A Trip to the Theatre
- Thread starter Slash
- Start date
Seeing Waiting for Godot tomorrow night hopefully. I'm intrigued as I don't know much about it. I hope I get time to see Enron at some point too.
I also found out that Bromley is getting Spamalot for a week in June, so getting tickets. Jodie Prenger (star of Oliver!) is in it too as the lady of the lake, it's going to be awesome.
I also found out that Bromley is getting Spamalot for a week in June, so getting tickets. Jodie Prenger (star of Oliver!) is in it too as the lady of the lake, it's going to be awesome.
LiveForTheLaunch
CF Legend
Never watched Chicago on Broadway or anything, but I saw the movie and can hardly even remember what it was about, so it can't be that memorable. I remember someone dies, that's about it.
Now that I can drive over in the states I expect I'll be going to see more shows, but I just really wanna see Wicked, as much as I disliked the book, but the soundtrack is amazing and if the story was condensed a bit, as I'm sure it is in the musical, it would be incredible.
Dave
CF Legend
When Sweeney Todd comes to the West End is better stick to the original plot and how its meant to be. Not the cut down version Burton did. The stage show ties up the story so nicely, it also has a great little plot with Anthony and Johanna which is missed in the show, also more of Todd's wife.
Uncle Arly
Strata Poster
Me & Lewis are going to see it at the Mayflower in Southampton.
I was persuaded to go with my A level music class to see Thriller: Live yesterday at the Lyric Theatre. I wasn't sure what to expect, but I actually had a very enjoyable night out.
I'll start off by saying that I'm not rating this like a normal show, because it isn't. It's very clearly a Michael Jackson tribute concert, just that it's a permanent-ish one.
It was a shame that I saw it with a very new cast. My music teacher has seen it six times, and said it was one of the worst. The dancers were out of time with each other at points, and though it wasn't bad enough to matter in most shows, it did for this one, knowing that MJ prided himself on the perfectly executed routines. The singing was good, but the leading lady was flat when she tried to sing and dance at the same time.
Although my favourite music (Jackson 5 stuff) was in the first act, I enjoyed the second half more, as it was more of a spectacle. It also didn't have any silly audience participation, unlike the first.
However, on a positive note, the band were epic. The guitar solos were fantastic, won't give any more away about that.
I feel like this review was more critical than I had wanted, because I actually had a great time, much better than anticipated, although how much this had to do with half my class being drunk before we reached London, I'm not sure.
A solid, if not spectacular 6/10
I'll start off by saying that I'm not rating this like a normal show, because it isn't. It's very clearly a Michael Jackson tribute concert, just that it's a permanent-ish one.
It was a shame that I saw it with a very new cast. My music teacher has seen it six times, and said it was one of the worst. The dancers were out of time with each other at points, and though it wasn't bad enough to matter in most shows, it did for this one, knowing that MJ prided himself on the perfectly executed routines. The singing was good, but the leading lady was flat when she tried to sing and dance at the same time.
Although my favourite music (Jackson 5 stuff) was in the first act, I enjoyed the second half more, as it was more of a spectacle. It also didn't have any silly audience participation, unlike the first.
However, on a positive note, the band were epic. The guitar solos were fantastic, won't give any more away about that.
I feel like this review was more critical than I had wanted, because I actually had a great time, much better than anticipated, although how much this had to do with half my class being drunk before we reached London, I'm not sure.
A solid, if not spectacular 6/10
Thought I'd bring up this topic, since earlier today I went to a performance in Wimbledon of the touring SPAMALOT.
It was a matinee performance, and having arrived at the theatre very early, we found out that the role of King Arthur would not be played by Marcus Brigstock at this particular performance. We felt a little disappointed, but we took our seats in the auditorium and waited. A word of advice if you plan on seeing this show, do not arrive too early. We had to sit for 30 mins listening to music that at the start was entertaining but after a while got on my nerves.
