50 Favourite Musicals: 42: KERN GOES TO HOLLYWOOD (1985) (Jerome Kern / various)

The 50 shows that have stood out down the years and, as we get up among the paint cards, the shows that have become the cast recording of my life:

First performed: 1985, Donmar Warehouse

First seen by me: as above

Productions seen: one

Score: Jerome Kern / various 
Book: Dick Vosburgh

Plot:  Four singers explore the songs of Broadway and Hollywood composer Jerome Kern with a particular emphasis on songs that were used in the Golden Age of the Hollywood Musical.

Five memorable numbers: WHY WAS I BORN?, BILL, CAN'T HELP LOVIN' DAT MAN OF MINE, SMOKE GETS IN YOUR EYES, REMIND ME

Before the Donmar became a player, along with the Almeida, in the off-West End, mini-National Theatre stakes, it was the humbler Donmar Warehouse and staged an eclectic mix of plays, musicals and cabaret.  In 1985 David Kernan formed 'Show People' to put on shows that had evening and regular late-night performances so performers in other shows could catch them too.  In that year they staged two revue-style shows which followed the tried and trusted formula of SIDE BY SIDE BY SONDHEIM - cast of four with some occasional biographical detail to space the songs out - and both are on my Top 50 musicals list.  The first is KERN GOES TO HOLLYWOOD which was Kernan's idea to showcase the remarkable songbook of Jerome Kern, emphasizing songs written for or used in films.  Kernan brought together a trio of female singers which gave the production a sheen of pure class: Elaine Delmar, Liz Robertson and, in particular, the glorious 81 year-old Elisabeth Welch who was nominated for an Olivier Award.  The show transferred to Broadway the following year for a short engagement but long enough for Welch to again be nominated, this time for a Tony Award.  On the back of her success in KERN she returned the following year to the Donmar with her own show, luckily for posterity both were recorded.  I was lucky enough to meet her around the time of KERN and when I complemented her on the show she said her only regret was more emphasis was not placed on the lyricists who had been on the top of their game with Kern's music.  KERN GOES TO HOLLYWOOD was a fantastic show and could certainly do with being revived... but where would you find performers of such impeccable musical taste and class nowadays? 

There is no video footage of the show but here is Elisabeth Welch's glorious version of WHY WAS I BORN? - existential pain never sounded so lovely... and just for you Elisabeth, the lyricist was Oscar Hammerstein II.

THE KING AND I at London Palladium - Sher Quality

Constant Reader, as you might have noticed, I am currently running through my Top 50 Musicals but pity the new musicals that land in the middle of this exercise... I cannot include them in the list so they will have to sit in the anti-room, swinging their tap-shoes and twiddling their thumbs, waiting for the next go-round.  Rules is rules...  and remarkably that is where the 67 year-old THE KING AND I finds itself now I have finally seen it on stage.

I had always resisted seeing it onstage as I had a lingering dislike of Rodgers and Hammerstein's canon which was probably as much to do with perception as anything else, I simply had not seen any on stage, only the film versions of their biggest shows: OKLAHOMA, CAROUSEL, SOUTH PACIFIC, THE KING AND I and THE SOUND OF MUSIC.  But after seeing Bartlett Sher's wonderful revival of SOUTH PACIFIC at Lincoln Center, I decided it was time to have another look at them - and here we are again in the safe hands of Sher with his Lincoln Center production now residing at the London Palladium, which has twice before been the home for the show.

What THE KING AND I has always been is a star vehicle: Gertrude Lawrence's agent contacted Rodgers and Hammerstein in 1950 to see it they could adapt a book about Anna Leonowens who had been a tutor to the children of the Siamese King Mongkut between 1861 and 1867.  They were wary, not seeing how they could make the episodic book into a through-story and also had concerns about Lawrence's failing vocal power but after seeing the 1946 film ANNA AND THE KING OF SIAM they saw how their show could be about the clash of cultures - the King wishing to open his country out to the West but reluctant to give up his absolute power - while the traditional musical love story could be relegated to the supporting characters of Tuptim and Lun Tha.

The search was on to find The King but none of the original choices were available - enter an actor who was concentrating on being a television director, Yul Brynner.  What was considered a supporting role suddenly took off with Brynner's magnetic performance and the show was a hit.  But tragically, Lawrence started to falter with the demands of the role and started missing performances regularly; she would recover but then be hit with another illness.  Despite hospital check-ups for the various ailments the doctors failed to diagnose that she had liver cancer.  She, Brynner and the show won Tony Awards in March of 1952 but her health continued to fail and she died in September 1952, one of her last wishes was for Brynner to be given star billing. 

Brynner's success in New York meant he could not appear in the London premiere which starred Herbert Lom opposite Valerie Hobson, and of course Yul Brynner went on to recreate his role in the 1956 film version opposite Deborah Kerr for which he won the Best Actor Academy Award; Brynner would finally play the King in London at the Palladium in a 1979 revival which he had already played on Broadway and a tour for three years.  He continued to play his iconic role on and off until four months before his death in 1985, even after being diagnosed with inoperable lung cancer two years before.  A limited engagement New York Center revival in 1960 gave Barbara Cook a chance to play Anna opposite Farley Grainger; she later said that, although she only played it for a month, it was her favourite role - she said the actress playing Anna is perfectly supported by both score and book.

This thought is certainly borne out by the extraordinary Kelli O'Hara who lights up the production with a luminous performance which fully justifies her Tony Award for it; her Anna is an intelligent, still-grieving widow who, while standing her ground to The King when she feels she is in the right, warms to his intellectual curiosity and belief in his country.  We had missed seeing her in SOUTH PACIFIC so it was a real thrill to experience her soaring, full-bodied soprano voice as she sang the standards "Hello Young Lovers", "Getting To Know You" and "Shall We Dance?"

She is joined by her Broadway co-star Ken Watanabe who was given a bit of a rough ride by the NY critics for his heavy Japanese accent but I thought he gave a winning performance, effortlessly bringing out the King's wily humour and curiosity as well as his imperious demands for respect.  It was a testament to both their performances that by the time of their climactic duet "Shall We Dance?" you can relax and just enjoy their obvious pleasure in performing together.  It's a role that is so identified with Brynner that Watanabe's success in the role is all the better for that.

