Review – Redlands, Festival Theatre Chichester, 2nd October 2024

“I f**king love the Witterings,” asserts Keith Richards from the dock, explaining why he bought a 15th century baronial manor house (with moat) – that’s the Redlands of the title – in the heart of leafy West Sussex, during his 1967 trial alongside Mick Jagger for drug-related offences at Chichester Crown Court. That little statement expresses perfectly the delightful class-based friction that gives this story a delicious edge. No better theatre then, nor indeed audience, for Charlotte Jones’ unusually structured but extremely entertaining play that brought the Rolling Stones under the gaze of the West Sussex Constabulary in a trial where the two stars were defended by one Michael Havers, QC, later Attorney-General and Lord Chancellor under Margaret Thatcher’s Prime Ministership.

In fact, this is virtually two plays, neatly dovetailed together, but possibly misleadingly if you’re expecting a play about Jagger and Richard. In fact, the most significant characters in the play are Michael Havers and his son, wannabe actor, Nigel Havers (yes, the Nigel Havers), and their fractious, distant relationship. It’s not that Havers Senior doesn’t like or value his son – although he finds it hard to accept that the latter doesn’t want to work in the law like everyone else in the family – it’s primarily that the QC is such a busy man, and so work-oriented, that he simply hasn’t the time to be interested in him. Mind you, Havers Senior shows himself to be a typical stuffed shirt when he refuses to allow young Nigel to attend the lunch table dressed in the Kings Road’s fashions of the day. It’s left for Michael’s father, Sir Cecil Havers (Bongo to his friends) to give Nigel moral support by going to Lord’s together, boosting his confidence and generally getting down with the kids – Bongo is nothing if not a barrel of laughs.

Secondary to the Havers dynasty, the play next concentrates on the effect of the Redlands court case on Marianne Faithfull, Jagger’s current flame, referred to as Miss X during the trial. She was present when the police made the drugs raid and felt that she was equally if not more responsible than Mick and Keith – but Havers refused to let her testify. Whilst Havers was able to lodge a successful appeal against the sentence that Jagger and Richard received, Faithfull laments that her name will never be cleared – and she does indeed come across as the person who loses the most in the whole story. As for Jagger and Richard – all publicity is good publicity, and they never looked back. Charlotte Jones sets the date of the sentencing appeal on the same day that young Nigel is to take his audition to study at RADA, intertwining both elements of the story into an emotional finale.

Ms Jones enjoys wringing every possible local connection out of the text, with news reporters describing the local community as largely decent, and Keith Richards describing the people surrounding him as old (at which point he gestures to the overwhelmingly geriatric Festival Theatregoers); she also gives her central character of Nigel Havers the role of narrator, talking directly to the audience throughout, acknowledging that he’s on the stage of the Festival Theatre – right here in Chichester – and he even points out the audience to his father at the end of the show, who’s astonished to discover that there’s been a thousand or so of us watching him from the very start. It’s a fun concept that doesn’t really hold water, but we play along with it because it’s very shapely and lends a nice surreal air to everything going on. To be frank, there’s not much verisimilitude in the production; after all, the Stones did not break from the court case to perform a rock number in front of the Judge with dancing police officers. But it is entertaining to see how a gifted barrister like Michael Havers could spin the facts in his questions to the police and Jagger and Richard (a.k.a. the boys) so that the former come across as conniving targeting entrappers and the latter as sweet-natured innocent lads.

Joanna Scotcher’s multi-level set reserves a largely empty space downstage for Havers’ home and office and the courtroom, and a curtained-off hidden upstage area for Stones performances and a dream sequence. It works, for the most part; perhaps it looks a little clumsy when characters who have nothing to do with the musical performances, like Havers’ office staff, enter the stage by revolving out from behind the half-raised curtain. Ryan Dawson Laight’s costumes are excellent, creating some very believable 60s fashions alongside the stiff and starchy legal types. I could really aspire to a pair of Keith Richards cuffs.

The performances are all superb; hats off to Louis Landau (Nigel Havers) and Jasper Talbot (Mick Jagger) on their stage debuts, both extremely convincing portrayals of the younger versions of people we all know and love. Mr Talbot’s on stage Jagger is pure entertainment and almost a snapshot of the original’s iconic performances. Anthony Calf does a first rate job as Michael Havers; authoritative, genial in a condescending sort of way, flustered by what he doesn’t understand – a strangely vulnerable large cog in a very traditional wheel.

Emer McDaid stands out as Marianne Faithfull; self-confident because of her upbringing but powerless against the might of the law. Her singing voice is very reminiscent of the early Faithfull, and her brief rendition (together with Mr Landau) of Ruby Tuesday brings a lump to your throat. There’s terrific support from Olivia Poulet as the increasingly assertive Carol Havers, brilliant attitude from Brenock O’Connor as Keith Richards, and a typically scene-stealing performance from Clive Francis bringing all the irrepressible fun out of the character of Bongo as he can muster; he’s got a tambourine, and he’s not afraid to use it.

This is an undoubtedly odd play; in some ways neither one thing nor the other. But the drama and music elements subtly combine to make a thoroughly entertaining whole, and you’ll be so tempted to take a diversion via West Wittering on the way home. A plea to Front of House: please make more of your requests before the show for everyone to turn off their mobiles. I’ve never heard so many phones going off during a performance before and it really killed the mood a few times.

