|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 11, 2018 14:24:35 GMT
Ideally, those running institutions funded primarily by the public purse should stick to the Nolan Principles: Always work with all your siblings. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 11, 2018 14:25:02 GMT
I always stick to the Nolan Principles personally. For instance, I'm always in the mood for dancing. And romancing. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 11, 2018 14:26:04 GMT
Ohhh, the Nolan Principles is a thing? That explains a LOT about Bill Kenwright's Blood Brothers casting policy...
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 11, 2018 18:04:48 GMT
Really interesting the discussion of nepotism here. I was looking at the Royal Exchange Manchester website earlier today and noticed that Maxine Peake stars in Beckett's Happy Days (25 MAY 18 - 23 JUN 18) and then her own play she has written, Queens of The Coal Age opens as the next production in the same space (28 JUN 18 - 21 JUL 18).
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 11, 2018 19:42:23 GMT
I still find it hard to fathom that the Royal Court thought it was a good idea to stage a play by an employee. Especially one who has no previous stage credits, and who is yet to write any dialogue or create a dramatic character other than herself. It would have to be something quite exceptional in order to justify such progamming...and the reviews, also written by work colleagues, aren't good enough to convince me that that's the case. I suppose they're better reviews than those Goats received, but following the Rita Sue mess...it would be nice for the conversation to be about the actual plays...and not everything surrounding them...
I get that it's not the first time this has happened at the Court, but The Pride was well received and, later on, successfully revived. Though perhaps My Mum's a Tw*t will be too one day...possibly performed by Glenda Jackson...?
|
|
1,120 posts
|
Post by samuelwhiskers on Jan 12, 2018 2:47:18 GMT
It does raise interesting points about the nature of putting oneself and one's own personal experiences directly onstage. I read a review that mentioned the playwright's "evident love and sympathy" for the main character. But really there is no "character", it's literally the writer recounting her own experiences. Odd wording. I do wonder how the knowledge of the play's genesis affects how it is perceived. Really interesting the discussion of nepotism here. I was looking at the Royal Exchange Manchester website earlier today and noticed that Maxine Peake stars in Beckett's Happy Days (25 MAY 18 - 23 JUN 18) and then her own play she has written, Queens of The Coal Age opens as the next production in the same space (28 JUN 18 - 21 JUL 18). I don't think that's really comparable. Maxine Peake has been an Associate Artist at the REM for six years, and she's written a couple of well-received plays and things. Queens of the Coal Age started life as a Radio 4 play. Though I admit the timing of the two is perhaps not great. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 12, 2018 10:27:28 GMT
Only on TheatreBoard would anyone suggest that a theatre shouldn't work with its Associate Artists.
|
|
1,064 posts
|
Post by bellboard27 on Jan 12, 2018 11:58:37 GMT
I wonder if anyone working at a theatre has ever submitted a new play entitled "My Artistic Director's a Tw*t"?
|
|
371 posts
|
Post by popcultureboy on Jan 13, 2018 9:27:30 GMT
The only thing that bothers me about what Warden's day job is and where the play is being produced is the comment in the Guardian interview that it "barely needed revising". Having seen the show, it needed SO much revising! It was all over the place and needed a lot of tweaking and shaping to turn it into something less unwieldy and scattershot. Patsy Ferran is a marvel, the set is a joy, the piece itself could have been exceptional, but it falls a little short.
|
|
1,861 posts
|
Post by NeilVHughes on Jan 13, 2018 18:29:42 GMT
More essay than monologue.
Redeemed by a hypnotically playful Patsy Ferran.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 18, 2018 9:58:52 GMT
More essay than monologue. Redeemed by a hypnotically playful Patsy Ferran. Ferran is brilliant. The monologue is OK. I kept wanting to hear the mother’s story. The piece is entertaining enough if quite slight. OK way to spend an afternoon. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 18, 2018 10:23:27 GMT
Reminiscent of Adrian Mole in that everything is seen from the perspective of the young adult and the teller is directly trying to manipulate their audience.
