1,862 posts
|
Post by NeilVHughes on Jan 10, 2022 10:51:00 GMT
ATG were surprisingly proficient, had a credit for this from when initially scheduled and was given access to the 48hr early access:
We know that you will have been looking forward to seeing the show, so as a credit voucher holder, we’re giving you TWO DAYS priority access to the new dates.
Fortunately prices seem to have remained the same as my credit covered the new booking exactly.
|
|
|
|
Post by floorshow on Jan 10, 2022 11:15:36 GMT
Thought I had credit for this but was a refund apparently - I feel suddenly poorer :/
|
|
|
|
Post by talkingheads on Jan 10, 2022 11:27:08 GMT
Every single seat in the balcony is marked as restricted view - I'd that right? I resent paying any more than £15 for any seat that it restricted view.
|
|
2,850 posts
|
Post by couldileaveyou on Apr 14, 2022 10:46:33 GMT
Joining the cast alongside the previously announced Emilia Clarke (Nina), Tom Rhys Harries (Trigorin), Daniel Monks (Konstantin), Indira Varma (Arkadina) and Sophie Wu (Masha) are Jason Barnett (Shamrayev), Robert Glenister (Sorin), Mika Onyx Johnson (Medvedenko), Gerald Kyd (Dorn) and Sara Powell (Polina), with understudies Katie Buchholz, Tina Harris, Joseph Langdon and David Lee-Jones.
Pretty much the same cast that was supposed to do it in 2020
|
|
|
|
Post by oxfordsimon on Jun 21, 2022 18:51:06 GMT
|
|
7,061 posts
|
Post by Jon on Jun 21, 2022 18:54:32 GMT
It's Jamie Lloyd, it's part of the production to be stripped down. |
|
|
|
Post by oxfordsimon on Jun 21, 2022 18:57:17 GMT
Stripping down does not require microphones. That is adding an unnecessary element.
Or perhaps one might call it a gimmick...
|
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Jun 22, 2022 5:59:23 GMT
Why are they wearing microphones? Is projection not a thing for actors these days??? Right from a few years after it opened actors at the NT have always been amplified or miked, once so badly that their voices seemed to be coming from the back of the auditorium. |
|
2,850 posts
|
Post by couldileaveyou on Jun 22, 2022 10:20:48 GMT
Visible mcrophones are kind of Jamie Lloyd's signature thing
|
|
529 posts
|
Post by jampot on Jun 23, 2022 10:46:21 GMT
I saw this production prior to lockdown and enjoyed it. It was the first version of it that I had seen. Couldn't help but think if I had seen a non Jamie L would I of enjoyed even more....
|
|
|
|
Post by cavocado on Jun 23, 2022 11:57:18 GMT
I've assumed with previous JL productions that it's a way of highlighting the artifice of a stage play, like breaking the 4th wall, or set designs where you can see all the tech equipment lying around? I find that all a bit gimmicky and hackneyed, especially when used for stylistic effect rather than a more fully thought-out philosophy, but, on the other hand, I don't really care as long as the production and performances are top notch.
|
|
|
|
Post by alessia on Jun 30, 2022 5:45:22 GMT
Went to see The Seagull last night. The first act has the same (or very similar) plywood box set as Cyrano, maybe even smaller than that, symbolising the claustrophobia and isolation the play is about.
The actors stay on the stage all along, moving chairs as needed when they are speaking. There are no other props, which I understand is another of the J Lloyd Company's trademarks. It's all stripped back and everybody on stage is barefoot.
I was not familiar with the story (not that much happens anyway) but had no trouble understanding the relationships between all the various characters. The programme has a good essay about Chekov and naturalistic theatre which is advisable to read before the show for those like me who don't know his work very well. The acting was excellent from everyone, I particularly liked Indira Varma and Daniel Monks. Emilia Clarke is of course the main draw of the show. It is a really good debut, she looks very natural as Nina, although this is (I felt), a fairly 'safe' role. It was the first preview and some empty seats all around, plus the Pinter really should sort out the air con as it was hot as hell in the royal circle. Apart from that it was a very good night out, I enjoyed the show a lot and hope it does well going forward.
|
|
|
|
Post by vernongersh on Jun 30, 2022 7:57:46 GMT
Went to see The Seagull last night. The first act has the same (or very similar) plywood box set as Cyrano, maybe even smaller than that, symbolising the claustrophobia and isolation the play is about. The actors stay on the stage all along, moving chairs as needed when they are speaking. There are no other props, which I understand is another of the J Lloyd Company's trademarks. It's all stripped back and everybody on stage is barefoot. I was not familiar with the story (not that much happens anyway) but had no trouble understanding the relationships between all the various characters. The programme has a good essay about Chekov and naturalistic theatre which is advisable to read before the show for those like me who don't know his work very well. The acting was excellent from everyone, I particularly liked Indira Varma and Daniel Monks. Emilia Clarke is of course the main draw of the show. It is a really good debut, she looks very natural as Nina, although this is (I felt), a fairly 'safe' role. It was the first preview and some empty seats all around, plus the Pinter really should sort out the air con as it was hot as hell in the royal circle. Apart from that it was a very good night out, I enjoyed the show a lot and hope it does well going forward. How long was the show? And so glad you enjoyed. Looking forward to this - I adored Cyrano (and also, like yourself, have never read or seen the play before) |
|
|
|
Post by alessia on Jun 30, 2022 8:16:14 GMT
Started at 7.30, and it ended at 10. There was a 20 mins interval, and the first act was definitely longer than the second.
