587 posts
|
Post by Polly1 on Jul 19, 2022 11:49:34 GMT
Saw and liked this at Chichester, although Mr. Polly was quite bored. Don't know if they're miked at The Bridge but on the thrust stage at Chi, I found great difficulty hearing the younger actors, and Phoebe Nicolls in particular.
A shame this isn't doing good businees but is anything selling well at the moment?
|
|
1,120 posts
|
Post by samuelwhiskers on Jul 19, 2022 12:36:12 GMT
The only show I’ve seen sell out this year was Prima Facie (and maybe Punchdrunk’s latest).
I was at Much Ado press night last night and the circle was half empty, which I’ve never seen on a press night.
|
|
1,862 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by NeilVHughes on Jul 19, 2022 12:41:03 GMT
Was at Jack Absolute last night and attendance was equally low.
I put this down to the heat and travel restrictions as there were significantly less people ambling along the southbank as I made my way to the theatre.
|
|
7,061 posts
|
Post by Jon on Jul 19, 2022 12:57:09 GMT
Was at Jack Absolute last night and attendance was equally low. I put this down to the heat and travel restrictions as there were significantly less people ambling along the southbank as I made my way to the theatre. I agree, I wouldn't go to the theatre currently until things cool down a bit. |
|
|
|
Post by alessia on Jul 19, 2022 15:51:58 GMT
It has now appeared in the Central tickets club, along with Doll's house- so definitely getting a bit desperate to get the theatre full.
|
|
|
|
Post by nottobe on Jul 29, 2022 10:25:13 GMT
I caught this last night and thought it was terrific. Stephen Beresford has written a very compelling play that gives you a lot to think about but is also an entertaining night out. All nine of the characters are fully formed and real helped by top notch performances from everyone. I don't think I can really add to the other comments people have left but would urge everyone to see this play.
I also have to say I found the ending to be very moving and I usually do not cry at theatre however I did feel my eyes getting a little watery. And a bonus that I would say the theatre was quite full, 80% and most of the empty seats in highest circle.
|
|
1,471 posts
|
Post by mkb on Jul 30, 2022 16:33:56 GMT
The auditorium was less than half full on Friday night, which is a crying shame for such a cracking play. The audience was mainly an older crowd too. Don't youngsters appreciate good theatre any more? Attracting the under 40s to straight plays has always been a problem in the provinces, but it seems to have infected London too. I presume it shows that the cost-of-living crisis is disproportionately hitting younger people.
I concur with others that the cast are first-rate, especially Jennings and Nicholls. The story is engaging throughout, although I struggled to believe that the mother and stepfather of the Southbury child would behave in quite the way they do when confronted by loss and a vicar and his family being so supportive.
I loved the character of the interfering Jan, driven by loneliness into misguided do-gooding, and who is something of a monster. I think we've all met people just like Jan and can shudder in horror.
The play is a mere smidgen away from being a five-star. So much is very well observed and insightful, but there are one or two lapses in verisimilitude that damage the piece overall. It's very much recommended nevertheless.
From the front row, side stalls, I found myself having to peer round seated or stationary characters for a few minutes at a time, but these are excellent value for money at £25.
Four stars.
Act 1: 19:30-20:34
Act 2: 20:53-21:56
(I think someone wanted to get home quickly, given the very prompt start and slightly shortened interval!)
|
|
1,471 posts
|
Post by mkb on Jul 30, 2022 18:49:10 GMT
***CORRECTION***
My partner points out that, although the character of Lee claims to be the closest thing to a father that Taylor Southbury had, he was actually her uncle not stepfather.
|
|
3,565 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by showgirl on Jul 30, 2022 20:17:31 GMT
Having seen this at last at today's matinee (booking held over from last year), I endorse but can't improve on the recent positive comments. It's a messy play, a bit melodramatic towards the end but consistently engaging and full of interesting, well-developed and varied characters, all seemingly at loggerheads with each other. I did feel a couple of the women were almost too intense and I wondered why the vicar and his wife ever got together or remained so but this is the sort of play I go to the theatre hoping to see and very rewarding.
|
|
|
|
Post by matty on Aug 2, 2022 22:07:39 GMT
I saw this tonight and really enjoyed it. It's the first west end play I've seen recently that I've walked away and thought that it was worth the price of my ticket. The cast was great, as others have said, the play is messy, but I was totally engrossed.
