|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 30, 2018 22:49:34 GMT
Okay....so I have something embarrassing to admit. I didn’t make it to the second act. Instead I found myself wandering along the Thames straight into a local eatery where I stuffed my face for the following hour. I just couldn’t go back. Not even for the adorable Parkinson. I found this a very weak play; the second scene did not pass the Bechdel test and Wade may be using irony in the first act but I checked out. It reminded me a bit of Ira Levin’s Stepford Wives. Now that would be a great novel to adapt for the stage in this #metoo era. What did you eat |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 30, 2018 23:46:48 GMT
Okay....so I have something embarrassing to admit. I didn’t make it to the second act. Instead I found myself wandering along the Thames straight into a local eatery where I stuffed my face for the following hour. I just couldn’t go back. Not even for the adorable Parkinson. I found this a very weak play; the second scene did not pass the Bechdel test and Wade may be using irony in the first act but I checked out. It reminded me a bit of Ira Levin’s Stepford Wives. Now that would be a great novel to adapt for the stage in this #metoo era. Why exactly did you find it weak? (Apart from those two points, which don't make a weak play in themselves).. I don’t want to go into too much detail as I don’t want to spoil it for others. Also I can only give a partial view because I haven’t seen the whole play. The Parkinson character seems depressed from the start and it would have been great if we could have seen her enjoying and believing in the illusion that she has created for herself a bit more before hinting that it isn’t quite what it seems. I found it all a bit joyless - even when she danced with her friend’s husband the joy was wrung out of the action because of her desperation. What was interesting about the play was that it was like an updating of Ibsen’s a Doll’s House - which is reflected in the set. Except that here the dialogue is stilted and the play’s events are closer to sit-com action. The thing I really don’t understand is how this speaks to the experience of women today. Perhaps it doesn’t have to, but if you are going to explore feminism today at least do your homework and make this a little more incisive. I am pleased to note however that my opinion is a minority view and that most of you (and the critics) like the play. My leaving at the interval just means that it wasn’t my cup of tea, that’s all. And I wasn’t in the mood to sit through something I wasn’t enjoying. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 30, 2018 23:48:11 GMT
Okay....so I have something embarrassing to admit. I didn’t make it to the second act. Instead I found myself wandering along the Thames straight into a local eatery where I stuffed my face for the following hour. I just couldn’t go back. Not even for the adorable Parkinson. I found this a very weak play; the second scene did not pass the Bechdel test and Wade may be using irony in the first act but I checked out. It reminded me a bit of Ira Levin’s Stepford Wives. Now that would be a great novel to adapt for the stage in this #metoo era. What did you eat Vegan Katsu curry - delicious! |
|
92 posts
|
Post by chameleon on Jul 31, 2018 16:40:04 GMT
Why exactly did you find it weak? (Apart from those two points, which don't make a weak play in themselves).. I don’t want to go into too much detail as I don’t want to spoil it for others. Also I can only give a partial view because I haven’t seen the whole play. The Parkinson character seems depressed from the start and it would have been great if we could have seen her enjoying and believing in the illusion that she has created for herself a bit more before hinting that it isn’t quite what it seems. I found it all a bit joyless - even when she danced with her friend’s husband the joy was wrung out of the action because of her desperation. What was interesting about the play was that it was like an updating of Ibsen’s a Doll’s House - which is reflected in the set. Except that here the dialogue is stilted and the play’s events are closer to sit-com action. The thing I really don’t understand is how this speaks to the experience of women today. Perhaps it doesn’t have to, but if you are going to explore feminism today at least do your homework and make this a little more incisive. I am pleased to note however that my opinion is a minority view and that most of you (and the critics) like the play. My leaving at the interval just means that it wasn’t my cup of tea, that’s all. And I wasn’t in the mood to sit through something I wasn’t enjoying. Interesting - there's a scene at the start of the second act (flashback) that tries to do that - but (at least to my mind) it doesn't go deep enough - so you never quite end up believing the strength of her commitment to the game, or the reasons for it. (And, you didn't miss much. Without this backbone, the narrative meanders in the second act..) |
|
|
|
Post by asfound on Aug 3, 2018 9:27:24 GMT
This wasn't great in my humble opinion. Save the sets, musical changes and Katherine Parkinson there doesn't seem to be much going on at all. Some sitcom like sketches, a very shoehorned sexual harassment bit that seemed to having to do with the gist of the main story, and I suppose some very slight commentary on materialism, nostalgia and gender roles. I didn't really understand the motivation of the characters or what the play as a whole was trying to say. Maybe my expectations were too high, reading other comments I was hoping for a Lynchian style exposure of the dark underbelly of this artificial and forced suburban idyll. Not too original I guess but it would have been more interesting than what we got. There was a lot of grumbling during the interval and afterwards too - both about the staging which meant a lot of people around the sides and top couldn't see much, and about the play itself.
