“Much Ado About Nothing” Review

David Tennant and Catherine Tate in Much Ado About Nothing.  For a Doctor Who and Shakespeare fan (who rates Ten/Donna as the best Doctor/companion pairing since the ’70s and Much Ado as one of the three first division comedies) what could hold more promise?

It’s a very lively, funny production, and I enjoyed it hugely. Tennant and Tate are both outstanding comics as well as actors (Tennant’s comic timing was just what the Doctor needed, and it is often overlooked just how fine an actor Tate is). Thus, being the Tate and Tennant show was both the productions great strength, and its weakness. They played up the comedy, supplemented by some elaborate slapstick, perhaps at the expense of some of the drama. That’s not to say the key moments weren’t dramatic (Tate’s delivery on “kill Claudio” was chilling) but they seemed a little bit detached. Perhaps there was too little chemistry with the rest of the cast (it would have been hard to guess, without the dialogue, that Hero was Beatrice’s roommate, making her contract on Claudio seem a little eccentric). Tate was superb, however; her social and emotional detachment otherwise played perfectly and underlined by a well staged sequence of her drinking and dancing alone at the party.

The slapstick did seem to gain a life of its own, though, and the staging of the sequence in which Benedict is being set up was hugely overcomplicated by an unnecessary gag with some paint whilst the revolve was turning, making maintaining his eavesdropping whilst preserving sight-lines within the timing of his speeches very clumsy. And The Watch almost always seem to feel the need to add in “business” (is that Ben Elton’s fault?) which is a shame, because Dogberry gets some lines that are funny in their own right. Boom.

All the emphasis on comedy meant that when things darken there is too little shift in tone, and too late. It almost seems to swing too far: suggesting Claudio contemplating suicide was presumably an attempt to deal with his unsympathetic behaviour, but it only makes it worse, portraying him as weak and cowardly too. It’s a hard part which is rarely played right: but I am inclined to agree with one of the friends I went with that the best performance of the role was by a student who played in a college production with us.

I’m probably being overcritical because the RSC’s superb production with Tasmin Greig an absolutely peerless Beatrice was so recently (or not? Can it really be five years ago?)  And that’s unfair because I enjoyed every minute of this production; its energy, its good humour, its massive sense of fun and the stellar performances of its two leads. The Gibraltar setting and the 1980s vibe was very effective in injecting a high-spirited zestiness; and at the heart of the play is the interplay between the two comedy leads, so as a vehicle for Tate and Tennant it would be hard to find a better choice.

No Comments »

“Naturalism: From East to West” Review

A month ago I went along to a public workshop on naturalism, on the set of the Cherry Orchard at the National, The chair of the seated panel, Matt Wolf, introduced the actors and John Beschizza, of RADA, expounded on historical context in which naturalism was realised and how being “real” was such an radical departure in theatre. He sat in his seat, and gave a very convincing if muted account, before leaping up and declaring he didn’t really believe in it. He had an anecdote from an audition where he’d tried to be terribly “real” and bored his teachers half to death and he set this against the need to perform in the sense of entertaining. It was an interesting perspective in what was billed as an exploration of Stanslavski’s pioneering acting method!

But the majority of the workshop was simply a rehearsal of a scene from The Seagull, with Jamie Ballard and Sally Hawkins, in which drawing on the actors’ personal experience and connecting it with the text on the page was emphasised (again and again motivations were questioned, “how do you feel” and “what do you want” being Beschizza’s key directorial prompts). It was fascinating to see the same passage performed repeatedly, with the conversations and questioning dialogues in between bringing a flat interpretation into something lively and convincing. The actors were amazingly open, and professional; I was impressed by how fully they threw themselves into the emotions in a public rehearsal. A performance must be one thing, a private rehearsal another. To be exposed in the way that discovering the part, experimenting, in public, requires seems to me an incredibly courageous undertaking. Both actors displayed admirable professionalism.

After the workshop we discussed whether actors can ever achieve this kind of performance without a director: can they, with sufficient experience, ask themselves the questions and explore their motivations. Do Judi Dench or Ian McKellen really need someone else to prompt this? Although I find it hard to imagine how the director could be dispensed with, it’s an important point. If naturalism really is about connecting with something inner, then direction cannot be imposed. Yet whilst Beschizza never criticised a response, or allowed the actors to feel there were any wrong answers, sometimes he would keep asking the same question (eliciting different  or more developed responses) whilst at others he would be satisfied with the first reply he received. I was left feeling the director’s vision had an important place in the process we witnessed, though whether his skill was in persevering until he got the “right” response, or until he felt the depth and quality of the response indicated that exploration of the question had been exhausted I am not sure.

