FEATURE: Million Dollar Baby

As part of the BFI’s ‘The Cinematic Life of Boxing’ season, a screening of Million Dollar Baby (2004) was followed by a Q&A with broadcaster and former athlete Jeanette Kwakye, retired boxer and writer Ruth Raper and professional boxer Laura Akram. The season explores the boxing lens and its unique ability to platform stories of love, social injustice, politics and above all, the strength of the human spirit.


Clint Eastwood’s Million Dollar Baby is one of cinema’s greatest examples of this; on the surface it’s the sad story of a remarkable female boxer and her reluctant trainer, but in truth it’s a story of family turmoil, gender inequality and, as Clint Eastwood himself described ‘a father-daughter love story’.

Oscar-winning Hilary Swank stars as underdog Maggie Fitzpatrick, who finally convinces coach Frankie Dunn (Clint Eastwood) to take her under his wing, aided by gym caretaker and narrator Eddie Scrap-Iron Dupuis (Morgan Freeman). It’s got everything you want from a boxing movie: grit, determination, heart-warming success, out-of-character vulnerability and a devastating ending.

Eastwood’s idea for the film was initially rejected by Warner Bros – ‘It’s about a woman in boxing! Nobody will want to see that!’ – but he convinced them with a small budget and strong will. It’s true, in 2004, not many people did want to see women in boxing; women’s boxing wasn’t even in the Olympics until 2012, and even now women’s matches are knocked down to the bottom of line-ups. Raper discussed the current attitude towards women’s boxing, noting that there is ‘still a long way to go’.

The first ever all-female boxing card to headline a major venue was just last year at the Royal Albert Hall, and still they are paid a fraction of what their male counterparts receive. The former boxer turned writer/presenter discussed this with current boxer Laura Akram after the screening. They discussed the truth of the film, its moments of dramatisation and accuracy, and how it made them, as female boxers, feel. It was clear that the film’s tragic ending isn’t conducive to improving the sport’s dangerous reputation, but that its portrayal of the typical boxing gym, the themes it discusses and the relationship between coach and athlete were handled truthfully.

There was a general sense of hope from the panel; female boxing has come a long way since 2004, with world champions Katy Taylor, Caroline Dubois and Claressa ‘T Rex’ Shields, to name but a few, leading the way for aspiring young women. Representation in cinema is gaining traction, with Ryan Destiny’s portrayal of Claressa Shields in The Fire Inside (2024) Sydney Sweeney starring in Christy, the 2025 biopic of legend Christy Martin.

Also up for discussion was the accuracy of the film’s ‘Hit Pit’ gym, Raper noting that boxing gyms are often ‘in places where they are needed’, in deprived areas, working mens clubs, and that Million Dollar Baby does a good job of representing this element of the sport. The side stories of Danger Barch (Jay Baruchel) and the gym regulars are a big part of this, symbols of the social and symbolic power of boxing beyond its definition.

Wonderfully facilitated by Jeanette Kwakye, the evening was an inspiring and eye-opening peek into the world of women’s boxing, and an excellent meeting between cinema and sport, highlighting the importance of their intersection expertly.

FEATURE: The Boxer and Q&A with Barry McGuigan

This year the BFI is hosting a season celebrating The Cinematic Life of Boxing, showcasing a diverse range of films that represent the sport on the big screen. From genre-defining giants like Stallone’s Rocky, to historical documentaries exploring its harsh realities, Dr Clive Chijioke Nwonk has curated a series of screenings and Q&As that see cinematic life through a boxing lens, using it as a way to ultimately explore ‘the human spirit’ itself. 


As part of the season, on Tuesday 14th April BFI Southbank screened Jim Sheridan’s 1997 film, The Boxer, loosely inspired by the life of prolific boxer Barry McGuigan. The film follows Danny (played by Daniel-Day Lewis), a former provisional IRA volunteer who returns to his hometown after spending 14 years in prison. His inability to escape his past and his reconnection with his childhood sweetheart forces him to confront his old allegiances, exploring the competing agendas and intense violence of the Irish Troubles. 

McGuigan’s boxing career, as explored in the Q&A session with him after the film, was marked by the conflicts sparked by his success. A man heralded in the international boxing hall of fame, he held the WBA and lineal featherweight titles from 1985-86, and has represented Ireland, Northern Ireland and competed for British titles in his fights. 

Though he advocated for an end to sectarian violence during the Troubles, McGuigan’s neutrality was ill received, with IRA members and loyalists wanting him to pick a side.The Boxer explores these tensions, released in the final year of the Troubles, and showcases how the sport became a place to reconcile political differences. Throughout his career, McGuigan chose not to wear sectarian colours, and continually asserted that boxing had nothing to do with religion, sect or division. His experience sparring in his local boxing gyms with Catholics and Protestants alike meant that to him, the sport was non-sectarian. Amidst a backdrop of riots and street violence, the gyms became a place to access complex emotions with structure and discipline.  

