Brain Tree's Reviews

A Human Being Died That Night, 25 May 2013

2013-06-05T13:56:00.001+01:00

Firstly, an apology. I got into a habit of attempting to write reviews then forgetting them (or remembering them as their run had ended, so it has been a while. I also just haven't seen that much this year or certainly little of interest.

A Human Being Died That Night at Hampstead Downstairs is Nicholas Wright's return to Hampstead after the wonderful The Last of the Duchess in 2011, which I loved. This is very different, an adaptation of A Human Being Died That Night: A South African Story of Forgiveness by Dr Pumla Gobodo-Madikizela, it looks at Gobodo-Madikizela's meetings with Eugene De Kock, a white policeman accused of the murders of many South Africans and refered to as "Prime Evil". It looks as forgiveness, suspicion and post-apartheid South Africa.

Noma Dumezweni and Matthew Marsh. Credit to Hampstead Theatre

It's strengths are the performances; Matthew Marsh as De Kock (and a frightenly accurate Afrikaners accents) who could easily play De Kock as a monster who regrets his incarceration but plays him a vulnerable man with a stutter, an abusive childhood and an indication of the insecurity of the Afrikaners that kept Apartheid going for decades and Noma Dumezweni as Gobodo-Madikizela, whose introduction outside the studio space could easily convince you that she was a psychologist and not an actress remembering lines. Wright doesn't paint either as perfect; she is understandably suspicious of white South Africans but pushes her anger towards Cape Town and Table Mountain, landscapes that were no go for a black South African in the townships and De Kock, who reveals, during a touching moment of sympathy where Gobodo touches his hand, that was the hand he used to kill people with.

At 80 minutes with no interval it doesn't sag like so many plays, it leaves you wanting more not just due to writing and performaces but in hope that a better understanding of South Africa, that has attempted forgiveness in the most public way with its Truth and Reconciliation committees and is suffering new issues such as AIDS amongst its poor black South Africans.

After the poor Travelling Light it is good to see Wright tackle the problems and roots to reconciliation in his homeland.

This House (Cottesloe), October 2012

2012-11-26T12:37:00.001+00:00

Who's in it? Charles Edwards, Phil Daniels, Philip Glenister, Lauren O'Neill, Richard Ridings, Vincent Franklin and Julian Wadham.

Where did you see it? The Cottesloe, but it's sold out run finishes on the 1st December and with a transfer to the Olivier in February.

Every so often this blog develops an unhealthy obsession with a play (Collaborators, Last of the Duchess) and this is my play of 2012. It helps with James Graham's This House to be a major fan of politics but this young writer merely puts together a coherrent script out of the real life drama that was the House of Commons between 1974 -1979.

It is a testament to the storyline that there is no real character development outside the Labour and Conservative Party whips. Charles Edwards, Ed Hughes and Julian Wadham are in the blue corner and Philip Glenister, Lauren O'Neill, Vincent Franklin, Philip Glenister (sadly not appearing in the Olivier transfer) and Phil Daniels, who appeared later in the run due to a family bereavement and was replaced by the fantastic Andrew Frame (appearing script in hand as the Cottesloe doesn't employ understudies) for the early shows.

The ensemble made up of Gunnar Cauthery, Andrew Havill, Christopher Godwin, Helena Lymbery, Giles Taylor, Matthew Pidgeon, Rupert Vanisart and Tony Turner are probably the most interesting to watch, they get to show their range even when their characters don't even have names; most of the MPs are refered to as the Member for [insert constituency here], which draws acknowledgement when the Member for Finchley is mentioned but mostly caused me to want to go home and google resulting in a "Oh that's who the Member for Abingdon is!"

The play's strength isn't so much its script (reading the playtext reveals a long winded play that would have been far longer than the 2 hours 45 it clocks in at) but a director and set designer in Jerrmy Herrin and Rae Smith, respectively, who make the most of the Cottesloe (the set's main attraction is the House of Common green benches in the stalls) and a house band doing versions of David Bowie songs (Daniels, envoking his Parklife days even does a number) that add to the seventies atmosphere and avoids being pretentious or embarassing to watch. Even the choreographed numbers feel like they have a place in a play that's text already has a lot going on.

I cannot really find fault with this play and it is such a relief to see a strong play after the disaster that is Damned by Despair at the National Theatre and what has been a weak year for NT productions in general.

Damned by Despair, 5 October 2012 (Preview)

2012-10-07T21:53:00.001+01:00

Who's in it? Bertie Carvel, Sebastian Armesto, Leanne Best, Rory Keenan, Lorna Brown, Michael Gould, Amanda Lawrence, Pierce Reid and Alex Warren.

Where did you see it? Olivier, National Theatre

Occasionally the National Theatre put on productions that make you wonder what the director has on Sir Nicholas Hytner . Associate Director Bijan Sheibani must have something pretty major to bring Frank McGuinness' adaptation of Tirso de Molina's Damned by Despair to the biggest theatre on the South Bank.

It is a complete and utter car crash. The lack of big names means it isn't selling too well (I had complementary tickets) and when it does get an audience in they are quick to disappear at the interval. The story surrounds hermit Paulo (Armesto), who after receiving a message from 'God', goes to find his counterpart Enrico (Carvel), a violent man who kills for money and sometimes just for fun. Armesto and Carvel are badly miscast. Armesto lacks the charm or ability to keep the audience interested in Paulo and Carvel, 2012 Olivier Award winner for Matilda, is all charm and muscle (He looks fantastic, he reminded me of a young Gary Oldman when Oldman only played psychos) but his musical theatre past keeps cropping up, with limp wristed movements and all round campiness that ruins any belief the audience had in Enrico,violent gang-leader and killer. The brilliant What's on Stage forum suggested he wants baddie roles but Carvel will be lucky to get any roles after this.

Company in rehearsal

Add in the fact that is religious propaganda that sits uncomfortably with a 21st century audience. I hate to sound all Ricky Gervais but it feels out of place, in the same way 13's message of Atheism felt like being force fed marbles of issues that aren't done well at the best of times but feel particularly clunky in the theatre.

It is also doesn't seem to know when it is set, is it 17th century Naples as the original or is it a modern day setting (There's a really cringey bit with Carvel and his gang, shocking made up of mostly black men which really offended me, singing 'Stuck in the Middle' with you as they chopped off someone's ear) . The actual set is one of the cheapest, nastiest sets I have seen in a theatre.It looks like cardboard and the only pay off is a scene towards the end. It's staging means a lot of action takes places amongst the audience, which results in awkward shuffling as some realise they are both watching and they are also part of the action. There is also the poor supporting cast, only saved by Alex Warren and Rory Keenan, who provide actual charm and suitable acting in this poor production. Leanne Best plays Celia as smug, quite unnecessarily which makes me think she isn't necessarily acting the smugness and Pierce Reid, who was actually quite good in Collaborators, is reduced to ensemble.

I am not sure how the National can justify this dull play at any time, let alone during a recession. Offering during the Travelex season isn't justification for why it looks and feels so cheap and it isn't what you expect from the National Theatre.

My recommendation is don't go but if you do try to enjoy as campy nonsense rather than a serious play.

The Judas Kiss 15 September 2012

2012-09-17T13:45:00.000+01:00

Who's in it? Rupert Everett, Freddie Fox, Tom Colley, Cal Macaninch, Ben Hardy,

Alister Cameron, Kirsty Oswald

Where did you see it? Hampstead Theatre

It has been a while, hasn't it. I struggled to see performances (where were all the Edinburgh previews this year?) and then write about them.

I return to blogging after seeing The Judas Kiss by David Hare. This production has the perfect recipe of a subject that still interests, over a century after his death, and a cast lead by theatre veteran Rupert Everett and the up and coming Freddie Fox. The story is divided into two halves; Oscar Wilde (Everett) on the evening before his arrest and Wilde after his release living with his lover and the cause of his downfall Lord Alfred 'Bosie' Douglas (Fox).In the middle you have Robbie Ross (played brilliantly by Macaninch), a man far more in love with Wilde than Wilde ever was with him, though clearly fond of him as he was Wilde's first male lover. Ross has the uneviable task of paying off the help (Oswald, Hardy and Cameron) whilst trying to get his friend away from the police. He is also go-between for Wilde and his wife Constance, though we never meet her, her humiliation and hatred of Bosie comes through Ross.

