Anna Francolini In Twelfth Night. Photo: Rich Lakos
The show may take place outdoors but the critics seemed uncertain whether the setting of the play is a seaside cafe or a gay nightclub. Either way, a production-dominating Anna Francolini as Olivia owns it. Some reviewers complained that the added songs didn’t add much except time to Owen Horsley’s gender fluid production. They enjoyed Michael Matus’ Sir Toby Belch as a drag queen, and were moved by Richard Cant’s Malvolio.
Nick Curtis in the Standard (4★) said the show was ‘Stylish and surprisingly sexy…Owen Horsley’s production leans heavily into the themes of sexual and gender confusion in Shakespeare’s play. His staging is witty and seductive, only marred by an almost willful lack of pace.’
Andrzej Lukowski at Time Out (4★) also had a pretty good evening. ‘I’m not sure Owen Horsley’s lengthy production finds any incredible new depths in Shakespeare’s greatest comedy. But it is, nonetheless, lovely stuff.’ He was not alone in liking Olivia: ‘in the show’s most entertaining turn, Anna Francolini stars as a Miss Havisham-alike, clad in elaborate veils of mourning, tottering about with her late brother’s ashes.’
Frey Kwa Hawking for WhatsOnStage (4★) found it ‘a dignifiedly twilight world, stylish and welcoming.’ Aliya Al-Hassan at London Theatre (4★) said ‘this inventive production is a thought-provoking delight.’
Sam Marlowe in The Stage (3★) was less impressed: ‘as a whole the staging fails to ignite, its musical interludes decelerating scenes that, delivered with superficial, presentational sentiment, are often already in danger of becoming laborious.’ She wasn’t keen on the director’s interpretation: ‘while this is pleasant enough entertainment, its performative passions keep the drama’s pleasure and pain at arm’s length.’
Similarly Clive Davis of The Times (3★) thought it was laid on a bit thick: ‘director Owen Horsley unveils a vision of Illyria which, playing up the queer themes, ends up jabbing the audience hard in the ribs every time it aims to raise a smile. By the end of the night, you can’t help feeling a little bruised.’ And the end was a long time coming, ‘As the evening marches towards the three-hour mark… the surfeit of songs slows the action.’
Kate Wyver writing for The Guardian (3★) found enough to keep her happy: ‘There is much to delight in. Ryan Dawson Laight’s sumptuous costumes shine and Michael Matus gives a glorious turn in drag as Toby Belch, a bully towards Richard Cant’s proud Malvolio, who doesn’t deserve the level of cruelty set upon him.’
Claire Allfree in the Telegraph (3★) thought ‘Horsley’s overlong production struggles to cohere the play’s admittedly disparate elements.’ She said it ‘depends far too much for its energy on Sir Toby.’ For her, it was ‘Richard Cant’s astonishing Malvolio – a bony withered nerd in buttoned-up tweed – who steals the show.’
Average critics’ rating 3.5 Value Rating 58 (Value rating is the Average Critic Rating divided by the typical ticket price. In theory, this means the higher the score the better value but, because of price variations, a West End show could be excellent value if it scores above 30 while an off-West End show may need to score above 60.)
If you’ve seen Twelfth Night, please add your review and rating below
Spirited Away at London Coliseum. Photo: Johan Persson
It’s easy to see why risk-averse producers find stage adaptations of successful films tempting. There’s a readymade audience that already knows and loves the characters and the story. The question is, what will a theatrical dimension add to the original? The question loomed large among the reviews of this adaptation of Hayao Miyazaki‘s 2001 animated feature about a little girl’s adventure into a world of spirits, especially since a number of reviewers clearly loved the original. Another comparison cropped up frequently, namely how did it compare with the RSC’s celebrated adaptation of another Miyazaki film My Neighbour Totoro. The stage version of Spirited Away has already had success in Japan and comes to the UK intact, with added surtitles (reviews pointed out they are distractingly high up). There was much praise for the way John Caird (who directed Les Miserables) and Maoko Imai had reimagined the film for theatre, for the design by Jon Bausor and for the score by Joe Hisaishi. Opinion was mixed and, while there were no bad reviews and two awarded 5 stars, the high ticket prices brought down the Value Rating.
[Links to full reviews are included but a number are behind paywalls and therefore may not be accessible]
Louis Chilton in The Independent (5★) was not sure if ‘one of the greatest and most adored animated films of all time’ needed a stage version but, ‘If we must have an adaptation, it’s impossible to imagine a better one than this.’ ‘Spirited Away is three hours of constant, unpredictable spectacle,’ he wrote. ‘There are so many scenes here, so many locations and characters, all imbued with a tremendous visual flair and kineticism…it connects – not just on a sensory level, but on an emotional one too.’
Gary Naylor at The Arts Desk (5★) admitted to being a massive fan of the film, so his approval of the stage version is significant: ‘Though the puppetry and costumes are visually stunning, we never lose sight of the fact that we are watching a stage show and not a whizzbang hybrid of CGI and live action. The unique aesthetic is honoured.’ He concluded: ‘going through the tunnel with Chihiro, learning alongside her…and emerging older and wiser is the key to appreciating this landmark production…not everybody will get that, and that’s fine. For those who do, there’s nothing that compares.’
For Cindy Marcolina at Broadway World (4★), it was ‘event theatre at its best.’ ‘It features astonishing visuals and sublime stagecraft alongside the beautiful, iconic score,’ she said. Like other fans of the film, she had concerns for the uninitiated: ‘While it’s a piece of spectacular beauty and curious philosophy, keeping everything in means that the 125 minutes of the movie have become three hours with an interval. Still, it rarely drags. It’s a chunky show geared towards those who stay entranced by the emotional pull of a story they already know and love.’ She offered further evidence that this is one for the fans: ‘There’s reverence in the approach and accuracy in the ideation.’