Also, what was with all the flies buzzing around the stage? At first I actually thought it was part of the production, and I was getting excited that it was going to turn into a paranoid horror with the perfect 50s home decaying to expose something more sinister (Lynch again). Then I realised - no, it's just some flies buzzing around and distracting me. Then I looked at the flies and thought about their place in the world, and the actors performing and wondered about what the point of it all was.
|
|
628 posts
|
Post by jek on Aug 3, 2018 15:12:59 GMT
I didn't enjoy this much at all. Having given up paid employment (as a postdoctoral research fellow) when I had my eldest child twenty years ago I am keenly aware of the issues around financial dependency, isolation, finding meaning through the domestic etc. but I just didn't think this play addressed them in an interesting, novel or entertaining way. Interestingly (and not for the first time at the National) I thought the programme notes - specifically the essay by Victoria Smith - were much more insightful and better written than the play. It wasn't terrible - and clearly there were some good performances but I could have spent my Thursday evening more productively and enjoyably.
Funnily enough when I came home I checked my bookshelves and found that I have a copy of Kay Smallshaw's 'How To Run Your Home Without Help' (the 2005 Persephone edition, not the 1949 original). It is clear from both the flawless state of the book and the less than flawless state of my home that I have never read it!
|
|
2,389 posts
|
Post by peggs on Aug 4, 2018 16:45:48 GMT
Future same Katherine Parkinson, now I get it @ryan, I knew she was good but this was just delightful. This had me from the word go, had avoided reading anything so the set, music, dancing, script, production and acting were just Devine.
Audience at times seemed to mistakenly think it was at a panto in its reactions. Person next to me a complete fidget, moving, chatting, feet on seat, 're doing hair at least 3 times. Am such a coward, did no more than glare which just seemed to puzzle her. In contrast woman on right who insisted on holding a plastic bag throughout made not a rustle.
Right now the treat of going back and reading what everybody else thought.
|
|
1,861 posts
|
Post by NeilVHughes on Aug 4, 2018 17:34:36 GMT
peggs was also there this afternoon. Katherine Parkinson was excellent as expected, found the play itself a little tedious. Maybe was expecting a more insightful exploration of living life through a rose tinted lens of an idealised past.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 4, 2018 17:37:06 GMT
peggs was also there this afternoon. Katherine Parkinson was excellent as expected, found the play itself a little tedious. Maybe was expecting a more insightful exploration of living life through a rose tinted lens of an idealised past. Tedious is the perfect word for this |
|
2,389 posts
|
Post by peggs on Aug 4, 2018 21:27:36 GMT
I was also somewhat alarmed to see things I remembered growing up with, my parents clearly weren't that cutting sledge as I grew up in the 80s, mind you my mum still uses one of those weight milk covers too.
|
|
3,557 posts
|
Post by showgirl on Aug 4, 2018 21:42:20 GMT
I too was there this afternoon; wish I'd known other regular posters also were, though I'd've had no means of identifying anyone anyway. peggs has summed it up perfectly for me: I'd been a bit concerned by recent reports but absolutely loved this and it didn't drag at all for me, though I found the ending perhaps a little weak - but it had been such a strong piece until then that I don't know what Laura Wade could credibly have done otherwise. All the characters, not just the leads, were well-developed and the parts well played and though I loathe 50's style (it reminds me of my childhood), the set and costumes were impressive even if they made me shudder with recognition. So I'm really glad to have seen this and to consider it time and money well spent. |
|
2,389 posts
|
Post by peggs on Aug 5, 2018 8:25:04 GMT
|
|
2,740 posts
|
Post by n1david on Aug 5, 2018 11:37:21 GMT
Well I was there last night, mere hours after the theatreboard non-meetup.
