19,676 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Sept 18, 2016 6:47:55 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 18, 2016 8:58:18 GMT
And Ian Hallard. They seem to be doing lots of Press together which I think is really sweet! |
|
8,107 posts
|
Post by alece10 on Sept 18, 2016 10:15:52 GMT
I was going to book but a friend said they had seen the play a number of years ago and it was really depressing. Is this so? I don't do depressing!
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 18, 2016 11:15:08 GMT
I was going to book but a friend said they had seen the play a number of years ago and it was really depressing. Is this so? I don't do depressing! Such things are relative...being a 'gay play' written in 1970 it's certainly not as depressing as those of the 80s for obvious reasons...It's a humourous play with a serious undertone is how I'd describe it. I think it's well worth seeing, and for a younger person like yourself George I'd say it's an interesting piece of theatre that doesn't get performed often, and though I hate to use the word 'important' maybe a 'significant' less known drama. Is it entierly frivolous and silly? no, there are more serious elements to it. Is it still fun and interesting as a play? yes. |
|
19,676 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Sept 18, 2016 11:41:24 GMT
I was going to book but a friend said they had seen the play a number of years ago and it was really depressing. Is this so? I don't do depressing! According to the interview with Norton the film version is much heavier going than the play. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 18, 2016 11:45:07 GMT
Also Gatiss' facial hair and the wig he described on Norton should really lighten the mood...
|
|
8,107 posts
|
Post by alece10 on Sept 18, 2016 14:57:44 GMT
I was going to book but a friend said they had seen the play a number of years ago and it was really depressing. Is this so? I don't do depressing! Such things are relative...being a 'gay play' written in 1970 it's certainly not as depressing as those of the 80s for obvious reasons...It's a humourous play with a serious undertone is how I'd describe it. I think it's well worth seeing, and for a younger person like yourself George I'd say it's an interesting piece of theatre that doesn't get performed often, and though I hate to use the word 'important' maybe a 'significant' less known drama. Is it entierly frivolous and silly? no, there are more serious elements to it. Is it still fun and interesting as a play? yes. Thanks for the compliment but I am certainly not young and remember both the 80s and 70s very well. Oh and I'm not George either. 😁 |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 18, 2016 15:22:20 GMT
Such things are relative...being a 'gay play' written in 1970 it's certainly not as depressing as those of the 80s for obvious reasons...It's a humourous play with a serious undertone is how I'd describe it. I think it's well worth seeing, and for a younger person like yourself George I'd say it's an interesting piece of theatre that doesn't get performed often, and though I hate to use the word 'important' maybe a 'significant' less known drama. Is it entierly frivolous and silly? no, there are more serious elements to it. Is it still fun and interesting as a play? yes. Thanks for the compliment but I am certainly not young and remember both the 80s and 70s very well. Oh and I'm not George either. 😁 Oh God sorry...it's the Sheridan picture that threw me! Ignore me completly then (aside from the actual stuff about the play, it's funny-serious is my best description!!) Christ I see a Sheridan picture and I think George now, heaven help me if I met the woman! |
|
8,107 posts
|
Post by alece10 on Sept 18, 2016 15:56:31 GMT
Thanks for the compliment but I am certainly not young and remember both the 80s and 70s very well. Oh and I'm not George either. 😁 Oh God sorry...it's the Sheridan picture that threw me! Ignore me completly then (aside from the actual stuff about the play, it's funny-serious is my best description!!) Christ I see a Sheridan picture and I think George now, heaven help me if I met the woman! That's so funny. Don't worry at all. Wish I was 22 again. But I'm claiming the Sheridan pic as mine was up there before George came onto the forum. Bless him! |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 18, 2016 16:35:37 GMT
Oh God sorry...it's the Sheridan picture that threw me! Ignore me completly then (aside from the actual stuff about the play, it's funny-serious is my best description!!) Christ I see a Sheridan picture and I think George now, heaven help me if I met the woman! That's so funny. Don't worry at all. Wish I was 22 again. But I'm claiming the Sheridan pic as mine was up there before George came onto the forum. Bless him! You have Sheridan seniority! haha don't we all wish we were 22...some days I wish I could just remember 22... |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 29, 2016 0:15:53 GMT
Well, this was quite something. I was at the first preview this evening, along with a number of Gatiss fans (he received rapturous applause when he entered) and thoroughly enjoyed it. I didn't know the play going in to see it but was absolutely delighted - it's funny, it's rude, it's heartbreaking and I cannot believe it's 50 years old; it's still so relevant.
