5,120 posts
|
Post by Phantom of London on Nov 28, 2020 18:01:51 GMT
I saw a production too at the Southwark Playhouse and I found it a struggle.
I can say the same about Thornton Wilder’s Our Town, the only thing I’ve got from that play is constantly looking at my watch,
|
|
2,389 posts
|
Post by peggs on Nov 28, 2020 18:10:09 GMT
The witches terrified me in the Stewart/Fleetwood version though yes I agree with your point generally about witches now lynette. I think at school Macbeth was reduced to 'they both evil and bloody thirsty'. Profound! I loved the Don Carlos with Derek Jacobi in my early theatre going days. But yes sometimes things are built up so much there's no meeting that level of expectation and I fairly often am not sure why something is a 'classic' or considered so earth breaking. |
|
4,046 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by Dawnstar on Nov 28, 2020 18:21:16 GMT
Don Carlos too I think, you have to be German. I've not seen the Schiller but Verdi's version is probably my favourite of his operas - and I prefer it Italian to the French even though the French is "correct". I would have thought it would interest the Spanish & French more than the Germans, as it's a French princess marrying into the Spanish royal family. |
|
|
|
Post by sph on Nov 28, 2020 19:33:20 GMT
I'm just not a Shakespeare person and don't enjoy it at all. I respect his importance in laying the foundations for modern theatre and storytelling, but likewise silent films paved the way for modern-day films and I don't particularly enjoy those either!
And then there's the "Oh but if you see it done WELL..." crowd who think you just haven't seen the right production of a Shakespeare play - and they insist on telling you about that MARVELLOUS interpretation they saw of Hamlet in 1973 with nothing on stage but an electric radiator and a neon light.
It's really just not for me.
|
|
5,716 posts
|
Post by lynette on Nov 28, 2020 20:37:25 GMT
The Patrick Stewart is very good. Wasn’t it thingy Fleetwood as LM? Remind me.and a modern take on it. Stalinist
|
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Nov 28, 2020 21:06:37 GMT
The Patrick Stewart is very good. Wasn’t it thingy Fleetwood as LM? Remind me.and a modern take on it. Stalinist Mrs Rupert Goold. Correct. Stalinist yes. Very nasty first scene of a soldier dying in hospital (from Scene II in the play actually) surrounded by nurses who then launch into “When shall we three ....”. |
|
1,064 posts
|
Post by David J on Nov 29, 2020 1:44:00 GMT
Macbeth is one of those plays where I feel the first half is the most interesting. Right up to Macbeth's second meeting with the witches. After that the play slows down for me as we lead up to his death. That said the Malcolm and Macduff scene is one of the best in the play.
Agree on the Rupert Goold Macbeth. Best Macbeth for me is the Yukio Ninagawa production. Beautiful to watch and the only one I felt sorry for Macbeth. Then again it could have been the endless playing of Adagio for Strings affecting me.
Romeo and Juliet is worse for me. I think its telling that I haven't seen a production since the Rupert Goold production which really spiced up the play for me (there's an ongoing Rupert Goold theme here). The play is a good romantic/comedy play that turns into a tragedy by the end of the first half. After that the play drags as we watch the stars align for the lovers to die by bad luck.
Julius Caesar has a similar problem with the second half but its made up by some compelling characters. I think we can all agree Antony and Cleopatra really suffers by the end. Even an average production will feel tedious.
Henry V does nothing for me. Whether or not you make it a jingoistic of an anti-war play. Except for the time when I saw Antic Disposition's WW1 production, when I realized it is better as a soldier's play rather than a play about Henry V. Watching the soldiers of the trenches finding themselves in the soldiers the play draws the limelight to away from the titular character
Just as I find King Lear is rather England's tragedy rather than his. He's a difficult character to sympathize with as it is and yet I've seen more than a dozen productions. So many characters die, many of whom are england's leaders, so the surviving ones in the closing moments are left lost and rudderless as england is left adrift.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Nov 29, 2020 11:08:02 GMT
... there's an ongoing Rupert Goold theme here Rupert Goold used to be such a great Shakespeare director. In addition to the ones you mention there were the Arctic "Tempest", the Las Vegas "Merchant of Venice", Pete Postelthwaite's "King Lear", Ben Whishaw "Richard II" on TV, and years ago an "Othello" where Othello was a USA airman on a base in England during WW-II. All quite brilliant in their way. But all we've had from him in the last decade has been a distinctly average and unimaginative "Richard III" with Ralph Fiennes. It's a pity. |
|
5,120 posts
|
Post by Phantom of London on Nov 29, 2020 12:47:58 GMT
I just watched the film of Macbeth with Stewart/Fleetwood.