It was announced that Ruthie Ann Miles would recreate her Tony Award-winning role as Lady Thiang but tragically she has hit by a dangerous driver in March, killing not only her 4 year-old daughter but her unborn child too. Miles is still credited in the programme as is Naoko Mori who was a glorious addition to the production, her version of "Something Wonderful" was one of the stand-outs and she made Lady Thiang a real presence.

I also liked Na-Young Jeon as Tuptim, the 'present' from the King of Burma to the King.  She too had real presence on stage and played the role was a keen pain; I particularly liked her singing of "My Lord and Master", which is one of my favourite songs in a score packed with classics.  One of the few failings of Hammerstein's book is the role of Lun Tha is so under-written: he literally runs on, sings a song with Tuptim, then runs off again - twice!  Dean John-Wilson ran nicely but that's about it.

As with SOUTH PACIFIC, Bartlett Sher's direction seemed to clear away all the accumulated clutter around the musical so the characters lived within the production, bringing fully thought-through lives onto the stage with them.  For such a lavish musical there are only 9 roles within it and Sher seemed to give them all - apart from Lun Tha - a space and a moment to make themselves known.  His production certainly had it's moments of lavishness - and of course the lengthy "Small House of Uncle Thomas" ballet in Act II - but Sher seemed to make the book numbers spring naturally from the action rather than signalling "Ok musical number, I'll hand over to the choreographer".

Sher is reunited with his SOUTH PACIFIC creative team and they all contribute to the show's success: Christopher Gattelli recreates Jerome Robbins' choreography well -  I even liked the potential interest zone-out of "Small House of Uncle Thomas" with it's fine central performance by Ena Yamaguchi!  Michael Yeargan's glorious Siamese court shimmers with gold opulence of the court without overdoing it and also gives us a memorable opening scene of Anna's ship coming into the Bangkok harbour against a turbulent sunset.  Catherine Zuber's costumes are pure joy and Donald Holder's lighting also give the production a glorious sheen.

THE KING AND I is playing until the end of September - do see it, it's Something Wonderful.

 

 

50 Favourite Musicals: 43: FINGS AIN'T WOT THEY USED T'BE (1959) (Lionel Bart)

The 50 shows that have stood out down the years and, as we get up among the paint cards, the shows that have become the cast recording of my life:

First performed: 1959, Theatre Royal, Stratford East 

First seen by me: 2011, Union Theatre, London

Productions seen: two

Score: Lionel Bart
Book: Frank Norman

Plot:  1950s Soho; Fred runs a 'spieler' - a gambling bar/brothel - with his longtime girlfriend Lil, but their relatively peaceful life catering to brasses, pimps, bent coppers and ne'er-do-wells is threatened by the expansionist plans of a neighbouring thug Meatface...

Five memorable numbers: FINGS AIN'T WHAT THEY USED T'BE, WHERE DO LITTLE BIRDS GO?, THE CEILING'S COMING DAHN, POLKA DOTS, G'NIGHT DEARIE

Ex-con Frank Norman had originally sent his play to Joan Littlewood as a possible production for her Theatre Workshop company but Littlewood saw it's potential instead as a London musical and sent it to pop songwriter Lionel Bart - who had just written the lyrics for his first musical LOCK UP YOUR DAUGHTERS - to see what he could come up with.  The musical took off like a rocket, straight from Stratford East into the West End where it ran for 886 performances and won the Evening Standard Theatre Award for Best Musical.  Despite it's mundane - and now rather dated - storyline, Bart's music and vibrantly non-pc lyrics still burst off the stage with his unmistakable signature cocky cockney bravado.  After a muddled and clumsy Union Theatre production - nothing new there - there was a much better revival at Stratford East in 2014.  However which cast nowadays can compare to the sensational original cast recording. recorded live, which features Glynn Edwards, Miriam Karlin, Barbara Windsor, Toni Palmer, James Booth and Yootha Joyce?   That original production, by the way, was choreographed by Jean Newlove who was pregnant with her daughter, Kirsty MacColl...

Here is a trailer for the 2014 Stratford East revival, staged to celebrate Joan Littlewood's centenary..

50 Favourite Musicals: 44: PASSION (1994) (Stephen Sondheim)

The 50 shows that have stood out down the years and, as we get up among the paint cards, the shows that have become the cast recording of my life:

First performed: 1994, Plymouth Theatre, NY
First seen by me: 1996, Queens Theatre, London

Productions seen: three

Score: Stephen Sondheim
Book: James Lapine

Plot:  In the 1860s, a young Captain in the Italian army is transferred to a remote outpost, leaving his mistress in Milan.  While there he becomes the object of obsessive desire for a withdrawn and sickly woman, his Colonel's cousin.  Her passion repels him but love is a strange thing...

Five memorable numbers: LOVING YOU, I WISH I COULD FORGET YOU, HAPPINESS, I READ, FINALE

Sondheim's deeply intense musical - based on a novel by Iginio Ugo Tarchetti and the Italian film adaptation by Ettore Scola - can leave you feeling claustrophobic at times; it is relentless in it's exploration of the mysterious power of love with hardly any humour to leaven it.  A remarkable chamber musical, it slowly ebbs into your mind as you watch Giorgio - a man who has always been in control of his love life - become enmeshed and undone by Fosca's unrelenting passion.  I had been swept away by the Broadway cast recording but was left somewhat cold by the London premiere where a torturous Maria Friedman and somnambulist Michael Ball rattled around the large Queens Theatre stage but subsequent smaller-scale productions have hit the show's emotional core, culminating in Jamie Lloyd's excellent Donmar production in 2010 which pared the basilisk-stare of Elena Roger's Fosca against the emotional fragility of David Thaxton's Giorgio.

Here the original Fosca, Donna Murphy, casts a spell with LOVING YOU, the score's emotional peak..

50 Favourite Musicals: 45: FIVE GUYS NAMED MOE (1990) (Louis Jordan / various)

The 50 shows that have stood out down the years and, as we get up among the paint cards, the shows that have become the cast recording of my life:

First performed: 1990, Theatre Royal Stratford East
First seen by me: as above

Productions seen: three

Score: various

Book: Clarke Peters

Plot: Nomax, down on his luck and left by his woman, is is visited by the five guys named Moe who appear out of his radio and bring him back to happiness through the songs of jazz legend Louis Jordan.