The touring version is changed a fair amount, especially in act two. The lyrics to "you wont succeed on broadway" are completely different and many other lines are changed. When I first heard how different it was I didn't think I would like it, but actually, having seen it in the West End as well, I found that the change of lyrics made it much more entertaining the second time around. The show had also been made a lot more topical, with refernces to very recent news events. I decided eventually that the changes were fo the best.
The individual performances. The cover for Brigstock, Graham MacDuff, was fantastic. His portrayal of Arthur was amazing, and very funny. The man filling MacDuff's place as Lancelot, Kit Orton, was also superb, absolutely perfect for the part.
The Lady of the Lake was bing played by Jodie Prenger, of Nancy fame. I enjoyed her in the first act, in which she sings more operatic songs, but felt that her voice could not cope with the Diva style of the second act.
Todd Carty, (you know, the one who can't ice skate) was playing Patsy, and I was pleasantly surprised. I don't think the role showed his acting ability to the fullest, but he did not murder the songs which was what worried me initially. he coped very well.
The production was... well... interesting. The cast was minimal, and sections of the script were cut from the full version, but this is to be expected form a touring production.
Would I recomend it? I went with friends which made it more fun, but many of us had seen it on the West End, and came out feeling not disappointed, but not overwhelmed by it. Anyone who had not seen it before however absolutely loved it. These are the people who I would suggest go and see it.
There were good and bad, but the fact that the show itself is hilarious has to boost it up to an 8/10
It was a matinee performance, and having arrived at the theatre very early, we found out that the role of King Arthur would not be played by Marcus Brigstock at this particular performance. We felt a little disappointed, but we took our seats in the auditorium and waited. A word of advice if you plan on seeing this show, do not arrive too early. We had to sit for 30 mins listening to music that at the start was entertaining but after a while got on my nerves.
The touring version is changed a fair amount, especially in act two. The lyrics to "you wont succeed on broadway" are completely different and many other lines are changed. When I first heard how different it was I didn't think I would like it, but actually, having seen it in the West End as well, I found that the change of lyrics made it much more entertaining the second time around. The show had also been made a lot more topical, with refernces to very recent news events. I decided eventually that the changes were fo the best.
The individual performances. The cover for Brigstock, Graham MacDuff, was fantastic. His portrayal of Arthur was amazing, and very funny. The man filling MacDuff's place as Lancelot, Kit Orton, was also superb, absolutely perfect for the part.
The Lady of the Lake was bing played by Jodie Prenger, of Nancy fame. I enjoyed her in the first act, in which she sings more operatic songs, but felt that her voice could not cope with the Diva style of the second act.
Todd Carty, (you know, the one who can't ice skate) was playing Patsy, and I was pleasantly surprised. I don't think the role showed his acting ability to the fullest, but he did not murder the songs which was what worried me initially. he coped very well.
The production was... well... interesting. The cast was minimal, and sections of the script were cut from the full version, but this is to be expected form a touring production.
Would I recomend it? I went with friends which made it more fun, but many of us had seen it on the West End, and came out feeling not disappointed, but not overwhelmed by it. Anyone who had not seen it before however absolutely loved it. These are the people who I would suggest go and see it.
There were good and bad, but the fact that the show itself is hilarious has to boost it up to an 8/10
OK, so I'm the only one who seems to post reviews in this topic, but this will not stop me from writing my review of Earthquakes in London.
I went to the Cottesloe (one of the theatres at the National Theatre) earlier today for a matinee performance of this new play by Mike Bartlett. It's directed by Rupert Goold, who for those of you who don't know is the director to have for your play at the moment.
The play follows three sisters... and that's about as much of the plot as I can explain here. You need to see it to really get much further than that.
The first thing to note about the play is that it is performed in a very interesting space. There are stages at both ends of the room, and an S shaped walkway through the centre of the room. Audience members are either seated at the sides, next to the walkway on swivelling bar stools or, as I was, standing in the gaps around the walkway. I feel that this was the best place to be to really enjoy the play, but at over 3 hours long, you need to be willing to end up with quite painful legs.
