Death of England: Closing Time. Photo: Helen Murray
Closing Time is the final part of the Death of England trilogy which began with Michael and then Delroy. It features Sharon Duncan-Brewster and Erin Doherty as Delroy’s black mother and white girlfriend respectively in an emotional but also funny drama that explores race in Britain today. Currently, all three are performing at @sohoplace and, as The Telegraph said, the trilogy together ‘makes for the most layered and satisfyingly complete theatrical experience.’ But how well does Closing Time stand alone?
[Links to full reviews are included but a number are behind paywalls and therefore may not be accessible]
Dzifa Benson for the Telegraph (5★) called it ‘a ferocious way to bring the cycle to a close’ and thought ‘what an astounding, kinetic force the pairing of Sharon Duncan-Brewster and Erin Doherty proves to be’.
BroadwayWorld’s Alexander Cohen (4★) proclaimed, ‘The political trumpets ring loud, but the humanity beneath it echoes louder.’ The actors ‘Doherty and Duncan-Brewster conjure combustible humour,’ he said.
Sam Marlowe for The Stage (3★) gave such a good review, it is hard to understand why she didn’t award more stars. She did say the play is ‘at times over-deliberate and unsubtle’ but she praised the acting to the hilt. She explained that the play ‘switches between fervid, direct-address confessionals and confrontational dialogue. Such is the scorching talent of Sharon Duncan-Brewster and Erin Doherty that the solo set pieces are riveting – but the writing reaches its most potent intensity when they interact. The acting is flawless’.
By contrast, Arifa Akbar in The Guardian (3★) had so little to say that was complimentary, it’s a wonder she gave even 3 stars: ‘its emotional power is drowned out by exaggerated and flattening comedy, the women shouting and stomping so their hostility verges on farce…for too long the dialogue wanders aimlessly…the tone is too screamy for the tension to build, and some deliveries are so fast that lines are swallowed’.
Alun Hood at WhatsOnStage (3★) was thankful for ‘the opportunity to watch a pair of actresses of this calibre firing on all cylinders’. However, Duncan-Brewster and Doherty are probably better than what they’ve been given to work with here. The former is fiery, humane and affecting, while the latter finds a bruised, watchful vulnerability beneath all of Carly’s defensive bite. Neither actor hits a false note’. He elaborated his opinion of the play, ‘Closing Time is a captivating, troubling slice of modern British life that feels unsettlingly accurate, if never revelatory.’
Suzy Feay writing for the Financial Times (3★) was even harsher on the writing: ‘There are two skilled, high-octane performances to enjoy here, but with its talk, talk, talk and lack of character development or incident, this doesn’t feel like a play’.
Nadia Nadarajah and John Hollingworth in Antony and Cleopatra at The Globe. Photo: Ellie Kurttz
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.’
Shifters at the Duke of York’s Theatre. Photo: Craig Fuller
Benedict Lombe‘s Shifters was a huge success from the fringe powerhouse that is the Bush Theatre and has now transferred to the West End. It’s a love story told in flashbacks about two people in Britain, one with Nigerian and the other Congolese heritages. We see their first love and follow them through breakups and reconciliation as their careers burgeon. At the Duke of York’s, some of the audience are on stage to recreate the traverse feel of the Bush production. The critics were universal in their 4 star reviews.
[Links to full reviews are included but a number are behind paywalls and therefore may not be accessible]
Tom Wicker writing for The Stage (4★) was one of the few reviewers to attend the West End transfer. He handed out plaudits to the author and the cast: ‘Her brilliant ear for the cadence of their changing lives, including the darker notes, is energising.’ ‘It’s funny, grounded in authenticity and blessed with a pair of leads whose charisma pulls you effortlessly into its bittersweet tenderness.’ He expanded on his praise for the two leads: ‘Heather Agyepong and Tosin Cole, both returning from the original production, make every line sing: they’re hugely funny, but teetering on the edge of heartbreak.’
Fiona Mountford in the i (4★) thought ‘the skill of Lombe and the entire Shifters team (was) to wear tender profundity deceptively lightly.’
Other reviews are from its run at the Bush Theatre.
