8 posts
|
Post by shabbytigs on Nov 2, 2017 22:05:00 GMT
Apologies if there is already a thread on this, but this sounds intriguing. It would be interesting to see what stories they will be adapting for this. There are no further details. All the Almeida website mentions is that the stories would be based on the ones written by Rod Serling, Charles Beaumont and Richard Matheson. Could be anything! Any thoughts? |
|
562 posts
|
Post by jadnoop on Nov 16, 2017 8:49:50 GMT
Pretty intrigued about this too. I wonder if they haven't given away one of the stories with the photo on the website. The rehearsal image of the lady holding the mirror looks like it could be the end of the Eye Of The Beholder episode. If that's the case, the story has lots of relevance today, but I wonder how they'll make it work without the twist being immediately obvious. |
|
1,103 posts
|
Post by mallardo on Nov 16, 2017 15:15:49 GMT
I see Lizzy Connolly is in it - that's all I need to know.
|
|
1,502 posts
|
Post by foxa on Dec 9, 2017 10:41:56 GMT
I saw this last night and can confidently say it is my favourite production directed by Richard Jones.
Which perhaps isn't saying much since after seeing his 'Once in a Lifetime' at the Young Vic I vowed never to see anything else directed by him. But lured by my fondness for the original Twilight Zone series I took a punt on £10 tickets.
Anne Washburn's adaptation takes a bunch of different Twilight Zone stories, chops them up and interweaves them. Some are brought to a conclusion and some are left hanging. I think if you are familiar with the series you can sort of fill in the blanks in some instances, but I wonder, if you aren't if that would be particularly frustrating. The design (set by Paul Steinberg, costumes by Nicky Gillibrand) takes a playful retro approach (lots of black and white to mimic the original black and white television series; early 1960s American clothing) - including retro ideas about what the future/space travel might look like. Some low-tech effects are created by simply having cast members twirling mysterious Twilight Zone-type images (an eyeball; a sign saying e=mc2, a mysterious doorway....) All the performers are good, including John Marquez's funny Rod Serling (the show's host and one of its writers.) The fractured, episodic nature of the piece left us feeling that some of the ingredients were better than the final cake. There would be a brilliant interlude lasting five or ten minutes and then it would sink back into something less interesting/satisfying for a while. However I reckon they are on to something in reviving some of the Twilight Zone themes: the secrets/nastiness that lie beneath the apparently ordinary; how people behave selfishly in desperate situations; fear of strangers/the unknown; loneliness and mental health...
It came in at over 2 and a half hours last night, with one interval - I think it could be trimmed by ten minutes. I would (cautiously) recommend. (But remember I was one of the few who liked Mr Burns, by the same playwright.)
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 9, 2017 11:04:21 GMT
(But remember I was one of the few who liked Mr Simpson, by the same playwright.) More also liked Mr Burns. |
|
1,502 posts
|
Post by foxa on Dec 9, 2017 11:11:37 GMT
Ah, HG, I knew when you quoted me it would be with a correction. I have duly and (full of shame) changed my error from Mr Simpson to Mr Burns.
|
|
1,103 posts
|
Post by mallardo on Dec 9, 2017 12:19:14 GMT
Foxa, I was there too - in the front row - how did I not see you?
Myself, I had no particular love for the old '60s series - I was there to see Lizzy Connolly and I was not disappointed on that score! I did know some of the episodes however. There are eight of them in the play, interwoven, as foxa says. I suppose there was no other way to do it - they couldn't be run as complete episodes back to back to back without the play being a very bumpy ride. But, again, as foxa says, it all ends up a very mixed bag because some stories are much better than others. In fact one wonders why some of the stories were chosen at all.
The exception to the pattern is an episode called The Shelter which takes up a good chunk of second act and is played straight through. It's a serious piece about human behaviour in a crisis - missile attack, who gets into the bomb shelter - that becomes a portrait of society particularly appropriate to our current situation both here and in America. It's wonderfully written - Rod Serling wrote the original but Anne Washburn has clearly intervened with new material - and played. For me it was easily the highlight of the evening.
I mentioned that The Shelter is "serious" - as all of the original episodes generally were - but much of this play is not. Director Richard Jones applies a "take" on the material which often seems just this side of parody. The black and white and grey sets and costumes are, I suppose, appropriate, since the stage is framed as a large TV set. But the actors all seem to be giving heightened performances - big reactions, knowing looks, melodramatic line readings - as if this represents yesterday's acting style. But that just isn't so. The acting in the series was usually quite excellent - the dramatic heightening was achieved through camera angles and editing choices. Jones's approach does not do justice to the series he wants to pay homage to.
John Marquez does a nice job playing Serling, handling the host's unique purple prosey intros and extros and moments of narration with style. But other actors get in on it too, stepping out of scenes to do their Serling impressions. And there's an ongoing cigarette gag that seems to have a purpose I could not detect - was Serling notorious for always having a cigarette in hand? Whatever...
The play didn't really work for me. It was too hit and miss, too unfocused, lacking in dramatic momentum, too at odds with its original material. But I would be remiss if I didn't note that it does have a rousing and quite unique ending that supplies some context to the evening and which, I think, contributed to its warm reception from the audience. So it does get some things right.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Dec 9, 2017 12:48:49 GMT
Has there ever been a Jones production where the actors didn’t give “heightened” performances ? It’s nothing to do with the material, it’s just what he does. Expressionistic I suppose you’d call it if you wanted to treat it seriously.
|
|
1,502 posts
|
Post by foxa on Dec 9, 2017 14:05:10 GMT
I'm sorry I missed you Mallardo - my husband and I were back in the Row H pole seats.
