‘Wise Children’ – The Old Vic – Saturday 20th October 2018

(Rated 4/5 ) 

Back at the transformed Old Vic for this thoroughly enjoyable stage adaptation by Emma Rice of Angela’s Carter’s novel about twin sisters Nora and Dora - conceived, and then growing up in a heady world of theatrical drama with song and dance, comedy, hints of tragedy, Shakespeare, a little Burlesque and a pantomime feel at times.  We first meet the twins on their 75^th birthday, in their caravan, where they receive an invite to their blood father’s 100^th birthday party. They in turn invite us to join them in the story of their family dynasty from 1920s on when said father, Melchior Hazard, made his name as a renowned Shakespearean actor. He created them with the help of a maid to the woman who becomes their carer, adopted Grandma Chance. The maid is abandoned by Melchior and the twins disowned by him. Step in his twin brother Peregrine who is sometimes present, sometimes absent, but always makes sure money is sent to support them. The twins are unable to resist their inherited calling earning their living as show-girls and joining their dysfunctional stage family.

The tone of this production is very light-hearted yet there are some very serious undercurrents only hinted at – incestuous abuse of one of the girls by Uncle Peregrine as well as grief and struggles for anything resembling healthy relationships. Blood is thinner than water in this herstory, with family and those who love and really care being biologically unrelated to you. For me the almost brushing over of the more poignant elements is disappointing – then again I guess humour so often covers the darkness of real lives for performers. Commonly the best comedians suffer with depression. My other disappointment was that the production had an amateur feel at times – more panto (not in a good way) and line fluffing, than professional performance.

Nora and Dora are variously played by puppets, Mirabelle Gremaud & Bettrys Jones, Omari Douglas & Melissa James, and Etta Murfitt & Gareth Snook. As you may be able to detect there’s a lovely mix of gender swapping in there with some mistaken identity possible also a la Shakespeare. All Noras and Doras are very good but Omari and Melissa especially so – the former a superb dancer with a beautiful singing voice. The sisters’ key love interest – ‘the blue-eyed boy’ – is played by very pretty, very female Patrycja Kujawska.

Sam Archer as young Peregrine is also a stunning performer. His older self - Mike Shepherd - fine but less of note as, for me, are the two Melchiors Ankur Bahl & Paul Hunter.

Katy Owen was a very shouty Grandma Chance reminding me of Catherine Tate’s Nan – funny yes but a little too much somehow.

For me this was very good but not great enough to highly recommend. Good for an entertaining couple of hours.

Wise Children – Review by TheRestrictedReviewer © 2018

‘Richard II’ - Barbican Centre - Thursday 16th January 2014

(Rated 4/5 )

I told my friends/fellow theatre-goers that David Tennant had a lot of work to do to impress me as Richard II. I was joking in some ways – so confident in “DT” and his abilities as he has never disappointed me - but having seen two previous very good performances of “R2” by Eddie Redmayne and Ben Whishaw and been exceptionally impressed by the latter, who embodied him so perfectly and sensitively, I was doubtful as to whether DT could match or even top that. I was also excited to give him that challenge – though of course the man himself knew nothing about it ;). So who and how was “R2-DT” as he has become affectionately known to us ever since we first heard that David was going to undertake this Richard? Well not an immediate hit with me. I was a little put off by his accent (my issue with posh accents that are not the actor’s own ;)) and, as one of my friends said, he doesn’t get much to do for some time in this production of the play. Of course that is the text itself, but The Donmar’s production had Eddie sitting on the throne as the audience took their seats giving us time to kind of bond with him. R2-DT does not appear for some time. His transformation includes long wavy hair extensions and black mascara – he is slim elegant and beautiful – and he convincingly plays the vanity, narcissism and materialistic attitudes of Richard II. This Richard is not so much young – well DT is a little bit older – but his youthfulness comes from a strong yet subtle femininity that DT gives him. As you see him next to his Queen, played very nicely indeed by RSC newcomer Emma Hamilton, they are two lovely royal feminine creatures. I felt really drawn to his Queen – pun very much intended as DT does give his Richard an element of gay man far be it from a drag version – with whom I could connect more than Eddie or Ben’s Queens. Michael Pennington has the exciting task of playing John of Gaunt and so delivering probably the most anticipated speech in this play, ‘This Sceptered Isle’. His version, while not losing any of the lilting poetry, still comes across as sort of matter-of-fact – he might have said ‘This is England and I love it and that’s that’. ;). Oliver Ford-Davies appears again alongside DT – having played Polonius to his Hamlet – his interaction with John of Gaunt is good attentive listener, but he shines later in the humour of his part of the Duke of York, both bumbling, indignant, fickle and despairing as to the events around him brought about by his nearest and supposedly dearest. Marty Cruickshank and Jane Lapotaire, as the Duchesses of York and Gloucester respectively, were delightful. I also really took to Greene and Bushy – Marcus Griffiths and Sam Marks – not large parts but they made their presences felt, but not so much to Nigel Lindsay’s Henry Bolingbroke. I guess if you grow sympathetic to Richard, you’re going to turn against Henry, though I somehow didn’t feel as much as I’d want from him as a character – indifference isn’t so good. R2-DT gradually made his way into my heart – by the end of the performance I was kissing my friend next to me in delight!

The design, courtesy of Stephen Brimson Lewis, was very clever – strings of metal onto which the scenery itself was projected, including as an opener the interior of Westminster Abbey. The projections changed through the play and I forgot they were there. I recall really noticing the lyricism of Shakespeare’s words when delivered in the production at the Donmar. Part way through this I suddenly remembered that, but somehow it seemed lost in this production. The focus seemed more on conveying it as more natural speech.

I suppose it is a very obvious thing to say both how different productions can come across in such different ways but also show the audience something/s completely new about the characters, the story; in this case the history. It’s all in the interpretation, and even in a character so ‘set’ somehow, as you might expect real-life King Richard II to be, as opposed to a character like Hamlet who can be literally anything the actor wishes to give him, the actor can give us very refreshingly new aspects of who he might have been. I think that is especially true for Shakespeare’s plays – ‘remakes’ can keep on coming, whilst for other plays – screen or stage – you may sometimes think – what is the point when you’ve already seen a good version! Here is so much depth in all he wrote and on each reworking, on each performance of the same reworking, ever more truth about the human condition and new insights emerge. “R2-DT” is also very opposite to the image you may get if you think of the little blue droid his nick-name is based on. As is his way he gives so much feeling to everyone he embodies making his character leap out and grab the audience’s empathy. He is extra-ordinary with the emphasis on that extra. As to be expected some of the audience wanted to clasp at and laugh out loud in response to the tiny nuggets of humour there are in the play, especially when coming from DT, which was a shame as at times their loud ‘guffaws’ - more suited to a comedy - took away from the poignancy of performance. This is probably the farthest away DT has been in performance from his regeneration of The Doctor. Shakespeare is not even remotely alien to him – this is DT beauty-fully at home.