Shame that it hasn't sold well. The top gallery was open tonight, but I'm not sure why, they could have moved the people down a gallery and it would have made it look a bit busier.
|
|
|
|
Post by alessia on Aug 3, 2022 5:42:31 GMT
The auditorium was less than half full on Friday night, which is a crying shame for such a cracking play. The audience was mainly an older crowd too. Don't youngsters appreciate good theatre any more? Attracting the under 40s to straight plays has always been a problem in the provinces, but it seems to have infected London too. I presume it shows that the cost-of-living crisis is disproportionately hitting younger people. You noticed this too, so it was not my impression...I have observed this a few times at the Bridge (Bach and sons was the same, A Number, even White Noise) for some reason it attracts an older crowd and dare I say, less diverse than any other theatre I've been in so far. I was wondering why this is, can it be the type of plays? Maybe a show about the Church wouldn't interest younger people- in this case. |
|
682 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by mrnutz on Aug 3, 2022 10:03:46 GMT
When I went to see this I was one of the youngest people there - and I'm 37! 99% white too.
|
|
|
|
Post by alessia on Aug 3, 2022 11:31:50 GMT
When I went to see this I was one of the youngest people there - and I'm 37! 99% white too. sounds about right. I noticed that the audience at the Bridge tends to be older, mostly white and, dare I say, very posh! when I went, there was a guy outside smoking a pipe lol - |
|
|
|
Post by theoracle on Aug 3, 2022 22:44:18 GMT
I found this very moving when I went to see this and felt the company handled the delicate and heavy elements of the show very well. To think it had been nearly 3 years since Alex Jennings was on stage seems almost immoral - he doesn’t hide the fact that he’s a seasoned pro in this production. Much of the cast seemed a fair bit younger but everyone brings their A game to this. The performance I attended was better attended than some others reported with it being 60% full but agree that it was still mainly older, white patrons which to be fair, I wasn’t surprised by.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 4, 2022 15:52:31 GMT
I struggled a bit with this.
Great acting all round, moving final scenes, some laugh-out-loud moments in the story.
But my main problem with it was: why wouldn’t a guy as bright as David try to strike a compromise with the family? Balloons outside the church? A few balloons on the close family’s pew only? It felt like a small gesture that wouldn’t have offset the vicar’s point of view too much either.
That would, of course, have rendered the play redundant. But I couldn’t help but feel maybe there was a more interesting story to be told in the Southbury family’s response to Lee’s actions…
|
|
|
|
Post by cavocado on Aug 5, 2022 7:38:27 GMT
But my main problem with it was: why wouldn’t a guy as bright as David try to strike a compromise with the family? Balloons outside the church? A few balloons on the close family’s pew only? It felt like a small gesture that wouldn’t have offset the vicar’s point of view too much either. People do often choose the wrong hills to die on, don't see when it's time to back down or know when to compromise. To me that was what made it an interesting play - the focus on this flawed and very frustrating character who has clearly got a lot of weaknesses and has compromised his integrity in other ways, but decides to make a stand over something like this. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2022 17:10:17 GMT
But my main problem with it was: why wouldn’t a guy as bright as David try to strike a compromise with the family? Balloons outside the church? A few balloons on the close family’s pew only? It felt like a small gesture that wouldn’t have offset the vicar’s point of view too much either. People do often choose the wrong hills to die on, don't see when it's time to back down or know when to compromise. To me that was what made it an interesting play - the focus on this flawed and very frustrating character who has clearly got a lot of weaknesses and has compromised his integrity in other ways, but decides to make a stand over something like this. That’s interesting. Do you feel he was wrong? Because I didn’t, entirely. It felt like the family only wanted all those balloons to make them feel ‘good’ about the event, if I can put it that way. I mean, surely they could have had a balloon-filled ceremony in a non-religious setting? My view would be that by choosing a church ceremony, you have to accept the Church gets a say in what’s allowed. I guess the final scenes knit together that both sides were right in a way. But following a couple of people back to the station afterwards (in a non-stalkery way!), they seemed to be discussing whether the vicar had been ‘punished enough’ by {Spoiler - click to view}His wife leaving him. And that felt weird to me, because I didn’t feel he deserved to be ‘punished’ - not for the balloon thing, anyway. |
