1,281 posts
|
Post by theatrefan77 on Nov 2, 2017 8:54:07 GMT
This was heavily papered last night. Got comps but passed them to friends as I didn't want to suffer it again. Two friends hated it, the other two thought it was OK. Very empty house apparently.
I totally agree with The Guardian review. For me it's totally spot on with just one star . All the main papers have given it an average of two stars which is in my opinion far too generous.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Nov 2, 2017 9:04:10 GMT
Sir Ian's voice was more hilarious than frightening...especially hearing him say 'succulent c---'...there were giggles all around in what was surely intended to be a shocking moment. That shows the power of McKellen, I'm laughing at it now and I wasn't even at the performance. |
|
3,536 posts
|
Post by Rory on Nov 2, 2017 9:09:47 GMT
This was heavily papered last night. Got comps but passed them to friends as I didn't want to suffer it again. Two friends hated it, the other two thought it was OK. Very empty house apparently. I totally with The Guardian review. For me it's totally spot on with just one star . All the main papers have given it an average of two stars which is in my opinion far too generous. Telegraph and Independent have given it 4 stars. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 2, 2017 13:05:43 GMT
Opening Night. Suzi Quatro. Jeff Wayne. Michael Barrymore. Names Names Names! Thankfully no pixie boots on show from La Seagrove but the real thoughts on everyone's minds wasn't the show but: Has anyone seen Claire Louise Connolly and Kerry Ellis in the same place at the same time? Does Glynis Barber have a picture in the attic? What a fox! Adam Garcia clearly knows his way around a boudoir.  Your Mother Knits Socks in Hell
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 2, 2017 13:24:29 GMT
Adam Garcia clearly knows his way around a boudoir. Just for that, we should all take a moment to enjoy a 1970s picture of Suzi Q.  |
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Nov 2, 2017 16:25:21 GMT
Adam Garcia clearly knows his way around a boudoir. Just for that, we should all take a moment to enjoy a 1970s picture of Suzi Q. I remember an interview with her in those self-same 1970s where she said she never wore knickers under her leather trousers as it was more comfortable. A useful tip that I am still waiting for an opportunity to test. |
|
7 posts
|
Post by peln on Nov 3, 2017 10:48:26 GMT
Oh dear several of us were walking out at curtain call after a West End preview last week. How did Jenny Seagrove keep from corpsing?
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 3, 2017 13:48:46 GMT
I see online that Father Joe is played by Elliot Harper. Bill Kenwright should place a prominent advert for The Exorcist in the Heisenberg programme, billing his show as "THE EXORCIST - AN ELLIOT HARPER PRODUCTION".
|
|
2,775 posts
|
Post by daniel on Nov 7, 2017 14:16:22 GMT
Interesting to note that an interval has now been added. Updated running time online of 2h10.
|
|
5,142 posts
|
Post by TallPaul on Nov 7, 2017 14:17:31 GMT
Interesting to note that an interval has now been added. Updated running time online of 2h10. Bar and ice-cream sales? |
|
2,775 posts
|
Post by daniel on Nov 7, 2017 14:25:03 GMT
Interesting to note that an interval has now been added. Updated running time online of 2h10. Bar and ice-cream sales? Possibly - traditionally producers have had to pay a "no interval fee" to the theatre owner, to make up for the lost revenue. Knowing Bill Kenwright, it wouldn't surprise me if he opted to put the interval in to avoid paying this. Could equally be due to disturbance from people re-entering the auditorium after going to the toilet, or perhaps not even being re-admitted full stop. Basically, I don't know  |
|
5,142 posts
|
Post by TallPaul on Nov 7, 2017 14:27:26 GMT
The things you learn on TheatreBoard. Every day is a school day. I love it!
|
|
3,536 posts
|
Post by Rory on Nov 7, 2017 15:52:54 GMT
Glad I saw it without the interval. Kept the tension level up. Surprised they've put one in again as the critics took issue with the interval in the Birmingham run.
