|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ShireHorse
Rohan
Aug 5 2014, 12:54pm
Post #1 of 20
(351 views)
Shortcut
|
|
The Crucible (again!)
|
Can't Post
|
|
I've started a new thread since this play runs until September and the first thread has sunk without trace, LOL!
Last week, I went to see The Crucible with RA as John Proctor for the second time. And I'm really glad I did.
The play and the production and the performances are so complex and so dense that I found it very difficult to absorb everything the first time around. That, plus the fact that Judge Hathorne stood in the way and blocked my view of the biggest emotional highlights of the final scene meant that I left feeling that I had missed some very important moments.
My husband had been very gripped by the play too and so, when I suggested that we go again, he was happy to agree. A day trip to London on the train plus two tickets at £85 each worked out pretty pricey. But, the performances gave us so much pleasure that they were definitely a satisfying way of spending our money.
Did I notice any differences? I'm sure there were a number in the actual production but the ones that stood out for me were, first, the lay-out of the stage before the play started. When I went initially, chairs were scattered all over the stage. When the play starts, the actors come on, sit down and then rise and remove their chairs, leaving Proctor to stare out at the audience before he also leaves. The trouble was, people were trying to cross the stage to get to their seats and the toilets and the staff kept encouraging them to walk around the edge. Presumably some of the chairs got knocked out of place. Yesterday, the 'train lines' ran straight across the stage, from the aisle on my side to the aisle and the toilets on the other and the chairs were placed either side. If you want a metaphor, I suppose it could represent a divided community; but it also meant that you could walk straight across the stage, LOL.
Secondly, at my first visit, there were no ashes falling from the ceiling for some reason. This time there were and it was a very striking piece of stage craft that added to the atmosphere. I'm glad I caught that.
As far as the acting was concerned, I have a feeling that everyone had toned down the shouting. RA's voice sounded gruff but not hoarse as it had done in the first week. But, when he got to the final scenes, it kept on breaking with emotion. And I wondered if this was just a brilliant piece of acting - because it did sound very good and appropriate for the moment - or if his voice was actually breaking from the strain. Perhaps someone will ask about the pressures on his voice at the Q&A session which he is holding on Sept 2nd from the Old Vic stage.
But it was a truly moving performance - now that I had a clear view of the stage. I liked his moments with his wife best of all and when they are both brought out of prison and see each other for the first time in months, it was all so gut-wrenching that I felt the tears come to my eyes (and I'm not a teary person). The acting was beautiful and so pitiable. Proctor is hunched and bent from his torture and doesn't stand up straight until he has torn up the confession and announced 'I am John Proctor!' There were some truly powerful and uplifting moments in that final scene.
His farewell to his wife - which I was unable to see last time - was also very moving. They touch each other so gently and with such intensity of feeling and the kiss is so full of love and longing: however, I didn't feel weepy here but uplifted and triumphant.
Conclusion: yes, he's very, very good and I'm not surprised that so many have been knocked back by his performance.
And the others? I really enjoyed Abigail's cold, evil eyes; but I also felt a very small amount of sympathy for her. So, Sam Colley did very well indeed.
Mary Warren is still my favourite female performance and Mr Hale my favourite male (apart from RA). I really liked Elizabeth Proctor the first time around but after seeing that 'trailer' video where it is obvious how very slowly she speaks, I couldn't help but focus on it yesterday and I found her measured way of talking a bit odd.
Now, I tried to like Jack Ellis as Danforth but, as I mentioned before, I still found his accent exaggerated and his performance OTT. Interestingly, someone who also saw it yesterday, tweeted:
Tom ‏@tomlikestheatre 24m
The Crucible at #OldVic is a fantastic production. Slightly marred by a very over-theatrical Danforth. But otherwise a solid, powerful show.
But, not everyone agrees with this, so each to their own.
I concentrated on the music more this time, too, and, before Act III, it rumbled so ominously that my whole chest cavity was vibrating with it.
