Theatre Reviews Roundup: Look Back In Anger / Roots

Almeida Theatre

In their Angry And Young season, The Almeida has revisited two plays from the 1950s that helped revolutionise the English stage. Both concern working class people and are set in kitchens (hence the nickname ‘kitchen sink drama’?). Atri Banerjee directs John Osborne’s Look Back In Anger and Diyan Zora directs Arnold Wesker’s Roots. Each critic had a favourite, while often not liking the other: where some saw a striking portrait of anger and misogyny in Jimmy Porter in Look Back in Anger, others were merely disturbed; some admired Roots‘ defiant Beattie, others thought the play lacked passion. All admired the stars Billy Howle and Morfydd Clark. I’ve separated comments about the two plays but the star ratings sometimes covered both, and sometimes star ratings were omitted.

Look Back In Anger

The Guardian‘s Arifa Akbar (2★) was on the attack: ‘watching it now is a curiously cold anthropological experience’. ‘John Osborne’s pugilistic sweet-stall seller…looks like a charmless, self-pitying tyrant here who weaponises his working-class chip against his wife.’

Patrick Marmion in the Mail (2★) joined in, ‘There’s a strong seam of misogyny in all Osborne’s writing — and Howle does little more than lend this sullen, self-pitying exponent a babyish whimper. The play has little to teach us, and does less to amuse.’

The Times’ Clive Davis (3★) felt ‘watching the endlessly self-pitying Jimmy complain about his wife, Alison, is like watching a thoroughly one-sided boxing match’. Sam Marlowe in The Stage said, ‘The unrelenting verbiage of Jimmy Porter, as he assaults Ellora Torchia as his upper-class wife Alison with a battery of taunts and insults, is heavy going and quickly begins to seem like overkill.’

Fiona Mountford in the i (3★) called it, ‘this interminable bore of an often misogynistic rant’. Susannah Clapp in The Observer (3) took a similar stand: ‘Billy Howle dazzles as Porter: as raw and ranging as Poor Tom on King Lear’s heath. But for all their force, his speeches are puny: Osborne glorying in his misogynistic power.’

Andrjez Lukowksi of Time Out (3★) commented, ‘antihero Jimmy Porter’s abusive treatment of his upper middle class wife Alison is deeply problematic. It was doubtless meant to be so at the time as well, but it was written in an age with a different attitude towards domestic violence, and I think the passage of years has made Jimmy an increasingly repulsive, harder to emphasise with character. ‘ He didn’t like with the way the production moved away from the original’s naturalism: ‘At the end of the day a Pinteresque take on Osborne neither conveys the shattering impact of Look Back in Anger’s original incarnation nor, crucially, can it out-Pinter Pinter.’

Aleks Sierz at The Arts Desk (4★) took a more positive view: ‘What’s exciting theatrically is Osborne’s truthfulness in depicting masculinist attitudes which are as prevalent today as they were some 70 years ago. Yes Jimmy rants; yes, he’s unbearable (we have all surely met his type); yes, his opinions are disagreeable. But, boy, does he light up the stage.’

Tim Bano in The Standard (4★) called it ‘a crackling piece of drama’. For him, ‘Banerjee pulls the tension tighter and tighter, a nasty, thrilling tension, in which Porter expresses his vile, misogynistic, insulting views, shoving them at his wife and friend Cliff because there’s nowhere else for them to go.’

The Telegraph‘s Dzifa Benson (4★) said, ‘Howle portrays (Jimmy) as a coercive abuser, with a nervy, febrile energy that always feels dangerously on edge and ready to explode at any minute.’

Matt Wolf for LondonTheatre (4★) said, ‘you shiver at Jimmy’s weaponising of verbal finesse – language from his mouth cuts arguably more deeply than a knife – even as you sense a lost and haunted manchild adrift in a world that, as Jimmy knows full well, doesn’t give a damn.’

Sarah Hemming in The Financial Times (4★) declared, ‘It’s a blazing production of a tough, ugly, angry, desperate, sad play.’ Sarah Crompton at Whats on Stage (4★) observed, ‘(Howle’s) Jimmy really is lost and by emphasising that, Banerjee subtly counteracts Osborne’s unbearable desire to see this ruthless man-child as a hero.’

For Alexander Cohen at Broadway World (5★) was the most enthusiastic, ‘To experience John Osborne gut the audience like a fish, all their grotesque innards splayed out in front of you is as intoxicating as it is nasty…Banerjee makes it clear as day: his clenched indignation is even more pathetic in 2024.’

Roots

The Guardian (4★) said, ‘It is a static play but there are masterful subtleties around class and interplay of characters built into its pace, alongside humour.’ The Observer (4★) called it ‘an extraordinary piece of work: intimate and visionary’.

The Times (4★) noted, ‘Morfydd Clark is utterly convincing in this role. Beatie’s tragedy is that she patronises her folks yet has acquired all her new values from a bohemian boyfriend’. LondonTheatre (4★) called Clark ‘a stonking star turn’.

Dzifa Benson in the Telegraph (4★) said, ‘Morfydd Clark lends (Beattie) a breezy charm and resilience that seem to belie the raw vulnerability she displays when Beatie’s mother gives her a dressing down.’

The Financial Times (4★) enjoyed ‘Diyan Zora’s deftly paced and beautifully acted production of Roots … She keeps Wesker’s punctilious naturalism and yet frames the drama as a memory play.’

The i (3★) said, ‘Wesker lets out an impassioned cry for working-class liberation through greater curiosity and captures the timeless emotional theme of the facility with which children blame their parents for their own failings. Beatie has strong roots in this limited but loving place; a top-quality 100 minutes of drama shows that she also has a winningly defiant mind of her own.’