Everett shines as Wilde, but it is not a difficult part. The audience can empathise with Wilde's love for his children who are estranged from him and his determination not to flee whilst he has the chance. What everyone struggles with is how he can love Bosie so, a man who introduced him to the rent boys who provide evidence against Wilde at trial, a man so spoilt and selfish yet so unaware.Hare (and Fox) could easily make Bosie a one dimensional villain but there is something intriguing and attractive about this horrible character that attracts Wilde (and Gallieo, played by the rather well-endowed Tom Colley). My only issue would be the second half, which drags but has the most potential (it is mostly a two hander between Wilde and Ross or Wilde and Bosie).

Fox, Everett and Macaninch in The Judas Kiss

I should warn, or mention in passing so you buy tickets, that there is a LOT of full frontal nudity in this play. Tom Colley is the highlight (Let's just say Fox is very keen to put on his bedsheet when wondering around the stage whereas Colley isn't) but it is all done tastefully, though maybe too darkly lit for some people's tastes.

I think what stuck with me was Wilde's comment that Judas's betrayal to Jesus wasn't dramatic enough. He hardly knew Jesus, it should have been John that administered the kiss. The saddest thing about Wilde is that he betrayed by EVERYBODY for something that wouldn't raise an eyebrow had he done these thigs a hundred years later.

Chariots of Fire, 19 May 2012

2012-06-09T20:20:00.001+01:00

Who's in it? James McArdle, Mark Edel-Hunt, Tam Williams, Simon Williams, Sam Archer, Savannah Stevenson, Natasha Broomfield and Jack Lowden.
Where did you see it? Hampstead Theatre (Transfers to the Gielgud Theatre on the 22nd June 2012)

I'm not sure if people have fond memories of the film Chariots of Fire. I think the fondness for it and its success is completely dependent on Vangelis's music as opposed to the whole "two men win races" thing.

Director (and artistic director of Hampstead Theatre) Edward Hall desperately tries to recreate the beach scenes by having his company (elder member exempt) warming up (Really? they couldn't do this in their dressing rooms?) and running around the round stage in what could be a beautiful piece of choreography if they weren't wearing modern day t-shirts and tracksuit bottoms. I won't bore you too much with the plot, the plot is the same as the film version.

Chariots of Fire is more than two men win the athletics, it is about overcoming discrimination, your God or your love of sport etc etc but this stage play becomes about which actor can run around in circles most convincingly. It doesn't make the play exciting and any tension that has been created is then slowed down by watching people run around. The scenes set in Paris 1924 feel anti-climatic and lose meaning because you know all comes good. The actual scripted scenes are nothing special, Mike Bartlett has brought nothing to stage that wasn't on the screen and completely unsubtle (Oooh, they hate him because he's a Jew, do you see?). Bartlett's seems incapable of not treating his audience like idiots, he was just as blatant during the epic 13 at the National Theatre last year. The production of Chariots of Fire isn't about showcasing great actors (I think James McArdle and Jack Lowden are wasted in their roles as Harold Abrahams and Eric Liddell) but about showcasing what the Hampstead Theatre can do.

Nicholas Woodeson and James McArdle

I think the move to Gieguld without judging its success at the Hampstead is a major problem (though it has sold out-not dificult when so many seats have been removed for the round staging), will there really be an audience for this because of 2012, will that audience not just go and see the theatrical re-release due this summer? In a season that has seen the stage adaptation of The King's Speech close early because it was released too closely to the film will the same fate not be dealt to Chariots of Fire.

One Man, Two Guvnors, 12 May 2012

2012-05-21T21:01:00.001+01:00

Who's in it? Owain Arthur, Martin Barrass , David Benson, Robin Berry, Nigel Betts, Gillian Budd, Andrew Dennis, Derek Elroy, Gerard Horan, Daniel Ings, Ben Mansfield, Laura Matthews, Jodie Prenger, Richard Shanks, Hannah Spearritt, Gemma Whelan and Matthew Woodyat.

Where did you see it? Theatre Royal Haymarket

One Man, Two Guvnors originally starred James Corden, Chris Oliver and Jemima Rooper, they have now taken this smash hit play (it transfered to Aldwych from the Lyttelton, National Theatre AND toured the UK) to Broadway and the play continues, with Corden's understudy Owain Arthur, taking on the lead role at the Haymarket.

The Theatre Royal Haymarket is a horrible, expensive mess of a venue. I shouldn't have gone back after seeing The Importance of Being Earnest there a few months ago but the National Theatre were offering cheap (and what I thought were better) seats in the Upper Circle. My seats in the Upper Circle were even worse than the balcony. For anyone familiar with The Simpsons you will remember a wonderful scene where Springfield's police force have their own documentary series Bad Cops. In Bad Cops we see Principal Skinner and his mother Agnes call out the police. The argument surrounds the television where one half of the screen has been covered causing a hysterical Skinner to exclaim "We rented The Man Without a Face...I didn't even know he had a problem!"

I could only see half the stage, something not apparent if you were to book tickets for OMTG and take a look at the seating plan. I was in C3 Upper Circle, the couple next to me on C1 & C2 left about five minutes into the show. Whilst a ticket can stress restricted view they had no view at all. A complete rip off on the part of the TRH. Especially when they are charging at least £15 for seats where the audience cannot see the play.

Jodie Prentice and Owain Arthur

As for OMTG part of me wants to suggests anyone with restricted view tickets isn't actually missing much. I don't get the rave reviews (and it seems the Oliviers agreed with me). The play revolves around Brighton, mistaken identity between a twin brother and sister, the sister's lover who murdered her brother and the harlequin in the form of Francis Henshall (Arthur) who acts as minder for both Rachel (the twin sister of the dead Rocco) and her boyfriend Stanley, who she is escaping to Australia with.

Firstly there is too much going on, a lot of the back story involving the fiancee of the late Rocco feels tacked on and where this is humour it feels false, in fact it is false. The corpsing, the audience participation (except one section are all faked) and I fail to understand how such a strong adaption by Richard Bean of A Servant of Two Masters needed to break the fourth wall (or pretend to). My review and disappointment is definitely to do with the poor seats where I couldn't see a lot of the action but also a shockingly poor play that's doesn't really know where it is going.

New Act Comedy

2012-05-13T17:17:00.002+01:00

I don't write enough about comedy on this blog. I hope this will be rectified as the Edinburgh previews begin but for now I've been attending a few new act nights in London, mainly to support my friend Ian Lane but also because I don't know why I avoid new comic nights, I feel like I should support them because a select few will become established well known acts one day. I also appreciate that it is damn hard and as a punter viewing new comics I've come up with some dos and don'ts.

DO know how to use a microphone
The new comic's first nemesis (well first on stage nemesis anyway) I saw so many comics fight with a rogue microphone stand at Rudy's Revenge 2012 on 25th April. It is distracting, not only for the comic but for the audience member and microphone technique is a skill that needs to be learned.

DO speak proper!
One comic at Rudy's Revenge could not talk properly. Maybe it was nerves, maybe he is uneducated but either way he got no laughs because his set wasn't audible.

DON'T make jokes about Stephen Fry
Inexplicably jokes about how wonderful Stephen Fry don't go down well, especially when you look like a young Stephen Fry (as the comic at Rudy's Revenge-at this point you are probably wondering about the lack of names I am using. It isn't my place to embarass acts by naming and shaming them). It is also doesn't allow for the fact that some of your audience are on twitter and have witnessed Fry's petulant child antics first hand. He is not untouchable.

DON'T charge for new act nights
When you live in London there are plenty of cheap, established nights that contain known comics. If you are lucky you can get a good night of comedy for about £6. For Rudy's Revenge organisers to charge £3 for acts that will range in quality or have no quality whatsoever seems appaling when there are so many free new acts nights, like Freedom on the Fringe at the Torriano. That's a tip for promoters rather than comics.

Quick Update

2012-05-13T17:03:00.000+01:00

So it has been three months since I last updated. I apologise, it was never my intention to have such a delay between reviews but the truth is I have struggled to write anything decent for the plays I have seen. I will give quick overviews of what I have seen since February 1st 2012

Tyne Daly

Masterclass, Vaudeville Theatre 1 February 2012
Starring Tyne Daly as Maria Callas. Daly gives a stunning performance (and she looks great) and is successful in her monologues as well has her chemistry with other cast members but the play isn't as good as her performance. The monologues don't feel like anybody's voice and it skirts over her relationship with Onassis rather than looks at it in the detail it deserves. It doesn't seem sure of its audience either, is it about opera, is it about Callas or is about attracting a lot of Cagney and Lacey fans.

