Tag Archives: Festival

Review – The Seagull, Chichester Festival Theatre, 13th November 2025

Posted on by

The Seagull premiered at the Alexandrinsky Theatre, St Petersburg, in 1896. This isn’t the Alexandrinksy, but it is St Petersburg!

If you were to imagine the plays of Chekhov arranged on a seesaw (bear with me on this idea), his early offerings like Platonov and Ivanov would be high in the air on one side of the seesaw and his meaty humdingers like Three Sisters and The Cherry Orchard would be firmly rooted to the ground on the other. The Seagull would be hovering over the fulcrum in the centre, bursting with Chekhov’s teeming ideas and themes, but never quite playing them out to their maximum effect.

I’m glad to get that iffy metaphor out of the way. The Royal Lyceum Edinburgh production of The Seagull enjoyed a brief extension at the Chichester Festival Theatre last week and marked not only new Artistic Director James Brining’s first show for the Lyceum but it has also been hinted that it will have been Caroline Quentin’s swansong in live theatre (which would if true, officially, be a travesty). In his programme note, adaptor Mike Poulton emphasises that he hasn’t attempted to modernise Chekhov to make him in some way more relevant today, because Chekhov is naturally eternally relevant; and when I read that before the show started, it was music to my ears.

That said, this production took traditional to its extremes. It was the very essence of reverence; yes, it allowed Chekhov’s text to do all the talking, but it came across as surprisingly bland. There was very little change of pace; the big dramatic moments (of which there aren’t many) were softly delivered, and both the comedy and the tragedy of the play were dialled down. The central character, the fading but still vain actor Arkadina, has the potential to horrify the audience with her insensitivity but still make you laugh with her asides; the main tragic character, her son Konstantin, ought to move the audience to tears with his mental torture, so that his final act comes as an awful culmination of his misery. But the production was neither funny enough to make you laugh much, nor tragic enough to make you cry. Overall, it just wasn’t enough.

There were, nevertheless, a number of successful aspects to the show. You really gained a sense of what it might have been like to live in the middle of the Russian nowhere in the 1890s, with decent people scraping a living whilst decadent others showed no empathy. It offered a substantial atmosphere of hopelessness; the disparate elements of a non-cohesive community where the only thing you could enjoy was the sunny weather, which would eventually turn into your enemy when winter came. Colin Richmond’s set judged that faded glory perfectly, with its tall windows and encroaching fields, suggesting that the natural environment would soon overtake the increasingly dismal dacha as it falls into decline; a lovely allegory of the last days of the Tsars.

Are these seagulls? Whatever, there are a lot of them.

Caroline Quentin’s Arkadina was the picture of haughtiness, full of a pretence of caring whilst scarcely hiding her selfish soul. She gave the character an urban sophistication to contrast with the rural backwater and portrayed her as a genuine person rather than an any kind of caricature. The humour that is an essential part of Arkadina never quite came to the fore, but it was a very believable performance. Harmony Rose-Bremner was excellent as Nina, unassuming but ambitious, looking to improve herself and gain favour wherever possible. She made a good partnership with Lorn Macdonald’s Konstantin, trying to perform his pretentious play to the best of her ability; Mr Macdonald portrayed Konstantin as a weak and ineffectual aesthete, trying to find his artistic voice – but perhaps not trying that hard. Unfortunately, the final scene between the two where Nina explains why she went off with Arkadina’s lover Trigorin, and Konstantin’s beseeching that she stays with him, came across as very static and monotonous, creating a conversation that ends very much with a whimper rather than a bang.

Elsewhere, Steven McNicoll made the best of his opportunities as the estate manager Shamrayev, bringing in some welcome humorous petulance when refusing to budge over providing horses for the carriage; Tallulah Greive was a splendidly belligerent Masha, Forbes Masson gave a wistful, but distant, performance as Dorn, Michael Dylan’s Medvendenko was suitably hard-working but under-achieving, and Dyfan Dwyfor a convincing, if perhaps over-likeable Trigorin.

Art versus reality, eloquence versus an inability to communicate, fresh ambition versus the reality of failure. Chekhov’s ideas are all there, but they felt particularly sub-surface in this production rather than given their full potential. All very respectful and all very safe; it was good, but you can’t help but feel that with that cast it should have been better.

