Review

You are currently browsing articles tagged Review.

Thomas Middleton was one of Shakespeare’s contemporaries. He wrote works for most major playhouses in London during the early 17th century. However, his name doesn’t conjure the same reaction as the bard. Most people when hearing his name would probably reply with ‘Thomas Who? Does he play for Chelsea?’ I would like to count myself as one of the few who actually know his name, but alas, I cannot. Before seeing Women Beware Women at the National Theatre, I had only seen his name in passing, not knowing him from any other playwright, or football player for that matter.

There is possibly a reason for this.

Women Beware Women is a flawed piece (that seems to be my motto recently). I overheard somebody saying after the show that it was amazing how a show that is so overblown can be so under written. This is a fair statement. This production clocks in at almost three and a half hours, with enough action to comfortably fill ninety minutes.

Women Beware Women is a confused piece of work that centres around a social group of characters in Florence. Leantio, a poor banker’s clerk, has married Bianca, an heiress from Venice. Soon after the wedding, Leantio is called back to his business and leaves his wife in the care of his mother. Meanwhile, Isabella has been promised to Guardiano’s Ward by her father Fabritio. However, Isabella’s uncle, Hippolito, is in love with Isabella and confesses this to her sister Livia, who then conspires to bring them together. Confused? This is only the first two scenes…

What transpires is worthy of a Jerry Springer episode, with rape, betrayal, incest and murder. This culminates into a climax that leaves your head spinning and asking exactly what just happened. Unfortunately, this climax comes in 10 minutes at the end of 3 hours, and the questioning isn’t due to an unexpected twist or turn, but utter dumbfoundedness.

In saying that, Middleton does have a way with words. While his scenes tend to go on forever with very little progress, he certainly knows how to turn a phrase. His evocative dialogue is full of wit and substance, and his darker turns are close to immaculate. Bianca’s exchange with Guardiano after being effectively locked in a room for the Duke to do with her what he will is so full of malice, yet still maintains an air of propriety, and echoes some of the greats of this period. However, what Middleton seems to fail at is progressing the story, and creating scenes that make sense. The aforementioned climax of the play is nothing short of a pointless blood bath. It’s as if the author saw Hamlet or Romeo and Juliet, liked how many people died at the end, then emulated with not much reasoning behind it. Also, the predominant theme is that women are the cause of all evil. However, a deeper reading of the text (and the programme) suggests that it is the men who cause these actions by treating the women as possessions and pets. Somehow, both of these readings merely come across as misogynistic.

In terms of this production, The National Theatre has yet again assembled a fine cast and thrown all the production values they could at a less than perfect play. The entire cast did an admirable job with a sluggish play. However, there were some who stood out above others. In general, the three women at the centre of the play, Bianca (Lauren O’Neill), Livia (Harriet Walter) and Isabella (Vanessa Kirby), were incredibly strong. O’Neill’s darker moments during the first act brought a beautiful sense of malice to the character. Walter shone as the controlling matriarch who loses it all in the end. Out of the men, Hippolito (Raymond Coulthard), Ward (Harry Melling) and Laentio (Samuel Barnett), were the standout performers. Barnett made Laentio by far the most likable characters in the show. His wit and bumbling charm served the character perfectly, and made you feel for him, even when his actions aren’t always pure. Melling is a brilliant comic actor. Having only ever seen him as Dudley Dursley in the Harry Potter films, he is a revelation. He completely steals every scene he is in.

At just under three and a half hours, Women Beware Women isn’t an easy watch. However, if you have a penchant for Jacobean drama and want to see one of the lesser appreciated playwrights, then have a look at Women Beware Women.

Just remember, Middleton is no Shakespeare.

Women Beware Women is playing at the National Theatre until July 4.

Tags: , , ,

I think I’m in love. His name is Jason Robert Brown, and he is musical theatre’s savior.

A tad dramatic, and possibly influenced by the love-in that was Hair last week, but an apt statement after seeing The Last Five Years last Friday at the Barbican.