A little bit of stage craft I hadn't noticed before: a rope is used by Abigail in two different ways - as a symbolic means of leading and controlling the other girls and, before the trial scene, as a noose that she drags behind her when she enters. Now this should have been noticeable the first time; but, as I said, there is so much going on that you just cannot absorb everything.
Other things:
No mobiles went off and there was no wolf-whistling when RA took off his shirt (that seems to have been a one-off) but a couple of members of the audience were a bit distracting because they kept swigging from their bottles of water during the best moments and when you're sitting opposite them in an otherwise very still setting, you really notice it.
People laughed a lot more during this performance and I suddenly became aware of the sheer amount of wry and even black humour there is in the play, right up until the bitter end.
My special moment:
The first time I saw it, RA stood only feet away from me and seemed to be looking straight at me. I couldn't meet his gaze because it somehow felt as though I was intruding upon his performance.
Well, last week, although we had moved to the other side of the central aisle, we were 4 rows back and just in the actors' line of sight. And they were very close. Towards the end, there came a long moment again when he stared straight at me. This time, I deliberately looked back and I honestly felt we made eye contact (although I'm sure we didn't - I'm confident he was lost in his performance.) And this was a very odd feeling: staring so fully into the eyes of a man that I didn't know from Adam. I wondered afterwards how many other people he stared at around this bowl of our crucible and whether it was deliberate as he tried to draw us all into this circle of guilt and judgement. It was a very important moment for me. (Said by one who doesn't want to meet him in person at the stage door because I don't see the point.)
The cheer for RA at the end was even louder and more enthusiastic than it had been the first time. There was a standing ovation but, from where I was sitting, only half as many people stood up as before. Interestingly, although the front row opposite me were cheering and whooping, they didn't stand up. Perhaps they thought it worth a whoop but not a SO or perhaps they didn't want to block the view of those behind them.
Well, now I am satisfied. I do not need to see this again because I am left with so many vivid memories. But, I would like to see a DVD of it. I think that Yael Farber's production and RA's interpretation of JP as a rough farmer and an everyman has cast a new light on the play and brought home to many what a great play this is - that it is a play for all time and is not just about McCarthyism but carries with it a message about the human condition. 'Plus ça change....'
Alaa Al-Shroogi ‏@alaaalshroogi 3m
Riveting performance of #TheCrucible @oldvictheatre last night. So timely. #TheMoreThingsChangeTheMoreTheyStayTheSame
NB The production is completely sold out for the next 7/8 days and there are not many tickets left after that.
|
|
|
The Grey Elf
Grey Havens
Aug 5 2014, 3:31pm
Post #2 of 20
(246 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Again, thank you so so much for this detailed second review, ShireHorse!!
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I wonder if the reduced shoutiness is a thing they were forced to do to protect the actors' voices -- especially Richard's! -- rather than being a modification made for artistic reasons. Nobody wants anything to endanger RA's wonderful baritone, LOL.
And you got to stare into Richard's eyes! I wouldn't be surprised if you really did connect because I believe that's probably what he was going for, to help draw you, as a representative audience member, further into the play.
It's interesting that you felt a modicum of sympathy for Abigail because Proctor did in fact take advantage of her (though she may have been quite willing). Is it actually clarified in the play whether their affair was mutual or was it JP seducing her?
Of course, it fatefully brought out the very worst in her character and what Abigail does in retaliation is indefensible. I gotta say, just seeing the expression in Miss Colley's eyes from the play's stills creeps me out! But what a great production on which to launch her career! She's a very very lucky young actress (besides being cast opposite Richard, of course  )
I can't believe somebody had whistled when Richard took off his shirt! Incredibly inappropriate for such a serious play.
Speaking of which, SH, could you elucidate at all on the play's humor? It's hard to imagine given such dark subject matter that anything light could be mined from this play.
Your review and all the new details it revealed makes me ache to be able to see this play more than ever. 