I had a really good time. It's bit laboured in parts but I suspect they found some of the dialogue and action so much fun that they found it difficult to cut - someone said upthread it was already 15 minutes down on the Clwyd production but I'd quite happily have lost another 15 minutes.
The characters and the scenario aren't realistic or believable in the form in which they're presented, but I was quite happy to take this as an allegory or fable - there are people for whom nostalgia is a support, whether that's at the Bake-off end of things or those who believe "Britain was better before [choose social or political event]". This took that to extreme limits in, I thought, a playful way without expecting us to imagine this house as a real house in Welwyn living real lives today.
Having said that, I'm not sure it had anything deeply profound to say about feminism or nostalgia, but I was quite happy to sit and spend a couple of hours being entertained by this. I thought the four main characters were well-drawn with only Alex being somewhat underwritten. Given it was written for KP I don't think this will have a long shelf life but I found this much more enjoyable than the somewhat similar "I have something to say but not sure what" Allelujah which I saw a couple of days previously.
|
|
5,688 posts
|
Post by lynette on Aug 11, 2018 21:24:19 GMT
Yep a better evening than Allelujah.
I really enjoyed this. Best description of the 50s I’ve heard - almost as good as my own. I think there was a lot in this play about marriage more than the clear cut equality question. Well not that clear cut. I liked the dialogue between them. I feel it is contemporary and unstagey. I’d like to read it and I can see this having a bit of a life because there is enough there to carry it forward.
I do think the West End beckons.
|
|
1,345 posts
|
Post by tmesis on Aug 11, 2018 21:45:12 GMT
I enjoyed it. I also loved, and recognised, since I was born then, all the 50s references. The mother's speech that acknowledges, and then demolishes, all these references was one of the highlights for me.
|
|
587 posts
|
Post by Polly1 on Aug 11, 2018 21:46:51 GMT
Yep a better evening than Allelujah. I really enjoyed this. Best description of the 50s I’ve heard - almost as good as my own. I think there was a lot in this play about marriage more than the clear cut equality question. Well not that clear cut. I liked the dialogue between them. I feel it is contemporary and unstagey. I’d like to read it and I can see this having a bit of a life because there is enough there to carry it forward. I do think the West End beckons. Oh lynette, did I miss you, how disappointing! Yes, I can see it transferring. Worked on a lot of levels for me and Sian Thomas stole the show. Oh, and the frocks are fab! |
|
32 posts
|
Post by londontheatrefan on Aug 14, 2018 12:55:05 GMT
I agree that it was much better than Allelujah! While I didn't think this was a five star show it was so much better than I thought. Katherine Parkinson was a delight - I knew she could do comedy well but she nailed the more emotional scenes. Now I want to go back to the 50s to wear all those outfits  |
|
5,688 posts
|
Post by lynette on Aug 14, 2018 16:06:21 GMT
Yep a better evening than Allelujah. I really enjoyed this. Best description of the 50s I’ve heard - almost as good as my own. I think there was a lot in this play about marriage more than the clear cut equality question. Well not that clear cut. I liked the dialogue between them. I feel it is contemporary and unstagey. I’d like to read it and I can see this having a bit of a life because there is enough there to carry it forward. I do think the West End beckons. Oh lynette , did I miss you, how disappointing! Yes, I can see it transferring. Worked on a lot of levels for me and Sian Thomas stole the show. Oh, and the frocks are fab! Should've worn me badge. I liked the hairstyles. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 17, 2018 9:24:44 GMT
Saw this last night and I didn’t really love it or find it any good. First of all I had a seat in the side of the middle gallery which was very restricted meaning I missed all the scenes in the kitchen and couldn’t see anything so just had to rely in the dialogue and try and not get too annoyed at the audience laughing at the stuff I couldn’t see. Honestly though I think if I did have a better seat it wouldn’t have really made me enjoy the play much more, I have to agree with parsley’s comments in this and just I didn’t really care about the characters or find it very funny or an interesting story, I would have much rather have seen the story of Judy but living in the commune to be honest. And I think it would have worked better in the Lyttleton just because quite a lot of the seats in the dorfman are side facing meaning lots of people miss design of the play and it just would have worked better with all the audience facing front the dolls house.
