4,021 posts
|
Post by Dawnstar on Sept 20, 2019 18:27:52 GMT
I can quite understand why they had to take out rows AX & AY. The stage is above eye level in row A. Taking out the other rows does mean there's at least 6 feet of legroom for all but the outermost seats. I am regretting A1 (booked only as the rest of the row was already gone) as I'm outside the pros arch & will probably miss stuff stage right.
No pre-show, at least not thus far with 5 mins to go. Playing what I think are 90s pop songs, although I've only actually recognised one so far. Plain blue velvet curtain with a large lectern in front of it. Running time in the programme is 2h20 but the ushers have been saying to all the entering audience that the interval may be longer tonight.
|
|
4,021 posts
|
Post by Dawnstar on Sept 20, 2019 22:47:44 GMT
Edit: post deleted because there's no point in anyone slogging through it when danielwhit has said similar things but in more detail & in a more interesting way below. |
|
526 posts
|
Post by danielwhit on Sept 20, 2019 23:12:12 GMT
The "2hrs 10 including interval" running time seriously needs to be looked at - as previously posted, this was 2hrs 45 tonight. To their credit this did include a 27 minute interval due to a "large set change" (which was very prop heavy in changes but in all honesty I struggle to see why it took that long). There's a very good core play here, with Mischief clearly edging towards comedy with an emotional hook rather than out-and-out farce as they mature. Cuts do definitely need to occur, however there are some fantastic moments here. Definitely feels on a par with the first preview of Comedy About A Bank Robbery, from my recollection. More spoilery thoughts buried inside the spoiler tag.. Act 1 (6 year old) - starts off as "Yellow Group from Year 2" performing an assembly. They get held back to have playtime in the classroom as they "added bits". One of the added bits is a fantastic demonstration of how six year olds interpret extra marital sex (cleaning the bedroom). The chairs/tables in the classroom are larger than life, to try to "size down" the actors. This is a little bit off scale, as I have never seen a 6 year old need to actively climb onto a chair before. The scene is solid, however the fact that this is almost entirely constructed of things which are later used as jokes is not hidden in the slightest. It is extremely obvious and, in my opinion, needs to be made somehow more subtle.
Act 2 (13 year old) - strong section. I am a secondary teacher so the tropes presented were immediately visible and I spent a great deal of this act thinking "yeah, that's something ___ would do". SOme of the 6 year old stuff hit punchlines, other jokes were teased to be deployed later. Stronger than act 1.
Interval.
Act 3 (30 year old) - the best of the three. This is clearly where the bulk of the creativity work has been placed in. Almost all of the plot points presented in Act 2 are neatly wrapped up, alongside some classic farcical moments. Henry Lewis' hamster difficulties evolve wonderfully from Act 1 all the way to Act 3. I do not want to reveal anything plot related here, however there are some real gems in this act.
Curtain call. Curiously two understudies appeared - but not all four. Then a song which, personally, felt very self-indulgent. There was no reason for a song (in fairness a couple of the characters are presented as having been in a band, however this is clearly not that line up so it jars significantly), and it is an easy 5 minutes to cull with the evening no worse off for it. I'm heading back shortly after press night, will be interesting to see what changes have been made in the meantime. Well worth a visit, just expect a straighter comedy than Bank Robbery. Culturally, this is clearly designed to match the Mischief team's ages. As I am one year younger than they are, I got a lot out of this. Also, buy the programme - it has a lot of very good reading material, makes a great change from most commercial programmes! |
|
|
|
Post by waybeyondblue on Sept 21, 2019 18:04:55 GMT
2h45m today’s matinee with approx 22m interval.
It reminded me of the Movie Night show with shades of The Play in the second half. First half could be tightened whereas the second was much better. I felt the direction of travel wasn’t clear from the get go and maybe some introduction would help explain why we’re watching a number of funny and less funny oberservations about kids.
Not wasted but not yet a classic.
|
|
1,120 posts
|
Post by samuelwhiskers on Sept 21, 2019 23:41:15 GMT
The second half is objectively much stronger both in terms of writing and acting (the primary school stuff felt like extended improv) but the entire first half is non-stop laughs, and the second is mostly serious drama with the odd gag thrown in. Some bits in the second half are very funny, but I was surprised how dark and serious it got. Kudos to Mischief for trying something different and not being afraid to allow scenes of real emotional drama breathing space. But a surprise to find myself suddenly watching a Pinter play with hamsters after being barely able to breathe in act 1 from laughing so hard.