The Last Five Years is a two hander that sits somewhere between a song cycle and a musical. It premiered in Chicago in 2001 and then moved Off-Broadway in 2002, with two of the most talented performers I’ve ever seen (thanks to bootlegs). Norbert Leo Butz (better known as the original Fiyero in Wicked or Freddy in Dirty Rotten Scoundrels) and Sherie Rene Scott (original Amneris in Aida and Christine in Dirty Rotten Scoundrels) are, and will always be, one of the hardest acts to follow when it comes to this show, bringing bucketloads of talent, emotion and intelligence to a beautiful score by Mr Brown. It has been one of my favourite shows since I first found the original cast recording in 2005, and I’m always slightly apprehensive when seeing a production.

It tells the story of Jamie and Cathy, and the arc of their relationship over the course of five years. He is a writer, who has success with his latest book, and she is a struggling musical theatre actress. The show takes form as a song cycle, with small monologues linking some songs. The unique element of the story is that whilst Jamie’s story plays from their first meeting through to their last goodbye, her story starts at the end and moves backwards. This means that from the beginning you are aware that they are doomed. What makes the rest interesting is finding out why. It’s an intense, emotional and very real look at relationships, which makes sense considering it’s loosely based on the composer’s relationship with his ex-wife. How loosely we don’t know, but considering he was forced to rewrite parts of the show, including replacing Jamie’s opening number, due to the reaction from said ex-wife, I’m not sure it was that loose an interpretation.

Before seeing this production at the Barbican, I have seen the show twice before. One I enjoyed immensely, with one of my favourite directors in Sydney who deserves to be directing professionally. The other I did not. There are two problems with this show. One, it is very difficult to interpret this show in any way other than the author’s intention without messing it up, and two, it is a rather difficult piece that requires two strong actors who can sing the pants off of the score, which is no mean feat. The range, control and tone that is required to sustain a 90 minute performance with no breaks and actually make the audience enjoy it is a rather tall order, and it seems not all productions succeed in finding the right people.

All this being said, I thoroughly enjoyed this production. While not produced in the style that I would of chosen (something that plagues my opinion every time I see this show), the staging was thoughtful and intelligent. However, I did take issue with the fact that Jamie and Cathy interact throughout the entire show. This is a personal gripe that I have with directors who choose this interpretation. I think it detracts from the beautiful moment where the two meet in the middle, but the people who attended the show with me seemed to love it and I conceded in the end. The use of the cellist toward the end for Jamie’s heartbreaking ‘Nobody Needs to Know’ was inspired. Again, introducing another actor to the stage was not how this was written, but it completely changed the dynamic of the scene. In fact, it made me not only focus on Jamie’s problems and the situation he has been forced into, but also on the impact this was having on the other character on stage. When the song was finished, I’m fairly certain that there wasn’t a dry eye in the house. Apologies for the cliché.

Freddie Fox and Lily James are both students at Guildhall School of Music and Drama, and considering this, they did an extremely good job of bringing these characters to life. As Cathy, James managed well to perform what is one of the most challenging female roles in contemporary music theatre. Her tone is beautiful and warm, and while she struggles slightly with her upper register when belting, her quieter moments were extremely evocative, and often brought my fellow attendees to tears. She did suffer slightly from ‘stage school’ acting at times, but on the whole did an admirable job for a role that is extremely complex and layered with subtleties. Fox, as Jamie, is a fantastic actor. So good, in fact, that he manages to act his way out of most songs, choosing to speak-sing a lot of the songs. At first, this irritated me to no end, feeling like he was committing a crime against Brown’s score. However, his characterisation was so strong that despite this, I enjoyed every minute of his performance. his intensity, mixed with playfulness, shaped Jamie into a character I hadn’t seen him before, colouring him with a far wider spectrum of blacks, greys and whites than I had seen.  Also, when he did choose to sing his songs, he has a formidable voice and great control, the highlight of which being his heartbreaking rendition of Nobody Needs to Know.

However, what made the show were the flawless seven piece orchestra. They brought the music to life, often interacting with the actors through knowing winks, smiles and scowls, which worked perfectly.

I wish I could go back and see this before I knew about the show. If I could have unlistened to the music the three hundred thousand or so times I’ve already listened to it, I’m sure I would have found this to be the show of the season. Of the year. Of the decade.  However, what I did see was a very good production of an amazing show.

And by students, nonetheless.

