1,346 posts
|
Post by tmesis on May 29, 2017 15:44:03 GMT
I hated this at the National. Everyone seemed to find it hilariously funny but I didn't laugh once. In the past few years at NT only Cleansed was more annoying and tedious.
I remain amazed at the generally ecstatic reviews.
|
|
75 posts
|
Post by claireyfairy1 on May 29, 2017 18:21:15 GMT
I think the points about not exploring consequences are fair enough if that is important to you. I personally believe that isn’t the point at all and that it successfully and purposefully doesn’t moralise or judge these girls from a future with hindsight. Use of the word consequences implies an inevitability or a forgone conclusion that girls like these, who want to drink, go on escapades, have sex, explore their sexuality or indeed who react to tragic circumstances inelegantly or in ways that are shocking will have a future that is undesirable and thus should present them as people as undesirable. The world is a lot more complicated than that and assuming it’s inevitable and thus necessary to explore is just the kind of idea the play sticks two fingers up at. There's no Catholic guilt. No regrets.
That’s not to say there aren’t plenty of excellent plays that do explore those issues and they’re worthwhile too. But fundamentally this show is about friendship and dealing with the painful things that happen when you’re a teenager and trying to figure out who you are together, as a collective force of women that support and love each other, instead of tearing each other down (as women are so often portrayed in media).
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 29, 2017 19:46:31 GMT
Drama hasn't been the arbiter of morality for most of its long life and when it has it's been pretty dull and reactionary. Religion may have become less important in people's lives and politics somehow unimportant to them but those are the places to go if you want to be instructed in morality.
Theatre is a terrible hobby for perfectionists, aesthetic or moral.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 29, 2017 20:54:56 GMT
I hated this at the National. Everyone seemed to find it hilariously funny but I didn't laugh once. In the past few years at NT only Cleansed was more annoying and tedious. I remain amazed at the generally ecstatic reviews. I LOVED Cleansed |
|
651 posts
|
Post by greeny11 on May 29, 2017 21:33:09 GMT
I saw this tonight - best bits by far were the songs. Great singing and great harmonies. The rest of it left me a bit baffled. For something that won Best New Comedy at the Oliviers, it was remarkably unfunny. The bits that were meant to be serious were fine, but the rest of it was just not to my tastes. I also got lost as to whether they were portraying their main characters, or other characters. Overall, I was a bit disappointed, especially considering the rave reviews it's been getting.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 29, 2017 21:42:28 GMT
I saw this tonight - best bits by far were the songs. Great singing and great harmonies. The rest of it left me a bit baffled. For something that won Best New Comedy at the Oliviers, it was remarkably unfunny. The bits that were meant to be serious were fine, but the rest of it was just not to my tastes. I also got lost as to whether they were portraying their main characters, or other characters. Overall, I was a bit disappointed, especially considering the rave reviews it's been getting. It's the only show the director will ever have on in the WE Let her have her 2 seconds of fame And I must say She hasn't directed many of the RC Hits Under her tenure to date Has she? She is like a glorified caretaker |
|
196 posts
|
Post by rockinrobin on May 29, 2017 23:43:40 GMT
Oh no.
I'm flying to London in 2 days and planned to see it on Saturday afternoon because of rave reviews but having read this thread, I'm not so convinced anymore... What do I see instead? (Feeling tempted to return to the Young Vic and embark on a journey through galaxies with Brendan Cowell, but...).
Or should I still go?
