A Very Expensive Poison - Old Vic 2019

[drmaplewood]

Oh god, 11pm! I'm going tonight.

[NeilVHughes]

Was waiting to hear a bit more before committing but now suitably intrigued and taken the plunge.

Found a cheap front row for the 31st, only concern is the audience participation especially with where I am sitting.

[edi]

I don't think this gives away anything. 1 audience member is prompted to say something and another 3 to read out aloud something. Nobody is required to improvise or stand up ... so not too bad but I don't like any kind of participation

[Fleance]

SPOILER: Click to show

{Spoiler - click to view}The sound of Mrs. May's voice was chilling.

[drmaplewood]

Just over 3 hrs tonight so they’re trimming already. Will make coherent thoughts in the morning but it needs a fair bit of tightening up and I’m not sure it entirely works but Iw was rarely bored.

[siteseer]

Need help choosing a seat. Need an aisle and have a few options.
Row H is available as is the first three rows. Are the first few rows
too close? Already have tickets for Hansard, Appropriate, Evita, The Doctor,
Falsettos and The Night of the Iguana. Should be a great first week of
September. This board has been extremely helpful in choosing my shows.
Very grateful and thanks in advance.

[andrew]

I can count the three hour plays that couldn't have been shortened on one hand, does this justify it's length?

I'll be there on Monday either way I guess...

[youngoffender]

I was at the fourth preview last night (Friday 23rd) and it was a lot slicker than expected - no fluffed lines, and complex scene changes all working smoothly. What doesn't work, sadly, is the play. Lucy Prebble concedes in the programme that she struggled with the framing of this story, and what we see here feels like an early draft that came up against an immovable deadline.

SPOILER: Click to show

{Spoiler - click to view}
The first half is the stronger, with some modestly intriguing scenes as we start to wind back from Litvinenko's poisoning to his early work for the FSB back in Russia. But just before the interval we are introduced to Putin (played with musical-hall relish by Reece Shearsmith), who then becomes an acid chorus throughout the second act's increasingly sketchy and uninvolving hunt around London for polonium traces. Tonally it's all over the place, attempting to milk the comedy in the poisoners' ineptitude alongside a central tragic love story, but by the time the actors dropped completely out of character and asked audience members to read conclusions from the public inquiry, I was scratching my head at many of the baffling decisions.

I can see what Prebble was trying to do, putting multiple perspectives on this story rather than just a linear narrative when we know already from the inquest whodunnit. But her approach sucks all drama out of an overlong evening, and the intermittently accented pairing of Tom Brooke and MyAnna Buring as the Litvinenkos never got me invested in their fate.

Look out for some familiar Soviet caricatures in the first half. Their scene is the highlight by some distance.

[londonpostie]

My thoughts weren't disimilar youngoffender, but then the first person I spoke at the cycle rack loved it - about 30 years and a nationality different to me. It just reminded me there are all kinds of audiences for all kinds of styles. It is shambolic in parts and head-shaking - but by my perhaps staid, conventional measure. Others think otherwise. It might even be somewhat ... generational.

[finalperformance]

Time flew by and got out around 10:30. A first rate production. Construction still on at Old Vic and temp toilets are outside theatre.

[Steve]

I really enjoyed this. Informative, entertaining, never boring, the substance lags behind the style, as psychology and motivations are sometimes swamped by procedural elements and playful theatrical techniques.

Some spoilers follow. . .

Lucy Prebble takes the factual material surrounding the assassination of Alexander Litvinenko, and reassembles it, like a series of Russian Dolls, into layers that are peeled back, one after the other, until we get a final clear picture of what happened and why.

But she spends too much time on the what, and too little time on the why. Of course, if you know absolutely nothing about Litvinenko, this approach may wholly succeed for you, as we start in Litvinenko's hospital death bed, and move back in time, and again, and change perspective, and whatnot, doling out facts.

But if, like me, you saw news coverage of the case, back in the day, the procedural elements involving investigating all the different places Litvineko might have been poisoned just spark deja vu.