The Last Five Years was playing at the Pit Theatre at the Barbican Centre from 12 – 16 April. Unfortunately it isn’t anymore.

Tags: , , , , ,

Review: Hair

It seems that recently I’ve been in quite the quandry when it comes to shows. So far it’s been that the production is top notch, but the cast struggle with a bad script, or the cast aren’t too crash hot, but the production is just so darn fun that it makes it impossible to dislike it. I’ve been waiting for a peice of theatre to come along and knock my socks off with cast, production and the actual text itself. Sadly, I’m still waiting. However, I’m not exactly sure why.

Hair first premiered Off Broadway in 1967. It was an extremely controversial show, featuring foul language, drugs, sex, nudity and *gasp* rock and African American music. It was the perfect anti-war, anti-establishment, anti-everything theatrical masterpiece that blew everyone away. Critics seemed to love it, whilst state governments did not. Regional productions were cancelled due to the nudity and use of the American flag, and a bomb was even thrown at a theatre where Hair was showing. When it first played in London in 1968 it had a similar response. Critics loved it and it had a marked effect on London theatre, ostensibly stopping stage censorship. All this said, I just don’t really get it.

Hair, to me, is a vast collection of songs tied extremely loosely to a plot surrounding a commune of hippies and the vietnam war. Firstly, there seems to be no quality control around the songs themselves. Some songs are fantastic, while others barely warrant a listen. Secondly, most of te songs have little reason to be in the story, apart from being vaguely anti. The way these songs are presented are by turning a phrase and bursting into song, much like Godspell, which doesn’t do the musical any favours. However, this is what is often lauded as the brilliance of Hair. It breaks most theatrical and musical conventions. It has provided much fodder for academics to talk about the musical influences, the significance of particular scenes (the nude scene, especially), the sloppy style and every other aspect of the show and the performing of the show. Still, I just don’t feel the same things that other people seem to feel when they see this production.

That being said, this is the strongest cast I have ever seen on stage. Every single member of the tribe was an unbelievably strong singer and actor, and the movement and staging of the entire thing was flawless. The ‘leads,’ if you can call them that, were each perfectly suited to the role. Will Swenson as Berger was a force to be reckoned with. He dominates the stage as a kind of leader to the Tribe. He has an intensity and something bordering on rage bubbling beneath the surface that makes him absolutely electric to watch on stage. Gavin Creel as Claude and Caissie Levy as Sheila had two of the most impressive voices I’ve ever seen on stage. I have never seen anyone match the purity of both of these singers. Sasha Allen as Dionne was everything Dionne should be: a black powerhouse who could belt the roof off the theatre. Andrew Kober took the cake with a comic tour de force as both Dad and Margaret Mead. His comic acting was amazing and it was quite impressive how well he could seamlessly slip back in with the Tribe, having to constantly go between Tribe and ‘straight’ characters. All in all, the cast were amazing and instead of gushing over the entire cast, I shall leave it at that. I think it’s fairly clear why they chose to tour this cast with the production, as I don’t think I could have seen a better cast made of west-end performers.

Also, I think Hair is a show that performers can really appreciate. While I didn’t particularly like the show, I was wishing that I was onstage with the cast. It is a show where the cast are so united as a group and so immersed into their performances that it makes other performers jealous. RENT is another show where this seems to happen. Another incredibly flawed show that looks like an absolute joy to be in (which I got to experience first hand in Sydney). Another show that critics seemed to go mental for that I didn’t particularly get.

I did enjoy Hair. I just didn’t enjoy it as much as I feel I should have.

I guess some shows just aren’t for me.

Hair is playing at the Gielgud Theatre from 14 April. Check out their facebook page for cheap tickets!

Tags: , , , , ,

Review: Blaze

Blaze at Peacock Theatre

I feel like there should be a support group for this kind of thing. I’ll start things off…

Hi, my name’s Luke and for about 10 weeks in the year I am addicted to So You Think You Can Dance.

It is because of his addiction that I went along to Peacock Theatre this weekend past to see the new offering from Sadler’s Wells and panDaddy Productions, Blaze. It’s a ‘streetdance sensation’ very much in the same style of Bounce, that took the West End by storm in 2005, and features two dancers from said reality tv show. I will admit that this last little factum is the only reason I purchased tickets, but I’m extremely glad I did.