The Stage thought, ‘Clark makes Beatie’s eventual epiphany powerfully moving.’ As to the production, ‘overall, it’s a brisk staging that serves the play well, and if it does so without any particular innovation, it’s crammed with texture and feeling.’

Whats On Stage (3★) took a different view: ‘The problem is that Wesker’s writing lacks the ability to leap into the family’s minds; it’s a sociological study rather than a drama. Diyan Zora’s stylised, non-naturalistic staging pushes them further away.’ For the Mail (3★), ‘Wesker’s play…works best as social history.’

The Standard (3★) didn’t find much to get excited about: ‘The anger is deadened, drowned out in a society that’s far angrier, and far louder. Zora’s revival goes some way in cracking open the slightly dry carapace that surrounds the piece, and there are undoubtedly great moments, but too often it feels like an experiment in reviving a forgotten play, too much like homework.’

Critics’ average ratings:
Look Back In Anger 3.5★ Roots 3.6★

Look Back In Anger and Roots can be seen at The Almeida Theatre until 23 November 2024. Buy direct from the theatre

October 7, 2024October 8, 2024

Theatre Reviews Roundup: Juno and the Paycock

Gielgud Theatre

One To Avoid?

The 100th anniversary of Sean O’Casey’s tragicomedy turned into more of a wake than a celebration as critic after critic laid into the production. If the producers hoped a barnstorming performance from Mark Rylance would carry the day, they will have been disappointed. Even critics who liked his over-the-top acting weren’t sure whether it worked in the context of the production. Many weren’t convinced that the production itself had got the balance right between comedy and tragedy. With no less than four 2 star reviews from leading critics, Juno and the Paycock has one of the worst average ratings and value ratings of the year so far.

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

Time Out’s Andrzej Luwoski (4★) was lone in giving four stars and almost alone in loving Mark Rylance’s performance: ‘Rylance has gone full vaudevillian… he rocks a toothbrush moustache, a penchant for dazzling extremes of physical business, and a tendency to directly address the audience or look bewildered out of the corners of his eyes as if he can’t work out why he’s trapped in a play. For the first half he’s so dazzlingly strange and doing so much more than anyone else – much of it inscrutable – that it’s hard to focus on the other actors. I found it brilliantly, bizarrely funny, the sort of auteur performance that no other actor alive would so much as think of giving.’ He was right to say, ‘I suspect reviews will be divided on whether it makes any sense in the wider context of the production.’ He added emphatically, ‘But you know, if somebody offered me a Picasso I wouldn’t fret that it didn’t go with the furniture.’

Marianka Swain of LondonTheatre (3★) took a similar view‘ of Mark Rylance’s performance. Aided by his Charlie Chaplin moustache, he relishes the vaudevillian aspects of O’Casey’s work’…’However, Rylance is operating in a completely different register to the rest of the cast, who, while also alert to the work’s humour, offer much more grounded naturalism. That means he frequently pulls focus unnecessarily in a scene with his clowning, and undermines some of the darker material.’

Alice Saville in The Independent (3★) was disappointed that the play’s ‘deep sense of injustice and pain doesn’t get space to breathe here,’ but felt its male star saved it: ‘Rylance’s charisma knits together a production that’s full of roustabout hilarity and poignancy mingled together, bright and bleak at once.’

The Guardian’s Arifa Akbar (3★) said, ‘Smith-Cameron really is the heart and soul of this production, for all of Rylance’s charisma … when the tone flips to tragedy, Smith-Cameron is tremendous.’ She commented, ‘Beneath the bonhomie are O’Casey’s poetry, and the family’s craving to be somewhere they are not known, but this production does not dwell too long on these.’

Nick Curtis in The Standard (3★) had this to say about the stars: ‘Succession star J. Smith-Cameron is splendid in it as tenement matriarch Juno’ but ‘Mark Rylance … sadly continues his recent slide into mannered self-parody’. He didn’t think the play had aged well: ‘Today its juxtaposition of broad humour with sectarian violence and poverty jars, as do the thick-as-stout accents.’ As for the production, ‘Director Matthew Warchus accentuates the strangeness by giving his production the veneer of a black-and-white slapstick film, the cast in white pancake makeup and kohl-rimmed eyes.’

Heather Neill at TheArtsDesk (3★) disapproved of the treatment: ‘This is an unusual revival, giving both the comedy and tragedy full scope, but in the final scene it topples off balance into melodrama and becomes a different play altogether.’

Ssrah Crompton at WhatsOnStage (2★) called it ‘a horrible melange. Everyone on stage seems to be performing in a different version of the play, there is no chemistry, little sense of purpose.’

Dave Fargnoli in The Stage (2★) went further: ‘this turgid production from director Matthew Warchus never quite succeeds in capturing the author’s deep anger or extraordinary compassion.’ He gained some pleasure from the cast: ’Mark Rylance provides a riveting focal point as alcoholic, tall-tale-telling ‘Captain’ Jack Boyle. In a wholly committed performance, he stutters and slurs his lines, searching for words through a haze of drink and shame.’

The Times’ Clive Davis (2★) was critical of Mark Rylance. ‘His version of the feckless Captain Jack is a leering, gurning loafer who bears more than a passing resemblance to Charlie Chaplin’s tramp…It’s weirdly laboured, and makes the play’s sudden transition from high jinks to grim melodrama all the harder to take.’

Clare Allfree in the Telegraph (2★) was not impressed by either of its stars: ‘Rylance doesn’t shrink from Boyle’s essential helplessness but his confected, overly self-regarding performance lacks the requisite humanity to make us care.’ Of J. Smith-Cameron, she said, ‘she imbues Juno with a flinty pragmatism. Yet her exasperation with her obnoxious husband rarely tips into the necessary desperation. Even in the final scene, having lost almost everything, she maintains a monotone stoicism. The play demands more.’ Her conclusion? ‘O’Casey’s desolate play should force us into a reckoning with its characters’ contradictions. In this ultimately underwhelming production, one that’s far too in thrall to its star casting, there is not enough room for such complexity.’