(This post was edited by The Grey Elf on Aug 5 2014, 3:33pm)
|
|
|
ShireHorse
Rohan
Aug 5 2014, 4:30pm
Post #3 of 20
(238 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Glad you enjoyed my review, Grey Elf!
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
And I'll try to answer your questions.
I suppose when you think that more than 50,000 people have seen this play so far, one wolf whistle isn't bad going. There was a lot of tutting on Twitter. Although he looks very beautiful, in no way would you consider it a gratuitous moment and none of the critics have thought fit to mention his shirt-off scene - which is a contrast with the way they were a bit satirical about Hiddleston's shirt-off moment in Coriolanus.
As far as the stare is concerned, I did wonder how many others in the circle got the treatment since I sat in two different places and was stared at twice. (And, no. It was not my radiant beauty that drew his eye, LOL!) I still have a strong memory of the unblinking eye contact and then the flutter of his lids as he finally broke away and turned back to the centre of the stage. So, perhaps you're right and he does deliberately focus on one person. Perhaps that's what Farber told him to do.
And, yes, I think the text first of all encourages a little sympathy for Abigail when we learn that her parents were massacred by Indians right beside her on the pillow. But, you do also think that, as the older party, Proctor should have been more responsible and should have rebuffed her more firmly when the affair first became a possibility.
And the production shows how repressed by a paternalistic society all the women are. Abigail is a free spirit who tries to break out of the straitjacket. It takes two to tango, as well. And so it seems very unfair that Proctor should call her a whore.
It's not made clear who is responsible for the start of things. Abigail tells the girls that JP used to shake and 'sweat like a stallion' whenever she was near him and we know that Elizabeth had been ill for months and that she was a 'cold wife'. No excuse, of course, and John never excuses himself but you can't help but feel, seeing how manipulative Abigail is, that she was in there like a flash, taking advantage of the situation.
Right. The humour. I'm trying to remember what made people laugh.
The first time they only seemed to laugh at Giles Corey's remarks, a gruff old man who does have some amusing comments about his neighbours and about the situation. But, the second time, there seemed to be laughter throughout.
For instance, when Proctor is asked to recite the Ten Commandments, he can only think of nine and his wife adds rather drily, "Adultery, John."
Then during the courtroom scene, one of the judges says something like "The pure in heart need no lawyers," and the cynical London crowd had a good laugh at that.
Then during the last scene which one imagines is no laughing matter, Elizabeth tells John how Giles Corey has been pressed to death and that his last two words were, "More weight." And the two of them lean their heads together and laugh gently at the remembrance of their stubborn, brave friend. But, even before they do this, the audience laughs in appreciative admiration of Giles too.
Finally, as John and the elderly and stoical Rebecca Nurse are led out to be hanged, she stumbles and John catches her. They have both been in prison, starved and tortured, for months. But she looks up with a gentle smile and thanks him saying that she has had no breakfast today. There was a ripple of laughter here too because people understood what a brave face she was putting on things.
There were other places but these are a few that I remember.
And just to make you feel REALLY bad that you won't be seeing it, here's a beautifully written review from an on-line arts and cultural magazine, The Double Negative: "Astonishing and heart-breaking." And they thought that RA was pretty wonderful too:
http://www.thedoublenegative.co.uk/...ible-at-the-old-vic/
|
|
|
ShireHorse
Rohan
Aug 5 2014, 4:39pm
Post #4 of 20
(252 views)
Shortcut
|
It's an interview by a fan site, RACentral, who ask about The Crucible coming to New York. He says he would LOVE to bring it to New York if at all possible.
And so, Americans may yet be in with a chance!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cmya8xSBkKw
|
|
|
Kim
Valinor
Aug 5 2014, 4:48pm
Post #5 of 20
(236 views)
Shortcut
|
I'm glad to hear you had such a great experience on your second viewing and thanks again for sharing your thoughts with us. I can almost feel like I got to see it too - it just sounds so incredible.
