![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
lorannahThis was another slightly silly week of theatre (though nothing can beat the 8 show week of doom) - so with four plays squeezed in (and a resignation), I've split the diary into two posts. First up, as I seemed to spend most of the start of the week at Sloane Square, it's the Royal Court Edition.
So this week I've seen:
20. 14th February 2011 - The Heretic, Royal Court Downstairs (Play - Bean)
21. 15th February 2011 - Our Private Life, Royal Court Upstairs (Play - Rozo)
THE HERETIC - Royal Court Downstairs
My second climate change play of the month and though I still think I’ll give Greenland a miss (promises of impressive polar bears and all) – I really enjoyed this one too. Given that comparisons are going to be somewhat inevitable between the two, I might as well get it out of the way here and admit that if I were forced to choose between the two, that Water had the edge for me – it’s hard to resist the eclectic inventiveness of Filter.
Really though what struck me about the two was how they both take a similar approach to the climate change issue – they’re both looking at it from a personal perspective – they’re making it about how it impacts people and relationships. Though the palette that Filter use is larger. Here we see Dr. Diane Cassel and her relationships with her colleagues, students and daughter and how they are affected by her unusual views on climate change. One of the strengths of the piece is the portrayal of these relationships, firstly because it led to some very dialogue and secondly because all the performances were excellent. Though, of course, Juliet Stevenson rightly steals the show - I was very impressed with both of the young actors. I really loved Lydia Wilson in Blasted at the Lyric last year (though I didn't much like anything else about the production) and thought she was just as excellent in this and I felt that Johnny Flynn did a great job of making a character who could have been intensely frustrating very likable. However, the relationships didn't emotionally grip me in the way that the ones in Water did and overall I didn't find it as satisfying.
The place where The Heretic did come out the better was with the science, which it managed to make very engaging. There is a valuable message I think in the idea that we should be allowed to question issues like climate change and I found the discussions of the use of data and hiding and manipulating information some of the most interesting in the play. It’s somewhat a shame therefore that this strand gets somewhat forgotten in the exploration of the relationships. By the final scene it’s not even really mentioned which makes it far too easy to imply that Cassel's life is simply far better if she stops worrying about climate change, stops questioning it – which I really don’t think is the message that Bean was trying to put across. It would, in fact, be a far better play if this final scene was dropped all together – as it is at best an unnecessary attempt to give us an oddly neat and happy ending and at worst detracts from everything that has gone before whilst being misogynistic, simple and unrealistic.
Otherwise it's difficult to think what else to say, the set did what it needed to but didn't make much impression otherwise (though I did like seeing the sky moving in the skylights). It was a good, enjoyable production but not overly daring and hasn't particularly stuck in my mind - which certainly wasn't true of the second of my Royal Court productions of the week.
OUR PRIVATE LIFE - Royal Court Upstairs
This is a really difficult play to review and not just because of the difficult, uncomfortable subject matter. It’s more, in fact, that I came away with the sense that whilst there was a huge amount to enjoy and admire in the production, I was having the difficulty of appreciating that through the shadow of the production I wanted to be seeing. Alas, I fear that sentence makes absolutely no sense.
Perhaps the easiest way to explain is to talk about Colin Morgan. He is one of my favourite young actors in the UK at the moment; I think he has a truly exceptional quality to his performances which make me want to see everything he ever does. But (in what I suspect will be a hugely unpopular opinion) I didn’t like his performance here. I suspect it was more a directorial choice than an acting one as it was a problem I had across the board.
They’ve taken a quirky, odd play and presented it in a quirky and odd way – understandably – the set is bright and the use of hidden cupboards and sliding screens make it seem slightly off kilter. The acting is similar, brash and inventive and not really aiming at reality. These are all directorial choices that make sense and possibly work exceptionally well for others (I loved this sort of thing in The Drunks for example).
Morgan’s Carlos is a prime example of that – right from the first moment we see him, his performance is loud and unusual and unsympathetic and we are left in no doubt that there is something not quite right with Carlos. And from the moment I realised what the play was doing, I couldn’t help feeling how much more interesting and devastating it would have been if the audience had been given room to doubt. If the performance had been subtler, if it had reflected the fact that the play is also very dark and very clever – if we had been left uncertain of how ill Carlos was, how much was his fantasy. If the audience had been allowed in on the doubts that the family was suffering. If we had been left with the vague sensation that the therapist may have been planting memories, but not the certainty.
It was a sensation I was left with through the entire production. With the exception of Anthony O’Donnell’s performance, which was a lot more natural. Unsurprisingly he was my favourite, particularly unsurprisingly as I complete adore him and he’s managed to be my favourite in everything that I’ve seen him in (with the exception of that time the divine Ed Bennett was amazing in As You Like It). As it was his more realistic approach made him by far the most sympathetic character for me, which may have been lost in my imagined alternative production and almost certainly would have robbed the ending of the sheer power it carries here. In contrast to The Heretic, here is a final scene, an epilogue used to shattering effect.
Partly though I was left with the feeling that I didn't know whose eyes I was supposed to be looking through - whether I was seeing this story from the viewpoint of Carlos or his family and I'm not sure whether that was a fault on my part or if the production simply hadn't made that decision. If we are seeing this through Carlos' eyes then the oddness of the production makes sense to me - the bright colours, the people crawling out of cupboards, the layers of noise - but I sort of felt like we were supposed to be seeing this from the eyes of those around him - which made the production choices work less well for me (though I'd be more than willing for another production to change my mind on this aesthetic choice).
In the end though I couldn’t quite shake off the feeling that this was an excellent play that I’d like to see again (and I’ll keep my eye out for more plays by Rozo) but that I had no real desire to head back and see this production another time. However, I certainly didn't regret seeing it and it definitely stuck with me and made me think - which is a success in my book.