Barbican – nice theatre but too cold!!!


Richard II (“R2-DT”) – Review by TheRestrictedReviewer © 2014

‘Twelfth Night’ - Shakespeare’s Globe - Thursday 4th October 2012

Twelfth Night – the name of this play is as familiar to me as A Midsummer Night’s Dream – and yet I hadn’t seen it before, at least I don’t think so – it is one of those, in seeing which, you get kind of a deja vue feeling. Here we have another that starts with a shipwreck and uses two of Shakespeare’s favourite comedy devices of mistaken identities and twins – well hey if you have a formula that works, it well bears repeating. That said I’m not sure many writers these days would get away with quite so much repeating ;)

This is a great fun romp - the main attractions in this case are Mark Rylance playing Countess Olivia and Stephen Fry as her steward Malvolio; both of whom romp to the max. The production marks Stephen Fry’s first return to the stage after his now famous disappearance from it 17 years ago during a performance of Cell Mates. He was said to have had a bad reaction to reviews – as he later and so movingly explained in his documentary The Secret Life of the Manic Depressive, he in fact had a bipolar depression. Since that coming out, Stephen seems to have coped with life and performance even better than before – he is on our screens in something almost every single week, as presenter, actor, comedian, quiz show host… he now also has his own production company, writes profusely, travels also profusely and is an all-round absolutely wonderful example of a highly creative human being. He’s been challenged on his kindness by Pamela Stephenson Connolly in one of her Shrink Wrap programmes – but as he said he just likes to be nice – and whyever not?! In my opinion he is the nicest celebrity of whom I’ve had any experience and I am the proud owner of a personal letter from him – that said, as are many others – he gives as much as he can to as many as he can. He also has my empathy and understanding because I have experience of a loved one with bipolar disorder. For that reason I’d decided this review would honour that empathy and be as kind as possible. BUT he has no need of that degree of kindness at all. His performance as Malvolio is absolutely excellent!! No excuses required – in fact so much the opposite. If I can be so bold I think that his coming out, and being so open and sharing, has enabled his expressiveness and now he can fully excel in who and how he is. Stephen lends the very best of Stephen Fry to this role and is absolutely adorable. (Okay, yes, as Shakespeare is a repeater of plot devices, so I am of superlatives and absolutelys ;))

I felt so anxious for him. Not knowing the play I didn’t know when he would first make an entrance. I was also eagerly awaiting Mark Rylance’s entrance. And, of my goodness, what an entrance that was! Countess Mark-Olivia tiptoes in and parades the stage as though on wheels – I still haven’t worked out how it is that men in Elizabethan dresses as woman look like they are being wheeled around but it’s very funny! Dressed in black – his character in mourning for her father and brother and swearing to avoid the company of men for 7 years; which doesn’t last much more than 7 minutes! – looking elegant, perfectly feminine, poised, lady-like and very slim! Such a far cry from the puffed-up strength and burliness of Rooster in Jerusalem. In fact you wouldn’t believe it was the same person, and yet, in Mark Rylance’s case you absolutely would! There is such an ease to his manner and embodiments that it all seems as natural as breathing – a turn of phrase, manner and attitude occurs seamlessly in a heart-beat. He gives us acting perfection, so real that it really is not an act. He is just being! He can be male or female and we believe him. And yet he can still work so delightfully with the incongruence and hence comedy of the fact that he is a man playing a woman. A man in drag?! Oh no! It’s like a gender in between, which is how he seems. So soft and sensitive – how can such a person convincingly give us Richard III – well he can and did – albeit with much more sensitivity and humanity; still the bitter, deformed tyrant. And so he processes the stage and takes us; the audience along with him – so much so that it took me some time to realise others had come along in with him – amongst those others Stephen-Malvolio. Before I was aware there the dear man was advising his mistress!! Stephen and I had somehow avoided the anxiety of his entrance in the entrancement of Mark-Olivia.

And maybe the entrancement by both of these is the reason why scenes without them seem almost banal and routine. You find yourself thinking “Okay, here’s a bit of Shakespeare filling, til the best bits come.” And actually that IS a shame. Twelfth Night is the story of young Viola - here played by Samuel Barnett – who survives the aforementioned shipwreck, in which she believes her twin brother Sebastian to have drowned, and takes on the disguise of a young man, calling herself Cesario, and enters the service of Duke Orsino (Liam Brennan). The latter is attempting to woe Countess Olivia and sends Cesario to do the job for him ;) Viola falls for Orsino and Olivia is bewitched with love for Cesario… and so the usual wonderful Shakespearian romantic comedy ensues. Samuel Barnett is a very worthy and talented young male actor – whom I liked very much indeed as Queen Elizabeth in Richard III by the same company. But here he drowns and Viola along with him – NOT because he is bad, but because his goods aren’t good enough to make him as visible as he needs to be to match the likes of Mark-Olivia, Stephen-Malvolio and also Paul Chahidi as Olivia’s gentlewoman Maria. One of the wonders of this play are Shakespeare’s musings – through his characters – on men and women in love and how they deal differently with love and that state of being. Samuel is a man, playing a woman, who then takes on the role of a man, and Shakespeare made the absolute most of this in the dialogue he provided for Viola and her interactions. Sadly this doesn’t make enough impression. The subplot involving the tricks played by Maria and others – including the lovely fool Feste (Peter Hamilton Dyer) – on Malvolio seem to become the main plot…

And OMG how delicious! Malvolio is convinced that Olivia is in love with him and that she delights in him wearing yellow stockings and cross-garters… he must smile profusely at her to show her that he returns her affection. And here is where we get the highlight between Mark-Olivia and Stephen-Malvolio as the latter delivers the famous line…

            “Some are born great, some become great and some have greatness thrust upon them…”

thrusting himself onto her!!! The entire audience laughed long and hard at this.

Where Stephen’s expressions of love as Malvolio are thrusting and blatant, Mark’s towards Cesario, and then Sebastian are charmingly subtle and faltering. Where Stephen strides across the stage and later dances deliberately and clumsily like a bouncing baboon, Mark glides along until startled when he trots along like a colt before rapidly regaining that graceful mare.