“Will you follow me, one last time?”
|
|
|
Riven Delve
Tol Eressea
Aug 5 2014, 4:55pm
Post #6 of 20
(232 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Thanks for posting this, ShireHorse!
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I love hearing about RA, but I'm especially glad that the performance of the play gave you a fresh perspective on it and food for thought. I think great performances enhance the play rather than turning the focus on themselves! Kudos to RA and the cast.
“Tollers,” Lewis said to Tolkien, “there is too little of what we really like in stories. I am afraid we shall have to try and write some ourselves.”
|
|
|
The Grey Elf
Grey Havens
Aug 5 2014, 6:06pm
Post #7 of 20
(229 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Oh, I do hope this happens! As do many of his fans here, I suspect.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Plenty enough perhaps to make up a theater moot. 
|
|
|
Dame Ioreth
Tol Eressea
Aug 5 2014, 6:31pm
Post #8 of 20
(225 views)
Shortcut
|
|
OH! Brethil! I may get to come back!
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Please let it come here!
Time to start playing the lottery again. My DI Adventure Fund needs refueling!
Where there's life there's hope, and need of vittles.
― J.R.R. Tolkien, The Lord of the Rings
|
|
|
Kim
Valinor
Aug 5 2014, 7:39pm
Post #9 of 20
(216 views)
Shortcut
|
I'm there!
“Will you follow me, one last time?”
|
|
|
Annael
Immortal
Aug 5 2014, 7:43pm
Post #10 of 20
(224 views)
Shortcut
|
|
from your mouth to . . . TPTB's ears
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I would like to see a DVD of it.
I so hope that happens. Not likely that I'll get to London before the end of the run. The Crucible is one of my top two favorite plays (the other being Cyrano de Bergerac).
To be sane we must recognize our beliefs as fictions.
- James Hillman, Healing Fiction
* * * * * * * * * *
NARF and member of Deplorable Cultus since 1967
|
|
|
glor
Rohan
Aug 6 2014, 2:57pm
Post #11 of 20
(208 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I was about to post my review so here goes
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Performance night: 26th July 2014.
I will not repeat what others have said nor the reviewers who gave this production outstanding 5 star reviews. I will not comment on it's length either for two reasons 1) it really didn't feel 3 and half hours long and 2) this is TORn we are not people who balk at watching something that is more than two hours long be that theatre or film
This is a powerful production, one in which the entire cast are exceptional, this is important in understanding the vision and interpretation of Yael Farber, the director and why critics are saying this production has made them reappraise The Crucible.
Farber, does not fall into the trap of directing The Crucible as metaphor in which the characters simply become empty vessels spouting the message of intolerance and hysteria over logic and reason instead, she allows the actors to be, the characters to breathe and the Miller's words to be spoken for what they are, rather than what English literature academics think they should be. In doing so, she takes the audience into 17th Century Salem.
This production is quite simply beautiful in it's stark simplicity, the sets and lighting are puritanical in their minimalism, even the lavish adornments of the Old Vic are covered in dull drapes so that the audiences eyes are not distracted by finery, as doing so would be a sin, certainly in the Puritans world. As we watch the play in the round, one occasionally glimpses other audience members as if they they were part of the play, the silent accusers and villagers watching the madness unfold. I have never been to the theatre an been so transported to another time and place like this before.
Farber gives quiet, even silent witness as each act opens with a simple non-verbal piece, that sets the scene and provides a meaningful contrast to the tension and anger that permeates substantial parts of the play. There are elements of physical theatre in this production, and symbolism; the girls dance in their hysteria in the courtroom scene as if they were still dancing in the woods, the repression of the women signified by the covering of their hair, their tresses only revealed to signify their wildess or openess, the physicality of the men, almost brutish in their movements apart from the educated minister and the Judge, the ashes that fell barely noticebale at first then increased in volume as the body count grew in the final act. At this point in the production the cast had hit their rhythm, passionate but never overwrought (The Crucible is a play too easily led down the path of scene chewing, shouting, not this production), each actor reflecting of each other combined with the use of movement, there were times this production felt like a ballet, poised and graceful enchanting, yet powerful.
yes, as the Times critic said this production felt like it had been conjured rather than performed.
