Gillian Anderson & Billy Crudup in the play of the year

@sohoplace

The critics loved this production of Edward Albee’s classic play about a drunken couple taking out their pain and disappointment on each other. Praise was showered 5-star reviews on Gillian Anderson (‘a performance of masterful control’ Telegraph) and Billy Crudup (‘phenomenal’ Time Out). They also loved the intimacy of the in-the-round production directed by Marianne Elliott (‘so close to its players that you end up feeling skin-crawlingly guilty by association’ Independent) and Miriam Buether’s set (‘a slowly revolving gladiatorial arena’ Standard).

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

5 stars ⭑⭑⭑⭑⭑

WhatsOnStage‘s Sarah Crompton praised the play, saying it ‘sizzles with energy and power. In a production as good as this one, starring Gillian Anderson and Billy Crudup as Martha and George, the couple whose drunken sparrings stretch over a long night’s journey into day, pulling their house guests, ambitious academic Nick (Josh Dylan) and his frail wife Honey (Phoebe Horn), into their emotional maelstrom, it has the capacity to hold an audience spellbound.’ She concluded: ‘There’s something magnificent about seeing one of the great American plays so clearly realised and rethought. There are no gimmicks here, just clarity and respect. It is a great night at the theatre.’

Claire Allfree for the Telegraph declared: ‘Albee isn’t simply exposing the disappointments at the heart of marriage but the fictions we construct to shield ourselves from the uncertain future of a civilisation in irredeemable decline. What a play. What a production.’  She described how ‘Anderson, in a performance of masterful control, slowly strips herself back to reveal the desolation beneath. Crudup’s superficial affability gradually curdles into a desperate, bleak self-loathing. They emerge less as two irreparably damaged people locked in a marital cage fight than as equal players in a perverse love story.’

Time Out’s Andrzej Lukowski liked it: ‘Marianne Elliott’s in-the-round production is so intimate – not to mention intense – that after a while the thrill of Anderson and her co-star Billy Crudup being a couple of metres away is replaced by a sort of horror, a sense that we are not simply watching events from a distance, but are physically in the room for the madness.’ He noted: ‘If Anderson is good, Crudup is phenomenal … he is tremendous as the at first urbane, likeable George, who seems like the milder, more sophisticated partner to the coarser, angrier Martha. Squint and he’s the victim in the marriage. But as the night wears on, there’s something sinister about his self-containment and his inability to match Martha’s outbursts: his restraint becomes ominous and nakedly manipulative (…) Crudup is a model of restraint and nuance and that just makes his George all the more sinister – a virus quietly infecting everyone else’s brains.’

For Olivia Rook of LondonTheatre: ‘Crudup’s pedantic George is a revelation. He is bristling with resentment towards his lot in life (…) He wears a mask, lightly passing cruel judgements, asking intrusive questions, and malevolently pursuing his guests like prey, but even he has flashes of vulnerability: shattering a bottle, wrapping his hand around Martha’s neck, and growling like a caged animal when he hears her sounds of lovemaking with another man.’ She went on: ‘Anderson matches his vitriol, endlessly badgering George and name-calling, thrusting her finger in his face as she leaves the stage, determined to have the final word. Her nasal twang grates appropriately, as she repeatedly rips into her husband, abusing their shared history to tap into all his weak spots.’ She was gripped: ‘The audience’s horror is mirrored in their eyes during the desperate, devastating final act — named “The Exorcism” — when Martha and George peel away the layers of viciousness to reveal the achingly empty core of their relationship. There is to be no more pretending — and that final punch lands hard.’

The Independent‘s Alice Saville enthused: ‘Marianne Elliott’s blistering @sohoplace production comes as a shock, putting the audience so close to its players that you end up feeling skin-crawlingly guilty by association. Gillian Anderson and Billy Crudup prowl about a round stage like wounded lions, endlessly battling for dominance – only instead of ripping each other’s flesh, they do something far worse, expertly tearing into ancient grudges, secrets, and shared delusions. If you want to be deeply, profoundly disturbed by a night at the theatre, there’s no finer way to do it than this.’

The Financial Times’ Sarah Hemming found the two stars ‘so scintillatingly good are they that you check yourself for bruises as you stagger out (…) It’s a joy to watch Anderson and Crudup go at Albee’s text, mining every glittering dark gem out of the intricately layered dialogue and bringing exquisite timing to their verbal duels (…) Together they track the couple’s long night’s journey through to dawn, switch-backing from flirtation through dangerous hostility to a quietly moving catharsis. But it’s their skilled delivery of the emotional subtext that really counts. When Anderson’s Martha lets her guard down, you suddenly glimpse the despair that threatens to overwhelm her.’ She tells us: ‘Albee’s withering critique of the American dream, of postwar materialism and of a dog-eat-dog system comes across loud and clear.’

Neil Dowden for Plays International described how ‘Elliott … gives us a compelling theatrical experience throughout the three hours’ stage time – there is no let-up in either the awkwardly funny barbs or the rising feeling of the characters being trapped in an alcohol-fuelled nightmare.’

4 stars ⭑⭑⭑⭑

Dave Fargnoli of The Stage said: ‘this lively revival from director Marianne Elliott is fast paced and unabashedly entertaining. Elliott gives the piece a heightened intensity, and at its best, the vicious repartee absolutely crackles.’ About the stars he noted: ‘Anderson’s Martha is brilliantly crude, wielding her power like a sledgehammer, whether relentlessly haranguing or crudely flirting. She spits and snarls in a broad New England accent, and crawls around the stage in drunken despair. At her most vulnerable, she becomes a point of stillness, voice dropping away to a husky, pleading whisper, tears glinting in her eyes. As her equal and opposite George, Crudup initially appears entirely ineffectual, squirmingly uncomfortable in his own skin. Slowly, he reveals a sly, incisive power, his surgically precise verbal eviscerations breaking down everyone around him.’

The Standard‘s Nick Curtis declared: ‘Gillian Anderson and Billy Crudup give towering performances in Edward Albee’s intense 1962 drama, about a middle-aged couple engaged in vicious, liquored-up psychological games to hide the core sadness of their marriage. Marianne Elliot’s production turns a mid-century modern living room (by the ever-excellent Miriam Buether) into a slowly revolving gladiatorial arena, perfect for this in-the-round venue. At three hours and 20 minutes it doesn’t stint on the methodical savagery. The shifting dynamics and brutally funny repartee of the central couple are immaculately mapped. Anderson is as good as you’d hope and expect as the bleary, destructive Martha, but Crudup is a revelation as George, wounded but quick-witted and nimble, like a greying mongoose battling a striking snake.’ However: ‘the central revelation – when it comes – seems too weak to support the torrid psychodrama.’

Alexander Cohen of BroadwayWorld concluded: ‘Who’s Afraid of Virgina Woolf?’s gleeful assassination of American family dynamics would have shocked its audiences more in 1962 than today. The barbarism remains perversely entertaining, but what lies beneath for an audience to get its teeth into? Perhaps the anxiety of relationships, which in the age of social media loneliness and situationships weighs heavier. But maybe best not to overthink it. Come for Anderson and Crudup going toe to toe. Stay for the ensuing blood, sweat, and tears.’