It kind of reminded me of the Godfather in one scene, ‘where they take care of family business.’
|
|
|
|
Post by crabtree on Nov 29, 2020 15:43:01 GMT
Godot can keep waiting, I'm afraid.
|
|
1,064 posts
|
Post by David J on Nov 29, 2020 17:32:13 GMT
... there's an ongoing Rupert Goold theme here Rupert Goold used to be such a great Shakespeare director. In addition to the ones you mention there were the Arctic "Tempest", the Las Vegas "Merchant of Venice", Pete Postelthwaite's "King Lear", Ben Whishaw "Richard II" on TV, and years ago an "Othello" where Othello was a USA airman on a base in England during WW-II. All quite brilliant in their way. But all we've had from him in the last decade has been a distinctly average and unimaginative "Richard III" with Ralph Fiennes. It's a pity. I saw his R+J, Merchant and Richard II. Some of the best and most creative Shakespeare I've seen. Such a shame his productions in the Almeida haven't been as inspiring. His Medea is the worst theatre experience I've ever seen. Talk about dreary. Yes, I'd rather see Wooster Group's Troilus and Cressida over that. That said he is in charge of Headlong and Almeida that attracts some very talented directors. |
|
1,064 posts
|
Post by David J on Nov 29, 2020 18:12:50 GMT
Three Sisters, Ivanov, Platonov and Uncle Vanya are my favorite Chekhov plays but otherwise I've yet to see The Seagull that engaged me and I haven't seen The Cherry Orchard since the NT production 9 years ago.
I won't say Angels in America was tedious. The NT production was very good. I could just tell I need to experience more in life to really engage with the plays
Never a fan of George Bernard Shaw. Candida and that controversial act from Man + Superman are the best pieces of his I've seen so far and I like some of his writing. But his plays always feel dry and unengaging. Heartbreak House at Chichester is one of the most tedious pieces of theatre I've seen with of the most unlikeable characters
Oh and I hate Hay Fever. I get the whole point is to make fun of this bohemian family but that is practically all Noel Coward has to offer and I hated them.
|
|
5,120 posts
|
Post by Phantom of London on Nov 29, 2020 18:53:51 GMT
Oh I definitely not saying Angels in America is tedious, I’m saying that a 8hr play felt like 2hr play.
Angels in America, War Horse and Curious Dog and Jerusalem are the finest plays I have ever seen.
Mentioning Angels in America with this thread title, I can see why you thought I was down on Angels.
That Medea in the Greek season at the Medea, felt like 8hr, wasn’t a patch on the National version, where Helen McCrory was absolutely superb.
|
|
5,031 posts
|
Post by Someone in a tree on Nov 29, 2020 20:03:44 GMT
I've just watched Long days journey into night (digital theatre) . Goad it was painful and is now firmly on the list. Wiki tells me A moon for the misforgotten is the sequel - yay!
|
|
1,064 posts
|
Post by David J on Nov 29, 2020 22:06:28 GMT
Oh I definitely not saying Angels in America is tedious, I’m saying that a 8hr play felt like 2hr play. Angels in America, War Horse and Curious Dog and Jerusalem are the finest plays I have ever seen. Mentioning Angels in America with this thread title, I can see why you thought I was down on Angels. That Medea in the Greek season at the Medea, felt like 8hr, wasn’t a patch on the National version, where Helen McCrory was absolutely superb. Sorry didn't think you were down on Angels at all. Glad the time flew by when you saw it, whereas I didn't. Enjoy the writing or anything and appreciated it discussed way more than homosexuality and AIDs. Just didn't connect with me on an emotional level enough to warrant that amount of time. As I remember leaving the second part I thought these are very personal plays that on touch life experiences that I've have or yet to face to fully appreciate. Especially at 8 hours. Now on the Medea side it was an hour and 30 minute production that felt like an eternal slog listening to what sounded like someone's ramblings on their blog copied into the script. And has writer Rachel Cusk written another play since then? And after all that, when I was yearning for the famous ending, they have this 'thing' come one (I believe it was meant to be a God) and give a monologue in which she passingly says "oh and the kids killed themselves" Funnily enough Wooster Groups Troilus and Cressida was more than 3 hours so I must have been mad staying after the interval. Partly because it was the first time I was watching the play. But at the same it was the first time I was watching an absolutely pretentiously bad production and it was fascinating to watch. Like watching a car crash in slow motion. I left Medea absolutely livid. Funny what you get out of a long production sometimes |
|
|
|
Post by vickyg on Nov 30, 2020 10:04:19 GMT
If you can’t suspend disbelief vickyg, I do not see how you can enjoy any theatre. The very act of acting on stage in any time setting is false. Only monologues or real life, time conversations would be ok? I’m puzzled. Helen Mirren has just been criticised for saying that we should get kids to experience Shakespeare first in the theatre before school as so often school ruins it for us. But I agree with her. A good production will intrigue the kids and mostly they won’t notice that they don’t get every line. I meant I seem to not be able to suspend disbelieve for Romeo and Juliet and A Midsummer Night's Dream specifically. My favourite feeling is when something takes you to another world and you are totally in it. But no matter how many productions of the above I see, that never happens. |
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Nov 30, 2020 11:49:59 GMT