The core five are certainly extremely talented actors.
|
|
343 posts
|
Post by Figaro on Sept 21, 2019 23:52:53 GMT
I’ve just put up 2 tickets to see this tonight (Sunday) on the notice board.
£10 each!
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 22, 2019 12:19:52 GMT
The second half is objectively much stronger both in terms of writing and acting (the primary school stuff felt like extended improv) but the entire first half is non-stop laughs, and the second is mostly serious drama with the odd gag thrown in. Some bits in the second half are very funny, but I was surprised how dark and serious it got. Kudos to Mischief for trying something different and not being afraid to allow scenes of real emotional drama breathing space. But a surprise to find myself suddenly watching a Pinter play with hamsters after being barely able to breathe in act 1 from laughing so hard. The core five are certainly extremely talented actors. I’m intrigued - are there really hamsters or is this an autocorrect gremlin? |
|
4,021 posts
|
Post by Dawnstar on Sept 22, 2019 12:22:11 GMT
The second half is objectively much stronger both in terms of writing and acting (the primary school stuff felt like extended improv) but the entire first half is non-stop laughs, and the second is mostly serious drama with the odd gag thrown in. Some bits in the second half are very funny, but I was surprised how dark and serious it got. Kudos to Mischief for trying something different and not being afraid to allow scenes of real emotional drama breathing space. But a surprise to find myself suddenly watching a Pinter play with hamsters after being barely able to breathe in act 1 from laughing so hard. The core five are certainly extremely talented actors. I actually found the second half funnier as well as stronger. That may be because I don't find real children remotely amusing so was probably not as amused by fictional children as the rest of the audience were, although seeing 5 adults playing children is much more amusing than seeing actual children on stage. I’m intrigued - are there really hamsters or is this an autocorrect gremlin? The word "hamster" is correct. (Carefully phrased to try to avoid spoilers.) |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 22, 2019 16:54:13 GMT
Curiouser and curioser! I’m going next week so I’ll just stay intrigued until then. :-)
|
|
4,021 posts
|
Post by Dawnstar on Sept 22, 2019 17:22:58 GMT
Whereas the comparison to Pinter is not - apologies to anyone booking on the strength of an oxygen deprived post.
I've never seen a Pinter play so can't comment on that. I would say to anyone going not to expect another Goes Wrong show & the 13+ age warning should be observed as while children might enjoy the 1st act I think by the 3rd act they'd be struggling, at least I certainly would have been at 13.
|
|
3,307 posts
|
Post by david on Sept 22, 2019 17:58:09 GMT
As my London theatre binge week continues, I attended today’s matinee (thank you Mischief theatre and your Sunday shows!). A really enjoyable afternoon spent at the Vauderville theatre. It’s certainly different to their traditional “Goes wrong” productions, but the fact that MT have gone in a different direction in this production is welcomed by me and on the whole does work. Certainly, like others who have already seen it, I’d agree that of the two Acts, the second is a much stronger act both in terms of writing and performance by the Mischief gang and has a much more emotional depth to proceedings that their other work previously hasn’t shown.
In relation to Act 1, I thought the first scene was actually the better of the two scenes in this Act, and maybe the second scene didn’t work quite as well for me ( though there are still some great gags here) and could possibly be tweaked whilst still in previews.
As with their other work, the gags (physical and verbal) are never ending and in the audience I was sat in with today, they all seemed to land well enough. The on going hamster joke really was well done and to be able to sustain it for 2hrs 45minutes is to be congratulated.
I was sat in stalls C7 today I felt that I got an excellent view of the on stage proceedings.
