Apollo Theatre, Shaftesbury Avenue

Fawlty Towers is so well-loved, there was always a danger that a stage adaptation would disappoint. For some critics, it did, but most found that John Cleese’s theatrical version of three classic episodes honoured the original. Opinions varied on whether the actors were making the characters their own or simply doing impressions but they did their job well and, crucially, Adam Jackson-Smith impressed as Basil Fawlty.

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

Neil Norman in The Express (4★) thought it was ‘the funniest show in town.’ He said, ‘Director Caroline Jay Ranger ensures that the comedy timing is immaculate’ and ‘Jackson-Smith is well nigh perfect.’ Fiona Mountford of the i (4★) ‘emerged two hours later, giddily and delightfully weak from laughing’. Clive Davis, an avowed fan of the TV series, declared in The Times (4★) ‘this genial condensing of three episodes delivers a hugely entertaining blast of unadorned nostalgia.’

Marianka Swain at LondonTheatre (4★) positively wallowed in the nostalgia. ‘This brand of farce, building from comedy-of-manners to manic slapstick, is also very much of its time.’ ‘with not a single word wasted, and some of the best punchlines ever written.’ ‘Caroline Jay Ranger keeps the pacing brisk and maintains the original’s zany energy and pin-sharp timing.’ Aliya Al-Hassan at BroadwayWorld (4★) called it ‘a very funny and entertaining evening, one that is remarkably faithful to the original material.’ She thought, ‘The cast is superb, landing every joke and intonation expected of them’ and picked out the main character, ‘Adam Jackson-Smith is the reincarnation of Cleese’ She was pleased with ‘the incredibly deft comic timing and old-fashioned and very British entertainment.’

In The Sunday Times (4★) Dominic Maxwell overcame his fears about putting a beloved TV show on stage: ‘This is a celebration, not a museum…This stuff still works. And it is done here with love as well as a laser focus. It is nothing I haven’t seen before, but it made me laugh a lot.’ It may not seem like it but Patrick Marmion in the Daily Mail (4) was happy that it replicated the TV show: ‘Caroline Jay Ranger’s production offers her company all the creative freedom that Kim Jong Un grants the people of North Korea.’

Brian Logan in The Guardian (3★) was quite enthusiastic: ‘this Fawlty Towers redux is no pale imitation of the original, but a very vivid one.’ Adam Bloodworth at CityAM (3★) seemed to like it despite himself: ‘it’s better than you’d think.’ He ended, ‘it might not be challenging theatre, but it’s a nostalgic joy.’ Dominic Cavendish in the Telegraph (3★), while saying it was ‘indisputably funny’, cautioned ‘the show falls far short of its peerless source material.’ ‘You admire the fidelity of the impersonations,’ he said, ‘while still pining futilely for the genuine article.’ He felt the comedy had worked better on television back in the 1970s: ‘the use of farcical elements…looks decidedly creaky today’

It was all too familiar for Tom Wicks in Time Out (3) : ‘We’re left anticipating old laughs rather than being surprised by new ones.’ Theo Bosanquet for WhatsOnStage (3) thought the same: ‘it inevitably struggles to feel like anything more than a kind of waxwork impression.’

For Nick Curtis in the Standard (3★) it was an ‘efficient and energetic stage adaptation’ but an ‘oddly soulless affair’. Twisting the butter knife, he continued, ‘it feels like an exercise in zombie nostalgia.’ While others revelled in its fidelity to the original, for Nick, ‘Caroline Jay Ranger’s production, overseen by Cleese, is too loyal to the source.’ I think we know the answer when Nick found himself ‘wondering if there were any artistic rather than purely commercial justification for this stage adaptation.’ As Manuel might say, ‘¿Qué’

Fawlty Towers The Play can be seen at the Apollo Theatre until 28 September 2024. Buy tickets directly from FawltyTowersWestend.com

Average critics’ rating 3.6★
Value Rating 40 (Value rating is the Average Critic Rating divided by the typical ticket price.)

