Wolf Hall - Aldwych Theatre

Wolf Hall book cover

I've read both Wolf Hall and Bring up the Bodies and was favourably impressed. They were gripping, intense, atmospheric, disturbing, unusual, authentic-sounding... 

Wolf Hall the play

was

not.

The costumes were wonderful. The script was very faithful to the book. The play contained all the important plot points. 

But. It was two-dimensional. It lacked tension, drama, a sense of impending doom. I found it difficult to become properly absorbed in it. I even almost fell asleep in the second half (!!!). I forced myself to stay awake because the costumes were so beautiful. I'm a sucker for swishing robes and English hoods. And because I'd paid £40 to see it.

I think one of the main problems was its pacing. It was too fast. Even a theatre novice like myself understands the importance of pausing in order to create dramatic tension. But there were very few pauses in the play. Lighting and sound effects could also have been employed to ratchet up the tension. There should have been more shadows for people to lurk in, and more people lurking in them. I felt that the producers/directors prized competence and basic faithfulness to the plot over trying to create the book's pressurized atmosphere.

Sir Timothy

The characters, again, were played competently and somewhat literally. Thomas Cromwell was a cockney (well, kind of), Anne Boleyn shouted a lot and Jane Seymour cowered in almost pantomimic fashion. One didn't get a sense of the depth of the characters. In addition, Thomas Cromwell didn't have much of a 'presence'. I tended to forget about him when he wasn't speaking. Which isn't right! Thomas Cromwell needs to have a strong, imposing, definite, slightly intimidating presence. It's true that how actors look doesn't necessarily matter - if they are good actors they'll make you believe in the character even if they don't look much like them - but I found it difficult to get beyond Ben Miles' refined looks. I think he's more suited to lord of the manor-type roles in period dramas.

I didn't like the concrete walls/columns surrounding the stage. Yes, I know it's modern and almost expected to have minimal scenery/props etc., but I found the concrete incongruous with a play set in Tudor times, in which the actors are wearing Tudor costumes.

In conclusion, my recent discovery that Boots no longer stocks Chapstick or Lypsyl gave me a much greater sense of tension and drama than this production.

Next: probably Round Two - Bring up the Bodies. Ding ding!

All's Well that Ends Well - Hampstead Parish Church

All's Well that Ends Well leaflet fragment

I haven't updated this for aaaaaaaagggees because I haven't been to the theatre since March, not because I have been seeing things without writing about them. Apologies to all my readers for leaving you on tenterhooks, especially my dear Russian reader(s).

Last week I went to see 'All's Well that Ends Well', performed by The Hampstead Players, not once, but twice. That is, I saw it twice, not that they performed it only twice. Egads.

I wasn't overly keen on AWtEW when I saw it at the Globe in 2011, so, while looking forward to it, I wasn't excited enough to get diarrhoea beforehand, as I did prior to the Players' production of 'As You Like It' last year. AWtEW is a strange play - neither comedy nor tragedy, it contains complex and not altogether likeable characters, and has a plot that becomes particularly complicated and difficult to follow in the second half if you're not listening carefully enough.

However, I was pleasantly surprised. I really enjoyed it. Both times I felt fully absorbed and engaged in the story, which couldn't have been presented more comprehensibly. Sarah Day was sublime as Helen. She immediately engaged the sympathies of the audience and very effectively conveyed her emotions through subtle facial expressions and gestures (and verbally, of course...!). Her feelings towards Bertram were clear from the first scene, before she'd uttered a word. I enjoyed the scenes featuring Helen and the Countess of Rossillion (Moragh Gee), which were credible and quite touching. I can't think of many mother/(surrogate) daughter relationships in Shakespeare. 

Bertram was well played by Nicolas Holzapfel as rather a peevish spoilt brat. There were glimmers of good nature about him, though. I liked the fact that in the opening scene he hugged Helen with what seemed to be genuine affection before he left for Paris, which showed that he did care about her - he just didn't want to marry her.

I enjoyed the scenes in Florence, which were channeling the 1950s, for some reason. I loved Mary Clare's sarcastic, wordly (but virtuous!) interpretation of Diana. 

One of my favourite scenes was the interrogation of Parolles. It was very funny and reminded me of the scene in Henry IV Part 1, when Falstaff is robbed by Hal's friends without knowing it was them, and, when made by them to recount what had happened the next day, exaggerating and basically lying about what had happened.

Features of the production that I thought were particularly good:

• The fact that chairs had been placed on either side of the 'stage'. This was beneficial to the audience, as more people were able to have a close-up view. I imagine it was more satisfying for the actors, too, to have closer contact with the audience and to more easily feed off their 'energy' (<--- theatrical expression alert!). I think all plays performed at the church should adopt this seating layout.
• Pacing. It was fast-moving, which helped to keep it engaging. Very polished.
• The music between scenes was a good touch.
• Everyone played their parts to an extremely high standard - no weak links at all.
• I liked the silhouette of Bertram and Helen that appeared when they were about to make love in Diana's bed.

A good time was had by all, methinks.

And tomorrow I'm going to see...Wolf Hall!