Nick Curtis in The Standard (4★) called it ‘a pretty-much perfect, bittersweet modern rom-com’. He said, ‘Director Lynette Linton draws achingly subtle, detailed performances from her two leads, which showcase the fine grain of Lombe’s writing.’ Frey Kwa Hawking at WhatsOnStage (4★) declared, ‘It’s a play unafraid to take its time, unfolding with careful tenderness Des and Dre’s drifting apart and coming back together, the feeling of ineffability to them, what happens when it seems to stutter.’
Donald Hutera writing for The Times (4★) was impressed by the two leads, ‘They embody two unpretentiously articulate, passionate, complicated and vulnerable people ineluctably drawn towards each other even when they appear to be most in opposition. Des and Dre’s romance unfolds in a splintered fashion that nevertheless feels satisfying, believable and whole.‘ He ended, ‘Lombe’s touching, emotionally intelligent and contemporary black British love story is itself easy to fall in love with.‘
The Guardian’s Arifa Akbar (4★) said it had ‘real heart, soul and the everyday tragedy of long-lost first loves.’ She observed, ‘Directed by Lynette Linton, the pace at first feels meditative, and this allows the romance to fire up from its depths.’ Anya Ryan for Time Out (4★) said, ‘Lombe is a beautiful, nuanced and soulful writer and this is a romance overflowing with heart.’ She noted, ‘Alex Berry’s set is largely bare but decorated with luminous strip lights that look like lightning bolts and flash in different colours to show a change in the timeline. Standing among them, the actors look like they are part of something astronomical.’
Abbie Grundy for BroadwayWorld (4★) thought ‘Shifters is strongest at its most comedic. It’s here where the audiences fall in love with the characters.‘ and went on to say, ‘Shifters is a poignant piece of theatre. It’s the kind of love story you cannot help but root for and the soul connection many crave, elevated by sharp direction from Lynette Linton and undeniable chemistry from the performers.’ Aleks Sierz, taking a seat at TheArts Desk (4 ), said it was ‘exquisitely written and beautifully acted’.
Kirsten Grant, reviewing for the Telegraph (4★), said, ‘Lombe’s writing, suffused with wit and warmth, is exquisitely poetic at times. She’s at her best in those early scenes where the sharp, quick-fire verbal jousting between Cole’s Dre and Agyepong’s Des fizzes and snaps while revealing something deeper bubbling underneath.’ She was slightly more reserved than some in her praise: ‘At the heart of this drama is the connection between the two leads, at once electric and sweetly endearing. It’s a promising work from an up-and-comer still honing her craft.’
In The Stage‘s (4★) review of the Bush presentation, Holly O’Mahoney said, ‘Lombe delivers a tender, cosmic and cleverly unpredictable love story that will leave you wishing for a sequel.’
Critics’ Average Rating 4.0★
Value rating 62 (Value rating is the Average Critic Rating divided by the typical ticket price.)
The Years at The Almeida Theatre. Photo credit: Ali Wright
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’.
The 39 Steps at the Trafalgar Theatre. Photo: Mark Senior
Patrick Barlow‘s spoof version of the Hitchcock film, itself based on a John Buchan thriller, tells the story of Richard Hannah on the run from German spies and the British police, using minimal props and multiple theatrical effects. At the beginning of the century, it ran in the West End for nine years. It won an Olivier Award for Best Comedy and a couple of Tonys for Best Play and Best Direction during its Broadway run. Although it has hardly changed, this revival has not proved as popular with the critics as one might expect for such a previously successful show. The cast were praised, but the reviews were divided between those who thought the play was a classic farce and those who found it ‘creaky’.
[Links to full reviews are included but a number are behind paywalls and therefore may not be accessible]
Marianka Swain, popping up at LondonTheatre (4★), was a fan: ‘Balancing suspense with slapstick, and a cracking yarn with theatrical in-jokes, it’s a welcome piece of thoroughly escapist entertainment.’ ‘One moment you’ll be giggling at the sheer ridiculousness, the next gasping at a surprisingly brilliant coup de théâtre,’ she promised. She praised all the cast, mentioning ‘Safeen Ladha is a hoot as Hannay’s various love interests’.
