546 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by drmaplewood on Apr 21, 2016 12:02:20 GMT
|
|
816 posts
|
Post by stefy69 on Apr 21, 2016 12:43:07 GMT
Ooh ! Excellent news  |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 21, 2016 13:02:20 GMT
In the middle of this street
|
|
4,973 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by Phantom of London on Apr 21, 2016 14:50:32 GMT
Took long enough to transfer, was rumoured to be a filer before Stephen Ward opened. Also glad that Chichester is finally getting a transfer, it seems ages since I have seen any of their work in London?
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 21, 2016 15:02:04 GMT
I mean, Guys And Dolls is still running, and Gypsy and Taken At Midnight both did West End runs just last year, so it's not like there's been an absolute dearth of Chichester productions in London. Some years they transfer more, sure, but there's still not long between Chichester transfers.
|
|
7,052 posts
|
Post by Jon on Apr 21, 2016 15:10:08 GMT
I mean, Guys And Dolls is still running, and Gypsy and Taken At Midnight both did West End runs just last year, so it's not like there's been an absolute dearth of Chichester productions in London. Some years they transfer more, sure, but there's still not long between Chichester transfers. The Chekhov trilogy is going to the National in the summer plus Running Wild is going to Regent's Park so we're getting quite a few plays this year alongside Love Labour's Lost/Much Ado About Nothing and This House so plenty of transfers. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 21, 2016 15:10:42 GMT
If it ain't got Charles Edwards, I ain't interested.
|
|
4,973 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by Phantom of London on Apr 21, 2016 15:51:54 GMT
Sorry guys, I meant to say new plays, like Pressure and For Services Rendered (I think) from last year.
I wonder if this will now be classified as a revival?
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 21, 2016 16:09:16 GMT
Sorry guys, I meant to say new plays, like Pressure and For Services Rendered (I think) from last year. For Services Rendered was first produced in 1932. |
|
526 posts
|
Post by danielwhit on Apr 21, 2016 16:11:33 GMT
Sorry guys, I meant to say new plays, like Pressure and For Services Rendered (I think) from last year. I wonder if this will now be classified as a revival? Technically it is - although being remounted by the same creative team, by the looks. Worth saying this'll be the second revival, as such, seeing as the production at the NT moved venues. I'm looking forward to it, was going to try to head down to Chichester to see this and LLL - am glad I won't need to anymore! |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 21, 2016 16:12:09 GMT
|
|
4,973 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by Phantom of London on Apr 21, 2016 16:39:16 GMT
So can still be a revival I guess, even though it's the same production at the National, very interesting one to see how this falls with the Olivier, especially as this could compete with Shakespeare!!!!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 21, 2016 17:02:46 GMT
A revival isn't dependent on time but the production. As such, An Inspector Calls coming back to London is still the Daldry revival, not a revival of his revival. This House is still Herrin's original production, even though later than expected into the West End. It cannot, therefore be a revival.
Complicating matters is the venue, so Merrily We Roll Along from the Menier was a West End premiere, as the Donmar production was considered off-West End. It wasn't, however a London premiere and would be classed as a London Revival! So, if This House had been completely redirected then it would similarly be a London revival but a West End premiere, as the National is also not a West End venue.
|
|
4,973 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by Phantom of London on Apr 21, 2016 17:47:11 GMT
Thanks for that and very interesting.
I now understand it cannot be considered a revival, but because this production was nominated in 2013, so are we saying this cannot be nominated for a new play again? Similar to 1984.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 21, 2016 18:15:27 GMT
Thanks for that and very interesting. I now understand it cannot be considered a revival, but because this production was nominated in 2013, so are we saying this cannot be nominated for a new play again? Similar to 1984. That should be the case but nominating committees sometimes completely go against previous practice. Anyone taking over a role shouldn't be eligible for a nomination, for example, but they sometimes have been; same with a transfer, so the actors for this might possibly be deemed eligible. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 6, 2017 0:52:22 GMT
|
|
816 posts
|
Post by stefy69 on Jul 6, 2017 6:07:06 GMT
Really tempted to travel to see this again, first class theatre. |
|
