562 posts
|
Post by jadnoop on Jan 29, 2019 18:39:43 GMT
Does Mamet direct theatre regularly? I found most of his self-directed movies aesthetically supremely dull, but perhaps on the stage his simplistic style might work better.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 30, 2019 7:18:31 GMT
"A "badly behaved" film mogul inspired by Harvey Weinstein". Understatement much?
5 year old children having a temper tantrum in Tesco are "badly behaved". Harvey Weinstein was many things. Badly behaved was not one of them.
Get with the programme Malkovich.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 30, 2019 14:21:32 GMT
Mamet has not been on form for a very long time. Hard pass.
|
|
112 posts
|
Post by mrbluesky on Jan 31, 2019 9:48:18 GMT
"A "badly behaved" film mogul inspired by Harvey Weinstein". Understatement much? 5 year old children having a temper tantrum in Tesco are "badly behaved". Harvey Weinstein was many things. Badly behaved was not one of them. Get with the programme Malkovich. This! Just the description puts me off seeing this. As someone who has loved a lot of Mamet's early work, when it was first rumoured that he'd been working on something new, I held out hope that maybe, just maybe we'd get a show about how it all unfolded, told through a female voice, but nope. We've got the typical 'oh he's a bit naughty' narrative. Except here's the thing, Weinstein isn't 'a bit naughty'. A child who misbehaves, as you say, Ryan, is 'a bit naughty'. Weinstein and his cohorts are predators, and we should not be glorifying that, which I am worried this play will do. Add into that mix the fact that some of the sightlines at the Garrick are flipping awful, it's a definite no from MrBlue. |
|
2,481 posts
|
Post by zahidf on Jan 31, 2019 10:37:36 GMT
Shenton defends mamet
|
|
525 posts
|
Post by wiggymess on Jan 31, 2019 10:52:28 GMT
Very much agree with Shenton on this. |
|
3,535 posts
|
Post by Rory on Jan 31, 2019 10:54:24 GMT
I think Shenton is making the point, not unreasonably, that people should reserve final judgment until they have actually read the script or seen the play. One of the most vocal critics I've seen online is Morgan Lloyd Malcolm, whose play Emilia will be running at another Nimax venue. Has she actually read the script?
I totally get the fact that people, as @ryan articulates so well, have issues with the initial description of the play, the trailer etc, but should we not wait to see and hear what points Mamet actually has to make? And just because Mamet is a man, is he not entitled to write a play on this subject?
I get uneasy when people rush to condemn pieces of art without having the full facts. It reminds me of the recent furore over James Graham's Brexit drama for Channel 4.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 31, 2019 11:10:01 GMT
Well, if anyone's an expert in what constitutes childishness in the field of theatrical opinions, it's Shenton.....
|
|
923 posts
|
Post by Snciole on Jan 31, 2019 11:30:04 GMT
I agree with Shenton, judging a work before it is seen is unfair to all involved but as I wrote in this blog based on the synopsis, based on Mamet's previous work I don't trust or expect him to write an appropriate play viewfromthecheapseat.com/2019/01/30/bitter-wheat-an-inappropriate-play-at-an-appropriate-time/ It is already being described as a "black comedy" and Mamet's politics don't suggest a sympathetic portrayal will happen but I look forward to him surprising me (if I even bother getting a ticket) |
|
2,481 posts
|
Post by zahidf on Jan 31, 2019 11:38:23 GMT
I agree with Shenton, judging a work before it is seen is unfair to all involved but as I wrote in this blog based on the synopsis, based on Mamet's previous work I don't trust or expect him to write an appropriate play viewfromthecheapseat.com/2019/01/30/bitter-wheat-an-inappropriate-play-at-an-appropriate-time/ It is already being described as a "black comedy" and Mamet's politics don't suggest a sympathetic portrayal will happen but I look forward to him surprising me (if I even bother getting a ticket) I'm with you on it: it may surprise me, but given his past form and the publicity around it, I think its going to be a bit rubbish |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 31, 2019 11:39:32 GMT
People say "you can't judge a book by its cover" but actually, to a point, you can. That's why books have covers. Without reading a book, you can't say for a fact that it's terrible and an absolute waste of time to read. But you can certainly pick up a book and see if it's an author you've enjoyed previously, if it's a genre that appeals to you, if there's affirmatory blurbs from trusted names. I don't know that this play is going to *suck*, per se, but I'm familiar with Mamet's works, I've read the blurb on the website, and I don't think anyone can hold it against me or the others like me who have consequently gone "WHOA, nope, this play is absolutely not for me". And there *is* information out there already, it's... kinda completely normal and even acceptable to look at this available information and conclude "well, I've obviously not seen or read it, but it does sound frightfully misjudged from what we have here"?