Alun Hood at WhatsOnStage (4★) liked it a lot, ‘It’s quirky, swift, ingenious and altogether a smashing hour and three quarters in the theatre.’ He explained: ‘It takes a lot of skill to make something look this hilariously ropey, and the show delights in the unashamedly theatrical … It’s inventive and often very silly, but it never sends up the story itself’. The cast were praised, in particular, ‘Maddie Rice is the epitome of somebody with ‘funny bones’.’
CityAM‘s Adam Bloodworth (4★) enthused, ‘The 39 Steps is an homage to the roots of theatre: these skits could have been performed 100 years ago. That they still work today is testament to the power of clowning and physical theatre, without massive technological bells and whistles, to amuse and delight.’
Franco Milazzo’s review for BroadwayWorld (3★) starts well: ‘Patrick Barlow’s parody The 39 Steps creaks and groans in places but still has plenty of laughs’ but ends ‘there’s a dated feel about this play that lacks the audacious physical japery of later stage spoofs like The Play That Goes Wrong.’ Fiona Mountford at i-news (3★) found, ‘Time hangs heavy as one fast-paced escapade hurtles into the next, given that emotional engagement with these characters is vanishingly hard to come by.’
Calling it ‘sluggish and lethargic’, Claire Allfree in the Telegraph (2★) pointed out, ‘Speed, in short, is of the essence. But speed is precisely what’s missing in tour director Nicola Samer’s production’. Dave Fargnoli in The Stage (2★) said, ‘for all the slickness of the staging, this is a creaky piece that displays little love for the source material’.
Chris Wiegand for The Guardian (2★) also thought it didn’t work: ‘Too often you sense the wheels turning instead of losing yourself in the fun. The play should be equal parts thriller, comedy and romance – an ambitious mix – but it doesn’t satisfy on any of those levels.’ He concluded, ‘the result can sometimes feel less like a thrilling race against the clock and more of a garbled rush.’
While his peers compared it unfavourably to The Play That Went Wrong, The Standard’s Nick Curtis (2★) had a different comparison in mind: ‘this revival looks tired compared to successors in a similar vein, most obviously the sublime mini-musical Operation Mincemeat’.
Critics’ Average Rating 2.9★
Value rating 42 (Value rating is the Average Critic Rating divided by the typical ticket price.)
The story of a Jewish family trying to reconcile tradition and the modern world and their settlement being driven out of Russia at the turn of the 20th century has become one of the most successful musicals of all time. The music by Jerry Bock and Joseph Stein and book by Sheldon Harnick appeal to all nationalities through the last sixty years. Inevitably the shadow of past productions, particularly those involving the great Topol as Tevye, hangs over any new one. The 5 and 4 star reviews by the London theatre critics were united in saying that Jordan Fein‘s open air interpretation is a triumphant reinvention that looks both forward and backward. Tom Scutt‘s set was seen as a winner in itself, silencing any jokes about Fiddler On The Roof being staged at the only large London theatre without a roof. Adam Dannheiser was widely praised for his toned down version of Tevye. Indeed, the whole cast including the actual fiddler received plaudits.
[Links to full reviews are included but a number are behind paywalls and therefore may not be accessible]
Calling the show ‘Absolutely terrific’, Sarah Crompton at WhatsOnStage (5★) wrote, ‘The quality of Jordan Fein’s wonderful, emotional production is that it perfectly holds the balance of Fiddler on the Roof, neither tilting towards saccharine nor bitterness, towards schmaltz or politics.’ She was equally impressed by the cast: ‘At the heart of all this is the quiet underplaying and resonant voice of Dannheisser, who turns Tevye not into a Topol-style caricature but into a wry, ironic man, buffeted by events he cannot control, yet always finding it possible to assert love. He is matched by Laura Pulver’s Golde, full of emotion she doesn’t often express, but finding tenderness in gesture and stillness.’
Marianka Swain for The Telegraph (5★) called it ‘a masterclass in balancing innovation with tradition.’ She said, ‘in a stripped-back but exquisitely crafted production, Fein gets to the very soul of the work.’ She noted, ‘Fein’s staging is also beautifully attuned to the park’s natural magic. The shiver-inducing coup de théâtre is the sun actually setting during the bittersweet song Sunrise, Sunset. The bleaker second half then takes place in the dark of night.’
