The Globe Theatre

In the Globe’s new bi-lingual production of Shakespeare’s Antony and Cleopatra, the Egyptians speak in British Sign Language, while the Romans speak in English. Surtitles are provided for both languages. A couple of reviews labelled it a success, but many of the critics, while praising the actors, had doubts about whether the mix of languages worked, and some decided it definitely didn’t.

[Links to full reviews are included but a number are behind paywalls and therefore may not be accessible]

The Stage‘s Dave Fargnoli (4★) praised the production, ‘Director Blanche McIntyre and associate director Charlotte Arrowsmith – who, like a significant portion of the cast, is deaf – make the transitions between signed and spoken segments almost seamless.’ He liked the leads: ‘As Antony, John Hollingworth makes clear the general’s inner struggle between duty and desire. He is vapid and changeable, yet there is no doubting the intensity of his fascination with Cleopatra. Deaf actor Nadia Nadarajah ably ties together the Egyptian queen’s many contradictions. Sometimes regal, sometimes outrageously extra, she is never less than a commanding presence.’

Lucinda Everett for WhatsOnStage (4★) was positive about the use of BSL: ‘the cast’s signing powerfully brings to life Shakespeare’s imagery.’ ‘The way the languages and captions are used,’ she explained, ‘mixed, withheld, chosen above one another – becomes symbolic of many things…diplomacy…pain…death…love.’ She was concerned that ‘John Hollingworth’s Antony seems a touch too level-headed. Although his commanding physicality and charisma still make him a compelling watch.’ However, ‘Nadarajah’s Cleopatra meanwhile is a pint-sized powerhouse. Mercurial and witty, as all good Cleopatras are, but also charming, fierce, and at times delightfully petulant.’

Kate Wyver reported for The Guardian (3★) ‘Nadia Nadarajah is a regal Cleopatra. Obsessive and quick to temper, she is rash and romantic’, and referring to the surtitles, ‘Far from being distracting, they offer a strong case for such visual aids becoming a permanent fixture in the theatre.’

Other critics had more reservations and some were downright hostile.

The Standard‘s Nick Curtis (3★) was both impressed: ‘To have brought something so bold and complex to the stage at all is a technical triumph for director Blanche McIntyre. And disappointed: ‘Her production captures granular relationships but misses the big picture.’ ‘The whole thing,’ he declared, ‘is a mishmash of the thrillingly radical and the ridiculous.’

Julia Rank for LondonTheatre (3★ ) noted, ‘the production is most effective in building the relationship between Cleopatra and her ladies-in-waiting’. Despite acknowledging that the use of BSL sent out a ‘powerful contemporary message’, she said she found it ‘something of an endurance test’.

Sarah Hemming of the Financial Times (3★) pointed out, ‘This is a knotty, wordy play, brimming with great poetry. That makes for a great deal of intricate text, quite long to sign, and some passages, such as the countryman’s gag-riddled speech near the end, fell flat. Unless you know the play by heart, you find yourself reading the surtitles a lot, at the expense of experiencing the performances fully.’

Time Out‘s Andrjez Lukowski (3★) found it ‘fun’ and thought ‘Nadarajah is excellent: she plays Cleopatra with her whole body, and her heady physicality and total sense of living in the moment sets the whole stage alight.’ However he summed up, ‘It’s a spirited and breezy take on Shakespeare’s oft-dense tragedy that I’d say doesn’t quite work.’ He explained, ‘the production’s switching between languages has a tendency to disorientingly change the energy of the show’.

Debbie Gilpin for BroadwayWorld (3★) also didn’t think the mixing of two languages worked and she too found it an ‘endurance test’: ‘Unless you fit in the Venn diagram of hearing person and BSL fluent, if you want to know what’s going on you need to spend at least half of the play reading big chunks of text – and the whole thing with Shakespeare is that it has a far greater effect on you if you get the words direct from the actor. This is why teachers bring students to the theatre, rather than just making them read the script.’

The Telegraph‘s Claire Allfree (3★) agreed somewhat: ‘Blanche McIntyre’s admirably well intentioned production struggles to achieve lift off. Surtitles are a necessary irritant in theatre, regardless of what language is being translated; here, they end up badly marginalising individual performances.’ She blamed its failure primarily on ‘a production that, simply put, lacks ideas.’

Fiona Mountford at i-news (2★) was more blunt, ‘Unfortunately, the finished product is dismal, nigh-on incomprehensible and with almost no depth of characterisation.’ Referring to the surtitles, she observed, ‘Essentially, the evening entails a speed-read of this towering tragedy and that is a tough ask even of those intimately familiar with its shifting allegiances. Shakespeare without the aid of spoken tone and inflection is a considerable challenge.’

Clive Davis in The Times (1★) was even less impressed by what he called ‘Blanche McIntyre’s woefully unfocused bilingual production’. ‘Much of the time…the drama is played out like a clumsy, leering sitcom,’ he said. ‘Nor is there any sense of electricity between Nadia Nadarajah’s Cleopatra and John Hollingworth’s Mark Antony.’

Critics’ Average Rating 2.9★

Antony and Cleopatra can be seen at the Globe Theatre until 15 September 2024. Click here to buy tickets direct from the theatre

If you’ve seen Antony and Cleopatra at the Globe Theatre, please add your review and rating below

Almeida Theatre

The Years, based on Annie Ernaux’s autobiographical book Les Années, features Findlay, Romola Garai, Gina McKee,  Anjli Mohindra and Harmony Rose-Bremner playing the same character at five different stages of her life, as well as the other people they encounter. The play is adapted and directed by Eline Arbo. Sex, like a river, runs through a play which includes much humour and a harrowing abortion scene. The critics were generally impressed by the acting and the way the story was told, but some dissenting reviewers found it didn’t take off.

