Women excel as macho salesmen, but what was the point?
The Old Vic Theatre
The decision, apparently taken by the playwright David Mamet, to cast all women as the real estate salesmen in Patrick Marber‘s production of Glengarry Glen Ross had the critics scratching their heads. Nearly all found the acting excellent, especially that of Indira Varma and Rosa Salazar, but most were not sure that the experiment worked (‘the purpose of the gender reversal here feels unresolved’ Guardian). Some saw a point (‘the purpose of the gender reversal here feels unresolved’ Time Out). Rob Howell‘s sparse set in the current in-the-round configuration at The Old Vic was generally felt to add to the claustrophobia of a ‘boiler room’ but some thought there was not enough detail.
[Links to full reviews are included but a number are behind paywalls and therefore may not be accessible]
4 stars ⭑⭑⭑⭑
The Stage’s Sam Marlowe liked it a lot: ‘the focus here is unquestionably the ferocious performances. And they do not disappoint. This is true ensemble work by some of the finest actors working in British theatre, but if there is a standout, it’s Rosa Salazar’s Roma – costumed by Howell in a pair of mean shades and a sinister long leather coat.’ She ended: ‘Together, they are all so absorbing, and the pace and intensity of Marber’s direction so thrilling, that you almost forget the lack of substance at the play’s centre. It is, in its way, itself an elaborate, flashy theatrical con. But when it’s executed as scintillatingly as this, you don’t mind falling for the grift.’
The Standard’s Nick Curtis was conflicted: ‘Even as Mamet’s machine-tooled, combative dialogue locks in your attention, the casting throws a light on the deliberate shallowness of his characterisation. It’s an arresting but oddly distancing experience, as if you’re watching two plays at once, your brain constantly trying to unpick them.’ He described it as: ‘an experiment in perception and the artifice of acting. We simultaneously believe and don’t believe that these women are men. The casting accentuates the testosterone of Mamet’s writing rather than finding anything new in it. We are always aware we are watching a performance.’
Time Out’s Andrzej Lukowski in a presumed 4 stars review opined: ‘in stripping away the more preposterous layers of machismo and offering a more empathetic take, C.’ He concluded: ‘It’s a fascinating idea, and while it would be odd to see this without at least having seen the film for reference, I’d say it’s an experiment that works.’
3 stars ⭑⭑⭑
Marianka Swain for LondonTheatre picked out two members of the cast for special mention: ‘Varma is by turn blustering, wheedling, and furiously indignant, barrelling between emotional and physical extremes – from a shining moment of triumph, her whole frame suddenly animated, to quiet despair, her body collapsing in on itself (…) Excellent too is Rosa Salazar, giving us a fascinatingly seductive version of sleazy hustler Ricky Roma.’
Lucinda Everett for WhatsOnStage felt: ‘the production’s biggest challenge lies in Mamet’s insistence on the character’s names and pronouns remaining unchanged, leaving the spectre of masculinity hovering above the stage. A sudden shout of “John!” can momentarily break the illusion of the gender switch, make the more “masculine” performances suddenly feel like male impersonations, and scupper the chance to truly imagine how the play’s events, and its heart-breaking conclusion, would feel for a group of women.’
The Telegraph’s Dominic Cavendish acknowledged: ‘The female cast doesn’t have much room for manoeuvre. Adhere to the gender fixity of the roles and risk pale imitation. Counteract the template, dig beneath the pugilistic exteriors, and you can lessen the impact. It’s a tribute to the company that they walk this tightrope so well, combining ruthlessness and vulnerability.’ He conceded: ‘I feared we’d get toe-curling macho impersonation. Patrick Marber’s in-the-round Old Vic staging is better than that. Even so, it feels like a synthetic, vaguely modish experiment. The play still works, but why mess with perfection?’
The Independent’s Alice Saville described the simplicity of the set and concluded: ‘This minimalism might be efficient, but it doesn’t always serve the play, and makes it harder to create the claustrophobic, cigarette smoke-saturated feel of a tiny office that’s full of caged corporate beasts.’ She felt the production couldn’t make its mind up: ‘Maybe we’re socially conditioned to empathise more with women, however monstrous their roles are. Or maybe there’s just a lack of specificity to this staging, which keeps the male names of the original, without making it clear what gender each individual character is. By keeping things vague, the production loses its bite.’
Alexander Cohen at BroadwayWorld found: ‘the production lacks an electricity that should have been supercharged in Rob Howell’s claustrophobia-inducing in the round staging. The casting reframes the play’s masculinity but keeps it on a lead, not giving enough airtime to let the play’s testosterone fuelled heart bleed.’ He expanded : ‘We are too busy trying to sus out the commentary on gender dynamics and office politics to savour the play’s brutality. It’s like watching a philosophical thought experiment rather than a no bars hold bust up.’
The Times’ Clive Davis was not convinced: ‘Does it work? I’m not convinced. Salazar, wearing a long leather coat, her hair tied in a ponytail, struts around like an authentic Chicago hustler. But, collectively, this reinvention has the aura of a rehearsal room exercise in which accomplished actors sketch personalities without, for the most part, getting to the heart of the characters. Or grabbing them by the balls, as the salesmen would say.’
2 stars ⭑⭑
What’s the point? asked The Guardian’s Arifa Akbar: ‘You wonder why these women are playing at being men rather than performing as female versions of Mamet’s capitalists, especially in the era of Margaret Thatcher.’ (…) ‘Gender-switched productions are motivated by different reasons … Some are done for gender parity, some are political and others simply arbitrary, he says. For all its promise, the purpose of the gender reversal here feels unresolved.’
Critics’ average rating 3.2
Value score based on rating versus price: 42
Glengarry Glen Ross can be seen at The Old Vic Theatre until 18 July 2026. Buy tickets directly from theatre www.oldvictheatre.com
If you’ve seen this production, please leave a review and/or rating below
Having seen one of the final previews we are fully on board with the Guardian’s review – really, what was the point? We are always interested to see and actively seek out alternative “takes” on plays we like, but this offered little beyond gimmicky casting. Sure, some of the performances were fine, but having obviously women (some dressed in unisex style, others in skirts or dresses, high heels and carrying handbags), playing male characters as males, still with the original male names and delivery exactly like a male cast would have played it, missed the mark in a big way. Especially as there was no context to give sense to the casting, unlike for example the Donmar’s all-female Shakespeare plays a few years ago, set in a women’s prison. We still feel there would be a great opportunity for a female “take” on this play, but sadly this production isn’t it.