3-starsThree-sy Does It!

Review – Emma, Festival Theatre, Chichester, 6th November 2025

Posted on by

I confess, gentle reader, that I’ve never read Jane Austen’s Emma, but I sense that’s probably an advantage for anyone who sees this Theatre Royal Bath touring production of Ryan Craig’s adaptation of Austen’s 1815 novel. Dramatising a book always means having to make massive cuts to the original, otherwise you’d never be able to fit it into two and a half hours including an interval. But an Emma fan might well have firm ideas as to what to keep and what to boot out.

Jane Austen is very much in vogue at the moment – indeed, was she ever out of it? With the recent joyous production of Pride and Prejudice* (*Sort Of) and Laura Wade’s affectionate upending of the Austen landscape in The Watsons, she’s a target for modernisation and mickey-taking, whilst still admiring and relishing the essence of the original. I expected this adaptation to be much more surreal or meta; but, in fact, it’s a pretty straightforward production that tells Austen’s story (as far as I can make out) reasonably honestly and with a charming lightness of touch that brings all the relevant aspects of the nineteenth century into the present day.

Emma is a meddling, big-headed and insensitive young woman who knows her own mind and doesn’t know when to back down. She plucks a poor orphan girl, Harriet Smith, from obscurity and tries to make her fit for society, with no empathy for Harriet’s wishes or the honest farmer with whom she has been romantically linked. Instead, she sets her up with the local clergyman Mr Elton, who completely gets the wrong end of the stick and thinks that Emma has romantic ideas for herself on him, rather than trying to cultivate a romance between him and Harriet.

The first Act is very much a comedy of errors; but by the start of the second Act Elton has quickly married the snobbish Augusta, shattering Harriet’s expectations. Local gent Mr Knightley is sorry for Harriet and dances with her at a ball – which instantly convinces Harriet that they are both madly in love with each other; further disappointments ensue. Add to this mix Emma’s Achilles heel – the long-admired Mr Churchill, her rival in love Miss Fairfax, her bumbling old father and some heavy home truths from Knightley, and you have a recipe for a veritable West Country Coronation Street of tussles, resentments and misunderstandings.

Stephen Unwin’s production is slick and smart, with an emphasis on the comedy which can divert you from the fact that, deep down, Emma is a truly nasty piece of work, with a malicious streak revealing that she doesn’t give two hoots about anyone’s happiness or wellbeing. Her relish, for example, at the prospect of watching the admittedly dreadful Mrs Elton eating a strawberry (to which she allergic) is downright cruel. Any other character insights are pretty much ignored, as it’s all done for fun, and everything turns out all right in the end.

Ceci Calf’s set design is as blank and simple as you can imagine, inviting a silent running joke about the endless times that Mr Woodhouse’s chair and side table are diligently and knowingly brought on and off the stage. Her costume design is traditional and functional, all very respectable and nothing too showy except for the extravagant costume of the tastelessly imperious Augusta.

The cast all capture the spirit of the show very well, with a strong and credible central performance by India Shaw-Smith as Emma, bristling with confidence and the certainty that she is the most important person in the universe. In her professional debut, Maiya Louise Thapar gives us an affectionately unworldly Harriet, trapped by Emma’s plans and convincingly disturbed when all her prospects turn to dust.

William Chubb gives a scene-stealing performance as Woodhouse, curmudgeonly but not irredeemably so, knowing when to escape for the good of his senses. Ed Sayer gives a charismatic performance as Knightley, dishing out the criticisms much to Emma’s annoyance; Oscar Batterham is excellent as the hopeful Elton, only to be replaced by a more world-weary version after his marriage, and Rose Quentin is superb as the ghastly Augusta, point-scoring wherever she can, and never satisfied even when she has the best of everything.

The production never really soars into either the blissfully funny or revelatory character examination, but it bubbles along jovially in a sequence of amusing scenes and does exactly what it says on the tin. Did it make me want to read the book? Not really. But it was an entertaining way to spend a Thursday evening in Chichester!

 

3-starsThree-sy Does It!