The Observer’s Susannah Clapp (5★) noted, ‘its painful progression can suggest any group of people struggling with internal change, under threat from authorities, bullied into movement. It’s hard to imagine a production that would do so more powerfully than Jordan Fein’s. His is also the best use of the Open Air theatre I have seen for ages.’ Among the many aspects of the production liked by Mark Lawson in The Guardian (5★) were the way ‘Fein foregrounds comedy, setting the piece in the tradition of deflective Jewish humour’, and ‘Adam Dannheisser perfectly times the one-liners … but also conveys the character’s deep faith’.
David Benedict for The Stage (5★) was impressed by ‘Fein’s arrestingly intelligent second-act directorial decisions (which) deepen and darken the action and make the show richer and stronger than any recent London revivals.’ Cindy Marcolina at Broadway World (5★) called it ‘Charming, heart-rending, and utterly gorgeous’.
Gary Naylor on TheArtsDesk (5★) handed out plaudits to the star: ‘Adam Dannheiser…brings charisma to burn to the role’; to the director: ‘maintains a breakneck pace (I cannot recall time passing so swiftly in the stalls) and uses the unique qualities of his stage beautifully’; and to everyone involved.
Tim Bano for Time Out (4★) called it ‘a production about reinventing a classic musical through small gestures and symbols, rather than radical high concepts’. He praised ‘using the sun almost like a design element. It’s all gorgeous evening sunshine for the earlier, happier parts of the story, but the haunting wedding tune ‘Sunrise, Sunset’ is designed to kick in just as the light fades, and then the bleaker second half takes place under black skies.’
Suzy Feay for The Financial Times (4★) wrote ‘Adam Dannheisser brings huge warmth but dials down the bombast as this timid man in a big man’s body’.
Neil Fisher writing for The Times (4★) was not entirely convinced by the star: ‘The paterfamilias of this story can be stoic, wry, fierce, anguished, uproarious, pious. The appealing Adam Dannheisser goes for something between all these things — not entirely convincingly.‘ But he had no doubt about the production: ‘Consider Jerry Bock, Joseph Stein and Sheldon Harnick’s masterpiece revved up rather than revamped. Underneath a mighty canopy of wheat — a dramatic set by Tom Scutt that shows us both the deep roots of this Jewish community and its fragility — Fein’s production is a fast-paced, ensemble-driven night.’ He pointed out, ‘perhaps Fein’s greatest work is to balance the joy with the pain’.
Aliya Al-Hassan at LondonTheatre (4★) said ‘(Fein) manages to bolster all the joy, humour and sense of community, then brings us back down to earth as the insidious creep of antisemitism destroys the integral fabric of this society. ‘The Standard‘s Nick Curtis (4★) called it, ‘a liberating, exuberant and humane production where the great songs – Tradition; If I Were a Rich Man; Sunrise, Sunset – touch you to the core. It also feels sadly contemporary without even trying.’ Fiona Mountford for i-news (4★) called it ‘a musical triumph’.
The Express‘s Stefan Kyriazis (4★) liked so much about the show: For starters, he loved the set: ‘I felt like I was dreaming.’ He observed, ‘The ensemble are strong, the musicians (tucked at the back of the set and costumed like villagers) wonderful and the dancers are a joy.’ As for the production: ‘Set against Tom Scutt’s magnificent stage and costume designs, director Jordan Fein beautifully treads the tightrope of respecting and celebrating the 1964 show while sensitively adding some modern nuances’. The ending, he reported, ‘is pure, powerful theatre’. His only reservation seemed to be about the star: ‘Adam Dannheisser has a rich singing voice and brings warmth and easy wit to Tevye’s innate charm. I just didn’t quite feel the sense of a weary towering figure struggling to keep himself and his family afloat.’
Jane Prinsley at The Jewish Chronicle (4★) was not alone in thinking ‘this production is Golde’s, with Olivier-award-winning Lara Pulver’s sharp and knowing performance’. She was impressed that ‘Innovations never distract from the narrative, and the play’s relevance today speaks to its enduring power.’
Critics’ Average Rating 4.4★
Value rating 66 (Value rating is the Average Critic Rating divided by the typical ticket price.)
Thomas Treadwell and Cherry Jones in The Grapes of Wrath.