Absent Friends, Harold Pinter Theatre 2 February 2012
There are some that get the point of staging Alan Auckbourn's Absent Friends and there are some that don't. I don't. In Absent Friends it is a series of events and talking (someone on WhatsonStage.com discussion board compared it to Coronation Street, that is an insult to Corrie) there isn't a conclusion just a bunch of very good actors (Katherine Parkinson, Reece Shearsmith, Kara Tointon amongst others give strong performances) with a script that doesn't do them justice. I like a conclusion and I like to care what happens next off-stage. I didn't get that with Absent Friends.

The Importance of Being Earnest, Theatre Royal Haymarket 3 February 2012

James McNicholas

I really enjoyed this limited run of the Old Red Lion production of Earnest. Had a fantastic cast including James McNicholas as Algernon and Harriet Ballard as Cecily and any weak links in performance by other actors could easily be ignored with such a fantastic production. It was a fun, modern take on a play that has been done to death and fair play to TRH for taking on an off West End production, bringing it to the masses and not being in the dark unnecessarily (Trafalgar Studies could learn from this)
The issue I had was a personal one. My awful, awful seats. The Theatre Royal Haymarket is a horrible theatre. I was stuck in the balcony on uncomfotable chairs and the inability to hear very much. Subtle facial expressions were missed (particularly noticeable as the stalls were laughing in the aisles and all the balcony poors looked confused at each other). Those sorts of theatres encourage the 'Them and us' attitude that puts a lot of the general public off attending plays. TRH has no right to charging anyone when they can't even see all the stage.

She Stoops to Conquer, Olivier Theatre 7 February 2012
I walked out at the interval is the nicest thing I can say about this play. It added to my belief that the early part of 2012 has been incredibly disappointing for productions at the National and I hope the newer season, which includes Antigone, with Christopher Ecclestone and Jodie Whittaker and Timon of Athens with Brain Tree favourite Simon Russell Beale is an improvement.

After Miss Julie, New Vic 14 April 2012

Natalie Dormer and Kieran Bew

A big gap in my theatre schedule there; I was ill/seeing films/comedy/missing booked plays. After Miss Julie by Patrick Marber (a nice comedy connection there) is adapted from August Strindberg's Miss Julie (which was on in Manchester starring Maxine Peake) and the setting is moved to 1945's General election. I mostly went for the beautiful Natalie Dormer and she didn't disappoint. I fear she will never be a Judi Dench-esque national treasure because she specialises in bitches but she is damn good at them. The space was very odd, you literally walk across the set as you make your way to your (unreserved-cue confusion and chaos) seat and it feels very intimate. You don't really get that in many central London theatres and it is nice but I also like my distance as an audience member.

Execution of Justice 30th January 2012

2012-02-02T17:57:00.000+00:00

Who's in it? Madeleine Bowyer, Georgia Buchanan, Maurice Byrne, Doron Davidson, Aidan Downing, Philip Duguid-McQuillan, Lindsay Fraser, Thomas Grube, Catherine Hammond, Kate Harper, Jasper Jacob, Christopher Lane, Ben Mars, Alex McSweeney, Mark Parsons, John Rayment, Michael Shane, Joyce Veheary, Aonghus Weber and Peter Wiedmann

Where did you see it? Southwark Playhouse, London Bridge

This is the first British professional production of Execution of Justice by Emily Mann since it was written in 1982 (with an original cast that included Wesley Snipes) and I am not sure, especially after Gus Van Sant's 2008 film Milk why it has taken so long to get to the UK. Unlike Milk Execution of Justice looks at the assasination of San Francisco Supervisor Harvey Milk and San Francisco Mayor George Moscone through the eyes of their killer, Supervisor Dan White.

It focuses on why Dan White wasn't found guilty of murder by his peers and puts forward a number of possibilities, such the age of the jurors (many of the females were old enough to White's mother), religion with many of the jurors being Catholic and most worringly the exclusion of anyone with any sympaties to gay rights movement. The play certainly doesn't suggest the murder of Milk was simply a hate crime and the sentence of only seven years (White served five) because Milk was openly gay. The play looks at all the reasons; White's relationship with the authorities (through his time as a policeman and supervisor) and the city's relationship with its mix of inhabitants.

The large cast manage to make the most of this small, noisy and damp space. Situated beneath London Bridge a lot of trains go overheard and it can be a distraction but luckily this play, at 105 minutes, is riverting with some stunning performances; particularly Christopher Lane as White's lawyer Douglas Schmidt, Ben Mars as the Prosecutor, Philip Duguid-McQuillan as Dan White and Aidan Downing as drag queen Sister Boom Boom (the role played by Snipes) and stand out as performers to watch out for in the future.

A lot of reviews of this say that thirty years on this play has losts it impact. Emotionally, yes though the use of video showing the moment that Milk and Moscone's assassination is announced and the candle lit vigil by San Francisco's gay community never fail to be moving. The impact is lost because so many have done the story of Milk better, giving him a voice and a presence like the documentary The Times of Harvey Milk or Sean Penn's performance in 2008. Giving a voice to Dan White feels unfair, especially in the context that he got a very light sentence (though killed himself not long after release, perhaps with the awareness that a revenge killing was likely) but that fault lies with Mann, not the cast or direction in not the best of venues.

The Trial of Ubu 28th January 2012

2012-02-02T17:30:00.001+00:00

Who's in it? Nikki Amuka-Bird, Josie Daxter, Kate Duchene, Paul McCleary, Rob Ostlere and George Taylor
Where did you see it? Hampstead Theatre

The Trial of Ubu, written by Simon Stephens and directed by Katie Mitchell, is a fictionalised tale of French writer and playwright Alfred Jarry's 19th century dictator King Ubu being put on trial for war crimes in the Hague in the 21st Century.

Jarry's Ubu Roi was first written when he was 15 with some school friends and eight years later, when all the friends had moved on from the work he produced a play, that was deemed to vulgar to be played by actors so it became a puppet show.

What we get, in what I hoped was a serious drama about the war crimes process with a fictional antagnonist, is a puppet show for what feels like forever but probably only lasts 15 minutes. The problem, possibly due to translation. is that Ubu is vulgar and is obscene but the puppet show as a childish, immature element that completely is at odds with the rest of the play.

Paul McCleary as Ubu and Rob Ostlere as his guard

Once the puppet show has ended; which gives background to Ubu's rise to power, his domineering wife and all the attrocities he commits as King we are then "treated" to the live action performance. Set in a interpretors booth. Nikki Amuka-Bird and Kate Duchene have lovely voices but we learn nothing more about them. Through them we learn what is being said in the trial and for me this loses any impact Ubu's (fictional) crimes should have on the audience; sexual assault, murder of men, women and children. He kills bankers, which I think is meant to make us warm to him...

The main issue is the direction. Last year, as London went through the worst riots it had seen for thirty years I went to see A Woman Killed with Kindness at the National Theatre, directed by Katie Mitchell. I hated that and I hated this. She has this awful 'SPEED it UP, SLOW it DOWN' technique, which doesn't just get boring it gets irritating. She also has a habit of moving plays from the period they were set in. I have no idea who to blame for ridiculous references to events that happened 98 YEARS ago. The play's big dramatic moment is Ubu listing all the attrocities that have happened since Jarry wrote his play. Why didn't Stephens write a play looking at what would have happened if Hitler had survived to be trialed at Nuremberg or Milosevic if he had not had that heart attack. Stephens desperately wants this play to have heart and pathos. It has badly written characters and wastes them when they do appear on stage. Paul McCleary as Ubu (in Heath Ledger Joker make up) is underwritten and not given the chance to say his own lines (as they are read to us by Amuka-Bird or Kate Duchene).

To be blunt I don't recommened this play. I certainly don't recommened playing £29 to see it or even the £12 I did but it was only 80 minutes if you decide to ignore me.