3 stars ⭑⭑⭑

For The Guardian‘s Arifa Akbar: ‘The play, while exquisitely written and structured, feels tortuously long at over three hours, and though this is the point – to watch how two people destroy each other yet love each other – it still feels like a punishment. Staged in the round, it leaves little room for hiding. There is a revolve, slow for the most part, which shows their marriage up close, from every angle. For all the comedy and nervous laughs, this couple does combust and the end is devastating. Martha stops her high-pitched attack and becomes vulnerable. George lets go of his emotional cruelty. They have finally stopped the power games and play-acting of their marriage. Or have they?’

Dominic Maxwell of The Times got a bit bored: ‘for the first 90 minutes at least we are excitingly close to the back-and-forth between Crudup’s faded history lecturer and Anderson as his frustrated, high-born wife. Yes, they’re a good-looking pair of disputatious duds (…) if there’s anything lacking in the delectable set-up it’s that George and Martha’s sozzled sniping all essentially play as “banter” (…) There’s so much to admire here, but too little range. This Woolf needs sharper fangs to avoid feeling a good half hour too long.’

Critics’ average rating 4.4⭑

Who’s Afraid Of Virginia Woolf can be seen at @sohoplace until 19 December 2026. Buy tickets from the theatre sohoplace.org

If you’ve seen this production of Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf please leave your review and rating below

Christine Baranski & Richard E Grant get mixed reception

Wyndham’s Theatre

First produced in 1924, Noël Coward‘s Hay Fever  has delighted audiences for a hundred years with its description of a ghastly fading film star Judith Bliss, her bad-tempered husband and their obnoxious son and daughter, who invite unexpected guests to a squirm-inducing get-together. The critics all felt the play and the production were old fashioned fun. Whether ‘a meringue of nothingness’ (WhatsOnStage) is worth the money was only considered by The Telegraph’s Dominic Cavendish: ‘Burns’s production won’t enter the annals. Nor does it justify a top price of £250.’ The star attractions got a mixed reception. Hollywood actor Christine Baranski was generally found to be amusing if not hilarious (‘She commands the stage’ FT;  A few commented unfavourably on her acquired English accent (‘mumbles’ Independent). For many, Richard E Grant seemed the bigger attraction. His insouciant poshness was both a blessing and a curse for the critics: ‘perfect’ CityAM; ‘only okay … no fireworks‘ Time Out. The supporting cast, which included Lucy Karczewski, Nancy Carroll and Charles Edwards, received the highest praise. Emily Burns‘ direction of the farce elements and Frankie Bradshaw’s grand set design were appreciated.

4 stars ⭑⭑⭑⭑

What’sOnStage’s Sarah Crompton began by reminding us: ‘Noël Coward’s Hay Fever is a meringue of nothingness. Or rather, as his biographer Oliver Soden points out, it is “not so much artificial, as a commentary on artifice.”’ She pointed out at the end of her review: ‘Meringues aren’t exactly filling, but they are fun to eat.’ Baranski, she said, ‘retains instinctive comic timing and an ability to convey, with a raised eyebrow or a disappointed frown, her sense of life passing her by.’

CityAM’s Adam Bloodworth was a fan: ‘Burns’ conventional but sparkling production proves Coward is still an absolute king of farce.’ He liked the two stars: ‘Richard E Grant is obviously perfect for the feverishly privileged, short tempered David, who, like so many poshos, is magnetic to watch self-destruct (…) Baranski grips equally, flipping in milliseconds between sensual and ballistic’.

3 stars ⭑⭑⭑

The Telegraph’s Dominic Cavendish reported : ‘Grant is in his element as the scatty patriarch, combining Tiggerish zest with flashes of truculence. He’s not on stage much, though; Judith is the play’s real motor, yet Baranski’s performance stutters (…) he character should be entertainingly ghastly, yet where we need to see lavish layers of ingrained theatricality – with professed sincerity blurring, alarmingly, into affectation – we get one too many beady stares, and moments of televisual restraint.’ He was pointed in his conclusion: ‘It’s all enjoyable enough, and there are laughs to be had, but Burns’s production won’t enter the annals. Nor does it justify a top price of £250.’

Dominic Maxwell of The Times liked the supporting cast: ‘Coward’s prodigious dialogue calls for robust precision. Carroll leads a cavalry of light-comic supporting turns who know what’s needed. Charles Edwards is sublimely stiff in his tailored suits as the diplomat Richard. Lucy Karczewski is a quiet joy as a 1920s shy girl you could mistake for a socially anxious Gen Zer.’ He decided: ‘Emily Burns’s production gets more reliably spritzy as it goes along. The second act in particular has some relishable set pieces. Frankie Bradshaw’s grand set design mirrors the blues, beiges and gold trim of this theatre. It’s all still pretty pointless — but always handsomely, often amusingly pointless.‘

Tim Bano for The Financial Times thought: ‘Mostly … it chugs along in a pleasant and satisfying way, better than your local amateur effort but no great revelatory production to tug Coward into the 21st century. Grant is entertaining enough to watch, with nutty professor hair quivering on his head, and a childish giddiness at the games his family plays.’ He acknowledged: ‘Mostly, though, it’s Baranski’s show. She commands the stage like Judith does her household. From low imperious hoots, her voice flies up several octaves every few words. It’s cleverly done, this performance by a good actor playing a bad actor who thinks she’s good.’ He concluded: ‘This production is happy enough to be a diverting night at the theatre, but seems afraid of peering behind the performance. Despite a good cast and elegant set, it remains as shallow as its characters.’

‘It’s glossy comfort theatre.’ declared Time Out’s Andrzej Lukowski. He thought the cast almost saved it: ‘Christine Baranski brings a pleasingly doleful turn to reluctantly retired actress matriarch Judith Bliss’. However: ‘the play …  just doesn’t have enough fizz left in it after a century to feel entirely justified without some sort of superstar performance to lead it. And the problem lies with big star Grant … (his) performance is only okay: he offers workmanlike support but no fireworks.’

Regarding Baranski, Emma John for The Guardian thought ‘a technically sound RP oddly constrains her. Judith’s combination of pretend languor and genuine vagueness mean that jokes go begging and some lines land too earnestly’. She pointed out: ‘Director Emily Burns’s CV majors in farce and she stages some lovely bits of business, including a scene when a servant silently lays a breakfast table to a swellingly romantic soundtrack and a Gone With the Wind-crimson backdrop.’

BroadwayWorld‘s Aliya Al-Hassan agreed about Christine Baranski’s accent:  ‘(her) muddled accent of an odd mixture of RP and Atlantic twang impacts some of her delivery. But when she gets into her stride she leans into the acute and comedic melodrama of the role with gusto, sweeping from low imperious tones to much higher octaves. Richard E. Grant’s David has little to do in the first half, but emerges like a beacon in the second as the utterly self-absorbed writer. He is perfectly suited to the role of very well-spoken toff, which he does with ease, exploding into the vehement arguments with beautifully fluid delivery.’ She concluded: ‘Burns is not attempting to rewrite history here and there is nothing radical or new to be seen. The Bliss family are so bored with their lives and themselves that they have to create drama to pass the time, but we never get to peep below the surface of these motivations. A comfortable and comforting night at the theatre – just don’t expect fireworks.’