John Steinbeck’s 1930s novel The Grapes of Wrath tells of a family’s trek across America lookibg for a better life it’s a grim story and this new production is faithful to it The critics were divided on whether this was a good thing or a bad thing. Many praised xx’s grinding production but others were bored. Few had a good work for the old fashioned 1988 adaptation The cast were universally praised with US star Cherry Jones more than justifying her plane ticket.
[Links to full reviews are included but a number are behind paywalls and therefore may not be accessible]
Accepting ‘there is little joy here’, JN Benjamin for the Financial Times (4★) found solace in the acting: ‘(Cherry) Jones’s tender performance is like a warm embrace‘ and ‘Harry Treadaway is quietly fierce’. Dave Fargnoli in The Stage (4★) also centred on the actors: ‘Although the production feels perhaps overly reverent towards the source material, these powerful, heartfelt performances remain absorbing, channelling the desperation, hope and fury of Steinbeck’s story.’
Fiona Mountford for i-news (4★) said, ‘Carrie Cracknell’s sweeping and epic production of stylishly sculpted ensemble work…makes us uncomfortably, insistently aware of the modern-day parallels’. Julia Rank at LondonTheatre (4★) spoke of ‘a brilliantly striking production’ coupled with ‘a superb ensemble’. Claire Allfree in the Telegraph talked about a ‘stealthily exacting production’.
Nick Curtis in The Standard (3★) worried ‘the melodramatic scenarios and the stylised dialogue threaten to tip over into parody’. Fortunately it was saved by ‘the elegance of Cracknell’s direction and Alex Eales’ set’. He found it ‘lacking in drama’ but said the cast ‘remain compelling to watch’. The Independent’s Alice Saville (3★) declared, ‘It’s brutal, powerful stuff. But somehow this production still doesn’t have the aesthetic or thematic boldness to link together its two halves’.
Andrzej Lukowski in Time Out (3★) said, ‘It’s not awful or anything, but its reverence for Steinbeck’s text – and determination to retain most of his characters and much of his dialogue – leaves it feeling like a radio play’. He added helpfully, ‘Great story, great cast, great accents; but it’s not Cracknell’s most imaginative hour by a long shot – a fresh adaptation might have made all the difference.’
The Guardian’s Arifa Akbar (3★) found it lacking in boldness. ‘Slow-paced and with a lack of incident in the first half, it feels more like a stately procession than a moving, breathing piece of theatre,’ she said. Cindy Marcolina at Broadway World (3★) called it ‘so, so slow and stagnant’
Alun Hood for WhatsOnStage (3★) summed up: ‘For all the astonishing and sometimes beautiful stage pictures, the understated brilliance of Jones’s performance, and the haunting musicality, I’m not convinced that this isn’t a story that is better told on page or screen.’
The Times’ Dominic Maxwell (2★) made his feelings clear: ‘What a miserable evening!’ Susannah Clapp in The Observer (2★) was equally scathing: ‘it is hard to feel the need for this theatrical version’.
Critics’ Average Rating 3.2★
Value rating 36 (Value rating is the Average Critic Rating divided by the typical ticket price.)
Thomas Coombes in Death Of England: Michael. Photo: Helen Murray
The original Death Of England play by Clint Dyer and Roy Williams opened at the National Theatre in early 2020. It was followed later in the year by Death Of England: Delroy (the original being renamed Death Of England: Michael). A third play Death Of England: Closing Time came to the National in September 2023. Now all three plays are getting a run at Sohoplace. The first two, slightly updated, have opened, with Closing Time opening on 22 August. Each can be enjoyed separately or in any order. Michael and Delroy are best friends, one white, one black. Their monologues describe their experiences of class, race and masculinity. Thomas Coombes plays Michael, Paapa Essiedu is Delroy. The director is Clint Dyer. Some critics reviewed them separately, some together.
