3,040 posts
|
Post by crowblack on Aug 21, 2018 10:27:09 GMT
The Mario thing is far more pronounced in photos I asked the friend (non-theategoer) to whom I had given the free ticket what he thought of it. "Othello was great, Cassio was great, so was Desdemona - but the bloke who looked like Bobby Ball? Ruined it. Ruined it. It was just like watching Bobby Ball." I told him that was Sir Mark Rylance, enormous cheese in the acting profession. "Really? Well you should have seen him - Bobby Ball!" |
|
923 posts
|
Post by Snciole on Aug 21, 2018 10:43:42 GMT
Unless actual Bobby Ball is his understudy...
|
|
5,139 posts
|
Post by TallPaul on Aug 21, 2018 11:51:54 GMT
At Barry Chuckle's funeral last week, Tommy Cannon was there on his own, without Bobby, so who knows!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by bgarde on Aug 22, 2018 7:37:54 GMT
While I didn't confuse him for Bobby Ball, I think that does tell you a lot about the mood of the production, which is a shame.
|
|
747 posts
|
Post by Latecomer on Aug 22, 2018 14:59:55 GMT
I have to confess I found this production very strange. Rylance plays every line for comedy with his slightly stumbling muttering air...as though he is making it all up as he goes along, and whilst he has prefect comic timing, I find that some of the words get a bit lost in the mumbles and the tone just seems very odd. It's almost as if it all happens by accident.....and the sense of foreboding never really builds, so the drama at the end is sudden and a bit cartoon. Not a great success for me.
|
|
5,790 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by oxfordsimon on Aug 22, 2018 15:05:04 GMT
When I saw who was directing this, I lost all interest in the project.
Rylance is an actor who can soar to great heights but also fail to hit the mark in a fairly spectacular fashion.
His Rooster will live long in theatre history. His attempt at Richard III is to be swiftly forgotten.
I am utterly fed up with blatant nepotism in our theatres. Talented as his wife may be as a composer, her track record as a director is based solely on them working together. So if you want Rylance, you have to accept his wife as director. That is now how it should be.
|
|
4,153 posts
|
Post by kathryn on Aug 22, 2018 15:50:51 GMT
His attempt at Richard III is to be swiftly forgotten. I loved his Richard III! I don't think I've had an actor so effectively get me on Richard's side, even though I knew what he was doing was utterly reprehensible. |
|
5,790 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by oxfordsimon on Aug 22, 2018 17:47:38 GMT
His attempt at Richard III is to be swiftly forgotten. I loved his Richard III! I don't think I've had an actor so effectively get me on Richard's side, even though I knew what he was doing was utterly reprehensible. I hated it - all bar one moment. The costume/back/arm thing was just excessive. The cutting of Margaret from the production was awful. The ghosts were ludicrous. I just wasn't engaged at all. The only bit I liked was having Anne on for the bit where he was saying to put out that the Queen was ill and not likely to live long - and there was Anne sat obviously drugged. That was a new way of approaching the scene that really worked for me. The rest was just not right. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 22, 2018 17:53:08 GMT
I am utterly fed up with blatant nepotism in our theatres. Talented as his wife may be as a composer, her track record as a director is based solely on them working together. So if you want Rylance, you have to accept his wife as director. That is now how it should be. Or, if you want Clare van Campy, you have to accept her husband as actor. Isn't our theatre built on nepotism? |
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Aug 22, 2018 19:50:12 GMT
I am utterly fed up with blatant nepotism in our theatres. Talented as his wife may be as a composer, her track record as a director is based solely on them working together. So if you want Rylance, you have to accept his wife as director. That is now how it should be. Or, if you want Clare van Campy, you have to accept her husband as actor. Isn't our theatre built on nepotism? Yes there are many examples. Years ago we used to have a poster here who used to entertaining fulminate against the Royal Exchange Theatre in Manchester for this reason. The RSC are offenders and we’re going to see some more of it in the NT’s upcoming programme. Two of the most embarrassing West End productions of all time were the result of Trevor Nunn and Ian McKellen attempting to promote the careers of their (then) partners. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 22, 2018 20:14:00 GMT
Jan I would love to know which productions you mean. I probably didn’t see them, but I am nosey.