Five memorable numbers: FIVE GUYS NAMED MOE, DON'T LET THE SUN CATCH YOU CRYING, I LIKE 'EM FAT LIKE THAT, SATURDAY NIGHT FISH FRY, CHOO CHOO CH'BOOGIE

Short on plot but big on joy, Clarke Peters' tribute show celebrates the back catalogue of Louis Jordan whose recordings span the 1930s big band jazz sound through the jump 'n' jive swing years to the early stirrings of rhythm and blues that led to rock & roll.  Starting at Stratford East - where I was lucky to see it - the show conga'd into the West End where it ran for over four years; on Broadway it ran for over a year.  In 2010 the show appeared again at Stratford East where I saw it again and had the great joy of meeting Clarke Peters.  MOE memories include sitting in the prompt-side box at Stratford East in 1990 with Ann Molloy and Suzanne Golden who memorably held the show up because she didn't have a lyric sheet in her programme - Peters had to go into the audience to find a spare one - and when I saw the West End transfer at the Lyric with friend Guy, on his last night in the UK before leaving to work in Brazil, we were seated next to Ben and Tracey from Everything But The Girl!

Here is Clarke Peters with a revival cast in 1998 appearing in the Cameron Mackintosh tribute show HEY MR PRODUCER! singing a medley of the title song, HURRY HOME, IS YOU IS OR IS YOU AIN'T MY BABY and DON'T LET THE SUN CATCH YOU CRYING...

50 Favourite Musicals: 46: COMPANY (1970) (Stephen Sondheim)

The 50 shows that have stood out down the years and, as we get up among the paint cards, the shows that have become the cast recording of my life:

First performed: 1970, Alvin Theater, NY
First seen by me: 1996, Albery Theatre, London

Productions seen: two

Score: Stephen Sondheim
Book: George Furth

Plot:  Robert is single and living in New York; on his 35th birthday his best friends - five couples - throw him a surprise party which finally makes him confront his lack of commitment in relationships.

Five memorable numbers: BEING ALIVE, THE LADIES WHO LUNCH, BARCELONA, GETTING MARRIED TODAY, SIDE BY SIDE BY SIDE

As you all reel from the fact that a Sondheim musical is only at #46, I have to say that, although it's not my favourite of his shows, I think I enjoyed it more than the 'Variety' critic who reported after seeing it's 1970 Boston try-out "As it stands now it's for ladies' matinees, homos and misogynists."  Charmed.  I had to wait quite a while to see it and finally caught up with Sam Mendes' Donmar revival when it transferred to the Albery in 1996 with the extraordinary cast of Adrian Lester as Robert, the late Sheila Gish as Joanne, the unstoppable Sophie Thompson as Amy and such solid musical performers as Teddy Kempner, Paul Bentley, Clare Burt, Clive Rowe and Michael Simkins - a company as good as that can distract you from thoughts that the characters are all fairly annoying.  My main COMPANY memory is seeing Patti LuPone at the Leicester Square Theatre who ended her show with Joanne's coruscating solo THE LADIES WHO LUNCH and, at the song's climax, tossed her martini (aka water) into the audience - and over me.  Cow. Let's see if she can do it again in October when we see her play the role in Marianne Elliott's upsy-gender revival at the Gielgud....

Here is a remarkable performance of THE LADIES WHO LUNCH by it's originator Elaine Stritch - the performance is worthy of Beckett it's so unflinching..

.

50 Favourite Musicals: 47: BLUES IN THE NIGHT (1980) (various)

The 50 shows that have stood out down the years and, as we get up among the paint cards, the shows that have become the cast recording of my life:

First performed: 1980, Playhouse 46 NY
First seen by me: 1988, Piccadilly Theatre, London

Productions seen: two

Score: various

Book: Sheldon Epps

Plot: Three women sit in a run-down hotel waiting for the same no-good man to appear, and sing their lives through the classic blues and torch songs of the Golden Age of American jazz.

Five memorable numbers: BLUES IN THE NIGHT, ROUGH AND READY MAN, FOUR WALLS (AND ONE DIRTY WINDOW) BLUES, TAKE ME FOR A BUGGY RIDE, WASTED LIFE BLUES

Following on from similar jazz and blues revue-style shows like BUBBLING BROWN SUGAR and ONE MO' TIME, BLUES IN THE NIGHT changed the format from a night-club setting to a run-down hotel so the songs play more as a musical than an out-front recreation of a cabaret show.  Three women: an ingenue, a sophisticate and an older touring blues singer all interact with a man who seems to connect them through classic songs written by Bessie Smith, Alberta Hunter, Benny Goodman, Duke Ellington, Ida Cox and Harold Arlen among others.  It's a simple format that works because of the exhilarating song choices and having a tightly-focused quartet and I still remember the pure pleasure when I saw it 30 years ago.  An atmospheric live cast recording immortalizing the excellent original London quartet of Clarke Peters, Carol Woods, Maria Friedman and Debby Bishop has kept the show alive for me and I look forward to seeing a new production next year with Sharon D. Clarke and Clive Rowe in Kilburn,

Here is a compilation of scenes from a 1989 tv version of BLUES IN THE NIGHT with Peters, Woods, Bishop and Friedman.  The video quality is a bit shonky but it does give a flavour of the show's fun...

50 Favourite Musicals: 48: HAIR (1967) (Galt MacDermot, Gerome Ragni, James Rado)

The 50 shows that have stood out down the years and, as we get up among the paint cards, the shows that have become the cast recording of my life:

First performed: 1967, Public Theater NY
First seen by me: 1993, Old Vic, London

Productions seen: three

Score: Galt MacDermot / Gerome Ragni & James Rado

Book: Ragni & Rado

 Plot: A 'tribe' of hippies in New York assert their love of life and peace in late 1960s America but the Vietnam war looms ever closer...