When it came to the leads, The Independent’s Alice Saville was damning: ‘Christine Baranski mumbles her way through the central role of flamboyant actress Judith Bliss, while Richard E Grant fades unexpectedly into the scenery as her grumpy husband David. Instead, the biggest joy of the evening are this couple’s bewildered house guests, whose politeness imprisons them in an oh-so-genteel form of hell.’

Critics’ average rating 3.2⭑

Value rating 32 (Average rating combined with typical ticket price)

Hay Fever can be seen at Wyndhams Theatre until 12 December 2026. Buy directly from the theatre

If you’ve seen this production of Hay Fever, please leave your review and rating below

‘Entertainment value’ or ‘a colossal yawn’

Theatre Royal Haymarket

There was a striking divide between critics who loved James Graham‘s new play about John Maynard Keynes, and those who merely admired it. The majority found Mr Graham’s attempt to corral Keynes’ role in the country’s economy, his complex love life and his passion for the arts into one coherent whole didn’t quite come off. All applauded James Graham’s writing but there was a contrast between those who embraced his wide-ranging subject matter and those who thought it ranged too wide (‘there is too much ground to cover in the space of the play’ BroadwayWorld; ‘a colossal yawn’ The Stage) but some were more than happy (‘combines entertainment value … with a stimulating survey of the Cambridge economist’s life, times and interventionist ideas’ Telegraph; ‘The entire production is a plea for the value … of lives that are full of something more than the day-to-day grind’ WhatsOnStage ). Rory Kinnear as the multi-faceted Keynes was a hit for most critics (‘excels’ The Times). Bob Crowley‘s set was praised (‘ravishing’ Guardian) but there were mixed reactions to Nicholas Hytner‘s direction which included dance (‘slick, stylish’ LondonTheatre; ‘stolid and sterile’ The Stage). Other actors, particularly Royal Ballet principal Natalia Osipova making her stage acting debut (‘wit and charm’ FT), were praised.

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

4 stars ⭑⭑⭑⭑

The Telegraph’s Dominic Cavendish was enthusiastic, saying it: ‘combines entertainment value (for starters, gags about how you pronounce his name) with a stimulating survey of the Cambridge economist’s life, times and interventionist ideas. With slick direction from Nicholas Hytner, a winningly clipped but charismatic star turn from Rory Kinnear as the suited and sainted “father of macroeconomics”, and an entrancing “straight” debut from Royal Ballet principal Natalia Osipova as Keynes’s Russian ballerina wife, Lydia Lopokova, it’s incredibly timely, inviting us to ponder Keynes’s legacy as we face a fiscal black hole.’

WhatsOnStage’s Sarah Crompton was enraptured: ‘Graham clearly loves and admires Keynes, and Kinnear creates an unforgettable portrait of a man who bestrode his times with a gentle modesty that belied his cleverness. But the play’s lesson for today isn’t only economic. The entire production is a plea for the value of beauty, of art, of dance, of lives that are full of something more than the day-to-day grind. That was Keynes’ greatest lesson: it is important to know how to live as well as how to spend. This is art about the importance of art and is both uplifting and hopeful.’

Marianka Swain reviewing for LondonTheatre enjoyed her evening: ‘Keynes’s ideas are best expressed dramatically when he has an opponent, the Austrian economic Friedrich Hayek. They don’t quite enter into Hamilton-esque rap battles, but one of their duels is dynamically staged as a tango (choreographed by James Cousins). Nicholas Hytner’s slick, stylish production also makes clever use of sliding panels which swoop in with archival photographs and striking period artwork (set by Bob Crowley and projections by Luke Halls). Rory Kinnear brings typically deft nuance to Keynes’.

The Standard’s Nick Curtis called it a ‘joyfully Stoppardian if overstuffed new play about economics, art, sexuality and how to live a good life.’ He revealed: ‘I loved the sweep and brio of it, the epigrammatic wit and the zing of ideas, the compassion and love of human life that underpins a play that’s about worth not value. Nicholas Hytner’s sparely staged production features a stealthily compelling central performance from Kinnear as Keynes, magnetic though socially awkward and stiffly academic. Former Royal Ballet principal Natalia Osipova reveals ravishing comic timing – as well as faultless turns and leaps in dance interludes’.

3 stars ⭑⭑⭑

Dominic Maxwell of The Times was definite: ‘It’s no classic. Graham hasn’t found the form to turn so much content into a drama with a compelling hook. The great Hytner often just seems to be doing his best to keep a large cast organised (and sometimes dancing) as we skip forward from 1914 to Keynes’s death in 1946 and, briefly, beyond.’ He had mixed feelings about the star: ‘The contained Kinnear struggles to convince as Keynes the offbeat loverman (…) Kinnear excels, however, as Keynes the man arguing against the laissez-faire economics that dominated, Keynes the godfather of the welfare state.’

The Guardian’s Arifa Akbar was complimentary: ‘There is typically for Graham, dextrous storytelling and accessibility of ideas. Bob Crowley’s set design is little short of ravishing with its moving screens of art and archival footage.’ However, ‘The drama has a slightly static quality despite the twirling red-and-white feathered dancers of the Ballets Russes and its slick movements through time. It seems essentially like a biographical trot through Keynes’s life, made with fondness and admiration for the man – but perhaps not enough of what lies beneath the surface.’

The Financial Times‘ Sarah Hemming found: ‘some of the play feels overly diffuse. Graham and Hytner bring great sweep and drive to establishing the extraordinary facts about Keynes’ life: we watch him shuttle between grey Whitehall and the bohemian Bloomsbury Group. We witness him argue passionately against the punitive terms of the Treaty of Versailles and push for economic intervention during the Depression. We see him with male lovers, then falling unexpectedly for Lopokova (played with wit and charm by Osipova). Throughout, Kinnear beautifully conveys the contrast between his character’s buttoned-up exterior and his buzzing, creative mind.’ She delved deeper: ‘The whole thing moves like a dance, with ideas, people and politics swirling in and out of the spotlight. Bob Crowley’s sleek design of sliding geometric panels suggests a world in flux. But, despite droll work from Pip Carter as Lytton Strachey, Thomas Flynn as Grant and Naomi Frederick as Virginia Woolf, the episodic structure becomes unwieldy and prevents deeper engagement with any of them.’

Time Out’s Andrzej Lukowski also thought Mr Graham had bitten off more than he could chew, but ‘even when he’s not at his absolute best dramatically you’ll still come out of one of his historical dramas having learned a lot.’ He conceded: ‘It is still pretty damn good: nobody brings the past to life with the verve of Graham. It is, to be fair, almost certainly the most enjoyable play about an economist ever written. Kinnear is a delight as Keynes, who combines starchy Victorian gent, idealistic Boy Scout and sexually liberated bohemian in equal measures’.