|
|
587 posts
|
Post by Polly1 on Aug 22, 2018 23:17:33 GMT
I imagine the Trevor Nunn one was Imogen Stubbs' attempt at writing a play, We Happy Few I think it was called. Universally panned.
|
|
587 posts
|
Post by Polly1 on Aug 22, 2018 23:22:39 GMT
Also, whilst at Lehman Trilogy on Monday I chatted with a nice Scottish man who said he was going to see Othello the next day. I said I wasn't keen on Rylance but when he asked me why I couldn't quite articulate my reasons. I think it is something to do with the slightly flippant air he tends to bring to all his roles, which seems to be the case again here (I have no intention of seeing it).
|
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Aug 23, 2018 6:31:41 GMT
I imagine the Trevor Nunn one was Imogen Stubbs' attempt at writing a play, We Happy Few I think it was called. Universally panned. Correct. The McKellen one was an appallingly feeble play called Cowardice written by Sean Matthias. |
|
923 posts
|
Post by Snciole on Aug 23, 2018 13:15:12 GMT
Jan I would love to know which productions you mean. I probably didn’t see them, but I am nosey. Nancy Dell'Olio: LIVE! |
|
5,690 posts
|
Post by lynette on Aug 23, 2018 14:44:28 GMT
So what nepotism is going to come at the NT?
|
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Aug 23, 2018 15:56:50 GMT
So what nepotism is going to come at the NT? A few things. I have previously mentioned a new version of Vassa by Mrs Norris. |
|
5,690 posts
|
Post by lynette on Aug 23, 2018 17:41:51 GMT
So what nepotism is going to come at the NT? A few things. I have previously mentioned a new version of Vassa by Mrs Norris. Gosh. I suppose this is common practice. |
|
5,790 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by oxfordsimon on Aug 23, 2018 18:40:46 GMT
Not exactly nepotism but Norris has certainly played favourites with his programming a disproportionate amount of Churchill and Marber.
Of course people like to work with collaborators with whom they have a good relationship. But things can be taken too far and frequently are.
Impossible to eliminate it entirely. But there should be an industry wide push for a more open recruitment and audition process for all roles on and off stage.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Aug 23, 2018 19:33:38 GMT
A few things. I have previously mentioned a new version of Vassa by Mrs Norris. Gosh. I suppose this is common practice. She’s also writing a new play The Wedding to be directed by Rufus but I don’t know if it’s at the NT. This information is on her agent’s website. Another issue is ADs favouring talent who have the same agent. Directors who work at the Almeida are often from the same agency (excluding Icke) - could be coincidental if there are only a few big agents, I don’t know. |
|
2,052 posts
|
Post by Marwood on Sept 1, 2018 18:25:13 GMT
Mark Rylance, as always, a pleasure to watch (although he’s not seen that much in the second act): André Holland good too (although I don’t know if it was where I was standing, or what seemed to be him reverting to a Southern drawl in act two but I found some of his lines hard to hear towards the end), but overall all of the cast were good- I enjoyed this far more than the McKellen King Lear (wish someone could do something about the poxy helicopters flying over blocking out the actors though)
|
|
|
|
Post by Nicholas on Sept 9, 2018 12:24:10 GMT
It’s an interesting Othello – streamlined, precise, strong – but also one that’s strangely inert, simple, and (confusingly) not wholly suited to the Globe’s beautiful shared space. There’s much to admire and like, but it just didn’t manage to locate the play, to locate its politics, to locate its titular character. Perhaps down to its minimal set, its stripped-down run time, I was never really transported to a Venice that meant anything. Good things happened on stage, but it felt a wee bit stagey. Whilst many other problems were fascinatingly solved, it didn’t quite sell Othello: the great character, the great play.