Five memorable numbers: AQUARIUS, I GOT LIFE, HAIR, FRANK MILLS, THE FLESH FAILURES (LET THE SUNSHINE IN)

Odd for HAIR to be so low in my chart, particularly as Diane Paulus' 2010 revival was so wondrous but, for all the variety of the score, the book is showing it's age - and in particular, the lengthy and disjointed Vietnam drug trip in the second act stops the show dead, just when you want more of the members of the tribe that you have grown to like in the first act.  I got to know the score through the 1968 London cast album, but was totally bewildered by the disjointed Old Vic production by Michael Bogdanov in 1993; my only lasting memory of it was sitting in the back row of bleacher seats on the Old Vic stage with fellow First Call workers - as I watched Sinitta spiral down to the stage holding onto a strap with one hand while singing AQUARIUS, I had not noticed 1) that Paul J Medford had popped up behind us to sing the second verse and 2) that one of my colleagues had started a nose bleed - when the spotlight snapped onto Medford it also revealed Nigel covered in blood!!  That was the most dramatic thing in the whole show.  All was put right by the fantastic revival by Diane Paulus which we first saw on Broadway then visited 5 times when it transferred to the Gielgud Theatre but sadly it just didn't connect with a wider audience and closed early.  However I will long treasure the definitive performances of Claude, Sheila, Jeanie, Berger and Crissy by the wonderful Gavin Creel, Caissie Levy, Kacie Sheik, Will Swenson, and Allison Case who made me blub every time with her heartrending performance of FRANK MILLS.

Here that remarkable ensemble led by Gavin Creel and Will Swenson take over the Tony Awards with the title song - it won the Award that year for Best Revival...

HAMLET at the Globe - "To hold the mirror up to nature..."

Last week I found myself back in the dangerous corridors of Elsinore, this time via the bare stage of The Globe Theatre.  Yes folks, another week, another Globe visit...

So here I am again, seeing an actor taking on the challenge of Hamlet for the eleventh time - and who was following in the steps of Kenneth Branagh, Jeremy Northam, Ian Charleson,  Simon Russell Beale, Dan McSherry (indeed, who?), Jude Law, Rory Kinnear, Michael Sheen, Benedict Cumberbatch and Andrew Scott?  Michelle Terry, my first female Hamlet - apart from seeing Frances de la Tour doing a scene at a charity event - and a major challenge for The Globe's new Artistic Director.

HAMLET is presented by the same 12 actors who also appeared in AS YOU LIKE IT and I think the comedy succeeded more than the tragedy.  The same two directors are credited but there is no sense of direction during the play: people come, people go, with no sense of escalating tension for either Hamlet or Claudius.  Hamlet goes to England, he comes back from England...  people drop like nine pins in the final scene but with no real sense of mortality or that this is the climax of the actual play.

The directors' blocking and positioning of the actors on the stage, as with AS YOU LIKE IT, suggested it was possibly all worked out in the rehearsal room and just dropped onto the stage as is; there was a lot of traffic on the stage but none of it seemed to make any sense or helped with the dodgy acoustics in the round auditorium.  It was all a bit infuriating.

As I said, this Elsinore had gone minimalist and appeared to have no furniture to speak of at all.. and don't start me on the costumes or lack of them.  I was not totally surprised to read in the programme that they have brought their own stuff in to act in.  That might explain the light blue floaty dressing gown that Gertrude - the Queen of Denmark remember - wears in the closet scene:  they were obviously having a sale on at Primark.

There actually was one concept that worked: the scene with the players and Hamlet's staging of "The Mousetrap" - that never fails to get a laugh - is usually a problematic one because you have to see the play twice: once in mime, then the players act it out.  It can really try one's patience when you just want to get on with the plot, and also it's a bugger to focus on because you are too busy concentrating on watching Hamlet watch Claudius watch the play to see his reaction to the player king being murdered.  Here the players did the dumb show to set up what they were going to act but then vanished into the audience and the play was not shown, just the reactions front and centre of Claudius, Gertrude and Hamlet; loud and ominous percussion was played behind our first-level back-row to suggest the play.- which was effective but a bit-heart-attack inducing.

The casting, as with AS YOU LIKE IT, was ethnic and gender blind and created as many problems as with the comedy.  Surely an idea behind gender-mix-up casting is to possibly give a new slant on the role in question but here that was not in evidence apart from possibly within Terry's performance.  There were some seriously under-powered performances: James Garnon as Claudius made no impression at all as Claudius - he seemed to just point his elaborate hair-style at people (think Cameron Diaz in THERE'S SOMETHING ABOUT MARY) while Catrin Aaron was colourless as Horatio and Helen Schlesinger played Gertrude as if she had come into a room and forgotten what she was looking for.

The main problem was with the tipsy-tarty casting of Bettrys Jones and Shubham Saraf as Laertes and Ophelia respectively - if they had switched roles it might have proved more interesting and allowed them to give better performances, but no: Saraf brought no insights to Ophelia - just a man in a dress - and James was as lightweight and as vaguely irritating as she was in AS YOU LIKE IT in yet another male role.  I have enjoyed her performances in previous productions but in these two plays she has proved that she is a lousy man.  Shubham Saraf did redeem himself briefly as a very characterful Osric.

The fine Jack Laskey was reduced to playing Fortenbras and the player who recites the Priam speech - but even he was defeated with being placed over at one side of the stage in that scene and his speech went for nothing.  But credit where credit is due: Colin Hurley was a dull Ghost but seized his laughs as the Gravedigger, Richard Katz was a suitably irritating Polonius - while missing any suggestion of threat in his relationship with Ophelia - while the indispensable Pearce Quigley and Nadia Nadarajah made a good Rosencrantz and Guildenstern.

Above all else, it was Michelle Terry's show; she played with a solid authority and spoke the lines with great intelligence - oh, and that speech?  She played it kneeling at the front of the stage, holding an audience member's hand and asking him "To be or not to be?" which was a very nice touch, it somehow personalized it, as if Hamlet was asking his opinion.  Sadly she was given no help with the absurdly ugly costumes she had to wear and ultimately, a lot of the production was not up to her level.

I will have to ponder where Michelle Terry sits in my pantheon of Hamlets, but I know that her interpretation did not move me as others have; it is possible for this to happen even within a shonky production - Andrew Scott is a good example - but here I suspect Terry was unwilling to out-shine the ensemble - she didn't even get a solo bow!  This strikes me as a rather false humility, after all, as the Globe's artistic director she nabbed the role for herself.  Despite all the failings of the production, I have to admit that I was pleased to have seen it and I still have high hopes for Michelle Terry's tenure.

50 Favourite Musicals: 49: OH, WHAT A LOVELY WAR! (1963) (various)

The 50 shows that have stood out down the years and, as we get up among the paint cards, the shows that have become the cast recording of my life:

First performed: 1963, Theatre Workshop, Stratford East
First seen by me: 1998, Roundhouse, London

Productions seen: three

Score: various

Book: Joan Littlewood / Theatre Workshop / Charles Chilton / Gerry Raffles / Ted Allen

Plot: The savagery and foolishness of the Western Front in World War I is performed by a troupe of Pierrots.

