|
|
Post by nottobe on Jun 9, 2023 22:46:23 GMT
Saw this tonight and I'm in the camp that didn't like it. I'll admit I was interested in this because of the creative team and while I have seen a few Hamlets,I didn't know anything about this production or really too much about the stars it was about other than the basics of their celebrity.
I found it to be quite boring and not a story that is worth telling. The structure became very ploddy as repetitive, and the stakes where never that high. I know I was excited to see it but that was more to do with the hype because the story itself has nothing new or exciting or necessary to say. I liked Gatiss and Flynn, less convinced on Middleton. I especially liked Alan Corduner but that was more so because I was glad to see him onstage.
Technically it was a fine play but I was let down. For me the highlight was the two Coward songs
|
|
2,476 posts
|
Post by zahidf on Jun 15, 2023 9:32:32 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by londonpostie on Jun 15, 2023 9:55:30 GMT
NT: more transfers than Chelsea.
|
|
3,528 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by Rory on Jun 15, 2023 10:01:38 GMT
At the Noel Coward 9th December 2023 - 23rd March 2024
|
|
|
|
Post by artea on Jun 30, 2023 23:53:15 GMT
An opinion ... 2 stars only from me ... so no need to read on. Act 1 is just a soporific series of scenes that may have happened over the course of the NYC Hamlet rehearsal period. A scene from day 1 is followed by a scene from day 2 is followed by a scene from day 3. We're told each time a new day begins. That's as exciting as it gets for quite some time. It's irritating; gauche. And so it goes - nowhere really - until the final scene of the half: Gielgud alone. The first scene of Act 2 (Gielgud and Taylor - by far the best 2 actors in it) is the best thing in the play. It's the only one with wit and life and more than one good laugh; it has a spark and good writing. Sadly, Burton only comes to life, forgetting he's drunk for a moment to deliver a superb, transfixing so intelligent to be or not to be. For almost all the play, his voice is irritating; plain wrong, without charisma, without power. Certainly not SRB or Alan Howard or Richard Burton. The To be or not to be speech delivers another problem: it's brilliant and this play suffers in comparison. The play also suffers by the blasting of brilliant classical music into the auditorium to do emotional heavy lifting. Not just Zadok the Priest (there to impress that what you have just seen must be as brilliant as that - it isn't) but also JS Bach's Goldberg Variations, used throughout, particularly the Aria. It's a disadvantage to know Hamlet. The rehearsals for the early Act 1 Hamlet scenes are feeble. Most of the cast are given almost nothing to do so why are they there? Why give them tiny bits to do when what they are given is weak? There's the occasional arty tableau of the cast at the start of a scene, usually a party if I recall correctly, but they're perfunctory. Cut-outs are used to open scenes but they were much more dramatically used and filled the stage in David Hare's gripping The Red Barn, Lyttleton, 2016. I have no idea why this was produced. It represents what Norris came to get rid of: dead white men going on and on about themselves. {Spoiler - click to view}After the final image of the play, the first with dramatic epic lighting, shape movement and shadow, I wished I'd just seen Hamlet but without this Burton, and not waded through this half-baked simulacrum. |
|
5,688 posts
|
Post by lynette on Jul 1, 2023 20:38:05 GMT
Harsh but not untrue
|
|
3,557 posts
|
Post by showgirl on Jul 2, 2023 2:58:31 GMT
My former OH and I saw this yesterday, not exactly together (we had booked separately) but from adjacent rows in the cheap front stalls.
I found it a little slow to get going but was distracted (see below), though once it did, I was increasingly riveted as, I could see, was he. I did think it was largely a 2-person play with a big supporting cast and that Janie Dee was wasted - though always good to see her - and we agreed that Johnny Flynn didn't look too like Richard Burton but Mark Gatiss was spellbinding and very moving at times.
Behaviour by a fellow audience member did however seriously affect my attention and enjoyment during the long first half, as there were 2 very tall young chaps in the row in front. One of them wasn't so much in my line of vision and kept still anyway, but the one who was moved his head constantly from side to side; he didn't even stay in the same position for 10 seconds as I begain to time him. Goodness knows how he thought anyone behind could see and wouldn't be driven mad by such constant movement, but I didn't do the same or the person behind me would have suffered, too. Instead, at the interval, I spoke to the Box Office and FOH staff who agreed I could move to an empty aise seat in the second row, from which I had a clear if oblique view and could really focus on the play. I wish I had had the nerve to tap the culprit on the shoulder and ask him to keep still, but I always fear others' reaction even if they are in the wrong.
