy has elements of the pantomimic (?) which is probably why I was less than enthralled. |
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Jul 21, 2018 12:50:51 GMT
I watched this last night. It was comfortably the worst piece of theatre I have ever had the misfortune to encounter. I know someone who gives that accolade to a 1980s production of the same play. A pattern is emerging. |
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Jul 21, 2018 12:57:15 GMT
Looks like yet ANOTHER mess For Olivier This particular one was entirely predictable. |
|
1,120 posts
|
Post by samuelwhiskers on Jul 21, 2018 13:02:18 GMT
I bloody wish it'd been panto. Might have gotten some sweets chucked into the audience, or at least a bit of a singsong. Genuinely can't remember the last time I was so bored in the theatre. Utterly pointless and repetitive with almost no characterisation. Yes it's 'clever' (not that clever, since they take pains to spell out how clever they're being at every step) but who cares?
I don't get why they cast some poor actress to stand on top of the set with only the top of her head visible for the entire play. Did she even have any lines? At least the poor extra in Absolute Hell got to walk around a bit.
Okay the final scene is visually stunning. But you don't need to pay £30 or £60 to look at some nice lighting.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 21, 2018 13:50:59 GMT
Aren’t people sick
Of seeing all this sh*t theatre???
Don’t we all have better things to do
With our time
I value this forum
As I do use it
In part
To guide me on what to see
|
|