Five memorable numbers: I'LL MAKE A MAN OF YOU; GOOD-BYE-EE; OH, WHAT A LOVELY WAR; THEY WERE ONLY PLAYING LEAPFROG; AND WHEN THEY ASK US

Although Richard Attenborough's heavy-handed film version - loathed by Joan Littlewood - is probably more well known, the original still retains it's ability to freeze the smile on your face at it's depictions of the carnage on the Western Front during WWI.  Littlewood's partner Gerry Raffles had heard Charles Chilton's radio programme on the songs sung in the trenches and commissioned a script which Littlewood ditched.  She wanted her Theatre Workshop actors - including Murray Melvin, Brian Murphy, Larry Dann. Ann Beach and Victor Spinetti - to each research an aspect of the war and the short agit-prop linking sketches sprung from that; she also wanted the show to be from the ordinary soldier's point of view and NO uniforms.   Some of the sketches now seem heavy-handed - one on industrialists comparing the fortunes made through munitions lasts forever - but the three productions I have seen all had fine moments, my first at the Roundhouse was the most consistent; the irony being it was a mobile production by the National Theatre - another thing that Littlewood loathed!  There was also a Northern Stage tour which interpolated other songs - Owen liked it when a song not heard for ages, "Cushy Butterfield", popped up - and a revival at Stratford East.  The heartbreaking juxtaposition of the songs - optimism turning to weariness in the face of resignation and death - against the moving scenes of the 1914 Christmas truce between the British and Germans, and the French army literally baa-ing their way, like lambs to slaughter, into machine gun fire, keep their theatrical power.

Here is a trailer for the 2015 tour that followed the Stratford East revival the year before:

AN IDEAL HUSBAND at the Vaudeville - Wilde casting

Dominic Dromgoole's theatre company Classic Spring is coming into the home stretch now in it's year-long season of plays by Oscar Wilde; unsurprisingly THE IMPORTANCE OF BEING EARNEST will close the season but before that we have the first of the two plays Wilde presented in the fateful year of 1895, AN IDEAL HUSBAND.

It has been thrilling to see the plays presented together and to fully appreciate the fizzing wit and barnstorming melodrama in A WOMAN OF NO IMPORTANCE and LADY WINDERMERE'S FAN.  However AN IDEAL HUSBAND, although it has these elements, seems to have Wilde trying a more through-drama with less chattering characters swamping the storyline.

Sir Robert Chiltern is a high-flying member of the Government, married to a woman who holds the view - Wilde's young wives always initially hold dogmatic views on things - that if you have done wrong you should be punished.  What Gertrude Chiltern doesn't know is that her husband's whole standing in society is based on a shady secret - he gave a Baron news that the Government were going to back the building of the Suez Canal a few days before it was announced, giving the Baron time to invest in the deal and make himself a fortune.  The Baron's financial recompense to Chiltern bankrolled his start in political life.  Oh and by the by, how remarkable that Oscar should hit on the Suez Canal as a possible source of Government embarrassment.

At a soiree given by the Chilterns, their friend Lady Markby arrives with the glamorous but mysterious Mrs Cheeverly, who reveals to Chiltern that she was the late Baron's former lover and has in her possession Chiltern's incriminating Suez letter.  Her price for silence is that Chiltern puts pressure on the Government to push through a similar canal deal in Argentina which Cheeverly and her friends have invested in but which Chiltern knows is doomed to failure.  Mrs Cheeverly was a contemporary of Gertrude's at school and they always despised each other, which is another reason for her to wreak havoc on the couple.

Chiltern capitulates but when Mrs Cheeverly, in a row with Gertrude, reveals the secret to her, Gertrude is appalled that her "Ideal Husband" has broken the law.  Gertrude demands that he admits his wrongdoing even though it will ruin them.  In desperation, Robert confides to his best friend, the pleasure-loving Lord Goring, his quandary but Goring insists he keeps quiet and allow him to see to Mrs Cheeverly, whom he was once engaged to!  While all this is going on, Lord Goring is appalled that his father is putting pressure on him to finally marry - could Chiltern's sparky younger sister Mabel be about to get her "Ideal Husband"?

As Oscar himself said "The good ended happily, and the bad unhappily.  That is what fiction means" but not before he has taken us through twists and turns over the allotted 24 hours of the play's timeline.  It is a play I like very much - the two sides of the narrative intersect every so often and there are of course the killer lines dropped like jewels on velvet in the text, oddly enough mostly by the gossiping Lady Markby in the second act when she comes to tea with Mrs Cheeverly - it's like Oscar thought "you want the gags - here they are".  So we get scintillating lines like "She ultimately was so broken-hearted that she went into a convent, or on to the operatic stage, I forget which. No; I think it was decorative art-needlework she took up. I know she had lost all sense of pleasure in life" - lines that pop and fizz in the mind and that so betray the debt that Joe Orton had to Wilde.

The film version in 1999 was excellent with the perfect Lord Goring in Rupert Everett, but oddly enough the last time I saw it on stage was again at the Vaudeville Theatre in 2011 in a production that at the time I felt had "no unity of style, time and again a character would come on stage and suddenly you are forced to adapt to a new acting style so you are never sure on which level the play truly sits"  Here there certainly was that unity of style thanks to Jonathan Church's well-paced direction but the production felt topsy-turvy with it's casting.  I posited the idea that the actors had all called their agents and said "Why haven't I been asked to do the Classic Spring season - get me in one quick" and they have all landed up in AN IDEAL HUSBAND.

The quasar of oddity was Freddie Fox's casting as Lord Goring; in itself it wasn't a bad performance - particularly in the second act - but his youth threw the rest of the characters awry.  There was no way Nathaniel Parker's middle-aged Sir Robert would ever have had the late-twenties Lord Goring as his confidante and possible saviour from disgrace, while the idea that Fox's Lord Goring could have been engaged to Mrs Cheeverly years before simply stretched believe to breaking point, particularly as this is a major turning point in the plot's resolution.  Similarly, Frances Barber's gurgling, predatory Mrs Cheeverly must have been held back MANY terms at school if she was a contemporary of Sally Bretton's priggish Gertrude Chiltern.

