|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 30, 2017 6:53:33 GMT
Sope Disiru, so I have reasonably high hopes.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 30, 2017 7:47:34 GMT
Given they are already offering all tickets for some performances of Julius Caesar and Antony and Cleopatra for £10 for some performances in Stratford (including weekends) I suspect you are both correct. Hopefully they will also price the front row at £10 as usual. Who'd want to be front row for Titus Andronicus?! ;-) |
|
353 posts
|
Post by cirque on Mar 30, 2017 8:14:33 GMT
i weep for the loss of RSC as a company that related Shakespeare to our times.......its no longer a cause for gripe,replace with anger.Dont bleat about attracting new audiences-they will die of boredom and bewilderment.
sorry...no pleasure in this at all.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Mar 30, 2017 8:15:12 GMT
Given they are already offering all tickets for some performances of Julius Caesar and Antony and Cleopatra for £10 for some performances in Stratford (including weekends) I suspect you are both correct. Hopefully they will also price the front row at £10 as usual. Who'd want to be front row for Titus Andronicus?! ;-) In the Barbican that will be no problem. In the Pit for the Deborah Warner/Brian Cox one it was quite a queasy experience, the threat and anticipation of violence being almost as effective as the violence itself. The last RSC one in the Swan was quite a gore-fest too, |
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Mar 30, 2017 8:20:53 GMT
Sope Disiru, so I have reasonably high hopes. The pianist guy from our TV favorite "The Halcyon" ? Maybe that wasn't his best work ..... |
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Mar 30, 2017 8:35:28 GMT
i weep for the loss of RSC as a company that related Shakespeare to our times.......its no longer a cause for gripe,replace with anger.Dont bleat about attracting new audiences-they will die of boredom and bewilderment. sorry...no pleasure in this at all. I'm not sure they have ever related Shakespeare to our time, if I think of the really great RSC productions I have seen none of them explicitly did that, even the most recent unqualified successes such as the Boyd history cycle didn't. What has happened now is that something that used to be just one strand of their Shakespeare output - the literal verse-based approach to the text followed by Doran and before by Hall/Barton - has become the only strand in their output with other directors apparently co-opted into that approach. They have no-one on the regular staff who takes a different approach - in the past for example Peter Brook, Katie Mitchell, Deborah Warner, Adrian Noble, Michael Boyd, Rupert Goold all provided at least some variety of approach. Ironically what they are providing through things like Doran's dire History cycle is heritage Shakespeare which harks back to the approach in the 1940-50s whereas The Globe which is often accused of providing heritage Shakespeare is actually providing something else (albeit not to my personal taste). |
|
397 posts
|
Post by altamont on Mar 30, 2017 9:07:44 GMT
Clearly not a view shared by many, but I actually like the RSC to be purveyors of "traditional" Shakespeare. Everywhere else puts their own interpretation on the plays, including plenty that relate to current times - I find it refreshing to know that what I see at Stratford will be a little more traditional - perhaps in the current climate a bit old fashioned.
In recent months, I've seen the Harriet Walter and Toneelgroep versions of Julius Caesar - and they were both excellent - I'm now looking forward to seeing a "heritage" performance as a contrast
|
|
219 posts
|
Post by PalelyLaura on Mar 30, 2017 9:43:28 GMT
The last Julius Caesar at the RSC was set in Africa - it was fantastic and I'm looking forward to see this new production. I also like to compare and contrast more 'traditional' and 'modern' interpretations. I don't particularly mind where I see different kinds of productions (apart from the Globe, where I think it makes sense to be a bit more traditional) - just so long as overall, there is a good variety.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 30, 2017 9:49:58 GMT
Sometimes I prefer a traditional dress production, because there's just only so many times you can see a modern-dress Hamlet with everyone in suits except Hamlet in a t-shirt and no one's wearing anything more colourful than "dark grey". Tom Piper once said you can set a Shakespeare play in three different times - the time it is set, the time it was written, or the modern day. To set it in any other time adds a whole weight of cultural baggage that just weighs it down. I think he's a little bit wrong, as anyone who's familiar with Ian McKellen's Richard III may also agree, but I do see where he's coming from. Unfortunately it seems so does everyone else, as it's difficult to get a production of any play that looks notably different from other productions once you've seen it a few times. And as modern dress is currently extremely popular, it's breeches and togas that appeal to me right now.  |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 30, 2017 10:00:22 GMT
I will see Titus - it is a rarely-performed play. Coriolanus is quite rare too but it depends who is playing the lead as to whether it is worthwhile. is directed by Blanche McIntyre. Who has a very good reputation but who I've found to be not for me. In the two classic plays I've seen directed by her, she seemed to identify certain specific elements of the plays and make them theatrically interesting, centring modern staging devices on them, but the rest of the play around this seemed a bit heavy and flat. And if she doesn't convince you of the worth of her dramaturgy, then the show seems a bit of a wasted ooportunity. Jan, I guess you'll probably like it because you'll be interested in what she's spotted in the play and the angle she takes. |
|
219 posts
|
Post by PalelyLaura on Mar 30, 2017 10:08:45 GMT
It's funny because I've always loved the versatility of Shakespeare - I feel like you can set his plays in a huge variety of times and places and it can work in any of them. Whereas Jacobean revenge tragedy, for instance, is much more tied to the original time and place - I've never seen a successful production of one of these plays set outside the original period (except for a student production of The Duchess of Malfi, set in 1950s Italy, which had a cool 'noir' atmosphere).