I’d happily see that baboon and horse together on Strictly Come Dancing… meanwhile they were stunningly entertaining in the finale dance on that beautiful replica Globe stage. 

Twelfth Night – Review by TheRestrictedReviewer © 2012     

http://www.facebook.com/TheRestrictedReview

Twitter: @RestrictReview

‘Richard III’- Part 2 - Shakespeare’s Globe - Thursday 19th July 2012

(Rated 4/5 )

As promised, I am revisiting my experience of this production of Richard III. I wanted to say more and didn't feel I had the time and energy to do so, so here it is now... part 2.

As I've said before, I personally don't find this play that interesting aside from the character of Richard himself - or perhaps that should be multiple-characters/personalities of him - and how he became as he did. Unfortunately I didn't see Anthony Sher's portrayal of him, but Sher wrote a book on his experience and acting process during that time; Year of the King. Sher and his then psychotherapist, Monty Berman, analyse Richard and conclude that it all has to do with the fact he wasn't loved by his mother! That does come through in the play. And that he is bitter about his disability and the world owes him. And perhaps like Dexter (of TV fame, played by Michael C. Hall), and other psychopaths, once he has started killing he can't stop. In fact some of his arguments, though crazy, seem almost reasonable. Again, like Dexter Morgan, Richard Plantagenet confides in his audience a great deal, so we get a fascinating insight into the workings of his mind and plans - then to see them carried out and we can enjoy even more the horror and humour of his manipulations. And yet it is difficult to sympathise with him on the mother front - unlike Dexter, Richard's mother wasn't murdered horribly right in front of his young child's eyes and he doesn't take out his compulsion to kill on bad people - Richard's victims are innocents; amongst them women and children. Also, most disabled people don't go round murdering others. In fact of those I know, disability rather gives them a heightened compassion towards others and a strength in dealing with life's struggles. It does seem to be a well-used dramatic ploy for villainy though - other examples including The Phantom of the Opera and a few Bond villains!

This production was in traditional Shakespearean costume. I think that also helps us believe the men as women, in their skirts right down to the ground - they glide instead of walk along the stage. The young princes, played by Shanu Hazzan and Dylan Standen, looked just like little men in their royal garb. Very cute and I was very impressed by their delivery of Shakespeare's language as though it was the most natural way to speak in the world. 

The new Globe is a very special theatre. It has been reproduced as accurately to the original as possible within available knowledge. It has such an amazing atmosphere and you feel transported back in time. For someone with disability problems it is a little difficult. You are sitting on hard wooden benches with no support for the back - though you can hire cushions and fold up 'chair-backs'. Well that is of course if you are sitting at all! Many stand where stalls would normally be - great view but tough for a typically 3-hour long play. Actors and audience alike are open to the elements - best to take layers of clothing in case. That said, with the insistence on air conditioning in many closed theatres, it is often warmer in The Globe. I was far too cold in the Donmar on my last visit.

Really great job, and will be a great experience for anyone going instead of, or as well as a trip to the Olympics. For foreign visitors this troupe make Shakespeare easily understandable. I look forward to them, with the addition of Stephen Fry doing Twelth Night...

Richard III – Review by TheRestrictedReviewer © 2012

http://www.facebook.com/TheRestrictedReview

Twitter: @RestrictReview

‘The Hollow Crown: Henry V’ - BBC2 - Saturday 21st July 2012

(Rated 6/5)

And this time...
Better than perfect!!
Glorious, Highly Sensitive, Beautifully Moving, Tingling, Exciting, Inspiring, Uplifting, Heart-Wrenching and Tragically Sad. In fact I am welling up with tears of emotion as I write this. It may seem over-the-top to give it all those adjectives but - here's another one coming up - it really was the most exquisite production of this play that I have seen. And I do think Brannagh and Olivier's versions were excellent.

Hiddleston was convincingly different as now King Harry and gave an electric, yet emotional performance. He hit the mark absolutely, showing us just how much his character was feeling and yet not too much so as not to allow us the empathy to go through it all with him. He really was a King in mind AND heart. 
I had goosebumps galore! Especially in his:-
"We few, we happy few, we merry band of brothers..." speech. I would have willingly fought alongside him and I'm hardly equipped to do so!
Someone close to me commented how hard it was for the kings of that time - expected to constantly go to war and conquer this, that and the other country... as Harry says...
"Once more unto the breach, dear friends, once more...
Cry God for Harry, England and Saint George!"
In some ways it does seem a little bonkers. Constant conquering does not make a great country - looking to the needs of that country and nation does. Isn't it enough to rule just one? And really focus on looking after the citizens of that nation? 
But still provoked by a load of tennis balls from the Dauphin - harking back to Hal and his playing around - what is a King to do but conquer France? 
Harry V also refers back to Harry IV and wanting to make things right for his father.

Sir Richard Eyre presided over Henry IV and did a very good job. Taking charge and great care this time was theatre director Thea Sharrock. I really don't want to come across as biased, but the understandings and sensitivities of a woman enhanced this production in the extreme. There is no doubt at all this is one of Shakespeare's best plays, but work still has to be done in the interpretation and Sharrock brought out the absolute best in her actors. It is also a truly beautiful film. 
John Hurt lent his voice to the Chorus and truly brought out what seems to be Shakespeare's own feelings triggered as he went through the research and writing of the piece. And there were no weak links at all in the performing armour.

For lovers of Shakespeare and history this is a MUST-SEE! :)

The Hollow Crown: Henry V – Review by TheRestrictedReviewer © 2012

http://www.facebook.com/TheRestrictedReview

Twitter: @RestrictReview

‘Richard III’- Part 1 - Shakespeare’s Globe - Thursday 19th July 2012

(Rated 4/5 )

Ok, dear readers, no Shakespeare’s Richard III is NOT one of his 2-parters. However, my energy is restricted, such that I’m not sure I will be able to write all I want to say on Mark Rylance and The Globe company’s interpretation of this in one go. Yesterday involved a fair amount of moving around and it was all a bit too much for this body of mine. That plus the strange weather we’re having – just passably warmish then very cold wind and rain… lots of rain – it’s playing havoc with my ex-broken parts…

So enough moaning. We were very fortunate with the weather in the end last night. No rain and not too cold. So thankfully not Richard III within The Tempest!

And here I am complaining about my restricted body whilst Mark Rylance keeps putting his well-able body under the strain of being disabled – his Richard with a limp refreshingly different to the one he used for Jerusalem, and all hunched up and small compared to that other role for which he puffed himself up and became so famous and rightly highly-celebrated. And from the word go Mark injected his supreme talent into Richard. He was a funny Richard, even a strangely gentle psychopath, sensitive and gloriously charmingly manipulative, then dangerously brutal – making this a black comedy version, yet still dramatic and somehow not farcical. He was believable in his transitions from one way of being to the other, and had us really thinking about why and how this character – and I say character given the real Richard III had such bad press and was not a psychopath – became who and how he did.