A striking moment in the film that embodied this sentiment saw Danny competing against a Nigerian man in a boxing match in London. The scene explored the intense physicality, strategy and high emotional stakes of boxing matches, made even more tense by the political weight of what Danny represented. As Danny was about to win the fight, he threw in the towel, recognising that any more contact could have ended his opponent’s life. McGuigan described how Sheridan and co-writer Terry George had changed the events, as the boxer’s real life opponent had lost his life in that fight. This choice powerfully showcases filmmaking’s capacity to reimagine history, and became an important symbolic gesture for peace. 

McGuigan’s experience as boxing consultant for the film, as he trained Daniel Day-Lewis for a year in Ireland, reaffirmed to him that every fight has an arc, a story that makes it ‘majestic’. In the face of violence, he had tried to use the sport to create happiness, and in doing so captured the paradox of how a brutal sport played a crucial role in breaking cycles of political violence. The depiction of the events on screen have only amplified the incredible story. 

IN CONVERSATION WITH: Gabrielle Norma-Griffin and Taylor Carmen

We sat down for an exclusive interview with the performers of ‘Don’t Panic’, Gabrielle Norma-Griffin and Taylor Carmen, who is also the writer.

‘Don’t Panic’ is a dark comedy about two stage hands who, stuck together during a nuclear lockdown drill, debate the purpose of living in a world that’s poisoned the human experience.

This show runs from 21st-26th April at Etcetera Theatre Club, London- Tickets here


Taylor, Don’t Panic marks your writing debut. What first sparked the idea for this story?

Taylor Carmen: There was a time about three years ago I had been really struggling to engage with my art; I had graduated university into the pandemic and by the time acting and the arts reopened, I felt very displaced. Inundated by news cycles that painted a darker and darker reality for where our society is headed, I felt
overwhelmed and frustrated. This play emerged from this place of feeling lost in
the chaos, struggling to find purpose within it. These two characters are having a
really vital conversation I think all artists are struggling with today, and it’s a
conversation I was having alone in my head until I wrote it down and turned it into
“DON’T PANIC”.

Working on a two-hander places a particular focus on the relationship between performers. How did you begin building that connection in rehearsal?

Taylor Carmen: One really beautiful way I think we established a sort ofchemistry pretty quickly was by talking about other art that we loved. Bonding over movies or music gives us a better sense of who this other person is, what has informed their life and inspires them as an artist. Finding little things we both feel very passionate about, honestly things we fangirl over, gave us a shared language we then got to use throughout the play.

Taylor, how has it felt to be inside the work both as its writer and as Mani?

When I say “It feels like a rollercoaster” I don’t mean it’s been up and down, I mean it truly feels like that stomach-drop horrifying but scream-inducing thrill of a journey. Sharing your writing is a very vulnerable experience, so I feel grateful and humbled to have this room of people who are expanding this story with their imaginations. And as an actor, it’s been a joy to discover this character more intimately. I’m no longer negotiating which words to use, I’m actually finding how Mani walks and talks and it’s like meeting a version of myself I didn’t know existed.

Gabrielle, what was it like stepping into a brand-new piece and helping to shape The Kid from the ground up?

Gabrielle: It was so much fun! As an actor, it is my job to give a character flesh and bones,paying full respect to their humanity, and Kid just makes it so easy to do that. Kid is so reflective and relevant and so easy to love. I believe that because I am having so much fun, it doesn’t feel like work and makes stepping into someone else’s shoes that much easier.

What have you both found most rewarding about this collaboration?

Gabrielle-Norma Griffin: The opportunity to play has been so rewarding. Perhaps it’s because I am playing a literal child. Nevertheless, it has been fun jumping into the skin of someone who is so free with their imagination and creativity.

Taylor Carmen: The generosity these artists are giving to a new work has been a gift beyond imagination. It doesn’t feel like just my project, it feels like a little community is all putting in work to create something magical and important. It’s a microcosm of how I want the world to look, people eagerly showing up against all odds, asking “OK, how do we do this?” and then finding solutions together, one step at a time.

When audiences leave Don’t Panic, what do you hope stays with them?

Gabrielle-Norma Griffin: I hope they take the hope that this play provides.
When the world is on fire and it seems like everything will end, humans have a
way of bouncing back.


Taylor Carmen: A spirit of relentless, rebellious creativity.

IN CONVERSATION WITH: Josephine Burton

We sat down for an exclusive interview with Josephine Burton, Artistic Director of Dash Arts and director of ‘Our Public House’.

‘Our Public House’ is on tour from 15th May-4th July. Tickets here.


1. ‘Our Public House’ draws on the real voices of over 600 people across the UK. What was the process of transforming these lived experiences into a cohesive theatrical narrative?