Although a big difference is that Mole narrates in the moment but the Girl tells of her past.
|
|
1,478 posts
|
Post by Steve on Jan 18, 2018 14:12:25 GMT
Consider me thoroughly manipulated. I thought this was insightful, and absolutely delightful, although I'll concede that for me, Patsy Ferran can do no wrong, and any show where Patsy Ferran raps is a must-see, regardless. Some spoilers follow. . . The monologue itself, I loved, and I think it's underestimated, probably because it lacks the twists that you'd normally expect in a well-constructed story. Nonetheless, I loved it for the following reasons:- (1) the plot, about a mother's love being transferred from her daughter to a cult is fascinating, in and of itself; (2) the subplot, reading between the lines, about whether the mother was ever really capable of love in the first place, is equally fascinating; (3) the storytelling is intriguing, immediate and easy to follow, and full of worldbuilding detail, involving Argos page numbers, Kanye West lyrics and David Jason idolisation, etc, (4) there is so much humour, partly generated by vivid characterisation, whereby the lead character's mischievous motivation of perpetually "covering" [her] tracks" results in multiple mini comic triumphs amid a wider sadness; and partly from wry observations (eg: On losing her virginity, the character says something like "I was relieved it didn't hurt, though years later I realised that might have been a size issue"); (5) the use of amusing teenage overstatement, whereby a hated stepfather is amusingly only referred to as "moron," is constantly contrasted and undercut by desperately sad understatement, regarding the heinous neglect of the mother. I saw this last Saturday matinee, and the show is still living with me in a way it just wouldn't if the writing was underpar. Acted by Patsy Ferran, this show is really quite wonderful, though maybe more wonderful if you share my view that Patsy Ferran rapping harder than Hamilton is one of the funniest things in the world. 4 stars  |
|
55 posts
|
Post by nialld on Jan 18, 2018 17:59:39 GMT
Consider me thoroughly manipulated. I thought this was insightful, and absolutely delightful, although I'll concede that for me, Patsy Ferran can do no wrong, and any show where Patsy Ferran raps is a must-see, regardless. Some spoilers follow. . . The monologue itself, I loved, and I think it's underestimated, probably because it lacks the twists that you'd normally expect in a well-constructed story. Nonetheless, I loved it for the following reasons:- (1) the plot, about a mother's love being transferred from her daughter to a cult is fascinating, in and of itself; (2) the subplot, reading between the lines, about whether the mother was ever really capable of love in the first place, is equally fascinating; (3) the storytelling is intriguing, immediate and easy to follow, and full of worldbuilding detail, involving Argos page numbers, Kanye West lyrics and David Jason idolisation, etc, (4) there is so much humour, partly generated by vivid characterisation, whereby the lead character's mischievous motivation of perpetually "covering" [her] tracks" results in multiple mini comic triumphs amid a wider sadness; and partly from wry observations (eg: On losing her virginity, the character says something like "I was relieved it didn't hurt, though years later I realised that might have been a size issue"); (5) the use of amusing teenage overstatement, whereby a hated stepfather is amusingly only referred to as "moron," is constantly contrasted and undercut by desperately sad understatement, regarding the heinous neglect of the mother. I saw this last Saturday matinee, and the show is still living with me in a way it just wouldn't if the writing was underpar. Acted by Patsy Ferran, this show is really quite wonderful, though maybe more wonderful if you share my view that Patsy Ferran rapping harder than Hamilton is one of the funniest things in the world. 4 stars I think this is a really good appraisal of the play and I agree with it. Although I enjoyed it at the time, I didn't expect it to be a play that would stay with me but I've actually thought about it quite a lot since seeing it on Monday, which as you say wouldn't be the case if it was a sub par script. Although I think the main reason for my enjoyment of the play has to be Patsy Ferran. She really is a terrific actress and held the story so well, dealing with all emotional registers superbly and whilst she was hilarious at times and gave great comic hiding, also performed the sadness that lurked beneath the surface of the story and the words. I do think that with an actress not as strong the play might not have worked so well, but Patsy was just fantastic. The only thing I didn't like was the sound design, I found it jarring and quite awkward when some loud music suddenly played and found the music moments didn't work in such an intimate play and setting. But all in all I really enjoyed it. Would this have given the time of day if it had come from an unknown and not one of VF's colleagues? Perhaps not, but I for one am definitely glad this story was staged. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 18, 2018 18:07:36 GMT