For me, it's what the news DIDN'T highlight that was most interesting, and this show does a great job of characterising the man himself, harnessing Tom Brooke's natural openness, and coupling that with a charming conviviality and forthrightness, to suggest a man with almost spectrum-levels levels of naiveté and can-do spirit. Brooke's characterisation expanded the story for me dramatically in a relatable, human and tragic way.

But the motivation and psychology of the Russian authorities and agents, and pretty much everyone else in the story, never receive the same focus and attention. When Michael Schaeffer bitterly delivers a surprising monologue about how 35 million dead Russians in WW2 got overlooked by the West, it resonates like a punch to the gut, partly because it's so powerfully expressed and written, but also because it's so lonely a speech, an outlier of how great the show might have been if we could have peeked more deeply being the (Iron) curtain.

Instead, what we mostly get are the kind of fun and surreal theatrical techniques from Enron: singing, dancing and movement, puppet heads, assassins as keystone cops, Peter Polycarpou hilariously singing as Boris Berezovsky, and most magnificently, a wry, dry and sly Reece Shearsmith, as Vladimir Putin, popping up like Punch and Judy, to fake news the whole show lol.

But while that stuff is fun, it's surface, and it never gets deep the way Shaeffer's speech gets deep, and all the stuff about this hotel room, or that bar, or this night club, feels more like a quotidian episode of "Law and Order" (dum dum).

I loved Brooke and MyAnna Buring as the central couple, Alexander and Marina Litvinenko, and felt they gave the show a lot of heart, but what I wanted from Prebble was a bit more head.

3 and a half stars.

[londonpostie]

Aug 25, 2019 7:54:28 GMT Steve said:

I loved Brooke and MyAnna Buring as the central couple, Alexander and Marina Litvinenko, and felt they gave the show a lot of heart, but what I wanted from Prebble was a bit more head.

My inner Sid James forced me to quote this.

Interesting comments Steve.

Fascinated by the breadth of reactions. Mainstream reviews will be interesting.

[Deleted]

I saw it last night and Steve has hit on pretty much everything I would have said. This is recent history 101; for me, I wanted it to be angrier, to connect the dots with now. To make the murderers and their superiors into comedy characters feels wrong, when we are living through its continuation; not just overtly with the Skripals but with the propaganda of fake news (the true one, not Trump’s attempt to kill the phrase by subverting it).

Does it make it more palatable? Yes, but why should it? The ending is fine but feels like an apology rather than the call to arms that the story needs.

[sf]

Aug 24, 2019 11:34:23 GMT @theatremonkey said:

Got an email, matinees are now starting 30 minutes earlier at 2pm.

I got the same email. Irritating, given that I'd already booked train tickets based on a 2.30pm start.

[Phantom of London]

I was also there last night and a bit lukewarm to it, which can also be translated as tepid.

If the producers change the start time, does that mean the theatre has an obligation to re-imburse you, if you cannot make it.

Unfortunately that won’t apply to the train, which can cost more that the theatre ticket.

[zahidf]

I enjoyed this. I agree it was a little sketchy and tonally all over the place, but th3 comedy was good. And reece shearsmith always does a good slimeball

[foxa]

I had a bumpy ride with this but ended up liking it and would probably give the same number as stars as Steve - if not for entirely the same reasons.

The first 20 minutes or so didn't work for me - at all. Like Steve, I knew a bit about the story so some of it wasn't new and the style was sort of 'Casualty' stuck on stage. Just when I was about to despair, I got hooked. Thought the Boris and Putin sections were fascinating and very well performed. The surreal stuff worked for me - the story is so wild and crazy, a wild and crazy style seemed appropriate. Highlights were the ends of both acts, the use of puppets and as Steve mentions Shaeffer's speech (25 million!) Lloyd Hutchison was his usually endearing self - I always enjoy his performances (okay I didn't see Salome.)

It's baggy in bits and there were a few weird technical things (some tinny music was playing up in the Dress Circle for about 8 minutes early on, for example.) The women in the play except for MyAnna Buring, who I wasn't entirely sure about, had very little to do, but that seemed to be the nature of the tale. Row D aisle Dress Circle for £10 were a steal - no restriction to view at all.

