Jump to content


A Doll's House - Young Vic & Duke Of Yorks

Cracknell & Stephens

  • Please log in to reply
78 replies to this topic

#71 Epicoene

Epicoene

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1239 posts

Posted 28 October 2013 - 07:53 AM

View PostNicholas, on 26 October 2013 - 11:34 PM, said:

You can disagree with me, and I know some people here will.  But this is my opinion.  This is the greatest production I have ever seen, and Hattie Morahan's performance the greatest performance I have ever seen.
As a production I think it was just let down a little for me by that botched final scene (referred to up this thread). Of course us oldies have seen many more productions and performances to compare - for me it was excellent but not the best. I have heard people say the best Doll's House in the modern era was the Adrian Noble/Cheryl Campbell/Stephen Moore RSC one in the early 1980s which won several awards - unfortunately I couldn't get tickets for it (it was in the Other Place) - I wonder if anyone here saw that one and can compare. The current Almeida "Ghosts" is excellent too so make the most of it - productions that good only come round about once a decade. Best Ibsen I've seen ? probably the Deborah Findlay "Hedda Gabler" decades ago at the Almedia. The Trevor Nunn "Lady from the Sea" there was brilliant too (luxury casting with Benedict Cumberbatch in a supporting role I seem to remember).

#72 wickedgrin

wickedgrin

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1223 posts

Posted 28 October 2013 - 08:11 AM

View PostRedRose, on 28 October 2013 - 07:22 AM, said:



The more you watch the higher the expectations get and that makes those moments come around more rarely.




How true.

#73 Epicoene

Epicoene

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1239 posts

Posted 28 October 2013 - 08:23 AM

View Postwickedgrin, on 28 October 2013 - 08:11 AM, said:

How true.
I am not sure that is true. The really great productions are great in absolute terms so that no matter how much (or little) you have seen before they are still obviously great - it's just they don't come around that often - probably I could list about 1 every 3-4 years at most but they are evenly spread out over time, they are not clustered around the first productions I saw.

#74 wickedgrin

wickedgrin

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1223 posts

Posted 28 October 2013 - 11:04 AM


View PostEpicoene, on 28 October 2013 - 08:23 AM, said:


I am not sure that is true. The really great productions are great in absolute terms so that no matter how much (or little) you have seen before they are still obviously great - it's just they don't come around that often - probably I could list about 1 every 3-4 years at most but they are evenly spread out over time, they are not clustered around the first productions I saw.

Oh I would agree with that too, I am not looking at the dim and distant past through rose tinted specs. Some productions, a long time ago, I can barely remember at all! They certainly don't come round often, but for me, I know I am harder to please because I see so much.

#75 Lynette

Lynette

    Advanced Member

  • Global Moderators
  • PipPipPip
  • 5140 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:London

Posted 28 October 2013 - 12:47 PM

Hard to compare performances I think. How do you compare say, Ian Charleson in Guys and Dolls with Harrie M in The Doll's House ( see what I'm doing there? 'Doll' concept...) both in my list of top performances . I just hope my list gets longer as I see more.

Ibsen seems to work well in English and for our time. Interesting.

#76 Epicoene

Epicoene

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1239 posts

Posted 28 October 2013 - 01:15 PM

View PostLynette, on 28 October 2013 - 12:47 PM, said:

Ibsen seems to work well in English and for our time. Interesting.
Not sure if they are for our time, some are (Enemy of the People) but nothing about Ghosts is really for our time in terms of theme - they are just brilliant pieces of theatre, very sophisticated melodramas.

#77 Lynette

Lynette

    Advanced Member

  • Global Moderators
  • PipPipPip
  • 5140 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:London

Posted 30 October 2013 - 07:45 PM

Agree. Ghosts is no longer quite relevant unless you see it metaphorically.

#78 Latecomer

Latecomer

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1666 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Oxford

Posted 30 October 2013 - 07:53 PM

View PostEpicoene, on 28 October 2013 - 01:15 PM, said:

Not sure if they are for our time, some are (Enemy of the People) but nothing about Ghosts is really for our time in terms of theme - they are just brilliant pieces of theatre, very sophisticated melodramas.

I disagree....women and men are still judged for having sex. Men are congratulated, women are tarts. Nothing much has changed!

#79 Nicholas

Nicholas

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 330 posts

Posted 04 November 2013 - 05:02 PM

View Postmallardo, on 28 October 2013 - 06:55 AM, said:

Agree on Ivanov but I had some problems with Endgame. Thought Rylance's performance so theatrical - channeling John Cleese at moments - that the play lost its balance.  Simon McBurney was the real star of the evening for me.

Oddly enough, I completely agree about Rylance, but where it didn't work for you that's precisely why it worked for me.  Opinions are funny old things, aren't they?




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users