1,256 posts
|
Post by theatrelover123 on May 2, 2018 16:22:52 GMT
.
|
|
2,056 posts
|
Post by Marwood on May 2, 2018 17:09:27 GMT
I forgot that Monday is a Bank Holiday, but I have got a £2 ticket to see this next week (have been asked not to say where I got it from). I have no idea where I’ll be sat but at that price I’m not going to be too fussed: I’m presuming there’s going to be a lot more papering going on over the next few weeks if there are offers like this even before the reviews are in.
|
|
74 posts
|
Post by ruperto on May 2, 2018 17:16:47 GMT
I'd been really looking forward to this, and while it was reasonably enjoyable, it was - as others have said - dramatically inert for the most part, and probably would have worked better as a radio play.
Ben Chaplin was great as record producer Bernard (did I detect a bit of Mick Jagger drawl in his delivery?), but I was disappointed that Neil Stuke and Pip Carter (two actors I really like) didn't have more to do as a lawyer and psychotherapist respectively. As ever, Steve nailed it in his review above when he said there was too much tell, tell, tell and not enough show, show, show. The scene at the awards ceremony was well done and gave a glimpse of what could have been.
As it was, it didn't feel as if the characters and plot were properly set up at the beginning. There was much too much 'post mortem,' I felt - I wanted more scenes involving Bernard and Cat in the studio or on tour, rather than the few fleeting flashbacks we were treated to. Plus the ending was a bit of a damp squib. Or maybe the way it ended was the point. Also, there wasn't enough music!
I'm a massive fan of music and gigs, so I'm always keen to check out plays (as opposed to musicals) set in that world, but I often seem to come away dissatisfied. Birdland at the Royal Court with Andrew Scott as the rock star (I always felt his character was a little bit Brandon Flowers from the Killers, and a little bit Dave Gahan from Depeche Mode) was a funny fish, I thought - again, very little music - though to be fair, that is a play that has stuck in my memory and is one I think about from time to time. And one I definitely did enjoy was Platinum at Hampstead Downstairs a couple of years back (about a legendary protest singer who has retired from public life).
|
|
|
|
Post by max on May 2, 2018 23:44:46 GMT
I can't believe the amazing reviews that are coming in for this. I thought it was quite weak and misconceived. All the characters felt like they were in a play, not drawn from real life. But 'candidate for play of the year', 'never hits a false note', 'riveting' plus 4 stars from each of The Times, The Stage, Arts Desk.
|
|
29 posts
|
Post by vegas on May 3, 2018 6:50:42 GMT
I'm accompanying a group of students to see this in June, because they will be studying joint authorship in copyright law. I'm hoping it will stimulate some good class discussion. It will also be interesting to see how they respond to it as entertainment. They are law students, and I don't know how many of them are theatre fans.
|
|
2,744 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by n1david on May 3, 2018 13:45:51 GMT
I can't believe the amazing reviews that are coming in for this. I thought it was quite weak and misconceived. All the characters felt like they were in a play, not drawn from real life. But 'candidate for play of the year', 'never hits a false note', 'riveting' plus 4 stars from each of The Times, The Stage, Arts Desk. This has been generally well-reviewed, so I have to assume either it's just wasn't to my taste, or it was because I was at one of the early PwC Previews and it tightened up or got rewrites during the preview season. I don't normally go to previews, think I will revert to that policy as I'll never know whether it was a taste issue or a preview one. (Unless I were to go again, and I'm not risking that...) |
|
294 posts
|
Post by dani on May 3, 2018 17:20:03 GMT
The spread of opinion here is from 3* (Time Out, ES, Whatsonstage) to 5* (FT), with a cluster in the middle (e.g. Guardian, Stage). Personally I'd say it's worth 3*, and I'm surprised to see it described as electrifying or profound, as it seemed contrived and pretty shallow to me, but with some very good lines and a couple of enjoyable performances.
|
|
1,861 posts
|
Post by NeilVHughes on May 3, 2018 18:02:30 GMT
Have seen three previews in the last few weeks, two where I have agreed with the critics and one where I think they saw a different play, as I book in advance for most things and rarely rely on critics have found this divergence quite thought provoking.
Nine Nights, absolute cracker, Board and Critics in harmonius agreement.
Mood Music, surprised by the critics, I was especially enamoured by the composition and subject matter, as a musician who could bore the pants off someone (if they hung around) discussing diminished seventh arpeggios it is right up my street.