|
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Mar 30, 2017 10:15:49 GMT
Sometimes I prefer a traditional dress production, because there's just only so many times you can see a modern-dress Hamlet with everyone in suits except Hamlet in a t-shirt and no one's wearing anything more colourful than "dark grey". Tom Piper once said you can set a Shakespeare play in three different times - the time it is set, the time it was written, or the modern day. To set it in any other time adds a whole weight of cultural baggage that just weighs it down. I think he's a little bit wrong, as anyone who's familiar with Ian McKellen's Richard III may also agree, but I do see where he's coming from. Unfortunately it seems so does everyone else, as it's difficult to get a production of any play that looks notably different from other productions once you've seen it a few times. And as modern dress is currently extremely popular, it's breeches and togas that appeal to me right now. Piper is talking rubbish. Sometimes the "historical baggage" of another time brilliantly illuminates the play. You have mentioned one example. Another was the Michael Boyd Troilus and Cressida set in 1970s Belfast during the troubles - for a start it perfectly explained why the two opposing sides could easily come and go from each other's areas in the city under siege. There are many other good examples, Jonathan Miller and Trevor Nunn both set Measure for Measure in Freud's Vienna, the Rupert Goold Merchant (and his Othello with a black USA airman in WW-II East Anglia), the Barton Indian Raj Much Ado etc etc. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 30, 2017 10:18:32 GMT
Setting a play in a specific time and place is a very old-fashioned way to do Shakespeare.
The plays were written to take place in the present moment on a stage with the audience who were present.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Mar 30, 2017 11:51:50 GMT
Setting a play in a specific time and place is a very old-fashioned way to do Shakespeare. The plays were written to take place in the present moment on a stage with the audience who were present. So your argument is that doing the plays in the same way they were done 400 years ago ISN'T old fashioned ? Anyway the single piece of evidence we have (for Titus Andronicus) is that even in Shakespeare's day the plays were not done in contemporary ("modern") dress. It is also a very conservative view to say the original staging intentions of the author should be respected anyway. |
|
1,064 posts
|
Post by bellboard27 on Mar 30, 2017 12:36:05 GMT
I enjoyed the RSC LLL & MAAN book ending WW1. Also productions are not just limited to the present and a choice of historical periods. I went to a Hamlet set in some sort of sci-fiction future!
|
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Mar 30, 2017 12:41:21 GMT
I enjoyed the RSC LLL & MAAN book ending WW1. Also productions are not just limited to the present and a choice of historical periods. I went to a Hamlet set in some sort of sci-fiction future! Oh the future is a very rare place to set Shakespeare. I recall Hytner's Measure for Measure seemed to be set in some entirely self-contained imaginary world. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 30, 2017 13:40:40 GMT
Other than the front row of the stalls (which has "restricted view of surtitles" and is £40) the whole of the stalls and circle are £50 for the Ninagawa Macbeth. £28 for upper circle.
Looks like they have not put the side stalls seats on sale yet, presumably waiting to confirm details of the staging to see if these will be restricted.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 30, 2017 14:24:41 GMT
As an emerging director, Phyllida Lloyd directed a main-stage A Midsummer Night's Dream set in outer space. She later excised this production from her CV.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Mar 30, 2017 16:23:09 GMT
As an emerging director, Phyllida Lloyd directed a main-stage A Midsummer Night's Dream set in outer space. She later excised this production from her CV. And yet she left in her CV her NT Pericles. Inexplicable. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 30, 2017 18:05:25 GMT
It's certainly a suitably eclectic line-up - which is probably just as well, given I fancy trying the Woyzeck and Snow Mouse...
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 3, 2017 8:33:13 GMT
Barbican member's booking for the new season opens today - including the Ninagawa Macbeth but not including the RSC stuff which is next week - supposed to start at 10:00 but booking is already open.
|
|
562 posts
|
Post by jadnoop on Apr 3, 2017 11:48:13 GMT
Really looking forward to the Ninagawa Macbeth. It's strange that the cheaper/side seats aren't on sale yet. If it's a revival of something that's been at the Barbican previously I assumed that they would know about any viewing restrictions or sight lines issues.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 3, 2017 12:01:18 GMT
I think Macbeth was at the National originally rather than the Barbican?
But yes, they must know what the set is like so odd they've not put the side seats on sale yet. I seem to remember on a previous situation like this managing to book one of these by phone even though they weren't available on the website.
|
|
4,955 posts
|
Post by Someone in a tree on Apr 4, 2017 9:25:54 GMT
the website very helpfully informs me of the day of public booking but not the time. grrrr
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 4, 2017 9:48:25 GMT
Member's booking was 10AM although tickets went on sale around 9:30, so I'd assume the same for public booking
|
|