It is funny, moving and interesting. I couldn't say it fits into any particular genre because of the abstract techniques that Goold uses. I also found myself trying to work out where I recognised the actors from. It has Van Gogh from Doctor Who, as well as the scientist who created the Daleks in the war. All the performances given were superb.
My only criticism of the play would be the ending. It didn't really tie up the play. I don't believe that every play should have to have a message, but I would have liked for at least a conclusion to have been drawn. It was as if the creators of the play couldn't decide which bit to focus on, the environmental aspects, the family aspects, the religious aspects.
Despite this, I found it to be an incredibly interesting play, and definitely worth going to see. I would suggest not seeing it as a family thing though, as it contains swearing, nudity, smoking, drinking, drug use, death, and just about any other things you can think of.
I enjoyed my day out, but wasn't enthused by it, so a good 7/10
I went to the Cottesloe (one of the theatres at the National Theatre) earlier today for a matinee performance of this new play by Mike Bartlett. It's directed by Rupert Goold, who for those of you who don't know is the director to have for your play at the moment.
The play follows three sisters... and that's about as much of the plot as I can explain here. You need to see it to really get much further than that.
The first thing to note about the play is that it is performed in a very interesting space. There are stages at both ends of the room, and an S shaped walkway through the centre of the room. Audience members are either seated at the sides, next to the walkway on swivelling bar stools or, as I was, standing in the gaps around the walkway. I feel that this was the best place to be to really enjoy the play, but at over 3 hours long, you need to be willing to end up with quite painful legs.
It is funny, moving and interesting. I couldn't say it fits into any particular genre because of the abstract techniques that Goold uses. I also found myself trying to work out where I recognised the actors from. It has Van Gogh from Doctor Who, as well as the scientist who created the Daleks in the war. All the performances given were superb.
My only criticism of the play would be the ending. It didn't really tie up the play. I don't believe that every play should have to have a message, but I would have liked for at least a conclusion to have been drawn. It was as if the creators of the play couldn't decide which bit to focus on, the environmental aspects, the family aspects, the religious aspects.
Despite this, I found it to be an incredibly interesting play, and definitely worth going to see. I would suggest not seeing it as a family thing though, as it contains swearing, nudity, smoking, drinking, drug use, death, and just about any other things you can think of.
I enjoyed my day out, but wasn't enthused by it, so a good 7/10
Quadruple post. Just a short one this time. National theatre again, this time the Olivier theatre, for Danton's Death
Basically it's about the French revolution. It's an incredibly shortened version being presented at the National, but even then it seemed to go on and on with the endless metaphors and monologues about the revolution.
Despite this, I had a very enjoyable evening. The acting was very good and the play was funny at times. A great script, especially when it was written by someone in their late teens. It was also very well staged, but this is almost a given in the Olivier, it's such a superb space.
The technical side was let down by some incredibly dodgy and shaky follow spotting. This was a shame when the lighting and sound was so well thought out. One bloke in the audience left his phone on which also ruined it for a few minutes.
I thought it was interesting, but if pure entertainment is what you want, I wouldn't advise it (apart from the very end, don't want to spoil it). If you are slightly snobby about drama like me though, it's a great play.
A rather pretentious 7/10.
A
Basically it's about the French revolution. It's an incredibly shortened version being presented at the National, but even then it seemed to go on and on with the endless metaphors and monologues about the revolution.
Despite this, I had a very enjoyable evening. The acting was very good and the play was funny at times. A great script, especially when it was written by someone in their late teens. It was also very well staged, but this is almost a given in the Olivier, it's such a superb space.
The technical side was let down by some incredibly dodgy and shaky follow spotting. This was a shame when the lighting and sound was so well thought out. One bloke in the audience left his phone on which also ruined it for a few minutes.