I mean, I'm a big fan of "don't knock it until you've tried it", and of course it would be fairest to see the play in question before casting final judgement, but it's hella unrealistic to expect people to abide by a strict binary of "if you've seen it, you can judge it, if you've not seen it, you can't hold any opinion whatsoever".
(And yeah, this play is absolutely not for me, so although it may yet turn out to be a great piece of theatre, I'm going to stay in Team "This Sounds Misjudged", and wait and see what teams the people who do see it end up in. And maybe I'll read it in the NT Bookshop one day between shows.)
|
|
525 posts
|
Post by wiggymess on Jan 31, 2019 11:46:00 GMT
People say "you can't judge a book by its cover" but actually, to a point, you can. That's why books have covers. Without reading a book, you can't say for a fact that it's terrible and an absolute waste of time to read. But you can certainly pick up a book and see if it's an author you've enjoyed previously, if it's a genre that appeals to you, if there's affirmatory blurbs from trusted names. I don't know that this play is going to *suck*, per se, but I'm familiar with Mamet's works, I've read the blurb on the website, and I don't think anyone can hold it against me or the others like me who have consequently gone "WHOA, nope, this play is absolutely not for me". And there *is* information out there already, it's... kinda completely normal and even acceptable to look at this available information and conclude "well, I've obviously not seen or read it, but it does sound frightfully misjudged from what we have here"? I mean, I'm a big fan of "don't knock it until you've tried it", and of course it would be fairest to see the play in question before casting final judgement, but it's hella unrealistic to expect people to abide by a strict binary of "if you've seen it, you can judge it, if you've not seen it, you can't hold any opinion whatsoever". (And yeah, this play is absolutely not for me, so although it may yet turn out to be a great piece of theatre, I'm going to stay in Team "This Sounds Misjudged", and wait and see what teams the people who do see it end up in. And maybe I'll read it in the NT Bookshop one day between shows.) It's a fair point, I just think there's a difference between picking up the book, reading the synopsis or whatever, and then putting it back because you don't want to read it and picking it up, reading only the synopsis, and then deciding, before reading it (or before it's even published) to create a furore and moral backlash against it. (By the way I'm not accusing you of taking the 2nd route at all) |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 31, 2019 11:59:07 GMT
No, that's cool, I don't take the internet personally.  I don't think we can fault the backlash though? As far as I can tell, no matter how loudly people are shouting, they are still fundamentally shouting "THIS SOUNDS MISJUDGED AND I DO NOT WANT TO SEE IT", I haven't seen any "THIS SHOULD BE BANNED AND WE ARE GOING TO PICKET THE THEATRE" just yet. Like, a LOT of women have experienced sustained sexual harrassment (in fact, a useful thing to remember, when a woman appears to be overreacting to something, is that she is very rarely reacting to that one single instance, her reactions are based on a pile-up of experiences over time), it's pretty reasonable to feel exhausted and shouty about a couple of 70+ year old men who probably haven't experienced it for themselves (and who are in a similar demographic bracket to the perpetrators) standing up and casting out their own loud voices rather than stepping back and letting someone else tell the story. (And yes, I KNOW, writers are going to write about things they haven't personally experienced, I'm not saying they *can't*, but there are writers out there who *are* able to tell these stories from a more personal perspective and they SO rarely get the opportunities afforded to... well, the 70+ year old men. When we eventually *have* equality, then no one will need to *ask* for equality anymore.) |
|
5,691 posts
|
Post by lynette on Jan 31, 2019 12:06:56 GMT
Mamet has elevated his work by calling it a 'black comedy' prob the most difficult of the genre to get right, for a U.K. audience. I won’t judge, but to quote another old man in When Harry..'when you know, you know'
|
|
1,970 posts
|
Post by sf on Jan 31, 2019 18:47:25 GMT
Just booked - tickets are on sale via nimaxtheatres.com right now. £97.50 premium, then £67.50, £57.50, £47.50, £37.50, £25. £10 off all prices 7th to 20th June. Will say that they have been very decent about the centre block pillar seats in the stalls. For those who don't mind sitting that far back, P7 or 18 for £25 can't go that far wrong, if you prefer it to the upper circle, I'd say.
