celltheory

Another belated theatre wrap-up - more positive than the last one!

I saw a couple of Bell Shakespeare productions. Their Henry V was a straightforward take, staged as a contemporary international conflict in military fatigues. The play was compressed down to 1 hour 50 minutes but felt complete. As the war enters St Crispin's Day, the stage is covered in a black mud that stains all the cast members and made the floor seem so slippery I was worried for their safety. The tone of this production dwells on the horror of war, and the ending with Katharine accepting her fate to marry Henry feels quite a downer. I liked the play overall, though not everything worked. For example I think the choice for JK Kazzi as Henry to play the St Crispin's Day speech as very casual and light didn't work - especially because earlier in the play he really did deliver a big war speech, so he's capable. I remember, from a previous Henry V, finding the speech so moving, so rousing - it felt like an anticlimax to see it delivered so casually in this one.

Next was Bell's King John - not conventionally staged but one of their 'play in a day' series with the director and cast rehearsing for just one day, and then reading without costumes or props, scripts in hand. In a fun twist, the cast and director were actually the Henry V team I'd just seen, on a brief break! They did have one addition to the cast, an actress playing King John, but otherwise it was the same. This is a rare play I'm unlikely to see performed elsewhere, though I did read it earlier this year. On seeing it live, the play makes more sense to me in some ways: the comedy comes out better, some of the drama too, and the director's introduction of the play as one about "mediocre men" rings true. Everyone is just a venal politician, without any goal except grabbing power and opportunity, so it does feel very contemporary in that way. A few things didn't work for me: the Bastard was cleverer on page than in this staging, and playing the death of a child for laughs felt too flippant. A play with some very interesting scenes and roles, but doesn't stick much in my mind - it really peters out at the end.

Before King John, the company director came out to give an intro and thank their sponsors. He gave some interesting background: the play in a day is a pet project of a couple of their major individual donors and it's not a profitable venture. At the first play in a day staging, there were around 35 people in the audience, and the donor picked up the costs. For King John there were 240 in the audience and this was almost enough to break even for the costs of cast, crew, etc.

A classic of a different kind: Agatha Christie's And Then There Were None at the Theatre Royal. I love the book, for all its problems, it's such a fun puzzle box. This was a very by the book staging, played pretty much completely straight, feeling rather dated as a result - but it's still an entertaining story to the end. Notably only one murder happens before interval. After that the deaths come thick and fast!

Last week I went to the Belvoir St Theatre for The Wrong Gods. Set in a small village in India, a girl clashes with her mother - the girl wants to leave and continue her education, her mother wants her to stay and continue their way of life by the river. Seven years pass and the girl returns, this time representing a large company that wants to dam the river, displacing the village's inhabitants. I wanted to like this, a play from Indian-Australians, starring four women, about mothers and daughters, environmental concerns, and self-determination. But I was honestly so bored, even at just 90 minutes. The first half is okay, the second half is just the four characters shouting at each other didactically.

Finally I saw Dangerous Liaisons at New Theatre. The Marquise de Merteuil and Vicomte de Valmont engage in a battle of wits, using and manipulating others with sex and power for their own pleasure and amusement. I've seen several versions of this story, including a 2012 production of the Christopher Hampton play, with Pamela Rabe and Hugo Weaving as the leads. This version is based on a different adaptation by Deborah Mulhall, but the script doesn't differ substantially from the Hampton version in my view. This particular production was, in terms of quality, rather inconsistent. Some of the actors were quite good, others were just quite bad. The costumes were fine, deliberately anachronistic with nods to the past. The set design was ok, the lighting and sound were occasionally confused. The musical/dance interludes were a bit cringe - one was set to Nine Inch Nail's Closer, to give you an idea. However: I was entertained. It was an imperfect entertainment but the script and story were strong enough, and the actors and crew earnest and hard working enough, that there was enough interest and effort there to stay to the end.

Five minutes before the play ended, it came to an abrupt pause - there was apparently a noise complaint and the cops got called! After a few minutes of stoppage (Valmont getting up and dusting himself off from his death scene) the play resumed (Valmont lying down again) and shortly concluded. Quite a memorable ending.