Aliya Al-Hassan of BroadwayWorld agreed: ‘despite Graham’s adept writing, there is too much ground to cover in the space of the play; Keynes and the Bloombury Group; Keynes as the economist and his rivalry with Austrian economist Fredrich Hayek; Keynes as an art and culture lover. All fascinating individually, but impossible to really delve into sufficiently in the time given.’ Like other reviewers, she complimented various actors: ‘ Natalia Osipova makes a solid and convincing acting debut as his wife, Russian ballerina Lydia Lopokova, often using movement to convey more than her words.’ And ‘Laurie Kynaston is excellent as rival Hayek, showing huge admiration for Keynes, but also unafraid to contradict him totally. The dialogue between Kynaston and Kinnear is sparkling.’

2 stars ⭑⭑

The Independent’s Alice Saville was emphatic: ‘James Graham’s play about a pioneering economist is about as dull as a pessimistic audience member might fear (…) In an attempt to make this man sexy rather than stodgy, Graham and director Nick Hytner have layered on all sorts of added excitements. Royal Ballet principal Natalia Osipova pirouettes between scenes, resplendent in red feathers, and there is no end of bisexual shenanigans. But it’s not enough to drag this tale out of lecture theatre territory.’

The Stage’s Sam Marlowe also thought The Standard of Living was sub-standard: ‘Graham fails to pull off his usual adroit blend of sparkling perspicacity and lively, engaging drama; and what’s more, Nicholas Hytner’s production is uncharacteristically stolid and sterile, making this a disappointing double whammy (…) It’s irredeemably dry and ultimately, I’m genuinely sorry to say, a colossal yawn.‘

Critics’ average rating 3.2⭑

Value rating 33 (Value Rating is a combination of the critics’ rating and the typical ticket price)

The Standard of Living can be seen at Theatre Royal Haymarket until 12 December 2026. Buy tickets directly from standardoflivingplay.com

If you’ve seen The Standard of Living at Theatre Royal Haymarket, please leave your review and rating below

Road movie musical lacks horsepower

Young Vic

Many of the critics thought this musical didn’t live up to Ridley Scott’s classic movie, (‘the show just can’t match the film’s thrust, depth or stunning ending’ FT) despite being the work of the same writer Callie Khouri. Neko Case’s songs received a mixed response (‘more about mood than narrative’ Standard; ‘every song has its place in moving along plot and characterisation’ BroadwayWorld). The two leads Amy Lennox and Rachel Tucker were praised (‘sing their hearts out’ WhatsOnStage).

4 stars ⭑⭑⭑⭑

Louise Penn at BroadwayWorld disagreed with her fellow critics. She was adamant: ‘There’s no car, but the lighting by Natasha Chivers and sound by Gareth Owen make convincing stylistic choices to compensate.’ She concluded: ‘There’s always something to catch the eye in Thelma & Louise. As for the songs, occasionally a lyric doesn’t quite catch, but every song has its place in moving along plot and characterisation. Thelma & Louise works as a musical and, more importantly, matters as a comment on why these two made the choices they did.’

Holly O’Mahony at The Stage said: ‘the songs (music and lyrics are by Neko Case) have an infectious zest that doesn’t tamper with the story’s gutsy, rebellious spirit. Under Trip Cullman’s direction, Thelma and Louise are every bit the gun-toting, patriarchy-busting duo whose roguish ploys we whooped for on screen back in 1991 – and 30 years on, they’ve still got plenty to say to the men standing in their way.’ She concluded: ‘It’s a fist-pumping joyride – and, just as with the film, we’re rooting for them the entire way.’

Jess Phillips for the Daily Express had one problem with the show: ‘The problem is that the main set is made to look like a bar – which makes sense, since many of the scenes take place in various dive bars – but also has to double as a motel, a police interrogation room, and a diner (…) making it a bit of a confusing jumble.’ Otherwise: ‘Thelma and Louise is going to be a success, once it works out its kinks. Its central cast are incredible and their voices all hold weight – but they’re also a delight to watch come alive on stage.’

3 stars ⭑⭑⭑

WhatsOnStage’s Sarah Crompton said: ‘it all feels meagre, slow-paced, stripped of excitement and crucially of that sense of liberation which powers the narrative even as it dips towards its inevitable close. Lennox and Tucker sing their hearts out, but it’s not enough.’

The Financial Times’ Sarah Hemming reported: ‘try as it might, the show just can’t match the film’s thrust, depth or stunning ending. All in all, this musical version sadly hasn’t found its own road.’

Julia Rank at LondonTheatre was disappointed by the design: ‘The set opens up towards the beginning to reveal an overturned car, but that’s never seen again, and the staging is oddly bound to a single location (a dive bar designed by Christine Jones and Brett J. Banakis), with the car represented at brief intervals by whooshing lighting.’ She praised the stars: ‘Lennox and Tucker both have outstanding stage presence and do a sterling job’.

Time Out’s Andrjez Lukowski liked the music: ‘I’m a Neko Case fan and enjoyed how different to the average showtune her poetic country rock contributions are, with a thumping  live-band sound that foregrounds booming drums and forceful guitars’ but ‘good as the songs are, they’re mid-paced and contemplative, further slowing the action down.’

The Standard’s Nick Curtis pulled it apart. He explained the basic problem: ‘theatre can’t do literal scale or scope like film and one misses the wide-open vistas of Arkansas, New Mexico and Arizona. Ditto the sense of propulsive forward motion as Louise’s ’66 Thunderbird throatily devours the blacktop (represented here by a pair of weedy parallel lights zooming across the back wall).’ About the music, he said: ‘the country-rock score by Canadian powerhouse Neko Case, though distinctive and often beautiful, is more about mood than narrative, and her rich images often descend into word salad’.

The Times’ Clive Davis was another who thought the musical failed to live up to the film: ‘where Scott expertly tweaked the tension on the big screen, here the final confrontation with the forces of law and order fizzes gently. This musical lacks horsepower.’

2 stars ⭑⭑

The Guardian’s Arifa Akbar was even more disappointed than her colleagues that the musical didn’t live up to the movie: ‘Fans of the film can forget those glorious scenes of the women’s turquoise convertible Thunderbird, and of the magnificently lonely desert, both of which felt like characters in their own right. Instead, the backdrop is a prosaic saloon bar’. She continued: ‘The narrative plays out as two women on the run. You wish for more depth, more bonding between them, which does come in the second half when the show finally fires up, but it still feels like empowerment-lite.’

Franco Milazzo for Plays International asked: ‘“How did such a talented cast get suckered into signing up?” Amy Lennox, Rachel Tucker, and Jordan Luke Gage (a sheer waste of talent for the thinly written thief JD) do well with what they are given but there are notable shortfalls where the drama, emotion, connection, character definition, and thrilling set pieces in the original film are concerned. It’s not helped that Neko Case’s songbook is, by and large, underdeveloped and eminently forgettable. As with most other screen-to-stage adaptations, projection is doing the work of imagination, lending a cinematic sweep to writing that has done nothing whatsoever to earn one.’