Interestingly, at the end of the process, the actors were quite dismissive of “isms” in general. “You can’t act an intellectual ideal” was a constant refrain; yet the process of connecting expressions of inner feelings through experiences to the text seemed to be something that Stanslavski’s method had embedded so thoroughly that he was barely acknowledged.

No Comments »

“King Lear” Review

Being a little squeamish, I’ve always had a problem with Lear. It’s that scene. Gloucester’s eyes. “Out vile jelly.” But having lit a production of the show and therefore been forced to sit through it for two and a half weeks plus rehearsals, I’ve come to love the play itself, it’s one of my favourites.

When I heard Jacobi was playing Lear I wanted to see it, even before I discovered Gina McKee was Goneril. I’ve been a fan of Gina McKee since I saw her in the wonderful Our Friends in the North (playing opposite a future Doctor and a future James Bond). McKee was the most thrilling Goneril I’ve seen, and absolutely terrifying. Sharper than a serpent’s tooth.

Lear is one of those parts where the whole play depends on a single actor, he’s on stage for most of the time and it must be physically as well as emotionally exhausting. I believe Jacobi chose to wait until now to tackle the role at the age of 72, and he is every bit as good as I anticipated, it is a wonderful performance. My only minor quibbles were over the opening scene when he was quick to become enraged. Given how his anger grows from this point, the emotional dynamics put a strain on the following scenes. Perhaps this is why the famous speech in the storm scene is whispered, with the sound effects cut out, or perhaps this was supposed to emphasise his inner turmoil. Or perhaps it was just to do things differently in one of the most celebrated sequences in the play. Regardless, Jacobi’s stamina is incredible, a sustained virtuoso performance that never fails to command absolute attention.

The set in the Donmar was particularly impressive too, uniform white planking extending into the auditorium. During the well-realised storm scene every crack was flooded with light to impressive effect.

It’s a production with no weak links. Gwilym Lee perhaps deserves a mention for a particularly fine performance as Edgar, but I’d have been happy to recommend it on the strength of either Jacobi or McKee’s performances alone.

Due to the rather belated completion of this post the run at the Donmar is now over, but if you get a chance to, catch it on tour until 16th April.

No Comments »

“As You Like It” Review

The RSC’s “As You Like It” at the Roundhouse gets better when the action hits Arden, but while the production gets better, the play rather fizzles out.

The opening of the production could not be in greater contrast to their Romeo and Juliet, in which the gloomy atmospheric delivery of the prologue was followed by highly energetic and slightly terrifying skirmishes choreographed to violent pyromanic perfection.  Here the actors wander onto a brightly lit set which looks a little like a bookend.  The apron is backed by what looks like a set of rather shabby cupboards.  Rather than feeling like the RSC’s London home for the next years, it’s reminiscent of seeing a touring production in a community centre.  The wrestling scene, also rather unforgivingly lit, is unconvincing too (despite some blood spatter from the collision of cranium and cupboard).  The performances are good but there’s not a lot of atmosphere.

As soon as the action shifts to Arden we get to see what the designers are capable of, however.  The lighting dips, the snow starts falling, trapdoors open in the stage and the naff cupboards swing open and to reveal a joists, ladders and straw bales like the inside of a barn.  It’s a very effective set and there’s some nimble clambering by cast members as they take advantage of the scope it offers.

'Hang there, my verse, in witness of my love'

It’s years since I’ve seen As You Like It, and it’s not a play I know well, though I remember being very fond of it.  Unfortunately, on getting reacquainted, I’d have to accept it’s not in the first division of Shakespeare comedies (in the pub, afterwards, we agree that after discounting the “problem plays” like The Winter’s Tale and The Tempest, that the first division comprised A Midsummer Night’s Dream, Much Ado About Nothing and Twelfth Night).  The central premise (spoiler ahead, look away now) of girl dressing as boy (paper thin excuse already forgotten) then pretending to be herself while boy she fancies woos her is, in my humble opinion, terrific; unfortunately there’s not a lot more to the play than that. Rosalind is a great character.  Her scheming, deception and machinations are wonderful.  But although these are resolved, the absurd way in which other plot elements are effectively discarded give the end of the play an anticlimactic feel.

The premise by which she and her cousin Celia get exiled is dramatic and well handled, and despite the flaws of the court scenes, this gives the flight to Arden the urgency and jeopardy it needs.  Once in Arden, the play becomes more fun, and the production picks ups.  But while the danger is set aside, it’s unfinished business, and the plot feels like it needs a return to the court to see the new Duke overthrown, Oliver repent and the exiled Duke his rightful place.  The adventure in the woods almost needs to be bookended, as in A Midsummer Night’s Dream.  Instead, Shakespeare seems to have had another “exit pursued by a bear” moment, and written an fight between Orlando and a lion (hello? a lion?) to precipitate a change in Oliver, and deposes the new duke with a line about a religious conversion.