As far as I recall I have only seen this play once before. That time it was Kevin Spacey playing an apparently far more serious and unsympathetic persona and I didn’t understand the plot, lost track of the Queens and felt bored. We were too high up to really see facial expressions though and when Kevin’s face loomed large on a screen it did get a lot more interesting and the charming psychopath was well visible. I looked up the plot before I went this time. In essence Richard kills lots of people to get the crown, and is then killed himself. The End. And when he is not on stage, for me it is a pretty boring play. What makes it interesting, or not, is how the actor chooses to embody Richard. And then how he interacts with the other characters…

In this production everyone is played by men, back to the tradition of Shakespeare’s time. And I was actually surprised that I was having to remind myself of that when the Queens – as in royal not gay; though they may be that too! – were performing. They were all superb, but particularly Samuel Barnett as Queen Elizabeth.

And once the play has ended and the epilogue has kindly informed us what happens next in the ‘real’ history, the original tradition of dancing and prancing around is also revived within the replica of Shakespeare’s own Globe Theatre and up gets Mark as himself and joins in. We are all reassured this was only a play and nobody is actually dead!

Richard III – Review by TheRestrictedReviewer © 2012

http://www.facebook.com/TheRestrictedReview

Twitter: @RestrictReview

‘The Hollow Crown: Henry IV Part II’ - BBC2 - Saturday 14th July 2012

(Rated 4/5)

And this time...
Not quite perfectly excellent so I'm taking a mark off ;)!
Still great cast, great writer, great production! But perhaps in a strange way it can't quite match up in emotion and drama with its prequel. Reports on Shakespeare's own writing history differ; some say he planned the entire Hollow Crown series - in effect as the story of the legacy on Henry V of his father's gaining the thrown by killing Richard II, others that Henry IV Part 1 was so well received by the audience, that William wrote a sequel. And are sequels ever as good?! In my experience of current movie sequels usually not.

Still, this is powerful drama. What does it really mean to Henry IV to die and how is he coping with the guilt of the manner of his gaining the thrown? What is he feeling about the prospect of his errant son, Hal, becoming King? How do they resolve things between father and son if at all? And does Hal really banish "plump Jack" and his other non-Royal friends? Or instead does he favour them and honour them?

Life as a royal at the time of these Henrys, and even later in Shakespeare's time was so different to today. Watching Tom as Hal in Part I, I couldn't help thinking of our young Prince Harry and how he would face these issues? He is happily interacting with 'common people' but these days that is so encouraged! (Of course it is his brother William, who we expect to be in Hal's position, but I'm sure William will also not even consider banishing anyone or stopping his friendships with his more lowly subjects! The very idea may seem farcical to us now.) The pressure on them is so much less in that sense. They have been part of revolutionising the monarchy in any case. The crown is perhaps not such a heavy burden as it was. The responsibility and power less. But monarchs still a sacrifice of normal life and cope with being celebrated (or not!).

And so Hal fully becomes Henry V next Saturday...

The Hollow Crown: Henry IV Part II – Review by TheRestrictedReviewer © 2012

http://www.facebook.com/TheRestrictedReview

Twitter: @RestrictReview

‘The Hollow Crown: Henry IV Part I’ - BBC2 - Saturday 7th July 2012

(Rated 5/5)

And again...
Perfectly excellent!
Great cast, great writer, great production! Flawless!

This time the exchange between Hal (Tom Hiddleston) and Falstaff (Simon Russell Beale) - playing Hal's father and himself - gave me goosebumps!
Falstaff as Hal                        "...Banish plump Jack and You Banish The World..."
Hal as his father... himself     " I do... I will"

A friend and I met Tom Hiddleston when he came out of the Donmar Warehouse having played in Othello with Chiwetel Ejiofor in the title role. Tom had made a big impression on my friend - yes she fancied him big time ;) - but also she saw something startling in him - she told him that he would make it big in Hollywood. She was so right! Tom has incredible sensitivity, a very high EQ, is gently and beautifully eloquent and such an understanding of the human condition; our feelings and our struggles. As he says and does so convincingly: An actor can "inhabit every extremity of the human condition." 

For me Simon Russell Beale was an unexpected Falstaff but very good. Julie Walters was a delightful Mistress Quickly.

I am very much looking forward to Part II and then to Henry V.

Meant to say this play is also very dear to me as I studied it for English Literature at School :)

The Hollow Crown: Henry IV Part I – Review by TheRestrictedReviewer © 2012

http://www.facebook.com/TheRestrictedReview

Twitter: @RestrictReview

‘The Hollow Crown: Richard II’ - BBC2 - Saturday 30th June 2012

(Rated 5/5)

Perfectly excellent!
Great cast, great writer, great production! Flawless!
As always 'This sceptered isle' gave me goosebumps!

The Hollow Crown: Richard II – Review by TheRestrictedReviewer © 2012

http://www.facebook.com/TheRestrictedReview

Twitter: @RestrictReview

‘Richard II’ - The Donmar Warehouse - Tuesday 10th January 2012

(Rated 4/5 )

There is no doubt in my mind now that the Donmar Warehouse, not only provides the setting of the plays performed within it, but also a hugely important quality; a kind of transpersonal, ethereal character, who adds volumes to the quality of performances of the players and the emotional experiences of individual audience members. It feels appropriate to me to name this character Lady INTIMACY. She enhances the relationships between actors and audiences immensely and provides the deepest connection possible for the theatre. The actors are even more exposed than on the standard stage. The audience members are up close and personal, and at each performance there can only be 250 of them. The performers share in all their brilliance or collapse under their inadequacies. TRUTH on STAGE. I have now seen several productions at the Donmar: Othello with Chiwetel Ejiofor wrenching my heart to breaking point in the title role; King Lear with the ever-stunning Derek Jacobi; A Doll’s House with a wealth of excellent performers and the manically moving Polar Bears – all of which blew me away – and then just one, which will remain nameless, did not. The latter fell flat – was alright but not great – the truth revealed with no hiding behind a magnificent stage or by being far away from the viewing eyes.