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 30, 2017 0:00:10 GMT
Oh no. I'm flying to London in 2 days and planned to see it on Saturday afternoon because of rave reviews but having read this thread, I'm not so convinced anymore... What do I see instead? (Feeling tempted to return to the Young Vic and embark on a journey through galaxies with Brendan Cowell, but...). Or should I still go? Rule of thumb on the internet - don't listen to anyone who you don't know, haven't got a history with or who writes in a professional capacity so that you can research the same. Such opinions are utterly worthless to somebody else. Every single time. You may as well just go with your instincts. |
|
2,775 posts
|
Post by daniel on May 30, 2017 2:16:02 GMT
Oh no. I'm flying to London in 2 days and planned to see it on Saturday afternoon because of rave reviews but having read this thread, I'm not so convinced anymore... What do I see instead? (Feeling tempted to return to the Young Vic and embark on a journey through galaxies with Brendan Cowell, but...). Or should I still go? if it helps, I bloody loved it. Yes it's rude and crude, and doesn't take itself too seriously, but if that's your type of humour too then you'll have nae bother. It's great to take note of the opinions of others, but never let anyone put you off seeing a show if it's one your instincts tell you that you'll enjoy! |
|
3,564 posts
|
Post by showgirl on May 30, 2017 3:50:46 GMT
Finding this discussion interesting since, as I had to cancel my ticket for the NT run, I'm still undecided about making another attempt to see the play. I take the point about showing a range of young women, though when I was that age, neither I nor any of my friends behaved in the way claireyfairy1 describes. We certainly knew others who did do those things but obviously we looked on aghast from a safe distance, almost as though it might be contagious. I suppose the trouble is that a play about good, sensible girls (or boys), who do their homework, take their exams seriously and try to plan for the future, would be considered boring.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 30, 2017 8:13:41 GMT
Oh no. I'm flying to London in 2 days and planned to see it on Saturday afternoon because of rave reviews but having read this thread, I'm not so convinced anymore... What do I see instead? (Feeling tempted to return to the Young Vic and embark on a journey through galaxies with Brendan Cowell, but...). Or should I still go? Go with your instinct- if you liked the sound of it enough to want to book, go and see it! |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 30, 2017 8:18:58 GMT
Plus if your expectations are lowered, as they will have been by this thread, you may end up enjoying it far more than if your expectations were sky-high.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 30, 2017 8:55:33 GMT
I take the point about showing a range of young women, though when I was that age, neither I nor any of my friends behaved in the way claireyfairy1 describes. We certainly knew others who did do those things but obviously we looked on aghast from a safe distance, almost as though it might be contagious. I suppose the trouble is that a play about good, sensible girls (or boys), who do their homework, take their exams seriously and try to plan for the future, would be considered boring. [ That's my problem with this play - the ladette stereotype is outdated and just as insulting towards women as some of the 'old, white, male' plays. And it put me off seeing this. I didn't know anyone like that growing up, and my impression of young folk these days is that they've rejected that approach to life, being less likely to drink and have casual sex, and far more concerned with social justice? But if it's a good laugh, fair enough! |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 30, 2017 9:39:40 GMT
I suppose the trouble is that a play about good, sensible girls (or boys), who do their homework, take their exams seriously and try to plan for the future, would be considered boring. Harry Potter and the Cursed Child? Matilda? |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 30, 2017 9:41:54 GMT
Have you even seen Cursed Child or Matilda? Both heavily feature rebellious children who take matters into their own hands instead of buckling down and quietly doing what they're told.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 30, 2017 9:50:33 GMT
Have you even seen Cursed Child or Matilda? Both heavily feature rebellious children who take matters into their own hands instead of buckling down and quietly doing what they're told. Matilda is studious and intellectual and you can"t fault Scorpius and Albus for planning for their future, so much so that they create a number of different futures. |
|
5,142 posts
|
Post by TallPaul on May 30, 2017 13:34:26 GMT
Finding this discussion interesting since, as I had to cancel my ticket for the NT run, I'm still undecided about making another attempt to see the play. I take the point about showing a range of young women, though when I was that age, neither I nor any of my friends behaved in the way claireyfairy1 describes. We certainly knew others who did do those things but obviously we looked on aghast from a safe distance, almost as though it might be contagious. I suppose the trouble is that a play about good, sensible girls (or boys), who do their homework, take their exams seriously and try to plan for the future, would be considered boring. The History Boys? |
|
3,564 posts
|
Post by showgirl on May 30, 2017 18:47:22 GMT
Interesting points, Cardinal Pirelli and pdc1. I've never read/seen anything Harry Potter-related; ditto Matilda, but I've certainly seen - though obviously not remembered - The History Boys. All the plays featuring teenagers which I do recall seeing - e.g.Jumpy - depicted them as bolshy and rebellious, so apparently very cliched.