Ian Hallard and James Holmes are both extraordinary, but it really is an ensemble piece and every member of the cast has their moment to shine.
Have just looked to go again in October and it seems like most tickets in the Stalls have now been sold, so it seems to be selling very well. I'd recommend booking before reviews come out, as can imagine it will sell out such an intimate venue - also my first time at the Park; gorgeous venue; amazing sandwiches!!
|
|
3,565 posts
|
Post by showgirl on Sept 29, 2016 4:10:51 GMT
That's encouraging, mrmusicals, as I'm seeing this soon. However, the infuriating Park still haven't posted even an approximate running time, though they must now obviously have some idea - so could you please provide this?
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 29, 2016 9:46:14 GMT
Finished by 9.45 - I imagine that could change during previews?
|
|
19,676 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Sept 29, 2016 11:19:31 GMT
Finished by 9.45 - I imagine that could change during previews? Was that with a 7.30 start? It doesn't start until 8pm at The Lowry |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 29, 2016 14:44:47 GMT
Finished by 9.45 - I imagine that could change during previews? Was that with a 7.30 start? It doesn't start until 8pm at The Lowry So, add on half an hour to get 10.15pm. Unless it was the 3.00 matinee, in which case add on five hours to get 2.45am. Probably your first guess was right. |
|
19,676 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Sept 29, 2016 15:15:16 GMT
I'm trying to establish the running time, not what time it finishes.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 29, 2016 16:02:04 GMT
7.30 start, yes.
|
|
3,565 posts
|
Post by showgirl on Sept 29, 2016 20:20:28 GMT
Thank you for the running time info - though as I ended up leaving at the interval, it didn't matter, and fortunately the first act was relatively short at 45 mins.
I'd say this hadn't aged well, except that I don't think it could ever have been any good; it was like a feeble sitcom pilot.
I will now brace myself for the chorus of dissent...
|
|
|
|
Post by crabtree on Sept 29, 2016 20:55:01 GMT
no dogs or nudity then.....
|
|
|
|
Post by crabtree on Sept 29, 2016 20:56:57 GMT
How was John Hopkins.....a huge fan of him, especially after a rather memorable scene in the RSC's last Titus, and in Mad World
|
|
3,565 posts
|
Post by showgirl on Sept 30, 2016 4:00:15 GMT
Sorry, I didn't recognise anyone in the cast; I had just gone for the play. But judging from the almost capacity (and overwhelmingly male) audience and the otherwise appreciative noises, there will soon be plenty of others who will be able to report back on this for you.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2016 9:02:42 GMT
How was John Hopkins.....a huge fan of him, especially after a rather memorable scene in the RSC's last Titus, and in Mad World Really good - it's hard to describe his character without giving away the plot, but he's quite a complex character and his voice is incredible! |
|
408 posts
|
Post by maggiem on Sept 30, 2016 12:33:14 GMT
How was John Hopkins.....a huge fan of him, especially after a rather memorable scene in the RSC's last Titus, and in Mad World You mean the bath, don't you?  |
|
|
|
Post by crabtree on Sept 30, 2016 17:57:23 GMT
oh I do mean the bath from Titus. A brilliant piece of stagecraft, made even more brilliant by the fact that we was wearing his laurel reef (and nowt else). Yes, what a voice. I've not seen him in any of his TV work, but on stage, he is a stunning actor.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2016 18:03:37 GMT
I really enjoyed him in Ben Hur at the Tricycle, where his skirt was so short that even people sat in the circle could see up it.
|
|