I thought it was interesting, but if pure entertainment is what you want, I wouldn't advise it (apart from the very end, don't want to spoil it). If you are slightly snobby about drama like me though, it's a great play.
A rather pretentious 7/10.
A
Uncle Arly
Strata Poster
Went to the Nottingham Playhouse tonight to see Hofesh Schechter's dance company perform 'Political Mother'.
Stunning. Mind blowing. Epic. Powerful. Moving.
It's one of the best dance pieces I've seen to date. The score was rock and scremo influenced, but the meaning behind he piece was politics and folkdance, so it was an odd mix, but worked beautifully.
If you're into dance, you MUST see this. Or ANY of Hofesh Schechter's work, it's just incredibly beautiful.
10/10.
Short clip below:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kjSf8d3Br5I[/youtube]
Stunning. Mind blowing. Epic. Powerful. Moving.
It's one of the best dance pieces I've seen to date. The score was rock and scremo influenced, but the meaning behind he piece was politics and folkdance, so it was an odd mix, but worked beautifully.
If you're into dance, you MUST see this. Or ANY of Hofesh Schechter's work, it's just incredibly beautiful.
10/10.
Short clip below:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kjSf8d3Br5I[/youtube]
Uncle Arly
Strata Poster
jokerman said:
It is pretty amazing! This show was 75 mins long, but because the band was live and on stage too, some reviews called it 'part contemporary dance piece, half rock concert', and it really was.
I went to see Philip Glass's opera, In the Penal Colony last night. It's doing a short UK tour at the moment and it's the first time it's ever been performed in this country.
I loved it. It's one of my favourite Kafka stories and it stuck very, very closely to the original. Our seats were on the stage, really close to the action, making it extra intense to the point of being quite uncomfortable at times, especially when you've got the performers singing/shouting in your face and staring you right in the eyes just a few inches away.
The music was phenomenal, all played live on stage by a 5-piece string ensemble. Since it's one of Glass's minor operas, it hasn't ever been recorded, so I'd never heard it before either.
Anyway, top stuff!
I loved it. It's one of my favourite Kafka stories and it stuck very, very closely to the original. Our seats were on the stage, really close to the action, making it extra intense to the point of being quite uncomfortable at times, especially when you've got the performers singing/shouting in your face and staring you right in the eyes just a few inches away.
The music was phenomenal, all played live on stage by a 5-piece string ensemble. Since it's one of Glass's minor operas, it hasn't ever been recorded, so I'd never heard it before either.
Anyway, top stuff!
Uncle Arly
Strata Poster
I saw Matilda - A Musical at the RSC last week; first public performance.
It was incredible! I've been looking forward to it for ages, as I love Tim Minchin, and he did the score and lyrics.
The kids were so talented, and the whole production was just brilliant. Really funny, and had moments where it made me well up.
As it was in previews, there were definitely a few things that needed changing/improving, but if it doesn't get a west end transfer after it's run at the RSC, it'll be a shame.
It was incredible! I've been looking forward to it for ages, as I love Tim Minchin, and he did the score and lyrics.
The kids were so talented, and the whole production was just brilliant. Really funny, and had moments where it made me well up.
As it was in previews, there were definitely a few things that needed changing/improving, but if it doesn't get a west end transfer after it's run at the RSC, it'll be a shame.
^Kids singing makes me cringe; I hate the precocious little bastards. I would hate that show.
In fairness, Philip Glass's operas are not much like traditional opera at all. This production only had two singing characters (sung in English so pretty starightforward to follow) and one who didn't speak at all. The music from the string players was really impressive.
Oh, and Steven Berkoff can **** right off...
jokerman said:
In fairness, Philip Glass's operas are not much like traditional opera at all. This production only had two singing characters (sung in English so pretty starightforward to follow) and one who didn't speak at all. The music from the string players was really impressive.
Oh, and Steven Berkoff can **** right off...