Review – Top Hat, Festival Theatre, Chichester, 18th July 2025

Posted on by

The big summer musical at the Chichester Festival Theatre is always a matter of great expectations. You can rely on an impressive production with no expense spared, and pretty much a full house for every performance. This year’s production, Irving Berlin’s Top Hat, has much to live up to – will it follow in the footsteps of last year’s outstanding Oliver! or other big hitters like Half a Sixpence, Crazy for You, South Pacific, Fiddler on the Roof, Oklahoma! – it’s a list of enviable quality.

I don’t have to tell you, gentle reader, that Top Hat is that hugely successful movie musical from 1935 starring Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers – ninety years old now and still holding a prominent place in the history of cinema and entertainment. Matthew White and Howard Jacques’ stage musical first appeared in 2011 and is a largely faithful adaptation of the original film. It’s not at all surprising that it’s considered worthy of a revival – after all, how can you miss with songs like Puttin’ on the Ritz, Cheek to Cheek, Top Hat White Tie and Tails and Let’s Face the Music and Dance.

To say it’s a simple plot is something of an insult to the notion of simplicity. American dancer Jerry Travers comes to London to appear in a show and meets – and annoys – Dale Tremont. He falls head over heels in love; she doesn’t. A case of mistaken identity ensues, with Dale believing Jerry to be married to her friend Madge, whereas Madge is married to Horace, the producer of the show. Dale marries an Italian fashion designer in anger; but Jerry is ever persistent, and when Dale’s marriage proves to be invalid as it was conducted by Horace’s butler – I know, bear with me – it all ends happily ever after. Even the spurned Italian fashion designer is happy, as he is placated by being employed to create Dale’s wedding dress. I don’t think he was really in love in the first place, do you?

I should point out that the show we saw was a Friday night preview, the fifth (I believe) public performance of the run, and of course I take that into account when summarising my thoughts. However, no amount of rehearsals, performances, tweaks and so on can change the fact that the script is incredibly corny, with some of the lamest jokes you’ll hear for many a year. Overall, the show is extraordinarily dated, and in a tedious rather than charming way. Various elements of the plot include stalking, misogyny, making fun of foreigners, domestic violence, love bombing and a spot of sexual harassment. Gosh they had fun in the 30s.

As for the production itself, it scores high on the basics but low on the embellishments. Credit where it’s due: Peter McKintosh’s set is superb, beautifully recreating a deco style, with a glass arch that reminded me of the Musée d’Orsay and a revolving stage underneath that transforms into hotel rooms, reception desks, and other vital scenes in the plot. He and Yvonne Milnes also designed the costumes which are outstanding; elegant, and totally in keeping with the era. Stephen Ridley’s out of sight orchestra fills the Festival Theatre with glorious arrangements of Berlin’s timeless tunes.

Kathleen Marshall, who also directs the show, choreographs all these big numbers, and there is – understandably – an emphasis on tap, which hits you full force with amplified tap shoes, creating a hugely impressive audible avalanche of tapping. However, the choreography for the non-tap routines feels less inspired and rather generic; and indeed, one wonders why they hit those Spanish lines for a routine that is set in Italy. Curious.

It’s a very skilful and experienced cast, but somehow the whole thing doesn’t gel. Philip Attmore playing Jerry is a fantastic tap dancer and showman, and Lucy St Louis as Dale looks the part completely and has a great voice, but there is hardly any chemistry between them. Clive Carter as Horace and James Clyde as his butler Bates do everything that the script requires of them – which is primarily to make them look stupid, with Mr Carter ending up with a black eye and a lipsticked mouth, and Mr Clyde looking like a very world-weary gondolier.

Alex Gibson-Giorgio injects the necessary high camp into his performance as fashionista Bedini, and the audience adored his solo number Latins Know How, but I’m afraid I found it excruciatingly cringeworthy and had to watch through the gaps in my fingers. The always reliable Sally Ann Triplett as Madge is missing in the first Act and her appearance at the beginning of Act Two breathes fresh life into the show, but even she gets bogged down with some dubiously outdated comedy.

By the time we were well into the second Act I was both very bored, and not remotely interested in any of the characters’ plights or how they would end up. Having great expectations of a show often leads to disappointment and that’s certainly the case for this production. Despite its glitz and glamour, great music and accomplished performers, this did nothing for me at all. I’ve added a star to my rating in the hope that it will improve in time for Press Night.