It’s all about Iago here, who plays it for laughs, but unexpectedly so. At the beginning, as Rylance runs through those words at such a pace, this Iago seemed to be an evil Cyrano de Bergerac – unable to flirt himself, he makes others his mouthpiece, specifically about ‘romance’ – but whereas Cyrano uses his power for good, Rylance’s Iago is a selfish, nasty player instead, and where Cyrano can love, Iago can’t. It’s all about sex, or lack thereof – talking about his wife’s infidelity stops this sad Iago dead, but when dancing with Emilia his attitude isn’t lust but control (stopping her dancing with anyone but him, but not dancing himself) suggesting him sexually incapable, sexually frustrated. Unlike the other knights with their shiny pointy daggers, Iago has a baton, phallic but blunt and useless. I do think that permeates his performance. No motiveless malignity, he only slows down when describing Othello sleeping with Emilia, and the distinct silences after make this loud and clear. Whilst I think this is his motivation, he does seem to make it up as he goes along (shocked when Othello agrees to kill Emilia), and it’s this that’s interesting about his Iago – because then, these aren’t the actions of some revenger or even some malignity, but of a failure: a weaker, less clever, impotent soldier, surprising himself and relying on luck. It’s an interesting interpretation, especially from an actor who so easily invites audiences into his confidence – yes, he played things for laughs, but he did as the class clown who uses humour to hide his own deep inadequacies, a pitiful grin masking his loneliness. He’s pathetic, but never deserving our pathos. This makes Iago a hard character to warm to, but makes for an interpretation easy to admire quite a bit.
Incidentally, I LOVED Rylance’s Richard III. It might actually be my favourite Rylance role ever (no, still Endgame). It was all about the joy of evil, as if told by a friend who DID deserve pity, and Rylance connected to the crowd on such a chummy level it was soooooo thrilling murdering together. Whilst this approach would have been great for a Globe Iago, I’m kind of glad Rylance played him so unloveably pathetically – it made an interesting contrast.
Instead, it’s Sheila Atim who runs away with this production (Emilia’s the best role in the play anyway). Always dressed in gold (thus always the most visible person on stage), she’s a literal trophy wife for Iago, a woman he married for show not love. However, Atim gives Emilia energy and autonomy even when silent, through motion and through strength. Where Iago is pathetic, Emilia is always engaging to watch sing, dance and be herself. In a crowd scene she’s great at drawing attention to herself (unlike Iago), when talking with Desdemona she seems eloquent and paced (unlike Iago). She’s a good musician (unlike Iago) and she’s clearly still got a romantic appetite (unlike Iago). Rylance’s relative age is also played up, his baldness deliberately hidden yet often displayed – comparatively, Emilia’s youth makes her more autonomous and him more pathetic. A trophy wife but never on the shelf – if she was unfaithful, then, frankly, good! This Emilia struck me as as poetic and powerful as the man she was married to (and potentially no less morally dubious), but clearly more complicated, considered, and interesting, maybe moral too. I don’t think this is because van Kampen wanted to set Emilia up as Iago’s foil – I think that’s because Atim’s that good. Maybe Atim should soon play Iago? (she should definitely release a CD)
Andre Holland, great though he can be, gets short shrift, because if the production plays up Iago’s paranoia, it also underplays Othello's. Holland’s a lovely, earnest speechifier, and his slow sexual doubts nicely mirror Rylance’s – or would, were these two closer. We never see enough of Holland and Rylance together; it felt like most of the cuts were to Othello rounding out his character. Rylance often watches Othello (an interesting choice) but rarely talks thus Othello never has reason to trust, like or know Iago (a duff choice). Instead Othello's offstage infidelity becomes Iago's motive, not Iago becoming Othello's; thus Othello’s merely the MacGuffin in Othello. I’m attributing this to the two hour thirty run time, and this is the first time I’ve ever complained about a show being too short.
