Month: April 2023

REVIEW: Mother’s Day

Published on by Mark LloydLeave a comment

Rating: 3 out of 5.


An interesting show about homelessness that is not quite a home run.

Mother’s Day is a thought-provoking play that explores the themes of homelessness, addiction, and motherhood. Written by Louise Monaghan, Mother’s Day tells the story of Jasmine, a homeless woman determined to make her daughter a dolls house for her birthday. She meets Tillie, a young woman who has missed the last bus home, and the two create an unlikely bond. Well, that is half the story.

If I had to describe this show in one word, that word would be interesting. The story is intriguing in that you have the story of Jasmine and Tillie, but also the story of the actors, Jenny, and Maria. I initially thought that this was not great, as before the show started the actors came out and introduced themselves and told us a bit about their lives. All very nice, but I thought this undermined the believability of the characters that they went on to play. This got completely flipped on its head though, as over the course of the show we revisited the lives of the actors and got to see what was going on in their lives. This helped give the message quite plainly that anyone can find themselves in circumstances which make them homeless, but the way it was done through utilising telling the story of the actors was really clever and a good way of avoiding the possible “preachy” pitfall that some plays with messages can fall into. It smartly both showed and told us what could happen, which I was a fan of.

Another interesting aspect of this show was the use of the audience. The audience was used very much as a recurring character, with lines and direction projected onto the back of the set. I am not normally one for audience interaction as it just makes me feel awkward, but having dialogue written in front of you helped to alleviate the potential social anxiety.

Both actresses gave strong performances that helped make both of the characters that they each had to play quite believable, and they successfully delivered the emotional and comedic moments required. I did feel a bit sorry for them as on the night I saw the show, a bag strap noticeably broke within the first 5 minutes and left a metallic chain dragging round. They both handled this fine, but I am sure they would have much preferred it not to have happened.

There were a lot of ideas in this show, and some of the different sections I feel dragged on a little bit too long. The drug taking/dancing sequence could do with shortening, or even reworking all together as I am not sure what this actually helped to add to the plot or character development other than making MDMA look quite fun. There is also an extended swimming/motivational phrases section which was witty to begin with, but then went on too long. In all this made the show seem to me to be 10-15 minutes too long, and I think that it could be tightened up a bit to help keep audience engagement throughout.

About halfway through the show things got a little bit “Twilight Zone” with the actors being unsure if they were playing their characters or themselves, characters acting out flashbacks and memories from their childhood, and this created quite a lot of intentional confusion. As intentional as it was, I do not really know what this added to the show. It gave it a bit of a sci-fi element that I do not think worked for the show and could be removed without negatively impacting the message of the production, and could potentially help to improve the show’s flow.

No review of this show would be complete without talking about the important work that went into it. From the Camden People’s Theatre website “Mother’s Day is part of a wider project called REBUILD, where a community of women who have experienced homelessness came together to build dolls houses and discuss notions of ‘home’. This was part of One Festival of Homeless Arts and the houses are on exhibition at Old Diorama Arts Centre.” People who had experienced homelessness were also given free tickets to see the show, and at the end of the play there was a slideshow of all the women who shared their stories during the workshops which helped to create the play.

In conclusion, this is a good show with a good message and some interesting theatrical techniques, but ultimately falls short of being brilliant. If the show runs again, I would recommend anyone who has an interest in learning more about the lives of homeless women, and wants to support a project telling these stories, should buy a ticket and go along.

Mother’s Day played at the Camden People’s Theatre Sun 23 Apr – Mon 24 Apr

REVIEW: F**cking Men

Published on by Mark LloydLeave a comment

Rating: 4 out of 5.

I really enjoyed F**king Men, and the play was really good too….A witty, fun, enjoyable show that will titillate and entertain (as long as male nudity does not scare you)

F**king Men is a dramatic comedy written by Joe DiPietro currently playing at the Waterloo East Theatre. First premiering in 2009 at the Kings Head Theatre, this show has gone through many different iterations with varying cast sizes and some updating of the script in order to keep it current and relevant. This most recent production will be playing at the Waterloo East Theatre until the 18th June.