Critics’ Average Rating 2.7★

Value rating 29 (Value rating is the Average Critic Rating divided by the typical ticket price)

Juno and the Paycock can be seen at the Gielgud Theatre until 23 November 2024 Buy tickets direct here

If you’ve seen Juno and the Paycock at the Gielgud Theatre, please add your review and rating below

October 6, 2024October 8, 2024

Theatre Reviews Roundup: A Tupperware of Ashes

Dorfman, National Theatre

Meera Syal in A Tuppence of Ashes. Photo: Manuel Harlan

Opinions varied quite considerably on just how good Tanika Gupta’s new play was, but the critics all praised Meera Syal’s performance as a woman developing Alzheimer’s. For some, the play covered familiar ground, for others it was poetic and profound. They were all impressed by the way the many elements of Pooja Ghai’s production combined to create a sense of how the disease feels from the inside.

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

Miriam Sallon for WhatsOnStage (5★) was impressed: ‘Tanika Gupta manages to include not just the plainly heartbreaking…but the profuse life already lived, as well as the many lives left to go on without protagonist Queenie. Her end is incredibly sad, but it is not her sum total, not even close.’ He said, ‘Meera Syal as Queenie is especially potent, her charm and dynamism morphing into belligerence and revilement and, later, into confusion and fear.’

A hyperbolic Anya Ryan in The Guardian (4★) said it ‘feels like a knife has been dug into your soul and twisted’. As for the star, ‘Syal shatteringly embodies Queenie, her movements gradually changing with each scene.’

Dave Fargnoli at The Stage (4★) said, ‘Images of flowing water and thematic echoes of King Lear ripple through this bleak drama… which unflinchingly depicts the guilt and frustration of caring for a loved one with Alzheimer’s’. He found, ‘Syal brilliantly charts Queenie’s deterioration, beginning with small hesitations and irritable flashes, moving through terror and cruelty, until she is a diminished, almost non-verbal shell of her former self.’

Debbie Gilpin at BroadwayWorld (4★) declared, ‘to be able to quickly switch from guttural rage to tearful confusion to childlike enthusiasm is no mean feat, but Syal pulls it off expertly.’ She called the production ‘entertaining, informative, and affecting.’

For the Telegraph (4★), Tim Robey said about Meera Syal’s performance ‘It’s angry. Visceral. Sometimes shockingly abrasive.’ He was also impressed by the production: ‘touches of stagecraft, poetic in their own right, capture a life unravelling’.

Aleks Sierz on TheArtsDesk (4★) commented, ‘Gupta’s writing mixes flashes of comedy even in the most tragic circumstances. But the general tone of her writing in this play is beautifully empathetic, with a really personal sense of deep emotion, carefully balanced between expressions of love and of loss.’

Julia Rank at WhatsOnStage (4★) said, ‘It could be unrelentingly bleak – and it doesn’t hold back in showing just how debilitating the disease is and how the pandemic robbed countless families of the chance to say goodbye to loved ones – but it’s a highly watchable piece given the subject matter. The tone is remarkably well-balanced with the right amount of light and shade and culturally specific jokes that have universal resonance.’

Tim Bano in The Independent (3★) disagreed. ‘Bleak’ was his word for it. He called it ‘an interesting but unsatisfying production.’ He said, ‘The second half is a pretty tough slog through her decline, which manages to be both depressing and a bit dull.’

For Tim Wicker at Time Out (3★) ‘Syal brings Queenie vividly to life’ but ‘The Lear-ness of it all also compacts the rest of the family’s relationships into a final international road trip that feels rushed…That said, this production still hits some powerful emotional beats as Queenie disappears into herself.’

The Times’ Clive Davis (3★) liked the production: ‘The dialogue is often flat and functional, with the underwritten subsidiary characters all slotted into place. But Pooja Ghai’s production oozes colour. The designer Rosa Maggiora creates a serene, Rothko-like backdrop…that places us somewhere between reality and the inside of Queenie’s jumbled mind. At moments when her faculties crumble, Elena Peña’s artfully muffled sound design and Matt Haskins’s nuanced lighting enhance the sense of disorientation. Nitin Sawhney’s percussive score evokes thoughts turning in circles.’

The i’s Fiona Mountford (2★) talked of ‘myriad elements that misfire, that strain for gravitas yet fail to achieve it.’ Her damning conclusion was ‘This is, unfortunately, not a piece of new writing worthy of the National Theatre.’

There was no rating accompanying Lucy ‘s review at CityAM but she said it ‘isn’t just an excellent work of fiction, but a bleak, vital conversation about how we treat our elderly.’

Critics’ Average Rating 3.6★

A Tupperware of Ashes is at the Dorfman in the National Theatre until 16 November 2024. Buy tickets direct from the theatre.

If you’ve seen A Tupperware of Ashes at the National Theatre, please add your review and rating below

October 3, 2024October 17, 2024

Theatre Reviews Roundup: The Cabinet Minister

Menier Chocolate Factory

The cabinet Minister at The Menier Theatre. Photo: Tristram Kenton

Arthur Pinero’s The Cabinet Minister has been given a thorough overhaul by Nancy Carroll (who also performs in it). Paul Foster directs the production. The result is that this Victorian comedy about a government minister, whose reputation is under threat when the media discover he has massive debts, has received some of the best reviews of the year.