Sarah Crompton at WhatsOnStage (4★) loved it: ‘This show is so transfixingly beautiful and so completely assured that it feels like balm; it’s almost hypnotically assured.’ She concluded, ‘Everything and everyone pull together to make the entire production into a very loving tribute to a deservedly acclaimed film. It’s captivating.’ John Nathan in The Jewish Chronicle (4★) described it as ‘a production that has made no compromises in creating some of the most astounding sights you will see on a stage’. The i’s Fiona Mountford (4★) said the ‘production, which is constantly revolving, swooping and lifting, is colourful and inventive.’ Dominic Maxwell in The Sunday Times (4★) preferred this to My Neighbour Totoro because it ‘keeps ringing the changes.’ It was, he said, ‘a spectacular piece of staging with an eerie magic all its own.’
Arifa Akbar in The Guardian (4★) was full of praise, too full as it turned out. It was, she said, ‘meticulous in its visual detail and choreography, delightful in its puppetry, both meditative and whirling in its speed, and packed full of comedy and adventure.’ ‘Sachiko Nakahara’s costumes stand out,’ she said. The music ‘adds sweeping emotion and an epic feel’ and ‘The physical movement is symphonic.’ However, she cautioned, ‘While superbly performed, it is a harder challenge to animate its emotional life because it is so dominated by action and spectacle.’ In the end, she found it a bit too much: ‘it is utterly magical but this banquet of a show also leaves you stuffed.’
Nick Curtis in The Standard (3★) is not a fan of the original film but conceded this adaptation is ‘superbly done’. He liked the way ‘The actors create credible relationships with serpentine dragons, giant, rotting godheads and tiny soot sprites, and there’s a core of emotional truth behind the story’s non-sequiturs and wild tangents.’ He said, ‘The show captures scale and perspective in a way theatre rarely achieves.’ But, ‘It’s too sappy and fairytale-ish to be entirely for adults, too discomfiting and grotesque for some children.’ It was far too long for him: ‘(it) starts to pall though as the story meanders through yet more bizarre twists and turns and the acting gets shoutier.’
Andrzej Lukowski at Time Out (3★) spent a lot of time comparing it unfavourably with My Neighbour Totoro: ‘this impressive but slightly starchy … production … doesn’t pull it off with the same panache and feeling of ground being broken as ‘Totoro’.’ And, ‘Although Toby Olie’s puppets and Sachiko Nakahara’s costumes are vivid and impressive, they aren’t the absolute showstoppers that the RSC’s gargantuan…constructs are.’ And, ‘where all the spirits in ‘Totoro’ are puppets, ‘Spirited Away’ … is reliant on human actors changing costumes a lot – sometimes it has the look and feel of an old fashioned song and dance spectacular.’ But he did like it, sort of: ‘(if) a true transposition of the film would have to take your breath away constantly, then for three hours it at least does it frequently.’
Dominic Cavendish in the Telegraph (3★) was another who preferred the RSC’s show. He described Spirited Away as a ‘sumptuous production’ but said, ‘Totoro has a simplicity and strangeness that works like a charm on stage. Here, the film’s shimmery sense of wonder has undergone a rather dutiful theatrical solidification.’ It’s fair to say, he was not spirited away: ‘At three hours, the dream-like narrative can feel at once stretched and too knotty, and less substantial than it initially appears.’ His conclusion was a downbeat comparison with the film: ‘A lavish labour of love, then, but the magical source-material transports you further, for less.’
The Times‘ Clive Davis (3★) had a disappointing evening: ‘during this meandering journey through the spirit world my inner youngster kept muttering: “Are we there yet?”’ He continued, ‘the colours and lighting are muted, and you miss the fluidity of the animated film.’
Sam Marlowe in The Stage (3★) was also underwhelmed. She said it ‘often looks lovely. But it’s missing the emotional guts and sinewy connective tissue required to make it properly 3D, its swirling imagery and meandering narrative remaining stubbornly flat. There’s always something rich and strange to look at, always something fantastical happening; but we often don’t know exactly what, or why – and too often, crucially, we don’t much care.’ She ended: ‘It rarely taps into the transformative, imagination-sparking power of theatre as an art form – and ultimately, that begs the question: what’s the point?’ Susannah Clapp in The Observer (3★) made a similar point, saying what was not happening was ‘a transformation, a dissolve of one thing into another. That needs more than the skills which motor this production: it needs a jolt of feeling. Constant animation does not always mean vivacity.’
Spirited Away can be seen at the London Coliseum until 24 August 2024. Buy tickets direct fromspiritedawayuk.com
Average critics’ rating 3.8★ Value Rating 18 (Value rating is the Average Critic Rating divided by the typical ticket price.)
If you’ve seen Spirited Away, please add your review and rating below
The Cherry Orchard at The Donmar. Photo: Johan Persson
Benedict Andrews has pulled apart Chekhov’s story of an aristocratic family blind to change and reassembled it as a modern take on resistance to climate change, with the production spilling over into the audience. The excitement of three 5-star and three 4-star reviews of The Cherry Orchard was offset by a couple of 3-star reviews and one 2-star. It seems one critic’s modern interpretation is another’s gimmick. All were agreed on the quality of the cast, in particular Nina Hoss and Adeel Akthar.