3-starsThree-sy Does It!

Review – The Government Inspector, Festival Theatre, Chichester, 10th May 2025

Posted on by

Back in those boring Covid pandemic days, I realised that I’d never read any Gogol, and decided that was a situation that needed rectifying. So I downloaded his short stories onto my Kindle for free, and spent many a happy hour laughing my head off at his hilarious, thoroughly rude observations, pricking the pomposity of the pretentious, and noting how, two hundred years on, his truths live on and nothing much has changed.

I’d seen a production of his The Government Inspector in 2011, and although it was something of a critical success, I wasn’t overly impressed. It was a sloppy show that went for cheap laughs and camped it up over the top, even though it thought itself to be a true smartypants of a production. Surely, Chichester, with a new version directed by Gregory Doran, will do a slicker job of it. I assumed.

This production has gone – largely – for a traditional approach, with a truly 1830s setting, costumes and music. The opening scene shows much promise, with all the officials of the town in a panic because a government inspector is in their midst and they all fear he will root out their corruption, bribe taking and inefficiency, thereby ruining their lovely lives. In true Gogol style, no time is wasted getting to the heart of the play, and it’s performed with urgency and commitment. Good start.

However, then everything just grinds to a complete halt. Whilst the audience is now ready to see this government inspector for themselves, Gogol instead introduces us to the mayor’s wife and daughter, bickering petulantly and tediously about nothing much. And the pace that had been built up in the first scene instantly collapses. It’s not a very funny conversation and it doesn’t get many laughs. By the time the scene is over and we go on to the inn where the Inspector (it isn’t the inspector by the way – it’s a joke of mistaken identity) and his man are staying with no intention of paying for their board and lodging, it’s amazing how little we care about any of them. As the play progresses, we realise how completely unlikeable every character in the story is, and no amount of pomposity-pricking is going to do anything to improve it.

The staging doesn’t help; the opening scene ranges widely over the huge Festival Theatre stage, using every inch available; but the second scene is very static and just takes place on two chairs at the front, and the third scene is crammed into a tiny part of the stage, which literally prevents its characters from breathing. You feel you want to somehow release them from their confinement.

A fool and his money are soon parted, goes the saying, and that is at the heart of the play. Each town officer does his best to bribe Khlestakov, the (non-) inspector, and as that wretch realises what is going on, his requests for money get bigger and bigger. At the end, the entire town has made an idiot of itself, and our anti-hero has sped off, cash in hand, looking for some other sad saps to dupe. It’s a very credible cautionary tale. But this production is most definitely not the sum of its parts. Too much shouting, inadequate use of the stage, some roles bizarrely underplayed whilst others are overplayed, it feels very unbalanced. There’s not enough light and shade, and despite their best efforts you never really get an understanding of the peril that the townspeople face. Individual rounds of applause are reserved for the three musicians who pop up during scene changes, and for an amusing but hardly original design trick of having a little carriage dart all around the stage, depicting the escape of the villainous clerk Khlestakov and his servant Osip. I saw that done in On The Twentieth Century in 1978 – it was mildly amusing then and it’s mildly amusing now.

True to Gogol, the play ends with a final tableau for what feels like at least a minute, daring individual audience members to start the final applause, whilst most of us just sit uncertain and uncomfortable at what we’re seeing. Whilst I admire this faithfulness to the original text, it does put the audience through an ocean of odd reactions and emotions, and you just want to look away!

There are some successful performances – Lloyd Hutchinson is good as the Mayor, a fiery mass of anxiety and overconfidence, and Miltos Yerolemou and Paul Rider work together excellently as Bobchinsky and Dobchinsky, the two minor officials who are almost two parts of the same body. Nick Haverson gives the best performance of all as Osip, the servant, ruthlessly and viciously putting his own interests first, no matter what his master wants.

Sylvestra le Touzel and Laurie Ogden play the mother and daughter looking and sounding like Mrs Slocombe and Liz Truss, which is an alarming visual prospect; for me, their performances never felt credible or, sadly, entertaining. Tom Rosenthal’s Khlestakov is a competent performance but neither larger than life enough to convince us of his importance, nor measly enough to convey truthfully that he is a smalltown clerk.