Some notes on the acting.
Samantha Colley as Abigail; stunning. Now, I have spent the last decade working with homeless and vulnerable teens, and I have encountered Abigails in the way Miss Colley brought this one to life, angry and damaged, and fearless, and able to understand the power that they have. This is one of the most accurate portrayals of the angry severly damaged girl I have ever seen and I sincerly hope that's from actorly research rather than experience. This made her Abigail feel real and is the Abigail Miller wrote, the one who saw her parents skulls smashed in by indians as a girl.
Anna Madeley's Elizabeth Proctor was quiet and touching rather than cold and aloof, the scene between her and RA as Poctor were moving and gentle with the palpable sense of marital affection, a woman that carried a sense of betrayal at her husbands affair/ They had some wonderful quiet personal scenes together especially, the ending when the Proctors reunite was so touching and intimitate I felt by watching I was intruding on someone elses private moment rather than watching a play, a testiment to the quality of acting on display.
RAs Proctor; my husband said after the play had finished; ' I was expecting more fire, I thought his voice was strained at one point, then I realised, it was his character's voice, not his, mind you, his character was a bit more complicated than that, it wasn't just rage'. Farber's production in allowing the characters to just be, has allowed for a more complicated Proctor than the rage against the machine he is often played as. This Proctor is complicated, prideful, earthy, brutish, yet tender, a man who you feel as the play moves across it's narrative becomes increasingly burdened by the consequences of his actions, who understands his part as the catalyst for this madness and the cost of his prideful silence on his affair, something that becomes fully realised in the famous 'give me my name' speech.
There is a theme in this production of silence, by drawing those unspoken scenes at the beginning of the acts farber is not just creating atmosphere, she is gently pointing to the other theme of the play, one which Miller has written into the script yet has been overlooked: Silence and why people are silent against the irrational, the hysteria, against injustice. The silence of Proctor who dares not admit to his affair because of pride, his loss of name(reputation) for commiting such a sin and more importantly the loss of his wife's reputation. Mary, whose fear of Abigail and almost everything means she stays silent on the truth until it is too late. Elizabeth Proctor who cannot lie, nor can she tell the truth, so she stays silent on the affair before Danforth, out of love for her husband and his reputation (Elizabeth is the embodiment of not telling lies doesn't always mean they speak the truth). Hale whose belief in the rational will out , yet stays silent on the matter, only to realise too late what his silence has done. Danforth whose fear of being wrong and all that means, the blood on his hands, the loss of his soul and the betrayal of the law which he holds dear, keeps his silence and silences the statements of others. I could go on, but silence, is littered all over Miller's script, even those falsely accussed who remain silent by refusing to lie and save themselves from the noose, and Giles Corey silent in his torture save for 'more weight'.
This works because every actor in this production plays a believable character by deconstructing the metaphorical discourses that surround Miller's work she has allowed the actors to become their characters, and therefore the audience to understand something else, why these things happen, why we stay silent and the truth is veiled by the unspoken.
When the final act was over being in the stalls, I had to walk across the stage to exit the theatre, as I did so I could see the ashes strewn across the floor and I walked upon those 'bodies' as the actors had done, and I like many others in the audience walked them out on the soles of our shoes, across the carpets and into the foyer a silent reminder of the deaths caused when people fail to speak the truth.
When I was trying to get a cab back to the station I notice a youngish couple coming out from the play both looking stunned by the production, I wanted to go over to the man in the couple and speak the truth but I couldn't, I just tittered at his Batman T-Shirt and thought, Batman would have been a waste(for RA)...rather than saying it out loud at the poor bloke who was probably crying at the idea of Ben Affleck in a cape..,
|
|
|
glor
Rohan
Aug 6 2014, 3:18pm
Post #12 of 20
(204 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Nice article with a funny quote from twitter
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
http://www.nybooks.com/...s-west-end-crucible/
Another critic, Nick Clark of The Independent, tweeted with greater self-awareness:
Richard Armitage was excellent as John Proctor. I imagine, like me, the other males in the audience suddenly felt very Beta.
|
|
|
ShireHorse
Rohan
Aug 6 2014, 3:52pm
Post #13 of 20
(192 views)
Shortcut
|
|
That was a really wonderful review, glor!