If you’ve seen Fawlty Towers, please add your review and rating below

Trafalgar Theatre

It’s a bit like bands playing their greatest hits. Last year Mark Rylance revived his performance as Rooster Byron in Jerusalem. This year we have Denise Gough returning in Duncan Macmillan‘s People, Place & Things. The revival recreates the exact 2015 production with the same director (Jeremy Herrin) and set designer (Bunny Christie) with critics agreeing that Ms Gough is every bit as good and, in some opinions, even better, as the actress who lies to others and herself as she struggles with addiction.

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

Susannah Clapp in The Observer (5★) declared, ‘Jeremy Herrin’s tremendous production, with tremendous Gough, is even better second time around.’ Anya Ryan in The Times (5★) said, ‘as nauseating and adrenaline-spiking as it gets, this is also theatre at its most vivid.’ It was, she declared, ‘an unforgettable night.’ Sam Marlowe in The Stage (5★) pulled out every adjective in her dictionary to praise the play and its star. ‘Duncan Macmillan’s drama is a hurtling exploration of addiction, existential crisis and identity, at once visceral and brainy, and Jeremy Herrin’s staging…is electrifying: a sensory immersion galvanised with euphoria and panic, rage, fear and pain.’ As for Denise Gough, her character’s struggle against addiction ‘is conveyed with such sweaty, nauseous, wracking vividness that, watching it, you almost forget to breathe.’ There are yet more adjectives: ‘Gough is blazingly charismatic, combining pugnacious swagger, fierce intelligence and raw vulnerability’

Alun Hood at WhatsOnStage (5★) also thought it was better than ever: ‘While you can’t improve on perfection, you can still surround it with such levels of excellence that its lustre seems magnified so that it shines even brighter.’  He listed the components: ‘Andrzej Goulding’s unsettling video designs, Bunny Christie’s clinical tiled set (featuring audience members onstage as though taking part in a particularly elaborate group therapy session) and above all Tom Gibbons’ sound and Matthew Herbert’s music…conspire to suggest a life tumbling out of control.’ He concluded it was ‘A painful pleasure, and a must-see all over again.’ It was not to be missed, agreed Aliya Al-Hassan at Broadway World (5★): ‘Staging, writing and acting meld into a pretty perfect production. However, this is very much Gough’s show; her mesmeric and urgent performance is a must-see.’

Jessie Thompson, Arts Editor at The Independent (5★), thought Denise Gough was better than ever, saying her performance ‘appears only to have grown in richness and exquisite fragility’. She praised the production as ‘a celebration of the healing power of art and theatre. It’s an electric communal experience. The play can now be regarded as a contemporary classic, Gough’s performance confirmed as one of the greatest of her generation.’

Nick Curtis in The Standard (5★) brought out the superlatives. ‘I’ve rarely seen a show where script, production and star mesh so perfectly. Bursts of pumping techno express moments of chaos and abandon. Bunny Christie’s antiseptic rehab-centre set is a blank canvas for staticky video projection and sudden eruptions: it frames a bank of audience members on the stage behind, so we can all have a good, hard look at ourselves.’ Even more than that, ‘it’s Gough’s navigation of a gamut of emotion, from withdrawal jitters to defensive truculence, disinhibition to raw vulnerability, that drives the evening. She’s magnificent.’ Olivia Rook for LondonTheatre (5★) agreed, ‘Gough’s titanic performance is still the beating heart of this play.’

Fiona Mountford at the i (4★) said, ‘this is Gough’s show and she is, once again, quite simply magnificent.’

Both the star and play wowed Time Out‘s (4★) Andrzej Lukowski. ‘Gough is magnificent and absurd in equal measure, a performance that’s simultaneously high comedy and high tragedy.’ He had reservations about the play but went on to say: ‘the first half’s whiff of cliche feels like an effective way of lulling us into a false sense of security before a second half that has to rank as one of the greatest in twenty-first century drama.’

