I'm Not Running (National Theatre)

[Being Alive]

I’m going to this on Saturday.

Should I not?

[dlevi]

I saw this last week and retitled it "I'm Not Staying". This is a bad play, with unbelievable and unsympathetic characters . Caroline is told by another doctor that there is aman dripping in blood with severe injuries in the A & E and she continues to have a conversation with Sandy and then get his phone number. I guess she was out of class the day they taught the words: First Do No Harm.

The set is clearly part of the Nationa;s austerity budget for scenery and I felt while watching it I was seeing everyone's 5th choice for each of the actors. I'm a fan of David Hare's and have been for more decades than I care to remember but like many older playwrights he seems to have lost the fire that propelled him to the top of his profession. He's just marking time now with nothing really to inspire him.

[schuttep]

Saw this Tuesday and agree it's below par for Hare with not much that's relevant to today. The auditorium was quite full but several people opted out of the second Act.

And what was that staging about? The actual acting space was totally lost in the middle of the large Lyttelton stage. If it had to be performed it was tailor-made for the Dorfman - or preferably the Donmar.

[n1david]

According to David Hare, we’ve all got it wrong. And so have the critics.

While on the surface a story about a hospital closure and an MP debating whether to run for party leadership, I’m Not Running was “simultaneously about parents holding you back and pushing you forward . . . as much a psychological subject as a political subject”, he said. Hare said critics found it “absolutely impossible to understand; the idea that a political play is also a psychological play”.

He’s very against “documentary plays”, which sounds a bit like having a go at “This House” amongst others.

www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/real-life-drama-is-killing-art-says-sir-david-hare-ttzpfwgg9

[samuelwhiskers]

I love how shady the Times is being there, following up Hare’s tedious rant with review extracts essentially saying, “Yeah, but This House was really fun and great and I’m Not Running put people into comas.”

[Jan]

The Times further sticks the boot into Sir David Hare today in their leader column no less:

“His play Via Dolorosa launched at the Royal Court Theatre in London in 1998 with a solo performer: Sir David Hare. This consisted of profound reflections on the intractable Israeli-Palestinian conflict, based on the insights of Sir David Hare. These were gleaned from a brief visit to the region in 1997 by Sir David Hare. Reviewing Hare’s work a few years afterwards Dominic Dromgoole speculated that “maybe the real enemy all along was vanity and that eventually couldn’t be defeated”. Sir David Hare could put him right on this, doubtless in a 90-Minute monologue”

[Being Alive]

Has anyone seen this and liked it? I’m sat in the foyer now and probably wouldn’t have got out of bed if I didn’t have Anthony and Cleopatra booked for tonight.
Please tell me I’m not going to have a completely hideous afternoon (I’m on the front row too!)

[andrew]

Dec 8, 2018 13:24:52 GMT Being Alive said:

Has anyone seen this and liked it? I’m sat in the foyer now and probably wouldn’t have got out of bed if I didn’t have Anthony and Cleopatra booked for tonight.
Please tell me I’m not going to have a completely hideous afternoon (I’m on the front row too!)

There's a nice bit of stagecraft with the projections and revolves and set changes. The set and design is still rubbish, but the change is fun.

[dani]

It's amusing that Sir David "Dyed" Hare wants to pick a fight with people who, he says, could not grasp "the idea that a political play is also a psychological play". However feeble the play was politically, it was even more feeble psychologically.

[bordeaux]

I agree that the latest Hare is bad, but the Times article is just snide. There is no evidence that Hare doesn't admire This House or My Name is Rachel Corrrie; those are just assumptions based on a superficial reading of what Hare was saying. He himself has done semi-documentary stuff - like Stuff Happens - so isn't against it. Here is a perfectly friendly discussion, full of mutual admiration, between Hare and Graham, in which Hare says: 'This House is one of the best definitions of the process of politics I have ever seen.'

www.theguardian.com/stage/2018/may/06/david-hare-james-graham-drama-politics-labour-party

The article is trying to create a row where there isn't one. And Hare's wider point is right: far better to create character and metaphor than come up with a copy of political events we all know about: the problem is that Hare has lost that knack.

[Jan]

It is amusing that with his rants against documentary plays, directors’ theatre, and European-style productions Sir David has become exactly the type of reactionary conservative establishment bore he’s professed to dislike for all these years. The NT could improve their age, gender and ethnic balance at a stroke by never employing him again.