When we were leaving I heard people discussing it in relation to the Salisbury poisoning and it's sent me to the internet to look up some stuff I didn't know/had forgotten about - so that's got to be a good thing?

[Dave B]

I really enjoyed it. It certainly has flaws and some of the jokes are just har har Russian stereotypes that don't stand up to much scrutiny. The actual staging is quite fantastic, the swings and the use of the entire stage (and then some) is really impressive.

When it does come together, it's excellent. The monologue about Russian deaths, the speech just before the internal and notably, the dance at the end are all fabulous and land hard.

I came out of it really impressed and fairly moved. In the cold light of next day, I am a little less so, and I'd tend agree that it's all on the surface. Tho I would say that the spectacle and the theatrical techniques are quite excellent and frankly worth the price of admission alone.

[Dr Tom]

I see this one now has a gunfire warning. Would anyone mind saying what happens and when in a spoiler tag, please? And whether it's real gunshots, or sound effects.

[zahidf]

Aug 29, 2019 14:58:47 GMT Dr Tom said:

I see this one now has a gunfire warning. Would anyone mind saying what happens and when in a spoiler tag, please? And whether it's real gunshots, or sound effects.

<SPOILER>

'Mugging' scene ends with the mian character pulling a gun to shoot in the air. Dunno if real or sound effect!

[Dr Tom]

Aug 29, 2019 15:08:05 GMT zahidf said:

Aug 29, 2019 14:58:47 GMT Dr Tom said:

I see this one now has a gunfire warning. Would anyone mind saying what happens and when in a spoiler tag, please? And whether it's real gunshots, or sound effects.

<SPOILER>

'Mugging' scene ends with the mian character pulling a gun to shoot in the air. Dunno if real or sound effect!

Thanks. One gunshot I can cope with. How far into the show is it?

[andrew]

Aug 29, 2019 15:37:56 GMT Dr Tom said:

Thanks. One gunshot I can cope with. How far into the show is it?

SPOILER: Click to show

{Spoiler - click to view}
Real gun firing a blank. I think it's about an hour in maybe, some youths appear and start harassing Alexander, after a brief altercation he pulls the gun quickly and then fires into the air.

[theatrelover123]

Aug 29, 2019 15:08:05 GMT zahidf said:

Aug 29, 2019 14:58:47 GMT Dr Tom said:

I see this one now has a gunfire warning. Would anyone mind saying what happens and when in a spoiler tag, please? And whether it's real gunshots, or sound effects.

<SPOILER>

'Mugging' scene ends with the mian character pulling a gun to shoot in the air. Dunno if real or sound effect!

Where's the spoiler?!!!


I CAN'T SEE IT!!


WHERE IS ITTTTTTT??


Is it hidden behind a spoiler tag?

WHERE??!!


Oh.....no.....hang on........that spoiler is right there in plain sight for all to see.

As you were

[lynette]

Very sad and moving play. I’m not totally convinced by the way LP has chosen to present it: obviously in the zeitgeist with smashed fourth wall and variation of tone because for me it worked best when closest to a straightforward drama. Maybe she felt the audience doesn’t know enough about the subject and needs reminding of the context and so on to ‘get’ it fully. So she is not, I don't think intending this to last, rather like Hare’s polemics on the railways and the Iraq War, or her other work for that matter. But there is a genuine tragedy here and proper characters. Some lovely detailed writing though and all done with style, good sets, lighting etc. Nice acting, loved the change in the accent from ‘Russian’ to Russian English - been trying to remember where this is done in another play.

Interestingly, we don’t get to find out what happened to Boris, the Mayfair ‘bear’. This would have taken away from the main ‘plot’ I suppose but it is very relevant to the overall message LP is putting before us.

We went to this tonight instead of The Weatherman at the Park, the tix for which I dumped having read the word ‘rancid’ in one review. No, I don't always believe reviews but this one was dire and I had the choice.

[popcultureboy]

Aug 31, 2019 22:33:57 GMT lynette said:

Nice acting, loved the change in the accent from ‘Russian’ to Russian English - been trying to remember where this is done in another play.

Rock 'N' Roll by Tom Stoppard