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

LondonTheatre‘s Marianka Swain (5★) declared, ‘This is, hands down, one of the funniest shows in London theatre right now…this is primarily a total romp, jam-packed with witty one-liners, physical humour, sublime character comedy, and some very, very silly double entendre.’ She praised Nancy Carroll: ‘Carroll not only supplies this zippy update to Pinero’s work, but also gives a fabulously charismatic performance as the mercurial Lady Katherine’ and picked out two ther members of the cast: ‘the supreme scene-stealers are Dillie Keane (having almost indecent levels of fun) and Matthew Woodyatt as a doughty, overbearing Scottish matriarch and her tongue-tied son: they are absolute comic bliss.’

Cindy Marcolina at BroadwayWorld (5★) loved it. She talked of a ‘captivating cast list under Paul Foster’s crisp direction, delivering a one-laugh-a-minute play bound to lighten up the dreariest autumn day.’ She reserved the highest praise for ‘Nancy Carroll, who ‘is dazzling both as adaptor and performer; she commands the stage with scrumptious irony, deliciously flawless comic timing, and double-entendres galore’.

Of Nancy Carroll, Alun Hood for WhatsOnStage (5★) picked out: ‘Dillie Keane, resembling a dyspeptic Caledonian version of Whistler’s Mother, steals every scene she’s in as bonkers Lady Macphail’. He noted, ‘everybody and everything from the sublime cast to Oliver Fenwick’s glowing lighting, Betty Marini’s elaborate wigs and the joyful dances by Joanna Goodwin, are on the same crazy page.’ Of Nancy Carroll, he said, ‘At her most adorable when she’s behaving most appallingly, it’s virtually impossible to take your eyes off her. She’s a highlight in an evening of rare, unexpected pleasure.’ He noted, ‘there’s a poignancy to The Cabinet Minister opening on the day Maggie Smith’s death was announced, since the production’s leading lady Nancy Carroll has, perhaps more than any other actress of her generation, inherited the dame’s mantle when it comes to high comedy.’

For Helen Hawkins on The Arts Desk (5★), it was the memory of another Dame that Nancy Carroll conjured up: ‘Something in the range and versatility of Carroll’s voice echoes Judi Dench’s. She can be all soft winsome charm, then pivot to an imperious snap with pinpoint-sharp comic timing. Her asides are mercurial; her way with innuendo, hilarious.’ Comparisons with both Dame Maggie and Dame Judi- praise indeed.

Lindsay Johns for the Telegraph (5★) said, ‘This delightfully pacy, elegant and stylish new adaptation by Nancy Carroll (who also stars as Lady Katherine Twombley) positively brims with vitality, full of salacious double entendres and unmistakable contemporary political allusions. With an enchanting set and period-costume design by Janet Bird, the four-act play…is directed with a winning combination of levity, riotous exuberance and occasional moral seriousness by Paul Foster.’

Clive Davis in The Times (4★) agreed. He was particularly pleased with the way Nancy Carroll had updated Pinero’s play: ‘the script is peppered with jokes, leering double entendres and music reminiscent of Isobel McArthur’s irreverent update of Jane Austen in Pride & Prejudice (*sort of)’… ‘This play is like a glass of fizz that hits the spot.’

The Guardian‘s Arifa Akbar (4★) said it was ‘springy, silly and full of satirical sting’. She opined, ‘There is no stage comedy out there quite so funny, and this is as frothily enjoyable as it is pertinent.’

Holly O’Mahoney in The Stage (4★) added to the accolades: ‘Foster’s direction, with Joanna Goodwin’s concise movement coordination, ensures each player is in the optimal position on Janet Bird’s grandly dressed set to squeeze out every possible drop of comedy.’

Only Tom Wicks in Time Out (3★) seemed lukewarm about the show: ‘What stops this production from being truly great, as funny as some of its lines and scenes are, is the lack of that singular and relentless escalation you find in the best of the genre. In spite of Carroll’s changes, there’s too much going on, too many trifling side-plots, in every way. It doesn’t build to that perfect pinnacle of comedic disaster.’

Critics’ Average Rating 4.4★

The Cabinet Minister is at the Menier Chocolate Factory to 16 November 2024. Click here to buy tickets direct from the theatre.

Read Paul Seven Lewis’s review of The Cabinet Minister here. Watch Paul’s review on YouTube here.

If you’ve seen The Cabinet Minister at the Menier, please add your review and rating below

October 3, 2024October 3, 2024

Reviews Roundup: Giant

Jerwood Theatre Downstairs – Royal Court Theatre

Actor John Lithgow sits reading the Literary Review — John Lithgow in Giant at the Royal Court. Photo: Manuel Harlan

Some of the best reviews this year greeted Giant at the Royal Court. It’s the debut play by long-established director Mark Rosenblatt, directed by theatrical giant Nicholas Hytner. Giant tells the story of what happened when Roald Dahl was exposed as anti-semitic. The critics were unanimous that John Lithgow as Dahl was ‘terrific’. They agreed that the play started well but some thought it lost drive in the second act.

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

The Times’ Clive Davis (5★) described the play as ‘subtle, intelligent and stylishly crafted’. ‘Lithgow is astonishing,’ he said… ‘he gives us a celebrity who is a perplexing mixture of old school gent, jester and bully.’ He spread his praise in all directions: ‘Hytner keeps the direction brisk’. Tim Bano in the Evening Standard (5★) proclaimed: ‘It’s hard to think when the Royal Court last staged a play that felt so dangerous, or one so spectacularly good.’

In Time Out (4★), Andrzej Lukowksi declared, ‘It’s one heck of a debut play – well-made and sturdy, exquisitely tense, and scrupulously fair, less trying to damn Dahl than understand him.’ John Lithgow gave ‘a towering performance … His Dahl is magnetic: frail and malignant, cruel and kind, righteous and monstrous’. Alice Saville in The Independent (4★) praised ‘Nicholas Hytner’s simmering, tense production’ but said the play ‘ultimately lacks tension, because it’s clear from the start that Dahl is deeply but lazily prejudiced, with no intention of changing’.

