562 posts
|
Post by jadnoop on Dec 6, 2018 1:00:18 GMT
Anthony Neilson's 'contemporary reimagining' of Edgar Allan Poe's Tell-Tale Heart had it's first preview tonight.
The first comments from twitter are an interesting, if mixed, bag. A few walk-outs and very negative tweets; a few positive comments; and a note about how horrific it is. Apparently an audience member threw up!
Intriguing.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 6, 2018 1:22:55 GMT
Anthony Neilson's 'contemporary reimagining' of Edgar Allan Poe's Tell-Tale Heart had it's first preview tonight. The first comments from twitter are an interesting, if mixed, bag. A few walk-outs and very negative tweets; a few positive comments; and a note about how horrific it is. Apparently an audience member threw up! Intriguing. Given Neilson’s method of writing I’m surprised that anyone would book for an early preview. #seeitafteropeningnight |
|
|
|
Post by catcat100 on Dec 6, 2018 1:53:36 GMT
Call me a bit weird. But if someone was sick!! I'm so glad I've already got a ticket.
|
|
816 posts
|
Post by stefy69 on Dec 6, 2018 7:36:42 GMT
Well sounds like my cup of tea !  |
|
137 posts
|
Post by jason71 on Dec 6, 2018 8:07:10 GMT
Has anybody got any info on the running time please?
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 6, 2018 8:16:15 GMT
I've got a seat that doesn't appear to exist according to Monkey's seat plans (though I can extrapolate where it will be easily enough), so I'd very much like to hear about the set once people here start going, particularly with regards to visibility from the side-most seats.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 6, 2018 8:35:03 GMT
Oh how lovely. I'm going tomorrow.
I've seen many a show that's made me nauseous in the past so I think I'm well prepared.
|
|
2,052 posts
|
Post by Marwood on Dec 6, 2018 10:31:47 GMT
I'm going to see this at the end of the month - not expecting that much to be honest but I had a credit for a returned Exit The King ticket and thought I'd use it up before the year is through, and this won out because everything else I looked at was pretty well sold out all through their runs.
|
|
|
|
Post by firefingers on Dec 6, 2018 11:13:43 GMT
Call me a bit weird. But if someone was sick!! I'm so glad I've already got a ticket. I've just booked one, mainly because I forgot all about it and can't normally get stuff in the Dorfman because of how stuff usually sells before I know where I'm working, but also a little bit because if it is bad enough to make someone vomit... |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 6, 2018 11:20:05 GMT
|
|
3,304 posts
|
Post by david on Dec 6, 2018 12:52:53 GMT
It the performance made someone vomit, that is definitely not a review of the production you want to publicise. I’ve booked for the last Saturday night performance this month. These comments have definitely peaked my interest in the play.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 6, 2018 12:57:15 GMT
It the performance made someone vomit, that is definitely not a review of the production you want to publicise. Wouldn't that be exactly something you'd want to publicise? 'The Tell-Tale Heart' isn't really a cuddly, laugh-a-minute tale . . . |
|
3,533 posts
|
Post by Rory on Dec 6, 2018 13:12:14 GMT
I'd love to see it!
|
|
406 posts
|
Post by MrBunbury on Dec 6, 2018 13:35:32 GMT
Going next Wednesday. Quite excited by the alleged impact of the play on the audience (I will take a paper bag with me, in any case...).
|
|
3,558 posts
|
Post by showgirl on Dec 6, 2018 16:18:50 GMT
I wonder whether the NT will need to issue a trigger warning about the vomit-inducing effect and if so, how they would express it? Or maybe a graphic would be more effective?
|
|
1,081 posts
|
Post by andrew on Dec 6, 2018 16:30:33 GMT
I'm not clever enough to know not to book a Neilson play during previews, so I'm at this tonight. I'm not at all squeamish but will ensure I've seen it on a full stomach so I can feel as nauseated as the average person.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 6, 2018 16:37:01 GMT
Hey andrew, I'd be very grateful if you could keep an eye open for how the view might be affected for people on the pit level sides, particularly the seats nearest the stage, particularly on the left as you're looking towards the stage. If we're going into a John situation again, I'd like to know with enough warning that I've got time to try for a Friday rush...  |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 6, 2018 17:12:38 GMT
Hey andrew, I'd be very grateful if you could keep an eye open for how the view might be affected for people on the pit level sides, particularly the seats nearest the stage, particularly on the left as you're looking towards the stage. If we're going into a John situation again, I'd like to know with enough warning that I've got time to try for a Friday rush... What’s ‘a John situation’? (Paging @ryan) |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 6, 2018 17:51:51 GMT
The cast of Annie Baker's John spent a lot of time over on one side of the set, somewhat unnecessarily for the plot and very frustratingly for the audience who was sat on the side that couldn't see that part of the stage.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 6, 2018 18:04:19 GMT
I'm not clever enough to know not to book a Neilson play during previews, so I'm at this tonight. I'm not at all squeamish but will ensure I've seen it on a full stomach so I can feel as nauseated as the average person. This old thread about Unreachable gives some idea as to what can sometimes happen. www.theatreboard.co.uk/thread/820/unreachable-royal-court-matt-smith?page=2It’s just his working process (which, unsurprisingly, isn’t really given much prominence in advertising). I love seeing work being tried out and tweaked as it reaches an audience but others may want to be sure that they are getting a finished product (see also Sylvia). |
|
1,081 posts
|
Post by andrew on Dec 7, 2018 10:48:23 GMT
Well. That was interesting. The director came on at the start and made a glib little speech about how the play had been created and therefore how unfinished it was, how different it is to the night before it and how our particular play will never be seen again. "It's a preview guys, you know 'pre' as in 'before' and 'view' as in 'being in any way ready yet'". The audience laughed, my alarm bells started going off. I think it would be unfair to properly review the show given its basically foetus-like state, but I'll say one or two things. With regards to the gore, it's nowhere near as extreme as I was expecting. There's obviously an intentional 'let's gross the audience out' objective at play, which is fine, but it's not particularly outrageous. In spoilers I will describe for anyone the less tasteful elements should they be considering not attending on account of them. If you think you'll be fine either way, don't look and save the surprise. {Spoiler - click to view}A character has a grossly disfigured prosthetic eye which the protagonist slices with a pizza cutter, the eye leaks out a pus like substance for a second then blackout. Body parts are sawn and handled. A character appears, obscured by a scrim mostly, to have been partly sawn apart. You don't see much of that though. A character has his neck covered in fake blood as if he's been slashed with a knife. A character pops in her hand another fake eye that she finds and it explodes with pus again.