It was a casting coup to get real-life father and son Edward Fox and Freddie Fox to play the fictional father and son of Lord Caversham and Lord Goring and they certainly had an easy playing style together on stage - Edward Fox is now sounding like a member of a lost Hapsburg royal house as his vowels are so clipped, he really was never the same after playing Edward VIII was he?  He also seemed odd casting initially as he broke the rhythm of the scenes he popped in and out of, but as with Freddie, came into his own in the second act when Caversham has more substantial scenes - and one absolutely killer exit line, played to perfection.

Other pleasures dotted among the odd cast were Susan Hampshire who was sweetly cutting as Lady Markby (despite the odd stumble), Tim Wallers as Goring's butler Phipps - only on for one scene but stealing everything in the scene apart from the doorknobs - and Faith Omole, in her West End debut,  as a spirited and cheeky Mabel Chiltern. The best performance, unsurprisingly, was the unstoppable Frances Barber as Mrs Cheeverly; in this oddly-cast production, she was the perfect fit - even if some of her costumes were not.  I am sure they were designed to be over-the-top but at times they got in the way of her performance.

Cut from the same cloth as Mrs Erlynne in LADY WINDERMERE'S FAN - mysterious woman living on her uppers in Europe returns to London to intrigue society - here, Mrs Cheeverly has no real redeeming features - which is why I love her!  However I would say that underneath it all, she is a Modern Woman, living on her own and by her own design, using the traits that if she were a man would possibly take her far.  In the tying-up-all-the-loose-ends of the last act it is a damn shame that she vanishes from it, I yearned to see her one more time - she is facing an uncertain future with her investments lost but you know she will land on her feet - or her back - but always on her own terms.

Of course it is impossible to watch any of the plays without overlaying it with Oscar's fate: despite the wide-range of characters his authorial voice is so strong you cannot help but see and hear him behind each of them.  The play premiered in January 1895 and was still running three months later when Oscar brought Lord Queensberry to court on the ill-fated charge of Criminal Libel; the collapse of that trial led to his arrest for Gross Indecency and all that followed...

While hearing the lines about your past indiscretions catching up with you, it's the following speech by Mrs Cheeverly that rips through the intervening years with a startling prescience:

"Sir Robert, you know what your English newspapers are like. ... Think of their loathsome joy, of the delight they would have in dragging you down, of the mud and mire they would plunge you in. Think of the hypocrite with his greasy smile penning his leading article, and arranging the foulness of the public placard"

Oh Oscar.

 

SWAN LAKE at Covent Garden - Scarlett's swans take off...

This December I will see my fifth production of Matthew Bourne's SWAN LAKE at Sadler's Wells and I am sure I will blub again at the last scene, it gets me every time.  But three years ago, after we had our Paulean conversion to the Royal Ballet, we decided it was time to see a 'classic' production of Tchaikovsky's masterpiece.

In 2016 we saw the visiting Bolshoi production, and what a disappointment that was!  Technically proficient yes, but danced with no sense of emotion or connection to the audience - it felt like they turned up for work and did their job, no more no less.  So the news that the Royal Ballet were going to stage a new production by Liam Scarlett set us off... finally a chance to see it done properly.

The night we went marked the 1,026th performance of SWAN LAKE at Covent Garden and Scarlett's version has replaced Anthony Dowell's production which had lasted in the repertoire for thirty years!  As I have frequently mentioned, it is jaw-dropping how long productions run in the ballet and opera houses of London - can you imagine the idea of the National Theatre only ever staging revivals of productions from the 1980s and 1990s?

But SWAN LAKE goes even further back, because - as is the case with practically all productions - it is based on the version staged by Marius Petipa and Lev Ivanov for the Imperial Ballet in 1895.  The main body of the ballet is theirs: Petipa's choreography is used for the palace scenes, the famous lake side scene is Ivanov's while Scarlett has devised a new final scene as well as the featured dances for the visiting princesses - apart from the Neapolitan princesses dance which is by Sir Frederick Ashton!  With all these choreographic strands to be woven together, Scarlett has said that his biggest challenge is to make it flow together as if from a single vision - and he succeeded; it was a thrilling production.

With the romantic design by John Macfarlane and moody lighting by David Finn, Scarlett's production swept you up in the swirling drama of Tchaikovsky's monumental score and the oft-told tale of Prince Siegfried who, when ordered to marry by his imperious mother The Queen, falls in love with the beautiful Odette who is under the spell of the wicked magician Von Rothbart who has disguised himself as The Queen's chief courtier.

Odette is transformed from a swan into a woman only at night but Siegfried is tricked at a sumptuous palace ball by the sorcerer into proposing to the mysterious Odile who resembles Odette.  As soon as he does, Odette is doomed to remain a swan forever but can Siegfried save Odette in time?  Of course it ends unhappily but this only makes Tchaikovsky's score all the more powerful and all-encompassing.

The biggest ovation of the evening was for the orchestra, under the baton of Valery Ovsyanikov, which filled the auditorium with the full grandeur of Tchaikovsky's score

Originally we had booked on this particular night to see Steven McRae dance the role of Siegfried but a recent leg injury put paid to that so instead we saw William Bracewell who performed the role well enough but it did not stop me thinking how much more thrilling McRae would have danced the love-lorn prince.  Akane Takada danced the dual role of Odette / Odile, but while her Odette was a graceful, captivating presence I felt she missed out on the seductive danger of Odile.  I will long remember though her slowly rippling arms showing the exact moment that Odette transforms back into the Swan.

Thomas Whitehead added yet another villain to his collection as the hissable Von Rothbart, Kristen McNally was an imposing presence as The Queen while Marcelino Sambé hit all the right notes as Benno, Siegfried's friend, in particular with his dazzling leaps.  SWAN LAKE of course allows the ballerinas of the company to shine and they were glorious as the elegant, ever-watchful swans.

A special mention to the tripping cygnets danced by Isabella Gasparini, Elizabeth Harrod, Meaghan Grace Hinkis and Romany Pajdak, while Itziar Mendizabal was on eye-catching form as the Spanish princess and a special mention to the whirling excitement of Olivia Cowley as the Spanish dancer attended by Reece Clarke, Téo Dubreuil, Fernando Montano and Giacomo Rovero.

I suspect this production will be visited again in years to come; I now look forward to seeing the Matthew Bourne version with new eyes in December at Sadler's Wells.