The only thing I didn't like was the sound design, I found it jarring and quite awkward when some loud music suddenly played and found the music moments didn't work in such an intimate play and setting. I thought the music is all cued by the Girl as part of her presentation to us of her story. It all illustrates the detail of what she's telling us, so that we all get every point. Similarly, the sudden lighting cues and the bursts of movement and dance. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 18, 2018 20:07:31 GMT
The character tells you everything so you never have to work anything out for yourself. I’m not going to go into any detail because it will spoil it for others. This is where I think the Theatre did the writer a disservice by not having them do rewrites and go through several drafts. This play could have been devastating especially given the brilliance of the performer. Adrian Mole is a good comparison. Sue Townsend was of course a more experienced writer. Mole is beautifully observed: despite its simplicity the comic story has a wonderful pathos because you are shown events rather than told about them. The characters are very clear. Here, they are fairly sketchy. You hardly ever hear their individual voices. Warden’s story is powerful and that’s what lingers rather than it being anything to do with the writing, which in my opinion is not that great as a piece for Theatre. They were right to do it because it touches on important themes and it isn’t a bad piece of writing. As someone further up the thread says the writing is sort of “meh”!but you can see it’s potential.
|
|
3,040 posts
|
Post by crowblack on Jan 21, 2018 0:30:49 GMT
I saw it this afternoon and really enjoyed it, though I agree there's room for improvement in the play itself (shape and structure in the latter part, though the voice is always vivid). I thought Patsy Ferran was wonderful. The front row beanbags were very comfortable, btw - have they used them before?
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 23, 2018 8:25:14 GMT
WARNING: graphic content
I forgot to say that when I googled this show with a view to purchasing tickets I was directed to several porn sites with details of mums and...um...twats.
|
|
294 posts
|
Post by dani on Jan 23, 2018 9:08:25 GMT
Really? When I Google it, I just see pages relating to the show.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 23, 2018 9:09:25 GMT
Google results aren't the same for everyone. They are influenced by your previous search history.
|
|
2,480 posts
|
Post by zahidf on Jan 23, 2018 9:32:53 GMT
I thought this was great. Very funny and Patsy was wonderful.
|
|
294 posts
|
Post by dani on Jan 23, 2018 13:25:39 GMT
Google results aren't the same for everyone. They are influenced by your previous search history. I'm well aware of that. If someone's seeing a lot of NSFW content after searching for this particular play, I'd suggest that's... I think you see my point. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 23, 2018 14:26:58 GMT
Indeed, I'd suggest you're both making the same point.  |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 23, 2018 15:27:19 GMT
Indeed, I'd suggest you're both making the same point. Ah but one is a man, and one who evidence here suggests enjoys explaining things to women, because we fools cannot wrap our head around such things as facts  |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 23, 2018 23:29:13 GMT
Indeed, I'd suggest you're both making the same point. Ah but one is a man, and one who evidence here suggests enjoys explaining things to women, because we fools cannot wrap our head around such things as facts [/quote I don’t think it reflects your search history because entering “Tw*t” (actually I don’tlike That word) will take you to all sorts of websites all by itself. Admittedly, they’re quite low down on the food chain and I really should not have been surfing the net at work but I didn’t log onto the websites that came up - even a very sweary mumsnet thread came up as a result...jeez, anyone would think I had too much time on my hands (I really don’t). |
|
