The Beast's Pen

The last time I saw Daniel Kitson, he sat down for over 90 minutes and talked constantly. On this occasion, he walks around for the same amount of time and speaks not a word.  The starting premise is a garage filled with old junk, including countless tape recorders of all shapes and sizes which are piled up on a table at the very back of the stage. The table is in bright light throughout, but the rest of the stage is barely lit at all. Kitson then proceeds to remove the recorders one by one, match them with their accessories, carry them downstage, connect them to power and amplifiers and play the tapes on each. The recordings are of Kitson’s voice telling the stories of Thomas and Trudie, separated in time by 36 years. The characters live dull, uninteresting lives, but Kitson’s objective is to make the mundane seem significant, using richly descriptive prose and astute observations of the minutiae of everyday living. Embracing themes on the nature of memories and memorabilia, the show is often funny, but more often poignant. Kitson’s strenuous labours, working as a kind of stage technician, themselves give importance to the insignificant and this show’s unusual format, which distances the audience from the characters, produces the very weird effect of bringing us closer to them. As with other Kitson shows, it seems a little too long, but it builds to achieve an emotional power that was unexpected, so much so that I found myself crying for much of the last 20 minutes. An entertainment that is completely unique.

Starting in Nottingham, Headlong’s adaptation of George Orwell’s classic novel has been going the rounds for several months now, picking up almost universal critical praise on its way. Therefore, there is a temptation to emulate the story’s hero, Winston Smith, and defy conventional thought by labelling it complete and utter rubbish, deserving of an immediate place in Room 101. But that would be a lie, because this really is 100 minutes of the most electrifying theatre. In terms of set and costumes, the production remains rooted in 1940s Britain, but adaptors Robert Icke and Duncan Macmillan have extended Orwell’s dystopian vision to the modern day and a century further into the future. Their biggest challenge must have been to replicate the shock effect that the book had upon readers in the immediate post-War era for modern theatre audiences who know Big Brother as a reality television series, are used to being watched by security cameras as they walk down every street and live in a world where media manipulation dominates all areas of life. Yet shock us they do, partly because of the durability of the original work and partly because of their total mastery of theatrical skills. We are startled by visual images, changing sets, blinding light followed by total darkness, projections of images and films on to a screen above the stage; we face a constant bombardment on our senses, whilst, at the same time, a spare and faithful script is giving a rigorous workout to our brains. Every second of the running time is bleak and discomforting, but also mesmerising. In a strong ensemble, Mark Arends’ Winston is an everyman of unheroic appearance, Hara Yannas’ Julia is alluring and ambiguous and Tim Dutton’s O’Brien is a cold and efficient bureaucrat. A final word of praise to the Almeida for putting many of its rivals to shame by again producing a superb programme that is packed with fascinating information. Top marks all round.

After a recent run of seeing Shakespeare scaled down to be performed above pubs and such places, this marks a return to the traditional – arguably the greatest Shakespearean actor of the age performing on our grandest stage under the guidance of one of the World’s most accomplished stage and cinema directors. So, enjoyable as the smaller productions were, this is most definitely Shakespeare Max. Sam Mendes’ modern dress production is mounted superbly. using every inch of the Olivier’s huge stage and recounting with painful clarity the story of ageing, dementia and inheritance. Simon Russell Beale is nowhere near being an octogenarian. but he manages to look 80 with his stooping demeanour, fidgeting hands and grizzled visage, until he exits through the audience and ruins the illusion by racing up the stairs of the darkened stalls. As he stands beneath a statue of his younger self, towering to more than twice his real height, the ravages of age are captured in a single image. Russell Beale is an actor who is never afraid to have himself made to look ridiculous, which is a vital quality, because there is no character in English drama who cuts a more ridiculous figure than that of Lear for much of this play. However, his Lear is also a man of power and authority, albeit diminished in body and mind. Tom Brooke is an unorthodox but wonderfully moving Edgar and the ever reliable Adrian Scarborough makes the perfect Fool. Of the daughters, Kate Fleetwood is an icy Goneril and Olivia Vinall a sweet and sincere Cordelia. As Regan, Anna Maxwell Martin is ruthless and volatile, playing very much against the image created by her most famous television roles; however, at this performance seen from half way back in the stalls, her diction, intonation and voice projection all seemed weak. Maybe because expectations were set too high, this production feels less than monumental, but, nonetheless, it is extremely impressive.