But just to make a quick comparison with the Hytner – Lester was better than Holland in and of himself, but in no small part this was down to the military setting, where his vulnerabilities had to be hidden with macho bravado, a self-suppression Lester played beautifully but wholly in the DNA of the setting. Here, what is Venice? A wooden O. Without so strong a setting, where is this Othello and what does he lead? (how was Ejiofor, and crucially also how was Grandage?) Here, too, smaller roles – Cassio, Rodrigo – were generally played for laughs, which didn’t help ground the show or give context to Venice. Even the full ensemble scenes emphasised Iago and Emilia – sadly sidelining Othello and the military themselves.
Now, my expectation of “Mark Rylance plays Iago at the Globe” were that Rylance would crowd-surf his way through these scenes, clown us into liking him, and darken the story as it went on. Instead, Rylance gives a really interesting, insular, counter-intuitive but inventive performance – and nothing on stage really leaps off the stage, Atim aside, Iago’s villainy included. Expectation vs reality? Perhaps, but I admire and like the textual ideas – I just didn’t engage with anything beyond its interpretation of Iago and especially Emilia. Indisputably this Othello: The Moor of Venice downplays Othello and Venice. But it’s good too: I’m happy to write all these things I found really, really, very interesting about how Iago’s a funny failure; how Emilia’s his exact opposite; how an old and impotent Iago is as dangerous as a young and virile one; and especially how, in fact, a sexually frustrated (involuntarily celibate?), racist, sexist, past-it wannabe soldier bullying their way into the big leagues is as topical an Iago as you could get. In theory I LOVE that – but why can’t I say I liked Othello? Perhaps because these were all readings of the text, and not, as the Globe always does best, playings.
|
|
4,153 posts
|
Post by kathryn on Sept 14, 2018 23:13:40 GMT
This is the third production of Othello I have seen, after the Donmar Ejiofor/McGregor and NT Lester/Kinnear, and definitely the one I found the least satisfying. Which probably reflects a little unfairly on it, because the first two were acknowledged to be truly excellent. Like Nicholas, I too felt the lack of specificity in setting hindered it. I am less keen than him in Rylance’s Iago, who drifted too far towards pantomime villain for my taste. Maybe it was the effect of a Friday night audience being a bit too eager to laugh - including at moments which were not intended to be funny - and later on, to hiss.
I felt this production was lacking in bite, in part because it felt a bit pantomime and in part because it seemed to have lost the idea of Othello being an outsider in Venetian society. Though the moment when Desdomona was hit did elicit an audience gasp....
This production does boast the best party I’ve seen on stage, and I liked how the dancing was used. It just didn’t quite manage the switch to a tragic tone - I didn’t feel the inevitability and horror on the deaths as the relationships unravelled.
|
|
|
|
Post by floorshow on Sept 20, 2018 16:30:36 GMT
Caught the matinee today. Fun watching it with a well behaved (and packed in) crowd, very few of whom knew what was coming. Big gasps for any deaths and the the occasional laughter/muttering/hissing for Rylance's broader moments. Ran til almost 5pm too, without ever dropping the pace.
Was all a bit too soap-opera though, I guess that's the balance of keeping Iago quite light and frothy to make the deaths more shocking when they come rather than dialling up the sinister scheming and moustache twiddling.
Not sure about Lodovica, could have put a little effort in.
And he really doesn't look like Mario..
|
|
2,389 posts
|
Post by peggs on Sept 22, 2018 21:44:56 GMT
Got to this, this afternoon. The rain really helped the gloomy atmosphere. Too cut for me - I thought at first it was interesting to have an Iago reacting rather than scheming... then I realised they cut most of his internal dialogue. Didn't think Othello really held the stage either. Liked Desdemona more as it went on, and Bianca was hot. 3 stars from me, will blog it some time.
Oh, and admittedly some schadenfreude sitting comfortably in the back row, watching the pit fill with water. Now, does the rented cushion double as a floatation device? You illuded me again @theatremonkey, I was one of those drowning pit people. 12 hours in rain at globe today, the warm train is way more exciting than it usually is. |
|