Sarah Crompton at WhatsOnStage (4★) said Lithgow’s ‘terrific performance is a compelling reason to see this play’ but ‘It’s a play that doesn’t quite decide where it stands in that argument about whether you can loathe the man and admire the art’.

Patrick Marmion in the Mail (4★) described how ‘At moments last night Lithgow’s brilliantly, brazenly unapologetic performance reduced the theatre to shocked, breathless silence.’ He found ‘The play goes off the boil after the interval’. The Guardian’s Arifa Akbar (4★) agreed. She said it had a ‘slowly brilliant first act, stupendously performed by its cast’ but ‘By the second act, his antisemitism is glaring, and the drama seems to not know where to go from here’.

Describing the play for BroadwayWorld (3★), Gary Naylor said, ‘It starts ugly and stays ugly – a tonal issue the play, even under Nicholas Hytner’s direction, never resolves, hobbling its dramatic potential.’ He continued, ‘Dahl’s shocking words – are drawn directly from sources. That does beg the question as to why so little of the plot rings true.’ Julia Rank at LondonTheatre (3★) thought: ‘John Lithgow is terrific’ but ‘The weakest elements are the characterisations of the “help” characters. ’

Dave Fargnoli in The Stage (3★) concluded ‘Though the writing could be tighter and more sharply focused, Rosenblatt tackles this thorny subject with the right mix of journalistic balance, insight and rightful condemnation.’ Claire Allfree in the Telegraph (3★) thought the play ‘can’t escape the limitations of its fair-minded format’.

Critics’ Average Rating 3.8★

Giant can be seen at the Royal Court Theatre until 16 November 2024. The run is sold out but watch out for returns or extra performances, or hope for a West End transfer.

If you’ve seen Giant at the Royal Court, please add your review and rating below

October 1, 2024October 2, 2024

Reviews Roundup: David Oyelowo in Coriolanus

Olivier, National Theatre

David Oyewolo in Coriolanus. Photo: Misan Harriman

A wide range of opinions greeted the new production of Coriolanus on the large Olivier stage at the National Theatre. There was a five star review in Time Out and two stars from The Times. David Oyewolo was widely welcomed back after a long absence from the English stage. There were mixed feelings about Lyndsey Turner’s production. Some thought the way she concentrated on Coriolanus as a soldier out of step with Rome’s patricians and plebeians was an exciting interpretation, others found it lacking drive. That feeling extended to Es Devlin’s monumental set, which for some captured Rome’s power and for others dominated too much.

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

Time Out’s Andrjez Lukowski (5★) thought it was ‘tremendous’. He said, ‘it’s supercharged by an outstanding central performance that deftly walks the line between sympathetic and repellant.’

The Standard’s Nick Curtis (4★) praised ‘Oyelowo’s relentless, driving conviction…His naturally benign face seems to harden and warp as Coriolanus’s arrogance consumes him. He speaks Shakespeare’s verse with rare fluency. He’s also a convincing combatant in excellent fight scenes.’

For Claire Allfree in the Telegraph (4★), ‘LyndseyTurner’s vaulting revival…thrillingly aligns the play’s tricky contours with a modern, ill-at-ease Britain.’ She talked of ‘Devlin’s formidable concrete set design’ and of Oyelowo’s ‘alert, sensitive performance reveals a man both tormented and infuriated by his increasing alienation from a world he doesn’t understand.’

Alexander Cohen at BroadwayWorld (4★) liked the production’s approach: ‘confluences of history weave together through myth and tear apart time: a tyrant in a toga is no different to one in a suit and tie.’ He was wowed by the way it looked: ‘Es Devlin’s set is dazzlingly labyrinthine, brutalist concrete blocks cascade from the rafters shattering the boundaries of performance.’ He loved the star: ‘David Oyelowo plays the eponymous anti-hero with viper fangs hissing venom in all directions’. He did have one criticism: ‘It’s a shame that the rest of the supporting cast feel sidelined…. Without their weight to counterbalance him, the production just struggles to maintain its blockbuster propulsion to the bitter end.’

Sarah Hemming in The Financial Times (4★) referred to ‘Lyndsey Turner’s mighty production…led by a terrific, deeply troubled David Oyelowo, which fuses past and present, public space and playing space, to brilliantly eloquent effect.’ Fiona Mountford at the i (4★) was impressed by Oyelowo’s ‘towering performance of coiled intensity, as well as notable verbal dexterity.’. She noted: ‘Productions of this play are usually very certain about where right and wrong lies, but Turner thrillingly throws all that into doubt. She makes us interrogate the motives of the rabble-rousing tribunes’.

Sarah Crompton at WhatsOnStage (3★) was impressed by ‘a thrilling central performance by David Oyelowo’, but thought it was ‘weighted down by a set by Es Devlin that makes every scene look sensational, but also like a spread in The World of Interiors’ not to met ‘a score by Angus MacRae that loads each moment with ever louder significance.’ She found, ‘Lyndsey Turner’s direction is claustrophobic and tightly controlled, when sometimes the emotions of the play seem to cry out for breathing space.’ She concluded, ‘it’s a slick production rather than an involving one.’

The Observer’s Susannah Clapp (3★) thought, ‘Turner’s production is monumental rather than fully articulated or driving…The set pieces are tremendous but they lack an internal central motor.’ As for the star: ‘.David Oyelowo is forceful but uninflected; as unvarying as a bullet.’The Guardian’s Arifa Akbar (3★) said the drama ‘is woodenly underpowered and never evokes quite enough feeling’.

‘The crowds rule in what is arguably Shakespeare’s most complex political tragedy,’ said Anya Ryan at LondonTheatre (3★). ‘In Lyndsey Turner’s production…they arrive, angry and holding placards, as if fresh from the scenes of a modern day protest…It is their presence that carries Turner’s vision and brings Shakespeare’s tragedy wholeheartedly up to date.’