The Donmar has completely spoiled me. All other theatres in comparison, and even if just a tiny bit, I find disappointing. And I guess this is why I am writing about it before I even review its production of Richard II! The theatre has only one negative from my point of view – its reputation now exceeds its capacity making tickets very hard to come by. That said, I have joined the returns queue on a number of occasions now and never failed to get in. And at least, if standing and being cold are problems for you, you are able to sit down with a wall against your back, (and something soft under your bum if you’ve brought such an item), and the wait is inside.

And so to Richard II – the play which contains one of the most famous speeches of all time:-

            “This sceptered isle… This England”

- delivered in this case by a Donmar regular, Michael Hadley, in such a refreshingly different way. The speech comes only four lines before the character’s (John of Gaunt) death and is usually delivered with great gusto. In Michael’s conveyance there was a vulnerability and struggle, which brought the power and the passion of the feelings across even more poignantly and heroically. My friend and I noticed several other familiar Donmar faces – I commented the Donmar reuses actors and she said it sounded like they I meant they are recycling them. This all adds to the warmth and intimacy – a family atmosphere. And the star, Eddie Redmayne, is also a Donmar recyclee. His Richard is very youthful, childlike; a boy at once amused by his status as King – playing King – and at the same time overwhelmed by the power and enormity of what being King means to him. He is a youngster trying to be a perfect God – constantly practising how that might be, and in his efforts and naivety failing badly at holding the Heart and the Head of what that role entails at its best. He is corrupted by it all and has to be deposed – and by whom but his own cousin, Henry Bolingbroke, played by Andrew Buchan. They performed like young lads play-fighting – Richard had come to the throne age 11 years; you’re at once endeared and horrified. Richard is healed in his downfall and loss – in a way he has to break-down to break-through – and in that process, and Eddie’s portrayal, I felt so much compassion for him. I was moved to tears and upset by the forced parting from his Queen, Pippa Bennett-Warner, and his murder. For me, although like the next Richard (III), this Richard was something of a conquering tyrant, I felt more empathy for him. In my opinion, he knew not what he did, was never old enough to become wise, and was like a hysterical child set on winning. Yet it shows how dangerous that is given the power and responsibility of his position. Shakespeare was hard on both these Richards though. History shows them to be much better than he made out. But then where’s the drama eh?!

Like The Comedy of Errors the text of this play is very poetic and lyrical. It is a delight to listen to, especially when voiced so beautifully by all concerned.

Director Michael Grandage – whose Donmar reign ends with this play - and my friend both stated this is a play close to their hearts. It is now for me too.

Richard II – Review by TheRestrictedReviewer © 2011 

http://www.facebook.com/TheRestrictedReview

Twitter: @RestrictReview

‘The Comedy of Errors’ - National Theatre: Olivier Theatre - Tuesday 20th December 2011

(Rated 4/5 )

This was marvellous entertainment! Such a simple, well-executed plot involving mistaken identity – well there’s a surprise ;) – two sets of twins, and a whole series of errors. To me it felt as though it was over in a few moments – as they say time does fly when you’re having fun and this had bucket-loads of that! A fast-paced, high-jinks comedy, which felt somewhat like Morecombe and Wise do Old Bill’s best rhyming dialogue, including many bonkers beatings that had us crying with laughter.

Lenny Henry was the absolute master of comedy as ever. And Chris Jarman an excellent match as his twin of the same name, Antipholus. The Dromios – Lucian Msamati and Daniel Poyser - were fabulous as well. Also of note was Amit Shah, highly humorous as Angelo, the disgruntled  goldsmith, chasing both Antopholuses for money for the gold chain commissioned by one of them.

Lenny proves that he wasn’t just a one hit Shakespearean wonder as Othello, and combines his perfection in comedy with his new passion for the Bard. He convincingly becomes increasingly confused and indignant, as he is chased by the law and women believing he is his brother and accused of madness. His elocution is faultless and the audience may recognise a few mannerisms from his stand-up such as cawing ;) Others were not so clear in their expression – a bit of mumbling – though still the delightful rhymes shone through.

The set was amazing – revolving blocks creating numerous different types of construction – our favourite the Phoenix block of flats. This production was set in modern times and the costumes were lovely.

This lesser known of Shakespeare’s plays stands out above many of his comedies in the way it is treated here by performances and production.

Note: The ‘we’ in the above is not royal, but multiple as this review is based on comments from all four of us who attended.

P.S. For those with disability of the lower limbs it’s worth noting that there are many flights of stairs to climb to The Olivier Theatre. You may like to take the lift. The seats are very comfortable. And the setting – The South Bank – is a personal favourite of mine.

The Comedy of Errors – Review by TheRestrictedReviewer © 2011

http://www.facebook.com/TheRestrictedReview
Twitter: @RestrictReview

‘The Tempest’ - Theatre Royal Haymarket - Thursday 13th October 2011 / With reference to… ‘Richard III’ - The Old Vic - Saturday 27th August 2011

(Rated 4/5 )

The Tempest – thought to be Shakespeare’s last play and possibly written by him for his last performance in a lead role also – is a play I had not read or seen yet wanted to for some time. I had heard it described variously as weird, fantastical, surreal and probably Shakespeare’s most autobiographical. I recall seeing a production of A Midsummer Night’s Dream at The Globe Theatre, on a night of high winds and rain, and, of course, in the open air. One of the people I was with commented that, on that particular night, it was a more appropriate setting for The Tempest! Perhaps The Dream, with its themes of fairy magic and fantastical happenings, is the closest of Shakespeare’s other plays to The Tempest. And yet in fantasy land there can live greater truth than in reality. It would seem that the attention to detail and study of events, which Shakespeare used in most of his other plays, was let go in this instance. He seems to come so much more from feeling/emotion than clever wit. There are very few, if any, plot tricks and devices: No real sense of the tools he uses time and again of mistaken identity and multitudes of settings and scene changes. We have one setting in real time in accordance with the oldest ‘rules’ of Aristostlean drama.

All that matters here is to understand how this man – Prospero – feels about his isolation for twelve years on a desert island with his daughter in the environment he has created for himself; his plan to take revenge on those who banished them – including his own brother – and plot to marry his daughter with his brother’s son; and in order for all this to occur, how he uses his magic and employs the spirits to create the tempest, shipwrecking those on whom he wishes to take revenge and carrying out tricks upon them. As is common in Shakespeare we have the villainous brother and the clowns, including the King’s fool, played by Nicholas Lyndhurst in high comedic form.