[Links to full reviews are included but a number are behind paywalls and therefore may not be accessible]
Arifa Akbar in The Guardian (5★) explained the update: ‘It is still a story about masters, peasants and the legacy of serfdom, but the anxiety over wealth, class and dispossession is powerfully felt to be ours too.’ She loved the acting, ‘Hoss and Akhtar, both better known for their screen work, are tremendous’ as well as the interpretation, ‘It is not so much tragicomic as comedy and then absolute tragedy.’ The Standard‘s Nick Curtis (5★) was similarly enraptured, calling the production ‘revelatory’. It ‘hits the play’s poles of tragedy and comedy with devastating accuracy,’ he said, ‘Yet it all feels entirely true to the spirit of the original.’ He too was impressed by the acting: ‘German stage star Nina Hoss is heartbreaking and exasperating…Adeel Akhtar, so often cast in downtrodden roles, is astonishing.’ He continued: ‘I’ve never seen an audience laugh so hard at this play, nor seen the closing scene with servant Firs performed as movingly’.
Andrzej Lukowski of Time Out (5★) described the design: ‘Magda Willa has created something equally memorable. In an in-the-round configuration in which cast members sit amongst the audience when not performing, every inch of floor and the entire back hall is covered in geometrically patterned rugs, a mix of ‘70s palette and ‘80s design that feels curiously out of time.’ He explained: ‘What Andrews is just plain astonishing at is character and casting…it’s a wonder to spend time with these people’ He concluded: ‘It builds to a queasily brilliant climax, But it’s the journey that’s the joy.’
Dave Fargnoli The Stage (4★) appeared relieved to be confronted by a modern take: ‘this lively, irreverent version brings tremendous immediacy to the piece. Replacing Chekhov’s stultifying tension with raw, feverish anxiety.’ He too praised the cast: ‘In an appealingly playful ensemble, Adeel Akhtar stands out.’ For Greg Stewart at Theatre Weekly (4★) it was ‘a captivating and visionary take on the Russian playwright’s final work…Benedict Andrews’ The Cherry Orchard transposes the societal upheaval of early 20th century Russia to modern day societal shifts, and amplifies Chekhov’s themes of change and progress in a profound way.’
Claire Allfree in the Telegraph (4★) said the production ‘ratchets up the characters’ psychological fracturing to such an extent the play fizzes from the get-go with a dangerous off-kilter threat.’ She described how ‘Andrews’ production is ultimately almost entirely an exercise in tonal dissonance. The mood can switch from comedy to horror in a second. He has the ability to turn a moment inside out so that feeling is revealed by its opposite emotion.’ But she ended with a reservation: ‘You miss, despite everything, the ineffable music of Chekhov; that keening inner poetry that can pounce just as bitterly as any directorial gimmick.’
Susannah Clapp in The Observer (4★) was particularly impressed by the performance of June Watson as the old servant Firs which she said, ‘takes your breath away’. She described the production as ‘choppy and fierce’ and concluded, ‘There are plenty of gleams and flares here: they do not add up to a revelation.’
Sarah Crompton at WhatsOnStage 3 had mixed feelings. ‘It’s like hearing a Puccini aria played by Slipknot. The melody survives but struggles to be heard,’ she said. ‘What makes the production shine, in fact, is the performances.’ She concluded, ‘It’s an enjoyable evening, but Chekhov is barely left standing at the close.’ Tim Bano in The Independent (3★) was struck by the appearance of the production: ‘the most obvious thing is the rug (Magda Willi’s design). It’s massive. All over the stage, covering the back wall, the coppery colour of dried blood or cherry stains.’ He found ‘it’s a production that’s made by particular moments, rather than working as a whole’. In fact, for him, it was ‘ alienating and a bit confusing. The way Andrews keeps pulling us toward the contemporary has worked in his previous shows. It gets us closer to the heart of the play. Here it gets in the way.’
For Dominic Maxwell at The Sunday Times (2★), ‘the clever details hig the attention and impede the dramatic flow.’ For him, ‘the almost three hours moved painfully slowly.’ Clive Davis in The Times (2★) was another who couldn’t get on with it at all. ‘What adds to the frustration is that this modern adaptation contains decent performances….(Andrews) is so determined to scatter directorial flourishes in all directions that it’s impossible to focus on the human tragedy unfurling in front of us.’ It ‘dissolves into confusion,’ he said. ‘…as the orchard faces destruction, the actors tear up the rugs. If only they could have done the same to the script.’ Ouch!
Average critics’ rating 3.7★ Value Rating 67 (Value rating is the Average Critic Rating divided by the typical ticket price. In theory, this means the higher the score the better value but, because of price variations, a West End show could be excellent value if it scores above 30 while an off-West End show may need to score above 60.)
If you’ve seen The Cherry Orchard, please add your review and rating below
Minority report at the Lyric Hammersmith. Photo: Marc Brenner
Minority Report started as a sci-fi story by Philip K Dick but its most famous manifestation is as a film starring Tom Cruise. Inevitably, a number of the reviews compared the budget theatrical version by David Haig to the multi-million dollar Hollywood spectacular…unfavourably. In the critics’ reports, no-one awarded more than three stars, mainly because the plot is ‘muddled’ and ‘too sketchy’ and, for some, it looks ‘naff’. On the plus side, the lead Jodi McNee‘s performance was widely praisedand some liked the fast pace supplied by director Max Webster (Life of Pi) and the ‘ambitious visuals’.