For Helen Hawkins at TheArtsDesk (3★) ‘this is a super-dynamic production that hardly pauses for breath’. Saying it is ‘minus a key item: a hero whose end is tragic’, she observed: ‘We are watching a lucid examination of a process working itself out, not a dense study of a flawed nobleman in extremis.’ Dominic Maxwell in The Sunday Times (3★) was unmoved, calling it ‘ingenious, diverting and tension-free.’

The Times’ Clive Davis (2★) found much to criticise: ‘there’s no fire at the heart of this production.’ He declared: ‘Part of the problem with Lyndsey Turner’s curiously flat production is that you spend a lot more time casting an eye over the levitating grey slabs of Es Devlin’s characteristically chic set design than admiring the stiff-necked grandeur of Oyelowo’s doomed warrior.’ He had a problem with the latter too: ‘this soft-spoken general has the quietly exasperated manner of a middle manager overwhelmed by a late-night pile of spreadsheets.’

Critics’ Average Rating 3.6★

Value rating 48 (Value rating is the Average Critic Rating divided by the typical ticket price.)

Coriolanus can be seen at the National Theatre until 9 November 2024. Buy tickets directly from the theatre with this link.

If you’ve seen Coriolanus at the National Theatre, please add your review and rating below

September 20, 2024October 21, 2024

Reviews Roundup: Witness For The Prosecution

County Hall, South Bank, London

It was the venue as much as the play itself that wowed the critics Agatha Christie’s courtroom drama was revived. The former London County Council building County Hall stunned most of the reviewers and is a major contributor to its continuing popularity with audiences. Some reviews are from the opening, and some coincided with the 2000th performance in early 2024. The cast changes every so often but has so far featured top quality actors.

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

Olivia Garrett for the Radio Times (5★) called it ‘a spine-tingling and mesmerising watch which messes with your mind perfectly.’

Michael Billington in The Guardian (4★) said it was ‘imaginatively staged by Lucy Bailey’. Tom Wicker for Time Out (4★) called it ‘a deliciously enjoyable revival’ and praised the director: ‘Bailey plays up the melodrama beautifully’.

Marianka Swain in the Telegraph (4★) described it as ‘pleasingly old-fashioned fare’. She continued, ‘Christie’s bravura twisty plotting is still second to none. Combined with Bailey’s inspired use of an historic location, it’s criminally entertaining.’

TheArtsDesk’s Heather Neill (4★) found herself in ‘a magnificent, atmospheric space, standing in for the Old Bailey.’ The Times’ Clive Davis (4★) agreed, ‘the best reason for seeing Lucy Bailey’s handsome courtroom revival… is the setting itself.’

’the entertainment here lies in the twists and turns of the plot,’ declared Sarah Hemming in The Financial Times (3★) However, ‘The production struggles more in the intimate scenes in legal chambers and falls awkwardly flat in the one episode outside the court’. Henry Hitchins for The Standard (3★) noted, ‘Lucy Bailey’s production relishes the conventions of courtroom drama, not least the emphasis on ritual’ but thought it ‘a bit slow-footed … and lacks a nagging element of mystery.’

Will Longman for LondonTheatre (3★) complained, ‘The audience isn’t given enough to go on, and so there isn’t an air of mystery to this murder.’ Theo Bosanquet at WhatsOnStage (3★) found ‘this Agatha Christie classic still provides twists and gasp-inducing reveals aplenty, even if its melodramatic tendencies somewhat undermine the emotional impact’. He was disappointed that ‘the climax – no spoilers, of course – is action-packed but left me rather cold. It feels like an almost pantomimic finale to what is until then a slow-burning thriller.’

Natasha Tripney reviewing for The Stage (2★) was one of the few reviewers who didn’t like the venue: ‘the sheer size of the room proves cumbersome and exposing’. She wasn’t keen on the production either which she called ‘disappointingly pedestrian’.

Critics’ Average Rating 3.5★

Value rating 47 (Value rating is the Average Critic Rating divided by the typical ticket price.)

Read Paul Seven’s review of Witness For The Prosecution

Witness For The Prosecution can be seen at County Hall. Click here to buy tickets direct from the producer

If you’ve seen Witness For The Prosecution at County Hall, please add your review and rating blow

September 20, 2024October 2, 2024

Reviews Roundup: Waiting For Godot

Theatre Royal Haymarket

Msamati and Wishaw triumph

Lucian Msamati and Ben Wishaw in Waiting For Godot

Much excitement surrounded the star casting of Lucian Msamati and Ben Wishaw in a new production of Samuel Beckett’s Waiting For Godot. The critics were impressed.

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

‘This is the best production I’ve ever seen, ‘ declared Nick Curtis in The Standard (4★). Ben Whishaw and Lucian Msamati bring a potent, tragicomic chemistry,’ he said. Sarah Hemming from The Financial Times (4★) commented, ‘I’ve never seen the play’s dance along the border between artifice and truth so meaningfully executed. Macdonald and his team relish the play’s philosophical brilliance and emotional depth while underscoring its chastening political power.’

Sam Marlowe at The Stage (4★) noted, ‘It’s not, perhaps, a revelatory staging, and its measured pacing demands patience and close attention. But as sensitively handled as it is here, the play is at once tragic, absorbing and oddly comforting’.

The Times‘ Clive Davis (4★) said Msamati and Wishaw are ‘a beautifully paced double act in which the music hall humour is astutely balanced with dizzying glimpses into the existential abyss.’ He confessed, ‘If, like me, you’ve always been sceptical about the grandiose claims made for this play, Macdonald’s revival forces you to listen and learn.’ Wishaw, he said, ‘is in complete command as Vladimir ‘.