Critics’ average rating 3.1⭑

You can see Thelma & Louise at the Young Vic theatre until 24 October. Tickets available from the theatre

If you’ve seen Thelma & Louise at The Young Vic, please leave your review and rating below

Josh O’Connor is a knockout

Almeida Theatre

Josh O’Connor returns to the stage to play a young violinist who decides he can earn more money by becoming a boxer. The critics praised his acting and that of all the cast which includes Daniel Mays and Zubin Varla. There were mixed opinions of  Clifford Odet‘s 1937 play: some loved the ‘bluntly brilliant satire of capitalism’ (Independent) but others thought didn’t quite land the punch intended (‘the moral sophistication of an RKO Studios B-movie’ Times. They liked Sam Yates‘ direction (‘lends the piece energy’ The Stage).

4 stars ⭑⭑⭑⭑

Time Out‘s Andrzej Lukowski liked it a lot: ‘Though elements of Sam Yates’ stylish take will doubtless prove to be divisive, I thought it was great, a crack cast meeting a bold vision that seeks to do more than just squeeze Golden Boy into standard naturalist tragedy shapes.’ He described the production: ‘Yates meets Odets’ lack of subtlety with operatic intensity (…) he does add a whole string quartet who hang out behind a wooden screen in Rosanna Vize’s stark ‘30s house interior set. Obviously they ram the point home. But it’s not like there was much subtlety there to begin with and very crucially they sound amazing, not simply for their more elegiac, melodious contributions but also the thrilling dissonance they unleash later on as Joe’s divided mind begins to crumble. The boxing scenes are a maelstrom of strings, movement and a black and white camera feed  beaming images from a punchbag O’Connor is sparring with: it’s weird and chaotic and a bit Jamie Lloyd – I was a fan.’

The Independent‘s Alice Saville called the play ‘a bluntly brilliant satire of capitalism and the way it destroys people who mess with it’. She appreciated this version: ‘Yates’s superlative production throws everything it can at this savage play, making its text ripple through an operatic sonic universe.’ As for the star: ‘A shirtless, blood-smeared Josh O’Connor is a standout … taking on the title role of an ambitious young boxing star whose arrogance masks his vulnerability in the jaws of a machine he’ll never master.’

Dave Fargnoli of The Stage reported: ‘A canny staging from director Sam Yates lends the piece energy, slipping in surprises and striking images. Moments of symbolic movement – both graceful and tortuous – develop between scenes. Joe beats out rhythms on a punching bag that has a camera embedded inside, live streaming dizzying black-and-white shots, like scenes from Raging Bull.’

Tristram Fane Saunders for the Telegraph called it ‘a gripping revival that proves there’s plenty of life in Clifford Odets’s half-forgotten American tragedy.’ ‘O’Connor carries himself with a loser’s stoop, leaning forward as if constantly yanked on by his ambition, or just bracing himself against the battering winds of the world.’ He concluded: ‘the strength of this production isn’t its handling of moral issues, but the thrill of blow-by-blow sensation.’

Neil Dowden for Plays International said about the star: ‘Sufficiently muscular to convince and increasingly bloodied as Joe’s bouts take their toll, O’Connor strongly conveys a sensitive awareness as well as the ambitious hardening of his behaviour, as his internal sparring plays out before us.’ He drew attention to: ‘Dan Balfour’s splendid sound design evokes the raucous boxing crowd as well as the fast, noisy traffic of NYC.’

Olivia Rook for LondonTheatre brought attention to the whole cast: ‘O’Connor is joined by a stand-out supporting cast. Mays’s desperate and slippery Tom, full of empty promises, is happy to use people to get ahead — even his lover, the realistic Lorna Moon … who has learned to protect herself after a lifetime of disappointments. Zubin Varla is unsettling as the macabre puppet master Eddie Fuseli, who wants a stake in Joe and helps to shred his humanity. Meanwhile, Stanley Townsend’s kind Mr Bonaparte, Joe’s loving father, is the warm heart of this play.’

3 stars ⭑⭑⭑

Chris Wiegand reported for The Guardian: ‘It is a play of opposing forces: cynicism and optimism, instinct and intellect, defence and offence. Staging Golden Boy is principally a question of strings and ropes: how to capture Joe’s gift for the violin and his force in the ring. Sam Yates’s revival adds a prologue of stillness, with O’Connor watching a young boy play the instrument. As the music swells, he draws back the shutters on Rosanna Vize’s half-office, half-home set to reveal musical director Roman Lytwyniw’s elevated string quartet before picking up the violin delicately himself.’ The play didn’t knock him out: ‘Odets was a seasoned Hollywood screenwriter and the play has a hard-boiled poetry and deadpan humour, with the kind of polished lines that fly in a film noir or screwball comedy but are difficult to land on stage.’

The Times’ Clive Davis described it as ‘a production that has lots of muscle, but throws too many loose punches.’ He was almost persuaded: ‘O’Connor is so compelling, in fact, that you’re almost willing to overlook the flaws in a play that, at heart, has the moral sophistication of an RKO Studios B-movie.’

2 stars ⭑⭑

Gary Naylor for BroadwayWorld found: ‘the closing 30 minutes or so descends into melodrama, punctuated by so much shouting that I can’t have been alone in letting it just wash over me. Why director, Sam Yates, went for that approach, I do not know, but nothing gathers diminishing returns like an ear-battering in the theatre.’ He decided: ‘despite all that talent on stage and a superstar draw on the playbill, the production fails to establish a place in our hearts, the care we need to feel for those lost in capitalism’s seductive grip just not breaching the fourth wall.’

Critics’ average rating 3.5⭑

Golden Boy can be seen at The Almeida Theatre until 31 Otcober 2026. Buy tickets from the theatre almeida.co.uk

If you’ve seen this production of Golden Boy, please leave a review and rating below

Tilda Swinton returns to the stage in triumph

Royal Court Theatre

In 1987 director Stephen Unwin, designer Bunny Christie and actor Tilda Swinton caused a sensation with Man To Man, the fragmented story of a German woman who transforms herself into her dead husband in order to survive in Nazi Germany and beyond. The trio are back with the same play, slightly updated, to celebrate the Royal Court Theatre’s 70th anniversary. The critics were all impressed by Tilda Swinton (‘verbal flexibility and perfect pacing’ Guardian) but some but some didn’t think Manfred Karge‘s play had aged well (‘a little bit boring’ Standard).

4 stars ⭑⭑⭑⭑

The Stage’s Sam Marlowe was gripped: ‘the combination of Swinton’s white-hot talent and the vividness of Karge’s imagery grips you in its teeth like a rabid dog, and shakes and shakes you. I can’t stop thinking about it.’

Time Out‘s Andrzej Lukowksi reassured us: ‘this isn’t one of (Swinton’s) arch performance projects, it’s a proper play, in which she loses herself in a proper character.’ He extoled her qualities: ‘it’s genuinely astonishing how ageless she looks – you’d never put her at 65. But it feels like that’s not simply because she doesn’t look it, but because she really really is a great and incredibly vigorous actor who can choose to channel the energy and voice and posture of a younger woman. Slash man. Slash woman pretending to be a woman pretending to be a man.’

Mark Lawson of The Guardian described the star: ‘With a gruff laddishness as her base tone, Swinton – on a Bunny Christie set dotted with period East German technology including fridge and tape machine – regularly transforms verbally and physically into other women and men.’ He continued: ‘Anthony Vivis’s 1980s English version, revised by director Stephen Unwin, conveys Karge’s knack for vivid imagery. A smoker’s yellow-stained finger is able to write an endearment in after-sex sweat on Ella’s body; Hitler youth piss swastikas in the snow. The show at times resembles performance art (…) but the performer’s verbal flexibility and perfect pacing make Man To Man compelling theatre.’