However, on the way back to my abode I found myself in a slight quandry. Having never seen a ‘streetdance sensation’, or for that fact any modern dance show, how was I to review? How do I review something that I really have no point of reference for? Therefore, I have decided to pretend that I am an afficianado of dance. I’ve been to the ballet… Once. I own some dance pants and an aged pair of jazz slippers. I can do this.

To be honest, I didn’t really know what to expect from Blaze. I like hip hop dance as much as the next middle class white boy, but an hour and a half of it? What resulted was an hour and a half of pure entertainment. It helps that these are 16 of the best hip hop dancers and breakers currently performing. Also, they have a team of 7 choreographers from across the globe, as well as one of the top West End directors/choreographers at the helm. Add to this some of the best lighting and projection work that I’ve seen on the London stage, and it’s hard to see where they could go wrong.

The dancers were all extremely strong. it’s interesting to see both Lizzie Gough and Tommy Franzen from sytycd in the context of a show surrounded by other professional dancers. You are led to believe that these guys are the best that the UK has to offer. What struck me is how much they blended in with the troupe. They may have been on tv for a few months, but they are definitely not the best out there. In saying that, Tommy, who came second in sytycd, at times did stand out from the rest of the dancers. Not so much due to talent, which is definitely in no short supply, but more so because he has an extremely distinctive style. So much so that it was incredibly obvious which routine he choreographed for the show. I honestly believe he has a future in choreography, with his routine being one of the most enjoyable in the show.

The three breakers (four if you count the MC) are clearly at the top of their game. The moves that these guys pulled off were only matched in precision and skill by sheer lunacy. It’s amazing to see these three dancers, nay athletes, pull off some of the most death defying moves I’ve ever seen. The little comic interludes for the three breakers were also very well done.

While all the routines were quite amazing, the highlight of the night was definitely the extremely touching couch routine. The two dancers, Rowen Hawkins and Lil’ Steph, portrayed two quarrelling lovers with a grace and poignancy usually only seen in contemporary dance routines. While it felt a little sytycd, I was sucked right in. It’s a problem I have.

The technical aspects of the show, particularly the lighting and projection work, were simply breathtaking. The way that both worked with the set design was slightly awe inspiring. Special mention of Lizzie’s 3D routine, where the dancer interacted wih the lighting and projection flawlessly. It was a fantastic display of performance and technology working in ways that theatre often refuses to. The lighting designers, Patrick Woodroffe and Adam Bassett, and video designers, Mehmet Akten, Robin McNicholas and Jane Laurie, need to win something for this show. Now.

Overall, whilst being a slight dance philistine, I enjoyed Blaze immensely. Even a dance moron like myself can see and appreciate the flawless technique and immense skill that everyone in his production posesses. I wholeheartedly suggest seeing this before it moves on in a weeks time.

Blaze is playing at the Peacock Theatre until March 28.

Tags: , , , , ,

Waiting for Godot

I managed to secure a free ticket to Waiting for Godot, currently playing at Theatre Royal in Haymarket, thanks to a fellow Twespian. Waiting for Godot holds a special place in my heart, as it was my introduction to absurdism way back in high school. Having studied it at both high shool and university, I’ve seen countless filmed productions and quite a few staged excerpts, mostly by students. As a result, I’ve often found it a largely innaccesible play. Even the Beckett directs Beckett production felt incredibly academic in it’s approach. Even though I love the play, I had written it off as a piece of theatre reserved for actors, directors and academics; a slightly elitist play that would never be popular theatre.

This was definitely the case when Godot premiered in France in 1953. Audiences left half way through and The Irish Times famously deemed it a play where “nothing happens. Twice.” Waiting for Godot features two four and a half characters, a bare stage save a tree and a bucket load of absurd dialogue. Vladimir and Estragon are two clown like figures who are stuck in an endless loop, waiting beside a road for Godot, the heavily symbolic, never present title character. They are joined by Lucky and Pozzo half way through each act, but the why is never truly explained. It’s a play that is heavy on symbolism and dialogue. However, this production manages to defy convention and actually present this revered text in an engaging and very entertaining way, and not just for the theatre snobs.