I’ve never seen a Saturday night Festival theatre audience so empty, and I’m afraid it was even emptier after the interval. The comedy gets lost in the franticness, and this production simply doesn’t work.

 

Two Disappointing For More!

Review – A Man For All Seasons, Festival Theatre, Chichester, 31st January 2025

Posted on by

Our fascination with all things Henry VIII, Norfolk, Cromwell, More, Cranmer et al is seemingly unending. The Wolf Hall trilogy is not only a bestseller but has spawned a successful TV series and countless dining table conversations. But 65 years ago Robert Bolt’s A Man For All Seasons appeared on stage for the first time, enjoying long runs in the West End and on Broadway, and with star-studded film versions in both 1966 and 1988. And this continued fascination was certainly reflected by the lack of empty seats in Chichester’s Festival Theatre on Friday night, as well as the audience’s riveted attention being held throughout with pin-drop silence.

A Man For All Seasons approaches the Henry VIII – Catherine of Aragon divorce and resultant split with the Catholic Church from the angle of Sir Thomas More, the Lord Chancellor who refused to consent to the divorce; and whilst he never actively proclaimed his disapproval, that was never going to be enough to satisfy the King. More’s morals and principles set him on an impossible course, leading to his being found guilty of high treason and his ultimate execution.

This current touring production by the Theatre Royal Bath is strong, simple, clear and gimmick-free, directed with unobtrusive sensitivity by Jonathan Church. Simon Higlett’s traditional costumes and set lend it an air of gravitas and authority, and a high quality cast offer a masterclass in acting. One also appreciates what a tremendous wordsmith Robert Bolt is, with beautifully shaped and constructed sentences and scenes, wonderful characterisations, and a great feel for oncoming disaster. There’s no denying it – the first act is both dense and intense, requiring deep concentration from the audience as we start to see life closing in on More; and the second act gains incredible momentum as chit-chat becomes an unofficial inquiry, and then legal hearings and an eventual trial in court and dispensation of justice (such as it is.) You can always rely on a courtroom scene on stage to be thrilling!

Bolt’s structural brainwave with this play was to have the Common Man as a unifying thread throughout the whole story. Someone who can relate directly to the audience, commenting on the action and characters, who can assume a variety of minor but vital roles as the plot progresses; the Common Man is both one of us in the stalls and one of them on stage. Casting Gary Wilmot in this role is a masterstroke as he is both a genius in stagecraft but also truly has the common touch, and it comes as no surprise that he gives a tremendous performance.

Another fine actor, Edward Bennett, takes to the role of Thomas Cromwell like a duck to water, blending the character’s fastidious attention to detail with a ruthless sadism. He clearly relishes the task of taking down an enemy; but he also reveals that, with the unpredictability of the king, he has no choice but to win at all costs, otherwise no doubt his head will be for the chop too. Calum Finlay is excellent as Richard Rich, portraying the character’s journey from humble start to eventual glory by means of backstabbing and betrayal; Bolt paints him as ruthlessly ambitious at all costs, and Mr Finlay convinces us perfectly.

There’s excellent support from Abigail Cruttenden as More’s wife Alice, unable to understand why he adheres to his collision course to ruination, and from Annie Kingsnorth as his relentlessly positive daughter Margaret. Orlando James has a splendid cameo as Henry VIII, almost unhinged with his own power, and Asif Khan is a delightfully meddlesome and untrustworthy Ambassador Chapuys; but everyone turns in a great performance and there is not one weak or ineffectual scene.

Heading the cast is Martin Shaw as Thomas More, recently turned 80 years but still a powerhouse on stage, with an apparently effortless yet physically demanding performance capturing the character’s unswerving constancy and honest decency.He gives us an impeccable portrayal of a stiff upper lip, only just letting the emotions show in the final moments when he can hold them back no longer.

After its week in Chichester, the tour continues to Malvern, Cheltenham, Oxford, Guildford, Canterbury and Richmond. A powerful play given a fittingly powerful performance.

 

4-starsFour They’re Jolly Good Fellows!