Travelling Light (Preview) , 14th January 2012

2012-01-18T12:15:00.001+00:00

Who's in it? Damien Molony, Anthony Sher, Paul Jesson, Lauren O'Neil, Abigail McKern and Sue Kelvin

Where did you see it? Lyttelton, National Theatre

Happy New Year, everyone! I slacked a bit when it came to theatre/comedy in December but I am BACK with a whimper at least. It seems apt to see play that combine my interests of film and theatre (and old country East Europen Jews) in Nicholas Wright's new play Travelling Light. Wright also wrote Last of the Duchess, which I saw back in October and it was totally amazing and should have got a West End transfer etc etc.

Sue Kelvin (Tsippa), Lauren O’Neil (Anna) & Antony Sher (Jacob Bindel). Photo by Johan Persson

When an audience member screeches in the stalls of the Lytelton, barely ten minutes into the show, "Where's Anthony Sher?" you know you have a problem. The problem being that Anthony Sher, as Jacob Bindel the illiterate timber merchant who funds the young Motl (played by Damien Molony in his Eastern European youth and by Paul Jesson in his later years as a studio mogul named Maurice Montgomery) is far from the star of the show and yet is probably the main reason this show is practically a sell out (which is incredible for a new play at the Lytelton) as well as the subject matter. His accent is distracting, he sounds like Pop from the League of Gentlemen and is hardly an interesting part for any actor; let alone one of Britain's finest. Where he does shine is the odd look or during his lengthy monologues.

That is another problem; this play just isn't enough about the early days of Hollywood. It is about some young man (who has a very uppercut British accent in his youth but VERY East European Jewish accent in his later years, despite spending 30 years in Hollywood) who lives in some nameless small town near Russia and inherits a camera from his late father. When we do get to Hollywood the film industry is settled and there's even talkies.

Damien Molony (Motl Mendl) and Lauren O’Neil (Anna). Photo by Johan Persson

What we do get is love, love rivalries and lots of film. Yes, lots of film in a theatre production and this is either its strength or its downfall. It is a very good distraction during scene changes but also leads to some of the worst blocking I have ever seen in a theatre production; backs to the audience, awkward neck turns (that could have been my cheap seats) and the films in question weren't always easy to see. I expect better from Nicholas Hytner, who has extensive experience in film and theatre, I wonder if he has spoiled by the staging of Collaborators at the Cottesloe and thinks he can replicate something similar in the Lyttelton? I desperately hope this is a preview glich that will be sorted by press night (18th January 2012).

Paul Jesson (Maurice Montgomery).

I think Damien Moloney as Motl has the most difficult job a theatre actor can have. Leading a play and not being the 'name', though I expect this will change when he takes over from Aidan Turner as the new vampire Hal in Being Human (which begins on BBC3 and is also an uneviable task; Turner was brilliant) soon. To be honest I struggled with his performance, he's not particularly playing a charming character and he's not particularly interesting to watch. He also did that annoying "No tears crying", which is fine if you are trying to get sympathy on a reality TV programme but not acceptable from an actor leading a National Theatre play. I also struggled with Lauren O'Neil. Not because she isn't a good actress, far from it. She's perfect as Anna, the beautiful film assistant and object of Motl and Jacob's affections and utterly stunning, except on film. Which is the whole point of the character, who is meant to be this stunning actress in the making. Pretty on film, yes but not breath-takingly beautiful as she is on stage. For those unfamiliar with O'Neil she appears on the match.com advert as the 'Girl on the platform'. Devastatingly pretty on film, yes but worthy of being Motl's obsession when we do see her on film; sadly not and I can't fathom why she doesn't photograph as well as she looks in real life.

Wright's strength's lay in his female characters and when they do have things to do they are brilliant; usually behind many of the play's shamefully low comic moments. The play's real gem is Paul Jesson as Maurice and he is hardly in it (he even shines in the plays awful ending) but this play is not a gem. This play might have worked better as a film and if it is to be a play should have been in the Cottesloe, not in the Lyttelton.

13, 2nd December 2011

2011-12-09T16:34:00.001+00:00

Who is it? Too many to mention on here so take a look at the cast list on the NT website.
Where did you see it? Olivier, National Theatre.

Mike Bartlett is the writer-in-residence at the National. I say this to remind myself why this poor, self-indulgent mess of a play even got past the first draft, let alone the biggest stage at National. I won a competition to see it and dragged along a friend, who had never been before. She is now reluctant to ever see a National Theatre play again. Having just looked up Bartlett I am suprised he is young (only 30) yet this play feels like it was written by some 80 year old writer who had heard of You Tube but wasn't really sure what it did. It feels confused and it already feels a little dated.

Geraldine James in 13

There are too many characters, which would be okay if they all had strong roles but they don't. With 13 characters all having the same dream you need A LOT of understudies so you end up with these odd scenes, which have no importance just so the understudies know what is going on. At least that is why I hope they are there. It feels a waste of many good actors. Geraldine James and Danny Webb stand out in particular as a Thatcher-esque Prime Minister and her Richard Dawkins-esque friend from university. Webb delivers the only good line of the evening when he compares James' character (the fact I remember no names only a week on is very telling) that as she has no children (her son is dead) and no husband (he left her) she can dedicate herself to job, just like Thatcher. When pointed Thatcher did have children Webb's character hisses "but she didn't care about them!", though it could argued she was fond of Mark when got lost in some sand, somewhere.

I get the impression someone, somewhere thought this play was quite edgy; wars in Iran, atheist rhetoric that somehow attracts half a million followers despite sounding like what 15 year old might mumble to each other on the bus home from school and something resembling a story yet not actually being one. Oh, and there is the big black cube. That is the set in the National Theatre. A big black cube. There's a Boris Bike and some Rihanna. There is really nothing to this play and my respect grows for the acting profession. Getting a good part in a good play is easy. Getting a mediocre part in an awful play and not screaming "THIS IS SHIT, JUST GO HOME" at the interval in hard.

The story that is there is many interconnecting tales from the American diplomat, his wife and their annoying daughter (who gets chopped into pieces and I think we are meant to be appalled but she really is annoying so you are quite glad she won't be in it anymore), the messiah-type figure (Trystan Gravelle), who may or may not have killed the Thatcher-like James' son and frankly who cares at 2hrs 45 minutes this play is too long with too much of nothing. I do worry when the National puts something like this on because it undos all the good work of what has been a good year for them. Part of me wants to recommend seeing it because it will never be performed again but the reason it will never be performed again is because it is so bad!

Juno and the Paycock 26th November 2011

2011-11-29T16:44:00.001+00:00

Who's in it? Ciaran Hinds, Sinead Cusack, Clare Dunne, Risteárd Cooper, Nick Lee, Ronan Raftery, Tom Vaughan-Lawlor and Janet Moran.
Where did you see? Lytelton, National Theatre

I imagine, when Juno and the Paycock was first performed in 1924 it was groundbreaking and utterly heartbreaking because for many it would have been very close to the bone. Whilst many issues are probably relevant for Irish people today; unplanned pregnancy (in a country where abortion is still illegal), poverty(though not famine-early 20th century levels) and unemployment some aspects have lost their impact.

Ciaran Hinds (Jack Boyle) and Sinead Cusack (Juno Boyle)

The big selling point of this play, at least from the National Theatre's point of view, is the joint collaboration between them and Ireland's National theatre the Abbey in Dublin. Genuine Irish doing a very Irish play and what good quality genuine Irish actor. Ciaran Hinds as Captain Jack Boyle (due to his brief period in the merchant navy) and the paycock of the title (Imagine an Irish accent saying 'peacock') and Sinead Cusack as Juno. You expect them to be excellent, they are names and even with a very limited first half for her character Cusack more than makes up for it in the second half. The real reason to go there (unless like me you have a crush on Hinds) is for Clare Dunne as Juno and Jack's daughter, Mary.

As a play there is a theme of strong females, Juno and Mary work (though Mary's striking over a colleague's dismissal put pay to that) and support the weaker males in the family. Jack, an alcoholic, lazy man who uses his energy to go out drinking with his partner-in-crime Joxer Daly (Risteárd Cooper) and avoiding any offers of work and son Johnny, who is physically weak; one arm and dodgy hip from various activities in the Easter Rising and the Irish Civil War but also shown to be a coward, like his father when he anonymously grasses up a neighbour and finds himself haunted by the spirit of the man whose death he caused.