It doesn’t hurt that everyone involved in the production are seasoned professionals. When you enter the theatre, you are struck by the art of the set design. Shying away from the bare stage that is often usedfor Godot, Stephen Brimson Lewis has instead created a decaying stage, complete with crumbling proscenium arch and balconies. A bare brick wall stands upstage and a gnarled bare tree sits on the back of a sloping stage. It’s an appropriately apocolyptic design that works brilliantly. Similarly, the way that Sean Mathias has staged this is almost apocolyptic. Vladimir and Estragon are presented as two old men, beaten by life and feeling as if the end is nigh.

Ian Mckellen is a force to be reckoned with. His portrayal of Estragon as an aging, doddery Northerner is an interesting interpretation, quite often reducing the absurdism of the dialogue to the rambling of an alzheimers sufferer, but it works a charm. The very straight and sane protrayal of Vladimir by Roger Rees, who replaced Patrick Stewart in this revival of last years production, is a perfect contrast. The stand as a dichotomy, representing both hope and despair, optimism and pessimism. These two, quite rightly, were the definite standouts in the production. both Matthew Kelly and Ronald Pickup as Pozzo and Lucky respectively were both very good. The problem is that the two characters aren’t particularly likeable, and when standing against two formidable actors playing two revered characters, they didn’t really tans a chance. In saying that, special mention has to go to Pickup for Lucky’s thinking speech, which was delivered with such madness that it left you feeling slightly exhausted.

It was a shame not to see the original pairing of McKellen and Stewart, but Rees was more than enough. The only problem I found was that with someone like McKellen on stage, he makes everyone else look nowhere near as good. The man is one of the greatest actors on the stage today.

Waiting for Godot is playing at Theatre Royal, Haymarket until 4 April

Tags: , , ,

Does a piece of theatre need to be good in order to be highly entertaining?

If we are talking about Priscilla, then the answer is most likely no.

I saw Priscilla when it first opened at he Lyric Theatre in Sydney in 2006. I also vowed never to go back and see it again. I was, suffice it to say, not impressed with the way they took a classic, nuanced Australian film and turned it into an OTT, high camp jukebox musical. Ok, so it kind of made sense due to pay homage to the subject matter, and it featured some of the best and biggest costumes you’re likely to see outside of the Moulin Rouge. But it isn’t a good musical…

I managed to get some tickets to Priscilla in London due to a Twitter competition (that still runs if you’re interested), that I entered in a ‘why not’ frame of mind. What I didn’t expect is to exit the theatre last night with a very large grin on my face having had a very good night at the theatre.

Come to think of it, I think the same happened in Sydney.

The problem is that I automatically judge this show in comparison to my favourite musicals. Usually, I tend to go for heavier, darker shows with amazing books and scores. Also, I compared Priscilla to the movie, which the show doesn’t attempt to recreate, rather seems to pay homage to.

So… The songs are a pastiche of awful drag standards, sometimes painfully arranged and often without any good reason to exist. The book is a slapped together montage of the funny lines from the movie, and definitely won’t be winning a pullitzer anytime soon. The cast were passable (with the exception of Oliver Thornton as Adam/Felicia who was FABULOUS), the accents horrible and the sets so glitzy they hurt your eyes.

It’s also possibly one of the most enjoyable shows you will ever see.

I don’t believe you can see this show without enjoying the ridiculous excess and camp chic. This mostly succeeds because the show knows how bad it is, and seems to then do it with more gusto. It also doesn’t hurt that it is done with tongue firmly planted in cheek. The performances are all completely overblown. Every character is an absurd caricature of their counterpart in the movie and it seems the direction given was somewhere along the lines of ‘if you can get a cheap laugh, go for it’. Some memorable examples include bouncy, sagging breasts on the bogan (Australian’s equivalent of Chavs), assless dresses, and a ‘why oh why did they spend so much money on a bad joke’ rendition of Macarthur Park (yes, someone left a cake out in the rain). However, these all make the show slightly more enjoyable as opposed to detracting from the overall quality. While the cast weren’t particularly good, I think this was more to do with the style of the show, as opposed to actual talent. I’ve seen a few of the performers in other things and they have been much, much better.