I also loved Cyrano, that was amazing and one of the two (the other being Jerusalem) best plays I've ever seen- this one is not as amazing but it is hard to top that I guess. This is also a very different play, in the sense that not a lot actually happens on the stage.
I look forward to the reviews..
|
|
1,485 posts
|
Post by Steve on Jul 1, 2022 17:47:28 GMT
Saw this last night, and loved it! The staging (chairs, microphones that pick up whispers, actors speaking one at a time) accentuates thoughts over actions, so characters you might ordinarily overlook, either because they are peripheral to the main story threads (eg Jason Barnett's Shamrayev) or because they are less extrovert or overtly expressive (Tom Rhys Harries's Trigorin) get much more play here, and it's intimate, exciting and revelatory! Some spoilers follow. . . Take Trigorin. He shares scenes with characters that are enormous and expressive, like Nina and Arkadina, two pivots of his romantic triangle, so he typically fades from audience attention and identification, but not here. Here he is allowed his full say without interruption, his quiet teeming self-doubt conveyed by microphones and speakers into what feels like intimate whispers in the audiences' ears, and having basically hated him in previous incarnations of the play, this time I felt for him: Tom Rhys Harries's Trigorin is Nick from the BBC's adaptation of Sally Rooney's "Conversations with Friends:" a quiet guy, riddled with self-hatred and depression, with imposter syndrome, overwhelmed by his much larger, more dynamic partner, seeking solace in the adoration of a younger girl. And Jamie Lloyd's democratic approach to Trigorin doesn't end there. He casts him younger than usual, and stages him as a clear mirror-image to Konstantin. So here, despite the fact he has usurped Konstantin's nest, competing for the affections of both Konstantin's mother and Konstantin's love-interest (which is why I usually hate him), here he simply IS Konstantin in an alternate universe where Konstantin is more successful. Rhys Harries as Trigorin, and Daniel Monks as Konstantin, are both terrific at conveying self-doubt and desperation-for-affirmation. Monks's Konstantin broke my heart, his expressions of the flame of his hopes as alive as his despair in seeing that flame doused. Lloyd often foregrounds him, sitting in front of the others, whether he's speaking or not, and although he doesn't get to stalk the stage, as he did at the Donmar as "Teenage Dick" the Third, his forlorn expressive face stalks our attention. I've seen Anya Reiss's translation of this play before, at Southwark Playhouse, and Lily James's Nina ate the play. Imagine the most hopeful, ambitious ingenue actress and fangirl you ever saw, and multiply by one hundred: her excitable, flapping, leaping, wide-eyed exuberance ate up the entire room, and the attention of the audience. You understood what Trigorin and Konstantin saw in her, but you didn't really see them at all, because you were too busy, engaged by and immersed in her boundless enthusiasm, just like them lol! Emilia Clarke's Nina can't eat this production, even though the lines are the same, because Jamie Lloyd's democratic approach won't let her. She can't interrupt people. She can't speak louder than them. She can't jump all over them. She can't change her appearance between scenes. It's all about her thoughts and expressions of Chekhov's words, broadcast intimately into the audience's ears. And it seemed to me, this Nina comes across as far more articulate, intelligent, considered and thoughtful than Lily James's more naive and primal Nina. Clarke is a well-mannered Nina, a good listener, a great conversation partner, only her cheshire-cat-permasmile revealing the delusion lurking within. With this Nina, it's only in her final speech that she commands ALL our attention, but when it happens, it's majestic, counterpointed and accentuated by the fact that she seemed so together in the first place. The fact that props and make-up aren't used are a drawback to some scenes. Without visible traces, important plot points, such as an injury Konstantin acquires towards the end of the first half, might be brushed over or missed. But I think what Lloyd wants to do is serve the words, give primacy to Chekhov and Reiss, and amp up and isolate those to such a degree that you really appreciate their power. And it works. I have never thought about Chekhov's words as much as I did watching this production, as well as how each and every actor brings those words to life, how interconnected all the characters are, in their inner lives as much as in their interactions: Indira Sharma hilariously nails Arkadina's stridency; Robert Glenister touchingly portrays Sorin's fading softness; Sophie Wu's staccato delivery suggests every blow life has delivered to her punching bag emo Masha's expectations; and holy crap, Jason Barnett's Shamrayev takes advantage of Jamie Lloyd's democratic intimacy to almost steal the whole play, allowing this tyrant of an estate manager to make caustic mincemeat of everyone in his path with the few words Chekhov gives him - laugh out loud funny sometimes, the most scary person in the play at other times - Jason Barnett's Shamrayev is something to behold! A wonderful performance! Anyhow, Lloyd's approach adopted here, an appoach seen in a few of his recent productions, doesn't quite reach the peak brilliance of his "Betrayal," where detail of the love triangle of Charlie Cox, Tom Hiddleston and Zawe Ashton seemed to shimmer and shine with such clarity, as democratising so many more characters can feel overwhelming, especially with the absence of make-up and props, and you might miss those big performances that demand one to stride about the stage flapping ones arms, but overall, this is the most intimate and revelatory "The Seagull" I've ever seen. 4 and a half stars from me.  |
|
|
|
Post by vernongersh on Jul 4, 2022 14:46:03 GMT
Does anyone know when Press Night is? Can't wait to read these reviews
|
|
1,245 posts
|
Post by joem on Jul 6, 2022 21:42:12 GMT
Truly awful. This is not Chekhov and should not be advertised as such.