In the end this is, unusually for Shakespeare, a simple surreal psychological journey of one man, setting free the daughter he adores, letting go of revenge and learning to forgive. And in this whole process letting go of his magic and tricks. And herein lies the autobiographical element – was Shakespeare processing the loss of his creativity in writing and performance before his own end in a kind of drama self-therapy? Perhaps symbolically, as Prospero releases his hold on his daughter to the care of another man, her cousin, so Shakespeare frees his written offspring to be adopted in performance by his fellow actors of the time, and, as he sadly was never to know, by many generations of actors since. His creative children have grown up in ever so many different ways as his characters are embodied by different actors, and plays taken under the wings of numerous production teams and interpreted by such a variety of directors.

For me the feelings and emotive forces in this play come through stronger than from all his other work. The drama involved in the likes of Hamlet, Othello and King Lear, is more complex, more compelling, certainly more intelligent and exceptional, yet I felt the truth pouring out of this play in a deeper, more profound way. Aren’t writers advised to write what they know and is that not usually the best of their work? Shakespeare’s research and insights into humanity cannot be flawed, but no research is required to write that which comes directly from the heart and in that, there is a pure freedom of expression. The other main, and highly significant, contributor to this feeling is the performance of Ralph Fiennes as Prospero. His embodiment is so gentle and powerfully moving. As he put on his magic coat at the beginning of the play, I felt a comfort and serenity, and during his epilogue my goosebumps had goosebumps.

In spite of years of study of Shakespeare in school, and feeling the need many times, as an audience member, to have some understanding of the script beforehand, in this case I did not. Though I did not understand all the intricacies of the dialogue, I got the essence of it and that was good enough. In a way, as with all accomplished acting, the power of the meaning; the subtext, comes across beyond the text, and in a sense, focussing on the text itself can get in the way of that. Unfortunately, I did not have the same experience when I went to see Kevin Spacey’s Richard III. That was in no way due to poor acting. One aspect had to do with the importance of the detail of the - as we now know – falsified history of Richard III; who he was created to be and what he supposedly did. It is a play – like many of the histories in my opinion – that requires prior knowledge of the events and characters involved. It is also important for me to be able to see the emoting of the actors involved. The Old Vic is too big to allow that for those in the cheap seats. When broadcast on screen at one point, Kevin’s emotionally expressive facial nuances were as clear as crystal and so varied – at various times scary, amusing and touching. Without that, for me, there is a lot missing from my the theatrical experience. This inspired me to buy a lovely set of 1940s opera glasses, so that, even if disabled by sitting far back ‘in the gods’, I can still spy on the minutiae of an actor’s emotions on the stage far below. That is, if they hold their heads up! One complaint – and the only one – I have regarding Ralph’s acting of Prospero, was that he bowed his head on some occasions.

In some ways it’s bizarre to even think of comparing the calm, magical Prospero and the tyrannical Richard. Whatever his vengeful acts, Prospero is all about his growing understanding of what it is to be human and forgiving. (Alongside his story, Prospero’s daughter is literally also learning how human beings are as she encounters others – aside from her father and the island’s native Caliban – for the first time. Through her experience and the contrast Shakespeare draws between humans and spirits/fairies, we also learn more about ourselves along with the human characters in the piece.) Shakespeare’s Richard is an inhuman tyrant, who may show moments of doubt and guilt, but was in contrast to those labelled as tyrants today, directly involved in the acts of terrorism and death he was instigating. In his case there is no learning of compassion and forgiveness. At the end of their respective plays both Prospero and Richard are set free, as are those under their influence. Richard’s death ends his cruel reign. Prospero asks for our indulgence to set him free and for ‘spirits to enforce and art to enchant’. This feels like the spirit of Shakespeare entreating to us never to forget him though his ‘ending is despair’ at the loss of the magic of his creative ability.

William Shakespeare, in my humble opinion, it is certain that as long as this world still exists, with producers still to produce your plays, actors to embody your characters, and audiences still to witness them, your spirit will reign supreme and your art enchant for evermore.

P.S. The Theatre Royal is a lovely old ornate theatre, but for those with disability of the lower limbs I would advise taking someone to lean on as you make your way to your seat: The stairs are small and awkward and there is no handrail to hold on to. As already mentioned the size of The Old Vic can lead to visual disabilities that have nothing to do with actual disability of the audience member. I have also experienced it to be far too cold as a result of over-enthusiastic air-conditioning. However it is not the only theatre with that problem.

The Tempest – Review by TheRestrictedReviewer © 2011

http://www.facebook.com/TheRestrictedReview

Twitter: @RestrictReview

Much Ado About Nothing - Wyndhams Theatre - 26th May 2011

(Rated 7/5 ) 

Please note for those who do not know the play or want to be surprised by the production, this review contains spoilers.

This was actually Much Ado About Something Totally Amazing!

Rated 7/5 as it is definitely better than perfection and 7 is my favourite number!

A spectacle triggered and catalyzed by the special connection between Catherine Tate, and David Tennant and definitely enhanced by their glorious skills in comedy drama making them an electric pairing of acting talent – in my humble opinion, best comedy couple ever!

And, yes I cannot resist, in the words of David Tennant’s alter-ego the 10^th Doctor, as if speaking to all performers/companions involved, ‘You were brilliant, and so were you, and you…’ Gulps!

From now on I will refer to David Tennant as DT, (as he is affectionately called by many), and Catherine Tate as CT.

I first heard about this on Saturday 8^th January 2011, in a text from a very good friend, with whom I’ve shared some previous superb DT performance viewings on stage in Hamlet and Love’s Labours Lost. I was in the bath at the time! The text read that DT and CT would be on BBC Breakfast. So I rushed out of the bath and put the TV on. That was around 8am so a bit of a wait to the end of the programme when they came on, just before 10am. DT said to CT: ‘You tell them.’ And so she did; they’d be doing Much Ado About Nothing together with her as Beatrice and him as Benedick. It had been CT’s idea to do it, but some time ago, and she thought too close to their time on Doctor Who and so they waited a while before running it by a producer, Sonia Friedman. CT added she thought DT would be the perfect Benedick. Later he said he thought she the perfect Beatrice. Russell T. Davies comments in his book, Doctor Who: The Writer’s Tale that DT and CT adore each other. Their on-screen chemistry is clear to all who have seen their stint together in the TARDIS during the fourth series of the new Doctor Who (DW). Though DT is not ‘My Doctor’ as Whovians term their favourite DW title-role playing actor, he and CT are my favourite Doctor-Companion combination. They spark off each other! Their joy and emotion hits you full on! And personally I love the concept of two best buddies working together for the entertainment of themselves and so for others too. That way we/the audience, get to experience their best work.