I don't want to spoil the play (despite its ancient-ness) but it has what you expect from an Irish melodrama; abandoment, religion, war, singing and Guinness(which had to be bought from Nigeria as it is a real struggle to get non-alcoholic Guinness). I read someone questionning why this play by Sean O'Casey is often performed and I think it is because it is one of the few plays to give all this characters a real purpose and whilst commentary on atheism or non-Christian religions may seem like a common theme it also makes this play seem timeless and could easily, much like Top Girls, have been written after the events rather during them.

Comedy of Errors (Preview) 22nd November 2011

2011-11-29T16:11:00.001+00:00

Who is in it? Lenny Henry, Claudie Blakley, Chris Jarman, Lucian Msasmati, Amit Shah. Michelle Terry, Daniel Poyser and Rene Zagger
Where did you see it? Olivier, National Theatre

For a first preview I think I made more mistakes than the cast, for some inexplicable reason (tiredness? I do have a proper job and everything believe it or not) I thought E came before G in the alphabet (My name has no Fs in so I don't register it) and sat in the wrong seat for about 15 minutes before the beginning. Such a fool.

Claudie Blakley (Adriana) and Lenny Henry (Antipholus of Syracuse)

In terms of audience this preview seemed to attract the rudest, most ignorant people. Next to me were two Japanese tourists. I think they both found the language a bit difficult, it is Shakespeare after all, so spent the whole play playing with their phone. They ignored the usher, either out of rudeness or they didn't understand. Is that behaviour acceptable in any theatre or is it just us British that get a bit angsty over mobile phones in theatres? THEN I had the most annoying family (I say family they all called each other by their first names but I can so imagine hemp wearing modern families doing that) who didn't understand what was going (and were British and English speakers so no excuse) and had to keep explaining to each other what Lenny Henry was doing.

Now I am not blaming Lenny Henry for attracting those sorts of audiences. I doubt Lenny has a big Japanese following and the children were about 12 and 16, does anyone under 21 know who Lenny Henry is? The issue is maybe a National thing. Cheap tickets and the inability to throw people out mean rude audiences will occur but hopefully not too frequently.

The play itself? Fabulous. I only went because I hadn't been to the theatre for a couple of weeks and Entry Pass tickets were released for the early previews. I didn't have high expectations because it wasn't a play I was familiar with and whilst I had heard good things about Lenny Henry (who won the Evening Standard Best Newcomer award) but I wasn't that excited about it. The play is about two sets of twins, who become separated. Antipholus and and his Dromio of Syracuse set out to find their Ephesus counterparts and the confusion that arises from their arrival.

Lucian Msamati (Dromio of Syracuse) and Lenny Henry (Antipholus of Syracuse)

Henry is excellent as Antipholus of Syracuse and as a comedian in his natural home, as opposed to his Othello but Jarman (the more experience Shakesperian actor playing Antipholus of Ephesus) of the two is more straight, more serious and thus quite unlikeable. Claudie Blakley and Michelle Terry are the stand out performances as Adriana (Antipholus of Ephesus's wife, who finds herself "dining" with both twins) and Luciana, Adrianna's twin. They play them as TOWIE-esque new money, all high heels and short dresses but it works brilliantly. I now want to see Shakespeare done by Essex only actors but it works so well. I would argue the double act of Blakley and Terry rivals Henry and Lucian Msamati (Dromio of Syracuse) for theatrical double act of year (even beating Alex Jennings and Simon Russell Beale in Collaborators).

Grace Thurgood (Courtesan), Claudie Blakley (Adriana, wife to Antipholus of Ephesus) and Michelle Terry (Luciana, her sister

I think the play's strength is its wonderful set (has there ever been a rubbish set at the National) and strong performances. Comedies are damn hard and this play pulls it off wonderfully.

The Last of the Duchess 5th October 2011

2011-11-24T14:17:00.001+00:00

Who is it? Anna Chancellor, Sheila Hancock, John Heffernan and Angela Thorne
Where did you see it? Hampstead Theatre, Swiss Cottage

Reviews for this play from the press have been a bit 'meh' but in the past few weeks it suddenly sold out.I'm not really sure why either of those things happened. The Last of the Duchess is directed by Richard Eyre, adapted by Nicholas Wright (whose Travelling Light premieres at the National next month) from a book by Lady Caroline Blackwood. I'm aware the idea of an aristocrat going to Paris to meet Wallis Simpson, the Duchess of Windsor in the early eighties sounds elitist and dull but it is very much driven by its performances.

Sheila Hancock (Suzanne Blum) and Anna Chancellor (Caroline Blackwood)

Anna Chancellor plays the alcoholic Lady Caroline, determined to see the reclusive (and maybe dead) Duchess as she is to sip from her half bottle of Vodka in her large handbag. Her attempts are constantly thwarted by Suzanne Blum, played by the excellent Sheila Hancock and a very convincing French accent, Simpson's in-house lawyer and only companion following the death of Edward, Duke of Windsor. Blum's attempts work so well that the only time we see the Duchess is in an early dream sequence, where horror of horrors Blackwood just can't get a drink of vodka from the (we are lead to believe anyway) equally alcoholic Duchess of Windsor. The play is very much stolen by Angela Thorne playing Lady Diana Mosley, played to be frightenly likeable and funny (until her hatred and suspicion of Jews, primarily Blum) appears. Mosley spends much of time in Paris investigating Blum, who she feels is stealing from the Duchess, and complaining about how ill and lizard-like Oswald has become.

The play very much focuses on women, but is no means about strong women. It is about women forced to cope without their man (nearly all are widows by the end) rather than being able to cope without men and when there are men they are camp, weak and of much lower social status of the women (no matter how much they try to hide it) John Heffernan has a tough role supporting the female cast as Michael Bloch, I've only ever seen Heffernan as a support and would love to see him in a lead.

This play certainly isn't about sisterhood, the Blum/Blackwood rivalry would shame Bette and Joan. It is vicious, fuelled by suspicion and mistrust yet there is clearly mutual admiration. Blum is a shameless snob who can be won over by a title and a promise of a photography session with Lord Snowdon and Blackwood fails to hide how impressed she is by Blum's very famous clients (Disney, Chaplin and of course the Duke and Duchess of Windsor) the final showdown between the two shows Chancellor and Hancock at their best, with an ending that is both satisfactory but disappointing if you take Blackwood's side.

John Hodge on Collaborators, 4th November 2011

2011-11-06T16:49:00.002+00:00

What was it? John Hodge talks about his play Collaborators at the Cottesloe, which I reviewed here

I'm not sure why I booked tickets for this long before I had even seen Collaborators. I'm worried I was hoping to see Alex Jennings (I did but only getting off the bus on his way the the NT). My obsession is out of control.

Once I did see the play I was strangely looking forward to this. I had given it a harsh review but I couldn't get it out of my mind and I hoped Hodge would answer the questions that remained.

Hodge, it was explained, like Bulgakov was a doctor too. It was also mentioned that this was a film script but nobody wanted to make it so Hodge sent it to the Literary director of the National Theatre, added all the necessary exits and entrances theatre needed (though didn't specifically demand the odd zig zag staging) and subsequently gained interest from Sir Nicholas Hytner, Artistic Director of the NT and director of the play. I'm still unsure why this is in the Cottesloe with such huge names in the cast, the cynics over at West End Whingers suggest that Hytner thought it wasn't good enough for the Olivier or Lyttelton and wouldn't have sold out. I think he was pandering to the egos of SRB and Jennings, who never get to perform in the Cottesloe before they are darlings of the theatre world.

The biggest issue with this platform was that many in the audience had yet to see the play and were seeing it after the platform (perhaps I should have done that) so there was a NO SPOILERS air and a lot of questions being asked that would have been explained if they had just held tight for another three hours. The things I wanted to know I was too scared to ask, why such a poorly written supporting cast, was that a relic of the film script? Why didn't the NT put on a Bulgakov play whilst Collaborators was in rep?

I was also left with the impression Hodge wasn't really aware of what was going on in terms of the actual production, like things had happened inbetween his handing it over and the press night that nobody told him about? He seemed perplexed, though diplomatic, about the set and didn't give any opinions (good or bad) about the cast though he may have been aware that Mark Addy was watching him in the cheap seats.