Based on tapes recorded by a real life American couple over a 30 year period, Abi Morgan’s new play explores the sexual politics surrounding a relationship in which a middle aged woman formally contracts to be the mistress of her long-time lover in return for material rewards. Tackling the issues with a feminist slant, the play is always well-written but so would be a lecture by Germaine Greer and audiences go to a theatre to see a drama not to listen to a thesis. Almost exactly one hour into the play’s 90 minutes, one of the characters shows the first flicker of emotion and, thereafter, the now geriatric pair offer only occasional hints that there might be bonds of affection between them that transcend their cold business arrangement. Saskia Reeves and Danny Webb are fine as the couple, but they could have been better if their performances had not been burdened by forced American accents. As the themes are universal, perhaps Morgan would have done better by abandoning factual accuracy and setting her play in, say, London, thereby helping us to connect with the characters. The accents and a desert set that looks as if its designer raided Kew Gardens for every variety of cactus in existence only serve to distance us further from them. There are plenty of interesting ideas under discussion here, but they do not add up to very good theatre.

This review was originally written for The Public Reviews: http://www.thepublicreviews.com

Centring on the intertwined worlds of journalism and politics, Guy de Maupassant’s novel, Bel Ami, told of corruption, greed, immorality and hypocrisy at the highest level of public life. The original setting was France in the 1880s, but crossing the Channel and leaping forward to the 21st Century, it is remarkable how little of the story has needed to be changed and, with the Leveson inquiry and phone-hacking trials still hitting the headlines, it could hardly be more topical. This new musical is performed by students for BA Musical Theatre at the London College of Music, with support coming from now professional alumni. Inevitably, there are a few performances that need a little polishing and the casting is not always perfect, but ample compensation is provided by the performers’ commitment and zeal. There are two alternat- ing casts and, at this performance, the lead role of George Dury was played by Johnny Fitzharris; he attacks the part with supreme confidence, commanding the stage and belting out his big number, Don’t Question Me, as if he really believes he could be the next Michael Ball. He may just be right. The story begins with George, a former soldier in Afghanistan, homeless and begging for small change at Westminster tube station. Through chance, he gets a job with a low brow newspaper and works his way up from junior reporter to celebrity gossip writer and political columnist, eventually using blackmail to enter politics. We start out rooting for him as a downtrodden underdog, but, when it becomes clear that he is ruthless, manipulative, amoral and a serial seducer of women, our attraction to him starts to wane. Having an anti-hero as the leading character in a story is not in itself a bad thing, but the absence of any sympathetic characters for him to play against leaves the show without an emotional heart. The women left in his wake are all users too and they behave equally badly; they sing their ballads of woe, individually and collectively, but the numbers fall flat, because our reaction to them is “you got what you deserved, so who cares?” The score by Alex Loveless is lively and varied, incorporating contemporary pop, a little rap and traditional musical theatre styles. He knows how to mix things up too, as when the show gets a little heavy in the second act, he diverts from the main narrative and throws in Too Much Money, showing MPs frolicking in their Caribbean playground. It is unusual in musicals for a single person to take on all three tasks – book, lyrics and score – and Love- less needs to be congratulated for this, but he may want to contemplate whether a collabo- rator could have helped to make the spoken dialogue sharper and wittier and guided him as to where he might have wielded the axe to songs that work less well than others. Chris Loveless’ direction and Anthony Whiteman’s choreography are fluid and imaginative, performed on an uncluttered stage with minimal props. Most heartening is that their pro- duction shows a clear understanding of what is uniquely possible in the art form of musical theatre. As examples: trial by media is explained in a gem of a routine with two rival groups facing each other – one (phone) tap dancing, the other performing a “liberal shuffle”; earlier a sombre funeral merges into a joyful wedding during a single song, the characters’ emo- tions seen to be equally shallow at each; and the corrosive effects of unethical journalism are demonstrated with the chorus waving their red tops as they sing Read All About it, cre- ating visual images that endorse the cynicism of the lyrics. Bel Ami is not the sort of of story from which we expect a happy outcome, but this produc- tion could well lead to several of them. If the efforts of these talented students have given the show’s creators a clearer vision of the strengths and flaws in their work, they should be able to develop it further and a full scale professional production may beckon.