[Links to full reviews are included but a number are behind paywalls and therefore may not be accessible]
Dominic Cavendish in the Telegraph (3★) was upbeat. He felt that while ‘his adaptation is admirably succinct, the political and psychological dimensions of the piece, hurtling by in 90 minutes, feel too sketchy.’ He looked for the positive: ‘in its most exhilarating moments, with search-lights criss-crossing the auditorium, you get a reminder that theatre can, and should, be exciting – and an inkling too of its tech-assisted future.’
There is no star rating attached to Time Out. It’s possible he thought it was so bad, it didn’t deserve any stars, but more likely there was a glitch on the website. At best, it feels like a three star review: ‘Although the many, many action setpieces in Max Webster’s production are accomplished, it’s hard to see the point in most of them… Even more muddled is the plot.’ He liked its lead: ‘McNee is charismatic and intense and looks pretty cool carrying a big gun while shouting at people.’ His conclusion was: ‘If this is the future I want no part in it.’
Anya Ryan in The Stage (3★) had mixed feelings. ‘The production has a slick air of ultra modernism, and whizzes through scenes at a relentless pace. Despite some spectacular, ambitious visuals, though, there’s the nagging sense that the theatre might not be the best medium for this dystopian fable.’
Nick Curtis at The Standard (3★) summed it up as ‘smart and daft, mind-expanding and lame’. Every aspect of the production gets a mention, not always complimentary . ‘Designer Jon Bausor uses pivoting metal grids and video screens … which is inventive but inevitably a bit naff’; ‘Director Max Webster favours pace and stridency over subtlety’; ‘The stimulating intellectual provocations of the script are constantly undermined by clichéd and slapdash plotting.’
‘There is plenty of dazzle, but little dilemma,’ said Susannah Clapp in The Observer (3★). Sarah Crompton at WhatsOnStage (3★) said ‘Despite a virtuoso production by Max Webster and his design team, which transforms a tiny stage into a richly realised vision of the near future, it never quite grips as drama.’ She went on, ‘It looks magnificent, but it never really digs below its sharp, hi-tech surface.’
Clive Davis in The Times (3★) ‘Jodie McNee’s harassed neuroscientist/CEO…holds your attention even when you can’t help noticing that the bargain-basement tech surrounding her is more reminiscent of Blake’s 7 than a Hollywood epic.’ He described ‘vehicles that are supposed to be something out of an Elon Musk sketchbook but actually resemble the car rides that keep children entertained in shopping centres’. On the plus side, ‘Haig poses useful moral questions about the trade-off between freedom and security. And McNee is hypnotically intense.’
Arifa Akbar in The Guardian (2★) was more critical: ‘this is a strangely lifeless creation – a zombie hybrid of film and stage. David Haig’s script has an undercooked plot filled with anaemic twists, while both the action and pace need finessing’. She continued, ‘the tension so necessary for an action drama of this kind is lacking.’ She found ‘the 3D set unmatched by its hollow 2D drama.’
Matt Wolf, writing for the LondonTheatre website (2★), was lukewarm: ‘The show’s look as it stands now is its lucky charm, even if the majority report, I have a hunch, will focus on a script in need of a reboot.’Demetrios Matheou at the Arts Desk (2★) found nothing to enjoy: ‘Webster’s amped-up direction – reaching its nadir with some bizarrely choreographed chase scenes – simply overpowers a text that isn’t fit to purpose in the first place’. He added, ‘There’s a forced nature, too, to the dialogue and hysterical emotions’.
Alexander Cohen at Broadway World (2★) came up with an interesting analogy: ‘David Haig’s new stage adaption is more like a cyberpunk-themed orgy at Printworks.’ (Printworks is a chain of entertainment centres but I’m not sure that particular activity is one of the attractions.) He went on to tear apart the show: ‘the production’s retro Dr Who-style brand of schlocky futurism and plastic campiness blocks it from conjuring any sense of pulsating paranoia.’ It was, he said, ‘Gormless fun for a while, but a beating emotional heart is noticeably absent.’
Average critics’ rating 2.6★ Value Rating 57 (Value rating is the Average Critic Rating moderated by the typical ticket price. In theory, this means the higher the score the better value but, because of price variations, a West End show could be excellent value if it scores above 30 while an off-West End show may need to score above 60.
If you’ve seen Minority Report, please add your review and rating below
Tina: The Tina Turner Musical. Photo: Manuel Harlan
Most reviews of Tina: The Tina Turner Musical date back to its opening in 2018. The reviewers often gave its then star Adrienne Warren as much or more praise than the musical. This makes it hard to decide how much difference her successors will make to the evening’s entertainment. Having said that, there’s no reason to suppose the current lead is any less impressive.
[Links to full reviews are included but a number are behind paywalls and therefore may not be accessible]
Dominic Cavendish of the Telegraph (5★) called it ‘slickly choreographed, beautifully designed and roof-raisingly well-sung bio-musical.’ Neil Norman in The Express (5★) was another evangelist for the show, going so far as to say: ‘This is one of those shows that has healing power.’ He enthused, ‘Phyllida Lloyd’s dazzling production has you in its grip throughout.’
The much-missed Michael Billington in The Guardian (4★) described it as ‘a heady celebration of triumph over adversity’…’both intelligent and consistently good to look at’ ‘As bio-musicals go,’ he said, ‘this is as good as it gets.’ Paul Taylor at The Independent (4★) proclaimed, ‘It has everything going for it.’ He cites the back catalogue and the ‘inspiring story’. He did have reservation: ‘Katori Hall’s book feels like a brisk summary of events, as it hops too evenly from one episode to another.’ In complete contrast, Anne Treneman in The Times (4★) said, ‘the story rarely dips into the superficial.’ For her it was ‘a show that reaches the parts most bio-theatre doesn’t touch.’