I've probably been left with more questions than answers but I do enjoy a NT Platform so I will forgive

Hamlet (Preview), 29th October 2011

2011-11-06T16:28:00.001+00:00

Who is in it? Hamlet stars Adeel Akhtar, Hayley Carmichael, James Clyde, Sally Dexter, Callum Dixon, Pip Donaghy, Michael Gould, Adam McNamara, Vinette Robinson, Michael Sheen, Matthew Trevannion,Eileen Walsh and Benedict Wong and is directed by Ian Rickson

Where did you see it? The Young Vic, SE1

Like my last review, Collaborators, this is completely sold out because like Collaborators this features a name so big, so in demand that tickets sold out five months before the preview.

Michael Sheen is wonderful, one of those few actors who can be a movie star yet still feel so right for theatre. Understandably Sheen's been away from the theatre since 2006 when he starred in the stage production of Frost/Nixon (I recently said on twitter that is a credit to Sheen as an actor to portray David Frost is as likeable!) and his return couldn't have been more anticipated.

Sheen is 42, in some ways he is too old to be Hamlet (though many actors have played the part at various ages it is seen as a young man's role) and I can't really compare his Hamlet to any others because I haven't seen them, not even David Tennant's that was on last year! I will say that Sheen has had the misfortune to be cast in one of the oddest interpretation's to hit the stage.

There's no ghost. It is utterly bizarre, even more bizarre than the community centre-esque staging in the Young Vic(and the ridiculous pre-show experience that precedes the play, which I won't spoil) Sheen takes on both Hamlets, disguishing his Prince from his King with a loud, Anthony Hopkins Welsh boom. There's also no chemistry between Hamlet and Ophelia (Vinette Robinson) or Hamlet and Gertrude (Sally Dexter). I can't help but wonder if Sheen wanted to play those parts as well and out of spite refuses to give them any chance to do their roles well.

This, like Collaborators, is a showcase for it's leading actor(s) and both exposes his talents and also feels a bit of waste of great actor and an adequate supporting cast (the lovely Benedict Wong features but not enough) There is an air with both plays (I hate to compare plays but I did see both within 24 hours) that no effort needed to be made because they would sell out whatever was churned out. This is incredibly patronising to an audience that has still paid money.

Like a fool I would still recommend this, quite simply Sheen is fantastic and he is one of those actors that will do less and less stage work. Catch him if you can, even if this isn't a fine production.

Collaborators (Preview) 28th October 2011

2011-10-30T18:46:00.001+00:00

Who is in it? Collaborators is performed by Alex Jennings, Jacqueline Defferary, Simon Russell Beale, Patrick Godfrey, Maggie Service, Pierce Reid, William Postlethwaite, Mark Addy, Jess Murphy, Marcus Cunningham, Nick Sampson, Michael Jenn and Sarah Annis

Where did you see it? Cottesloe, National Theatre

When this play by John Hodges (Trainspotting, Shallow Grave) was announced back in January a large sigh was made by all those who read it. It would be easier to source hen's teeth than tickets for this play. The presence of Alex Jennings AND Simon Russell Beale;who have only worked together once before in 2006's The Alchemist also directed by Collaborators director Sir Nicolas Hytner, in the 300 seater Cottesloe meant the tickets didn't even get to public booking before being sold out.Thankfully I have an Entry Pass, which meant a select few tickets were held back for each performance even if those tickets are literally in the cheap seats. The benefit with the Cottesloe is that the staging is adaptable and the audience (relatively) small so viewing, despite being on row T, wasn't a problem.

The play is set in 1938 where Mikhail Bulgakov (Jennings) is haunted by dreams of Joseph Stalin (Beale) chasing and killing him with his own typewriter. Bulgakov is battling terminal illness and Soviet oppression as he attempts to stage Moliere, about a playwright's struggle about an oppressive force. The play is banned after one performance but the secret police in the shape of Vladmir and Stepan (Addy and Cunningham) offer Bulgakov a choice; write a play about Stalin for his upcoming 60th birthday and see Moliere staged again or be arrested by the secret police and executed. Bulgakov takes the first option.

The play's strength is the relationship between Bulgakov and Stalin, as Stalin realises that Bulgakov cannot write a sycophantic play so Stalin will write it for him in exchange Bulgakov will do his job. What follows feels like a psychological thriller as Bulgakov defends Stalin's evil to his wife Yelena (Defferary) and friends, a situation encouraged by an improvement in their living conditions.

The play struggles, perhaps due to direction, staging or just time limits, to depict the message I think Hodges really wanted to get across that Batum, the birthday play for Stalin about his youth and emergence as a key Soviet figure (which later be depicted in Young Stalin, a book by Simon Sebag-Montefiore) isn't like Bulgakov's other work and thus must be written by someone else. This relies on the audience being familiar with his previous work and not being like myself, who only came because I enjoy this period on a historical level and because they quite fancy Alex Jennings (Jennings is looking foxy as ever said one twitter account-Absolutely!)

Simon Russell Beale in rehearsals

Instead the message becomes "Tsk, wasn't that Stalin a scamp let's laugh at this ridiculous...oh no wait he did kill a lot of people and maybe we should be all serious and that about it in the second half" Beale is then forced to go from playing the clown, which he clearly enjoys to playing this "monster" a lesser actor would fail but Simon Russell Beale manages to turn the clown into a monster without it feeling like major, inexplicable change. Jennings has a easy role as the tragic Bulgakov who everyone seems to adore, is intelligent. His only "failing" is fearing the death of himself and loved ones at the hands of Stalin so he does odd things like write letters asking to let out of Soviet Union then backtracking when offered a job at the Moscow Arts Theatre. It isn't clear why he didn't just leave, Yelena seemed keen to.

The biggest let down is the dull supporting cast, with the exception of Addy who is pretty close to perfect in this and bigger revelation than the theatre gods that are Jennings and Beale. The parts for the supporting cast feel very much like Hodges promised a drama school parts for their graduates. There is nothing for them to get their teeth into, for example William Postlethwaite plays a friend of Bulgakov, Grigory but there was nothing in the performance that really made him stand out. At the risk of sounding cruel if he didn't have the Postlethwaite name and cheekbones I wonder if he would have even been considered because, frankly, any young actor could have played that part.

I think crucially this play is very good and very well researched but it doesn't feel special. I didn't, despite its big names, feel I was watching a classic play and thus deserves its place in the tiny Cottesloe but I expect demand means it may get restaged in one of the bigger National theatres. If you can't get a ticket, don't worry, see it when it comes to NT Live on December 1st

Black Voices 17th October 2011

2011-10-25T17:11:00.002+01:00

Who was in it? Patterson Joseph leads a trio of BAME (black and minority ethnic) actors; Don Warrington, Ellen Thomas and Asif Khan in discussing black presence in theatre.

Where was it? Lyttelton, National Theatre.

Ellen Thomas

I often play a game, it stems from growing up in a mainly white area of Southampton where I was often the only ethnic minority;I am mixed race of Afro-Caribbean and White Irish/Scottish descent, with a bit of Portuguese and Indian thrown in. That game is SPOT THE NON-WHITE PERSON. As a game to play in London on the tube or the bus it quickly ends but at the National and at most theatres I usually concede defeat and spot myself.

As part of Black History Month Joseph et al discuss the presence of black actors in productions. Patterson is keen to stress that black people have been on the British Isles for years (he told the wonderful tale of a black soldier on Hadrian's Wall during the Roman period), why aren't they featured in more classical productions as characters, beyond slavery and servants? The problem is there isn't that much of a presence despite, by the sounds of it, drama schools having a long held "colour blind" policy giving their students a variety of roles that doesn't depend on them being, or not being a certain race. When I go to the National, for example, plays set in the inter-war years dominate. A Woman Killed with Kindness had an all white cast but that isn't to say the National Theatre is objectionable to casting black actors, they frequently appear in ensembles and The National did produce Elmina's Kitchen, which had an all black cast including Patterson and Warrington but I've heard some of the views of playwright Kwame Kwei-Armah, including his claims that he felt uncomfortable with "mixing the races" on Radio 4's The House I Grew Up In, which makes me question his motives when he cast only black actors, was it about increased theatrical presence, to get more black audience members or to avoid working with white people?