Definitely recommended!
|
|
270 posts
|
Post by stageyninja83 on Sept 23, 2019 9:27:39 GMT
Anyone know if there are day seats available for this?
|
|
4,021 posts
|
Post by Dawnstar on Sept 23, 2019 17:37:11 GMT
I asked on Friday & was also told no. However Stasia spotted that on Sunday some tickets were re-priced downwards on Nimax's website a few hours before the performances so it looks like there's some dynamic pricing happening at least, if no official day seats. |
|
4,021 posts
|
Post by Dawnstar on Sept 27, 2019 23:24:36 GMT
My second viewing tonight. There have been some changes since last week but apparently more are still to come. I again enjoyed Act 3 the most, both for humour and emotion. Watching Acts 1 & 2 again having already seen Act 3 once enabled me to pick up on more things that are referenced later. I'd therefore recommend repeat-viewing....but then I would, wouldn't I?!
Last week I immediately recognised Henry L's "flopping" as something I'd seen him do previously in an MMN show. He confirmed that it has indeed been recycled from that. I wonder if they're now cursing that one person who was bound to recognise it happen to see that particular MMN?!
|
|
1,485 posts
|
Post by Steve on Sept 28, 2019 10:52:56 GMT
For me, Mischief does it again, as this is a very funny show, a kind of comedy version of Michael Apted's legendary "7 Up" series of documentaries, in which Apted tested Aristotle's motto: "Give me a child until he is 7 and I will show you the man." There are ladles of farce, but also sentiment, as characters are better defined than in previous shows. And by defining characters better, Mischief set up deeper and more meaningful laughs down the line, which play alongside the purely farcical elements, laughs based on an audience's recognition of real human foibles and the expression of character through action. A 4 star comedy, for me, even now, in previews! Some spoilers follow. . . There are three acts, two before the interval ("Mischief as little kids" and "Mischief as teenagers"), and one after ("Mischief as the titular "Groan Ups.") As in the Apted documentary, groan-inducing childhood traits make for groan-inducing adult traits. The first act is the least funny, ironically because it is the least sentimental. This is because only once believable character traits are established for each character, can comic and dramatic threads be strung along and played by the plotting. And in the first act, the characters are too broad and cliched to be believable, so what you get is a lot of loud and sometimes successful comic bits and much farce. Still, the players themselves cover a multitude of sins, even in that first third of the show, as they bring with them their own indelible comic traits: Henry Lewis still booms and roars, Jonathan Sayers still pips and squeaks, Henry Shields still ducks and dives, Charlie Russell still acts and reacts to every plot point with more varied comic facial expressiveness than some of the best comedians in the business, and Dave Hearn still effortlessly conjures his inherent likeability, even if this time it is to utterly subvert it, twice, in two clever ways. And Nancy Zamit, well, she is the secret weapon of this piece, as every time other characters get sentimental, she subverts them by remaining relentlessly sociopathically narcissistic, thus undercutting any lulls in the comic energy on stage. For me, Henry Lewis is the most naturally funny comedian, an irrepressible ball of comic action, and Charlie Russell, the second most naturally funny comedian, an irrepressible ball of comic reaction. But God, do Jonathan Sayers, as Mr Squeak, and Nancy Zamit as Ms Shriek, give them a run for their money in this one. And Shields, having shown himself the most excellent actor, in Bank Robbery, by being genuinely frightening, here reaches furthest into subtle and poignant sentiment. Overall, despite the first act not quite being up to speed yet, the second and third are both beautifully constructed and equally loaded with laughs, and this piece is far funnier than I expected, given that it contains the offputting word "Groan" in the title, and doesn't include the enticing words "Goes Wrong." This lot remain a comic joy, and are the heart of new British Comedy (the kind that makes you laugh)! 4 stars.  |
|
4,021 posts
|
Post by Dawnstar on Sept 28, 2019 12:29:45 GMT
Steve I'm glad I'm not the only person to find the first act the least amusing. It can't only be due to my dislike of small children then!
|
|
543 posts
|
Post by freckles on Oct 2, 2019 9:33:51 GMT
I saw this on Tuesday evening and, although a huge Mischief fan, had mixed feelings. I agree that the first couple of scenes seemed like improv. Although there were a few funny moments, I was willing them to grow up and move on. But they did, and once the piece developed into a proper narrative I felt it got progressively better. It improved greatly as the characters got older, but I suppose we needed to know a bit about their backgrounds etc, hence seeing them as young children. The story doesn't really start until they are in their teens though. Farce is what Mischief does best and it all took a bit of setting up, but by Act Two I was enjoying things much more.