There were momentsTim Bano’s review in The Stage (4★) that made one wonder if the four stars were acting as a fifth column to lure readers in and then put them off: ‘nothing about the production is particularly interesting or innovative. It’s a standard bio-musical’ and ‘The design is unimaginative, the story skeletal’ and ‘pure hagiography’. Even some of his praise is of the ‘with friends like these’ quality: ‘wrapped around the bare bones of this extraordinary woman’s life, we watch a Tina Turner tribute band of supreme quality’. But he was absolutely clear the musical is ‘incredible’.
Fiona Mountford writing in those days for The Standard (3★) didn’t share the enthusiasm of the above. ‘this musical never fully sparks into life,’ she opined, explaining, ‘the material surprisingly lacks rigour, too often staying in soft-focus when a more forensic examination is required.’ ‘Simply the best? Not quite,’ she concluded.
‘Is a feelgood jukebox musical the absolute best medium to tell a story about domestic abuse?’ questioned Andrzej Lukowski at Time Out (3★) and answered ‘too often Phyllida Lloyd’s production struggles to make a sensitive synthesis of the two.’ Lloyd directs fluidly and at a pace, but there is, also, a weird feeling of it being clogged with ephemera.’ Despite his reservations, he concedes ‘it’s an entertaining night’.
Michael Arditti for the Sunday Express (3★) was possibly the least appreciative, calling it ‘a banal and scrappy account of the singer’s rise’ and commenting: ‘it is less an integrated musical than a Tina Turner tribute show with a highly accomplished central performance.’
It always fascinates me the way critics bring their own expectations to a show. So while Michael Billington (The Guardian) lamented ‘I’d have liked to have heard more about how her Baptist upbringing and Buddhist conversion sustained her during the dark times.’ Time Out’s Andrzej Lukowski pleaded, ‘Do we need interludes about Tina’s Buddhism?’
Bijan Sheibani‘s new play The Cord, which he also directs, is about the early days of parenthood. It concentrates on the father Ash’s experience, although some critics would have liked to have known more about the mother Anya’s and Ash’s mother Jane’s stories. The play is set in the round on a bare stage with lighting and a cellist providing much atmosphere.
[Links to full reviews are included but a number are behind paywalls and therefore may not be accessible]
Theo Bosanquet at WhatsOnStage (4★) was impressed: ‘Sheibani…has crafted something that feels both universal and deeply personal, highlighting a rarely-spoken truth of parenting: children have a way of finding us out.’ ‘the dialogue feels like it’s been recorded and spoken verbatim’ he said, and ‘Shamji and O’Higgins are excellent in the central roles’.
Claire Allfree in the Telegraph (3★) praised ‘Irfan Shamji who imbues Ash with a blundering bewilderment that feels instantly recognisable and true’ but felt ‘the play is self-limiting, never finding a sufficient universal imperative beyond the bubble of new parenthood that is all consuming for those involved, but considerably less so for everyone else.’ Holly O”Mahoney reporting for The Stage (3★) ‘Sheibani’s thoughtful writing and attentive direction validate Ash’s experience – his are tricky emotions to explore with sympathy – while retaining self-awareness.’ Her criticism was that ‘The focus is on Ash, the action pivoting between his interactions with Anya and Jane, and some conversations – which play out in real time – grow tedious.’
Caroline McGinn at Time Out (3★) felt the play was a ‘missed opportunity’. She acknowledged: ‘It nails the exhaustion, the rows, the anxiety, the joy’. She would like to have known more about Ash’s mother and ‘I wanted more humour, more tension, more drama really.”Every aspect of the production is meticulous,’ said Susannah Clapp in The Observer (3★) but she didn’t think it was good enough as a stand alone play, suggesting it ‘would be an interesting interlude in a larger event’.
Ryan Gilbey writing for The Guardian (2★) had a similar thought: ‘there is a nagging feeling that the drama hasn’t reached full-term.’ As did Anya Ryan in The Times (2★) : ‘There are stories to be told about what happens to couples and families after childbirth, but this one isn’t quite grown yet.‘ She added, ‘much like the sleepless, tear-filled nights of the early years of parenthood, it feels like an endless slog to get through.’
Average critics’ rating 2.9★ Value Rating 58 (Value rating is the Average Critic Rating moderated by the typical ticket price. In theory, this means the higher the score the better value but, because of price variations, a West End show could be excellent value if it scores above 30 while an off-West End show may need to score above 60.
If you’ve seen The Cord, please add your review and rating below
Guys And Dolls at the Bridge Theatre. Photo: Manuel Harlan
Frank Loesser’s 1950 classic musical Guys And Dolls is given a significant makeover by Nicholas Hytner at The Bridge Theatre. His ‘big idea’ is to produce an immersive production in which some of the audience stand in the middle of the auditorium while sets rise and lower around them. Most critics liked the atmosphere this created although there was some disagreement about whether it helped or hindered the story, which is based on Damon Runyon’s humorous tales of New York street life. Bunny Christies’s set and the (Olivier winning) choreography by Arlene Phillips and James Cousins were also well received. There may be some variations in opinion but no review awarded less than four stars. Since the opening night reviews appeared, there has been a change of cast so the many highly complimentary remarks about the singer/actors have been omitted from this summary. (The new cast has also been praised.)