So this week I've seen:
20. 14th February 2011 - The Heretic, Royal Court Downstairs (Play - Bean)
21. 15th February 2011 - Our Private Life, Royal Court Upstairs (Play - Rozo)
THE HERETIC - Royal Court Downstairs
My second climate change play of the month and though I still think I’ll give Greenland a miss (promises of impressive polar bears and all) – I really enjoyed this one too. Given that comparisons are going to be somewhat inevitable between the two, I might as well get it out of the way here and admit that if I were forced to choose between the two, that Water had the edge for me – it’s hard to resist the eclectic inventiveness of Filter.
Really though what struck me about the two was how they both take a similar approach to the climate change issue – they’re both looking at it from a personal perspective – they’re making it about how it impacts people and relationships. Though the palette that Filter use is larger. Here we see Dr. Diane Cassel and her relationships with her colleagues, students and daughter and how they are affected by her unusual views on climate change. One of the strengths of the piece is the portrayal of these relationships, firstly because it led to some very dialogue and secondly because all the performances were excellent. Though, of course, Juliet Stevenson rightly steals the show - I was very impressed with both of the young actors. I really loved Lydia Wilson in Blasted at the Lyric last year (though I didn't much like anything else about the production) and thought she was just as excellent in this and I felt that Johnny Flynn did a great job of making a character who could have been intensely frustrating very likable. However, the relationships didn't emotionally grip me in the way that the ones in Water did and overall I didn't find it as satisfying.
The place where The Heretic did come out the better was with the science, which it managed to make very engaging. There is a valuable message I think in the idea that we should be allowed to question issues like climate change and I found the discussions of the use of data and hiding and manipulating information some of the most interesting in the play. It’s somewhat a shame therefore that this strand gets somewhat forgotten in the exploration of the relationships. By the final scene it’s not even really mentioned which makes it far too easy to imply that Cassel's life is simply far better if she stops worrying about climate change, stops questioning it – which I really don’t think is the message that Bean was trying to put across. It would, in fact, be a far better play if this final scene was dropped all together – as it is at best an unnecessary attempt to give us an oddly neat and happy ending and at worst detracts from everything that has gone before whilst being misogynistic, simple and unrealistic.
Otherwise it's difficult to think what else to say, the set did what it needed to but didn't make much impression otherwise (though I did like seeing the sky moving in the skylights). It was a good, enjoyable production but not overly daring and hasn't particularly stuck in my mind - which certainly wasn't true of the second of my Royal Court productions of the week.
OUR PRIVATE LIFE - Royal Court Upstairs
This is a really difficult play to review and not just because of the difficult, uncomfortable subject matter. It’s more, in fact, that I came away with the sense that whilst there was a huge amount to enjoy and admire in the production, I was having the difficulty of appreciating that through the shadow of the production I wanted to be seeing. Alas, I fear that sentence makes absolutely no sense.
Perhaps the easiest way to explain is to talk about Colin Morgan. He is one of my favourite young actors in the UK at the moment; I think he has a truly exceptional quality to his performances which make me want to see everything he ever does. But (in what I suspect will be a hugely unpopular opinion) I didn’t like his performance here. I suspect it was more a directorial choice than an acting one as it was a problem I had across the board.
They’ve taken a quirky, odd play and presented it in a quirky and odd way – understandably – the set is bright and the use of hidden cupboards and sliding screens make it seem slightly off kilter. The acting is similar, brash and inventive and not really aiming at reality. These are all directorial choices that make sense and possibly work exceptionally well for others (I loved this sort of thing in The Drunks for example).
Morgan’s Carlos is a prime example of that – right from the first moment we see him, his performance is loud and unusual and unsympathetic and we are left in no doubt that there is something not quite right with Carlos. And from the moment I realised what the play was doing, I couldn’t help feeling how much more interesting and devastating it would have been if the audience had been given room to doubt. If the performance had been subtler, if it had reflected the fact that the play is also very dark and very clever – if we had been left uncertain of how ill Carlos was, how much was his fantasy. If the audience had been allowed in on the doubts that the family was suffering. If we had been left with the vague sensation that the therapist may have been planting memories, but not the certainty.
It was a sensation I was left with through the entire production. With the exception of Anthony O’Donnell’s performance, which was a lot more natural. Unsurprisingly he was my favourite, particularly unsurprisingly as I complete adore him and he’s managed to be my favourite in everything that I’ve seen him in (with the exception of that time the divine Ed Bennett was amazing in As You Like It). As it was his more realistic approach made him by far the most sympathetic character for me, which may have been lost in my imagined alternative production and almost certainly would have robbed the ending of the sheer power it carries here. In contrast to The Heretic, here is a final scene, an epilogue used to shattering effect.
Partly though I was left with the feeling that I didn't know whose eyes I was supposed to be looking through - whether I was seeing this story from the viewpoint of Carlos or his family and I'm not sure whether that was a fault on my part or if the production simply hadn't made that decision. If we are seeing this through Carlos' eyes then the oddness of the production makes sense to me - the bright colours, the people crawling out of cupboards, the layers of noise - but I sort of felt like we were supposed to be seeing this from the eyes of those around him - which made the production choices work less well for me (though I'd be more than willing for another production to change my mind on this aesthetic choice).
In the end though I couldn’t quite shake off the feeling that this was an excellent play that I’d like to see again (and I’ll keep my eye out for more plays by Rozo) but that I had no real desire to head back and see this production another time. However, I certainly didn't regret seeing it and it definitely stuck with me and made me think - which is a success in my book.