Jonathan Bailey gives a regal performance

Bridge theatre

There was a mostly positive reaction from the critics to Jonathan Bailey‘s portrayal of Richard II. The Bridgerton star has the chance to show a range of emotion as a man born to be king but unfit for the role.  Shakespeare‘s play covers the last two turbulent years’ of his reign . There was slightly less enthusiasm for Nicholas Hytner‘s production which many felt was uninspired.

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

The Guardian‘s Arifa Akbar (4★) enjoyed it: ‘Nicholas Hytner, as director, smooths away most of the play’s creakiness with a pared-down production that has the pace and intrigue of a thriller. It is muscular in its look and Bailey singularly shines, his luminosity putting the others slightly in the shade.’

Olivia Rook at LondonTheatre (4★) was another fan: ‘Bailey reveals and revels in all facets of this magnetic king and as Hytner has said in multiple interviews, he speaks Shakespeare “as though it is his first language”.’ Neil Norman in the Express (4★) thought ‘Bailey is effectively ineffectual as Richard, viciously petulant and deluded throughout’. He called Hytner’s production ‘illuminating’.

Sarah Crompton for WhatsOnStage (4★) was also on board: ‘The most compelling quality of the staging – driven on by a Hitchcockian score by Grant Olding – is the way that it treats the unfolding events not as historical inevitability, but as if they are changing moment to moment.’ She continued, ‘It’s propulsively driven, and often surprisingly funny, wheeling along with an absolute confidence. It’s been a long time since Hytner’s directed a history play and it feels worth the wait.’

Cindy Marcolina for BroadwayWorld (4★) liked the star but not the production: ‘Bailey now takes on a complicated head of state, breaking him open and thinning the lines between divisive, problematic political figure and sardonic, villainous poet. It’s Jonathan Bailey’s world and we’re merely living in it, but Nicholas Hytner’s production sees a five-star cast stuck in a three-star show. A drastic lack of identity keeps this Richard II moored, making it a standard modern-day adaptation that refuses to delve into anything particular.’

The Standard‘s Nick Curtis (4★) opined, ‘Jonathan Bailey gives the best performance I’ve ever seen of Shakespeare’s flawed monarch, an erratic tyrant who gains dignity once deposed.’ The Telegraph‘s Dominic Cavendish (3★) had had better: ‘He acquits himself well…even if, despite impressive splenetic flourishes, he doesn’t attain the recent greatness of Ben Whishaw and David Tennant in the part.’

The Times’ Clive Davis (3★) mischievously reported, ‘Jonathan Bailey gives us a monarch who is forever teetering on the edge of hysteria, with a touch of camp too…a surprising amount of laughter kept rippling through the stalls…Had we stumbled into a pilot episode of Blackadder?’

Andrzej Lukowski in Time Out (3★) was lukewarm: ‘Bailey’s king…at his best presents the air of a smug but inept middle manager’. He continued: ‘There is interesting territory to be explored in the hinterlands between Richard’s supposedly divine appointment and his mediocrity as a person. But too often Hytner’s production gets lost in them.’

The Stage’s Sam Marlowe (3★) felt Jonathan Bailey rose above the production: ‘The staging is solid rather than exceptional. But Bailey makes a transfixing Richard, his plight engaging to the last, despite the nastier excesses of his capricious behaviour.’