The moment the interview finished I was on the internet to book tickets - any tickets that could be obtained. Well, except they couldn’t be for love nor money. Not for the next 3 hours. The website was continually down and nobody answered the box office phone. I guess maybe a few others were trying too! I persisted, absolutely determined, and at the 11^th hour – so to speak (just as I had to go out); not a reference to Matt Smith honest – I was rewarded by the website finally allowing me to get two tickets. In actual fact I wasn’t quite sure when I’d got them for. By this point the website was live and working but in a kind of sporadic way that meant you could get so far before it hung up and you lost what you’d been doing. As it turned out they were tickets to a preview show. In theory the actors and whole performance improves during the run until the end when they’re so at ease with it, the flow is as perfect as it’s ever going to be. I imagine during some runs there are performances in the middle that may feel a little less good if the actors fall into the trap of roboticness and not feeling a new zest for it every performance. That said there is something very exciting about previews. The actors and team are still experimenting; trying out new things, and for me any mistakes are actually exciting opportunities, endearing, potentially exposing of some personal quality of that actor and not ‘wrong’.

On the day I felt the usual pre-performance nerves that I experience for the actors and for me. I trust them more than I do myself. Of course they’re gonna do great and have it all in hand – head and heart too – but maybe my psychology is someone has to be nervous so I’ll do it for them.

I arrived early – as is my way – but this time, joy of joys, no need for a google map or directions. If you do check google – which of course I did! – Wyndham’s theatre sits on top of Leicester Square tube. Geographically it is right next door. And of course there is a huge picture of DT and CT for all to see from afar so you absolutely can’t miss it/them. I had also checked out the location with a friend the previous Saturday and we’d also sussed out the ‘stage door’ situation – ‘stage dooring’ now being a necessary part of the complete theatrical experience for me. I love meeting the actors afterwards as themselves and doing the autograph/photo thing - lovely little interactions.

I sat in the theatre foyer waiting for a friend. (We were going to meet at the stage door but it was raining hard.) Already there were some quite scruffy-looking men, being organised by a smart-casually dressed woman. They seemed to have camera equipment and the woman was handing out notes. Press! It was press night. My friend arrived and then a man from below who informed everyone that there was another 7 minutes to wait as ‘Catherine was having her hair and make-up completed.’ OH how I’d have loved to gate-crash that press Q&A. Could’ve invented a fictional magazine/periodical that I was writing for. Well actually I am! But of course the organising woman had names and was counting heads on the way in so missed that gig!

Friend and I went to eat. We planned to go to a place about 5 minutes away but it rained so hard on the way that we dove into the nearest restaurant, which happened to be a Bella Italia, but could have been anything really! Later, unfortunately, I texted other friends that we were in Bella Pasta, causing a great deal of confusion in meeting up since there are no Bella Pastas on Leicester Square but, is I found out from one poor friend trying to find us, 3 Bella Italias!

Having rescued friend, and finished our meal, we made our way back to the theatre. We still had plenty of time and so decided to go for another stage door reccy. It was still there but quite neglected. We joked we’d have good spots if we stayed and didn’t bother watching the performance. Very different to the previous Saturday around 5:15pm when it was crowded with people waiting for the stars. On that occasion a couple walked past wondering if ‘it’ was Christopher Eccleston, whom everyone was waiting for. As DT came out, and I managed to get a good enough view, I commented, ‘He has stubble’. A passing man asked if that was good. I replied in the affirmative; certainly very good on most men to look at and if not too long and prickly to kiss too.

We collected two more friends at the front of the theatre and, seeing as we were all sitting in different places, agreed to meet for a just a few minutes afterwards – in my head the few minutes would extend to as long as it took DT and CT to come out – back at the stage door.

On the way to my seat I bought goodies. I had just planned to get a programme – as souvenir, for cast/crew information and to be signed by DT&CT – and a poster – to put up on wall. Then I spotted a T-shirt was available too. I unashamedly admit that, like DT, I enjoy wearing T-shirts – black best – on which are my favourite performers and/or something they have drawn, eg. DT and his doodle for Headway Essex.  So T-shirt was very tempting but a dilemma due to cost and being financially challenged. In the end, as friend said, I’d be getting them all anyway so I might as well do it now. I did and clutched them all lovingly and obsessively to my chest as I struggling past others to my seat. A fab seat! Central in 3^rd row stalls.

The play commenced with Hero (Sarah Macrae) dancing to a recognisable, but disguised 80s track, ‘played’ by a ghetto-blaster. And so the party, the theme and setting of the play are well and entertainingly established. According to the programme we are in Gibraltar and many of the male members of the cast, including Benedick and Claudio have come back from the Falklands war. All the music is 80s-inspired or adapted; so too, the costumes and hair. Maria’s young son, who has some highly amusing interactions with DT’s Benedick, comes on stage with a Rubik’s cube. CT’s Beatrice first appears dressed as a Blues Brother. And later DT’s Benedick redresses for the fancy dress party in highly colourful lace tights and top, denim mini-skirt and a curly fair-haired wig; Madonna?! Claudio comes as Adam Ant and Hero wears a Lady Diana mask and later her wedding dress. But I am jumping way ahead of myself and the play…

DT in fact first arrives on stage at the wheel of a golf-buggy to resounding cheers from the audience. Incidentally DT has said that this bit of ‘business’ will not continue for the whole run. What a shame; it was wonderfully hilarious seeing him do a 3-point turn to drive the buggy off stage again.

Benedick is talking with other characters, when Beatrice baits him, beginning the first of many rounds of comedic insulting banter by asking him why he is talking as nobody is listening to him. He retorts with the famous line;

"What, my dear Lady Disdain! are you yet living?"

She replies wondering how such disdain could die, with Beneck there to feed it.

And so the current state of their relationship is simply yet beautifully and effectively set-up by the master writer William Shakespeare; probably at his best comedically in this play. This is a classic situation of two people meant to be together yet constantly resisting their attraction. A meeting of minds and wit but determined to hate each other. The one set in his ways and content as he is with no need for a female love-interest/companion; the other as scornful of men as she is of marriage.

This seems designed for the skills of DT and CT. They play it marvellously, jumping off each other’s lines with their own in perfect timing, pitch and with a sense that they are absolutely in tune being out of tune. Interestingly, these two are playing this at ages 43 (her) and 40 (him). A time when single people these days may feel ‘on the shelf’ with no hope of getting off it, which would almost certainly have been the case/feeling in Shakespeare’s time. Many of us teenagers of the 80s can identify!