Hitherto I've always booked the rearmost row available of the 4 front rows and a seat on or as close to the aisle as possible but after this experience, I shall instead aim for the front.
Only the second play by Jack Thorne I had attended and imo infinitely superior to the lacklustre "Winston", the first half of which I had seen the week before.
|
|
|
|
Post by sfsusan on Jul 4, 2023 11:30:45 GMT
... the one who was moved his head constantly from side to side; he didn't even stay in the same position for 10 seconds as I began to time him. I wonder if the person in front of him was blocking his view, causing him to reposition constantly to follow the movement on stage. Is there a good solution in that situation? (I'm asking because I've been in that situation and tried to minimize my own head movement, but doing so sacrifices my own view in favor of the person behind me.) |
|
3,557 posts
|
Post by showgirl on Jul 5, 2023 3:15:49 GMT
sfsusan It may well have been the case that the metronomic movement of the chap in my eyeline was due to the person in front of him blocking his view - though he was so tall that it's hard to imagine that he couldn't simply see over. But as you suggest, if everyone thus affected swivelled about constantly, there'd be a domino effect rippling back through the rows. Oddly the very cheap front 4 rows of the Lyttelton stalls not only lack the normal slight rake found further back but if anything, seem to slope slightly downward from the front; something for me to bear in mind in future. So alas I have no answer other than to beware in future and look out for opportunities to swap seats. Nevertheless I found the play well worth seeing and am offering (see Noticeboard) a stalls ticket for the matinee of Saturday 15 July, should anyone be interested.
|
|
1,081 posts
|
Post by andrew on Jul 8, 2023 22:16:53 GMT
OK sure but like what an incredibly well executed ending. An iconic ending. It reminded me a little bit of Exit The King, where even if you hated what came before it (as I did with ETK), you couldn’t help by being utterly beguiled by the final few minutes of the play. It was beautiful.
And I liked the rest of it too but, seriously, what a fantastic ending.
Five stars just for the ending.
|
|
193 posts
|
Post by demelza on Jul 10, 2023 12:33:25 GMT
I saw this on Saturday evening as my friend was able to get us some fairly last minute seats in the second row of the stalls and really enjoyed it. I do agree with others on here that the ensemble cast is somewhat underused. Jack Thorne is very hit and miss for me, and I found this to be a real hit!
I enjoyed the performances and I was very happy to finally catch Luke Norris on stage and I really enjoyed him as the slightly awkward William Redfield. I do hope that he'll be transferring to the West End as I'm hoping to catch that run with another friend. I wouldn't describe myself as a big Mark Gatiss fan but I thought that he was really wonderful as Gielgud, even if he did remind me in parts of Jim Broadbent. I thought that Tuppence Middleton was very charming as Elizabeth Taylor as well. Johnny Flynn gave a great performance as Richard Burton too.
I really loved the ending, I don't think that you could have ended the play any other way.
|
|
1,470 posts
|
Post by mkb on Jul 10, 2023 16:13:32 GMT
I'm wondering how Jack Thorne managed to write both this and the Donmar's Winston play. My initial take was that they seemed worlds apart in terms of quality, but maybe the actors/direction swung it, or maybe it's just me. Maybe I was in the right frame of mind for Motive and not for Winston? More likely is that I find Gielgud and Burton interesting and John Reith, as portrayed, rather tiresome.
|
|
5,795 posts
|
Post by mrbarnaby on Jul 10, 2023 20:43:07 GMT
I'm wondering how Jack Thorne managed to write both this and the Donmar's Winston play. My initial take was that they seemed worlds apart in terms of quality, but maybe the actors/direction swung it, or maybe it's just me. Maybe I was in the right frame of mind for Motive and not for Winston? More likely is that I find Gielgud and Burton interesting and John Reith, as portrayed, rather tiresome. I don’t know how he has the time to write as many projects as he does. Maybe that’s the problem.. |
|
1,279 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by theatrefan77 on Jul 10, 2023 22:47:41 GMT
Watched this for a second time on Wednesday I really loved it even more than in my previous visit. For me this play has been one of the theatrical highlights of the year.