Gareth James said it best: “The closest match is Mamma Mia and that can’t be bad. Go for spectacle and laughs and you’ll certainly get them”

Oh, and Shane from Neighbours is in it. Win.

Priscilla is playing at the Palace Theatre, Shaftesbury Theatre in London.

Tags: , , ,

Silence! The Musical belongs to a new breed of postmodern ‘meta’ musicals that seem to be cropping up recently. From the ‘two guys writing a show about two guys writing a show about two guys writing a show’ of [Title of Show], to the comedic brilliance of Evil Dead: The Musical and Bat Boy: The Musical. It is a common trend for musicals to be tongue firmly planted in cheek, with a ‘musical theatre reference a minute’ style system. In fact, with recent examples, if you see the title [insert word]: The Musical, chances are you are going to be assaulted with slightly offensive, yet ultimately hilarious musical theatre (some other examples off the top of my head: Gutenburg! The Musical, Cops: The Musical, Debbie Does Dallas: The Musical, Reefer Madness! The Musical and Jerry Springer: The Opera).

I for one, don’t mind one bit. Many of these title have gone on to be new favourites, and Silence! almost joins them.

Almost.

I heard about Silence! through Playbill.com a while ago, due to the book having been written by [Title of Show]‘s Hunter Bell (I must admit here, I am an avid [tos]ser… and yes, I do realise how that sounds). When I heard that they were bringing the show back with the original director, but this time in London, I was a little excited. I purchased tickets as soon as I could and secured my seat for the first preview night.

I wasn’t sure what to expect. Above the Stag, a tiny venue situated behind London’s Victoria Palace, isn’t what I expected as a theatre. It’s a small converted room above the gay pub, The Stag. Thus the name, I suppose. It probably only holds max 50 people, and the stage size is tiny. I was expecting something a little larger, but this seemed to be perfect for what is, essentially, an incredibly low-fi, low-budget show. To produce the show with a budget anywhere above £10 would do the show a disservice.

Silence! has all of the elements to fast become a favourite of mine. It’s quite offensive, tongue-in-cheek and has a slight cult status. It features songs such as ‘If I Could Smell Her C**t’ and ‘I’d F**k Me’, and is written by said Mr Bell. However, something didn’t quite catch me with this show. It was funny, and it was well performed, yet it was also slightly forgettable.

I think the fault comes down to the show itself. There are a few decent tunes in there, but for the most part the joke doesn’t get past the title. Sections of the show seem to come off a bit like Silence of the Hams, possibly one of the worst films ever made. It is hard to get parody right, especially when the source is one of the most revered films of the past 20 years. The writers hit the mark in parts, and seemed to completely miss in others. However, the recent addition of the song ‘I’d F**k Me’ is probably the highlight of the show, with Fabian Hartwell doing a great job of being immensely creepy and pants wettingly funny at the same time.

In fact, the cast did a superb job, especially for a first preview night of a show that has been largely rewritten since it’s last professional performance Off Broadway in 2005. There was only one weak point in the cast, Shekella Dedi as Ardelia Mapp, who just didn’t have the presence and comic timing of the rest of the cast. She had a good voice, but unfortunately it was drowned out in her one diva moment towards the end of the show (a problem you’ll get when you don’t mic your cast). However, this was the preview night of a brand new show and she could have settled in later in to the run, so I shouldn’t judge. Tory Ross, recently seen on Broadway in 9 to 5 and Cry Baby, was perfect as Clarice. She had a great, strong voice, and maintained perfect character throughout. In fact, she’s one of the strongest comedic character actresses I’ve seen on stage in a while. Olivier Award winner Miles Western was perfect casting as Hannibal Lecter, the psychopathic psychiatric cannibal. His measured performance and icy stare were quite off putting, which made his delivery of songs like ‘If I Could Smell her C**t’ absolutely hilarious.

Silence! is a show that is thoroughly enjoyable to watch. However, don’t expect to walk away wanting to buy the cast album. Most of the songs are quite forgettable and probably wouldn’t work without the performer directly in front of you.

And my advice is don’t take you Gran to see this one…

Silence! The Musical is running till February 28 at Above the Stag Theatre in London. You can book tickets here.

Tags: , , , ,