Cindy Marcolina for BroadwayWorld (4★) claimed, ‘This Godot is a bitter tragicomic farce, deeply philosophical but also genuinely funny. It becomes a reflection of staggering humanity in its continuous contradictions.’ She offered a qualified recommendation: ‘Go see it, but don’t break the bank in order to.’

Claire Allfree for the Telegraph (4★) ‘MacDonald’s capacious revival offers no new radical insight. Rather its strength lies in its resistance to any specific reading while simultaneously appearing to contain many. This is a Godot as spiritual allegory, as political parable, as absurdist tragic comedy and human cry in the wilderness, a production that seems to drag us too into its dreadful struggle against the dark.’

Time Out’s Andrjez Lukowski (4★) told us ‘The performances are the big thing and here they’re acerbically funny and infinitesimally tender, something backed up by the low key humanity of Macdonald’s production.’

Adam Bloodworth in CityAM (4★) thought ‘Lucian Msamati and Whishaw bring freshness to the leads’. ‘It is thrilling to have the opportunity to study this incomparable and mercurial actor live once again,’ said Fiona Mountford in the i (4★) of Ben Wishaw.

Critics also praised the other actors The Independent’s Alice Saville (4★) said, ‘Jonathan Slinger is as suave as a circus ringleader in the role of enigmatic stranger Pozzo, his cruelties as precise as his pencil-thin moustachio, while as his abused servant Lucky, Tom Edden moves with the wild-eyed stiffness of Charlie Chaplin after a century-long speed bender.’

The Guardian’s Arifa Akbar (3★) was less impressed than the other critics: ‘James Macdonald’s production…seems greater parts comedy than tragedy…The comedy works in itself, and so do the dramatic moments, but the two seem slightly disconnected.’ She described’Rae Smith’s set…is a grey, razed landscape, rising up in the backdrop…It could be a post-apocalyptic landscape, a version of purgatory or the aftermath of war’ .

Critics’ Average Rating 3.9★

Value rating 46 (Value rating is the Average Critic Rating divided by the typical ticket price.)

Waiting For Godot can be seen at the Theatre Royal Haymarket until 14 December 2024. Buy tickets direct here.

If you’ve seen Waiting For Godot at the Theatre Royal Haymarket, please add your review and rating below

September 16, 2024September 17, 2024

Theatre Reviews Roundup: Why Am I So Single?

The Garrick Theatre

Jo Foster and Leesa Tulley in Why Am I So Single? Photo: Danny Kaan

Why Am I So Single? is the much anticipated follow up by Toby Marlow and Lucy Moss to their global phenomenon Six (or should that be SIX?). It arrived at the Garrick Theatre to slightly mixed reviews. All the critics agreed that it was musically strong- perhaps even better than Six– but there was disagreement about the story. Basically, the authors have looked at their own love lives and riffed on various aspects of dating, some light-hearted, some serious, in a not always coherent plot. Judging by the various reviewers’ reactions, it may be that this musical will appeal more to a younger generation (Generation Z?) who have had similar experiences. The stars Leesa Tulley and Jo Foster were widely praised.

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

Sarah Crompton at WhatsOnStage (5★) summed up, it’s ‘a fabulous show about two writers who are best friends and are recognisably you, trying to write a successful hit musical, while agonising about their unhappy love lives.’ She was struck by the way ‘its wry tone and its vitality is underpinned by a truthful portrait of just how difficult it is to find love in these modern, confusing times – and by the honesty and the relationship at its heart.’ She concluded, ‘Its hymn to the pleasure of friendship is what tethers its exuberance to the ground and makes it so moving as well as so funny. There are moments when it could be pulled back, and it is marginally long, but once you give it your heart, it holds you.’

Isobel Lewis for the i (4★) was fully on board: ‘Why Am I So Single? has all the conventional trappings of a classic musical: an earworm-stuffed soundtrack, pithy script, sharp choreography from Ellen Kane and dynamic central performances. But it’s also a show that constantly subverts expectations, sneaking in complex ideas about identity, nostalgia and grief alongside the tongue-in-cheek “men are trash” rants.’

The Financial Times’ Sarah Hemming (4★) wrote, ‘It’s wickedly self-referential and completely daft’, and said, ‘the show has so much effervescent joy, and is delivered with such energy and heart by Foster, Tulley and the terrific ensemble, that it’s irresistible’.

The Stage’s Holly O’Mahony (4★) called it ‘a whip-smart musical comedy’, saying ‘The show’s deft brilliance is in the lyrics of its songs. Eight Dates, about the brutal ghostings and last-minute cancellations rife in online dating, bottles the phenomenon superbly’.

The Standard’s Nick Curtis (4★) compared it to Six and found it ‘just as quirky and surprising and almost as good.’ He decided, ‘This zesty, in-jokey, crackerjack entertainment proves they’re certainly not one-hit wonders.’

Marianka Swain for LondonTheatre (4★), calling it a ‘more ambitious but still blisteringly entertaining second collaboration’, said it was, ‘a production packed with knowing winks to the audience: fourth-wall-breaking asides, quips about the structure of the show itself, and, happily for musical theatre geeks, tons of stagey references.’

Nancy Durrant writing for The Observer (4★) called it ‘A joy’ and said, ‘The writing is pin-sharp; stuffed with pop culture references, from Tracey Emin’s bed to LinkedIn, it pulls you up repeatedly with its intelligence and wit as Nancy (Leesa Tulley, exuding warmth) and Oliver (Jo Foster, hugely charismatic, with an astonishing voice), try to work out what’s wrong with them’.

Not all the veteran critics were alienated. The Times’ Clive Davis (4★) said, ‘there’s so much inventiveness on display This show is a laugh-a-minute feast.’