The provocative name of this show, coupled with the marketing featuring 4 naked men, really does make quite clear that this play is going to involve gay sex. However, this play is far more than just an excuse to just see naked men on stage (even if some of the advertising may have you thinking the opposite). Sex is obviously an important part of the story, but this show explores the interesting moments before and after, rather than the sex itself. There are a fair few sex scenes, but they do not feel gratuitous and last mere seconds before we move back on to dialogue. And the dialogue in this script is excellent. It is witty, at times hilarious, and thoroughly entertaining.

This production features 4 actors, each of whom play multiple characters. Apart from some slightly dodgy American accents, the performances were all excellent. A particular highlight has to be the scene stealing performance of Derek Mitchell as the eccentric playwright and uptight tutor. He brought brilliant comedic levity to the scenes he features in and had the entire audience howling with laughter. This makes his turn to a slightly more sinister character especially jarring and brilliant.

The set by Cara Evans, and the lighting design by Alex Lewer were really clever. The stage was split in 2 diagonally by clear glass panes that were somehow able to change from opaque to transparent in an instant. I was shocked and amazed by this but the rest of the audience did not seem as impressed as I was, so maybe this wasn’t proof of witchcraft but just some technology I was unfamiliar with. Either way, this was used to great effect to help separate different scenes as well as show flashes of characters at strategic moments. The lighting worked really well to show different scenes and transition between them. All in all, faultless.

The script and dialogue of this show really are the highlight with the comedic moments being especially strong. However, some of the darker more serious scenes did not quite ring true for me and seemed overly concocted and rushed. Given the nature of the show, being a collection of mini scenes post or pre sex, this is perhaps understandable, but it meant that some of the emotional gravitas was taken out of moments as they did not have enough time to breathe and develop into something truly emotionally impactful. They were not bad scenes or moments by any means, but they were not able to match the brilliance of the more light hearted sections and did not hit hard enough to show a significant contrast.

This show has been updated from its initial run, and as someone not familiar with the previous versions, these updates have been slotted in previously. I was entirely unable to ascertain which scenes or lines were new, and which had always been there. This show does touch on important topics such as monogamy vs open relationships, the emptiness of hook-up culture, loss, the Me-Too movement, and coming out, but it never comes across as preachy. It is merely characters experiencing their lives that we are getting glimpses into. This show does not represent the vast variety of gay experiences, but it also is not trying to. It is focusing on urban gay men of various ages who are all conventionally attractive and prone to hook-ups. There are of course many gay men that will feel that this show does not represent their lives, but also many gay men who will think that it does. It shows what it focuses on very well and it would be unfair to expect a one act play about a specific subset of gay men to have to be instantly representative of all gay men. But this show does touch on universal themes of loss, love, and loneliness which means that I think there is something in this show that everyone will be able to relate to in one way or another.

In conclusion, I really enjoyed this show and was thoroughly entertained throughout. It is not for the faint hearted, but if you don’t mind male nudity and frank discussions around and depictions of gay sex, then this is definitely a show I’d recommend.

REVIEW: A Thong for Europe

Published on by Jamie O' TooleLeave a comment

Rating: 4 out of 5.

Big and bold fun in this relentlessly camp musical

Jonathan Harvey has written the most sublimely camp and ridiculous musical I have ever seen. Unlike Eurovision’s unawareness for the most part of its own kitschiness, this is a show that knows how daft it is. A Thong for Europe is undoubtedly camp in its oscillating excessive garishness and sentimentality, and this quality makes it so enjoyable. Viewing the show through my theatre partner and I’s Gen Z eyes only made the experience richer in my opinion, as the absurdity of the show’s rapidly changing tones and many smutty gags hit us decidedly harder than our older audience counterparts. We soon find out that our protagonist Lulu has been tasked with fulfilling her mother’s wish of scattering her ashes on the Eurovision stage before she can finally ascend to heaven, and upon embarking on a mad dash to secure entry to the contest, kidnaps a prior performer and invites an eccentric visitor from the previously unknown state of Balkania to stay.