Paapa Essiedu in Death of England: Delroy. Photo: Helen Murray
[Links to full reviews are included but a number are behind paywalls and therefore may not be accessible]
Death of England
Dzifa Benson in the Telegraph (4★) concluded ‘This blistering cycle of plays is a compelling case for why England needs fresh ideas. The overarching message seems to be: England is dead, God save England.’ She was impressed by ‘Coombes’ and Essiedu’s astonishing physicality and bravura performances portraying multiple characters through switching accents and mannerisms with convincing ease.’ For Olivia Rook at LondonTheatre (4★) ‘Thomas Coombes (Baby Reindeer) gives a startling performance as a confused young man, simultaneously rejecting and perpetuating his father’s legacy of prejudice’ and ‘Essiedu’s performance is incendiary’.
Anya Ryan for Time Out (4★) noted, ‘At its best, the script feels like poetry. Words are sung out in repetition, phrases are echoed as memories in future scenes.’ He felt that Delroy was ‘the stronger and fuller of the two plays…It is a vigorous, loud and exhilarating act from Essiedu’.
Suzy Feay for the Financial Times (3★) referred to ‘the performers’ charisma, stagecraft and mastery of the space’ but preferred Michael to Delroy. She said of Essiedy in the latter: ‘his speeches seem slangy, improvised, sometimes hard to catch; overall, the piece has much less structure.’ Whereas Michael, ‘with its less sympathetic protagonist, is for that reason the more interesting piece and the tougher task for the actor.’
Dominic Maxwell in The Times (3★) said, ‘The writing crackles with contemporary life, while Dyer’s staging artfully uses every inch of the playing area.‘ Thomas Coombes gives, he said, ‘an extraordinary display of energy, presence and outsized wit’. Paapa Essiedu the speed of his wit and the variety of the voices he uses in this garrulous role — Delroy, like Michael, is a funny guy — are phenomenal’.
Like some other critics, Fiona Mountford at the i (3★) had reservations about the writing. She said, ‘while the staging and performances are near faultless, the writing is more of a challenge, and not always in a positive way. For starters, the 100-minute running time of each piece is far too long, greatly outstaying its potency’.
BroadwayWorld‘s Alexander Cohen (3★) decided Thomas Coombes’ ‘unmodulated firing-on-all-cylinders-attack-from-all-sides method results in a scorched earth rather than a clinical strike and clean kill’. Sam Marlowe of The Stage (3★) described ‘raw, unstinting performances from Thomas Coombes and Paapa Essiedu’. She talked of ‘Essiedu’s charisma sets the tinderbox account ablaze; it’s a phenomenal turn, vivid, witty, agonising and exhilarating.’
Death of England: Michael
Theo Bosanquet for WhatsOnStage (4★) said, ‘Watching Michael unravel in the close confines of @sohoplace is a visceral experience; it’s like being strapped to a rocket powered by fury.’ Arifa Akbar in The Guardian (3★) praised ‘an energetic central performance’ but said, ‘the tortured undertow of filial inadequacy, split loyalties between his father and his friend, Delroy, and jittery mournfulness, are not felt sharply.’ BroadwayWorld‘s Alexander Cohen (3★) thought ‘Roy Williams’s brilliance as a writer lies in the way he delicately coils intimacy into Michael’s soul’ but he decided Thomas Coombes’ ‘unmodulated firing-on-all-cylinders-attack-from-all-sides method results in a scorched earth rather than a clinical strike and clean kill’.
Death of England: Delroy
BroadwayWorld‘s Alexander Cohen (5★) wrote, ‘Essiedu really is a force of nature. Totally at ease, working the audience like a stand-up comic, then, with fox-like agility, backstabbing them with guttural force and working up to a symphonic crescendo.’
The Guardian (4★) said Paapa Essiedu’s ‘must-see’ performance ‘elevates this play into its own, one-man coup de theatre. Essiedu has astonishing poise, bringing tragic depth and integrity to Delroy but lilting joy and comedy, too. His enraged injustice, when it comes, is immense and you feel it burn. The sentimentality, when that comes, is transformed into a tenderness which brings tears to your eyes.’ Theo Bosanquet for WhatsOnStage (4★) declared, ‘Essiedu gives nothing short of a tour de force performance. He demands our focus and our judgment, literally turning us into his jury.’
Fangirls at the Lyric Hammersmith. Photo: Manuel Harlan
Fangirls is a musical by Yve Blake that originated in Australia. It concentrates on the experience of a 14 year old female fan of a boy band. It seemed those critics who best remembered what it was like to be a young fan loved it the most but all of them quite liked it. The original Australian director Paige Rattray is in charge of its UK premiere.
