Nell Gwynn - Globe Theatre

Sumptuous set of Nell Gwynn

Having seen Blue Stockings two years ago, I was excited to see Jessica Swale's latest offering. Following Nell's journey from humble theatre orange seller to successful actress and mistress of Charles II to aspiring playwright, Nell Gwynn was a big ball of wit, exuberance, ribaldry and joy. It was definitely my favourite Globe production of the year.

Gugu Mbatha-Raw was sympathetic and engaging as the courageous, determined, witty Nell. After being persuaded by actor Charles Hart (Jay Taylor) to try her hand at acting, Nell discovers she has a gift for it and quickly becomes indispensable to the company of players, much to the discomfort of Edward Kynaston (Greg Haiste), the company's established actor specialising in female roles. When the King shows an interest in Nell she is torn between her rewarding theatrical career (and Charles Hart, with whom she is romantically involved) and the prospect of a more comfortable - albeit potentially insecure - life with Charles II (David Sturzaker), with whom she has fallen in love.

The play was bawdy but not gratuitously so. Nell's humour was so infectious and her character so sympathetic that you couldn't help laughing along with her. The humour wasn't restricted to bawdiness; it was very witty and contained modern references (e.g. King Charles' anti-austerity remark). Kynaston was extremely funny as a stereotypical thespian, keen to demonstrate all the moves he had learned at 'fan school' in an attempt to intimidate Nell, and insisting on having an incredibly detailed backstory for the minor character he ended up playing. Nancy (Amanda Lawrence), the menial responsible for mending the company's costumes, was also a source of much of the play's humour. I loved it when it transpired that she had a perfect understanding of French as a result of having worked in France under Molière. 

My favourite scene was that in which Nell mocks the King's new mistress, Louise de Keroualle (Sasha Waddell), during a performance attended by the King and Louise. After Louise boasts to Nell that she intends to come to the performance wearing a 'grand chapeau' that will reduce Nell to insignificance, Nell comes on stage singing a song in French making fun of Louise, accompanied by other actors carrying an elaborate hat too gigantic to be worn.

The set was wonderful, complete with Royal Box and other theatre accoutrements. The costumes were excellent, including the many wigs. The music was great; songs entertaining.

One of the main themes of the play was the dearth of complex female characters in plays; once admitted into the company Nell tries to get Dryden (Graham Butler) to write more realistic and believable female characters. It was interesting to see this theme in the context of a play set in the seventeenth century, as it is of course still very relevant today.

Next: Probably Pride & Prejudice (guest post)

Secret Cinema - Star Wars

Me as a Starfighter Alliance Corps pilot

This wasn't a 'theatre' experience as such, but it did involve live performances by actors, so I thought it merited a post. I won't go into detail about it so as not to give too much away.

I am not a Star Wars fan. Before going to this event my Star Wars exposure consisted of watching Episode 1 at the cinema and a bit of one of the other films (can't remember which) at home. I don't think we even finished watching the one at home because I got bored. I just don't like things set in space. When given the opportunity to go to this event I was reluctant because I didn't think it would be worth it for me. But I ended up enjoying it a lot. 

One of the first things you do after obtaining your ticket is to complete a short online questionnaire to determine your role in the Rebellion. I got 'Starfighter Alliance Corps', and my partner, who was the driving force behind my going, set about acquiring a suitable outfit for me. The chosen outfit was a second-hand homemade one and was pretty good. I thought the front control box looked a bit primitive until I actually saw the film, and realised that the 'real' ones looked similarly basic. The Starfighter outfit was the most distinctive of the possible costumes.

The Secret Cinema experience involves entering and immersing oneself in the world of the event's theme - in this case Star Wars - before watching the film in question (in this case The Empire Strikes Back). Here are some of my thoughts and recommendations:

• It was definitely worth dressing up. It made the experience a lot more immersive and I have never been given so much respect in my life as when I was dressed as a Starfighter Alliance Corps pilot. One of the actors at the event greeted me with 'It's good to see you again, pilot', while another told me I should congratulate myself.