It was genuinely iterative and for a long time, deliberately open-ended. We didn’t arrive at the workshops with a play already mapped out waiting to be illustrated by what we heard. We went out not knowing what we’d find or what form the eventual work would take. Verbatim? Documentary? A piece of music theatre? The research came first and the form followed.

What gradually became clear was that the speeches we’d gathered were too alive, too specific, too individual to flatten into a single narrative voice. Each one belonged to a particular person in a particular place with a particular set of experiences behind them. So rather than creating verbatim theatre, we let them become the interior lives of fictional characters – the thing each character knows and feels and has been quietly carrying. Barney Norris was extraordinary in that process. He has a gift for building fictional worlds that are genuinely porous to reality without losing their dramatic shape.

The pub setting helped enormously. It gave us a container – one place, a storm outside – within which all these different voices and perspectives could credibly collide. And the music gave us a way to let the speeches themselves be heard, transformed into songs, without stopping the drama dead.

2. Your work with Dash Arts often sits at the intersection of theatre, music, and social enquiry. How did that cross-artform approach shape the creation and staging of ‘Our Public House’?

At Dash we’ve always believed that the big questions deserve the full range of artistic tools – that music can get somewhere text alone can’t, that movement can articulate what speech won’t. So the cross-artform instinct was there from the start. But what was interesting about ‘Our Public House’ was that each element found its own organic justification within the world of the play, rather than being imposed from outside.

The music exists in the play because Sanjana’s pub hosts an open mic night. The speeches exist because she runs a speechwriting workshop for her locals. The BSL exists because one of our characters is a deaf politician who communicates in multiple ways. Nothing is decorative. Everything is load-bearing. In this project, we were reaching for an integration where the form and the content are genuinely the same thing, and I think we found it.The staging reflects that too. We’re working with Good Teeth Design on a set that’s rooted in the pub but flexible enough to shift as the drama shifts; expanding to include the community cast, opening up to blur the line between the world of the play and the world of the audience. The pub becomes the nation, and the nation becomes the pub.

3. The play explores a community that has collectively disengaged from politics. What conversations or questions were you most interested in provoking in audiences through this story?

Honestly, what struck me most over three years of workshops wasn’t disengagement, it was the opposite. Everywhere we went, people had ideas. Specific, considered, passionate ideas about what wasn’t working and how it could be better. About NHS waiting times and what might actually help. About school funding and what teachers are up against. About the cost of housing and who it’s locking out. The disengagement from formal politics masked something much more alive underneath.

What I really wanted to bring into the play was that energy, the sense that change doesn’t have to wait for an external agent to arrive and sort things out. It can come from within a community. It often does. And alongside that I wanted to bring the solidarity I witnessed in those rooms. There’s a story we’re constantly told through social media and through the news about a country divided against itself, polarised beyond repair. That simply wasn’t my experience. In workshop after workshop, in prisons and schools and working men’s clubs and deaf communities, I found kindness. Curiosity. A genuine interest in other people’s experiences. I wanted that spirit to live in our pub.

So the conversations I hope audiences leave having are less about “Aren’t politicians awful?” and more about: “What would I say, if someone gave me the floor? What do I actually think needs to change? Who in my community is already doing something about it?” The play asks those questions not as an assignment but as an invitation.

4. This production brings together hearing and deaf performers and incorporates BSL, SSE, and creative captioning. How did accessibility influence your creative decisions, beyond simply being an added feature?

It reframed the whole project, in the best possible way. Working with deaf communities in Manchester and Birmingham during our research phase wasn’t a box-ticking exercise, it was genuinely formative. We learnt things about communication, about what it means to truly listen, about how it feels to live in a world where you are given no power or space to make the changes you need to live well, about the different ways a person can hold multiple linguistic and cultural identities at once, that fed directly into the writing and the staging.

When we brought a deaf actor into the rehearsal room at the National Theatre Studio early in the development, the question immediately became not “How do we include BSL?” but “How does this character’s experience of the world shape everything around her?” Accessibility wasn’t an add-on and a creative proposition. Mary, our deaf politician, ended up being in some ways the moral centre of the play. She’s the first politician in the drama who genuinely listens to her community. There’s something I find quietly radical about that: the character who moves between two languages, who has had to fight to be heard her whole life, is the one who actually hears people.

Captioning every performance and interpreting at least one of them at every stop in our tour isn’t separate from the artistic vision. It’s part of the same commitment – to make a show that speaks, in every sense, to everyone.

5. The idea of the public house as a civic space feels both nostalgic and urgent. What drew you to this setting as the heart of the story, and what does it represent to you today?

I’ve been thinking and creating work for a while now about what sociologists call third spaces – the places that are neither home nor work, neither fully private nor fully public, where you encounter people outside your immediate circle in a setting that still feels safe and recognisably yours. The squat. A dive bar. The townsquare. The pub. These are the spaces where communities actually form, not through grand civic gestures but through accumulated small interactions over time. And we’re losing them. As those spaces close or become unaffordable or simply fall out of the rhythms of people’s lives, we retreat into our own bubbles. Online. At home. Among people who already agree with us.