[Links to full reviews are included but a number are behind paywalls and therefore may not be accessible]
‘For two hours and 30 minutes, you feel like a teenager again,’ enthused Olivia Rook for LondonTheatre (5★), praising it as ‘a celebration of young female expression’. Jessie Thompson at The Independent (5★) was another reviewer who revisited her teenage years: ‘although Blake succinctly targets the cynical capitalist exploitation of teenage girls, this celebration of vulnerability, bravery and self-acceptance will win you over for something more. Fangirls doesn’t just evoke the untamed inner life of being a teen, it reclaims it – making you wistful for when you felt things so deeply that they actually hurt.’
Charlotte Vickers at WhatsOnStage (5★) said, ‘Rattray’s direction … is impeccable, moving us between humour and the deadly serious on a knife edge’ and added, ‘All of the songs are really strong’. Katie Kirkpatrick at BroadwayWorld (5★) was a fan: ‘Fangirls has everything that you could want from modern musical theatre: it’s a visual spectacle, full of talented performers, catchy songs, impressive dance numbers, and an exciting story. It’s the definition of a feel-good night out at the theatre.’
Holly O’Mahony for The Stage (4★) found ‘Blake delves into the intense, insecure minds of young female fans, and ultimately serves them justice.’ Calling it ‘fantastic’, Sarah Hemming in The Financial Times (4★) noted that ‘at its core is a sympathy for the disorientation and despair that can cloud teenage years, sometimes seriously.’ She was impressed by a cast ‘peppered with talent’. Isobel Lewis reviewing for the i (4★) called it ‘an impressive, bombastic production’.
Claire Allfree in the Telegraph (3★) told us not to worry about the ‘completely barmy plot’ because ‘what matters here is the punchy hip-hop routines’. She added, ‘Paige Rattray’s neon-lit production,(is) undeniably superbly executed’. The Guardian‘s Arifa Akbar (3★) concluded, ‘the musical goes from what might have been a penetrating exploration of young femininity to an absurdist comedy caper which never quite captures the quietly tortured ache of that first crush.’
The Standard‘s Nick Curtis (3★) said, ‘The dancing is dynamic, the singing largely good, the design a pulsating mix of music-video graphics and deranged close ups projected onto three curved screens. But the veil of kookiness covering a thin, derivative plot really bugged me.’ Clive Davis in The Times (3★) praised ‘the exceptional quality of the performances‘
Shrek The Musical with music by Jeanine Tesori and book and lyrics by David Lindsay-Abaire is back in a new production by Samuel Holmes and Nick Winston. Antony Lawrence and Joanne Clifton are the leads. Following a short tour, it has arrived in London but it seemed most of the critics, posting the worst reviews of the year so far, would be happy to send Shrek straight back to the swamp.
[Links to full reviews are included but a number are behind paywalls and therefore may not be accessible]
Aliya Al-Hassain at LondonTheatre (3★) was the only mainstream critic who seemed to have any time for it, calling it a ‘buoyant stage musical adaptation’. She picked out Antony Lawrence’s performance as Shrek for praise.
Chris Wiegand in The Guardian (2) experienced ‘sludgy monotony and often unmemorable songs’ in a ‘show often feels flatly unadventurous’. Theo Bosanquet from WhatsOnStage (2★) was disappointed that ‘a production that relies so much on laughs just simply isn’t as funny anymore’. Kirsten Grant for the Telegraph (2★) called it ‘a cheap attempt to cash in on a cult favourite’ but she did draw a crumb of comfort from ‘a stand-out performance from Cherece Richards as Dragon, whose powerhouse vocals momentarily lifted the production’.
Labelling the musical ‘an atrocity’, Anya Ryan for The Times (1★) said ‘Their love story is in crying need of chemistry — instead, everything is shouted at a torturously loud volume.’ Nick Curtis in The Standard (1★) called it ‘pretty lame’. ‘The sets are a skimpy collection of poorly projected animations and flown-in flats,’ he said.
Critics’ Average Rating 1.8★
Value Rating 24 (Value Rating is the critics’ average rating combined with the typical ticket price)