• When you reach the planet destination I would recommend looking around properly, soaking up the atmosphere and interacting with or at least observing the characters there. It's easy to be seduced by the food stalls and spend too much time queuing and eating. If you're not a massive fan of the films, it's especially important to make the most of this part of the experience because it's probably the bit you'll enjoy the most. There's a lot going on. 

• I discovered that it's 'Han Solo', not Hans Solo.

• My criticism of the experience was that there wasn't any follow-up or continuity on the mission we were supposed to be accomplishing. There was a lot of build-up but it was never fully realised. I may not be a Star Wars fan, but I do like my experiences of this sort to be properly immersive and complete. 

• Spend some time in the bar after watching the film. There was a good atmosphere and music.

Next: Nell Gwynn

As You Like It - Globe Theatre

Set of As You Like It complete with earth
piles for burying recently deceased
Duke

I always forget how long this play is and how many elements it contains...When I think of it I always think of Orlando wooing Rosalind as 'Ganymede' in the forest, but that only starts in the second half of the play! The best time to see a production of As You Like It at the Globe is on a warm, sunny Spring day. Conditions were not optimal when I saw it (cold and cloudy), but I still manged to get into the spirit of it.

The costumes at the Globe are always of a high standard, but I was particularly impressed by those in this production. The women of the court all had late Elizabethan double-bump hairstyles and Rosalind and Celia's first outfits and wedding outfits were extremely elaborate and, in the latter case, dazzling.

Michelle Terry was a vibrant, exuberant, self-assured Rosalind. Because she naturally has a low voice her 'transition' into a man wasn't as dramatic or played for laughs to the extent that it is in most productions, which was refreshing. I enjoyed the development of Rosalind's relationship with Orlando (Simon Harrison). The fact that the actors playing Rosalind, Celia and Orlando were on the more mature side of the age spectrum for their characters (i.e. in their 30s rather than 20s) gave the characters a stronger, more confident quality. Orlando is usually portrayed as naive and slightly vulnerable; in this production he came across as quite worldly wise and dominant. I think he guessed that Ganymede was Rosalind early on.

I thought the production could have made more of the bucolic nature of the Forest of Arden. How? I don't know. I'm influenced by the first AYLI I saw at the Globe, which made me feel as though I truly was in a forest. Maybe it was just the weather. But no, I think it was also the music in the first production and their use of a fire. They may have had pretend trees, as well, but maybe that was just my imagination.

At the risk of sounding curmudgeonly, I wasn't keen on the inclusion of modern props for entertainment's sake. A modern map, an umbrella and one of those shopping bags on wheels made an appearance. Oh, and a bicycle. I don't have a problem with actors making modern cultural references during a comedy (e.g. riding on brooms pretending to play Quidditch in A Comedy of Errors) - it doesn't detract from the spirit or atmosphere of the play. I can imagine actors in Shakespeare's time making ad lib references to current events to amuse the audience. But using modern props in an otherwise authentically costumed and 'propped' play seems to defeat the purpose of the Globe. It's supposed to be as it would have been in Shakespeare's day! 

I really enjoyed the tap dance, though, performed by two of the men of the forest, so maybe I'm being inconsistent. The parts featuring Touchstone (Daniel Crossley) and Audrey (Sophia Nomvete) were some of my favourite scenes in the play (they were in the tap dance scene). In this production Touchstone genuinely seemed to care for Audrey, which was nice. He was an understated Touchstone, but funny nonetheless.

Next: Secret Cinema presents Star Wars

Richard II - Globe Theatre

Another throne...set of Richard II

Despite arriving earlier than usual at the Globe AND there being a tube strike, the groundling queue was sizeable when I got there, comprising a party of around twenty American students. However, on being released into the Globe, the students, sheep-like, gravitated towards the end of the stage build-out, allowing me to slide triumphantly into the exact place I would've chosen had I been first in the queue! Yesss!! It's these little Globe victories that I enjoy nearly as much as the performances themselves. Well, not really.

