REVIEW: King of Pangaea at King’s Head Theatre


Rating: 3 out of 5.

Overall, however, King of Pangaea is slick, ambitious, and sweet; a lovely little musical that deals with loss through child-like innocence and the transcendence of hope. 


King of Pangaea, a new musical from Martin Storrow, is a One Act spritely epic about familial grief, hope, imagination. 

Sam Crow (Alfie Backwell), an ordinary boy, is grieving the loss of his mother. In order to deal with this, he travels to Pangaea, a practically uninhabited island of his own imaginative creation in search of a metaphysical puzzle piece. 

Along the way, he encounters a variety of mystical, swashbuckling types, beautifully clad in colourful garments (a wonderful Carly Brownbridge). The narrative itself evades clarity somewhat, but this shall suffice. 

Whilst it isn’t packed with musical bangers, the cast are wonderful, all with angelic voices. in his professional debut, Blackwell is charismatic and adorable, easily holding his own. HIs voice, above all else, is gorgeous. 

There is perhaps something a little oxymoronic about a one act musical in that it slightly undermines its grandeur. but King of Pangaea is pacy and holds attention – no mean feat in this attention deficit economy. 

The story and energy of the piece is sweet, with a palpable heart. it is perhaps a little too earnest, a little too saccharine for british sensibility. but tomato, tomato; potato, potato. 

Kudos must be handed to the set design (also Brownbridge). Inventive, with a vibe of child-like wonder, the set itself plays a large role in the success of the show. 

The cast are strong, and competent. Dan Burton as Sam’s father and sometimes-pirate is particularly engaging, and Emily Tang eminently watchable. Mark Curry as an immortal Prophet Elijah is charming, and Sophia Ragavelas as Sam’s mother, Celia, underscores much of the emotion. They are all slightly hampered by a script lacking in nuance, and a plot that squeezes in everything without definition. Narratively, it was slightly incoherent, and in its ambition loses sight of its core explorations. It may have benefited from a whittling of narrative plot points to focus more on the interpersonal familial relationships and how loss and grief are felt and communicated by all involved. 

What are your thoughts?