[Links to full reviews are included but a number are behind paywalls and therefore may not be accessible]

Holly O’Mahony in The Stage (5★) described it as ‘an exploration of womanhood that is as riveting as it is reflective, passionate yet void of sentimentality, and rebelliously sexual from start to finish. It is simultaneously a personal story, a generational one and universal in its depictions of the female experience.’ She said, ‘It’s a woman in her own words, unfiltered, impassioned and sincere.’

The Guardian‘s Arifa Akbar (5★) extolled its many virtues: ‘Wit and whimsy sits alongside darkness and you feel the protagonist’s blackest moments keenly but there is sisterliness, too, as other versions of the woman acknowledge the trauma of the moment’ and ‘While this woman’s life is full of compromise, it is in no way a disappointment. Sexual expression and joy become key across the ages and it is joyous in itself to see this enacted so uninhibitedly on stage.’ She concluded, ‘you feel the passage of time, both in this protagonist’s life and your own. It leaves theoretical questions around history, memory and love in the mind, long after its end. There is so much emotional depth, surprise and theatrical virtuosity here that it holds you rapt across the ages. What an accomplishment.’

Isobel Lewis for The Independent (5★) said, ‘a tapestry of history is weaved, constructing the full, extraordinary image of a life that is, in many ways, totally ordinary. The play captures these contradictions, finding laughter in tragedy and devastating detail in mundanity. It moved me in ways theatre often tries to but rarely achieves.’

Fiona Mountford at the i (5★) told how ‘The five performers mesh together mesmerically; they are all Annie, as Annie, like everyone, is a permanent palimpsest of memories. These superlative two hours make us reflect profoundly upon our own position in, and transition through, this procession of photographs, memories and life stages.’

‘I shall remember The Years for many a theatre season to come,’ declared Matt Wolf for TheArtsDesk (5★). He described how ‘We sense her adolescent awakening, sex and sexual desire a leitmotif throughout, and the way in which age confers wisdom and enlightenment alongside a bewilderment at a younger generation whose shared lexicon may not be available to their elders.’

The Observer‘s Susannah Clapp (5★) was impressed that the production ‘gives new life to the uneasy relationship between page and stage, showing that adaptation can be not simply piggybacking but revelation. Arbo’s reimagining…cleaves open an important piece of literature and makes its significance glow.’ About the cast, she said, ‘these actors make everything count.’

‘With minor reservations, I absolutely loved this,’ said Nick Curtis in the Standard (4★). He expanded, ‘Findlay may be less well known outside theatre circles (despite a strong screen career), but her presence is a guarantee of quality. McKee’s blend of nuance and swagger here made me think she should be the next Doctor Who. Garai is commandingly brilliant. Mohindra and Rose-Bremner are bold and charming. A winner.’ His reservation? ‘It’s yet another play where a writer bangs on about writing and showcases their own impeccable cultural taste’.

Time Out‘s Andrjez Lukowski (4★) thought it was ‘a playful couple of hours, fluidly directed by Albo. There are harrowing moments but it’s also full of humour and humorous interplay.’ He said, ‘the performers are charismatic, fierce, playful’, and observed, ‘none of what we’re seeing is really ‘the past’, ‘the future’ or ‘now’; it’s a human life, which includes all these events equally.’

Dominic Maxwell in The Times (4★) wrote, ‘The longer it goes on, the more joyous it feels, even as it looks decay and obsolescence in the face. Other characters are deliberately sketchy. You leave, though, understanding this woman’s place in the world — and by extension your own — in a new way. It’s a real eye-opener.’

Patrick Marmion in the Mail (4★) was complimentary: ‘Between them, the five women create a frank, unsettling and thoughtful performance that might best be described as a game of cherchez la femme.’

Alun Hood for WhatsOnStage (3★) had mixed feelings about it: ‘I found myself torn between being moved by its female driven authenticity and the consistent vision of one woman navigating seismic times, then utterly frustrated by its elliptical nature. It’s certainly not a good play by any traditional standards, but it has a haunting insistence that can’t be written off.’ He described it as ‘a bewildering mixed bag as a piece of theatre, but it’s strangely magnificent. It’s tremendously self-indulgent, sometimes clumsily staged… but it’s also gamely, sometimes stunningly, performed and full of roaring life.’

Dzifa Benson writing for the Telegraph (3★) found ‘(Arbo’s) reverence for her source material hampers its execution on stage; she doesn’t quite manage to slough off its limitations, which prevents the play from becoming a truly adventurous take on Ernaux’s work. In this production, it’s the acting that saves the day.’

Gary Naylor in BroadwayWorld (3★) was blunter, calling the story ‘a middle class life, one insulated from poverty by money and education, one blessed with friends and family and achievement, but also presented as unfulfilled, paralysed by ennui and hobbled by unsatisfactory men,’ but acknowledged that if you put that aside you might find it ‘a moving and thought-provoking two hours’.

Critics’ Average Rating 4.2★

The Years can be seen at the Almeida Theatre until 31 August 2024. This production is sold out but check the theatre’s website for returns.

If you’ve seen The Years at the Almeida Theatre, please add your review and rating below