The stage build-out was one of the most interesting I've experienced at the Globe. There was a short runway leading from the main stage to another stage, leaving a 'corridor' on either side for groundlings to stand sandwiched between both stages, if that makes sense (see picture below). I was next to the runway, meaning that I was surrounded by three walls, allowing me to lean backwards as well as forwards. It was a roomier position than usual.

Anyway: Richard II. It began with the coronation of the child Richard II in a shower of gold confetti. He clutched a wooden toy horse that was to make a poignant reappearance later on in the play. The adult King emerged as the last flakes of confetti floated to the ground, dressed in the same cream outfit as his youthful counterpart. In a bigger size, of course.

Charles Edwards did a good job of portraying Richard's evolution from narcissistic, capricious, pampered monarch, complete with parasol and band of sycophantic followers, to a broken, imprisoned, (almost) friendless, deposed king. After Richard exiles his cousin, the hard-faced Henry Bolingbroke (David Sturzaker), for six years, and seizes his father's land, Bolingbroke takes advantage of Richard's ill-advised trip to Ireland, returning to England with an army. Things quickly go downhill for Richard from that point. His friends melt away and he ends up having to hand his crown over to Bolingbroke - literally.

I enjoyed the scenes where Richard is flanked by his tittering, fashionably-dressed, flattering courtiers. The four courtiers gave excellent performances in their transformations from complacent favourites to desperate, fearful people (dead people, in some cases).

One of my favourite scenes was the one in which Richard visits his dying uncle (Bolingbroke's father), John of Gaunt (played by William Gaunt!). Richard is unsympathetic towards his uncle and looks forward to taking his possessions after his death. Gaunt is witty on his deathbed and strikes unease into the heart of the King by describing him as a 'dying man' - Richard initially thinks Gaunt is talking about himself, but he isn't! It was good to see a vulnerable person verbally socking it to Richard.

The comic interludes featuring gardeners, real plants and the parents of former Richard II favourite Aumerle (Graham Butler) shuffling on their knees towards the new King were a welcome relief from the seriousness of the rest of the play.

My standing place looking out into audience

Music normally plays a big part at the Globe but there didn't seem to be much of it in this production. Brass instruments.

This play wasn't one I'd particularly want to see again. The production was great; it was the play itself...it didn't fully engage me. It didn't have the drama and tension of (for example) the Henry VI trilogy, the humour of Henry IV or the utterly compelling protagonist of Richard III. There wasn't even a big battle scene, like in Henry V. There were no ghosts. Or proto-feminism. Or dancing. Apart from one 5 second dance near the beginning. Someone dressed in quasi Arabian garb? Or was that the dream I had last night? I felt a bit sorry for Richard towards the end, but wasn't that bothered about what happened next. 

I also would've liked a proper jig at the end. There was music but no dancing, as far as I can remember. The final music sounded at first like the Laurel and Hardy theme music. Which is not a criticism!

Next: As You Like It

The Turn of the Screw - Upstairs at the Gatehouse

Upstairs at the Gatehouse theatre

I wasn't able to see The Hampstead Players' Richard II last week, unfortunately, due to unavoidable job-related circumstances. However, I made up for it by seeing the Tower Theatre Company's The Turn of the Screw twice! It was performed at Upstairs at the Gatehouse, which, like most places in Highgate, is apparently haunted. The intimate, hot, slightly oppressive space of Upstairs at the Gatehouse was the perfect setting for a summer ghost story and psychological drama.

Set at the turn of the century, The Turn of the Screw is the story of a young governess who obtains a post at the country estate of Bly, where she is to look after two orphaned children, Miles and Flora Havelock. Full of good intentions, she quickly grows unsettled when she learns more about the former inhabitants of the house, namely the governess, Miss Jessell, and valet, Peter Quint. Who are DEAD! But who may or may not remain as ghosts, with whom the children may or may not interact. 