Susannah Clapp in The Observer (5★) led the charge: ‘Fuelled by Bunny Christie’s design, Tom Brady’s musical supervision and choreography by Arlene Phillips with James Cousins, it swings up, down and sideways, enveloping the audience without ever dimming the dazzle of performance.’ ‘This is immersive theatre with real point,’ she continued, explaining ‘the story ‘needs city jostle and faces from the street.’ The choreography, she said, ‘whisks across small spaces without seeming cramped, and has more flare than flounce, more expression than attitude.’
For Clive Davis in The Times (5★), it was ‘sheer bliss’. ‘On a cold, wet night, we had found our little corner of heaven,’ he purred, and noted ‘Bunny Christie’s neon-trimmed design is as stylish as the period costumes’.
Quentin Letts in The Sunday Times (5★) exulted in his idiosyncratic way about the ‘Joy, laughter, liberation from all the ghastly priggishness of the 21st century.’ Helen Hawkins reporting for The Arts Desk (5★) called it an ‘exuberant new production’. John Nathan in The Jewish Chronicle (5★) described how ‘The air is thrillingly charged with a frisson of danger and the energy of the in-yer-face performances.’ ‘it is the ambition of the evening that astounds’ he said.
For Nick Curtis in The Standard (5★), it’s a ‘near-flawless’ production. ‘I can’t stress enough the meticulousness and care that has gone into every aspect of this show. Blissful and exhilarating,’ he said. and ‘The choreography, by Arlene Phillips and James Cousins, in these tight and elevated spaces, is astonishing. Sarah Crompton at Whats On Stage (5★) declared it to be ‘a definitive and joyous piece of theatre. It is an absolute triumph, not to mention a blast.’ Throughout, the choreography by Arlene Phillips and the co-director James Cousins, fills the space with movement that is both classy and cool… It is a wonder and a tonic.’
Dominic Cavendish in The Telegraph (5★) loved the way ‘Hytner’s box of tricks, the Bridge, unleashes the show all around you if you’re one of the 380 punters standing in the thick of it. Even when seated, you’re gazing upon an extravaganza that explodes every which way.’ He liked ‘Hytner’s impeccable feelgood escapism’ and was impressed that ‘The choreography (Arlene Phillips and James Cousins) is fast and fluid, not too fancy, using spatial constriction to evoke a joyous hustle and bustle.’
Isobel Lewis in The Independent (4★) was much more enthusiastic: ‘The staging may be inventive, but this production already feels like a classic, knowing when to rock the boat and when to stick to what works. And boy, does it work.’ Sam Marlowe at the Stage (4★) thought, ‘The staging doesn’t reframe the show in any revelatory new way.’ Thus disagreeing with Susannah Clapp at The Observer (above) who said it had ‘a real point’. On the whole though, she declared that the production ‘sure is one swell time.’
Arifa Akbar from The Guardian (4★) in the seated area had a different view (in both senses), grumbling, ‘It was clear that the promenading audience was experiencing the show differently’. She was an outlier when it comes to the choreography, which in her opinion, ‘never quite flies, maybe owing to the slightly cramped size of the sets.’ Comparing it unfavourably with the Young Vic production of Oklahoma!, she said it is ‘an emphatically traditional enactment of the story itself, with period dress (costumes by Deborah Andrews) and exaggeratedly cartoonish characters.’ She acknowledged that it is ‘a feat of innovative staging’.
Average critics’ rating 4.7★ Value Rating 49 (Value rating is the Average Critic Rating divided by the typical ticket price. In theory, this means the higher the score the better value but, because of price variations, a West End show could be excellent value if it scores above 30 while an off-West End show may need to score above 60.)
Sophie Thompson and Charles Edwards in The Ballad of Hattie and James. Photo: Mark Senior
Emma John writing for explained the plot of Samuel Adamson’s new play: ‘two friends reconnect late in life, and what follows is a journey backward and forward through their timeline, exploring the love of music that brought them together and the events that have pushed them apart.’
[Links to full reviews are included but a number are behind paywalls and therefore may not be accessible]
Marianka Swain in The Telegraph 4 ‘a spellbinding showcase for the perfectly in-tune Sophie Thompson and Charles Edwards.’ ‘this is a rich reckoning with our younger selves, with talent, desire, art and absolution, led by two actors who together create a great emotional symphony.’ She concluded: ‘the revelation of the moments that have made them, as well as the missed connections that define them, are a powerful reminder of what we owe to each other.’ The critics nearly all agreed that the two central performances were powerful but disagreed about whether the time-jumping script worked or confused.
[Links to full reviews are included but a number are behind paywalls and therefore may not be accessible]
Tim Bano of The Independent (4★) was one of those who loved it, calling it ‘a big sweeping symphony of sexual identity and music…really good, really funny and really smart’. ‘Adamson writes brilliant dialogue,’ he said. He reserved special praise for the two leads: ‘It’s amazing to see the way they spin around each other during these long scenes, like magnets, sometimes attracting and sometimes repelling.’ ‘
Tom Wicker at Time Out (4★) also found them impressive: ‘As Hattie, a charismatic Thompson seems to disrupt the very air around her, sandpaper raw in a world determined to box her in. Edwards holds himself with excruciatingly effective tightness, clipping his lines with the simmering precision of a desk clerk who might be about to throw his typewriter out of the window.’