Laura Rutkowski for the Radio Times (4★) wrote,’Yes, there are the big, outrageous musical numbers full of hilarious double entendres that make you want to just get up there and dance right alongside the cast, but it also touches upon queerness, shame, rejection, and loss in ways that feel representative and not tokenistic. Such was her enthusiasm that she declared, ‘I defy anyone not to have a massively enjoyable time at this musical. It’s uplifting, hilarious, and creative’. A few critics took up her challenge…

Arifa Akbar in The Guardian (3★) loved the score. ‘Moss and Marlow are without doubt the most talented musical songwriters out there,’ she declared. ‘What elevates the production is the score: every song is a powerhouse’. She was less keen on the story: ‘the first half about dating woes feels old hat as Bridget Jones, in spirit.‘ Taking the opposite view to The Stage’s reviewer, she found ‘The power of the drama hits in the second half as the characters become more vulnerable and intimate’.

‘Sweeter and frothier than pink prosecco, Toby Marlow and Lucy Moss’s new musical is squarely aimed at the girls, gays and theys,’ said Alice Saville in The Independent (3★). ‘Marlow and Moss are talents to be reckoned with, when they find a story that’s really worth telling.’ She concluded, ‘The first half erupts like a shaken bottle of prosecco, fizzing and flowing with astute hit after hit. And while the show flattens in the second, it’s still, quite probably, the defining musical of the dating-app age.’

Time Outs’ Andrjez Lukowski (3★) described it as ‘an endearingly quirky but preposterously self-indulgent parade of set-piece musical numbers with about three minutes of actual story in between.’ His review ended: ‘Good tunes, good cheer and good vibes from Moss’s larky, energetic direction – that makes extremely imaginative use of the ensemble – mean it all goes down quite agreeably. But ultimately Moss and Marlow’s rambling tribute to their own friendship seems unlikely to have the staying power of its predecessor: a curio, not a classic.

Gary Naylor on The Arts Desk (3★) explored the target audience: ‘Some will ache with recognition, as Oliver and Nancy dig deeper in deeper into their own psyches… Others will wonder how these two twenty-somethings can afford their lifestyles, why exactly Oliver! is their favourite musical and why they stick to amateur therapy when there are so many professionals out there.’

Dominic Maxwell in The Sunday Times (2★) offered the most damning review: ‘A bit of satire about modern dating mores gets us so far but beyond that the duo are soon staring inwards and repeating themselves. With jokes, with intelligence, with tunes. All of which would be enough for a one-act trifle, but stretches patience over a show that’s almost as long as Les Misérables.’

Variety doesn’t award stars but its reviewer David Benedict called it ‘fatally slack’, and said, ‘the target Gen-Z audience … might decide to go to a West End musical to see their lives reflected. But where “Six” long ago crossed over from the youth market to ticket-buyers of all ages, “Why Am I So Single?” riskily lacks appeal beyond its target audience.’

Critics’ Average Rating 3.6★

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

Why Am I So Single? can be seen at the Garrick Theatre until 13 February 2025. Buy tickets direct here.

If you’ve seen Why Am I So Single? at the Garrick Theatre, please add your review and rating below

September 9, 2024September 10, 2024

Theatre Reviews Roundup: A Night With Janis Joplin

Peacock Theatre, Sadlers Wells

Mary Bridget Davies in A Night With Janis Joplin. Photo: Danny Kaan

For music fans of a certain age, the legendary Janis Joplin, who died far too young, holds a special place. They should enjoy A Night With Janis Joplin which most critics heralded as an excellent (albeit slightly too loud) concert, thanks to an ‘uncanny’ performance from Mary Bridget Davies. However, the telling of her life story was criticised by many as being too thin and too vanilla. (Sharon Sexton appears instead of Ms Davies at selected performances.)

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

Charlotte Vickers at WhatsOnStage (4★) was not too concerned that there was ‘very little plot to keep the narrative going’, she was swept along by ‘the power of the performances, and the dedication of the production to making the night with Janis Joplin real.’

Adam Bloodworth for CityAM (4★) felt ‘A Night with Janis Joplin is best when it feels like a proper gig.’ He protested ‘It’s too loud’ but ‘Otherwise, this is a commendably raw ode to a legend.’

Will Hodgkinson reviewing for The Times (3★) found ‘Mary Bridget Davies’s embodiment of all things Janis for this cabaret-style show was uncanny’, but thought it an ‘entertaining but slight show in which such a wild spirit as Joplin proves an ill fit for the clean-cut constraints of the jukebox musical format.’

Franco Milazzo from BroadwayWorld (3★) liked Mary Bridget Davies’ performance but was unimpressed by the show: ‘at times, it feels that this show was created not to tour theatres than to provide cruise ship diners with some aural entertainment.’

Helen Hawkins at TheArtsDesk (3★) commented, ‘As a concert, it’s top-notch; as a theatrical piece about its subject, it could do with a stronger structure and a less forgiving spotlight’. She too praised the star: ‘It’s when Davies unleashes her phenomenal voice that the show really lives up to expectations.’

Matt Wolf for LondonTheatre (3★) said, ‘Davies is a wonder, even if the woman she is playing remains largely a cipher right through to the end.’

Paul Vale in The Stage (3★) described the show as ‘less a fully fledged musical than an immaculately performed tribute act’.

It may be fortunate for the rating, that Nick Curtis’ review in The Standard is not rated. He described the show as ‘a star performance in a shoddy vehicle’ and concluded ‘the overall effect is hollow’.

Critics’ Average Rating 3.3★

A Night With Janis Joplin can be seen at the Peacock Theatre until 28 September 2024. Click here to buy tickets direct from the theatre

If you’ve seen A Night With Janis Joplin at the Peacock Theatre, please add your review and rating below