The attention to detail in this production was extraordinary. If you have read any other reviews in this blog you will know what a sucker I am for lavish sets and minutiae; I was all over the sets and props here. The main set comprised a door, bookcase and large window with long curtains. A translucent white curtain was periodically drawn across the above for scenes taking place outside the house. Most of the ghosts' appearances took place behind the translucent curtain or the window. The lighting on the ghosts' faces was used to great effect, rendering Miss Jessell's face skull-like and Peter Quint's craggy and unhinged. Things that particularly impressed me included the following:

• The stagehands were all dressed in servants' garb of the period rather than the traditional stagehand clothing of anything black.
• The letter from Miles' headmaster had a school crest on it! Which I could see through the paper, as well as the word 'School' in copperplate print!
• The old-fashioned, completely authentic-looking schoolroom desks.
• When the Governess and the children came in from the rain, they were actually wet.
• The bookcase that folded down into a life-sized wooden bed.

Emily Carmichael was excellent as the nameless Governess, believably turning from a determined, idealistic, self-controlled young woman into an obsessive nervous wreck (still determined, though). It was an extremely intense part and she remained focussed and engaging right up until her final scream. Miles and Flora (Isaac and Eliza Insley) were also very well played. They looked perfect for their roles - Miles really did look angelic - and they had an endearing, realistic sibling rapport, which perhaps wasn't surprising given that they were siblings in real life. Miles was properly precocious and creepy but also sympathetic, and did the best pretend piano playing I have ever seen. Flora's character was more fleshed-out than in the 2009 BBC adaptation of The Turn of the Screw (my only previous exposure to TTotS). She had an interesting personality of her own rather than just serving as the more innocent adjunct of Miles. They both had quite a few funny lines.

My favourite scene was Miles and Flora's show, which they performed in front of the Governess and Mrs Grose (Alison Liney). It was sweet and amusing but had menacing undertones. My second favourite scene was that in which Peter Quint (Nicolas Holzapfel) unexpectedly appeared in the Governess' bed, eliciting gasps and squeals from the audience, after having behaved amorously with Miss Jessell (Nina Tolleret) outside the window.

The only slightly weak element of the play was the Governess' alleged attraction to the Master (i.e. her employer, the children's uncle), Mr Sackville (Martin South). Given how much older he was than her, it just didn't seem plausible to me that she would have fancied him - especially after only one meeting - even if she was naive and inexperienced.

The piano music between scenes suited the tense atmosphere perfectly.

Next: Richard II (Globe version)

King John - Globe Theatre

King John set

Black-hooded monks, incense, organ music, candles aplenty...what more could you want from a performance of Shakespeare's rarely performed play King John? Robin Hood, perhaps? He didn't feature but the character of The Bastard provided one with all the outspokenness, courage and rebelliousness (albeit not against King John) that one might desire.

It was good to be back at the Globe. Unlike usual, as soon as one entered the theatre - and, as a groundling who had queued for over 1.5 hours, I was one of the first to enter the theatre - there were people on stage - hooded monks - playing instruments and intoning religious chants. Combined with the incense, one immediately felt as though one was in medieval times in an ecclesiastical setting. I felt that the Globe went the extra mile for this production when it came to the music and props, perhaps in order to compensate for the fact that most people wouldn't be familiar with the play. The organ and Tibetan singing bowl in particular were used to excellent effect.

Most of the action took place in France, which I hadn't expected. King John (Jo Stone-Fewings), his mum, Eleanor of Aquitaine (Barbara Marten), and his recently-discovered illegitimate nephew, The Bastard (Alex Waldmann), set off for France with an army, because John feels threatened by his rather angelic young nephew, Arthur (Laurence Belcher), whose claim to the throne is strong. John allies himself with King Phillip of France (Simon Coates). John's niece, Blanche of Castile (Aruhan Galieva - who had a beautiful voice), marries Louis the Dauphin (Ciaran Owens) in a match that will strengthen John's claim to the throne. There follows a dramatic breaking of allegiances, an excommunication, a potential blinding with hot irons and a succession of deaths. There was a reasonable amount of sword fighting, which I enjoyed.