...and I've just booked P7. My classic compromise when a production involves a few people I really want to see and a writer I'm not a fan of: buy a ticket, but make it a cheap one.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 31, 2019 20:15:11 GMT
Presumably it’s fictional because the case is sub judice but then what’s the point? It’s neither timely, being too late to be a warning nor a reflection on the reality as it’s too soon for that.
It’s just an opportunistic attempt to be ‘relevant’, just like Edfringe shows that try and piggyback on the latest cause celebre in a desperate gambit to sell tickets. The sort of thing that someone out of touch would think of as being a good idea.
|
|
3,306 posts
|
Post by david on Jan 31, 2019 22:39:20 GMT
Just booked - tickets are on sale via nimaxtheatres.com right now. £97.50 premium, then £67.50, £57.50, £47.50, £37.50, £25. £10 off all prices 7th to 20th June. Will say that they have been very decent about the centre block pillar seats in the stalls. For those who don't mind sitting that far back, P7 or 18 for £25 can't go that far wrong, if you prefer it to the upper circle, I'd say. Thanks for the info. Just booked a P7 seat for a Sat matinee in July. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 3, 2019 10:59:16 GMT
Late to the party, but I think it's entirely fair to pre-judge theatre with an opinion, because we all have 'em after all. As much as my 'Lordy I don't think I need to sit through another Pinter play' is one, saying 'Hmm Mr Mamet might not produce the most sensitive response' are both based on previous experience of the man's work.
In this instance as well very few were calling for Mamet not to be allowed more a raised eyebrow and 'well I might give that a miss for my sanity'
Also Shark Menton telling people not to pre-judge has given me a giggle.
|
|
2,481 posts
|
Post by zahidf on Feb 4, 2019 16:34:49 GMT
Ha ha ha ha ha
|
|
5,691 posts
|
Post by lynette on Feb 4, 2019 16:39:39 GMT
Priceless and serves them right. What a stupid tagline.
|
|
999 posts
|
Post by Backdrifter on Feb 5, 2019 11:08:35 GMT
^ I agree, a very dumb strapline getting a deserved response. I'm not sure what to make of the bulk of the above discussion. While my instincts tell me not to dive into pre-production judgements I'm inclined to agree that most of us will anyway, plus it's what we all do when deciding whether to see anything at all. Don't know about the Edinburgh Fringe and the "point" of plays being dragged into it though! HOLLYWOOD IS A HELL HOLE. A new play starring John Malkovich in his return to the stage after 33 years, written and directed by David Mamet in a good mood. From June 7th "in a good mood"? It seems they're deciding to disregard 2017's Call Me God, then. I mean, yes it was just a handful of performances in a church, but it still counts as "the stage" doesn't it?! |
|
1,861 posts
|
Post by NeilVHughes on Feb 7, 2019 9:26:58 GMT
BackdrifterDefinitely states ‘in a good mood’ in the blurb, thought it was my cutting and pasting initially. The marketing for this does not inspire confidence in the production.
|
|
923 posts
|
Post by Snciole on May 20, 2019 15:41:20 GMT
Full Company announced. Nothing interesting to add to the previously announced casting except Matthew Pidgeon is in it. Matthew also happens to be Mamet's brother in law. Joining the previously announced John Malkovich as Barney Fein, Doon Mackichan as Sondra and Ioanna Kimbrook as Yung Kim Li are: Alexander Arnold as Roberto, Teddy Kempner as Doctor Wald, Matthew Pidgeon as The Writer and Zephryn Taitte as Charles Arthur Brown  |
|
4,361 posts
|
Post by shady23 on Jun 7, 2019 20:07:27 GMT
First preview tonight.
|
|
423 posts
|
Post by dlevi on Jun 8, 2019 7:50:05 GMT
My issue with the play is that it probably wasn't written when it was pitched and booked. Mamet's plays for the last decade have been typing exercises rather than the well thought out, tightly constructed and intellectually stimulating plays of the past. Is it good? Will it be provocative? Who knows? But having been taken for lots of money over the past decade on crap plays - Romance, The Anarchist, etc. I'm done. Until of course I read the notices and find myself in front of the Garrick hoping for a day seat.  |
|