Clive Davis in The Times (3★) also praised the stars but with a caution: ‘Charles Edwards and Sophie Thompson make such an intense combination that you’re almost willing to overlook the script’s wilful, self-referential tangles.’ He also found fault with the way ‘Richard Twyman’s production rushes through too many key scenes.’ Sarah Hemming in The Financial Times (3★) also felt the actors were better than the play. They, she said, ‘find a spiky, intense chemistry’, and she did say the play was ‘richly textured, witty and original’ before adding, ‘it does suffer at its own hand: it’s very dense and packed, and the impressionistic whirl of periods and events sometimes makes it harder to anchor scenes, blurring their emotional impact’.
Emma Johnson commented in The Guardian (3★): ‘the revelation of the moments that have made them, as well as the missed connections that define them, are a powerful reminder of what we owe to each other.’
Lucinda Everett at WhatsOnStage (3★) disagreed about the lead actors: ‘Hattie and James’s connection never quite gets off the ground.’ She was also put off by the narrative: ‘thanks to all of the decade-hopping, the events that buffet their friendship feel oddly timed.’ Theatre Weekly‘s Oliver Valentine (3★) thought: ‘neither the characters or the play’s cliched middle-class dilemmas are interesting enough to drag out the epic saga that Adamson indulges in.’ Franco Milazzo in Broadway World (3★) was another who was unimpressed: ‘Some will find the final scene disappointingly overly sentimental, others a tearjerker of a goodbye. My hankie stayed where it was.’
Dave Fargnoli in The Stage (2★) found much to criticise: ‘(director Richard) Twyman does little to make the elusive story feel coherent, with an unevenly paced staging that rushes through the densest dialogue but slows to a crawl during poignant scenes.’
The Ballad of Hattie and James can be seen at The Kiln until May 18. Buy tickets direct from kilntheatre.com
Average critics’ rating 3.1★ Value Rating 78 (Value rating is the Average Critic Rating moderated by the typical ticket price. In theory, this means the higher the score the better value but, because of price variations, a West End show could be excellent value if it scores above 30 while an off-West End show may need to score above 60.)
If you’ve seen The Ballad of Hattie and James, please add your review and rating below
Sam Tutty and Dujonna Gift In Two Strangers. Photo: Tristram Kenton
The musical Two Strangers (Carry A Cake Across New York) underwent considerable development over the last few years before arriving at The Kiln in London where it mopped up enough critical and audience acclaim to justify a transfer to the West End. This two-hander tells the story of two 20-somethings in New York for a wedding. Sam Tutty (last seen in Evan Hansen) plays an enthusiastic British man who believes all the cliches about the Big Apple, and Dujonna Gift is a cynical New Yorker who puts him right. The plot is not some much about cake and more about them getting to know each and themselves.
The reviews for its West End reincarnation (average 4.3★) were even more enthusiastic than those for its Kiln run (average 3.8★). This is particularly interesting because many review outlets chose not to visit the show a second time, and leads one to question whether this best serves the readers. Sam Tutty and Dujonna Gift received high praise, Kit Buchan’s script is frequently complimented for its comedy and for being an unpredictable rom-com. Jim Barne and Kit Buchan‘s songs are generally- but not universally- liked, as are Tim Jackson‘s direction and Soutra Gilmour‘s set.
[Links to full reviews are included but a number are behind paywalls and therefore may not be accessible]
Alex Wood at WhatsOnStage (5★) thought it was ‘heartfelt, intimate, messy and utterly endearing’. He proclaimed: ‘Barne and Buchan’s book is up there with the funniest in the West End right now – both Tutty and Gift have the audiences in the palms of their hands with every wisecrack, wordplay and whimsy.’ And he liked the music: ‘The tunes themselves are for the most part big, catchy and chipper.’ Theatre Weekly’s Greg Stewart (5★) was also full of praise for them: ‘our leads have perfectly mastered the comic timing required to pull off the delicate balance between humour and pathos.’ And he loved the music: ‘Barne and Buchan’s spectacular score, which is constantly surprising, and consistently satisfying’. He was in no doubt, ‘it will melt your heart’.
Caroline McGinn at Time Out (4★) found the musical rom-com ‘not too sickly, but perfectly sweet.’ It was, she said, ‘carried joyfully onwards and upwards by the wit and charm of its excellent cast, its upbeat music and outstanding libretto.’
The cake failed to rise for Olivia Garrett at Radio Times (3★). She described it as ‘fresh, funky’ but also ‘muddled and tonally confusing’, explaining ‘the story moves from happy to sad to silly and back again’. Dominic Maxwell in The Sunday Times (3★) concluded: ‘Tutty and Gift excel, and earn their standing ovation. Yet the contrivances pile up, and there is a sense of almost-there about an appealing yet underplotted show. ‘
Two stars carry a play across London
For more opinions, we must turn to the reviews of the run at The Kiln. We won’t count the ones who sent a reviewer to both venues, like Alex Hood at WhatsOn Stage who awarded 3 stars (as opposed to the more recent 5 from his managing editor), or Greg Stewart at TheatreWeekly who saw it twice and gave it 5 stars on both occasions.
Kate Kellaway in The Observer (5★) describing it as ‘fresh, funny, ironic, inventive and moving’, analysed it thus: ‘its charm is in an intelligently calculated magic that does not lose sight of real life in all its bittersweetness and struggle.’ She concluded: ‘Tim Jackson’s production – no conventional romcom – is flawless. This show rings – and sings – true.’
David Jays in The Guardian (4★) took a similar view: ‘Funny, heartfelt but unsentimental, it’s a charmer…just the right mix of sugar and sour.’ He observed, ‘Soutra Gilmour’s set design, two skyscrapers of frost-shaded luggage circling on an endless carousel, perfectly captures the mood.’