The show’s first half works hard to set up these ludicrous plotlines of exposition while the second half allows us to enjoy the spoils. For example, our expectations are hilariously subverted by a certain character’s reverse coming out when caught in an unlikely tryst with a woman. Sonia, the Merseyside pop star and Stock, Aitken and Waterman protége who represented the UK in 1993, also makes an appearance played by the always entertaining Keddy Sutton. Lindzi Germain who plays Lulu deserves mention as well for being a wonderfully passionate actor, committed to her character’s theatrical over the top emoting throughout.

The show is intrinsically scouse and this informs a massive chunk of the jokes. Attendees are expected to be in the know vis-à-vis local knowledge as well as Eurovision history. I caught myself wondering if any travelling Eurovision fans might find themselves in the thick of this production, struggling to decode the heavy accents and quick-fire references. Overall though, A Thong For Europe is a celebration of Liverpool’s heart and spirit through the glitz and glam of Eurovision. We get treated to a good handful of classics, most memorably Brotherhood of Man’s Save Your Kisses For Me and Conchita Wurst’s Rise Like a Phoenix, effectively finishing us all off with a rousing rendition of Waterloo at the end. It is all racy, silly, and totally enjoyable.

You can catch A Thong For Europe at Liverpool’s Royal Court Theatre until the 27th of May. 

REVIEW: Animal

Published on by Rachel WoodLeave a comment

Rating: 4 out of 5.

Gripping from start to finish, Animal is not to be missed.

Winner of the Through the Mill prize, and shortlisted for the Papatango Prize, Animal makes a rip-roaring arrival at London’s Park Theatre after its successful run in Manchester. Disability activist and equality trainer Josh Hepple approached writer Jon Bradfield with his idea for the play, centring around the rapidly blooming love life of twenty five year old David (Christopher John-Slater) – gay, disabled and profoundly horny.

David’s romantic odyssey is sparked by a familiar technological frustration, and resulting deeply unhelpful helpline conversation. David’s anger, however, is directed towards a sex toy designed with able-bodied consumers in mind. Living with cerebral palsy and unable to feed, shower or dress himself, this becomes the final straw. His flatmate Jill (Amy Loughton)’s annoyance at his carnally-motivated cancelling of their plans leads him to download grindr, after some hesitance in anticipation of people’s response to his disability. So begins a heartfelt and often hilarious quest for sex, love and connection, with all the highs and lows that come with navigating the online dating world.

David’s casual hook-ups include the lovely but very much married Bob (William Oxborrow), who interrupts their sex to call his husband and add deodorant to the weekly shopping list – ‘I’d forget my own head!’, he laughs – and the seriously weird Alan, who arrives with a Sainsburys bag and asks if he can put some meat in his fridge – ‘I dunno how long I’ll be here, and it’s reduced’. Amongst them is Liam, gorgeous, somewhat reserved, and harbouring severe body issues, becoming self-conscious at David’s open admiration. ‘You lie there like you’re the only one with stuff going on’, he fires back angrily in response to David’s questioning, ‘you’ve only known me an hour’. There is a beautiful reconciliatory moment when Liam asks David if he’d like to be picked up, to which David beams, ‘yeah!’ His utter joy and no small amount of delighted lust is apparent as Liam takes him in his arms.

David subscribes to the social model of disability, telling Liam he doesn’t have disabilities, he has the medical condition cerebral palsy. It is an ill-equipped society that disables him with physical and mental barriers, be it a building’s lack of level access or people’s attitudes to difference. Such attitudes have resulted in a generally shameful treatment of disability in the media, or else a tokenistic approach, with disabled characters portrayed as perfect, one-dimensional heroes, seemingly representative of the entire disabled community. Bradfield comments that ‘Josh’s willingness of this play into existence is, perhaps, a kind of activism, asserting not only that the central character in a play can be severely disabled, but also that they can be complex and flawed, and that the needs and relationships that arise from their impairments are a worthwhile source of drama and comedy’.