Overall unless you are exceptionally squeamish I don't think it's a reason to not attend. A lot of the grossness garners laughter from the audience, it isn't as intense as you might expect. My stomach felt fine throughout. As a comment on a work in progress, it feels like they've gone down some very strange paths in the rehearsal room, and the result is still a bit confused and struggles slightly towards the end. This is presumably all going to be fixed. It's quite a funny play, and only in one particular scene did it start to feel in any way scary. I don't know if the intention is for that tone, I would have preferred something a bit more intense and scary, that's at least what I thought I was going into. These spoilers are some more thoughts, again if you are going to see it then please don't look. {Spoiler - click to view}I thought it lost it's way towards the end where the ghost of the landlady and her brother want Celeste to kill herself, and the giant eye appears. It was all just confused and weird, as opposed to menacing or scary. The 'pre-ending' where it appears the play finishes but we learn that we've actually been viewing a play within a play also didn't quite work for me. The concept is fine, but things like the type-writer unfolding itself was all very odd, I just didn't feel like it was clear enough what that had to do with anything. The fake play ends and I'm just like "what was the point of all that?". And then the actual ending with the murderer didn't quite feel earned. That last scene just needs better dialogue, and they need to make it clearer the differences between the 'imagined' story and the 'real story', there's a lot of crossover and it just feels confusing until you figure it out, rather than being mysterious. The continued digs at the National Theatre are very funny though. Obviously it was my own lack of research that caused me to do this, but I feel a bit miffed that I paid to see something which isn't even supposed to be finished yet. We talk a lot on here about the nonsense of previews in the West End being so expensive and the increasing occurrence of shows not actually being finished. This was a whole other level. This was never going to be finished, but I still paid out thinking I was seeing perhaps an under-rehearsed but essentially complete play. I get that that's the "artistic method" behind this director, but it doesn't make it acceptable for an audience member. If you want to do something like this, why not tell everyone they're "experimental previews" and charge £10-20, get students and other low-income groups in, and then charge full prices once you've finished the show. No star rating because it isn't done yet. Good luck to the next person seeing it. Hey andrew , I'd be very grateful if you could keep an eye open for how the view might be affected for people on the pit level sides, particularly the seats nearest the stage, particularly on the left as you're looking towards the stage. If we're going into a John situation again, I'd like to know with enough warning that I've got time to try for a Friday rush... I started off in the gallery on the house right side, and the view was pretty bad. A few key moments missed, and I suspect in the second act there were even more key moments missed. In general people should probably prioritise seeing the right side of the stage. I moved down to the stalls for the second act in one of the 3 or 4 empty seats and had a much better time of myself. I couldn't sit in your particular seats (I'm guessing you're talking about L high numbers) because the patrons sat there throughout the interval but it looked OK Baemax. I don't think you'll have a huge problem. |
|
294 posts
|
Post by dani on Dec 7, 2018 11:37:15 GMT
Maybe I'm a philistine, but I think there is something really arrogant and thoughtless about the whole "My working method is to present things to a paying audience that are still in a very obvious state of flux".
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 7, 2018 11:44:14 GMT
Obviously it was my own lack of research that caused me to do this, but I feel a bit miffed that I paid to see something which isn't even supposed to be finished yet. We talk a lot on here about the nonsense of previews in the West End being so expensive and the increasing occurrence of shows not actually being finished. This was a whole other level. This was never going to be finished, but I still paid out thinking I was seeing perhaps an under-rehearsed but essentially complete play. I get that that's the "artistic method" behind this director, but it doesn't make it acceptable for an audience member. If you want to do something like this, why not tell everyone they're "experimental previews" and charge £10-20, get students and other low-income groups in, and then charge full prices once you've finished the show. Yes, that should be made clear. Once people pointed out his "method" I remember discussions from the thing at the Royal Court, but I wasn't aware until the other day that this was "that guy". And the previews are only £6 cheaper than non-previews, I think? |
|
1,502 posts
|
Post by foxa on Dec 7, 2018 16:45:47 GMT
If it was possible to double-like a post, I would do that for Andrew's above. Bet that is more informative and interesting that the published reviews and it is really enjoyable/insightful to hear an early report.
|
|
184 posts
|
Post by MoreLife on Dec 7, 2018 22:42:19 GMT
In all honesty, I think I have rarely seen anything as crappy and pretentiously meta than this. I so want my money back... but even more than that, I want those two and a half hours of my life back!!
It’s not just the unmistakable lack of refinement and the fact that it’s not just a work in progress, but a random pile of often inconsistent and incoherent undeveloped deas thrown together... but also that - as someone else that has seen the play has brilliantly expressed in a tweet - all of that meta-referential stuff is quite busy disappearing up the director’s behind.
|
|