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

Posted on by

“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 – Oliver! Festival Theatre, Chichester, 3rd September 2024

Posted on by

With the mighty Matthew Bourne directing and choreographing this year’s big summer musical at Chichester, it was never very likely that their new production of Lionel Bart’s Oliver! would be anything other than a smash hit. And there’s no point my keeping the suspense up that it might not be as successful as you would imagine – because it is!  Every inch a phenomenal production: the timeless, riveting story, combined with the irresistible songs (Every 1’s a winner, as Hot Chocolate might have said), Graham Hurman’s awesome orchestra, Lez Brotherston’s (who else?) sets and a perfectly cast group of actors portraying some of the most memorable characters in English literature, what more could you ask? Prepare to enjoy one of those sensational theatrical experiences that you’ll remember for a very long time.

One of the most marvellous aspects of this production is the tremendous lighting design by Paule Constable and Ben Jacobs; constantly atmospheric, always helping the story along, mixing menacing darkness with illuminated beauty where you might not expect to find it. Fagin and Dodger’s long walk home at the end of the show, for example, into the slowly revealing lights of London, provides a superb final scene. And how clever and creative to represent the dog Bullseye simply by an ominous shadow following a wall to his master’s voice!

Matthew Bourne’s choreography, of course, fits both the characterisations and the space available perfectly, with deliciously ebullient actions for the Artful Dodger, slyly wheedling moves for Fagin, and athletically rumbustious movements for the chorus of workhouse boys and Fagin’s gang. All the kids performed immaculately, and with pinpoint precision; we were treated to the Wapping group of young actors at our performance – I’m sure the Bethnal Green and Limehouse youngsters are equally irresistible.

It takes a Fagin of rare quality to make you feel sorry for him; but Simon Lipkin’s performance is so outstanding that you genuinely do sense he has reviewed the situation and realises that the reality of his life has no future. An extraordinary stage presence, he gives us a Fagin who is totally believable, as much a victim as those from whom he steals; a Fagin low on cynicism but high on caring and protecting his workforce. The big finale scene at the end, including the deaths of Nancy and Bill (sorry, spoilers), and the reuniting of Oliver with Mr Brownlow, also includes Fagin losing his footing on the bridge which upsets his treasure chest so that his precious trinkets twinkle their way down to be swallowed up by the river; and even though you knew that every single one of those jewels was stolen, you still feel sorry for him. Amazing work.

Shanay Holmes is a vulnerable, affectionate, big-hearted Nancy with a luscious voice, delivering all her songs with power and emotion, none more so than the evergreen As Long As He Needs Me which painfully drives home her conflict about loving a violent thug who has no hesitation about beating her. Talking of whom, Aaron Sidwell is superb as Bill; wiry, fired-up, irrationally explosive and terrifyingly unpredictable. I’m an admirer of convincing stage combat, and you’ll never see it done better than by Mr Sidwell with the fiendish smack he gives Nancy; and when he nuts Fagin on the head, we all feel it.

Elsewhere, Oscar Conlon-Morrey gives us a vindictively prissy but also disgustingly smarmy Mr Bumble; Katy Secombe’s Widow Corney turns from simpering sex-kitten to vicious fishwife with one whiff of a wedding ring; Stephen Mattews and Jamie Birkett make a thoroughly gruesome pair of Sowerberries; and Philip Franks is a very warm and approachable Mr Brownlow – you can imagine that Oliver will definitely thrive with his parenting skills.

At our performance, we saw Rudy Gibson bring all the Artful Dodger’s legendary showmanship and bonhomie to the fore with a terrifically brash and extraverted performance; and our Oliver was Raphael Korniets,who convincingly plays up the wide-eyed innocence of his character and has a stunning voice to boot.

The whole show knocks your socks off; there isn’t one misjudged moment nor a hair out of place throughout the whole performance. The Chichester run is now completely sold out, but the production will be returning to the West End at the Gielgud Theatre from 14th December.

 

Five Alive Let Theatre Thrive!

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

Posted on by

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!

Review – The Sound of Music, Festival Theatre, Chichester, 2nd September 2023

Posted on by

No sooner were Mrs Chrisparkle and I back from our four weeks at the  Edinburgh Fringe, we were off to Chichester for a weekend of (hopefully!) top quality entertainment at those terrific theatres. And, late to the party, we started off with the last Saturday matinee of the run of Adam Penford’s production of Rodgers and Hammerstein’s The Sound of Music. It’s ended now, but I’m sure it had a very successful run. As soon as you knew this was to be Chichester’s summer big show offering, you knew it was going to be a crowd pleaser. And Saturday afternoon’s audience was packed to the gunwales, with lots of kids all starting their journeys as the theatregoers of tomorrow, which is always great to see.