4-starsFour They’re Jolly Good Fellows!

Review – The Circle, Festival Theatre, Chichester, 1st February 2024

It was 47 years ago that I saw a production of The Circle at the Theatre Royal, Haymarket. I remember thinking at the time that it was a rather stately old play, not very relevant to the theatregoing public of the time and very old-fashioned for a 16-year-old know-all like me. Surely, in 2024, 103 years after its first performance, isn’t it a play that should be consigned to the archives?

In brief, absolutely not. This is a smart, intelligent, beautifully written and constructed play, packed full of insights, with three superb roles in which older actors can revel and another three challenging younger roles that give the actors a great opportunity to stick their teeth into. It’s no surprise that productions of this play have always attracted top quality casts. The original 1921 production boasted Victorian comedy legend LottieVenne as Kitty and Fay Compton as Elizabeth; a 1931 revival starred Athene Seyler as Kitty and a young Celia Johnson as Elizabeth, whilst a further revival in 1945 starred Yvonne Arnaud as Kitty and a youngish John Gielgud as Arnold. Even the production I remember from my younger days starred Googie Withers as Kitty, Bill Fraser as Porteous, Susan Hampshire as Elizabeth and Martin Jarvis as Arnold.

Here’s the set up: thirty years ago, the seemingly happy Lady Kitty Champion-Cheney left her husband Clive and five-year-old son Arnold to run off with the up-and-coming politician Lord Hughie Porteous. Since then, Clive and Kitty have never seen each other. However, Arnold’s wife Elizabeth is so curious to meet her mother-in-law that she invites Kitty and Hughie to their house – and Clive has unexpectedly turned up too. Will they let bygones be bygones or will the sparks fly? And might the experience of the older generation have an unforeseen influence on the younger generation? I’m not going to tell you – you’ll have to see the play for yourself; mind you, it’s been around since 1921 – where on earth have you been?

Somerset Maugham fits perfectly in the middle of the sequence of great English/Irish dramatists that started with Wilde and Shaw and went on to produce Coward and Rattigan. And whilst The Circle doesn’t quite sparkle with the same effervescent wit of say, Importance of Being Earnest or Private Lives, it truly holds its own in comparison to all those authors’ more thoughtful and searching comedies. And it’s a story as old as time how a family muddles through marriage separation, changes of partners and that familiar mantra of do as I say, don’t do as I do. Each of the main characters is given equal weight to express how they feel about the situation they face, and there are several excellent speeches and thought-provoking themes that linger on in the mind, long after curtain down.

The play has been elegantly adapted from its original cast of nine to a snappier seven, without disrupting any flow of language, plot or conversation. In fact, it’s an undoubted pleasure to see a play set in 1920 performed exactly as it would have been originally staged, with no attempt of modernisation. And whilst today we might smile a little indulgently at the “scandalous” social situation it presents with the benefit of a hundred years’ hindsight, when it was first produced it would have felt rippingly contemporary. Kitty left Clive thirty years earlier than when the play is set, so that would have been around 1890. Just imagine how shocked Queen Victoria would have been!

Louie Whitemore’s set is the epitome of simplicity, concentrating on the minimum requirement to suggest chez Champion-Cheney; some French Windows, and a few tables and chairs, one of which is almost certainly not a Sheraton. There’s terrific attention to detail with her costume design too, with Lady Kitty bedecked in haute couture, traditional British reserve for Clive and Hughie, and spiffing tennis flannels for Teddie.

Jane Asher is perfectly cast as Lady Kitty – a petite, diminutive presence on stage but with a vivid personality that bursts out from beneath that elegant exterior. You can just imagine the brash determined younger woman who left Clive for Hughie, running roughshod over all society’s accepted norms of the time; and she conveys that spirit of independence balanced with the wisdom of experience beautifully. Nicholas le Prevost captures the once-roguish charm of Porteous that has been shrunk by years of disappointment and bitterness and gives us a splendid portrayal of grumpy self-centredness and domestic resentment.Pete Ashmore encapsulates Arnold’s passionless prissiness with a well observed coolness and barely concealed anger. Olivia Vinall’s Elizabeth is an excellent study of someone trapped in a loveless marriage but with the curiosity to attempt to do something about it, and Daniel Burke’s Teddie comes across as a decent enough chap, with the sense to know that nothing’s perfect, but he’s happy to settle for that.

But it’s Clive Francis who steals every scene as the mischievous Clive Champion-Cheney, hovering with gentle menace over the card table, making extraordinary suggestions feel reasonable, manipulating everyone with the intent of achieving his own aims. His comic delivery is immaculate, his timing impeccable, and the twinkle in his eye irresistible. Together the cast form a superb ensemble and Tom Littler’s production is a winner from start to finish. Will The Circle still be performed in another fifty years’ time? I rather think it might. After it leaves Chichester, the show continues its tour to Oxford, Malvern and Richmond.

P. S. The Circle has literally come full circle for Clive Francis, who played Teddie in the 1977 production!

Five Alive, Let Theatre Thrive!