Jonjo O’Neill, who was an suitably mercurial  Mercution in Romeo and Juliet is engaging and idealistic as Orlando.  Katy Stephens is strong as Rosalind too.  Mariah Gale, who was so impressive as Juliet (the best, according to Michael Billington, since Judy Dench) is Celia; she doesn’t have much to do but she makes the most of the part, commanding even when she’s just sitting and watching Orlando and Rosalind.  But it’s in the comics that this production finds is strengths: Richard Katz is a superb touchstone, Forbes Masson a musical as well as melancholy Jacques, and the shepherds and shepherdesses entertainingly grotesque.

Finally, the music deserves a mention.  Unlike Romeo and Juliet, the ditties here are part of the action which adds to the charm considerably.  The compositions are rather beautiful, even when rendered for comedy value, and round out a very entertaining show.

1 Comment »

“Romeo and Juliet” Review

Went to see the RSC Romeo and Juliet at the Roundhouse on Saturday.

There’s a lot of energy in the opening, the “do you bite your thumb” gang wars shattering the brief peace of the museum set prologue.  It was actually scary: the slashing, chain-wielding frenzy threatened to overspill the tiny apron of the stage and the pyrotechnics were hot on my face, even though I was three rows back.  If I’d have been at the front, I’d have been worried I’d have lost an eye.  By the time the prince stepped in I was visualising the charred bodies; there was more than a whiff of fear.  There’s the same level of energy at the Capulets’ ball.  The choreography – as well as the pyrotechnics – is outstanding in this production.  Also the music from a band perched on the 2nd floor balcony (much as they were in the RSC’s Much Ado About Nothing four years ago, although there were, alas, no Cuban rhythms in this).

The fire, smoke and CO2 in the opening scene have a huge impact; heightened by the fire projected on the the three-storey stage.  But the fire was projected at points throughout the production that made less sense to me – like the nifty little hydraulic rostrum it felt overused.  Another thing I didn’t fully understand were the costumes, a mixture of modern dress and Elizabethan inspired outfits coupled with Doc Marten footwear (Elizabethan-punk?); the significance of the timing with which characters switched between one and another was lost on me.

Mariah Gale as Juliet gave the best performance in the role that I’ve seen.  It was an amazing: physically childish but psychologically tough; during the two-hour traffic of their stage (well, three hour) she seemed to grow up.  In her first appearance she seemed young for a thirteen year old, wearing converse with her party dress and swinging a toy while her parents discussed her marriage.  But the energy of her dancing (albeit wild, childish, unselfconscious) at the party made her fascination for Romeo understandable.  Her performance also made me realise, for the first time, how admirable she is as a character.  This was emphasised by an interesting take on Capulet as an abusive father.  While I wasn’t entirely convinced by the way it was played, the scene where Juliet refuses to wed Paris (played over the breakfast table) hinted at something that made sense of his character for me for the first time.  On his entrance, he shares a close moment of intimacy with his daughter as, in sympathy, he tries to cheer her up (“In one little body/Thou counterfeit’st a bark, a sea, a wind;”) It’s a genuine moment of father/daughter affection, and it’s what give the scene its power. When he sits down to eat and hears of her defiance, there’s a chill, and the mood changes.  Lady Capulet’s delivery is resigned rather than indignant (“Ay, sir; but she will none, she gives you thanks.”) It’s an excellent performance from Christine Entwistle, conveying the cowering resignation of a woman who has given up determining her own course, seeking comfort where she can (Tybalt?) and avoiding confronting Capulet at all costs. Juliet shivers out of control (you can picture her, aged 7, chained to a radiator for rearranging daddy’s desk) but does not give in under his tirade (“hang, beg, starve, die in/the streets.”)  His outburst is shockingly sudden and violent, and the portrayal of Capulet as a noble man wronged by his daughter never made sense for me.  The fun father who loves to be loved, to be the life and soul, and yet who turns nasty the second he doesn’t get his own way, that has a ring of truth about it. Read the rest of this entry »

6 Comments »

“The Harder They Come” Review

Until tomorrow night, The Harder They Come, a musical based on the Jimmy Cliff film, is at Cardiff’s New Theatre, I saw it last night: it’s great.