50 Favourite Musicals: 50: ON YOUR TOES (1936) (Richard Rodgers, Lorenz Hart)

I have been asked many times what my favourite musical is and I do always struggle: having seen so many it's always hard to be so definitive... but let's give it a go, eh?  Anyone compiling a "best of.." list immediately hits a wall, should one be objective or subjective, heart or head?  I have had to be fairly ruthless in dropping shows to a manageable 50 but, of course, some personal feelings for shows will have coloured my objectivity with the remaining titles.

So let's launch into the 50 shows that have stood out down the years and, as we get up among the paint cards, the shows that have become the cast recording of my life:

  

First performed: 1936, Imperial Theatre, NY

First seen by me: 1984, Palace Theatre, London

Productions seen: one

Score: Richard Rodgers / Lorenz Hart

Book: Rodgers / Hart / George Abbott

Plot: Phil Dolan, a former vaudeville performer is now a music teacher and is so impressed with a jazz ballet written by one of his students that he manages to get it performed by a visiting Russian ballet company.  However romantic complications ensue when he is targeted by the imperious Russian prima ballerina Vera Baronova, whose ballet partner/lover is driven to murderous revenge.

Five memorable numbers: IT'S GOT TO BE LOVE; THERE'S A SMALL HOTEL; GLAD TO BE UNHAPPY; ON YOUR TOES; SLAUGHTER ON TENTH AVENUE (ballet)

A shining example of the best of 1930s musicals with likeable characters, a smooth-running book which links the musical numbers like carriages on a brightly-coloured train and a memorable, tune-packed score.  34 years after seeing this, I still remember the thrill of seeing prima ballerina assoluta Natalia Makarova turn her pure star wattage to musical comedy and in particular, her breathtaking, sinuous sexuality dancing Balanchine's SLAUGHTER ON TENTH AVENUE.  It's about time for a revival... 

 

Click on Al Hirschfeld's great illustration below to watch highlights from a 2013 Broadway Encores! semi-staged concert version...

MY NAME IS LUCY BARTON at The Bridge Theatre: from the page to the stage...

...something can get lost along the way.

When it was announced that US stage and screen actress Laura Linney was to make her UK stage debut directed by Richard Eyre I jumped at the chance to go; since she first came to my attention in the late 1990s, Laura Linney has been an actress that I have admired for her crisp and cool performances in both comedy and drama on both big and small screens.  She did not disappoint, she was remarkable on stage... the play however...

It was all the more annoying as Eyre's production is beautifully nuanced and paced throughout it's 90 minute running time, helped by Peter Mumford's subtle lighting and Bob Crowley's elegant set design.  Sadly the play - an adaptation by Rona Munro of a novel by Elizabeth Strout - felt too thin for the energy expended on it by the creative team.

Laura Linney played the titular character Lucy Barton, a successful novelist living in her beloved New York with her husband  and two children, everything the way it should be.  But Lucy is admitted to an up-market hospital with an illness that proves hard to diagnose so her expected short stay drags on for weeks and she feels herself coming adrift from her life despite the trust she puts in her elderly Jewish doctor.  Worried how Lucy is alone most of the time, her husband calls Lucy's estranged mother from the Midwest to come and keep her company in the hospital.

This situation is fraught with problems, especially as mother and daughter have had a distant relationship for some years with little points of contact.  As her mother bombards her with long-forgotten inhabitants of the same town where Lucy grew up, the daughter muses on their relationship and the more painful memories of living with a father who returned from WWII psychologically damaged.

What her childhood did give Lucy was a yearning to read and write and instilled in her the desire to get away from her limited options for success in her small town and escape to NY to become a writer.  A wary relationship develops between mother and daughter again but as soon as Lucy appears to be on the mend, her mother disappears as abruptly as she arrived; it is only later on when Lucy has to re-evaluate her life that she can join the dots between her parents and her own children.

I am sure that people who know the book might get something more out of seeing it dramatized but I found myself enervated by the story which for all it's psychological digging and attempt to write about the current landscape of American lives, I just found to be just a modern take on the big-dreams-in-a-small-city tale which in the past would have served as the engine to many a Joan Crawford or Barbara Stanwyck star vehicle, or a mundane tv-movie of the week. 

Added to that, the rather tentative psychological insights of the play - which takes in such touchstones as the Holocaust, the AIDS crisis in the 1980s and 1990s, and September 11th - reminded me of what Virginia Woolf said of the writing of a contemporary female writer "It aims to soar but agrees to perch". Although to be honest, it was in this last part of the play, when Lucy tells us of all that happened after leaving the hospital, that Laura Linney really came into her own and held us all in the palm of her hand.

Her cool, reserved quality was a good way in to the play and Crowley's spare set of a hospital bed, a night-stand and a chair, meant that all attention was focused on her exquisite performance which included a subtle shift in accent when playing the mother which gave that character a distinctive personality.  Linney's humane Lucy Barton held the audience rapt until the final well-deserved ovation.

I am so pleased to have seen this remarkable actress finally on stage in such a nicely calibrated production... it's just a shame I found the play to not be worthy of their talents.  I have now been to The Bridge three times and each time have left vaguely unsatisfied.  Maybe it's the space itself?

AS YOU LIKE IT and THE TWO NOBLE KINSMEN at the Globe - Back to the Bard...

Now is the winter of our discontent, made glorious summer, by this daughter of Terry... well, for now anyway.  Like a Duke in a Shakespeare play I have been in exile from The Globe in Southwark since 2016, after being subjected to the childish Theatre-In-Education-style productions under that victim-card-playing creature Emma Rice, the personification of all that is ghastly with dumbed-down British Director Theatre where all is surface and hollow.  Her leaving was trumpeted as sexism on the part of the Globe Board, when in fact other issues were more pressing... like, where did all the volunteer staff go?

But now we have the fine actress Michelle Terry as the Globe's new Artistic Director and the first two performances have been great fun... yes, they have the now mandatory non-traditional casting but they were both played with such brio that it could be forgiven, unlike Rice's infantile look-at-me look-at-me revisionism.

For me AS YOU LIKE IT is an ironical title as I have never seen a production that I have liked!  Some have been good in parts but none have seized my imagination and proved truly memorable unlike other Shakespeare plays.  Terry has started her season with AS YOU LIKE IT and HAMLET performed by a rep company of 12 and I must say the cast was an area that was problematical for me.