The pub felt like the perfect place to put that question under the light. It’s quintessentially English – locally inhabited but a national institution, carrying centuries of social and political life within its walls. And yet it’s also changing, disappearing, and in some ways has never fully belonged to everyone – there are plenty of people in 21st century Britain for whom the pub has never felt like their space. That tension interested me enormously. Who does the pub belong to? Who gets to feel at home there? What does it mean to reclaim it as a genuinely shared civic space?

And practically, it’s a wonderful place dramatically. Intimate and public at the same time. Full of music and confession and argument. A place where people say things they wouldn’t say anywhere else. What more could you want for a play?

6. With ‘Our Public House’ touring to different regions and incorporating local community participants at each stop, how do you anticipate the production evolving as it travels?

I think it will keep surprising us, and that’s exactly as it should be. Each city brings its own particular preoccupations, its own specific anxieties and ambitions, and the local ensemble members speak to those directly through the speeches they deliver on stage. Our professional cast respond to those speeches in character which means the drama genuinely shifts depending on what’s being said. A speech about social housing in Leeds lands differently from one about green spaces in Cornwall, and our characters have to meet it where it is.

What I’m most curious about is how the professional production will be changed by touring how the cast will be affected by spending time with communities in each place as they perform. We’ve always found that the workshops feed the work in ways you can’t predict or manufacture. Something about sitting in a room with people who have something real at stake in the questions the play is asking changes how you perform it. It grounds you. It reminds you what it’s all for.

By the time we reach London, ‘Our Public House’ will have been genuinely shaped by Leeds and Prescot and Coventry and Cornwall and Sheffield. It will carry all of those places with it. That feels right for a play about a country trying to understand itself.

IN CONVERSATION WITH: Kai Tomioka


25 years after Michael Nunn and William Trevitt’s critically acclaimed debut performance Pointless at the Roundhouse, pioneering dance company BalletBoyz will return to the stage with Still Pointless leads audiences on a retrospective journey through a quarter of a century of daring commissioning, producing, and performing dance across stage and screen. We interviewed one of the dancers, Kai, to share how they feel.


This show looks both backward and forward at once. When you are dancing a piece with history like Critical Mass, do you feel more like a custodian of legacy or a creator of something new?

Thinking about lineage and legacy, Critical Mass sits somewhere in the middle of those two things, and when I’m performing it, I have to consider being a both custodian and a creator at the same time. By definition, contemporary dance talks about the present, so performing something that was contemporary 25 years ago requires reinterpreting to make it able to say something about where we are now. Dancing a work like Critical Mass means honouring what has come before, aspiring to what may lie ahead, and that way create a container for both the past and the future. But when I perform the work live, it is solely about that present moment in time. 

BalletBoyz is known for blending film and live performance. How does that shift the way you inhabit the stage? Do you feel you are dancing for an audience, a camera, or something in between?

The depends on the what the work is and how it is intended to be perceived, but for me as a dancer, although I have a degree of responsibility for the audience, ultimately my responsibility is about performing it for myself as an artist and for the integrity of the work. The added factor is that BalletBoyz sits in the margin between contemporary dance and classical technique to an extent, and classical dance has a different presentational project to any audience, whether it is live on stage or for the camera. As a dancer, I have to think about where I sit within that, and how I balance projecting out versus projecting in. 

The programme spans a wide range of choreographers and styles. Which piece challenged you the most personally, and why?

We’re currently about halfway through the rehearsal period, and I have found Fiction particularly challenging. The character I perform in the work is separated from the rest of the group, which means I have struggled to find a consensus with everyone else about what the work considers and what it has to say. Fiction was created very specifically on and for the people who were in the studio at the time, so now I need to start working on making it my own. We’re still at the point in the rehearsal process where we’re replicating something that has come before, and we as a company of dancers need to now determine how we make this something new that we can give our own contribution to. It brings up questions about how we inhabit the history and legacy of each work, whilst also transforming it into something that is reinterpreted and forward-looking. But we have to learn the work first, because how can you change something that you don’t know? We need to be able to understand it first in order to translate it.

There is a signature irreverence to BalletBoyz, a refusal to take ballet too seriously. How does that philosophy show up in your rehearsal room day to day?

I’m not sure that the irreverence of BalletBoyz is a refusal to take ballet or dance too seriously. The definition of serious doesn’t mean cold or formal, warmth and joy and personality can also be synonymous with taking something seriously or being passionate about it. The misconception of what serious looks like warps the perception of what dance can mean and how it can be viewed – I think the irreverence is more about finding a different path to creating valuable art. We don’t need to suffer for what we do. How this manifests in the studio, which is full of hard-working, passionate, dedicated, and serious artists, for me is about the fact that I am allowed to be a person before I’m a dancer. This allowance to be myself adds layers to the work that is presented on stage. The philosophy also shows up in the studio through the realisation that creativity is, has to be, both play and hard work at the same time, and understanding that art is not found through limitation but through freedom. 