Robert Jones’s design is perhaps a little heavy on the ecclesiastical side, with grey abbey windows and arches which deftly slide in and out. An ornate front door and mansion frontage is wheeled into place to suggest the von Trapp residence, which seems very grand indeed. However, you never get a feel for those rolling meadows of green and the Alpine peaks that lurk just outside the abbey that were so important to the young Maria; and indeed, when we first see her she emerges from beneath the stage via a trap laying down in the glorious sunshine, appreciating God’s glorious scenery, whilst supine, not on a verdant bank, but on an expanse of grey. Fortunately, Matt Samer’s orchestra bathes us in musical sunshine throughout the show, which makes up for the lack of colour variety.

The production itself is extremely classy and hits the right level of emotional engagement. I know I was not the only person in our party who noticed a tinge of moisture in their eye when the Captain melted at the sight (and sound) of his children singing (excellent melting from Edward Harrison in the role); the actual sound of music has a symbolic significance in this show, representing freedom, happiness, and love, as opposed to the self-repression that the Captain inflicted on himself and his children, and the oppression that would follow under the Nazis.

The production follows the original 1959 stage show reasonably faithfully, rather than the more familiar 1965 film, so expect My Favourite Things to come much earlier than you expect, The Lonely Goatherd has no puppet show, I Have Confidence is missing, and the nuns don’t get to scupper the Nazis cars at the end. The only change is that Something Good, originally written for the film, appears in Act Two instead of the lesser known An Ordinary Couple.

I always think that you can judge a production of The Sound of Music by how well it reflects the Nazi threat. For the Salzburg Singing Contest scene, Nazi banners unfurl and drop down from the ceiling all around the stage, and SS Officers appear spotlighted standing amongst the audience members, which is a very threatening sight. When the family are hiding at the abbey and the Nazi officers come to hunt them down, lights and shadows add to the tension and anxiety of the scene. I never found it credible that Rolf saw the family but didn’t give the game away; he was a very ambitious young Nazi and he owed nothing to any of the von Trapps apart from Liesl. If he had captured them, he would have been given great preferment. Still; maybe love can defeat a swastika after all.

The production benefited from some terrific performances. Gina Beck is excellent as Maria; her voice is clear and rich, her playfulness with the children (and indeed the Captain) is very nicely done, and her interaction with the other nuns works a treat. Janis Kelly as the Mother Abbess has an amazing voice and puts all her operatic heart and soul into the performance of Climb Ev’ry Mountain. Edward Harrison plays both the gruff and the sensitive sides of the Captain very well; and there are superb supporting performances from Wendy Ferguson and Julia J Nagle as Sisters Berthe and Margaretta, and Emma Williams as Elsa.

I wasn’t entirely sure about Ako Mitchell’s performance as Max; he came across as very showbiz and brash,rather than shifty and unprincipled. Lauren Conroy looks a tiny bit old for Liesl, but she still has that necessary childish charm; and Dylan Mason’s Rolf is earnest and protective – and a superb dancer. I think we saw the Green Team of children, and they were all terrific.

Powerful, emotional and fantastically musical, this is a very good production that would certainly suit a transfer in due course.

 

4-starsFour They’re Jolly Good Fellows!

Edinburgh Fringe 2023 Reviews – Do Rhinos Feel Their Horns, Shortlist, The Portable Dorothy Parker, The Courteous Enemy, and Rock Bottom

Posted on by

Do Rhinos Feel Their Horns or Can They Not See Them Like How We Can’t See Our Noses, Summerhall.