|
|
3,301 posts
|
Post by david on Aug 18, 2018 22:50:31 GMT
Having watched this tonight, it has confirmed my belief that Katherine Parkinson is truly a national treasure. Having seen her in “Dead Funny” and this play as well as CH4 “Humans” , she has never disappointed me in any of those performances. Even on stage when she isn’t saying anything, just a look she gives to someone can say so much.
While KP was the main reason for watching the play, I thought Sian Thomas gave an absolutely brilliant performance as Judy’s mum. For me, her speech to Judy about the realities of living in the 1950s rather than the fantasy world that Judy has created was the highlight of the play.
I have to feel sorry for Barnaby Kay who played Marcus. He really didn’t have that much to do in Act 1, though I thought he had much more to do Act 2.
The NT set design department have come up trumps with this play. The house set is absolutely brilliant and the attention to detail is amazing. Sat in Row C of the pit meant at times it was difficult to see the 1st floor. After the show I managed to stay behind once the crowds had dispersed to have a proper look at the set and even those upstairs rooms have so much period detail even if they are not always utilised fully during the play.
KP’s clothing like the set are brilliant and the attention to detail is amazing.
One thing that did annoy me was all that food produced. Seeing people eating chocolate cake on stage whilst having an empty stomach is not good. They could of at least offered it around!
|
|
7,050 posts
|
Post by Jon on Aug 19, 2018 1:18:23 GMT
I saw it today as well and enjoyed it, I had a front row seat which was slightly restricted but for £20, it was a steal.
Katherine Parkinson was just incredible, I've always liked her in stuff like The IT Crowd and Humans but she really embody the character of Judy, Sian Thomas was also great as her mother and the Act 2 speech about the 1950s was a highlight.
I could see it having a further life in the West End at one of the smaller playhouses like the Wyndham's or Harold Pinter
|
|
391 posts
|
Post by lichtie on Aug 19, 2018 11:40:07 GMT
For me, more miss than hit. Only the mother comes across as having a distinctively real character, the others are obvious plot contrivances. Warning to those in the restricted view seats on the left - expect to have to treat this as a radio play as you'll miss a lot of the action when it's in the lounge bit of the set (it actually works OK like that so maybe with a bit of work it has a future on the radio...)
|
|
3,325 posts
|
Post by Dr Tom on Aug 21, 2018 22:20:51 GMT
Back from this tonight. Very enjoyable, simple and charming.
I got a Friday Rush ticket, £20 front row to the side. Excellent legroom and close view of the living room and most of the kitchen. No upstairs view unless they came to the very front, but little happened there.
The clash between the 50s and the real world worked well and there were just enough moments to make you think.
Can easily see this transferring.
|
|
362 posts
|
Post by JJShaw on Aug 24, 2018 0:03:26 GMT
Well I just loved this tonight!
Very informative about nostalgia being a fantasy, but also I took a little from it about what we should value from the times past. I loved the exploration of their marriage and working together to make each other happy, the ending almost seemed very 50's with it all being happy.
Of course the set and costumes were such a visual delight, would love it to win best set as they really do go all out, even for the bathroom which is barely used.
I was in M4 which was fine and yes if you do have the higher numbers you might miss a little more than the lower numbers.
So happy to see this after the disaster of Exit the King.
I just loved it!
|
|
5,139 posts
|
Post by Being Alive on Aug 24, 2018 9:23:13 GMT
Going tonight, and I'm pleased that everyone has been having a good time!! Love KP, so it's exciting!
|
|