The formidably talented John-Slater is supported by a stellar cast. Harry Singh proves one to watch as both David’s friend Mani, an irresistible whirlwind of devastating one-liners and sage advice imparted from the club, and Jill’s boyfriend Michael, a North-London hipster whose studied zen is portrayed with hilarious accuracy. Park Theatre’s intimate stage is an ideal setting for the play’s domestic dramas to unfold, with Gregor Donnelly’s simple yet clever set and video designer Matt Powell’s effective representation of social media dating perfectly crafting the space into David’s world. Gripping from start to finish, Animal is not to be missed.

HIGHLIGHT: In Conversation with Tatenda Shamiso

Published on by Tabitha JamesLeave a comment

1.    How would you describe NO I.D.?

NO I.D. is a silly, warm, intimate show about the hoops that trans people need to jump through to accomplish the basic bureaucratic tasks around getting people to call you by your name on the other side of transitioning. It’s also an examination and embracing of the person I was before I transitioned, the person I was when I began the journey of transitioning, and the man I am now. I look at the things these three people share, and the ways in which they are different, peppering in the music I wrote in each phase of that journey, and calling on the voices of people who have been in my life throughout the entire thing to fill in the gaps in my storytelling. It’s good fun, it’s heartfelt, and it might make you queerer than you were before you saw it. 

2.    What has the journey of this play been like?

I started writing this play after being encouraged to do so by my director, flatmate and beloved collaborator Sean Ting-Hsuan Wang. We pitched it for Peckham Fringe before I had even started writing, got a slot in the festival and I was performing it in front of an audience about six weeks later! Since then we developed and extended the show as part of Theatre Peckham’s Young, Gifted and Black Season before showing that version at VAULT Festival. It’s been a very quick and intense process, which is exactly how I like making theatre, and at times it’s turned my whole house into a sweatshop – I’ve been lifted up, encouraged, aided and pushed by some of my closest and most talented friends, and that aspect of the process has been the source of a lot of my joy in making it.

3.    You perform in the play, as well as having written it. What’s it like to be both writer and performer at the same time?

Sometimes it’s a challenge to put my writer’s brain on mute whilst I’m on stage! Since my time as a child actor in community theatre in California I haven’t seen performance as the main event in my practice, but it’s been really fun and healing to get back on stage and perform as myself, as a version of myself that I’m proud to share. I just thank god for Sean, who has been a fantastic facilitator in my writing process and has helped to keep me centred in the job of performing, whilst also giving me a lot of space each night for variation and authentic interactions with every audience. 

4.    What do you want audiences to take away from the show?

I aim to generate empathy in everything I make. With this show that’s very much the case –  but I also hope that audiences walk away more curious about themselves and the way they operate in the world. I want to make space for people to reflect on their own position on the gender spectrum, and what it is to be gendered from a young age, and to find room for laughter within it.  NO I.D. is about change, and treating old versions of ourselves with compassion, and how we perform identities that we learn. It’s also about how stupidly difficult it is to get a person’s existence acknowledged on paper, and how reductive our understandings of identity are in bureaucratic settings. I hope that people feel inspired to consider the labour it can take to fit a tickbox, and how easy it is to fall through the cracks of our systems. 

5.    How does music feature in the show – what’s its place in it?

The show uses a few of the songs I wrote shortly before getting on hormones, and throughout my first year on testosterone. I’ve always used music to access, process and reflect on my emotions, both before and since my transition. I think the music fills in some of the gaps in the way I describe my journey: I present a case file of my transition in the text, and the music looks at those moments in my life through a more emotional lens. I tell you what happened in words, and then explain how I felt about it in song. It also helps me directly compare the person I was before with the person I am, because my recorded voice sounds very different from the live one. It’s cool to be able to sing with someone who literally is me but also isn’t here anymore. 

6.    The tone of the play feels very joyful. Why was this important for you?

I wanted to tell a trans story that presents a fuller picture of the trans experience than the ones we usually see in the media. I don’t want to tell a story about suffering and danger and anguish. The world is hostile towards trans people, and that is incredibly difficult, but being trans is not my problem. Being trans is actually my solution! With this show I wanted to share the freedom, the joy and the peace that come from self-discovery and self-acceptance. I also wanted to show audiences that everyone has space to take part in trans joy. My life expectancy as a Black trans man is short! I want to spend it laughing, and inviting others to laugh with me. 