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
You have perfectly voiced some of the thoughts lingering in the back of my mind.
"All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent." (Burke) Yes, of course! This is what the play is saying. And by the time they say something, it is too late.
And when I saw it 5 weeks ago, the ashes reminded me of the death camps and the silent multitudes who stood by and said nothing; but last week I thought of Gaza and the British prime minister's silent stance on the issue.
Loads of tweeters speak about it being a 'relevant' play and it says so much about so many issues and seems to mean different things to different people. Therein lies its greatness. And Farber's production has finally opened people's eyes to just how great it is.
|
|
|
glor
Rohan
Aug 6 2014, 4:34pm
Post #14 of 20
(194 views)
Shortcut
|
This production of The Crucible has garnered 9, yes NINE, 5 star reviews from the British press, that is something that only happens once every 5 to 10 years in serious dramatic theatre! As well as exceptional praise from the New York Times and The Wall Street Journal, the NYT also did a short editorial piece on how a South African Director and a Bunch of British thespians had finally produced a version of The Crucible, 'the great American play', that did it justice, high praise indeed.
The last production to grace the London stage, Jerusalem that garnered this much praise I was also fortunate to witness. Jerusalem. was wonderful, profound and enchanting in equal measure but it was more of a one-hander supported by an ensemble, that gave Mark Rylance in a role that had been written for him, an opportunity to display his talent, as one of the greatest if not THE greatest stage actor working today in a tour de force of a performance. A performance that has been acknowledged as one of the greatest on the London stage since Olivier's Hamlet.
The Crucible is traditionally performed as a one hander plus ensemble, this production isn't and it doing so it requires a more refined and deeper performance of John Proctor, without losing any of Proctor's power, without emasculating the character in the final act. I know that several reviews commented on RAs ability to be frail and strong, to show weakness without diminishing his power and adding that he is one fo the few actors who can do that.
I kept thinking about the powerful, give me my name speech, the mixture of fraility, pride, guilt at knowing your actions had sent your friends and loved one to their deaths, yet still pleading with dignity fto be left with one's reputation and when denied it, still able to convey the nobility of not taking your friends with you, of not having your name pinned upon the chapel door, both as an act of pride and sacrifice, forgiveness and redemption. Dignity, Nobility, guilt, loss, redemption upon facing death all in that short speech and thinking for days afterwards dismayed that I would not here it's like again.
Then it occured to me, and sent a massive chill down my spine, I will in a Movie theatre and I only have to wait until December, If Thorin's final words to Bilbo are conveyed with that power and depth as I saw on the Old Vic stage, I stand by an assertion I have made before, Fantasy could get it's first acting Oscar this coming February.
|
|
|
glor
Rohan
Aug 6 2014, 4:42pm
Post #15 of 20
(184 views)
Shortcut
|
. Although he looks very beautiful, in no way would you consider it a gratuitous moment and none of the critics have thought fit to mention his shirt-off scene
It was in the context of one of the silent openers to an act, the initial scene at the Proctors house. The removal of the shirt and the bathing/washing off of the dirt felt symbolic, a sign of domesticity, the way we feel comfortable at home away from the shackles of social expectations, it also felt like a washing away of sin, of the affair that had been revealed to the audience moments before.
|
|
|
ShireHorse
Rohan
Aug 6 2014, 4:50pm
Post #16 of 20
(190 views)
Shortcut
|
appeared in answer to the 3 star review given to The Crucible by Quentin Letts of The Daily Mail (when every other newspaper gave it 5 stars). It really put its finger both on the misogyny of the article and questions why the dumpy, middle aged journalist might be feeling a little sore with RA. I had already noticed the lovely quip from the Independent chap.