You are performing work by choreographers such as Christopher Wheeldon and Maxine Doyle alongside a brand-new commission. How does it feel to move between established voices and emerging ones within the same evening?

For me, dance is dance, identity is identity, refinement is refinement, so the difference between an established voice and emerging voice isn’t necessarily materialised in us as dancers or in how we present work on stage. 

If you could describe this 25-year journey not in steps but in a feeling, what does Still Pointless mean to you as a dancer right now?

I wouldn’t be doing what I do now if I thought that it was pointless, which is what the 25-year journey of BalletBoyz encapsulates. For some people dance may be pointless, and the importance of dance is being diminished all the time, which we’re being told through funding cuts and reduced performance opportunities and everything else that’s happening in the industry. But there’s a duality to dance: it can mean nothing but it can also mean everything, it’s something that is both completely imaginary and also the most real thing we can do. For us as dancers, it has always had value and it always will, and that gives us a reason for doing it, otherwise we wouldn’t put ourselves through any of this. So this is all we can do, all we can do is continue dancing. I don’t mean that in a hopeless way, I mean to say that this is the most hopeful thing I or any dancer can do in this environment – just to simply keep doing it. 

For tickets and listing, please visit here.

IN CONVERSATION WITH: Aldous Ciokajlo-Squire

We sat down for an exclusive interview with Aldous Ciokajlo-Squire, writer and performer of ‘6:24’, a raw portrayal of the euphoric experiences we have at raves.

‘6:24’ returns to The Sainsbury Theatre and MishMash Festival on Sunday 19th April- Tickets here


What drew you to capturing rave culture on stage, and what truth about it felt most urgent to tell?

Your emotions can feel like they’re bouncing off the walls at a rave. They feel impulsive and deep. I was once told that London accentuates whatever you’re feeling. If you’re feeling great then everything is great, if you’re feeling low, then it can all feel overwhelming. I think raves can often make you feel that same thing. You can literally be falling in love with someone whilst your heart is beaming in the crowd full of people dancing, or you can feel incredibly alone, surrounded by strangers. I really wanted to capture this feeling on stage and felt like it lent itself hand in hand with rave culture.

We’re in a time where the world is in a tense place. This play is not to distract people from what is going on, but to hopefully make people realise how delicate those around you can be.

How did working from “true events” shape the emotional honesty and boundaries of 6:24?

When I was younger, raves were the destination to go to. I’d go with what felt like everyone I knew in north London, rock up with a fiver for entry, dance all night with people I love and I’d feel for a split second time stood still. They were freeing, risky and full of life, so when I was writing this play, I wanted to capture the honest emotions those spaces offer. Everything that happens in the play is based on a true experience that I’ve either encountered, or witnessed, which has helped ground the world and characters in it.

The play centres on euphoria—what interested you in exploring what lies just beneath that high?

Raves have always had a funny way of bringing my emotions to the surface and making the outside world feel quiet for a brief moment. Euphoria is such a visceral feeling, an out of body experience where you get to just experience life in it’s fullest, making me feel incredibly present. I didn’t know how prominent this feeling would be when I was writing 6:24, but as I explored it further, I discovered so much more depth in all the characters. We all experience it in different ways, in different places, and for me, this is it.

How do movement and physicality help express what words can’t in the world of 6:24?

I feel like we often don’t say what we really want to in life. We hold back and have a fear of not being understood. I’ve seen it happen countless times, where someone finally plucks up the courage, using the energy of the night out to say what they’ve buried deep inside themselves. Just like in musicals, where they sing when words are no longer enough, the movement in this play challenges the trio to do exactly that, channel their emotions through their body.

What does 6:24 suggest about friendship at that fragile point between youth and adulthood?

The play is told through the lens of Felix, who has a desire to relive his most exciting days, his youth. He fears the reality of his twenties passing him by as someone who’s been forgotten about and when he reconnects with Lilly & Stephano, his whole world speeds up again, yet he’s still trying to obtain the same feeling he felt all those years ago.

When we’re young, the world feels massive, full of possibilities and as you get older, it becomes more streamlined. There’s people who were in my life growing up that I thought would always be there, but as time has passed, life has pulled us in different directions. The trio still has their deep rooted connections to each other, but the responsibility of growing up has clouded their youth. Something that they’re all trying to find again.

Returning to the piece after MishMash 2024, how has your perspective on the story evolved?

It’s very surreal to me how much this play has grown over the past couple of years. It started as a 10 minute piece in 2022, then a 40 minute piece in 2024 and now it’s the 3rd edition and the longest version it’s been. We’ve been able to explore all of the characters’ backstories further, and because of that, I feel like my whole perspective has shifted and the purpose of what we’re saying is clearer.