Absolute Hell, found it tedious and thought the production lacked the depth the play deserved, like @n1david tempted to see it again as it has been tinkered with a lot since I saw it in an early preview, as there is so much good theatre around currently this is unlikely.
|
|
|
|
Post by max on May 3, 2018 20:01:35 GMT
Agreed N1David, I try to avoid previews as it's too tantalising to wonder if changes were made in previews or the press simply hold another view. For this I saw the final preview; can't imagine the writing changed much, and ear-wigging the audience I wasn't hearing raves, more ho hums.
I feel it's had an easier ride as it's Joe Penhall; and a 'first play' writer would be savaged on grounds of character credibility. That's not necessarily wrong; we listen to people we've respected before, and I was looking forward to this a lot. It felt wrong/hackneyed/stagey from the first few lines - heart sinks. I came home to try and figure out my problem with it, and wrote:
The conception of this felt so far off real life that Act 1 was often embarrassing to watch. Who would this drawling mockney Producer be (in real life), paired with this young Irish singer-songwriter? Mickie Most? Martin Rushent? Brian Eno? They’re all of the distant past music-cred wise. Why would the record company think it would be a good idea, and bring a further sprinkling of quality or cache to her work? They’d either put her with someone young-ish like Mark Ronson, or (if working in LA as reputed) an older cool Black producer, like Nile Rodgers, or a team like Jam & Lewis. Or someone her own age.
Not that dance music seems to be her style; in fact (as with James Blunt on ‘Your Beautiful’) she might more realistically be paired with a co-songwriter to strengthen the work, and then the ownership of the song writing would be clearer from the start; rather than this Producer – Artist relationship.
Ben Chaplin’s character is written more as an ageing rocker than a midas producer. Why would a revered producer go out on the road with his act, on the tour bus? I’ve never heard of this, and the play seems confused. Perhaps it would have been better if it had been about a musical collaboration between two singer songwriter stars.
Everyone’s written as if they’re in a play: Lawyer ‘in a play’, pop star ‘in a play’, therapist ‘in a play’, but none of the writing feels like real life. The few scenes of making music are excruciating – I just didn’t buy them at all - the way music was spoken about, from riffs to chord progressions; and the music they were coming up with felt so ridiculously basic (or was that part of the satirical target ?).
Act 2 is a big improvement, because – on its own synthetic terms – things set up in Act 1 do finally land.
I liked characters walking in and out of each other’s scenes / memories of a shared moment/event – but that’s about it. I’ll stand by for the 4 Star reviews to come in, but I found this a really poor piece of work.
[Ha! Just re-read my prediction at the end.]
|
|
2,481 posts
|
Post by zahidf on May 3, 2018 20:27:10 GMT
I dont get the good reviews for this. its very average!
|
|
1,218 posts
|
Post by nash16 on May 3, 2018 22:28:23 GMT
I dont get the good reviews for this. its very average! It really is such a mild play and production. Yet the centre stalls were roaring... |
|
2,056 posts
|
Post by Marwood on May 7, 2018 19:38:57 GMT
Interval time: wouldn’t say it’s rubbish but not finding much to recommend it to anyone - sincerely hoping the second half is a lot better.
|
|
2,056 posts
|
Post by Marwood on May 7, 2018 22:50:24 GMT
I also found this a bit dull, a lot of skirting round what Chaplins character had done that had been so terrible to the 'heroine' without actually going into any details about what had happened (beyond her having been flown over state lines), and a lot of chatter from the supporting cast to no particular end didn't leave me feeling particularly bothered what happened to anyone at the end. I don't blame Ifans for bailing, I'm just glad I only paid £2 to see this. Stalls were about two thirds full, couldn't get a clear view where I was sitting up the upper levels looked pretty empty.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 8, 2018 0:52:46 GMT
I also found this a bit dull, a lot of skirting round what Chaplins character had done that had been so terrible to the 'heroine' without actually going into any details about what had happened (beyond her having been flown over state lines), and a lot of chatter from the supporting cast to no particular end didn't leave me feeling particularly bothered what happened to anyone at the end. I don't blame Ifans for bailing, I'm just glad I only paid £2 to see this. Stalls were about two thirds full, couldn't get a clear view where I was sitting up the upper levels looked pretty empty. How did you get a £2 ticket? |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 8, 2018 0:57:33 GMT