WhatsOnStage‘s Sarah Crompton commented: ‘Stephen Unwin’s direction of the 28 short scenes is clear and driving, and the text (translated by Anthony Vivis) a compelling mixture of the raw and the poetic. When Ella/Max thinks of her past life as a woman she sees herself in terms of Snow White, pale as snow. Swinton’s wistful delivery of those lines is just one of the inflections of a performance that captures the contradictions of a divided life, at once pitiful and revolting, admirable and disgusting.  Her sense of alienation from herself and from the times in which she is living is like a warning cry.  A play written in the 1980s speaks loudly today’.

Franco Milazzo for BroadwayWorld riffed extensively about the original German title Jacke wie Hose: ‘The German idiom means, roughly, that a jacket and a pair of trousers amount to the same thing, so why fuss over which one you’re wearing? It perfectly encapsulates what the whole play is about, namely that personal identity can be a matter of tailoring, not conviction. Yet, now we are stuck with Man To Man which sounds more like a problem page in a gay lifestyle magazine.’ He did go on to talk about the production: ‘It’s an alluring performance that moulds itself around a challenging script. The twenty-eight short scenes have more stylistic variety than a Eurovision host’s wardrobe. Prose jostles for space alongside blank verse, rhyming couplets, pub songs, proverbs and whatever else was running through Karge’s mind at the time he wrote this. While the arthouse crowd will no doubt find this restless mashup of dramatic styles deeply arousing, there are times when the text barely resists the temptation to slide into pretentious twaddle. Unwin’s direction has real verve even when it sags a little towards the middle; frankly, though, it could sag all the way to Sydney and still be barely noticeable when Swinton is in this kind of dominant mood.’

Kirsten Grant for the Telegraph reported: ‘Despite its rather short 85-minute runtime, the text itself is overloaded, interspersed with doggerel, rhyming couplets, and songs. But Swinton’s command of the stage together with Unwin’s clever direction keep the pacing from lagging.’

3 stars ⭑⭑⭑

Holly O’Mahony for LondonTheatre gave an insight into the actor’s performance: ‘it’s easy to forget you’re watching Swinton as she burps and swaggers around the stage as Ella-turned-Max. A working-class German, Swinton bestows her with a thick cockney accent, sardonic sense of humour, and a matter-of-fact attitude towards a hard-up life (…)  Under Christie’s self-consciously cool design, though, she looks more like an 80s rock star. Her short hair stands as if petrified above her head, while a cakey smear runs down her cheek. Beneath a fishnet vest occasionally coupled with a suit jacket, she does not wear her husband’s trousers, as the play’s blurb describes, but a pair of red Y-fronts, exposing her bare legs, bloodied knees and chunky black boots.’

The Times’ Clive Davis had reservations: ‘Karge’s overextended portrait of a woman who could be a modern Mother Courage becomes a test of endurance. Random reflections tumble over each other as Ella rummages through memories in a voice which often slips into a surly monotone. And the political backdrop to her life is often sketched in unsubtle terms.’

The Independent’s Alice Saville also had doubts about the play: ‘In 1988, I’d imagine that seeing an actor existing between genders on stage felt simpler – an artistic choice, reflecting on the dehumanising nature of war and industrialisation. In today’s simultaneously more politicised and more nuanced landscape, there’s something a bit thin about the way this character’s identity is drawn. Her feminine side is painted using excerpts from Snow White, poetic snippets of lost girlishness that feel irrelevant to her harshly masculine present. It feels like we’re building towards some sort of fantastical transformation that never comes.’

The Standard‘s Nick Curtis found it: ‘surprisingly, a little bit boring (…) It remains disjointed and elusive despite the finessing of its original director Stephen Unwin, and Swinton’s larky, captivating performance (…) The play’s 28 scenes feel simultaneously overstuffed with imagery and frustratingly sketchy. You search in vain for solid meaning.’

Critics’ average rating 3.6 ⭑

Man To Man can be seen at The Royal Court Theatre until 24 October 2026 (sold out but try £15 Mondays- tickets available at 9am online for that day’s performance https://royalcourttheatre.com) It will then tour to Edinburgh, Berlin and New York.

If you’ve seen the current production of Man To Man, please leave your review and rating below

Comedy amid the pathos in a top class musical

Hampstead Theatre

The critics loved Kimberly Akimbo. The musical had already won five Tony Awards for composer Jeanine Tesori and book writer and lyricist David Lindsay-Abaire before it received its UK premiere at Hampstead Theatre who acquired the rights early on. It’s certainly a coup for them.  The praise started with the writing (‘Lindsay-Abaire delivers a masterclass in tone, making light of the devastating and vice versa’ BroadwayWorld), then eulogised about the music (‘gorgeous and utterly earwormy’ The Stage), before moving on to the star Maria Friedman‘s portayal of a teenage girl with an ageing disease facing imminent death (‘a bundle of fear and joy, of anticipation and hesitancy, of resilience and damage’ The Arts Desk). The whole cast were praised for their singing and acting ability but a ‘memorable’ (Times) Alice Fearn received special mentions for her comedic criminal aunt. To complete the package, there was the design (‘Soutra Gilmour’s magical set’ Broadway World) and Michael Longhurst‘s direction (‘effervescent production’ FT). The plot might seem sad almost morbid but the crticis assured us it was ‘genuine, hilarious and utterly endearing’ (Guardian). Its average rating of 4.2 stars takes it to the top spot in the chart of Best Shows in London.

5 stars ⭑⭑⭑⭑⭑

Time Out‘s Andrezej Lukowski suggested: ‘Kimberly’s condition feels as much a metaphor for the transience of childhood and the fleetingness of life in general than a story to view literally.’ He said: ‘Friedman channels the frustrations, insecurities and gaucheness of being a teenage girl without ever seeming like she’s miking the idea for laughs.’ ‘the beauty of Kimberly Akimbo is what a rich texture it is: existential questions rubbing up against quirky John Hughes-isms, borderline magical realism, and poignant, earnest stuff on the difficulty of family. Plus romance!’ ‘Indie musical queen Jeanine Tesori delivers a wondrous small orchestra score that’s surging and melodic and powered by ravishing Beatles-y harmonies (…) while Lindsay-Abaire’s lyrics are more narrative than pop song, there are some tremendous earworms nonetheless’. ‘it’s easily my favourite musical of the year, and deserves a long life.’

Gary Naylor at The Arts Desk noted: ‘Performances are strong throughout the cast, turning what could be a set of stock characters in a potboiler of a plot into living, rounded individuals for whom we care deeply. A key to effecting that alchemy is the marshalling of musical theatre’s unique resources. David Lindsay-Abaire (book and lyrics and also the writer of the play on which the show is based) and Jeanine Tesori (music) use the score to reveal inner lives and lay bare insecurities. The songs articulate not just desires – the show is not short of ‘I Want’ numbers – but also lend considerable weight to matters as apparently mundane as a kid wishing for a treehouse.’ Talking of the character Seth’s solo, he pointed out: ‘in “Good Boy” but the writing is so intelligent and the delivery so heartfelt that his character moves from your head to your heart. That’s a journey musicals do in three minutes and plays in thirty.’ He praised the star: ‘Anchoring it all, Maria Friedman’s Kimberly is a bundle of fear and joy, of anticipation and hesitancy, of resilience and damage.’