|
|
5,139 posts
|
Post by Being Alive on Jul 10, 2023 23:07:04 GMT
I'm wondering how Jack Thorne managed to write both this and the Donmar's Winston play. My initial take was that they seemed worlds apart in terms of quality, but maybe the actors/direction swung it, or maybe it's just me. Maybe I was in the right frame of mind for Motive and not for Winston? More likely is that I find Gielgud and Burton interesting and John Reith, as portrayed, rather tiresome. When Winston went to war with the wireless has been around for a while - another London theatre has had the rights since 2020. To my knowledge he finished Motive mid last year. |
|
7,050 posts
|
Post by Jon on Jul 10, 2023 23:11:31 GMT
In the case of The Motive and The Cue, the original idea was conceived by Sam Mendes who came across the book about the production of Hamlet and through Neal Street commissioned Jack Thorne to write it as a play.
It's not that unusual for writers to have multiple play in some form of development with multiple theatres or producers. James Graham had Ink, Labour of Love and Quiz in the same year and last year Mike Bartlett had The 47th at the Old Vic and Scandaltown at the Lyric Hammersmith.
|
|
1,470 posts
|
Post by mkb on Jul 11, 2023 10:54:18 GMT
To be clear, I wasn't wondering how Thorne had time to write both plays; I was saying how could he be the author of two works that seemed to me so vastly different in quality.
|
|
1,475 posts
|
Post by Steve on Jul 15, 2023 23:11:40 GMT
To be clear, I wasn't wondering how Thorne had time to write both plays; I was saying how could he be the author of two works that seemed to me so vastly different in quality. For me, both plays are excellent, and, in some ways, are the same play: Both plays present a lonely, complex and refined man (Gielgud/Reith - both gay, incidentally) trying to resist a complex man of action, who wields far greater worldly power (Burton/Churchill), from using that power to bulldoze straight through him and his values. "The Motive and the Cue" is the more loveable play because deep down, actors respect each other's talent and can affirm each other, resulting in feel-good emotions for the audience, whereas politicians do not and never will respect broadcasters, resulting in feel-bad feelings for the audience. Further, Gielgud is far more fundamentally decent (and thus more likeable) than Reith, as depicted, and Burton is far more vulnerable (and thus more likeable) than Churchill, as depicted. Thus, both action and character favour audiences walking out of "The Motive and the Cue" with more benign feelings about themselves, about other people and about the world they live in, and the play itself, than if they walk out of "When Winston went to war with the Wireless," which is fundamentally deeply depressing, even if Reith does succeed in creating an institution which is designed to build bridges between a deep political divide in the population. Anyway, I saw "The Motive and the Cue" again tonight, the last night of the National run, and it was so exquisite and brilliant (and feel-good) that I adjusted my rating above from 4 to 5 stars (my initial reaction in previews was 4 and a half stars, but that half star is filled for me now). Some spoilers follow. . . Absolutely everybody in the production is firing on all cylinders at all times now, but of course it's Gatiss and Flynn who carry the conflict and the story, and both are precision perfect now. Truthfully, I think Gatiss had Gielgud from hello, but tonight his end of the first half delivery of Hamlet's address to the players, where he rails against players who "out-herod Herod" (Burton, anyone lol?) was filled with such a well of deep emotion, of memories of youth, of mourning for a world gone by, of wistfulness for a world that never was, that I was in tears. But it's Flynn taking absolute command of his Burton that has really lifted this production, as everyone else in the show is responding to what he does. In previews, when acting emotional moments, the accent might waver or the staccato punchiness of Burton's performance style might be lost. Not now. Flynn has a hold of everything Burton now: his posturing, his vulnerability, his accent, his penchant for electric exclamation in performance, the slow rise of his temper, the moments his guard falls and he softens, and being able to combine all this simultaneously makes for hugely alive moment to moment theatre. Indeed, Flynn is so good at getting inside Burton's tempestuousness now that I found myself rooting for him, even when he was behaving despicably, as I felt from Flynn the emotions and reasons for why he was behaving like that. Although I still enjoyed Janie Dee telling him off lol. And with Flynn on fire, it lifts the game of everyone else, including even Gatiss. In "Winston went to War," the real protagonist is the BBC, it's fight to walk its own path, apart from Government, to unite a Country. And that's an important story. In this, all the actors on stage fight to walk their own individual paths (as we all must do), with Flynn and Gatiss leading the way, coming together to create art. And that's an equally important story. I loved this tonight. 5 stars from me.  |