7.    NO I.D. appears, in the first instance, to be a one-man show. Do you think you could, however, consider your past self – of whom we see videos and photos throughout the show, and hear the voice of – to be a separate character in their own right? How do you see the relationship between your current self and your past self play out in the show? 

I do think she is her own character in the show! Sometimes we feel so distant from each other that I talk about her like she’s a separate person, both in the play and in my life. That girl sings in this show, she dances, her presence is felt from start to finish. Over the course of the show I think I call on her and excavate her in order to present her as part of my bureaucratic archive, but we also communicate together in song, and share how much we love each other. I have a very warm relationship to my past self and I think that warmth goes both ways between us in NO I.D.

9.    Why did you choose a distinctly bureaucratic lens to tell such a personal story?

Before making the show, whenever I would speak to people about my transition, the thing that shocked people the most was how absurdly difficult it was to sort out my paperwork. I liked the idea of presenting a part of the trans experience that people outside of it know very little about, but that everyone can relate to. Who hasn’t had to sit on the phone listening to crackling, choppy classical music, trying to contain their rage in their attempt to get the disinterested person on the other side of the line to give them what they needed? I wanted my audience to be able to recognise themselves in the show even if they weren’t gender nonconforming or queer, to establish some connection before I get into the more complicated parts of transitioning. 

10.  What does it mean to have your show transfer to the Royal Court?

It means absolutely everything to be doing this transfer. We are a young company, most of us immigrants, all of us queer, who have been taught our entire lives that our stories aren’t taken seriously on big stages. I’ve been told many times by people in our industry that I would never be able to bridge the gap between fringe theatre and theatres like the Royal Court with my work. I am so grateful to the Court for giving me a chance to prove those people wrong, and to prove to other young makers and trans artists that our work is worth believing in. 

REVIEW: Snowflakes

Published on by Megan LewisLeave a comment

Rating: 3.5 out of 5.

A satirical dark comedy which explores taking justice into the hands of the people.

How far would you go to right a wrong? Can two wrongs make a right? The world is full of people who have committed acts which they ought not to have committed, and the internet is full of people who want them punished. We have all seen it, in the comments sections and all over Twitter. People are angry and thirsty for justice. Has something you’ve seen online ever sparked those feelings in you? I know that I’ve felt it at times. But how far do you have to go before you become the bad guy?

Snowflakes, written by Robert Boulton, debuted in the Old Red Lion in 2021, and will now play at Park Theatre until 6th May. Taking inspiration from Inside No. 9 and Black Mirror, Boulton combines dark comedy, horror and satire into an examination of cancel culture, morality, and taking justice to an extreme extent. It is a script designed to spark debate, and to really get the audience to think. 

Marcus (Robert Boulton, the writer himself) and Sarah (Louise Hoare) work for a start-up company dealing in death. Delivering the results that the comments sections are calling for, they dole out punishment to those who have allegedly committed heinous crimes. The duo live-stream their trials, during which the public can vote on an app to decide the course of punishment: does the perpetrator live or die? 

As Marcus, Boulton is charismatic, darkly comical and compelling. He has a steadiness about him that exudes danger. Hoare flits between energetic and held, with a deeply expressive face and emotive demeanour she serves the complexity of her character well. There’s a captivating energy between Boulton and Hoare which is extremely watchable, even throughout the more addled parts of the narrative. 

The play begins as Marcus and Sarah burst in on Tony (Henry Davis), a famous writer who has awoken from a heavy night of drinking. The pair swiftly knock Tony back unconscious, and then proceed to chat about their purpose on the job. We learn that it’s Sarah’s first mission. A young woman eager to impress, she started at the bottom and climbed the ranks. Marcus, her teacher for the day, is a seasoned assassin. Boastful, and confident, he takes joy in his work. Sarah gets to it, setting up the space, pulling an assortment of weapons from boxes. Here Boulton’s writing sets us up for what is to come. We are yet to dive into the story, but characters are established and the witty dialogue makes it an easy watch. It’s interesting, though not entirely gripping. 

