3,040 posts
|
Post by crowblack on Dec 30, 2018 0:07:37 GMT
The ushers should've tasered them, at the very least. I turned around and tried the 'hard stare' several times but she was sprawled across her parents and not caring. I was planning to say something afterwards but, having given no indication during, she declared when it was all over that she really enjoyed it and I didn't want to put her off theatre - just hope I'm not sitting near her next time. |
|
923 posts
|
Post by Snciole on Jan 1, 2019 17:32:28 GMT
I struggled with this. I didn't understand who anyone was or what happening until halfway through. SRB and Leo Bill were engaging because they could focus on their characters but I don't think either was well cast but I was not getting any contemporary references/inspiration.
There was a real lack of characterisation. It reminded me of the recent Watership Down. I agree that there was some overacting from one of the actresses but she was the only one who tried to give her various characters personality and different voices (though I noticed SRB seemed to aim the bucket of water right at her though)
Also I found the use of fluids and dirt really unnecessary. You have this non existent set because everyone is imprisoned yet insist on soil, water and fake blood. Either you are embrace the symbollocks or you don't. It just heightened my anxiety about slipping and going flying into the audienxe.
To conclude I am not paying to see Shakespeare in 2019. I just don't care anymore.
|
|
5,690 posts
|
Post by lynette on Jan 1, 2019 20:44:10 GMT
Well, congratulations to the Almeida for putting someone off Shakespeare. What an achievement.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 1, 2019 21:12:32 GMT
Oh please, they're hardly the first theatre to do it and they won't be the last, and at least Shakespeare isn't their sole bread and butter.  |
|
1,217 posts
|
Post by nash16 on Jan 1, 2019 21:51:25 GMT
I struggled with this. I didn't understand who anyone was or what happening until halfway through. SRB and Leo Bill were engaging because they could focus on their characters but I don't think either was well cast but I was not getting any contemporary references/inspiration. There was a real lack of characterisation. It reminded me of the recent Watership Down. I agree that there was some overacting from one of the actresses but she was the only one who tried to give her various characters personality and different voices (though I noticed SRB seemed to aim the bucket of water right at her though) Also I found the use of fluids and dirt really unnecessary. You have this non existent set because everyone is imprisoned yet insist on soil, water and fake blood. Either you are embrace the symbollocks or you don't. It just heightened my anxiety about slipping and going flying into the audienxe. To conclude I am not paying to see Shakespeare in 2019. I just don't care anymore. I agree with a lot of what you've written here, and it chimes almost exactly with the thougths I put further up after seeing a preview. A shame to see they didn't amend any of the faults. But when they cut something that much, it really does remove all sense and all emotion/possibility for audience connection. I would say don't let this (or rather allow this) to put you off Shakespeare in 2019. Don't let this production have that victory. It's a terribly misguided, and badly abridged version of what Bill would have intended anyone to see. And I know that's a dangerous thing to say: what Shakespeare would have wanted. But I really don't think he would have liked his well crafted play cut to ribbons like this. Maybe wait for reviews (and runnin lengths!) before booking, but don't let this years forthcoming productions lose you as an audience member. The best Shakespeare production of 2019 is still (very much!) out there. |
|
923 posts
|
Post by Snciole on Jan 1, 2019 22:07:32 GMT
To be fair my experience of Shakespeare in 2018 was pretty grim. I have seen some excellent productions/adaptations (like the Mexican Macbeth in 2017) but I am getting tired of spending my money/time/both and coming out of it feeling foolish because a director has decided to make a production vague and unclear.
I don't blame William at all but there is an inherent, middle class smugness to Shakespeare which just alienates me. Maybe I am stupid and foolish but you only have to humour me for a few hours that I am not.
|
|
1,502 posts
|
Post by foxa on Jan 1, 2019 22:50:55 GMT
Some years ago, I heard a well-known actor suggest, not entirely as a joke, that there should be a five year moratorium on performing Shakespeare. She had several reasons: that it was blocking the stage from other writers, new and old; that directors had run out of anything new or relevant to do with his work; that the distribution of roles worked against actresses and that it risked turning people off the theatre. She wasn't saying get rid of him altogether, but after a break maybe everyone would return to the work refreshed.
And I see her point and also don't see it. As long as it remains on the school curriculum then there have to be productions or else students will think Shakespeare is something just to be read and as long as interesting/famous/box office draw actors want to perform his plays, then there is a financial reason for doing so. But I am resolved to be pickier about what I choose to see. This year, I'm very glad I caught the musical adaptation of Twelfth Night at the Young Vic, but could easily have missed Measure for Measure at the Donmar or Macbeth at the NT - and rather wish I had done. And am feeling a bit grim that I booked for this (and I don't know why I did - I saw the Redmayne version - that was fine, but did I need to see this one?)