Patterson Joseph

Why aren't there more roles for black actors? There's Othello and...well exactly. Theatres are forced into colour-blind casting, see the recent Cat on a Hot Tin Roof with James Earl Jones, for example. Colour blind casting is only really used for commercial purposes on the big theatres. I'm not sure it is used JUST because the actor is good and capable. Ellen Thomas told a anecdote about an audition she had; at an open casting she was told, along with the others, to play a peasant during the workshop. Being contary Thomas decided to play the leader of the peasants. Her boldness won her the part of the Queen of Spain.Jonathan Pryce came up when talking about colour blind casting; he had played an Asian character in Miss Saigon on Broadway and should this be as acceptable as casting a BAME in a traditionally white role. All of the panel said that was fine, except Don Warrington who questioned the commericial, bums on seats motives of casting Pryce rather than casting an Asian actor.

There were many BAME drama students in the audience for this talk and when it came to the Q&A session it was clear many of them thought there should be favouritism, both from the drama schools and from casting directors. I'm not an actor but if I was I'm not sure I would be happy with this. Do BAME students really want semesters where they focus on plays that may allow them to play "black" roles but alienate their fellow white students? Is it not better for schools to teach the skills and for the actors to convince a casting director that whilst they may be black they can easily play this role written for a white person. I do wonder if there is a sense of entitlement to roles from some BAMEs rather than an acceptance that, sadly, they will have to work harder than their white counterparts for roles.

All four speakers were examples of people who were successful through sheer talent. It is always going to be difficult for an actor to be a "black actor" because there simply aren't enough black roles being written. Whatever your colour or religion you have to first and foremost be a good actor the rest comes later.

Bette & Joan: The Final Curtain 7th September 2011

2011-09-23T12:21:00.002+01:00

Who is in it: Sarah Thom and Sarah Toogood, as part of Foursight Theatre
Where did you see it? Jackson's Lane, Highgate, until 24th September

"That sounds...awful" said my friend when I told him what I was seeing the following night, I didn't have the highest of hopes; a two hander about screen goddesses Bette and Joan and it isn't even the Anita Dobson/Greta Scacchi version that was in the West End!?

Bette and Ronald in 1987

I was wrong. It was BETTE than I expected (people are still complaining about the lack of puns and that one isn't even mine but Jonathan Sloman's) what helps such a production is it's great venue, which was turned into a wake for Bette as we waited to see the play with video of Whatever Happened to Baby Jane? playing, posters of Bette's films such as Jezebel and my personal favourite a framed picture of Bette and Ronald Reagan on the table reuniting (after appearing in Dark Victory together) in 1987.

I'm not as familiar with Bette and Joan as I should be though my general knowledge on Bette is better than it is on Joan. I've definitely seen a couple of Bette films like The Anniversary and Jezebel whereas the closest I've come to Joan is Mommy Dearest. The format of the play means you get a crash course in Bette/Joan history. Their childhood's; alluding to Joan's abuse by her stepfather, their multiple lovers, their films and their relationships with their children(and the abortions they had to keep the studio happy). The biggest thing to come out of this play is how similiar Bette and Joan were and it proved to be a hindrance rather than a help to their relationship. Just suggestion being that if they had just sat down together they would have realised that "You mean all this time we could have been friends?"

Sarah Toogood and Sarah Thom as Joan and Bette

Though I'm not sure that is the case. It is clear throughout Bette looked down on Joan (She saw Joan as merely as star, Bette was an actress) and made no secret of her joy when she outlived her. The play begins with Bette on her deathbed, her last night on earth before Joan, sent by Hedda Hopper and Luella Parsons (Hollywood gossip queens of the 1930s, like a interwar Perez Hilton) who now control the afterlife as much as they did the gossip columns and unsurprisingly Bette won't be seen dead with Joan, literally!It's strengths lie in the use of props and videos, that isn't to belittle the performances of the Sarahs who seem to physically morph into Hedda, Bette, Joan and Luella and it some ways it feels wasted in an outer London venue and would suit a bigger theatre and bigger cast.

This is a lovely production, in one of the lovliest fringe venues I have seen during my odyssey of theatre and comedy going and I'm afraid laziness means I've only got around to publishing it on its penultimate performance. The only criticism I have is one scene where Bette pleasures herself with her Oscar, which makes me sound like such a prude and I can see Oscar's phallic charms but it felt out of place in what had been a play full of subtle references to Bette and Joan's oversexed lives and their successful careers.

Neil Hamburger 5th September 2011

2011-09-10T16:47:00.003+01:00

Where did you see it? Soho Theatre, Dean Street

I'll be honest I wasn't really familiar with the work of Neil Hamburger but a friend sent around an email inviting me and you know what a social butterfly I am behind these sad, lonely trips to comedy alone...

I'm not sure what I was expecting, I'd followed Hamburger on twitter and found him quite funny but would it translate to the stage?

Yes and no. The whole point of Gregg Turkington's greasy anti-comedian character is that he is a horrible act to watch; bringing up lodged phlegm and an awkward performer but sometimes it felt just too awkward and just too slow, I found myself distracted by how Hamburger held his drink glasses. By the time Hamburger got going, the fantastic Ben and Jerry's joke for example, he slowed down again only to get good when it came to show-stopping (literally) end song. He's good, but not brilliant and I can see why someone on Twitter came on to complain and ask for a refund. He's okay, he's certainly not worth £10 for an hour's set.

I think my issue with Hamburger stems from the fact that there are comics on the British circuit doing what he does so much better, like David Earl's Brian Gittins. Hamburger's dated reference of Smashmouth and Kiss feel out of place when attacking Britney Spears for being a bit of a skank and Steven Tyler's role on American Idol. I think I would like Hamburger more if he just stuck to really old references to give a better impression of a terrible comic.

The Mother 3rd September 2011

2011-09-08T11:37:00.000+01:00

Where did you see it? The Scoop, it was in a double bill with Around the World in Eighty Days

This was the more adult of two performances, based on Bertoit Brect's 1932 play and translated by Mark Ravenhill it follows the life of a proletarian mother, Pelegea Vlassova (Nicky Goldie) in early twentieth century, pre-Soviet Russiaand her journey (as part of the Dangerous Journeys Season, remember?) through hostility towards her literate son, Pavel (Alistair Hoyle) and his fellow factory workers life of political activism against the factory owners to eventuality becoming one of the leading members of the movement. In an effort to protect her son from Russia's overzealous police she hands out leaflets, though fails to understand why the police are so against what is written on them as she cannot read.

Her son, gets arrested, others are killed and along the way converts her new employer (she is forced to escape to country when the pigs get on to her) to the joys of communism and then attacks religion when her son is killed(her transformation from ignorant, hostile woman who doesn't have enough tea for her son's activists colleagues to bolshevik revolutionary all takes places in an hour and a half.Amazing Oh, and there are songs. Lots of songs. One reviewer, Scott Matthewman said it has this doesn't become Communism: The Musical . It does, in fact the musical element is so unnecessary I do wonder if they had to give Richard Norris, the compsoner, something to do.

It would have worked okay as a straight play. I say okay because it isn't actually that good a play. Apparently it isn't performed that much *Harry Hill side look to camera* There's something totally believable about it but at the same time totally unreal, maybe because of all the songs. I didn't get the mothering instinct from the actress. I didn't feel like Pavel was her son, maybe a wayward nephew she was left in charge of. Even when he dies it feels like she wants to score some points against the Christians bothering her than grieve.

I found the supporting cast far stronger in this than the lead but mainly I left feeling a bit 'meh' maybe because I know how the story ends and that when her beloved Bolsheviks win it isn't a happy ending.

Around the World in Eighty Days 3rd September 2011

2011-09-07T16:55:00.004+01:00

Where did you see it? The Scoop, an ampitheatre next to City Hall

The Scoop, More London

This outdoor play was part of More London Dangerous Journey season. In its ninth year (though I will admit this was my first time) the company and offers free summer theatre and contains two plays, all with the same cast. This one, was on at 6pm and was the more family friendly play. It is the famous story by Jules Verne of Phileaus Fogg and his companion Passepatout's efforts to go around the world in..well eighty days. I'm not as familiar with story as I should be. In fact my only memories of the story involve Willy Fogg, the lion from the cartoon;my companion, who being slightly older remembered it from the TV and not some random VHS that was in her house like I did, she was also remembered he was a lion and I didn't (I've been thinking for all these years he was dog?)