It’s vibrant and full of joy, but also goes through deep sadness at points. It should take you on a journey where you want to dance with us right there on stage and then the next moment curl up in your seat. It’s unapologetic, reckless and full of heart, all of which were in the core story in previous editions, but the heart has grown in so many ways.

FEATURE: A Summer of Range and Renewal at Cambridge Arts Theatre

Following its major redevelopment and reopening in late 2025, Cambridge Arts Theatre enters its Summer 2026 season with a clear sense of momentum — and a programme that reflects both confidence in its heritage and an ambition to broaden its appeal.

The result is a season that balances well-known productions and established talent with more contemporary, diverse programming designed to attract a wider audience.

A strong foundation of classic and contemporary theatre

The season features a number of high-profile productions, including Tamzin Outhwaite in Abigail’s Party, Tracy-Ann Oberman in Noël Coward’s Present Laughter, and Martin Shaw in A Man For All Seasons.

Alongside these, audiences can expect new and returning productions that have built strong reputations with younger and more varied theatre-goers. Highlights include Operation Mincemeat, the Olivier Award-winning musical, and Showstopper! The Improvised Musical, which brings a more spontaneous, interactive energy to the programme.

Expanding the audience experience

Beyond traditional theatre, the Arts Theatre is placing a clear emphasis on variety. The comedy programme includes well-known names such as Stewart Lee, Michelle Wolf, and Phil Wang, while literary collaborations with the Cambridge Literary Festival will bring authors including Zadie Smith and Elif Shafak to the stage.

Musical theatre also plays a significant role this season, with productions such as Six, Barnum, and Catch Me If You Can offering a mix of established hits and high-energy performances.

A continued focus on accessibility and families

Family programming remains a key part of the theatre’s offer, with productions including The Gruffalo, The Cat in the Hat, Horrible Histories, and Dog Man: The Musical.

The theatre is also extending its reach beyond its main venue through its Pop-Up Adventures initiative, bringing performances such as The Tale of the Loneliest Whale into community spaces across Cambridge.

Honouring tradition while looking ahead

The return of the Cambridge Greek Play, with Euripides’ Ion, continues a long-standing university tradition dating back to 1882, offering a distinctive cultural experience within the programme.

At the same time, new adaptations of literary works — including The Spy Who Came in From the Cold and War of the Worlds — demonstrate a continued interest in reimagining familiar stories for contemporary audiences.

A theatre in its next chapter

As the Arts Theatre builds on its recent £16 million transformation, this season signals a venue that is both consolidating its reputation and evolving its identity.

With a programme that combines established favourites, new interpretations, and a broader mix of events, the Summer 2026 season reflects a theatre positioning itself for long-term relevance — rooted in tradition, but responsive to changing audiences.

Look at all the dates and get tickets here!

IN CONVERSATION WITH: Sergio Maggiolo

We sat down for an exclusive interview with Sergio Maggiolo, creator of and performer in JEEZUS!

This show runs from 21st April to 9th May at New Diorama Theatre – Tickets here


Your work sits at the intersection of faith, queerness and political history. What felt most urgent to reclaim or reframe through Jesus’ story right now?

I grew up with religion as a language of love. It was in the rituals, the songs, and the way we lived together. The urgency now is about taking that language back from the structures that weaponized it. The same systems that prop up patriarchy and authoritarianism love to hide behind faith, but with JEEZUS! we are redirecting that reverence. We’re pointing it toward joy, queer love, and the messy, ecstatic parts of being human. If religion is supposedly about love, then it has to stand against violence instead of justifying it. That feels like a story worth shouting about.

JEEZUS! resists mocking religion while still interrogating it. How did you navigate that tonal tightrope without losing either bite or sincerity?

I’m inside it, so I don’t have to look at it from a distance. I come from a family where religion is a genuine expression of love, so those symbols are part of me. That closeness is actually what gives me permission to laugh because the humour comes from a place of truth. There’s a massive difference between faith and the institution of the Church. I don’t mock belief, but I absolutely interrogate power. Contradiction is already baked into the dogma, so we just follow it to its most absurd conclusions. My compass is love for people and their spirituality, mixed with a love for rebellion and questioning what we’ve been told to bow down to.

The show blends Latin pop, cumbia and club beats with something almost devotional. How does music become a kind of theology within the piece?

The show didn’t even start as a musical. It became one through playing around in workshops until we realized music was the actual heartbeat. Music is already at the centre of religious ritual. It gathers people, lifts them up, and dissolves the individual into a collective. That is theology to me. In JEEZUS! the dancefloor and the altar are the same thing. Latin pop and cumbia just let us do that with a bit more sweat and bass. It also helps that the rest of the world is finally catching up to how powerful Latino music is.

Set against the backdrop of 1990s Peru, how consciously are you inviting audiences to draw parallels between personal awakening and political control?