|
|
5,690 posts
|
Post by lynette on Jan 1, 2019 23:09:30 GMT
For me Shakespeare and SRB is a match made in heaven so of course I booked immediately and for friends too! Then I suggested other friends book and join us. Now I’m gonna have to spend the evening apologising! It is ok for me. I’ve seen more RIIs than you've had hot dinners but for people who haven’t then I do think the directors need to think a bit more. Shakespeare is so good and has lasted so long for a reason. His plays continue to be 'relevant' without too much mucking about. But I haven’t seen this one yet so I may eat my proverbial hat.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 2, 2019 1:24:39 GMT
I don't blame William at all but there is an inherent, middle class smugness to Shakespeare which just alienates me. Maybe I am stupid and foolish but you only have to humour me for a few hours that I am not. On the contrary, I find Shakespeare to be pretty much classless, especially in contemporary productions that go against the ‘traditional way’. Someone like David Hare is what registers as smugly middle class to me, or yet another dull by the numbers retread of a classic from ‘the canon’* by a director who thinks that just plonking the text onstage is enough. *A phrase that annoys me intensely, as though there is a fixed agreement on quality. We change, society changes, what works changes; it is never fixed, always in flux. Some years ago, I heard a well-known actor suggest, not entirely as a joke, that there should be a five year moratorium on performing Shakespeare. She had several reasons: [snip] that the distribution of roles worked against actresses [snip] Haven’t recent developments in casting shown that to be a specious argument? |
|
999 posts
|
Post by Backdrifter on Jan 3, 2019 12:37:36 GMT
It's very interesting reading all the above. In a way it underlines for me why it's so good that Shakespeare/William/Bill/Shakes/Shakey etc is always being performed. I like that it's so adaptable, you can get such wildly differing productions and opinions of them. Because I accept that any theatre trip runs the risk of ending up seeing a load of b*ll*cks, it's also understood it's exactly the same for any Shakespeare production. When I think of all my Shakespeare shows to date, I feel it adds a kind of value that I've seen so many good, bad and indifferent versions of the same plays. It provides a nice frame of reference.
I love that among all the various above opinions about this RII production, one is that it reminds them of the recent Watership Down and has made them not want to see any Shakespeare for a year. You see, for me, that's what theatre is all about! (I realise how facetious that sounds but I'm being serious).
I'm all for productions going full-on minimalist (or should that be full-off?) and seeing what happens. Wasn't Rylance's final Globe production as director a Tempest with only him and two other cast and a length of rope? I love that kind of stuff. Indeed, I challenge any director to try for one or maybe even no cast, no set, no props, but still make it into theatre. Maybe even no stage, no space, nothing. Or maybe it's already been done but no-one realised it was there?
Personally I don't think any RII can top the RSC one I saw in 2008 with a jaw-dropping lead performance by Jonathan Slinger that remains among the top 3 I've ever seen. But I love the play, it's probably my favourite Shakespeare, so will carry on seeing it in the happy knowledge it won't ever be as good as that one, which this Almeida one obviously wasn't by a long way. But it was interesting to see their take on it.
|
|
1,280 posts
|
Post by theatrefan77 on Jan 3, 2019 12:41:56 GMT
I thought this was enjoyable enough and Simon Russell Beale was very good. Still my favorite production of Richard II was the Donmar one with Eddie Redmayne
|
|
999 posts
|
Post by Backdrifter on Jan 3, 2019 12:48:39 GMT
I thought this was enjoyable enough and Simon Russell Beale was very good. Still my favorite production of Richard II was the Donmar one with Eddie Redmayne Yes that Donmar one was good. I loved the Globe one, around 2002/2003 in Middle Temple Hall, with MR as Richard, then that one got bumped by the RSC one I mentioned. |
|
923 posts
|
Post by Snciole on Jan 3, 2019 15:25:27 GMT
Please note I am not paying to see Shakespeare, which means I expect you all to pay for me or at least invite me to your all-nude production of Two Gentlemen of Verona or something.
|
|
5,690 posts
|
Post by lynette on Jan 3, 2019 20:35:34 GMT
Please note I am not paying to see Shakespeare, which means I expect you all to pay for me or at least invite me to your all-nude production of Two Gentlemen of Verona or something. Well, there is a production of Twelfth Night at Southwark theatre that might tempt you. I won’t pay for your tic but I will buy you a drink if you turn up on 2nd Feb and find me. Small venue so you should be able to spot me! |
|
2,743 posts
|
Post by n1david on Jan 5, 2019 10:19:31 GMT
Well I thought this was just ok last night. I’d read the synopsis beforehand to remind myself of the plot (I’ve seen R2 before but not for a while) and it required quite a bit of concentration to work out where the doubling was going on (oh I see, he’s no longer Gaunt). If I’d rolled up in my usual Friday night pre theatre state I’d have been quite lost.
Glad I saw it, glad it’s not the only R2 I’ve seen.