4 stars ⭑⭑⭑⭑

Tom Wicker for The Stage declared: ‘Hampstead Theatre has a winner here’. He continued: ‘with a gorgeous and utterly earwormy score by Jeanine Tesori, (it) is a quirky, heartfelt delight.’ He complimented the design: ‘Soutra Gilmour’s extraordinary, split-level set revolves into an ice rink, Kimberly’s school and her dysfunctional family thrust together at home.’ And the star: ‘Friedman … beautifully inhabits Kimberly’s young-old energy. She mixes vulnerability with infectious, childlike delight by the end – leaving us gleefully uplifted, and aware of time’s preciousness.’

Lyndsey Winship for The Guardian admitted: ‘It’s a bizarre concept for a musical: a girl with a rare condition that causes her to age four times faster than her peers, in a family so dysfunctional that she’s the normal one. Meanwhile, the musical highlights are songs about cheque fraud and scurvy. And yet, somehow, through all this artifice and elaborate setup comes a show so sincerely heartfelt, one that is genuine, hilarious and utterly endearing.’

‘What an utterly charming gem this is’ began Marianka Swain for LondonTheatre. She advised: ‘it’s best approached as a resolutely quirky, filthily funny show that sneaks up and lodges itself in your heart.’ She described Kimberly’s situation: ‘Her condition makes her the ultimate outsider at school, but she begins to connect with other misfit kids: the endearingly eccentric Seth and the awkward show choir, who, in an unrequited love square, each fancy the wrong person (two of whom are closeted).’ She explained: ‘this very specific world is built with immense care, and that focus pays off: a single hurtful comment, like pregnant Pattie saying of her unborn baby “I want this one to be perfect”, hits like a thunderbolt. That’s partly due to a superb cast, led by Maria Friedman as Kimberly. She doesn’t adopt any exaggerated mannerisms yet fully convinces as a teenager thanks to her sweet singing voice and lovely open-heartedness, which makes you long to protect her.’

Louis Chilton for The Independent decided: ‘It is a show about ageing, and about youth – those most thoroughly universal of experiences. And in this, it is a clear success.’

WhatsOnStage‘s Sarah Crompton saw: ‘it is … a sort of love story and a supremely well-tuned (in every way) comedy of consistent error, of other teenagers who are muddling through, of people who don’t know themselves, powered not only by Kimberly but by her unpredictably outrageous aunt whose criminal endeavours both disrupt and power her upbringing.’ She talked of ‘the increasing sense that Kimberly is inhabiting a world where no-one quite fits in (there’s strong support from her misfit mates), allows the show to explore the themes that make it heartbreaking: the sense of snatching happiness from the events of lives that are often chaotic.’

For Katie Kirkpatrick at BroadwayWorld: ‘what this show does so well is find the joy and mundanity in its heroine’s life. Lindsay-Abaire delivers a masterclass in tone, making light of the devastating and vice versa. It’s a show about something tragic, but far from a tragedy in and of itself.’ She thought the design was one of the stars of the show: ‘ Soutra Gilmour’s magical set, which transforms from a clock to a house to a school to an ice rink and beyond. It’s perfectly fit for purpose while also finding a sense of whimsy throughout, providing a playground on which this story of ageing too fast can unfold. This is where Michael Longhurst’s direction comes into its own – it’s hard to separate from the set, as the two come together to build a contained, small-town claustrophobic world.’

The Financial Times’ Sarah Hemming honed in on the direction: ‘Longhurst’s ebullient staging, like the musical itself, keeps wrongfooting you. One minute it’s revelling in a wildly enjoyable number about criminal activity or a party at the local ice rink, the next it swings into a sweet lullaby about Father Time. And time, and the way we use it, sits at the heart of this gorgeous, moving show. In the end, as the cast sings, “No one gets a second time around.”’ She wrote about the star: ‘Friedman, leading an excellent cast in Michael Longhurst’s effervescent production, brings star wattage and immense vulnerability to the role of Kimberly. She’s incredibly poignant as she leans against the window frame of her dysfunctional family’s home and pens a letter to a charity asking them to grant her a normal life. Steering clear of superficial teenage mannerisms — Friedman is in her sixties — she grounds her performance in emotional truth’.

The Times’ Clive Davis mopped up the rest of the cast: ‘Alice Fearn makes a memorable aunt Debra, a petty criminal who lures her niece and her friends into a money-making scheme. Peter Hannah and Niamh Perry are terrific, too, as mom and pop. And there’s a close-harmony chorus in the form of Kimberly’s four friends who are besotted with Dreamgirls: Sara Hajizadeh, Ronav Jain, Robin Simoes da Silva and Aviva Tulley are deliciously eccentric, much like the show itself.’

Critics’ Average Rating 4.2⭑

Kimberly Akimbo can be seen at Hampstead Theratre until 7 November. Buy tickets directly from the theatre

Read Paul’s review here

If you’ve seen Kimberly Akimbo at Hampstead Theatre, please leave your review and rating below

High praise for 1536 author’s earlier play

Stratford East

Ava Pickett struck critical gold with 1536, so there was much anticipation surrounding this production of one of her earlier plays in which Helen of Troy is reimagined as a modern Essex girl. Most of the critics were thrilled (‘riveting’ The Stage) but there were outliers (‘vivid but erratic’ Times). The stars Michelle Dockery (Downton Abbey), Laura Aikman (Gavin & Stacy) and Maimuna Memon showed their acting chops. Stratford East’s new Artistic Director Lisa Spirling directed.

4 stars ⭑⭑⭑⭑

‘It’s a play that’s less about toxic masculinity and insidious racism than women’s response to it. Michelle Dockery’s Helen moves through multiple gears, from victim to rebel to a mother confronted with the daughter she abandoned’ said Emma John for The Guardian. She ended: ‘both comedy and drama are deftly paced and balanced in the production by Stratford East’s new artistic director Lisa Spirling’.

The Stage’s Sam Marlowe declared that the play was ‘crammed with nuance, paradox and uncomfortable observations about how the sexes relate, and the different types of power that they wield. This riveting production by Lisa Spirling … once again demonstrates Pickett’s singular gift for crackling dialogue, and for building and sustaining tension. And in its unflinching refusal to take refuge in the obvious and its darkly funny reworking of the tragic form, it’s a seriously clever piece of dramatic writing.’

‘This play is nowhere near the equal of 1536 but still riotously funny’ announced Jeremy Mailes in Plays International & Europe. He pointed out: ‘Pickett deals with bigger questions than superficial lifestyle choices of course though she is strong (and amusing) on things like fake tan and Botox. The large questions include the treatment of women as chattels, with Mario’s manhandling of Cee hinting at the extent of the abuse that goes on behind closed doors.’

