Name: The Rivals (Sheridan)
Date: 23rd November 2010. Press Night.
Venue: Haymarket, Theatre Royal
Length of performance: Just over an hour. For us.
Allow us to elaborate. Theatre is what we live and breathe and there has not been a single performance that we haven't got something tangible out of. That's the amazing thing about theatre; the ability to stir emotions, create images and give us 'new ways to dream' (to borrow the words of the unforgettable Norma Desmond in Sunset Boulevard...revival long overdue. ALW, are you reading????). And this is the mindset in which we set out to enjoy the latest revival of this restoration comedy.
On a cold, damp evening the Theatre Royal looked particularly beautiful and inviting. Though we were seated in the upper dress circle, visibility was good and there was an air of expectancy...but where was the audience? From where we were seated, the Gallery above us was virtually empty, the upper dress circle had noticable gaps in rows and entire rows without audience members.We like to think it was the weather keeping people at bay, as the cast advertised appeared to be strong and this was a play that had obviously endured the test of time. Whats not to love about a bit of Sheridan? Quite a bit, actually. Tamsin had never been overly enamoured since studying Sheridan at University and Karina had an aversion to that 'Mozartian' frilliness that often accompanied the era...but in for a penny, in for a pound. And it was press night! Whats not to enjoy?
Although we arrived in good time and hung around awaiting the arrival of the good and the great of the thespian community, we didn't see anyone we recognised. Compared to the press night of 'Flashdance' which had D-listers and celebrity wannabe's oozing out of the woodwork, serious theatre obviously has a much more low-key element to these first night proceedings. Or were we standing at the wrong door and they were all sneaked in behind us? Or are we, maybe, uneducated heathens who don't recognise the movers and shakers of the theatre world? If that's the case, then neither do the photographers. Of which there were none in sight last night. Anyway. Moving on.
In homage to Penelope Keith, Karina was planning on wearing a Margot Leadbetter-esque Kaftan, but the weather put a stop to that. Having never seen her on stage and only in sitcom's we were not sure what to expect. However, astonishingly, Penelope Keith, even after 30 odd years, still looks and sounds the same as she did on TV all those years ago. She was endearing in her part as Mrs Malaprop and was the one who managed to get a few chuckles and the odd guffaw out of the audience. Peter Bowles was quite lovely in his part as well. It was all very cheery and sprightly and that was to be expected. Speaking to the audience as a method of keeping the story moving, again, appropriate for the plays of that era, but nontheless rather annoying. Walking through one door and exiting through another whilst generally attempting to cause as much confusion and merriment as possible...all very smart and twee. But there was something missing.
The laughs. It wasn't funny. Some would argue that it would have to be the direction rather than the play, as the play is still going strong after a century or two and it is a 'comedy'. But we struggled to find a single element in the first half which would have captured our interest, despite the lush costumes. The story was a bit tedious! However, there were little moments of genius in the direction, which we liked and which made us smirk. The play itself is more of an acquired taste and maybe we just weren't refined enough to appreciate it. Who knows. The supporting characters/cast were...predictable. And we use the following word cautiously here in fear of being lynched...amateurish. Were it not for the beautiful surroundings of the Theatre Royal and the clever staging, the acting of the supporting cast wouldn't have been out of place in an amdram production. In Bognor. Which may sound a bit unfair to the cast (and to Bognor), as they are obviously a talented bunch, so it was probably the style of the play that prompted such performances, or the Director's (Peter Hall) vision of how these parts were to be delivered. Certainly a curious blend of acting styles which didn't necessarily compliment eachother comfortably on stage.
The interval was interesting. The curtain went down, there was a round of applause - and people exited the theatre. We made our way downstairs...and outside..and never went back in again, alongside ALOT of fellow theatre goers. We noticed a palpable indifference to the performance, which was really quite sad. Out of all possible emotions, surely indifference is the worst? However, for us as well, the interval couldn't have come soon enough, and obviously the same applied to our fellow absconders. On all the faces of the audience members leaving, as far as we could tell, was an expression that can only be described as...scary (see illustration). We recognised it on our own faces as well. "This is a comedy, we are polite, therefore we will smile in a jolly-hockey-sticks-tally-ho kind of way even if we don't like it...". Lordy. How british can you get.
To be honest, the play was boring. A Tuesday evening spent listening to something so - boring- was just plain - boring. Especially as the Fairies had some catching up to do. Maybe a play of this nature has just seen better days? Maybe it is a reminder of a bygone era and should stay in the past? But on that note, what about Shakespeare? Still relevant and gripping (depending on the production, naturally) and most definitely old. We even toyed with the idea of, maybe, being so shallow as to only loving musicals and hence not tolerating anything else, but realised that was also nonsense because we have seen plenty of plays with not an ounce of a musical interlude and loved them. Therefore it HAD to be the play. Or the production. Or the execution of the play in general. Apparently it's on for a limited run only, until February 2011, which might not be a bad thing, as we struggle to see how seats are going to be filled night after night. But it wasn't bad. Just the opposite of riveting. And falsely jolly, supposedly funny ha-ha when it came across as quite mawkish in a way. Then that is Sheridan and the era all over. Saying that, the reviews coming in seem to be speaking highly of the entire production. Maybe those reviews are written by people more educated in the world of theatre than us. Or could it be that something old and quintessentially british must not be criticised...? We were looking longingly over the road from the Theatre Royal to where Phantom is in residence, wishing we were somehow there again. Bet THEY were having a splendid time watching chandeliers fall...
...And a splendid time was had by us too! The evening ended on a high note; a Maccy D and double vodka later we were happy bunnies. And therefore this review will have a positive ending; this show has Penelope Keith and pretty costumes and we got an hours worth of proper adult culture before having a good chinwag. Excellent!
Did we miss something...?
No comments:
Post a Comment