Very consciously. Controlling bodies through shame and prohibition is just another form of colonization. If you take away someone’s relationship to their own desire, you take away their autonomy. Authoritarian systems rely on people being afraid to look them in the eye, which is why we use laughter. JEEZUS! refuses to take authority at face value, even while we take the themes seriously. What happened in 90s Peru isn’t an isolated event. You see the same patterns of displacement, control and silencing happening everywhere today. The personal awakening in the show isn’t a side story; it is a literal act of resistance.

You perform multiple roles alongside Guido. How does that shapeshifting reflect the fluidity of identity the show is exploring?

To be honest, I mostly just pull faces and let Guido do the heavy lifting. But in a clown duo, you’re constantly shapeshifting through each other anyway. Half the time you don’t know who is leading and who is being exposed. That instability is exactly the point. The piece feels both deeply personal and wildly theatrical.

Where did you find permission to be this unapologetically bold with your own story?

I got it from the people who gave me love and freedom early on. My family, mentors, and collaborators never asked me to shrink myself. I also found it in queer artists who made space for the absurd and the excessive. In Latin American theatre that has a history of creating something massive and powerful out of very little, often out of pure sweat and commitment. I also take a lot from the migrant experience. Watching people cross borders and still insist on taking up space. I hope JEEZUS! is proof that immigrant stories don’t just exist here; but they actively shape the culture and identity of this country.

IN CONVERSATION WITH: Alexis Gregory and Marc Svensson

As SMOKE prepares to tour the UK, writer and performer Alexis Gregory joins forces with Marc Svensson to create a bold, two-part theatrical experience that extends beyond the stage. Blending a gripping, darkly comic queer thriller with live post-show discussions led by You Are Loved, SMOKE confronts urgent issues around mental health, addiction and community in the digital age. Tickets are available here.

In this conversation, Lex and Marc reflect on the real-life experiences that shaped the work, the natural evolution of their collaboration, and their shared mission to open up vital, and often avoided, conversations within the LGBTQ+ community.


Alexis, SMOKE begins with such a haunting and contemporary premise. What first sparked the idea for this story?

Alexis: I was hacked, which of course is a very everyday experience now, but it was a very targeted one, with all my accounts being broken into over a few weeks, with log-ins from around the world, and my money being spent. At the same time I was observing, on social media, numerous deaths of gay men being announced, often in relation to drug misuse or suicide. In SMOKE, I explore this automatic assumption about the cause of death, which is obviously not always the case, but statistically more likely to be so than our straight counterparts. I combined these two themes as an urban queer thriller. And oh, I decided to add comedy into the mix too. 

How did your collaboration around the themes of the show begin to take shape?

Alexis: Marc and I were exploring and highlighting the same themes at the same time, Marc via his organisation You Are Loved, and me via my work as a playwright, creating work about, and for, the queer community. We decided to pair up, and offer audiences a unique two part experience; I have never seen a play and community organisation partner in this way, and try to reach as many people as possible across the UK. 

Marc: I completely agree with Alexis point about the shared themes. To me, it felt incredibly powerful from the outset that this wasn’t a collaboration where we had to force alignment; the themes were already shared. The work Alexis had created and the work we’re doing through You Are Loved were speaking to the same underlying reality: that too many people in our community are struggling in silence, and too many lives are being lost as a result. The collaboration really began to take shape through that recognition. The themes didn’t need to be imposed; they emerged naturally. Both the show and our campaign, The Silence Ends With Us, are rooted in the same truth: that there are conversations we’ve collectively avoided or shut down, particularly around mental health, drug misuse, and the more complex, uncomfortable parts of queer experience. What brought it together was a shared urgency. A sense that we’re at a point where continuing not to talk about these things is no longer an option. The partnership creates a space to confront those realities, and our work aims to extend that beyond the theatre into communities, into conversations, and into action.

Marc, from your perspective as founder of You Are Loved, what stood out to you about the piece when you first encountered it? 

Marc: I feel like I encountered SMOKE twice, in two different but equally impactful ways. The first was when Alexis told me about it. What immediately stood out was how closely it mirrored experiences I’d had myself. Particularly that feeling of repeatedly coming across posts on social media about people in our community who have died suddenly and prematurely from suicide or drugs, and seeing any meaningful conversation about it either shut down or quickly moved past. There’s this pattern where we see something tragic, we feel it briefly, and then we collectively look away. The second encounter was seeing the show at the King’s Head Theatre. What struck me then was how powerfully it captured the difficulty of trying to make sense of people in a world that often doesn’t make sense itself. We’re living in a digital era where the boundaries between what is real and what is constructed are constantly shifting, and that has a profound impact on how we understand each other, and ourselves.  

SMOKE looks unflinchingly at aspects of queer experience in a digital era. What conversations were you hoping to open up through the work?