[samuelwhiskers]

Was anyone at the talk and heard Hare's actual words? Now I've read the article more closely it strikes me as odd that the Times are claiming it as an attack on James Graham, who really has never written a documentary or verbatim play about modern political events. This House comes closest but was fictionalised (or at least stylised) and used historical events as a metaphor for current politics. The majority of his plays are not overtly about politics, and those that are, like Labour of Love or the Vote, aren't based on real people. I could name twenty playwrights whose work could more accurately be described as documentary style.

I guess Privacy was semi-verbatim but that wasn't about politics or rehashing events.

This comes only a couple of weeks after the Times' hatchet job on his Brexit TV movie, alleging an on-set feud and diva-like behaviour from Benedict Cumberbatch. The Times' own work of complete fiction according to James' Twitter.

[Being Alive]

Didn’t like it. Well, overall.
I liked the first half (although wanted to slap Pauline for most of that insufferable final scene where they just swap chairs for 20 minutes!)
But none of the ideas that they set in Act 1 did anything in Act 2.

Design was poor. You heard all the set changes so it didn’t feel smooth. Not for me. 2 stars.

[youngoffender]

I see that this is currently scheduled to limp on for another 25 performances in January, with loads of seats (including the cheap ones at the front) still available, many of them no doubt returns. And the last one of these is an NT Live, which I can't imagine filling many cinemas! I feel sorry for the cast.

[lynette]

Interesting they are carrying on. In the book of letters of the NT edited by Rosenthal, they have dumped shows. Suppose they have tighter contracts these days.

[Deleted]

They have been known to schedule the first run of a show without declaring the final performance, and then - instead of announcing the rest complete with designated final performance - just quietly let the whole thing drop, within the last few years. I think you're right that this was fairly tightly contracted, I feel like we've known the closing date of January 31st for a really long time and also there's the NTLive, but I bet they've still got the option to drop terrible shows if the circumstances are right.

[Backdrifter]

I am on the train having left at the interval after struggling through the first act. The earlier comments here probably relieve me of the need to explain further.

[Backdrifter]

Whatever our misgivings about what When We Are Sufficiently Embarrassed About This Stupid Title might be like, surely it's got to be better than this. Hasn't it?!

(EDIT: from early comments in since I said that, it seems not)

Even a member of NT staff who commented on my early departure looked furtively around, leaned in and said "Don't worry, it's just one big argument. Go on, go!"

[learfan]

Oh well, i quite liked this! So did most of the audience from what i could ascertain. Nearly full house. Huge part for Sian Brooke, thought she did well. Quite refreshing not to hear Brexit mentioned. No masterpiece but nowhere near the disaster made out.

[alexandra]

Agreed learfan, I enjoyed it too. One thing about David Hare, there are always a few good jokes. I and the stranger on my right chuckled for a long time about the votes one.

[NeilVHughes]

Found it as dull as ditchwater. (Apologies for any offence to any ditchwater and bog snorkelling aficionados)

A poor relationship play, masquerading as an even poorer political play, of course she is running, as we all are from something which will eventually come to define us.

[Backdrifter]

I meant to say earlier, did anyone else wonder what happened to Sian Brooke's voice? It was a weird mix of both shrill and blurred.

[zephyrus]

Against my better judgement, went to see this during the week. Found it very dull, and pretty much every aspect of the play was unconvincing (and I didn't enjoy having to spend a couple of hours listening to Sian Brooke's irritating voice.) The only unexpected bonus was the running time - the NT website listed the running time as 2h40 (and the screen by the box office said 2h45) so I spent a lot of time checking my watch during the second half, and was bracing myself for a 10.15pm finish... and I was pleasantly surprised when it was over by 9.55pm. (But, seriously, how difficult is it for the National to update the running time on the website and on the information screen in the foyer?)

[Deleted]

Was at the NT box office yesterday, people in front of me were collecting tickets for this and their circle seats had been upgraded to the stalls.

[tmesis]

Jan 27, 2019 17:45:26 GMT zephyrus said:

Against my better judgement, went to see this during the week. Found it very dull, and pretty much every aspect of the play was unconvincing (and I didn't enjoy having to spend a couple of hours listening to Sian Brooke's irritating voice.) The only unexpected bonus was the running time - the NT website listed the running time as 2h40 (and the screen by the box office said 2h45) so I spent a lot of time checking my watch during the second half, and was bracing myself for a 10.15pm finish... and I was pleasantly surprised when it was over by 9.55pm. (But, seriously, how difficult is it for the National to update the running time on the website and on the information screen in the foyer?)

Yes - the best thing about this tedious play is that it finishes earlier than expected.