Edward Eng’s very entertaining play unites two threads: the 1987 protests in Singapore that were clamped down on by the authorities under the suspicion they were a Marxist plot, and Ionesco’s absurd 1959 play, Rhinoceros, where almost the entire population of a French town turned into rhinos, symbolising the rise of Nazism and Fascism leading to the Second World War. Cheryl Ho and Shannen Tan play a number of characters, including a pair of journalists trying to get a scoop interviewing a “freshly turned” rhino. There’s excellent use of multimedia – which adds to the absurdism – and heart-warming moments too, including playing with balloons with the audience and the opportunity to pet a rhino. Underneath it all, it’s a thinly veiled criticism of the Singaporean government at the time and the whole “rhinocerising” of the community is deeply unnerving. This play can signify different things to different people, and personally, I found the idea of imprisoning them all in a zoo reminded me of the current British position on sending refugees to Rwanda. The performers have a terrific rapport with each other and the audience, and what seems deceptively simple on the surface has many hidden depths that gradually occur to you long after the show has ended. Provocative yet playful, an intriguing way to start your day!

4-stars

Shortlist, Assembly George Square.

Often cited as one of Shakespeare’s famous quotes is I would challenge you to a battle of wits but I see you are unarm’d; and that sense of antagonism was the first thing I thought when I watched Flying Bridge’s production of Shortlist. Two warring novelists who clearly hate each other try to belittle the other with waspish putdowns about their writing styles, never missing an opportunity for a barbed comment or a pseudo-intellectual observation. It’s a clever idea for a play and Brian Parks’ writing is packed with insults and offences-to-be-taken. However, sometimes less is more and I did find the barrage of contumely overwhelming and, consequently, rather tiresome. This is a shame because the show features two excellent technical and physical performances from Matthew Boston and Daniel Llewelyn-Williams. A bit like The Odd Couple (literary version) but neither character shows a remotely likeable trait! Oh, and Shakespeare never wrote that celebrated line.

3-stars

The Portable Dorothy Parker, The Space @ Surgeon’s Hall.

Dorothy Parker sits in her apartment, talking to a young secretary who has come to help sub-edit the choices of poetry to be included in the new volume The Portable Dorothy Parker. As she re-reads her old poems, she reflects on her life so far and remembers the parties, the scandals, and the men. Annie Lux’s play puts Parker’s works to good use as they not only illustrate the nature of the writer but also entertain us in their own right. Margot Avery plays Dorothy Parker as a more laid-back, reflective character than I might have imagined her to be, and the whole show is more of a gentle entertainment than a rip-roaring examination of a feisty, rebellious, creative spirit. Enjoyable, if unchallenging.

3-stars

The Courteous Enemy, The Space @ Surgeon’s Hall.

In 1958, the playwright Eugene Ionesco and the theatre critic Kenneth Tynan clashed over the latter’s review in the Observer of his play The Chairs, which broadened out to become a prolonged argument over the nature of theatre. Dan Sinclair’s The Courteous Enemy takes this event as its inspiration for what is described as an absurdist satire. It’s an excellent idea for a play, being a pivotal moment in freedom of expression during arguably the most significant decade in European theatre of the last century. But what the University of York Drama Society have created is one of the most abysmal shows I have ever seen. Infantile, crude and xenophobic, there are two and a half funny lines and I spent the rest of the show not believing what I was seeing. If laughing at silly French accents, jokes about penis size, grotesque simulation of Tynan fellating Beckett and whether someone is queer or not is your cup of tea, welcome to the early 1970s and you’ll love it. Everyone in our row sat in stony silence. Waste of an amazing opportunity.

Rock Bottom, Paradise in the Vault.

Nick Bottom turns up to perform Pyramus and Thisbe, but no one else shows up – none of the Rude Mechanicals, none of the Court; so he’s left to front us on his own. Being an old pro, he does his best, and falls back on those self-delusions of Athenian superstardom (in his head). But nothing really works and, unsurprisingly, he ends up in mental breakdown. This is a gem of an idea – agreed, Bottom has his faults, but he’s treated mercilessly by Oberon, so that his happy time with Titania is taken away from him, through no fault of his own, and you never think about how Bottom would be affected by that – and this little piece does go towards an understanding of his plight. However, in a sense, it is so successful, that Bottom’s sadness comes across too strongly to us, and it’s hard to enjoy watching him suffer. Rock Bottom has been around for a couple of years now but I still feel it could do with some refinement; we need to find him a more likeable character earlier on, so that we are on his side, (Team Bottom? why not?) before his rot starts to kick in. Much potential, but still not quite there yet.