Alexis: We hope the conversations starts in part two of the audience’s experience. You Are Loved have created a post-performance, forty-five minute community panel, with different guests each night in London, and different themes highlighted. On the road, for our regional dates, there are guests specific to that town or city, for example experts in various fields connected to SMOKE and YAL, community figures, and people with real life experiences the same as explored in SMOKE and that YAL’s vital work touches on. 

Marc: In terms of the conversations the work opens up, whilst this is probably a question primarily for Alexis, it’s also deeply connected to what we’re trying to do at You Are Loved. The reality is that the way we socialise, connect, and seek intimacy has fundamentally changed. For many gay men in particular, connection, sex, and even the search for love now primarily happens through apps. That brings opportunities, but it also brings challenges—around validation, comparison, accessibility of drugs, and the speed at which things escalate. What SMOKE does so effectively is hold a mirror up to that world and ask us to sit with it, rather than scroll past it. And that’s exactly the kind of conversation we need to be having. 

What have you both learned from audiences during the show’s journey so far?

Alexis: SMOKE had a mini run at the new Kings Head Theatre at the end of 2024. We went on to sell out the run. The audiences were amazing. SMOKE is challenging for the audience and asks them to take a risk with me, as the solo performer, too. Most audience members totally understood the story and themes I was trying to communicate. Audiences do want new, interesting, exciting work, that is outside the box. Well, my audience do anyway!  

Marc: What I have learnt from audiences during the YAL events we have done thus far is that there is a real and urgent need for these spaces to be created, and for these sometimes difficult conversations to be had. The fundraising concert we put on in October last year at St Giles Church in Barbican, London was incredibly powerful and frankly, one of the most significant days of my life (so far). I had so many people coming up to me during and after the concert, as well as contacting me afterwards, to tell me about loved ones they personally had lost and how much it meant to them that this space had been created to recognise the loss, and to show them that they are not alone. That concert was such a beautiful and powerful reminder to me that the work we are doing matters, and the power of our community is limitless.    

Looking ahead, what kinds of creative or community-led projects excite you most? 

Marc: What excites me most right now is the sense I have that something is shifting within our community, and within the organisations that support it. There is a growing recognition that the issues we are facing—whether that’s loneliness, poor mental health, or drug misuse—aren’t things that any one organisation can solve in isolation. They require a collective response, and to me it feels like people are genuinely leaning into that idea of collaboration rather than competition, or working in silos. We’re also seeing more willingness to address root causes, not just symptoms. To look at things like loneliness, disconnection, and identity, and ask harder questions about why people are struggling, and not just how we respond once they are. Alongside that, I see a rise in grassroots initiatives. New community groups, peer-led spaces, and social projects are emerging directly in response to the loneliness crisis we’re seeing across the LGBTQ+ community. That’s where real change often starts – at a local, human level. Personally, the most exciting projects are the ones that bring those elements together: creative work, lived experience, community connection, and collaboration across organisations. Because ultimately, that’s how we shift culture. Not just by raising awareness, but by creating spaces where people feel seen, connected, and supported, before they reach a point of crisis.

REVIEW: David Arnold in Conversation


Rating: 4 out of 5.

“A rare opportunity to hear directly from a composer whose work has shaped modern film music.”


David Arnold in Conversation at the Royal College of Music offered an engaging and insightful look into one of Britain’s most celebrated screen composers. Presented as part of the London Soundtrack Festival, it balanced anecdotal storytelling with thoughtful reflections on the craft, making it appeal to dedicated film music enthusiasts and general audiences alike.

Arnold, whose career spans over three decades, spoke candidly about his journey from early projects like The Young Americans to scoring blockbuster movies such as Independence Day and multiple James Bond entries, including Tomorrow Never Dies and Casino Royale. The conversation, hosted by film and soundtrack journalist Sean Wilson, felt informal yet focused which allowed Arnold’s personality to shine through. He is dry, self-deprecating and quietly passionate, which is an appealing blend of traits. He frequently returned to the importance of collaboration, highlighting how relationships with directors and producers shape a score as much as musical inspiration itself. He also illustrated how creating a good score is similar to the telling of a good joke – content is one thing but structure, timing and delivery are everything. 

The setting of the Royal College of Music’s Performance Hall contributed to the intimate tone. Unlike a formal lecture, the event felt conversational which added to Arnold’s relatability and likability. His ability to articulate complex musical ideas in accessible language was a standout strength, reinforcing his reputation not just as a composer but as a witty, engaging raconteur.

If the event had any limitation, it was its brevity; with such a wide-ranging career including work on TV shows like Sherlock and Good Omens, there was an inevitable sense that certain areas were only briefly touched upon. This nonetheless did not diminish the overall experience. All in all, it was an entertaining highlight of the festival which left the audience with a deeper appreciation of the artistry behind the screen.David Arnold in Conversation was part of the London Soundtrack Festival which concluded on Sunday 12th April 2026.