This review was originally written for The Public Reviews: http://www.thepublicreviews.com

If Agatha Christie and Ivor Novello had ever joined forces and then drawn inspiration from Cape Fear, the result could have been something like this show. Presented as part of the Landor’s From Page to Stage season, showcasing new musical theatre, it is a rollicking spoof of the whodunnit genre, set in 1935 on the remote island of Lost Crow during a spell of appalling weather, which sounds very much like that of February 2014. As British movie star Honey Quenelle (Amelia Adams-Pearce) is preparing for her Birthday party, news is filtering through that the local asylum is short of one lunatic. Conditions are so bad that the delivery from Fortnum’s cannot get through, but not bad enough to prevent the arrival of the guests, all of whom have good reason for wanting rid of the delectable Honey. This is a new show, but not one that attempts to extend the boundaries of musical theatre.! Rather it is one that retreats to the style as well as the setting of almost 80 years ago, with one-dimensional characters, a nonsense storyline, simple lyrics and hummable but quickly forgettable tunes. The costumes and set show excellent attention to period detail, the back wall being plastered with art deco posters for Quenelle’s films. A spoof of a genre that is already tongue-in-cheek can be difficult to pull off; it needs to be kept bubbling constantly and there are times when Olivia Thompson’s script becomes bogged down, relying much too heavily on one-line gags and not keeping the plot moving. Robert McWhir’s production also feels laboured on occasions, particularly during the show’s somewhat predictable first half. Just before the interval comes what could be one of the show’s best ensemble numbers, Just Like in the Movies, but it is rather unfortunate that it coincides with a plot development calling for a power cut and we see it only in half light. After the interval comes a spell when the show seems to have gone completely off the rails, but, happily, this marks a turn in the right direction, leading to a second half of outright barminess, some of which is so funny that no-one cares how ridiculous the denouement is. This success is largely due to a splendid company, all hamming exuberantly. There are two stand out-comic performances. Playing Mabel Gumm (not alluding to Judy Garland surely?), the dim-witted maid, Katie Brennan makes the most of the script’s funniest lines, searching for her lost gerbil and offering up delicacies such as pork cake and parsnip sponge. And then there is Jenny Gayner, who goes completely over the top, stealing the show as party guest Farmonica Fagarretty, a star-struck nervous wreck; her outrageous rendition of Sorry will linger in the memory long after everything else in this evening is forgotten. In all, Before the Night is Through is a mixed bag, a production that would need quite a lot of work to take it to the next level, but the Landor’s current season is all about such shows. It is interesting to have the chance to glimpse possible musical theatre talent of the future and, if we get a jolly evening of undemanding fun in the process, who’s complaining?

Lowri Evans is a conceptual artist, a presenter of ideas using both images and words. She is a sweet, smiling lady who exudes a charming innocence belying her 31 years. It would be difficult to write anything nasty about her or any of her work for fear that she might read it and start to cry.  And, to be fair, there is absolutely nothing to dislike on display here. Her wry observations about past, future and what lies between them are gentle, sentimental and quite touching. Inspired by her personal relationships and experiences gained from working with dementia sufferers, she uses images drawn on or projected onto screens (sometimes inserting her live self into them), short poems and children’s play things to focus our minds on the quirkiness of life. Each of the segments here would provide anyone with a pleasurable five minutes, meditating in a gallery. However, when strung together flimsily to form an hour-long show in a theatre space, the result is rather like a stand-up routine stripped of the comedy, lacking in real bite, substance or serious insight. As memory is a recurring theme throughout, it is rather ironic that this show, mildly entertaining whilst in progress, is so instantly forgettable; wandering outside afterwards, I could only barely remember what it was that had brought me here. Surely, I had not planned to watch Cricket on an evening in the middle of Winter?