When Tony re-awakens the action truly begins. He is accused of an unpunished crime against an unnamed woman. We are launched into the trial. It’s what you might expect: interrogation, accusation, defence. Davis brings depth to his character and does have some truly brilliant moments in the play, but I didn’t quite believe he feared for his life. Perhaps this was due to directorial choices or writing that was heavy on exposition.

A live stream from an on-stage camera projects Tony’s frustrated face onto a backdrop of blinds above the hotel bed, an effective choice which immerses the audience in the story. The fight scenes have promise, though they are a little hit-and-miss (I could clearly see the punches didn’t land, but with a thrust stage you’re bound to get this from some angles). 

There are several plot-twists toward the end of the play, I won’t go into detail – there were moments I genuinely didn’t see coming, and I’d rather not give you spoilers. I will say though that they complicate things a little, and the storyline becomes cloudy. It’s almost like Boulton is trying to fit too much into the second act.

Darkly entertaining and provocative, if a little convoluted at times, Snowflakes adds to the ongoing discussion of social media and cancel culture. In a world which seems to be heading toward the dystopian day by day this is an interesting and relative piece of theatre which will leave you questioning your morals.

REVIEW: little scratch

Published on by Alex AnsdellLeave a comment

Rating: 4 out of 5.

An intimate piece of spoken word that scrapes under the psyche of the everyday

At this moment, the theatre world is mad on book adaptations. The National’s production of Neil Gaiman’s The Ocean at the End of the Lane is on what it seems like is its twelfth national tour, the Harold Pinter are currently charging hundreds of pounds for James Norton torture porn with its adaption of Hanya Yanagihara’s A Little Life – but a subtler, less starry pick can be found not five minutes from Warren Street.

Rebecca Watson’s debut novel-turned-spoken word quadrologue little scratch comes to the New Diorama Theatre from Hampstead Theatre with direction from Katie Mitchell, after adaption from Miriam Battye. 

The play takes place in the brain of a single woman over the course of 24 hours in her life. The four actors (Eleanor Henderson, Rebekah Murrell, Eve Ponsonby & Ragevan Vasan) speak every thought that crosses her mind as she stumbles through her tedious routine – every thought. These actors barely take a breath, overlapping thoughts on thoughts in a tremendous feat of stamina and precision, and the result is a very enjoyable reflection of our own internal psyche.

There is something of the Sarah Kane in Watson/Battye’s language; unending streams of existential apathy, not without bite. This, combined with the Fleabag-esque haplessness of mid-20s existence, makes for a fresh interpretation of a formula gradually approaching over-saturation.

In many ways, little scratch has all the hallmarks of a radio play. The four actors stand at their microphones for the whole show, they carry an intimate tone throughout – they even have Foley tables complete with hairbrushes, sandpaper and other noise-making paraphernalia. This is to its credit and detriment: having visual reactions to the protagonist’s daily minutiae allows the script to keep bubbling but how static the piece is, combined with the relentless dialogue (monologue?), does test our stamina as well as theirs.

Our surroundings accentuate the play’s intimacy. The New Diorama’s snug theatre lends an air of confidentiality, the set – four lamps casting haze on the actors from above – makes them feel like lost relics, holograms. Melanie Watson’s score is complex, layering the everyday with the eerie to push us further into our seats. 

As the clock ticks towards midnight and the lead’s trauma begins to unravel, Mitchell and Battye weave a delicate and quivering thread of past suffering and present monotony. While this is a play that does require a level of endurance unusual for a night out at the theatre, its rich language and potent authenticity make it more than worth a punt. 

REVIEW: Vardy v Rooney: The Wagatha Christie Trial

Published on by Alexander PearnLeave a comment

Rating: 2 out of 5.

A courtroom drama in desperate need of extra time.

Way back in 2019, Coleen Rooney started the fire that was Vardy v Rooney when she pointed the finger at Rebekah Vardy for leaking her private Instagram posts to the tabloids. Spreading like wildfire, you’d have been hard-pressed to find someone not keeping up with the scandal. Sadly, what promised to be a riveting and crackling courtroom drama has well and truly sluiced any flame that was left, leaving this dramatization as a bedraggled and limp mess.