RA has fought hard to escape from his 'Incredible Hunk' image remarked upon by Mr Letts and I am pleased to say that not one other critic referred to this but treated him, at last, like a serious actor.
The sister paper, The Sunday Mail, backtracked with a flattering 5 star review by another critic. But, yet another DM writer closed ranks with QL and has just posted a load of Into the Storm premiere photos, referring to RA as 'beefcake' and being misogynistic once more by saying that Sarah Wayne Callies 'looked good for her age'. (37) I refuse to put up a link because they get their hits by being obnoxious.
|
|
|
glor
Rohan
Aug 6 2014, 5:07pm
Post #17 of 20
(185 views)
Shortcut
|
he's not a journalist or reviewer but a provactive(insert word here that is unsuitable for a community such as TORn) obsessed by his own publicity. (this isn't RA sour grapes but an opinion I and many others have of him including half of Fleet Street).
The thing is Letts has commented on the Crucible in other writings implying that it's the best play in London, wonderful etc, so he's a hypocrit.
For those TOrnites not from this side of the pond: the Daily Mail boasts it is Britains widest read paper, I don't know about read, but it has the highest circulation because it gives millions of copies away free, including free ones in grocery home deliveries from Britains biggest supermarket. It is quite frankly regarded as a bit of joke here, like Fox News, we think it's ridiculous but it does represent a sector of society and the way some people think.
I think that's what Letts was doing in his Crucible review pandering to it's paying readers: this is too highbrow, you will miss your train back to the suburbs, go see and Andrew Lloyd Webber musical it's more your thing, RA may be good looking but if your out for light visual treat in London don't see the Crucible it's serious theatre
It's not like any serious London production would put a Letts review in it's publicity anyway, it doesn't carry that weight, unless it's Cats (oh the irony)
|
|
|
Kim
Valinor
Aug 6 2014, 5:51pm
Post #18 of 20
(195 views)
Shortcut
|
Your posts were really interesting, informative reads, and again like ShireHorse's review, you made me feel like I was there too.
Totally agree with you about what we may see this December between Thorin and Bilbo - I think that will be one of the most powerful movie moments ever due to the skill of both actors, and I really do hope we'll see them both nominated for these performances. I do think RA's performance has been undervalued, and it's a shame the majority of Americans won't get to experience his powerful performance in the Crucible.
“Will you follow me, one last time?”
|
|
|
Theodora
The Shire
Aug 19 2014, 8:35pm
Post #19 of 20
(141 views)
Shortcut
|
I'm going to see The Crucible on Saturday September 6 and am very much looking forward to that. Especially after reading all the 5 star reviews.
A lot of reviews mentioned the effects of the role on RA’s voice. Hopefully the voice hasn’t suffered too much after almost 3 months of intense use, but I’m not too sure about that.
I enjoyed the reviews Shirehorse and Glor wrote, I’ll post mine as soon as I’m back from London.
|
|
|
ShireHorse
Rohan
Aug 19 2014, 10:48pm
Post #20 of 20
(139 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I'm sure you'll love it, Theodora!
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I thought that going twice was enough to satisfy me but I wish I were going with you!
Don't worry about his voice: when the critics saw the play, the combined opinion of the fans (including me who saw it at about the same time) is that he had a cold. No-one is concerned about it anymore. It cracks and breaks in the final scene but that's just emotional acting.
He might get another cold again, I suppose - I've lost count of the number of tweets from people who say they are ill with bad throats but have still managed nobly to get to the play and cough all over the actors! But, with any luck, he will manage to complete the production without being ill. (I believe that Martin Freeman had to take a couple of days off the other day. People were disappointed, of course, but said that his understudy was brilliant. Sorry, but nothing but RA would satisfy me, LOL!)
|
|
|
|
|