There weren't many female characters but the ones that there were were memorable. I often find myself pleasantly surprised by Shakespeare's parts for women. Eleanor of Aquitaine is portrayed as a formidable elderly woman, prepared to fight if need be. Blanche makes it clear that she's not happy with her marriage to Louis and that she can't automatically support his cause just because they're married. Constance (Tanya Moodie), Arthur's mother, is fiercely protective of her son and is determined to see him fulfil what she believes to be his destiny. None of them is reluctant to put forth their views in a forceful manner.

King John isn't portrayed as pure evil, as I'd expected. He certainly isn't a paragon of morality, but he is no worse than many of the shady, scheming monarch/courtier characters in Shakespeare's plays.

I loved the music, the costumes (wimples!) and the atmosphere, but wasn't overly keen on the plot. I've found other history plays, such as the Henry VI trilogy and Richard III much more exciting and tense. And...there was NO JIG. NO JIG at the end! Why not? Globe, if you can still find it in you to perform a jig after the carnage and destruction of Macbeth, why not after King John?? Songs are great, but don't make up for a jig.

Next: Richard II

Travesties - Bridewell Theatre

Me watching Travesties

'Travesties! When the feeling's gone and you can't go on, it's Travesties! When the morning cries and you don't know why...' The last Tom Stoppard play I saw was Arcadia, about fifteen years ago, which I didn't enjoy on the grounds of it being pretentious and difficult to follow. I was concerned I would have a similar reaction to Travesties when I read the blurb on its advertising leaflet: 'With all the pithy wit of Joyce and the literary virtuosity of Wilde, the political rigour of Dada and the absurdity of Lenin - Travesties is a whirlwind tour through politics, art and really great trousers. While the Great War rages across Europe, Zurich in 1917 is a battlefield of ideas and ideals. [...]' 

Anything that has the words 'Joyce', 'literary virtuosity', 'Dada' and 'battlefield of ideas and ideals' in its description has GOT to be pretentious, right?

Well, not necessarily, but this play certainly was.

I liked its basic concept: elderly man called Henry Carr (performed here by a Bruce Forsyth lookalike) reminisces about his younger days when he lived in Zurich, and the influential people he met. As he reminisces we see his reminiscences played out. However, his memories are faulty and sometimes confused, and there are times when the same basic memory is played out more than once but in slightly different ways. An interesting concept. The people with whom Carr interacts are James Joyce, Tristan Tzara (a founder of Dadaism) and Lenin. Carr played the part of Algernon in The Importance of Being Earnest while in Zurich and his memories are closely intertwined with this play.

The thing that annoyed me about Travesties - and Arcadia, too, as far as I remember - is that one's enjoyment of it depended almost entirely on whether one understood its myriad of social, political and literary references. In this case you had to have a reasonably intimate knowledge of The Importance of Being Earnest in order to understand half the script. Fortunately I happened to have seen TIoBE and listened to a radio adaptation of it recently [smug look] so I think I scraped a pass on that score. However, in order to wring the most enjoyment out of this play you would also have to have a good knowledge of Joyce, Ulysses, Dadaism, contemporary Russian politics...and probably a load of other things that I'm too goshdarned pig ignorant to even be aware of. Confession: I'd never heard of Tzara before seeing this play and it wasn't until the second half that I realised he was based on a real person, like Joyce and Lenin (yes, I had heard of them [wipes brow]).

There were some parts that I found amusing, such as Carr's love of clothes even while fighting in WW1, but didn't find anything laugh-out-loud funny.

My dislike of the play aside, Travesties was performed admirably by the Tower Theatre Company, a well-known amateur group. It wasn't an easy play to perform, requiring a good sense of rhythm, especially in the poetry scenes. Now I have a better knowledge of some of the characters I'm impressed by how well the actors copied their appearances. The costumes were great, hairstyles impressive. The set was excellent. It was good to see consecutive sets containing divans!

Next: I don't know. Nothing by Tom Stoppard, though. For another fifteen years.