When a mountaineer was asked why he climbed Everest, he replied “because it was there”. Similarly, my explanation for being at this show is that I happened to be in the Soho Theatre as it was about to start. The show is a collection of modern-themed comic songs performed by a masked Irish duo, their DJ and a puppet of Gabriel Byrne. To be fair to them all, they clearly have a devoted following and it is not their fault that this brand of in-your-face comedy is just not my thing. I prefer humour that is laced with at least a little subtlety and wit, rather than that which relies for its laughs on almost every other word uttered beginning with an “f” and being the same word. One consolation was that the audience was made to stand, making this show a lot more comfortable than many others at this venue; indeed many of my fellow audience members relished the opportunity to gather in circles and converse, shouting to make themselves heard over the din coming from the stage. This misspent hour felt like something I could have stumbled across on a drunken late evening at the Edinburgh Fringe Festival; happily, that is an experience that I will now never have.

We all reach crossroads in our lives when, like Gwyneth Paltrow boarding a tube train, we make one choice and then are left wondering what might have been if we had made another. This show, co-created and performed by Nathan Penlington draws on such experiences. The starting point is an apparently well-known series of Choose Your Own Adventure books for children by the American writer Edward Packard; in common with almost half the audience, I had never previously heard of them. The books provided readers with choices at regular intervals and the adventures then followed the courses that the readers had chosen. At this show, the audience is provided with key pads to vote, with the filmed documentary taking the courses selected by the majority. Penlington embarks on three (possibly more or less at some shows) missions: to find an unknown diarist with whom he has become obsessed, a lost childhood sweetheart and Mr Packard himself. We are told that there are 1,566 possible stories and over 30 different characters to be discovered. The stories are all true and all the possible outcomes have been pre-filmed. As the conclusions to different shows should rarely be the same, there is little risk of giving out spoilers by saying that, on this occasion, Penlington was left barely alive and near naked, handing out flyers to the departing audience. If the concept has flaws, it is carried by the presenter’s geniality.  Apart from being great fun, the show is given substance through being underpinned by wistful reflections on wrong decisions and lost opportunities. Original and entertaining.

After half a century during which, in our own country at least, society has become steadily more tolerant of minorities, the world of professional footballers stands resolutely as one of the last bastions of the old order. As seen in John Donnelly’s new play, it is a macho world which tolerates no deviations from its norms, particularly with regard to intellectualism and homosexuality; the private lives of its inhabitants are effectively as regimented as in a solid 4-4-2 formation and, if any of them begins to even think outside the box, they risk conceding the severest of penalties. The play takes place in three hotel rooms over a period of more than a decade, beginning in Bulgaria on the night before a Champions’ League match. Sharing the room are Ade and Jason, close friends who are also rivals for a first team place; they exchange laddish banter, but eventually come to realise that what exists between them may be more than just friendship. Later we discover that both played in the match, which proved to be pivotal for their careers, Jason going on to become a fabulously wealthy Beckham-style superstar, Ade to run a plumbing business and play at weekends on Hackney Marshes. In many ways Ade (Gary Carr) is the more interesting and certainly more sympathetic character. It would have been nice to get to know him better, but, after a shared first scene, the focus is set firmly on Jason (Russell Tovey) and his painful battle with his own sexuality. So what if top footballers have to suffer for their sport, aren’t they paid enough for it? True, but the play cleverly extends its range outside the enclosed world of football to show the wider impact of the game’s entrenched position. Firstly we meet Lyndsey (Lisa McGrillis), a single mother desperate for cash who agrees to provide a kiss and tell story in a media game of deception and counter deception. And then appears Harry (Nico Mirallegro), a young fan who is shaping his own life using the macho and largely false vision of his idol Jason as a role model, thereby demonstrating how football’s outdated image is damaging society more generally. Tovey, a familiar face in television and theatre, was described recently in The Guardian as exuding “irrepressible down-the-pub blokeishness”; he is is an Essex boy, has an athletic physique and he is an openly gay actor. So he ticks just about every box for playing Jason and he plays him well, except that he is never able to make us sympathise with him. In fairness, the writer gives him little to work on and, in a critical failing, he never allows the character to articulate his true emotions. All we see is Jason as outwardly egocentric and a vile bully, so that, when he is faced with either the Hitzisperger or the Fashanu option, do we really care? When the two footballers are reunited, Ade is partnered with a man whilst Jason is parted from his WAG and two children and living in a hotel waiting to find a new club to end his playing days in the Middle East or America. We are left in no doubt as to which of the two is the luckier. This play needs a little cutting from its first two scenes and is far from perfect, but it is absorbing, significant and has several memorable dramatic high points.