Jack Laskey was a very good Rosalind, playing up the ambiguities when she disguises herself as Ganymede, but her two main onstage partners were a bit of a worry.  They will no doubt say that the gender balance was maintained by Bettrys Jones playing Orlando - but what's the point when she made absolutely no impact in the role?  Something that is unanswered in gender-blind casting is: which would an actress rather play - Rosalind or Orlando?  Why take roles from actresses only to reassign them to male roles that they cannot bring to life? 

Laskey's other stage partner proved more problematical - deaf actress Nadia Nadarajah is playing Celia, and while dramatically it worked to illustrate Celia's own marginalization within her father's court, when one's understanding of any particular scene is compromised by the fact that Celia's lines are rendered silently, what is the point?  I had honestly never realized how many lines Celia had until they were silently spoken.  I am all for Nadarajah being given her chance to work but "The play's the thing" and surely any casting choice that deliberately hinders the understanding of that play should be questioned.  I must admit I have wondered now we are in the tipsy-tarty world of gender and ethnic blind casting, which brave theatre director will choose a white actor for OTHELLO?  Not this tide.

Meanwhile back in the forest of Arden... there were excellent performances from Colin Hurley as a loud and leering Touchstone and, in the performance of the evening, Pearce Quigley brought his louche and whacked-out charm to Jaques, for once his mournful and cynical interjections ringing totally true; there was even a really nice touch when he concluded "The seven ages of man" speech by suddenly bursting into tears.

There are other charming performances lurking in the invisible forest too: Tanika Yearwood made a real impression with some quality singing as Amiens and took to the skies as Hymen,  Helen Schlesinger did some neat slight-of-hand swapping from the kindly exiled Duke to the usurping Duke by simply turning her frock-coat inside out, Shubham Saraf was a memorable Oliver - not often said - and James Garnon, not an actor I usually like - had great fun as a stroppy and sluttish Audrey.  It goes without saying that I liked Michelle Terry's supporting turn as Adam, Orlando's old courtier - as soon as she spoke her lines you knew she was a real Shakespearean.

There are two directors credited for the production but I was vaguely annoyed at how the blocking of the scenes seem to have been worked out in the rehearsal room rather than the stage so The Globe's dodgy acoustics were not addressed and more often than not lines were not heard by them not being addressed to the whole audience: when you are battling noisy crowds outside, incongruous emergency sirens and aircraft noise above you need all the help you can get by simply taking in all the sides of the stage.

But despite my issues with it, I enjoyed it a lot!  The sheer joy of playing to that audience on that stage came through loud and clear and I felt some of the delight that I got from seeing productions at the Globe before the Bitter Rice years.

Four days later we were back to our new-found favourite seating - the back row of the first tier as it has an all-important back to the purgatorial benches - to see my first-ever production of THE TWO NOBLE KINSMEN, written circa 1613-14 which has the claim of being possibly the last play Shakespeare ever worked on, here in collaboration with John Fletcher, one of three dual plays, the others being HENRY VIII and the now-lost CARDENIO.

It has the distinct cut-and-shunt quality of a play that has been passed back and forth between two writers, each taking their favourite plotline in new directions before the tone shifts again and we are back on another plotline.  Singularly lacking in poetic flight, it gives you an idea of the plays which would have been quickly worked on and put on to feed the need for new plays in the new theatres of Jacobean London.

The rulers of Athens, Theseus and Hippolyta, declare war on the ruler of Thebes and vanquish the tyrant.  Theseus captures two of Thebes' finest fighters, the close friends Arcite and Palamon, and although he admires their courage and skills, he has to imprison them.  The two friends are happy they are together and do not fear imprisonment as long as they are together.  However this sworn devotion is broken when they both fall in love at first sight with the beautiful Athenian princes Emilia.

Arcite is released but is banished from Athens, he returns in disguise and after winning a wrestling match, becomes Emilia's bodyguard.  The jailer's daughter has fallen in love with Palamon and she releases him from his cell; he escapes into the Athenian woods with the lovesick daughter in pursuit but he ignores her which drives her mad.  Her madness however does not stop her joining in an exuberant Morris dance for Theseus and Hippolyta.

Palamon and Arcite meet again and despite the latter providing his friend with food and arms, they fight again. They are interrupted when the court discover them and Theseus demands them both executed.  However after Hippolyta and Emilia plea for mercy, he ordains that the friends fight in a public tournament with the winner marrying Emelia, the loser to be put to death.  Who will win the challenge, and who will ultimately win Emelia?

It has odd echoes of A MIDSUMMER NIGHT'S DREAM with lovers pursuing the unloving into the Athenian woods, a group of Athenian citizens rehearsing in the forest and the characters of Theseus and Hippolyta, while the jailer's daughter lovesick derangement reminds you of Ophelia in HAMLET - it feels like Shakespeare thinking "Oh I'll just chuck in one of my greatest hits..."  It is such a disjointed tale that I would think twice about seeing a straight version of it.

But here we have Barrie Rutter directing it, his first production since standing down from being Artistic Director of Northern Broadsides, the company he set up in 1992, and he gives us a rollicking, colourful, big-hearted version of the play which is totally winning.  He keeps the action moving around the Globe's stage and never lets the pace drop until the inevitable final jig.

He elicits unshowy, committed performances from his band of merrie players: Bryan Dick and Paul Stocker are good as the former friends, Francesca Mills is a delight as the jailer's daughter and there is fine support from Moyo Akandé as a Gorbals Hippolyta, Jude Akiwudike as Theseus and Jos Vantyler as the teacher leading the Morris dancers.  Ex-KINKY BOOTS star Matt Henry plays Theseus' right-hand man Pirithous so slightly that one suspects his MBE for services to theatre might have been bestowed somewhat prematurely, while Elloria Torchia's lightweight Emelia made you wonder what our Two Noble Kinsmen saw in her.

But these two quibbles aside, I thought Barrie Rutter - one of my original GUYS AND DOLLS heroes from the National Theatre in 1982 - triumphed with this production and shows that he has just the right populist touch needed for The Globe.  I hope it's not too long before he is back there.

So two productions in and I am won over to the Globe under Michelle Terry's leadership - we have HAMLET, LOVE'S LABOURS LOST (at the pretty but agonizingly painful-seated Sam Wanamaker Playhouse), and OTHELLO to go so I will keep you updated on the progress through the season.

As Michelle Terry quotes from HAMLET in her introduction to the season "Come, let's go together..."