You know that, when I attend these "N.T. Live" things, I tend to write about them afterwards, even though the world really isn't interested in what I "reckon…"
Well, I know someone who's off to see the thing "in the flesh" as it were next week, so I wouldn't want to spoil it for them - not that they're likely to be reading this kind of rubbish anyway - but - just in case they do - let's just say that I rather liked it and leave it at that...
It is, however, a damned impressive production, especially given the limitations of the venue. The Donmar Warehouse looks tiny and, certainly for the first few minutes, the show felt to this observer like one of those Fringe productions which I saw in Edinburgh in the days when I used to go along.
This is, of course, not a bad thing, because it focusses the production upon Shakespeare's rather excellent, if lesser-known, words and, by the end of the evening, it was riding far higher in my own list of personal Shakespeare favourites, if only you got to see the "proles" get their comeuppance... Grrr!!!
Still, I don't think that I'd "like" the Donmar all that much, not least because it looks as if it lurks in a "scary" part of town. Also, I like to be able to get "lost" inside an audience, whereas this venue looks like I'd be left feeling far too uncomfortably exposed for my own liking although, given that tickets sold out in moments way back when, that was never likely to be an issue.
"Corialanus" remains the great "political" play and toys with the power and ignorance of the masses and the misfortunes of hubris and still feels fresh and relevant today. In fact, you might even go as far as to say that it seems nore relevant now than it has done in a long time, depending upon your own particular political stance or point of view.
The performances were, of course, excellent, with the leads all being played with great skill, depth and range, which might surprise anyone who had only seen them in films, although, for me, it was Mark Gatiss who stood out simply because I'd never seen him being so bloody good in anything else before. Don't get me wrong, I know that he's a fine actor, it's just that I had him mentally pigeonholed in light comedy, but his slow decay into befuddlement and disappointment was astonishing to behold.
Of the women, playing parts that are seldom especially meaty enough in a lot of Shakespeare to feel worthy enough for the great actresses to turn up for, especially in such a "blokey" play, Deborah Findlay was another familiar face and her performance during her final scenes was astonishing, and Birgitte Hjort Sorenson seemed to have been flown in from Denmark to look miserable in that manner so well practiced in her "Nordic Drama" performances.
It was all rather interestingly staged, too, especially given the limitations of the space, with members of the cast sitting and waiting at the back of the stage to do their part in full view of the audience from time-to-time, and the near three hours fairly rattled along. Much of the set design involved fluids and graffiti, which was very bold and refeshing.
The "N.T. Live" experience remains a rather lovely way for wider audiences to sort-of experience the best of London Theatre without having to actually go to the wretched place. There are, of course, downsides to this. You're not "in the room" and "breathing the same air" as the actors, but then you do get to see more details of the show more intimately. Sadly, you do also get the stomach-churning anxiety caused by the occasional cutouts of the satellite uplink, the irritation of late arrivals (personally, I just wouldn't let them in…), the anxiety of getting a parking space early enough, the horrors of trying to leave the same car park later (thankfully less problematical this time), and the gushing and fawning of Emma Freud, sometimes giving the impression that she was having endless hot flushes over the star of the show, but, on the whole, I think that I'd still recommend N.T. Live to anyone who enjoys great theatre.
It is, however, a damned impressive production, especially given the limitations of the venue. The Donmar Warehouse looks tiny and, certainly for the first few minutes, the show felt to this observer like one of those Fringe productions which I saw in Edinburgh in the days when I used to go along.
This is, of course, not a bad thing, because it focusses the production upon Shakespeare's rather excellent, if lesser-known, words and, by the end of the evening, it was riding far higher in my own list of personal Shakespeare favourites, if only you got to see the "proles" get their comeuppance... Grrr!!!
Still, I don't think that I'd "like" the Donmar all that much, not least because it looks as if it lurks in a "scary" part of town. Also, I like to be able to get "lost" inside an audience, whereas this venue looks like I'd be left feeling far too uncomfortably exposed for my own liking although, given that tickets sold out in moments way back when, that was never likely to be an issue.
"Corialanus" remains the great "political" play and toys with the power and ignorance of the masses and the misfortunes of hubris and still feels fresh and relevant today. In fact, you might even go as far as to say that it seems nore relevant now than it has done in a long time, depending upon your own particular political stance or point of view.
The performances were, of course, excellent, with the leads all being played with great skill, depth and range, which might surprise anyone who had only seen them in films, although, for me, it was Mark Gatiss who stood out simply because I'd never seen him being so bloody good in anything else before. Don't get me wrong, I know that he's a fine actor, it's just that I had him mentally pigeonholed in light comedy, but his slow decay into befuddlement and disappointment was astonishing to behold.
Of the women, playing parts that are seldom especially meaty enough in a lot of Shakespeare to feel worthy enough for the great actresses to turn up for, especially in such a "blokey" play, Deborah Findlay was another familiar face and her performance during her final scenes was astonishing, and Birgitte Hjort Sorenson seemed to have been flown in from Denmark to look miserable in that manner so well practiced in her "Nordic Drama" performances.
It was all rather interestingly staged, too, especially given the limitations of the space, with members of the cast sitting and waiting at the back of the stage to do their part in full view of the audience from time-to-time, and the near three hours fairly rattled along. Much of the set design involved fluids and graffiti, which was very bold and refeshing.
The "N.T. Live" experience remains a rather lovely way for wider audiences to sort-of experience the best of London Theatre without having to actually go to the wretched place. There are, of course, downsides to this. You're not "in the room" and "breathing the same air" as the actors, but then you do get to see more details of the show more intimately. Sadly, you do also get the stomach-churning anxiety caused by the occasional cutouts of the satellite uplink, the irritation of late arrivals (personally, I just wouldn't let them in…), the anxiety of getting a parking space early enough, the horrors of trying to leave the same car park later (thankfully less problematical this time), and the gushing and fawning of Emma Freud, sometimes giving the impression that she was having endless hot flushes over the star of the show, but, on the whole, I think that I'd still recommend N.T. Live to anyone who enjoys great theatre.
I saw the word Coriolanus and my heart sank. We 'did' it at school and maybe it was because of this that I regard it with dread. I'm afraid I'm ore of a Twelfth Night man.
ReplyDeleteI admit that coming to it "fresh" helps… but then, to my shame, I've been coming to a lot of Shakespeare "fresh" in recent years.
DeleteMy school "pair" were Macbeth" and "Henry V" and until quite recently they were the only ones I knew "properly" apart from the odd film adaptation.
With "Coriolanus" I'd only previously seen the Ralph Fiennes version a couple of years ago which is rather brilliant but felt very different to this.
It is, of course, both staggering and heartbreaking (to a failed playwright at any rate) that Shakespeare basically covered just about every aspect of the human condition in his dramas four hundred and more years ago.