Treated as spectators to a sport, the trial is pulled apart in front of our eyes; every ounce of promised comedy and fun from the sporting puns is tossed aside as the show attempts the plough through 7 days’ worth of trial in a matter of hours. Part of the show’s draw is its verbatim nature, but this only further hinders the show. Firstly, the resulting language is dry and unengaging, ultimately, we are watching a condensed court trial that needs to keep jumping from point to point in an attempt to cover everything required. Secondly, it splits the world of the play into two pieces, the trial and the pundit narrators that interrupt with simplified explanations of what has just occurred. The overall feeling is laborious, this does not feel like a show that is excited or looking forward to sharing its story. Rather, it weighs itself down and always feels the need to push to the next point for fear of not having enough time to properly deal with the trial.

Not all is lost though, Polly Sullivan’s set is tonally perfect. A tacky wonder full of plastic chairs, thin wooden veneers, and fake grass pitches. It is here our combatants do battle, with strong performances from both Laura Dos Santos (Coleen Rooney) and Lucy May Barker (Rebekah Vardy). Both manage to stay afloat within the legal quagmire, successfully building believable and complex performances throughout. Sadly, this is not the case for either lawyer, their only purpose is to score legal goal after legal goal, a process that soon begins to grate.

An uncomfortable sense of voyeurism purveys the performance. Accents are exaggerated in a bid to generate laughs; jokes are told to expose a lack of intelligence or knowledge. It feels as though we are to laugh at not just the situation, but the women whose lives are caught within it and for our entertainment we can laugh at their struggles.

Vardy v Rooney veers clear of taking a true stance on any of this. Maybe this is a production that highlights the pervasive and destructive role of social media in our lives, or potentially it is to deride those who do not appear to work for a living and air their grievances in public for any amount of exposure. What is clear is that it feels half baked, and through attempting to cover everything we get a lacklustre realisation of all.

REVIEW: The Woman Who Turned Into A Tree

Published on by absolutelysirLeave a comment

Rating: 3 out of 5.

The connection to the myth, however, while planted well, does not bear the fruit that theatre company Collide have set out to grow, here.

The Woman Who Turned Into a Tree at Omnibus Theatre is an intriguing blend of sound, movement and text. Written by Swedish play- and screenwriter Lita Langseth and translated by Rochelle Wright, it is a heady exploration of a woman’s attempt to reinvent her identity into the “perfect version” of herself.

The play itself is an homage to the Greek myth of the nymph Daphne who begs her father to transform her into a tree in order to escape the unwelcome and manic advances of the god Apollo. In Langseth’s story, Daphne (Bathsheba Piepe) is the obsessed one, overwhelmingly stuck on the idea of being “the girl with class” and the concept of who she is in other people’s eyes. Her father, rather than a river god, is a working class man in a psych ward, and, instead of turning her into a tree, implores her to remember her wild spirit (embodied in the play by Ioli Filippakopoulou as a similarly dressed and be-wigged woman who crawls out of a wardrobe wearing a blazer backwards).

The basic plot line is that Daphne lives in a rubbish flat that only has one window which is blocked by a tree outside that may or may not be moving closer to her (but is the only flat she can afford). She has a classy job at a nightclub (the wage from which allows her to buy and wear designer outfits regularly, if not a nicer flat), and is unfulfilled and wholly unsatisfied with life as she has not yet reached the pinnacle of her perfect self. The derogatory words and phrases that are scrawled in chalk and cover the floor and furniture of Ioano Curelea’s set, and the fabric that looks eerily similar to a very large bin bag draped around the space is a good representation of this inner turmoil we’re told Daphne has. The space and the movement, designed by Filippakopoulou, which is staticky and fragmented reflecting Daphne’s difficulty in embracing her full self as she is, is at odds with the swankiness of the nightclub setting and this dissonance does well to further Daphne’s distress.