Have seen three previews in the last few weeks, two where I have agreed with the critics and one where I think they saw a different play, as I book in advance for most things and rarely rely on critics have found this divergence quite thought provoking. Nine Nights, absolute cracker, Board and Critics in harmonius agreement. Mood Music, surprised by the critics, I was especially enamoured by the composition and subject matter, as a musician who could bore the pants off someone (if they hung around) discussing diminished seventh arpeggios it is right up my street. Absolute Hell, found it tedious and thought the production lacked the depth the play deserved, like @n1david tempted to see it again as it has been tinkered with a lot since I saw it in an early preview, as there is so much good theatre around currently this is unlikely. Someone once told me about the three Ps: Press, Practitioners (those in the theatre industry) and Public. They said that there were plays that were loved by the press and the public but hated by those in the industry or loved by the press and hated by the public (who vote with their feet). They said that it is very rare for all three to be in agreement. |
|
2,056 posts
|
Post by Marwood on May 8, 2018 8:56:23 GMT
I also found this a bit dull, a lot of skirting round what Chaplins character had done that had been so terrible to the 'heroine' without actually going into any details about what had happened (beyond her having been flown over state lines), and a lot of chatter from the supporting cast to no particular end didn't leave me feeling particularly bothered what happened to anyone at the end. I don't blame Ifans for bailing, I'm just glad I only paid £2 to see this. Stalls were about two thirds full, couldn't get a clear view where I was sitting up the upper levels looked pretty empty. How did you get a £2 ticket? I'm on a mailing list of a site that offers tickets to plays, concerts, comedy : the tickets themselves are 'free' but you have to pay a £2 admin charge per head for the privilege. They're usually at lower key places like The Jazz Cafe or the Churchill in Bromley rather than anywhere like the Old Vic. |
|
19,676 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on May 8, 2018 13:42:16 GMT
Isn’t he marvellous when he’s angry?
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 9, 2018 14:40:33 GMT
Dreadful
Didn’t even last 30 mins
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 9, 2018 15:30:39 GMT
Ben Chaplin
Really is a awful actor
No facial expressions
The play is a disaster
Desperate
And unengaging
|
|
1,256 posts
|
Post by theatrelover123 on May 9, 2018 20:09:02 GMT
If there are any further infringements, the admin team will seriously consider revising our policy to ban members on a first offence and without warning, and also pass the details on to the papering company concerned.
Whilst I agree with the policy of not naming papering sites etc, are you allowed to pass on people’s personal information to another company when people have signed up in good faith and are anonymised/ haven’t expressly given their permission for details to be passed on? I might of course have missed it in the board rules (and please don’t ban me for asking) but it’s just a thought.
|
|
4,985 posts
|
Post by Phantom of London on May 10, 2018 22:26:55 GMT
To clarify, it means that we would consider notifying the relevant organisation that there has been a public posting by an anonymous someone, talking out-of-turn. We were fully aware that we cannot pass on actual information. ![]() Straight Red Card |
|
904 posts
|
Post by lonlad on May 14, 2018 23:34:28 GMT
Amazing the number of walkouts at this tonight - on top of plenty of empty seats to begin with. Even more amazing is that I wasn't amongst them. It's dreadful --- Penhall has lots of points he wants to make but forgot to write the play to contain them, and the production is surprisingly clumsy for someone of Roger Michell's pedigree.
|
|
137 posts
|
Post by jason71 on May 17, 2018 16:42:08 GMT
Just booked a ticket to see this play. Ticket only cost me £2. I hope that I've not wasted £2 on this show.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 17, 2018 17:42:16 GMT
Amazing the number of walkouts at this tonight - on top of plenty of empty seats to begin with. Even more amazing is that I wasn't amongst them. It's dreadful --- Penhall has lots of points he wants to make but forgot to write the play to contain them, and the production is surprisingly clumsy for someone of Roger Michell's pedigree. A lot of posters seem to concur, yet my perception is that this got very good reviews. I'd be really interested to hear if anyone has an opinion on why it was so popular with reviewers (if that's the case...I haven't seen them all, just the one in the Guardian which I think was 4 stars). |
|
37 posts
|
Post by welcometodreamland on May 26, 2018 22:30:33 GMT
Well I thought it was pretty good. First time in the Old Vic theatre and it's a pretty basic layout. Nothing unique about the layout of the place, but either way.
Thought it was good enough story wise. Ben Chaplin is great as this very seedy egotistical producer. Seana Kerslake I also really liked too.
One complaint would be to see more of what actually happened between the two rather than it being told through other characters.
Saw it today at its matinee showing. I think I was in Seat K14, so pretty close up.
|
|