I agree The Shelter was the highlight. And some of the fragments were intriguing, such as the mysterious little girl with the cocoa and the ventriloquist dummy scene. Besides The Shelter two of the other stories that were given a lot of time were the Astronaut story and the man who couldn't sleep (which provided an excuse for a song and some great nightmare stuff, but ultimately left me a bit, I dunno.) And there were some things I didn't understand (the party being shown on the TV screen.)
Serling not only smoked on camera he would advertise Chesterfield cigarettes - I think it was a bit in-jokey, but also establishes the period stuff:
And Mallardo is right - the actors were usually top-notch on the Twilight Zone series. I wonder how the play would work if it was played with more realism and genuine eeriness.
|
|
1,970 posts
|
Post by sf on Dec 9, 2017 18:18:02 GMT
I'm trying not to draw any conclusions from the fact that this will be the first play I see in 2018.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 10, 2017 12:15:20 GMT
quick question to those who have seen it. I was looking to by tickets for a Christmas gift and was wondering how restricted the £10 and £20 tickets near the front were? Thanks
|
|
1,103 posts
|
Post by mallardo on Dec 10, 2017 13:17:40 GMT
Those end of the row seats are restricted view not because of an obstruction but because the stage is framed like a TV set, not open at the sides as normal in this theatre. The end seats are outside the frame with an angled view and thus will not see some of the action. Just how much will be missed I don't know.
|
|
2,743 posts
|
Post by n1david on Dec 14, 2017 18:18:21 GMT
|
|
141 posts
|
Post by blobble84 on Dec 17, 2017 0:15:19 GMT
I found this all terribly dull - left at the interval.
|
|
76 posts
|
Post by finalperformance on Dec 21, 2017 5:10:30 GMT
I found this all terribly dull - left at the interval. I stayed but was not to impressed. I expected more so felt left down. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 21, 2017 14:20:52 GMT
Critics seemed to like this. I really didn't. Not remotely sure what the point of it was. Would probably have rather watched the TV show - but the production didn't really make me want to do that either. Massive wasted opportunity as far as I was concerned.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 22, 2017 12:58:18 GMT
Critics seemed to like this. I really didn't. Not remotely sure what the point of it was. Would probably have rather watched the TV show - but the production didn't really make me want to do that either. Massive wasted opportunity as far as I was concerned. Most reviews I have seen gave it 2-3 stars with an occasional 4 so not sure the critics did 'love' it.
Better received than Mr. Burns though which says all you need to know about that 'play'...
|
|
4,984 posts
|
Post by Phantom of London on Dec 31, 2017 2:32:46 GMT
This was a blatant hang on the coattails od 1984, which this very theatre seems to have had great success with, however with theatre trying to make a success from another show, is almost certain failure. Saying that I didn’t get 1984 I found it mildly enjoyable and mildly tedious in equal measure, as did I with this.
3 stars
|
|
|
|
Post by QueerTheatre on Jan 3, 2018 14:13:41 GMT
I saw this last night and just didnt really get the point of it? its is a parody? is it meant to make me think about the current political climate? its it just meant to be a nostalgic evening of sillyness? The show, and I have no idea what it's trying to say, and after Mr Burns i was so excited to see this... I guess i should have know what to expect from Richard Jones though....
|
|
1,970 posts
|
Post by sf on Jan 5, 2018 16:30:09 GMT
I saw it on Wednesday afternoon. I liked it - but with the caveat that I paid only £10 (the restricted-view seats at the end of the front row are a steal, it's a side view but you don't miss anything essential). Clever staging from Richard Jones, perfectly-judged just-the-right-side-of-too-arch performances, and it's an interesting idea to use Twilight Zone episodes as a jumping-off point for an exploration of, basically, fear and paranoia. I don't think the attempt to pull everything together in the final section worked as well as it should have, but it was worth an afternoon of my time.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 5, 2018 19:04:53 GMT
I saw it on Wednesday afternoon. I liked it - but with the caveat that I paid only £10 (the restricted-view seats at the end of the front row are a steal, it's a side view but you don't miss anything essential). Clever staging from Richard Jones, perfectly-judged just-the-right-side-of-too-arch performances, and it's an interesting idea to use Twilight Zone episodes as a jumping-off point for an exploration of, basically, fear and paranoia. I don't think the attempt to pull everything together in the final section worked as well as it should have, but it was worth an afternoon of my time. I also saw same afternoon Never seen almeida that empty at a matinee |
|
423 posts
|
Post by dlevi on Jan 7, 2018 10:58:02 GMT
I caught this yesterday afternoon and didn't hate it, but I didn't like it much either. I couldn't tell if we were supposed to laugh at it or with it, and when it was suspenseful Richard Jones direction would do something to dissapate the suspense. I've always been a fan of the original Twilight Zone series ( the various re-boots? not so much) so I didn't see the point in mocking them ( if that's what they were doing). The confrontation scene in The Shelter sequence was a disaster dramaturgically in trying to make the whole enterprise "relavent" and the American accents were a disaster. I'm fearful when the Almeida strikes a bargain with commercial producers and comes up with something mediocre.
|
|
3,535 posts
|
Post by Rory on Jan 7, 2018 12:12:53 GMT
I'm not sure that The Twilight Zone does have commercial co-producers.
|
|
1,970 posts
|
Post by sf on Jan 7, 2018 15:12:42 GMT
I'm not sure that The Twilight Zone does have commercial co-producers. "Presented in association with Ron Fogelman", it says in the programme. |
|
24 posts
|
Post by mistertonymac on Jan 10, 2018 9:58:42 GMT
Saw this last night, theatre full and got a decent reaction.
For me the tone was all over the place - maybe if it had started pastiche and fun and then got more and more serious it would have been better.
Alternatively, just stick with funny /serious and go with it, you can't have your cake etc....
I thought Ghost Stories did this so much better. Black humour which then just got more and more terrifying.
|
|