The cast, mostly the original Mischief gang, is excellent as usual, each bringing what has become their trademark characteristics to their characters. Nancy was unfortunately indisposed, so we had Holly Sumpton as Moon; Jonathan announced at the end that she'd gone on with very little rehearsal, but she was fabulous.
It's an unusual piece, and may yet develop and tighten up during previews, but entertaining enough, although not as constantly laugh out loud funny as the Goes Wrong stuff. There is a lot of really well-observed detail though.
The music in the auditorium is brilliant and gets you in the mood, and there is one fantastic scene change to music in Act One that I thought a particular highlight! No spoilers, but post-bows is fun too.
|
|
4,021 posts
|
Post by Dawnstar on Oct 2, 2019 18:20:25 GMT
Interesting that Holly Sumpton was the one to go on when according to the programme Krystal Dockery is first cover for Moon, with Holly first cover for the other two roles. Glad to see that they seem to have sorted out the first half's scene change.
|
|
543 posts
|
Post by freckles on Oct 3, 2019 7:49:24 GMT
Interesting that Holly Sumpton was the one to go on when according to the programme Krystal Dockery is first cover for Moon, with Holly first cover for the other two roles. Glad to see that they seem to have sorted out the first half's scene change. They said that the main cast barely knew their lines, never mind the covers, so I guess maybe she felt the most prepared. She was very good. The scene change seems to involve the entire floor of the stage being overlaid, (needed for one gag later), so I suppose that’s what was taking the time - they must have got quicker at doing it. |
|
4,021 posts
|
Post by Dawnstar on Oct 3, 2019 18:16:28 GMT
They said that the main cast barely knew their lines, never mind the covers, so I guess maybe she felt the most prepared. She was very good. The scene change seems to involve the entire floor of the stage being overlaid, (needed for one gag later), so I suppose that’s what was taking the time - they must have got quicker at doing it. Hardly surprising given they are doing re-writes. Holly's extensive TCAABR experience probably helped as well. I spoke to George Haynes after last Friday's show & asked if the covers had started rehearsing & was told they'd done a bit in the sutdio but hadn't had any stage rehearsals & I doubt they would have done much if any rehearsing between Friday & Tuesday. I find it so impressive that covers can manage to go on with little rehearsal.
Ah, we may not be talking about the same scene change then. When I saw it the floor laying was being done in the interval between Acts 2 & 3 whereas it's the scene change between Acts 1 & 2 that I was told wasn't up to speed as of last week.
|
|
5,691 posts
|
Post by lynette on Oct 5, 2019 18:17:47 GMT
There tonight. Bag check that rivals Heathrow. They really must invest in the wand if they wanna do this and the preshow music is so loud I’ve had to retreat to foyer until it starts. I’ve complained. It is only mixed pop stuff so why so insanely loud. Never heard the like before. Manager says I’m not the only one and they have already turned it down. But he has another one of those faceless conversations.
|
|
5,691 posts
|
Post by lynette on Oct 5, 2019 19:43:49 GMT
Half time. Hmmmmm Good job this wasn’t their first eh?
|
|
5,691 posts
|
Post by lynette on Oct 5, 2019 21:54:44 GMT
Some seriously good comic writing and touches. But structure all over the place. I’m told they have cut 20 mins already but they need to cut at least 10 from the first section which had a few dips anyway, at least 10 from teen section and yes, also cut from the last section which was the best. The scene change between 1&2 was dire. Invest in more people or some quick flick over boards and wheels for furniture. The set didn’t look right for 13/14 year olds to me. Too junior.
Was it sentimental at the end? Would someone have understood so readily twenty years ago? In some ways this had a serious message: nurture/ education don’t do much.
I’m looking forward to the Magic Show. These guys are super talented and it is really good that they decided to go for live theatre and not tv stuff. Good on ‘em
|
|
591 posts
|
Post by lou105 on Oct 6, 2019 11:01:33 GMT
The set didn’t look right for 13/14 year olds to me. Too junior. That was my interval comment too. In fact with the way they entered, I thought they were breaking into their old primary school. However! I enjoyed this and very happy to be close up and able to observe it all. For my personal tastes, the serious aspects to balance the farce were good. Down at 10.10 |
|
1,133 posts
|
Post by Stephen on Oct 6, 2019 11:40:16 GMT
Loud noises?
|
|