We are also introduced to Hero’s story. Claudio (Tom Bateman) is told that the Prince, Don Pedro (Adam James) plans to woo Hero for him. Claudio is suspicious that the prince actually plans to woo her for himself, unware that it is the bastard brother Don John (Elliot Levey) of whom he should be wary. As villain of the piece Don John plots to convince Claudio that Hero has been unfaithful and so ruining her for marriage. This is in fact the main plot of the play and the thread on which all else hangs, and yet it feels like it is there only to serve the drama of Beatrice and Benedick’s relationship.

We return to B&B as, set on getting them together, other characters amuse themselves, and us, by attempting to convince each one that the other is in love with them. The staging of this is total genius. Whilst the men discuss how much Beatrice loves Benedick, pillars revolve around the stage, at times just revealing enough and yet plenty of the hidden – or so he thinks – Benedick and his reactions to what they are saying. Meanwhile the blinds are being white-washed by painters. DT encounters many obstacles and has numerous accidents whilst trying to keep hidden while still hearing what’s going on. At one point he falls so that his hand gets covered in paint, which he later forgets and wipes over his face and hair. Of course we know, though he doesn’t, that not only do the conspirators know he is there but he is being highly unsuccessful in covering his accidents. Benedick’s facial expressions are classic DT! This is fall-out-of-your seat hysterically funny.

Beatrice is sent to call Benedick to dinner. The physical state he is now in begs all her disdain! He now feels for her supposed predicament and has decided to requite her love… but not yet. We experience the humour of their kind of transition state – her just as she was and he altered.

And then it is Beatrice’s turn to be set-up. This time one of the painters is on a pulley-system as he paints a pillar. Hero and Ursula (Kathryn Hunt) start talking about Benedick’s supposed infatuation and Beatrice tries to hide from them. In her case she crawls under a paint-spattered sheet. Her conspirators proceed to hook her up to the pulley and she is raised from under the sheet so she can look and listen from on high, whilst still believing she is hiding! Again there is phenomenal comedy from CT’s facial expressions and body language; and so much laughter that we can hardly hear the dialogue below her. We are provided with another wonderful and typical CT moment as, back down to earth, she unhooks herself and shows us how proud she is of her high-flying feats! All credit to CT doing that 8 performances per week in the 3-month run. I believe 101 times in all!

The acting by all is superb. There are no hangers on. They have the excellent text of Shakespeare to work on and sell it in spades.

The comedy continues to excel in the hands on the watchmen who witness talk regarding the dastardly deed of usual Shakespearean mistaken identity in which Hero, really Margaret (Natalie Thomas) is taken to have ‘spoken’ with Borachio (Alex Beckett) at her hen party. But otherwise the tone of the piece changes to a painful seriousness as the consequences of the deception play out.

The interval comes as Beatrice is getting drunk on the hen night as she struggles with her love for Benedick and fretting about how he will repond to her having decided to requite him.

Then in Act 2, Hero is preparing for her wedding in Lady Di gown and Beatrice, unprepared, has a hang-over! She curls up in Hero’s train.

B&B believe themselves in love but have not yet come out to each other. We see all the feelings that we can so identify with and feel for them in; the awkwardness, the vulnerability, the looks of love, the avoidances and again all superbly acted by CT and DT.

We then have the drama of Hero’s wedding in which Claudio refuses to marry Hero, accusing her of being ‘false’.  Beatrice is upset; distraught for her cousin, Benedick is all concern. This is again finely played, especially by CT revealing the heart of Beatrice and love for her cousin. A revenge plot is hatched to convince Claudio and others that Hero died from the shock and he is obliged to marry her ‘cousin’.

B&B are left alone. With a gulp, Benedick confesses his love to Beatrice. She laughs. This is such a huge ‘Aaww’ moment that I found myself expressing it out loud on several occasions through the scene. It felt so real and true. Just as many will empathise with; that moment where you declare love and the other reciprocates and you have the joy, embarrassment – if you’ve been sparring partners – a kind of denial and the heightened vulnerability, connection and delight. It tore at the heart in the most beautiful way.

But before they can be together, there is one thing he has to do for her – ‘Kill Claudio!’

And we have almost reached the denouement… but not before we have another very amusing scene between DT and the young boy involving a keyboard and leading to some more wonderful banter between B&B now in love… and an almost kiss! I was longing for it! Whilst also willing the play not to end!

At the repeat wedding – following a brilliantly powerful funeral scene, in which Claudio anguishes along to music from a loud, echoing ghetto-blaster – Claudio marries Hero’s ‘cousin’ to discover it is Hero herself.

Benedick asks the friar to marry him to Beatrice. Of course he has to ask her too! And they finally kiss to great whoops of delight from the audience.

They end, as the play began, with dancing.

During the curtain calls there were the best smiles you can imagine on DT and CTs faces. They seemed to enjoy it as much as the audience.

I was shaking as I stood up to applaud them.

As arranged I met my friends at the stage door.

DT was already out and signing autographs. How does he change so quickly?!

I managed to get a spot where I probably wasn’t supposed to be – kind of in the way of other actors coming out – but I wasn’t moved on – maybe the presence of my walking stick helped. I watched DT as he made his way along the line – happily signing and smiling in people’s photos – so open and delightful. I was wearing his Headway doodle T-shirt – kind of for him and also in the hopes of attracting his attention ;). Then he made it to me. I think he saw the T-shirt but didn’t comment. He signed the programme page with his picture on. And then went on to the next person, and then somehow he didn’t know who to go to next, and returned to me! I said he’d already signed for me and he replied ‘I could do you twice’ – okay maybe I’m misremembering that a little – but it was so sweet and funny – and yet it felt greedy to accept – a friend behind me handed me her flyer and I handed it to him to sign.

And then CT… SO lovely in person! (Friend later said how beautiful her hair is and how red-heads should rule the world! Made me so proud that I’m a strawberry blond! We also talked about how TV makes people fatter and distorted and how they look even better in person.) As I gave CT my programme to sign, I told her the performance was so good and she replied ‘Thank you, my darling’.

I am going again! Once is totally amazing but this is must-see several times over! It’s a drug and I’m addicted to that high!

Afterthought – courtesy of comments from my friends:

It was noted how quickly the conspirators are forgiven in the original compared to the Shakespeare Retold version in which Hero also keeps Claudio waiting and does not marry him; the trust destroyed between them. Maybe this reflects Shakespeare’s comedies in which he tends not to stay long with the ‘bad stuff’. Or perhaps it’s a historical thing and of his time when younger women of that ripe-to-be-married age didn’t have as much power to stand up for themselves in the same way as they do now and needed to have their honour defended by chivalrous men.

Much Ado About Nothing – Review by TheRestrictedReviewer © 2011

http://www.facebook.com/TheRestrictedReview

Twitter: @RestrictReview