Gielgud Theatre
One To Avoid?
The 100th anniversary of Sean O’Casey’s tragicomedy turned into more of a wake than a celebration as critic after critic laid into the production. If the producers hoped a barnstorming performance from Mark Rylance would carry the day, they will have been disappointed. Even critics who liked his over-the-top acting weren’t sure whether it worked in the context of the production. Many weren’t convinced that the production itself had got the balance right between comedy and tragedy. With no less than four 2 star reviews from leading critics, Juno and the Paycock has one of the worst average ratings and value ratings of the year so far.
[Links to full reviews are included but a number are behind paywalls and therefore may not be accessible]
Time Out’s Andrzej Luwoski (4★) was lone in giving four stars and almost alone in loving Mark Rylance’s performance: ‘Rylance has gone full vaudevillian… he rocks a toothbrush moustache, a penchant for dazzling extremes of physical business, and a tendency to directly address the audience or look bewildered out of the corners of his eyes as if he can’t work out why he’s trapped in a play. For the first half he’s so dazzlingly strange and doing so much more than anyone else – much of it inscrutable – that it’s hard to focus on the other actors. I found it brilliantly, bizarrely funny, the sort of auteur performance that no other actor alive would so much as think of giving.’ He was right to say, ‘I suspect reviews will be divided on whether it makes any sense in the wider context of the production.’ He added emphatically, ‘But you know, if somebody offered me a Picasso I wouldn’t fret that it didn’t go with the furniture.’
Marianka Swain of LondonTheatre (3★) took a similar view‘ of Mark Rylance’s performance. Aided by his Charlie Chaplin moustache, he relishes the vaudevillian aspects of O’Casey’s work’…’However, Rylance is operating in a completely different register to the rest of the cast, who, while also alert to the work’s humour, offer much more grounded naturalism. That means he frequently pulls focus unnecessarily in a scene with his clowning, and undermines some of the darker material.’
Alice Saville in The Independent (3★) was disappointed that the play’s ‘deep sense of injustice and pain doesn’t get space to breathe here,’ but felt its male star saved it: ‘Rylance’s charisma knits together a production that’s full of roustabout hilarity and poignancy mingled together, bright and bleak at once.’
The Guardian’s Arifa Akbar (3★) said, ‘Smith-Cameron really is the heart and soul of this production, for all of Rylance’s charisma … when the tone flips to tragedy, Smith-Cameron is tremendous.’ She commented, ‘Beneath the bonhomie are O’Casey’s poetry, and the family’s craving to be somewhere they are not known, but this production does not dwell too long on these.’
Nick Curtis in The Standard (3★) had this to say about the stars: ‘Succession star J. Smith-Cameron is splendid in it as tenement matriarch Juno’ but ‘Mark Rylance … sadly continues his recent slide into mannered self-parody’. He didn’t think the play had aged well: ‘Today its juxtaposition of broad humour with sectarian violence and poverty jars, as do the thick-as-stout accents.’ As for the production, ‘Director Matthew Warchus accentuates the strangeness by giving his production the veneer of a black-and-white slapstick film, the cast in white pancake makeup and kohl-rimmed eyes.’
Heather Neill at TheArtsDesk (3★) disapproved of the treatment: ‘This is an unusual revival, giving both the comedy and tragedy full scope, but in the final scene it topples off balance into melodrama and becomes a different play altogether.’
Ssrah Crompton at WhatsOnStage (2★) called it ‘a horrible melange. Everyone on stage seems to be performing in a different version of the play, there is no chemistry, little sense of purpose.’
Dave Fargnoli in The Stage (2★) went further: ‘this turgid production from director Matthew Warchus never quite succeeds in capturing the author’s deep anger or extraordinary compassion.’ He gained some pleasure from the cast: ’Mark Rylance provides a riveting focal point as alcoholic, tall-tale-telling ‘Captain’ Jack Boyle. In a wholly committed performance, he stutters and slurs his lines, searching for words through a haze of drink and shame.’
The Times’ Clive Davis (2★) was critical of Mark Rylance. ‘His version of the feckless Captain Jack is a leering, gurning loafer who bears more than a passing resemblance to Charlie Chaplin’s tramp…It’s weirdly laboured, and makes the play’s sudden transition from high jinks to grim melodrama all the harder to take.’
Clare Allfree in the Telegraph (2★) was not impressed by either of its stars: ‘Rylance doesn’t shrink from Boyle’s essential helplessness but his confected, overly self-regarding performance lacks the requisite humanity to make us care.’ Of J. Smith-Cameron, she said, ‘she imbues Juno with a flinty pragmatism. Yet her exasperation with her obnoxious husband rarely tips into the necessary desperation. Even in the final scene, having lost almost everything, she maintains a monotone stoicism. The play demands more.’ Her conclusion? ‘O’Casey’s desolate play should force us into a reckoning with its characters’ contradictions. In this ultimately underwhelming production, one that’s far too in thrall to its star casting, there is not enough room for such complexity.’
Critics’ Average Rating 2.7★
Value rating 29 (Value rating is the Average Critic Rating divided by the typical ticket price)
Juno and the Paycock can be seen at the Gielgud Theatre until 23 November 2024 Buy tickets direct here
If you’ve seen Juno and the Paycock at the Gielgud Theatre, please add your review and rating below