|
|
|
Post by A.Ham on Jul 16, 2023 8:45:23 GMT
In the case of The Motive and The Cue, the original idea was conceived by Sam Mendes who came across the book about the production of Hamlet and through Neal Street commissioned Jack Thorne to write it as a play. It's not that unusual for writers to have multiple play in some form of development with multiple theatres or producers. James Graham had Ink, Labour of Love and Quiz in the same year and last year Mike Bartlett had The 47th at the Old Vic and Scandaltown at the Lyric Hammersmith. And Cock at the Ambassadors, although the less said about that the better! |
|
|
|
Post by c4ndyc4ne on Jul 16, 2023 10:31:38 GMT
In the case of The Motive and The Cue, the original idea was conceived by Sam Mendes who came across the book about the production of Hamlet and through Neal Street commissioned Jack Thorne to write it as a play. It's not that unusual for writers to have multiple play in some form of development with multiple theatres or producers. James Graham had Ink, Labour of Love and Quiz in the same year and last year Mike Bartlett had The 47th at the Old Vic and Scandaltown at the Lyric Hammersmith. And Cock at the Ambassadors, although the less said about that the better! though that was a revival, so slightly different situation. thorne's revival of a christmas carol runs every year and cursed child is still playing. |
|
|
|
Post by A.Ham on Jul 16, 2023 11:13:57 GMT
And Cock at the Ambassadors, although the less said about that the better! though that was a revival, so slightly different situation. thorne's revival of a christmas carol runs every year and cursed child is still playing. Ah yes, good point! |
|
3,528 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by Rory on Oct 4, 2023 13:43:14 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by NorthernAlien on Nov 22, 2023 12:08:34 GMT
What the heck is going on with this? NT publicity says 'from the 9th', DMT's website doesn't even show any sold out performances for that date, just a blank space. The discounters have it opening even later? Is the first performance on the 9th happening? Or has it been postponed?
|
|
|
|
Post by papasmurf115 on Dec 29, 2023 1:02:39 GMT
Really enjoyed this play at the Noel Coward Theatre last night. The cast seemed pleased with a standing ovation. I loved Gatiss' performance as Gielgud & thought Johnny Flynn was a good Burton. Disagreed with the lady next to me who thought Flynn's voice was grating & annoying. Although having seen Hamlet & several other Uncle Will plays, I was more interested in the Gielgud/Burton ego dynamic. The staging also hit the mark.
|
|
3,301 posts
|
Post by david on Jan 3, 2024 0:21:35 GMT
My 2024 theatre year got off to a great start with a visit to the Noel Coward theatre for today’s performance. A purchase of a rush ticket this morning got me stalls H8. Having some credit on my TT account I ended up paying £22 for want I found out after looking in the DMT website was selling at £110 direct from the theatre (an absolute win there I think).
Despite a delay for an hour due to some technical issues, this offering from the NT was a 5⭐️ show for me and showed off the NT at its very best - a wonderful piece of writing (from Jack Thorne ) performed by a mesmerising cast mixed with a great set / sound / lighting design to produce a magnificent piece of theatre under the directorship of Zoe Ford Burnett for its WE transfer.
With Gatiss and Flynn as Gielgud and Burton respectively this two simply owned the stage the entire time and were an absolute joy to watch as the relationship between Gielgud and Burton played out on stage. The combination of both Gatiss and Flynn worked really well together (Flynn’s portrayal of Burton particularly the voice was spot on) and for me there was a real on stage chemistry between the two guys. As for the rest of the cast, (Tuppence Middleton as Liz T as brilliant) everyone brought their A game tonight to tell this fascinating behind the scenes story to life.
|
|