Marianka Swain in The Telegraph (4★) thought the show was ‘a total charmer’. As for the stars, ‘They have contrasting but beautifully complementary voices – one sweet and fluting, one rich and powerful.’ At The Standard (4★) Nick Curtis noted: ‘the knowing schmaltz of Jim Barne and Kit Buchan’s script and score is undercut with larky wit and a determination to not always do the obvious.’
Patrick Marmion at the Mail (4★) thought ‘Tim Jackson’s production is pitched perfectly between fantasy and reality on Soutra Gilmour’s set of high-rise suitcases.’ For The Independent’s Alice Saville (4★), ‘the jokes land like a blizzard of falling snow. ‘
Cindy Marcolina writing for Broadway World (3★) was not won over. She liked the stars: ‘They both excel in the roles,’ and praised the director, ‘Tim Jackson orchestrates remarkable comic timing’ but ‘It’s the material that’s, regrettably, nothing special.’ Paul Vale in The Stage (3★) was another who thought ‘too few of the songs live up to the drama’.
Clive Davis in The Times (3 ‘★) got close to loving it: ‘What a tantalising near miss.’ He saw in it ‘lots of charm and impressive central performances from Dujonna Gift and Sam Tutty…The songs are tuneful enough, and the lyrics are subtle, but in the end the (writers) don’t quite make you care enough about what will happen to the two characters.’ That ‘near miss’ might have become a hit had he attended the West End opening night: one of his readers commented recently: ‘I’ve just seen it again, at the Criterion this time, and was delighted to see that they have improved the show since its run at the Kiln.’
Two Strangers (carry a cake across New York) is running at The Criterion until 31 August 2024. Buy tickets directly here
Average critics’ rating 4.2★ Value Rating 61 (Value rating is the Average Critic Rating divided by the typical ticket price. In theory, this means the higher the score the better value but, because of price variations, a West End show could be excellent value if it scores above 30 while an off-West End show may need to score above 60.)
They loved the play, they loved the production, but most of all they loved Rosie Sheehy in Machinal, now transferred from the Ustinov Studio in Bath to London’s Old Vic. The 1928 play by Sophie Treadwell, directed by Richard Jones, delves into the mind of a woman who murdered her husband, but let Time Out tell you why it’s so good.
[Links to full reviews are included but a number are behind paywalls and therefore may not be accessible]
Andrzej Lukowski at Time Out (5★): ‘Jones’s hyper-stylized production is audacious from start to finish…a tale of one woman standing up to the system turned into a pulverising rapture.’ For him, every element worked: ‘Hyemi Shin’s retina-searing set is unforgettable, Benjamin Grant’s sound design skin-crawling unnerving, Adam Silverman’s lighting exquisitely unsettling, Sarah Fahie’s movement ravishingly creepy.’ About the star, he said: ‘Sheehy is astonishing. There’s something almost Hogarthian about how each scene sees her nail a different aspect of alienation’
The Observer’s Susannah Clapp (5★) was deeply moved: ‘(Richard) Jones’s staging is singularly complete: every sinew alarmed, from the snap of a black rubber glove to the glimpse of a flower trapped in a glass bowl; everything galvanised by a first-rate performance from Rosie Sheehy.’
David Nice was just as enthusiastic on the Artsdesk (5★) ‘You rarely see such meticulous, detailed work in the theatre,’ he said. Again the lead actor stood out in a stand out show: ‘Sheehy…is central, visceral when she needs to be yet precise and controlled – the sort of performance you wonder how an actor can sustain night after night.’ He concluded: ‘this is theatre that demands so much of team and audience, maybe even changes your perspectives. Unmissable.’
Awarding yet more full marks, Sam Marlowe in The Stage (5★) proclaimed: ‘It’s a mind-bending, inexorable helter skelter into hell, surreal as a nightmare yet terrifyingly real.’ For her, Rosie Sheehy acted ‘with such raw anguish and fury that it almost hurts to watch.’
Sarah Hemming in the Financial Times (4★) reported: ‘In Richard Jones’s super, stark production, (the play) tears off the stage as if written yesterday, led by an outstanding performance from Rosie Sheehy.’ She had more to say about her: ‘It’s a brave, searingly physical performance.’ She summed up the production as ‘a staging of hallucinatory force.’
Nick Ferris in the Telegraph (4★) was also full of praise for the star: ‘It is a masterclass in how to play a character at the end of her tether. Sheehy is matched with a stellar supporting cast’ in what he called ‘an exceptional production’. For Dominic Maxwell in The Sunday Times (4★), ‘Some scenes go on a good chunk after you’ve got their point’, but ‘The outstanding acting makes up for much of that. It’s motored by a star-making performance by Rosie Sheehy as Helen. ‘
The one party pooper was Gary Naylor at Broadway World (3 ★) ‘Coming in at a gruelling 100 minutes all-through, the play is not an easy watch. Whether it’s worth the emotional investment required on both on sides of the fourth wall for its equivocating payoff is moot.’
Two major outlets decided their reviews of the original pre-transfer Ustinov Studio production were sufficient. Back then, Anya Ryan in The Times (5★) said: ‘this is a damning, dehumanising picture of industrialisation and sadness.’ And The Guardian’s Arifa Akbar (4★) concluded: ‘We walk away in horror, just as we should.’
Average critics’ rating 4.0★ Value Rating 66 (Value rating is the Average Critic Rating divided by the typical ticket price. In theory, this means the higher the score the better value but, because of price variations, a West End show could be excellent value if it scores above 30 while an off-West End show may need to score above 60.)