The staging must have cost 75p, the shoes 0p. Why does Lloyd feel we need to be presented with a range of corns and bunyons? Does it inform on the characters?
There is little character development anyway, no movement and you could watch this on radio and miss out on nothing really. It is like a minor Pirandello piece but with hugely inferior dialogue. The actors did their best but with such poor fare there are limits to what can be achieved.
I'm glad I've seen it so I don't have to see it again.
The theatre felt as if it had been prepared for some Tennessee Williams play - hot and sticky and they can't switch on the fans because they're too noisy - never mind the actors are all miked.
An evening to forget.
|
|
904 posts
|
Post by lonlad on Jul 6, 2022 23:24:13 GMT
Notwithstanding the rave (not) review directly above, press night is tomorrow (Thursday).
|
|
703 posts
|
Post by theatremiss on Jul 6, 2022 23:45:51 GMT
Absolutely dreadful. This isn’t how Chekhov is done and I’ve seen a few Chekhov plays and productions over the years. I’m not buying into the stripped back nature of this production, it is sheer laziness and very cheap and nasty looking. Even the wonderful Varma couldn’t pull this one back. From front of DC I actually saw someone leave in the first act, the guy was centre stalls about 3rd row back, so I am sure he was seen, someone in the box in DC left as did a woman at the back of DC, all during act 1. I however made it to the interval and left. The lure of an earlier train home was more enticing than the wish to stay for the second act. It was also baking hot and I spent so much time mopping my brow due to the stuffiness of the theatre. Not a great night out, not even an average one
I can’t remember how to do a spoiler thingy otherwise I’d say much more. I will be really interesting to see the reviews when they’ve had press night.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Jul 7, 2022 6:01:36 GMT
Truly awful. This is not Chekhov and should not be advertised as such. It's the Anya Reiss hatchet job isn't it ? Her version of Three Sisters is up there amongst the worst Chekhov adaptations of all time. Everyone should just use Michael Frayn's translations, they are perfect. I see TodayTix are doing £25 Rush seats for this - I'll give it a go when the weather gets cooler. |
|
|
|
Post by alessia on Jul 7, 2022 10:41:59 GMT
Yes the Pinter is incredibly hot, I don't know why. The upper levels in particular. They really need to sort it out as it spoils the experience, especially if you already aren't enjoying the play!
|
|
4 posts
|
Post by nevervane on Jul 8, 2022 12:59:37 GMT
The reviews (both here and from critics) seem very mixed! Though I think I've seen more positive than negative in the press.
Snagged a ticket last night and I really enjoyed it and the audience seemed very engaged despite the awful heat.
I do think though, that if you're not into it by the first half hour then it would be pretty arduous to sit through the rest. You do have to buy in to the performance style.
I wouldn't see it again but I would recommend going. Just bring a water bottle if you're going in the next few days!
|
|
1,120 posts
|
Post by samuelwhiskers on Jul 8, 2022 14:22:39 GMT
I smuggled in two bottles (one of which may not have contained water) half full of ice!
I found this weirdly compelling and hypnotic, though it absolutely feels like all the actors have just taken massive amounts of Valium. Such a strange directorial decision to have most of the actors speak their lines in an extremely slow flat monologue. Nina is a joy in the first half because she actually has energy and emotion in her voice.
The lack of set or movement does force you to pay attention to the dialogue and the dialogue only, despite the flat affect.
Script is pretty dire. I don’t need lines about mobile phone plans! The scene where they play Charades and argue about movies is just strange. The movies named aren’t interesting or relevant enough for such attention.
You either click into it and find it compelling, or hate it.
|
|
394 posts
|
Post by lichtie on Jul 9, 2022 11:18:38 GMT
I won't be able to find out for myself today as it's cancelled due to COVID in the cast.
|
|
703 posts
|
Post by theatremiss on Jul 9, 2022 13:03:28 GMT
I won't be able to find out for myself today as it's cancelled due to COVID in the cast. Or maybe they are trying to think of a way to improve the production: shoes, set, wings? |
|