BTW a suspect the latex warning relates to the set. I was in the front row and on curtain up, it smelt like some specialist clubs in Berlin, so I think the walls are rubber (for easy wipe down). The blood had a lovely sweet smell, much nicer than tomato-based blood.
|
|
1,081 posts
|
Post by andrew on Jan 5, 2019 11:17:09 GMT
Similarly I wasn't swept away but had fun with Si as always. The post show cast discussion was a tedious thing to sit through as audience members tried to outdo each other with their analysis of the production instead of asking an actual question, wish I'd left after the bows.
|
|
|
|
Post by sfsusan on Jan 5, 2019 15:35:20 GMT
I thought the post-performance Q&A was interesting... especially when the cast said the director basically told them to not differentiate their doubled characters. Apparently, the 'through line' was to be emphasized, not the individual.
|
|
3,304 posts
|
Post by david on Jan 5, 2019 18:29:24 GMT
Having watched today’s matinee, unfortunately despite SRB’s performance (a chance to see him perform Shakespeare which was the main reason for booking) this production really did leave me a bit underwhelmed. Certainly this production really does require you to stay focused the entire time as it’s done at breakneck speed and at times I found myself a bit lost as to which characters the different cast members were playing as there wasn’t any differentiation in the actors portrayal of the characters. This seems to have been an issue for other patrons who I was talking to post show who found the production as a whole really confusing and some who actually nodded off during the show.
The use of the buckets with the different substances being chucked around to symbolise things did become less interesting as time progressed. While I applaud the production for creating something different in presenting the text, this really didn’t do anything for me. As others have noted and which I agree with, it was definitely something you would see from Celeb Jungle.
The glove fight scene mid show, whether it is was intended to be as funny as it was presented is something I would like to know. It felt more like a scene from a comedy rather than a serious play. For me it just felt out of place in the context of the entire piece.
Having deliberately stayed off the reviews of the piece so I went in with no preconceptions, I had a read of them post show and the similarities mentioned in some of the pieces with the current political climate I find hard to marry up. Whether this is due to the truncated text I don’t know. Maybe seeing the full text performed in another setting would help resolve this. Certainly, I wouldn’t give this production 4* stars as some reviews have done. At best maybe 3* on a good day.
As an aside, I did a tour of the theatre this morning and we managed to get onto the cube set. It really is a bit claustrophobic in there but certainly gave you an interesting perspective from what the cast see during the play.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 5, 2019 18:59:00 GMT
I've yet to see this production, but I would like to clarify that there is a scene in the text involving a lot of men challenging each other's honour using the time-honoured method of hurling a glove to the floor and it is fast and ridiculous and has been met with laughter in every production I've seen so far.
|
|
5,690 posts
|
Post by lynette on Jan 6, 2019 19:00:18 GMT
My heart sinks further...
|
|
1,217 posts
|
Post by nash16 on Jan 6, 2019 23:49:01 GMT
I thought the post-performance Q&A was interesting... especially when the cast said the director basically told them to not differentiate their doubled characters. Apparently, the 'through line' was to be emphasized, not the individual. What a stupid note to give a company of actors doing a play with multiple characters in?! No wonder it's baffling for newcomers to it. |
|
|
|
Post by oxfordsimon on Jan 6, 2019 23:57:50 GMT
My reaction to something like the 'through line' idea is that if it needed to be explained by the cast to the audience then the idea was fundamentally flawed from the very outset.
If audiences need it to be explained to them afterwards then you have failed to communicate what you were aiming at as a director. You can't blame the cast for things like this.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 7, 2019 1:07:42 GMT
It’s perfectly understandable, unless someone is spending time trying to measure what they expect against what they see. Just go with the flow and meet the production on its own terms. There is a clarity of intent in the direction and execution by the actors that makes the production’s focus clear.
I thought the director’s Young Vic Dream was the least of his productions, quite simplistic and skimmimg too much over the surface. This, however, had a depth and point of view that was a vast improvement on that - up there with his Changeling and Measure for Measure at the same venue. I also found his Edward II to be flat at the National but he’s by no means the first to struggle with the Olivier.
|
|
587 posts
|
Post by Polly1 on Jan 10, 2019 23:06:32 GMT
After taking a few minutes to acclimatise, I really enjoyed this. Peak SRB definitely, he broke me with two words: "need friends".
It really needs a familiarity with the play to get the most out of this production, which is not really a commendation. Very marmite reaction, people next to me loved it but someone behind apologising to companions for it being so disappointing.
Odd articles in the programme.
Surely the bit with all the gloves was meant to comic and to show the difficulty Bolingbroke had in exerting control or making a decision even though he now had power.
Finally, I worry how this is going to come over on the big screen next week, SRB especially. We are all used to, and love, his campness and mannerisms but it is going to look very overdone in close up. There should be an instruction to just listen to the way he speaks the text - unparalleled.
|
|
1,345 posts
|
Post by tmesis on Jan 12, 2019 18:13:49 GMT
I was feeling very grumpy about this to begin with but ultimately SRB's terrific performance won me over and I'm glad I went. Thank God I knew the plot and had seen other more conventional productions, otherwise I wouldn't have had a clue what was going on. I just found the production downright silly, and worse, alienating. But SRB was just superb; in fact he impressed me more in this than all the other many Shakespeare roles I've seen him do.
|
|