Bathsheba Piepe and Ioli Filippakopoulou embrace the weird of Daphne’s psyche, often mimicking the other, or posing in the elegant ways Daphne’s witnessed classy women do on social media; her main source of existential panic. The moments of quiet by both actors following revelations from Daphne’s boss and a phone call with her dad were particularly poignant.

The connection to the myth, however, while planted well, does not bear the fruit that theatre company Collide have set out to grow, here. The men are not as emphatic in either their pursuit or dismissal of her, more apathetic than Apollo ever was, and her desire to become the tree and/or forest that her mentally unwell father adamantly requests is acted upon only within the last few minutes and even that deep change is made by her unnamed counterpart with a jug of water while she claims it as her own. It all feels superficial and entirely unearned and when the lights go out, and the audience applauds, I’m not sure what growth and learning we’re praising. 

REVIEW: Betty Blue Eyes

Published on by Mark LloydLeave a comment

Rating: 3 out of 5.

A pig production that doesn’t quite fly, but doesn’t make a pig’s ear of it either.

Betty Blue Eyes is a musical set in 1947 about a pig with beautiful blue eyes. An intriguing proposition and one that had me wondering what on earth this show would actually be like. Betty Blue Eyes first premiered in 2011 and went on to be nominated for best new musical at the Olivier Awards. This musical is being revived for the first time in London since that initial run, at the Union Theatre.

After seeing this show my initial thoughts were that it was fine. Almost aggressively fine. Nothing amazing, nothing awful, just fine. This perhaps sounds harsh, but ultimately, I can see why this show has not been put on in London for over a decade. Some of the songs are quite good, with particular highlights being “Nobody” and “Another Little Victory” with some fun staging and charismatic performances. It is perhaps no surprise that both of these numbers heavily feature Amelia Atherton, playing Joyce Chilvers, whose performance was a highlight of the show for me. Some other performances in this very large cast of which I counted 18, were less strong and did not match up to the performance of Amelia.

The plot of this show is quite simple. Some members of the town council are illegally rearing a pig so that they can get around rationing and serve it at a banquet they are hosting to celebrate a royal wedding. An inspector shows up determined to find anybody not following the rules, and cue hijinks and drama. This simple plot is padded out with a number of songs quite frankly that do not really add anything. Just as the plot seems to be progressing and something might actually be about to happen, we have to stop and sing a not very interesting song for a few minutes. Had the songs perhaps been stronger I may not have minded but sadly at multiple moments it just felt like the show came to a stop while a song was sung, rather than the songs adding to the plot, or serving some greater narrative or emotional purpose.

This show is also tonally quite confusing. The best parts of the show are when the farcical aspects are played up and it is treated as the fun ridiculous comedy that a musical about a pig suggests it will be (using links of sausages as canes to dance with was a highlight for me). However, these fun moments are interrupted quite abruptly by overly serious moments which give you emotional whiplash. The central couple, Joyce and Gilbert, seem to go from a happy fun couple to having serious marital issues within a moment. The song “Magic Hands” encapsulates this tonal confusion for me perfectly. It starts off quite comedic but then we quickly head into far more serious territory around dead/maimed husbands from the war and surviving a bombing. This all happens within one song. There are definitely ways that light and shade can exist in a show, and some of the best musicals do this, but it just is not well done in this show.

The Union Theatre is quite a small space, so understandably the cast were not mic’d, however this did lead to some issues during larger group numbers in which the character singing the solo cannot be heard over the sound of the ensemble singing and moving. With such a large cast I can only imagine that this production has designs on moving to a larger venue, in which case the cast would be mic’d and this issue wouldn’t exist, but as the show currently is, it is an issue.

As this was a musical, I have a habit of always noticing one ensemble member more than the others, and for this show that was Kane Stone, who delivered all of the vocals and choreography with incredible enthusiasm and he was a joy to watch.

This show really is at its best when it leans in more to the farcical comedy side, and at its worst when it is trying to force emotional story beats that just do not work in my opinion. For this particular production, the large ensemble numbers are some of the best and I think there is enough here to enjoy to make it worth a visit. Just do not expect to have any of the songs stuck in your head after the show.