Emily Godwin for LondonTheatre emphasised: ‘It’s the women who take centre stage in this fierce contemporary adaptation, told with laugh-out-loud humour and gut-wrenching poignancy.’

‘nobody does foul-mouthed feminist subversion with an Essex drawl anything like Pickett’ declared Time Out‘s Andrzej Lukowski. ‘She’s on the fast track to national treasure status: let’s enjoy the theatre bit for as long as it lasts.’

The Standard‘s Nick Curtis said: ‘Pickett’s flair for rich, heightened dialogue, and for puncturing high drama with sudden humour, are already thrillingly present. Like 1536, Bloodsport is built around three strong and complex female roles, embraced with relish in Lisa Spirling’s punchy production by Downton’s Michelle Dockery, Gavin and Stacy star Laura Aikman and the always-watchable Maimuna Memon.’

3 stars ⭑⭑⭑

Cindy Marcolina for BroadwayWorld was condescending: ‘The framework of Pickett’s world-building is not very solid, and asking one too many questions has the story on the verge of collapse. It’s quirky enough for the easily pleased feminists who are happy to skim the surface of the discourse and enjoy a fiery night at the theatre, but not adequately charged to be a convincing harangue. It’s flawed and inconsistent, but it will certainly get you talking.’

2 stars ⭑⭑
The Times’ Clive Davis  found: ‘Ava Pickett’s vivid but erratic mix of ancient myth and modern-day melodrama zigzagged from one overwrought standoff to another.’ He concluded: ‘The problem is that, for all the torrent of words, the individuals themselves never come fully into focus.’

Critics’ average rating 3.6⭑

Bloodsport is at Stratford East until 10 November 2026. Buy tickets direct from the theatre

If you’ve seen Bloodsport at Stratford East Theatre, please leave your review a d rating below

Sophie Okonedo wows the critics

Donmar Warehouse

Sophie Okonedo wowed the critics with her performance as the bored rich wife Natalya who lusts after her young son’s tutor (‘wonderfully febrile and totally compelling’ WhatsOnStage). All the cast were praised. Brian Friel’s adaptation of Turgenyev’s 19th century classic has long been admired for cutting its length, providing scintillating dialogue, and balancing comedy with tragedy (‘a universal story of pained love and marriage’ Guardian). Lyndsey Turner’s production was praised for its light touch (‘beautifully executed’ FT).

4 stars ⭑⭑⭑⭑

The Financial Times’ Sarah Hemming said: ‘it’s very funny, astute and psychologically true about human beings’ expertise in rendering themselves miserable — particularly in Brian Friel’s mischievously spry 1992 translation and Lyndsey Turner’s beautifully executed production.’ Having lauded Sophie Okonedo, she pointed out: ‘it’s the rich ensemble work that really makes this production. Every character is deftly drawn and precisely rooted — funny, but real, so we feel their pain.’

Dave Fargnoli of The Stage declared: ‘Director Lyndsey Turner handles the piece skilfully, allowing events to unfold at a rhythm just slow enough to drive home the stiflingly dull state of the characters’ lives without becoming tedious, and with enough crackling tension and humour to remain utterly engaging.’

The Independent’s Alice Saville commented: ‘Turgenev’s A Month in the Country is an unwieldy play, originally running for over four hours, and never quite descending into the proto-Chekhovian emotional devastation it seems to promise. Here, Turner prunes it into a witty, approachable form – but leaves all its thorns intact.’

WhatsOnStage’s Sarah Crompton referred to ‘Okonedo’s wonderfully febrile and totally compelling portrayal of Natalya Petrovna, dissatisfied wife of a rich man Arkady, whose life and that of those around her is utterly unmoored by her sudden passion for her son’s young tutor Aleksey (Patrick Gibson). She is both a tragic figure, failed by her circumstances, and a comic narcissist, whose desire becomes the focus of her entire life.’ She concluded: ‘It’s a gloriously rich play, wonderfully realised in a production that holds its contradictions gently in its hands and just lets its subtleties reveal themselves. It ends on a surprising note of tenderness. A gem.’

The Guardian’s Arifa Akbar said Brian Friel’s ‘sparkling script “after Turgenev” is spun so delicately that it appears both of its time and a universal story of pained love and marriage.’ She went on: ‘The fine line between humour and hurt is as delicately trodden by director Lyndsey Turner and an able ensemble’. She informed us: ‘Lesley Travers’ stunning set design covers the stage with a glass box filled with foliage’.

Cindy Marcolina for BroadwayWorld described the effectiveness of the production: ‘Ennui, the potential of a young lover, and plenty of jealousy make Brian Friel’s take on Ivan Turgenev’s play the perfect end-of-summer treat. Friel succeeds in maintaining the classic idle nature of Russian drama, and Lyndsey Turner turns it into a delicious slow burn.’ Her analysis continued: ‘The individual dynamics between Okonedo and the other actors prop up the narrative. While nothing extravagant happens, the appeal of the production is deeply rooted in the correlation between the writing and the performances.’

The Times’ Clive Davis liked the production: ‘there’s a constant undercurrent of humour in Lyndsey Turner’s production … Yes, you can still see how Turgenev provides a template for Chekhov’s sketches of unfulfilled lives, but the shafts of humour keep the shadows at bay.’ He had an unfounded concern: ‘Could the 58-year-old Okonedo be a little too old to be playing Natalya? I thought so at first, but her subtle portrayal of a woman consumed by small acts of narcissism won me over.’ He also praised other actors: ‘Casting the ebullient Daniel Rigby as Shpigelsky, the doctor from lowly origins who uses clumsy jokes as a way of masking his hatred of his superiors, is a clever choice.’

The Telegraph’s Dominic Cavendish commented on Natalya: ‘what’s riveting about the characterisation – and Okonedo’s portrayal – is the sense that, minute by minute, even in lightly off-hand exchanges, she’s tussling with powerful inner forces: her sense of self, her social conditioning, desires that elude easy fulfilment.’ He found: ‘it all rings bracingly true‘.

Helen Hawkins at The Arts Desk detected a touch of Katharine Hepburn: ‘director Lyndsey Turner has dressed up this 1992 adaptation of the play by Brian Friel as something closer to a period screwball comedy.’ She found: ‘Okonedo’s snippy-snappy handling of dialogue and on-a-dime mood swings are razor-sharp, and she and the rest of the uniformly fine cast land this well oiled comedy impressively.’

The Standard’s Nick Curtis thought about the set: ‘Designer Leslie Travers accentuates the staginess by periodically dropping a foliage-stuffed glass box onto his idyllic, grassy set, emphasising that the characters are trapped by their emotions. It’s great fun: sheer proximity to the actors at the Donmar makes it feel as if we’re spying on them from a thicket.’

3 stars ⭑⭑⭑

Only Julia Rank of LondonTheatre broke ranks with the other critics. She thought: ‘Okonedo, unfortunately, doesn’t seem quite right for the role; she has too much natural gravitas, and the coquettishness feels forced.’

Critics’ average rating 3.9⭑

A Month In The Country can be seen at The Donmar Warehouse Theatre until 3 October 2026  Tickets from donmarwarehouse.com

If you’ve seen A Month In The Country at The Donmar, you might like to leave your review and rating below