|
|
|
Post by cavocado on Aug 5, 2022 19:42:29 GMT
That’s interesting. Do you feel he was wrong? Interesting question. My initial reaction is yes, he was wrong and should have made a pragmatic decision because of the impact on Taylor's family, local community and his own marriage/family. But I could see his reasons made sense, so maybe he was right - he's a messy, flawed character, but he was acting with integrity... |
|
1,083 posts
|
Post by andrew on Aug 6, 2022 22:52:36 GMT
I thought this was great. I didn’t have any issues with the vicars stance on the funeral, I think he explained his perspective very well and chose to draw the line of what’s acceptable in a church and what’s not, resolutely resisting disagreement from a community of people that aren’t even really part of his small congregation. All the actors were great, I thought the writing was good, and in act two when that “moment” happens it was genuinely an incredibly dramatic and well directed sequence. The final scene was excellent, not least because I love it when the size of the cast doubles just to pull off the last few minutes of something (The Inheritance Part 1, I’m looking at you…)
It’s criminal that it was so poorly attended. Young people do turn up to this theatre (eg for the Shakespeare stuff they gathered a younger crowd) but not for the very National Theatreish fare this is clearly a part of. I’m not sure if you can fix it, other than by casting young film stars unnecessarily. It’s a great shame.
|
|
1,057 posts
|
Post by David J on Aug 7, 2022 22:36:37 GMT
Saw this again with a friend of mine. Again a well written play. Not perfect, with a second act that doesn't live up to the highs of the meeting scene in the first, with the exception of that "moment".
This play reminded us of Ibsen's Enemy of the People, except with a happier ending for the main character.
One thing that struck me was how pacey it was, keeping things going whilst managing to deliver on the growing tension and characters. Inevitably there are some archetypes who are there to give a different voice like Janet Oram. And was there any point to the policewoman being pregnant?
At the end of the day, its about a priest trying to stay alive on this one hill he's made his stance on, which we both agreed worked. And Alex Jennings give a phenomenal performance here. And through the woodwork comes a number of themes. Not just the church, but how we can't understand everyone we meet, and whether getting that instant comfort or attention is actually rewarding.
This is the type of play I don't see frequently amongst modern plays and its a fresh breath of air.
|
|
77 posts
|
Post by tributary on Aug 9, 2022 21:43:09 GMT
I enjoyed this a lot but found the writing contrived and at times downright untruthful. That though didn’t stop our enjoyment of it.
|
|
4,789 posts
|
Post by Mark on Aug 13, 2022 20:42:31 GMT
Really enjoyed the matinee. Alex Jennings very good indeed and I found the writing to be excellent - and very funny at times. Got a TodayTix Rush ticket in the side section row J. There was only three of us in this whole section, was a shame to see lots of gaps, maybe 60% full overall, but the audience lapped it up.
|
|
5,694 posts
|
Post by lynette on Aug 28, 2022 9:32:15 GMT
I really do not understand why people think this is a wonderful play , unless I have read things wrongly. It was fine, some witty writing sub Ayckbourn, sub James Graham but overall it was a mush mush of every idea you could stuff in - gay marriage, ethnic adoption, alcoholism, loneliness, wrecking of local economies….etc etc… I would love to see this writer’s sixth play. It will be terse and to the point. Jennings carried it and I can’t see it entering the repertoire with less charismatic actors. The ending was contrived - we can’t get the coffin thru the traffic as if the police would not have cleared the way hours before for this huge event - to get the dead girl on the stage. Recently there has been a case of the vicar forbidding ‘Dad ‘ on a gravestone to be overruled by his bishop/archdeacon/whoever. This is how it works. Here the superior person hadn’t ruled. He wanted the vicar out. Tribunal case pending eh? This lack of actual realism became an obstacle for me.
|
|