|
|
22 posts
|
Post by iamian on Nov 9, 2017 11:29:35 GMT
Possibly - traditionally producers have had to pay a "no interval fee" to the theatre owner, to make up for the lost revenue. Knowing Bill Kenwright, it wouldn't surprise me if he opted to put the interval in to avoid paying this. Could equally be due to disturbance from people re-entering the auditorium after going to the toilet, or perhaps not even being re-admitted full stop. Basically, I don't know I guarantee you that it is ATG having a no interval penalty clause and BKL not wanting to pay it |
|
1,102 posts
|
Post by zak97 on Nov 12, 2017 15:07:34 GMT
Just had a look at ticket sales for tomorrow night - Upper Circle 23 sold, Dress Circle 49 sold. I know it's only a Monday (didn't look at other days), and the stalls looks under half sold (although I'm guessing some are with agencies?), but surely the running costs aren't low enough for this to chug through till March at this rate.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 12, 2017 16:52:06 GMT
I think if the next show (which I heard a while back is going in as a planned long runner, but obviously plans may of changed since) is expected to be a hit, they could bump it out I guess to have the next show in a few weeks earlier. That said though, its kinda pushing it for whatever show is going in next to not yet be announced. It leads me to think maybe a touring production could fill in until the Summer. Maybe that rumour of Addams Family could indeed be true?
|
|
904 posts
|
Post by lonlad on Nov 13, 2017 0:21:35 GMT
There were 500 in on Saturday night i.e. less than 50% of the house ... and on a Saturday evening !
|
|
7,059 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by Jon on Nov 13, 2017 0:26:14 GMT
I think if the next show (which I heard a while back is going in as a planned long runner, but obviously plans may of changed since) is expected to be a hit, they could bump it out I guess to have the next show in a few weeks earlier. That said though, its kinda pushing it for whatever show is going in next to not yet be announced. It leads me to think maybe a touring production could fill in until the Summer. Maybe that rumour of Addams Family could indeed be true? Or they could transfer a play like Quiz, it doesn't have to be a musical. |
|
904 posts
|
Post by lonlad on Nov 13, 2017 0:49:31 GMT
Quiz seems a longshot commercially for a house this size -- the Phoenix is much bigger, for instance, than the Duke of York's, where Ink is running, and that one has some names in the cast !
|
|
1,819 posts
|
Post by stevej678 on Nov 13, 2017 9:04:29 GMT
It made sense to have this in town for Halloween but the next few weeks are surely going to be a real struggle. Can there be a time of year when The Exorcist is less appealing than in the run up to Christmas?
|
|
3,536 posts
|
Post by Rory on Nov 13, 2017 9:29:56 GMT
I actually think younger audiences looking for a night out at the theatre as a festive treat, and alternative Christmas parties could go for this. The night I went, it was the youngest audience I've seen for a long time.
This is a very technically accomplished, atmospheric production with some nice performances and in my view is superior to the overrated Woman in Black. If that can do 28 years in town, there would be no justice if The Exorcist couldn't do 4 months.
|
|
3,057 posts
|
Post by ali973 on Nov 24, 2017 8:07:14 GMT
There's a scene where Uncle Burke (Tristan Wymark) who plays a director confesses to Father Damian (Adam Garcia) about how his cheap, trashy films are his sins and how he should be punished for them. Is it weird that I was thinking that this is a metaphor about Ben Kenwright?
I have a love hate relationship with horror movies, and have great interest in dark magic and the occult (though I don't practice), but I find it extremely fascinating. I also love The Exorcist and think it's one of the best horror movies ever made. So when this was announced for the stage, I said, "tickets please!".
I wasn't expecting high art here, but can't say that I was bored. Overall, lighting and set were pretty damn good and atmospheric. Special effects could have been better. Uncle Burke was a bit too cartoonish as the joie de vivre gay with a British accent. Clare Louise Connolly was pretty damn good as Ragan, and very convincing as a 12 year old. Jenny Seagrove read a bit too old to be a mother of a 12 year old, and looked and sounded like she was channelling Elaine Stritch! Was it only me who was like, "ELAINE?"! But I suppose she was fine as the concerned mother. Adam Garcia..what happened? The acting was really below par, dude.