|
|
|
|
Post by stagebyte on May 30, 2017 23:10:57 GMT
Is there any way to instigate an intervention via the internet? When I saw this show I was sickened Not only by what was on stage But at the audience who seemed to find Promiscuity and profanity casual social abuse of alcohol Depicted by under age characters So hysterical Having worked on the other end of this And seen the consequences There is nothing empowering or funny about it To then try and dress it up for middle class audiences As an alternative and stylish night out Is laughable The characters depicted in the show Need a stern telling off And a social worker And I found the description of having sex with a dying person After removing his catheter Particularly deplorable And perverted And likely it would be a criminal matter for the hospital Rather than entertainment The two people I went with left before the end and didn't speak with me again Have to agree with Parsley - with one exception - no hysterical laughing on the night I went - the hysteria replaced, in the circle at least, by stony silence - with the exception of a small group who laughed at literally every line, to the extent we began to think they'd been planted tthere to drum up enthusiasm. The story was paper thin, the play populated with stereotypical cardboard characters: tough one with heart of gold, large funny one, A star student gone bad etc. Nothing new or empowering to be found here. The dialogue at times was cringeworthy... the 'poignant' monologues awkward iand unbelievable. It reminded me of an overlong sketch in search of a cohesive plot, like a half finished improvised student revue. Crude story topped by a cruder story all seemingly having very little point except to shock became very tedious very quickly. Anyone who can drink the amount they were supposed to be drinking onstage in the period supposedly covered wouldn't be drunk and having a wild time... they'd be dead. A night with Our Ladies was like being trapped stone cold sober on day two of a hen party bender - everyone working too hard at having a WILD TIME, slightly amusing things becoming hysterically funny, the pseudo 'intellectual' insights, the boring tearful ramblings after one too many. The actresses themselves were plainly talented and had beautiful voices - the songs being the saving grace - but they had so very little in the way of real dialogue and character development to work with that any empathy or interest in their lives was completely lost. A few people left. Confusingly this seems to have been marketed as a musical and the leaflet gives ticket offers for schools. Be interested to hear what age they would expect this to be suitable for. |
|
2,775 posts
|
Post by daniel on May 31, 2017 2:51:51 GMT
|
|
716 posts
|
Post by theatre-turtle on Jun 1, 2017 22:05:22 GMT
I thought it was a fantastic and thought provoking play, and both the singing and acting of a very high standard.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 2, 2017 11:59:53 GMT
I hadn't realised the National is doing Friday Rush seats for this, near the front of the stalls.
|
|
362 posts
|
Post by JJShaw on Jun 8, 2017 11:56:55 GMT
Having read the mixed reviews here I went with trepidation yesterday but thoroughly enjoyed it! The comparisons to The History Boys are easy and obvious but it felt fresh and new and incredibly well acted and put together.
I do agree that they could have dropped slightly less swear words but thats probably just my inner prude talking, and I suppose it is capturing naturalistic dialogue of that age and location category?
|
|
5,142 posts
|
Post by TallPaul on Jun 8, 2017 12:38:57 GMT
I was amused at a comment on Londontheatredirect's website, that a lady "couldn't understand the Irish accents." One would never find such an idiotic comment on theatremonkey.com! |
|
5,142 posts
|
Post by TallPaul on Jun 8, 2017 13:09:07 GMT
^Only because we edit what appears, LOL. It's all coming out now. One simply doesn't know what, or who, to believe anymore. The world has been turned on its head! |
|