Arifa Akbar in The Guardian (4★) ‘Bunny Christie’s pulsating white set design shows Emma (Denise Gough) bared – a specimen to be examined through the speculum of the stage, while simultaneously taking us into her mind, with all its distorted perceptions. The configuration of the auditorium mirrors this duality, giving the illusion of an audience that is seeing itself from without as well as being within.’ It was, she said, ‘bleak – but also brilliantly done’

A rare vote of dissent came from Nick Ferris in The Telegraph (3★). He couldn’t deny the power of the lead: ‘Gough has lost none of her power in bringing this complicated antiheroine to life. It is truly a summit performance for an actor that should be studied at drama schools for years to come’, but he questioned the quality of the play. He said, ‘It is certainly entertaining, but achieves this end only through playing to the basic dark allure that stories of drugs and broken people have.’ Worse than that, ‘Act two, unfortunately, sees the plot lose its way, descending into a mix of cheap stereotype and unrealistic climax.’ ‘In the end,’ he lamented, ‘it feels a shame that the story cannot sustain itself to meet the heights of Gough’s performance.’

Average critics’ rating 4.6★
Value Rating 53 (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.)

People, Places & Things is at the Trafalgar Theatre until 10 August 2024. Buy tickets directly from Trafalgar Theatre.

Read Paul Seven Lewis’s review of the original production of People Places & Things

If you’ve seen People, Places & Things, please add your review and rating below

The Open Air Theatre, Regent’s Park

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.’

Twelfth Night is performing at the Open Air Theatre until 8 June 2024  Buy tickets direct from https://openairtheatre.com

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

London Coliseum

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 from spiritedawayuk.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

Lyceum Hammersmith

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 Andrzej Lukowski’s review in 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.’

The Bridge Theatre

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’.

Guys And Dolls is running at the Bridge Theatre until 4 January 2025.   Click here to buy tickets direct from the theatre

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.)

Link to Paul Seven Lewis’s review of Guys And Dolls

If you’ve seen Guys And Dolls, please add your review and rating below

The Criterion

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.

Two stars carry a play across London

• Lyttelton Theatre

An adaptation by Ben Power (The Lehman Trilogy) of Charles Dickens’ last completed novel Our Mutual Friend, with songs by P J Harvey, must have seemed like a surefire winner. Running through the typically Dickensian larger-than-life characters and complex plot about money, poverty, death and resurrection is the River Thames itself. Sadly for the National Theatre, the critics were not swept away. On thecwhole, they found the script shalloe but Bunny Christie’s set which evoked the river went down well. PJ Harvey’s song proved a sticking for most critics. So, Ian Rickson’s production was greeted with three and two star reviews with just one critic enthusiastic enough to award four stars.

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

That was Andrzej Lukowski in Time Out (4★). ‘The performance space becomes the Thames – the effect is majestic and disconcerting (I felt a bit seasick in places),’ he shared. It was, he said, ‘Dickens’s late class drama turned into a work both elemental and righteous.’

Arifa Akbar in The Guardian (3★) found it ‘light on the satire and heavy on mood, strikingly staged as a kind of 19th-century noir.’ She concluded: ‘The play winds up to a melodramatic end, with its potboiler elements exposed, but it still retains a curious power, and performances shine.’

Sarah Hemming at the Financial Times (3★) admired the ‘restless, intelligent, absorbing production’ but thought, ‘as drama it is held back by sheer narrative bulk.’ Susannah Clapp in The Observer (3★) decided: ‘Ian Rickson’s production aims to be more than episodically charged, to explore the life of the city that is not contained by character. It is not sufficiently wraparound-vibrant to achieve this.’

For Sam Marlowe in The Stage (3★) ‘emotional impact is a casualty’ and  ‘its characters don’t quite come to life, drowning in the politics and plot mechanics’ but she did appreciate ‘The performances are sinewy and direct, with Ellie-May Sheridan scene-stealing.’ Dominic Cavendish in the Telegraph  (3★) agreed: ‘the laurels go to the transfixing stage debutante Ellie-May Sheridan, who seems to have stepped out of Dickens’s imagination.’ Otherwise, for him, it was a ‘five-star wow bobbing in a three-star show.’

Fiona Mountford in the i (3★), like many others couldn’t resist a watery metaphor: ‘we emerge from this theatrical river feeling slightly soggy and mildly bewildered.’ Sarah Crompton at Whats On Stage (3★) also took a dip: ‘it feels bogged down in the shallows, never quite plunging into the depths of the story’s meaning or fulfilling its own intelligent and honest intentions. It’s full of integrity, but lacks drama.’