I've just watched Long days journey into night (digital theatre) . Goad it was painful and is now firmly on the list. Wiki tells me A moon for the misforgotten is the sequel - yay! A Moon for the Misbegotten is appallingly dull. I saw a famous production of it years ago with Frances de la Tour. Painful. I've never found Joe Orton's plays in the slightest bit amusing, real museum pieces. They never get revived now but his reputation is still high. I liked the Rupert Goold "Medea" - I was familar with the play anyway and it was an interesting spin on it. |
|
5,031 posts
|
Post by Someone in a tree on Nov 30, 2020 12:38:36 GMT
I've just watched Long days journey into night (digital theatre) . Goad it was painful and is now firmly on the list. Wiki tells me A moon for the misforgotten is the sequel - yay! A Moon for the Misbegotten is appallingly dull. I saw a famous production of it years ago with Frances de la Tour. Painful. I've never found Joe Orton's plays in the slightest bit amusing, real museum pieces. They never get revived now but his reputation is still high. I liked the Rupert Goold "Medea" - I was familar with the play anyway and it was an interesting spin on it. What the butler saw was on in Wendy's End 12 years ago. A few celebs in the cast and every performance was comped. It was poor but I would try another Orton, since then I've not noticed any chances to sample another Orton. I also didn't mind the Goold's Medea. |
|
5,169 posts
|
Post by TallPaul on Nov 30, 2020 12:48:51 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by ftfadia on Dec 1, 2020 0:08:33 GMT
I'm just not a Shakespeare person and don't enjoy it at all. I respect his importance in laying the foundations for modern theatre and storytelling, but likewise silent films paved the way for modern-day films and I don't particularly enjoy those either! And then there's the "Oh but if you see it done WELL..." crowd who think you just haven't seen the right production of a Shakespeare play - and they insist on telling you about that MARVELLOUS interpretation they saw of Hamlet in 1973 with nothing on stage but an electric radiator and a neon light. It's really just not for me. Same! I keep trying Shakespeare and all different kinds of productions waiting to 'get it' but I really just don't think it's for me. Can totally appreciate many aspects of the plays but still I don't actually enjoy myself when I'm sat there watching. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 1, 2020 13:40:23 GMT
Three Sisters, Ivanov, Platonov and Uncle Vanya are my favorite Chekhov plays but otherwise I've yet to see The Seagull that engaged me and I haven't seen The Cherry Orchard since the NT production 9 years ago. There was a touring Headlong production of The Seagull directed by Blanche McIntyre that I thought worked very well (saw it at Richmond). The one Chekhov that I struggle with is Ivanov, the rest are up there with the greatest plays in my opinion. |
|
5,716 posts
|
Post by lynette on Dec 1, 2020 13:45:45 GMT
Seen some tedious Chekhov in my time and some a bit odd but a really good production can get you all excited again like the Vanya at the moment which i think is online somewhere. Brilliant. Funny how Chekhov can be poorly produced but even an odd Shakespeare isn’t tedious. Am I wrong?
|
|
|
|
Post by oxfordsimon on Dec 1, 2020 14:16:25 GMT
So much with Chekhov comes down to the translation. And, of course, how much a director can continue the adaptation process in translating the translation into something viable for modern audiences.
I am working on The Cherry Orchard at the moment and selected one of the earliest English versions because it was out of copyright and thus I could further develop the text in the rehearsal room.
It didn't come with any modern sensibilities or attempts to make it feel more relevant. It was a straightforward translation into English by someone who understood the theatre.
It isn't cutting edge or modern. It is close to the original period in terms of feel and I can make it work with my cast as we explore character and situation.
If you stay true to Chekhov being a writer of plays in the comedic rather than tragic tradition, you avoid the heavy feel to those productions which only focus on the more tragic elements of the scripts. This is not that you have to treat them as sitcoms or farce. You have to view them as bittersweet comedies about dysfunctional people and to have casts who can treat their characters as real people. This allows the natural humour to emerge which then creates a more balanced interpretation.
So often modern productions come with an agenda rather than letting Chekhov be Chekhov.
I was loving working on Cherry Orchard before a virus delayed things by a year. With very few minor trims, we were looking at a run time of two hours plus interval which is not a long show. I am really looking forward to reassembling my team in the spring.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Dec 1, 2020 15:45:19 GMT
So much with Chekhov comes down to the translation. And, of course, how much a director can continue the adaptation process in translating the translation into something viable for modern audiences. I think the best translations are those by Michael Frayn - he has the advantage that in addition to being a very good playwright himself he speaks Russian and so worked from the original texts. There is one bit in Three Sisters in particular that I listen for that Frayn has rendered perfectly while all other versions I've seen are awkward. |
|
|
|
Post by cellarmaster on Oct 19, 2024 21:40:29 GMT
Never a fan of George Bernard Shaw. I imagine Shaw would be very annoyed to be called tedious. He loved provoking strong reactions, and often succeeded. Fellow playwright Henry Arthur Jones called him “a freakish homunculus germinated outside lawful procreation.” Israel Zangwill said “The way Bernard Shaw believes in himself is very refreshing in these atheistic days when so many people believe in no God at all.” There are lots of funny quotes about and from Shaw here: Funny theatre quotes, quips and insults |
|