Fogg (Eugene Washington) and Passpartout (Joseph Wicks) only have an hour and fifteen minutes to get around the world, the programme notes are keen to state that this is a shortened version of a production that was on at the RSC ten years ago but it didn't feel rushed. To be fair I do have the attention span of some of the small children in the audience and I'm not sure I could have tolerated Princess Aouda's (Suzanne Ahmet) and Fogg's 'Will they, won't they' love song in a Chinese temple for longer than necessary.

That was my issue with it, there were a lot of songs. A lot of complicated, not very memorable songs but I couldn't be too grumpy mcgrumps about it because the performances were fun and really good, it is easy to assume that this will be Am-Dram and thus really poor but these are all professional actors with lots of experience and it shows. They genuinely seemed to be enjoying themselves and there was the odd jokes for the adults (like the naming of the local Indian elephant, who wouldn't mate with the females, after Passpatout's obviously gay friend), tackling the moral issues of Sati and a song about Mormon wives (again the programme is keen to state that they predate Book of Mormon) Ultimately this may not be the best production ever but it is such a great story that would be miraculous to mess it up.

Also, if you hadn't guessed already...it was FREE! and it is always lovely to see people of all ages coming together to enjoy a show and yes, I might have cheered when Princess Aouda and Fogg got it together...

Galton and Simpson: The Fathers of Sitcom 1st September 2011

2011-09-04T15:37:00.002+01:00

Alan Simpson and Ray Galton

What was it: Writers Ray Galton and Alan Simpson talk with their biographer Christopher Stevens about their career
Where was it: The Lyttelton, National Theatre

Firstly, my apologies, I haven't posted for a while due to not attending any theatre or comedy events. August is a quiet month and anything that was on was off the cards due to a tooth infection I got towards the end of August. I'm back now though with what has to be one of my favourite things I have ever attended. I've had a bit of tempestuous relationship with the National after seeing A Woman Killed with Kindness and the aborted at the interval (hence lack of review) of Emperor and Galilean so I went back with some caution but you don't turn down an evening with Galton and Simpson do you?

L-R Simpson, Hancock and Galton

I remember as a small child seeing Galton and Simpson on something and being shocked they were still alive. My theory being "They wrote stuff from the olden days so must be old and dead" they weren't and thankfully they still aren't! Galton and Simpson are 81 and 82 respectively now and still incredibly sharp. What I didn't realise when I was questioning their mortality was how obscenely young they were when they started-they were working professionally for the BBC as writers from 1951, when they were in their early twenties. It is not only their writing skill I find amazing but also to have known each other for over 60 years.

How they met is quite a famous story but I never realised how close to death they were in that Sanatorium, both were given six weeks to live as there was no cure for TB. One was miraculously found whilst they were on their deathbeds. Writing comedy together came about from boredom and their disgust with what was on the amateur radio room. They discussed their early career, such as being screwed over by light entertainment performers financially.

L-R Sid James and Tony Hancock

Their big break came in 1952 when they met Hancock. They told how they decided to cast Sid James after stealing the format from another show to create Hancock's Half Hour. "We needed a crook and Sid James played a crook in about ten films a year" revealed Simpson (I chuckled at this as one of my favourite afternoon films is Too Many Crooks, where James plays a crook) and he mentioned a trip they made to cinema especially to see the credits as they didn't know James' name. They also spoke of James's nerves and reluctance to do radio as it was in front of a studio audience describing his "big hat and paper up to his face" and how the paper and hat were dropped lower and gone within a few weeks. Their relationship with Hancock was interesting too. They argued that his finest and most successful work was without James, Bill Kerr and Kenneth Williams, who they were reluctant to cast due to his "funny voice" and who as a group had a habit of cackling during recordings (all loudly), because everyone remembers the Blood Donor but complains that Hancock was at his finest with James. Finding out the Hancock/Galton and Simpson partnership ended because he didn't like the script and didn't have the guts to tell them ("He was a coward in that respect" said Simpson)

They moved on to Comedy Playhouse, it was clear from Galton that this was the project he most enjoyed because they told "You can write what you like" and seemed frustrated when one of the episodes "The Offer" was commissioned into a full series, which became Steptoe and Son. In fact Galton and Simpson only agreed because they thought Harry H Corbett and Wilfred Brambell would say no. In fact Corbett and Brambell said yes because they were being offered 600 pounds instead of a few shillings (Light Entertainment paid more than drama productions)

L-R Harry H. Corbett & Wilfred Brambell

Christopher Stevens, who was a great interviewer because he just let them talk, took questions from the floor and somebody asked about what David Hemmings role would have been in Steptoe and Son would have been had Brambell's Broadway career took off. Simpson told how Brambell announced he was going to Broadway to star in a musical called Kelly in 1965. Galton and Simpson thought "Sod ya, then" and looked to David Hemmings (who never knew of their plan and sadly never will) to cast him as Harold's long lost son. Alas Kelly closed after one performance and Brambell came back. Someone else asked if the relationship between Harold and Albert came from their own relationship. It was a interesting question that both men laughed off but their was an air of awareness that perhaps they resented but depended on each other as much as the Steptoes did. In truth they related to Harold more than Albert making Albert 70 years old because to them that seemed really old...

If there ever was any resentment it has long gone. They still seem close, perhaps because so many around them when they began have died. Simpson, who now walks with a stick, joked "He [Galton] helps me up the stairs and I tell him what day it is" and joking that "We were only given six weeks to live" and are still around sixty years later.

My only advice is to see these men whenever you get an opportunity though I suspect (hope!) they will be around for a while yet.

Top Girls August 13th 2011

2011-08-15T15:25:00.000+01:00

Who's in it Stella Gonet, Suranne Jones, Catherine McCormack, Lucy Briers, Laura Elphinstone, Lisa Kerr and Olivia Poulet.

Where did you see it? Trafalgar Studios, Whitehall

Brain Tree goes to the West End, apparently, I can't say Trafalgar Studios feels like it is part of the West End, despite being closer to Trafalgar Square than Westminster the space it occupies feel more London fringe. My role isn't to judge the geography of this theatre, honest.

Top Girls is an odd play. It is split into three acts meaning two awkward intervals in a space where you are forced to witness the set changes, no curtains at the Trafalgar and there's even an awkward mid act scene change where the actors are forced to play set designer.

L-R Stella Gonet, Laura Elphinstone, Olivia Poulet, Lucy Briers, Suranne Jones & Catherine McCormack

It's oddness stems from the first and most famous act where lead character Marlene (Jones) invites five other figures from history; Pope Joan (Briers), Isabella Bird (Gonet), Patient Griselda(Elphinstone) , Dull Gret (Poulet) and Lady Nijo (McCormack) to a meal at a restaurant to celebrate her promotion to MD at an employment agency. It meant to be like the standard girly night out where you sob, get drunk (in whatever order) and moan about all the men who have let you down. It is a great act with great performances but I don't feel it works with the later scenes.

I do wonder if Caryl Churchill wrote it in fear that the rest of the play would seem dated, strangely it doesn't despite being written in 1982, it feels very much like a play that was written after Thatcher had departed and as a feminist it was clear not very much had changed in terms of what women felt they needed to do (or not do) to be successful.

Lisa Kerr & Olivia Poulet

Act2 Scene1 moves to the current day and we see two girls-Angie (Poulet) and Kit (Kerr) Angie is Marlene's niece and lives with her mother, Joyce. I found this scene quite dull actually, it just doesn't fit with the previous scene and none of the characters are remotely likable, perhaps intentionally. I struggled with the pacing of Act 2 altogether, despite being a short play these scenes, especially the job interviews, just seemed to go on and on and on despite having the most to say (women being leapfrogged in promotion by men, the attitudes of men when leapfrogged by a woman etc etc)

Stella Gonet and Suranne Jones

Act 3 is a flashback to Marlene visiting Angie and Joyce and as a dramatic performance it is great but like so many plays and comedy sketch groups it just ends, no real conclusion. In some ways the play concludes as it goes along but to just blackout and have Jones get up off the settee to take her curtain call and bow just left me feeling a bit empty.

On a positive note all the actresses are fantastic and I could finally see what the fuss about Jones was about, she always seems to play "hard but hot Northern bitches with a heart" which I found a bit tiresome but in this she was still playing a character with more intelligence and more depth than I had seen her display before. Poulet and Kerr have a tough job playing the immature and innocent Angie and Kitt but the performances were convincing, even if the scenes they were in weren't always interesting.

I would recommend seeing it but do try and get very cheap tickets; apparently the good seats are going for £45!