Overall a pretty okay production by Kenwright. I expected worse. Would be interesting to see how a smaller intimate venue like Southwark Playhouse or Menier would handle this.
|
|
449 posts
|
Post by SageStageMgr on Nov 24, 2017 23:56:03 GMT
- [ ] Rather mixed feelings about this show! Overall a lot more positive than negative. Being a fan of the source material is always a mixed blessing. On the one hand, the opportunity to see the adaptation at all is a huge bonus - on the other, as always, it leaves the piece wide open to direct comparisons with the original (movie). In the numerous screen to stage adaptions I’ve seen over the years, often the largest obstacle the creators have to overcome is the audience’s perception and memories of the original. Be it a star cast member (Dick Van Dyke/Julie Andrews in “Mary Poppins”) or an extremely challenging-to-adapt iconic scene/moment (a flying car, a levitating 12 year old), the line between replica, homage and lip-service is a minute one.
“The Exorcist” is a surprisingly good fit for the stage as a piece of melodrama. The play zipped along nicely for me. The characters, although somewhat stock (the flamboyant gay British movie director, the reluctant priest, the doting mother) are fairly well established and their development sat fine with me. The flow of the story, the dialog and general quality of the writing was certainly strong enough to do the work justice. For example, a decent enough job was done of establishing Regan as a normal 12 year old girl, before her (slightly naive, admittedly) domination by malevolent Gandalf.
The casting is solid if unremarkable. I don’t have names handy as I’m sending this on a train home without a programme, but Regan did excellently as an adult actress playing a pre-teen girl. I rather liked Peter Bowles’ entrance! I found his performance intentionally downplayed, carefully sidestepping potential banana skins of camp ridiculousness. The outcome makes his elderly priest appear somewhat one-note, but it works. Adam Garcia was a tasty vanilla Damien. Unremarkable but fully palatable. I had a bit of a problem with Jenny Seagrove as Chris. Her acting was somewhat erratic; veering from hysterical squealing to almost unintelligible cod-American grumbling. She also looked more like Regan’s kindly Gran or a favourite Aunt than a supposed rom-com movie star.
The show is a faithful enough retelling of the movie. But those iconic moments I mentioned above? Extremely disappointing. And “The Exorcist” is a show that is really being sold on familiarity alone.
Stuff is outright missing; the spider-walking, the levitation - some is present but underwhelming to the point of derision. The vomiting is rubbish. The bed crucifix imagery is poorly realised. The production starts with a jump scare and that is literally it for the frights. If anything, the show underused the expected tropes of this kind of thing.
And here’s my biggest gripe; the whole thing feels somewhat like an opportunity missed. The effects range from utterly cack (a flower flops over, ooooooohhhh!) to ropey (Regan cutting into an obviously fake arm) to reasonably well done (parts of the exorcism in the finale). But at no point was I wowed by the stagecraft or spectacle. I wouldn’t say it felt “cheap”, but certainly lacking in ambition. Imagine what Cameron Mackintosh’s money and vision could’ve done with it, with top creative minds (Paul Kieve, Penn and Teller or Derren Brown) creating the illusions. It could have been so much more.
Not laughably bad, not breathtakingly good - just a fairly solid adaptation which won’t last until March I suspect.
Oh, I didn’t pay for my ticket but I wouldn’t have minded if I had paid about £30. Stalls less than half full.
|
|
1,245 posts
|
Post by joem on Dec 1, 2017 19:01:47 GMT
This was better than I expected. Still think horror doesn't work on stage but at least it wasn't boring and the production does try hard to create jumpy moments with the effects.
Good to see Peter Bowles still working.
Deals for premium seats with discounts and drinks thrown in but still plenty of empty seats. This won't last.
|
|
520 posts
|
Post by anthony on Dec 3, 2017 13:17:53 GMT
I saw it last night and thought it was OK. The set looks brilliant, especially right at the beginning of the play. I assume this is because you haven't had a chance to get used to the dark yet, so you don't see the stage hands/actors getting into position for the next scene, which you could clearly see a few minutes later. I also found the entire theatre was so atmospheric, they do a great job of building it up.
I found the interval to be in such a stupid position. The interval should have been after Regan kills Burke and not after Regan uses the crucifix as a phallus. It just seemed like such odd placing and very abrupt. After Burke just seemed like the natural place to put it, if they are going to have one.
I thought that both Jenny Seagrove and Clare Louise Connolly were brilliant.
|
|