On a minimal set, the excellent band are on stage for the whole time, as are the cast.  The show is packed with musical numbers, and the drummer and the two guys on keyboards (who were particularly excellent) kept the music playing through the dialogue and action. And sometimes the dialogue and action took place during musical numbers.  It gave the show a terrific pace. And I’ve not seen the film, but the show cut from scene to scene, taking advantage of the cast all being on stage so that with a snap lighting change and a few steps forward or back we could be transported from the scene of a police beating to a recording studio.  Perhaps my only criticism was the slightly peculiar choices in terms of the level of lighting: sometimes this focused right down on one or two people and at others washed the stage with colour – at the opposite to the moments I’d have chosen…

There were some great voices in the cast and the choreography was excellent.  Perhaps the acting was occasionally a little superficial: Ivan was played a little too “brightly”, so that when he first pulled a knife it felt like a faux-pas rather than a revelation about his character. But then two of my (female) friends were very enthusiastic about him (“it’s his eyes – and the thing he does with his knees…”) Ultimately – however – it was about the music, and my feet are still tapping a day later…

No Comments »

Dancing to Handel

I’m not that keen on dance. Usually I’ll run a mile at the merest whiff of a dance receital. Actually, I don’t go to the opera that much either. But look at this, from David McVicar’s Glyndebourne production of Handel’s Giulio Cesare:

I know it’s wrong (surely you aren’t meant to be able to swing your hips to Handel), but how can something so good not be right? So George Frideric may not have realised he was writing a cabaret, but that doesn’t mean he wasn’t.

And this isn’t even the best bit (Cleo’s opening scene when she kicks Ptolemy’s butt is great). Though Danielle de Niese (Cleopatra) may not be the best singer in this rather spiffy production (only because the competition is fierce), but she’s an amazing performer.

It’s a bit like parsnips in soup. Dance in opera can not only be palatable, but rather tasty.

No Comments »

Much Ado About…The Weather

Time again for outdoor Shakespeare at Lewes Castle. Yes, it’s raining. A lot. Our dress rehearsal was just cancelled. Fortunately the forecast is looking up.

Here’s The Argus‘ preview. And a quick Google shows our Don Pedro is plugging it on gay social networking site Outeverywhere.com!

As ever, I’m sound and lights. It’s a fairly modern soundtrack. If you do make it, see if you can spot the inspiration of Who finale Last of the Time Lords.

9 Comments »

Tom Jones: “Shining like a beacon in this naughty world”

It’s that time of year again – outdoor theatre in a medieval castle. This year we are doing Fielding’s Tom Jones. Hence the signs which read “TOM JONES” in large letters, then, slightly smaller (and bracketed) “the play”, to avoid any embarassment with ladies queuing with their underwear ready for the great man to strike up with “It’s Not Unusual”. Yeah, Tom Jones plays Lewes Castle… Great.

No, it’s an adaptation of the novel that we’re doing, and the director’s worried about how the good people of Lewes will react to all the sex. The landlady of my local stopped by and looked over the wall. “Very Lewes” she said, seeing the bawdy goings on, so that settled that. Several spectators with younger children were leaning over the wall enjoying one of the more energetic scenes Molly “thanks” Tom for his kindness. No kids were whisked away by shocked parents.

I’ve put the pictures I took at the dress last night over on PicasaWeb (still trying it out). Unfortunatley my batteries ran flat before I could get any decent ones. I forgot to charge them up.

#4d4d4d; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none">Tom Jones
Aug 15, 2006 – 8 Photos

It should be a highly enjoyable show (provided the weather does what it’s supposed to… by no means guaranteed). Gates open 6.30pm, bring a picnic; the performance starts at 7.30pm and is over by 10pm. Descriptions here and here and you can even buy your tickets online for tonight, tomorrow, Friday, or Sat.

3 Comments »

“Waiting for Gordo” Review

More political theatre tonight!

The play was highly entertaining. Beckett’s tramps become backbench Labour MPs, to whom Beckett is Secretary of State (for Gloom). They wait for Gordo, voting on Tonzzo’s increasingly absurd criminal justice bills.

Yesterday morning, whilst listening to the Today programme, I heard a feature on the production “Waiting for Gordo” to which listeners had contributed. “Funny”, I though, “that sounds exactly like Matthew”, a friend who appeared in Two Gentlemen of Verona when it went on to Cornwall. I hadn’t realised that the play was on at The Little.

I found myself sitting next to the playwright, Richard Heller (interviewed for Today last week). He was somewhat disturbed to find the political contributions he had received from radio listeners was more or less equally matched by the existential despair.

Sadly, although the play was mentioned in the Telegraph, The Independent and Newsnight as well as Today the audience was in the low 20s. Still, it was very well received, especially the speeches delivered by Lackey (a superb performance by Two Gentlemen’s Speed, Adam Macrae) culled (and reedited) from the words of the real-life Tonzzo and Gordo.

Tonzzo and Gordo

No Comments »