And so to the ones who really took against it. Alexander Cohen at Broadway World (2★)  said: ‘reduced to its naked mechanics, the exposition laden writing lacks the lustrous life blood that so warmly flows through the veins of Dickens’s literary worlds.’

Clive Davis in The Times (2★) came out fighting, calling it ‘this weirdly misconceived adaptation’. He didn’t pull his punches: ‘Ian Rickson’s lumbering production is anything but a page-turner.’ And a final kick at the ‘crowded, undernourished melodrama.’

For David Benedict at The Standard (2★) it was ‘a leaden three-and-a-quarter hours.’ His analysis of the failings of the adaptation included this comment: ‘where Dickens’ contextualised writing allows coincidence to thrive, in dialogue as bald as this, the coincidences just feel contrived.’ He concluded, ‘Near the end, Rokesmith sings “Why, why, why, why, why…” Indeed.’

PJ Harvey’s songs

It seems you either like PJ Harvey or you don’t, and the critics didn’t, except for the Time Out reviewer who is clearly a fan: ‘Harvey’s songs are integral…the poised drama they provide feels vital to a show which is bigger on storytelling than emotions and might have felt flat without its spine-tingling tunes.’ The Guardian had a foot in both camps, describing the songs as ‘anti-ballads’ whose ‘seriousness gives the story a lugubrious depth but also undercuts Dickens’ satire and levity.’

No-one else had a good thing to say about them. Tim Bano in The Independent (3★) noted ‘as the story gets more interesting and the characters richer, the songs remain the same – each character stands centre stage and sings out at the audience – until you can’t help sighing a little when another one strikes up, knowing another dirge is on its way.’ The i had a similar thought: ‘It’s a fine idea, but one that plays to decidedly diminishing returns as the mournful, almost identical-sounding numbers mount up.’

The Financial Times said the songs ‘add to the ballast and, often in a gloomily low register, are challenging to deliver.’ For WhatsOnStage, ‘the songs, which are dark and relentless as well as impressive, have a tendency to stop the action rather than move it on.’ The Telegraph agreed: ‘those ditties often impede the action, without adding much ambience.‘ ‘It sounds as if Harvey is constantly recycling the same two slender, indie-flavoured themes,’ said The Times.

For The Observer, ‘They supply a dark, rough undertow but they don’t push on the drama. Rather, like a tide, they simply recur.’ To the ears of The Standard: ‘Harvey’s ceaselessly repetitive, deadeningly slow rhythms and mostly stolidly unchanging harmonies – unhelped by Powers’ flat, earnest lyrics – never make a case for songs being in the show whatsoever.’ Broadway World too could have done without them and didn’t let politeness stand in the way of a good insult. The ‘sludgy dirge’ was a ‘bloated concoction of subdued power ballads paired with painfully superficial lyrics are such a tagged-on afterthought that the production couldn’t just go on happily without it, but would actively improve if it were abandoned.’

Thank goodness for Bunny Christie’s set

Time Out gave a vivid description: ‘At first the performance space looks virtually unadorned. Soon though, the entire ceiling – or rather a series of poles the lights are attached to – starts to undulate, rising and falling like the tide. Eventually it’s joined by the very surface of the stage, which ripples and heaves.’

The Independent recorded: ’50 spotlights hanging over the stage in receding strips, each undulating slowly, giving the queasy impression of the river somehow reflected in the sky, rather than the other way around.’ The Observer said: ‘Christie’s set – with iron lighting rigs that rise and fall – is evocatively adamantine, when not looking like decor for a 21st-century loft.’

The Stage referred to ‘a flinty, hard-edged staging‘ and the i called it ‘striking’.

London Tide can be seen at the National’s Lyttelton Theatre until 22 June 2024

Average critics’ rating 2.8★

Value Rating 41 (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. This rating is based on opening night prices- theatres may raise or lower prices during the run.)

If you’ve seen London Tide, please add your review and rating below