Review: One Man, Two Guv'nors and meeting the cast!!

Theatre: Theatre Royal Haymarket

Date of show: September 11, 2012

Director: Nicholas Hytner

Synopsis: One Man, Two Guv'nors is based on the classic Commedia dell'arte play Servant of Two Masters by Carlo Goldoni. The play is about exactly what it sounds: our main character, Francis, ends up with two jobs, working as a servant for two bosses, and he has to keep all of their affairs in order while keeping the two of them apart. Mistaken identity and love stories abound.

The play was just...incredible. It's unbelievably funny, smart, silly, and brilliantly written. The cast was phenomenal. The first scene was a bit mild, in terms of laughs, but by the end of the show my abdomen was actually sore from laughing; the show picks up very quickly. If you have the chance to see it, do. It's bawdy and stupid and at the same time very smart. The actors blew me out of the water. Go see this show if you can. 

My only complaint about the show was that we had to read the script before hand for class, so some of the "surprise" and "improved" jokes were ruined for us. BUT the actors did such a great job of acting those moments that they were still absolutely gut-busting and wonderful.

AND THEN
My roommate and I went to the stage door after the show and we got pictures with almost the whole cast! It was *awesome*. They were all so wonderful, and the lead even asked about our show in October! I doubt he'll come, but it would be so cool if he did, and the fact that he was interested at all was great. It was just wonderful to get to talk with them. We got to chat with one guy about his stunts (which are hilarious) and with another about his crazy quick changes (really fast costumes swaps). It was just...so great.

THIS PLAY. SO GOOD.

Seriously. New favorite play, I think. Though I just read War Horse, and the script is amazing and we go see it next week...

Review: Richard III

Theatre: Shakespeare's Globe Theatre

Date of show: September 8, 2012

Director: Tim Carroll

Synopsis: The play centers on the Richard III, who's aim throughout the play is to become king.

tldr: Great actors, dry script, misplaced comedic moments. 

We saw our second Shakespeare play on Saturday the 8th. We saw Richard III, one of the histories. The show is generally considered his most popular history play, and is sometimes actually classified as a tragedy.

The big highlight of the show was the actor Mark Rylance, who played Richard. He's THE Shakespearean actor. He's very famous in theatre, but only really for Shakespeare. He's done other things, but he became famous for his Shakespearean work, and has just kept on doing it. He's incredible, and was one of the only great things about the show. 

This cast was an all-male company. Which was interesting to watch, and the men playing women were, for the most part, good. The actor playing Lady Anne (Richard's wife) was terrible as a woman, but was later good when he played a different male role. 

My biggest problem with the show was the script; I've always found the histories to be dry. I'm also not sure I like how Rylance interpreted Richard. He's usually played as a very dark character, but Rylance pulled out the humor in the show, which was nice until it interrupted the flow of a serious scene. That happened a number of times, and it was actually kind of bothersome because it always happened right when there was going to be a great, dramatic tension and then release, but the audience never quite got to the height of the tension because Rylance broke it. And so we never got any real emotional satisfaction or substance to the characters for the most part. 

The only character who I felt any great connection to was Queen Margaret, but it only came at the very end, when she was mourning the death of her children (remember that a man played the role). 

Unlike Taming of the Shrew, when I forgot how long we were standing and didn't even feel like my feet hurt because I was so engrossed in the show, I was acutely aware of how tired I was and how much I wanted the show to end. 

I think the director should have gone for more drama than comedy and allowed the audience to really connect with the actors, especially Rylance's Richard. 

Review: Taming of the Shrew and JUDI DENCH

Theatre: Shakespeare's Globe Theatre

Date of show: September 4, 2012

Director: 

Synopsis: The Taming of the Shrew "Two wealthy sisters in Padua must be married off. The modest, demure Bianca has no shortage of suitors, but who on earth will take the wild, ungovernable, shrewish Katherina? Only the gold-digging Petruchio, a man as maddeningly strong-willed and perverse as Katherina herself, is equal to the task of bullying her to the altar."

The production was WONDERFUL. Everything a typical bawdy, Shakespearean comedy should be. The woman who played Katherina, or Kate, was too old by about twenty years, but she was otherwise spectacular. 
My only complaint is that some of the humor detracted from the text, in that it took over some particular moments. For instance, the guy playing Petruchio, who was incredible, was wearing nothing but a codpiece (a speedo, basically), and a pair of boots. But it was well placed, and was only moderately distracting. 

The best part of the show was that Dame Judi Dench was in the audience! The woman playing Kate was directed by Dench in a production of The Boys from Syracuse a few years ago, so we're guessing that she came to see her perform. But she was there. And it was awesome. I almost fainted. So did most of the rest of us. Because...I mean...Judi Dench. 

Review: Chariots of Fire (the play)

Theatre: Gielgud

Date of show: September 3, 2012

Director: Edward Hall

Synopsis (from Wikipedia): Chariots of Fire is a 2012 stage adaptation of the 1981 Oscar-winning film of the same name. Production of the Olympic-themed play, which opened at London's Hampstead Theatre 9 May and transferred to the West End on 23 June, is partially inspired by the 2012 London Summer Olympics.

tldr: The production focused too much on presentation, which was very good, as it a happens, and not enough on the content, which was less than fulfilling.

I am glad to have seen Chariots of Fire.

I will not go see it again.

The show is interesting in many respects, but falls very short in others.

The set is GREAT and uses a two-part turn table; there is an outer ring and an inner circle. They can move independently or together. There was also a fake track built as part of the set...(see below)

The staging of the show was wonderful: it included running warm ups and exercises as choreography/synchronized symbolic-y movement things and some very well done demonstrations using strobe lights and actors as moving slides...(see below)

The turntable was well used and really added wonderfully to the staging.

The lights were also quite good, and the sound design was very effective.

Basically, the show's tech work was superb.

The script was very much not.

It moved too quickly, was all over the place, and allowed for no emotional attachment to the characters, which they didn't seem to even try for. The main dilemmas for each of the main characters were fairly shallow and were never developed nor resolved. The love interests felt awkwardly tucked in around the main action, like an afterthought, which was disappointing, and there was some unnecessary music stuffs in there, which I think was meant to help set tone etc., but failed to do so, and I think the time allocated to mood music would have been better spent on the non-existent character development. There were some funny moments, but they didn't make up for the rest of the script.

The general consensus from the whole class is that the script was miserable. Some people agree with me about the staging, others didn't care for it. It is widely agreed that the lights and set were really good.

The actress playing the love interest of Abraham was just...not that great. She wasn't bad, but she seemed insincere and almost uninterested. One of my classmates phrased it as “the actors just seemed tired.”. I don't about all of them, but she certainly did.

The actress playing the love interest of Eric was very good, but her character is Canadian, and she occasionally slipped into her native Irish, I think it is, for a vowel or two. It wasn't frequent...maybe three times, and anyone who isn't native to the US/Canada likely wouldn't have noticed.

The coach, the Prince, the two main runners, and their team manger were all good for the most part, but I could have asked for more connection with the audience.

There was one very good bit about the script: 

The production started with some cast members on the stage dressed in modern running clothes stretching etc. This lasted for probably about five-ten minutes before the lights went down. The modern runners were then brought back at the end of show dressed in the British Olympic uniform, and the runners were mixed in with those dressed in the old Olympic uniforms. It was really cool to see the melding of the old and the new styles. 

Anyway, first West End show! It was a good if not totally fulfilling experience. But you learn something from even the shows you don't like, and I'm glad to have seen it.