Jump to content


- - - - -

Rsc New Team - Same As The Old Team ?


  • Please log in to reply
61 replies to this topic

#11 Pharaoh's number 2

Pharaoh's number 2

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3760 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London

Posted 11 November 2012 - 01:33 PM

Act one worked brilliantly I thought. It fell apart in Act 2.



#12 Lynette

Lynette

    Advanced Member

  • Global Moderators
  • PipPipPip
  • 5150 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:London

Posted 11 November 2012 - 01:36 PM

Yeah you're right, PN2. It was a good idea in the bar but didn't follow through.

#13 Epicoene

Epicoene

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1240 posts

Posted 12 November 2012 - 07:55 AM

View PostLynette, on 11 November 2012 - 01:27 PM, said:

How funny - yes that is what I meant. Serves me right for using ipad on my lap..all wobbly. I am aware of other people's views on the Elvis Merchant. I think we had a thread on it. But I also think I know a turkey when I see one and probably Patrick Stewart does too.

You reckon ? Do you know whose idea this production was ? Here's Patrick Stewart explaining:

"John Logan (screenwriter) and I were sitting on the set of “Star Trek: Nemesis,” working late one night, and somehow the conversation turned to “The Merchant of Venice.” John said to me, “That’s a play I hope I never have to see again.” And I presented an argument for why I thought it was a masterpiece and seriously misunderstood. The next Monday he came back to me and said, “You wrecked my weekend, and I’ll let you know what comes of it.” Three weeks later he said, “I have something for you.” It was a completed screenplay of “The Merchant of Venice” — set in Las Vegas. I was thrilled because in that context it worked beautifully — the play has a great deal to do with gambling, of taking risks both financially and in personal relationships which, in the play, are valued in monetary terms.
I am an enthusiast in setting Shakespeare’s works in periods other than when they were set or written. And as an actor who was going to play Shylock for the fifth time, I felt his character would work admirably in this kind of setting."

Goold was not involved at all in the development of the overall concept. It was really just one of these jobs he takes on as a director-for-hire (like re-directing the Sam Mendes "Oliver").

#14 David J

David J

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 349 posts

Posted 12 November 2012 - 08:31 AM

I did give that production a High Matinee but looking back I wished I gave it a higher rating. Stylistically I just loved how Rupert Goold made every effort to integrate the play into the setting. The only problem I had with it was that whilst I liked the message behind the ending, it went on for far too long.

I also think Patrick Stewart was miscast for that particular production; he acted as though he was still in Venice. I rate Rupert Goold highly for bringing something different to the plays stylistically. But I rate Gregory Doran higher than Rupert because he can be stylistic (just less than the latter), but he works well with actors.at the same time

Out of interest what exactly was it about the second act that fell apart?
My reviews can also be found at "A Night at the Theatre"

http://www.anightatthetheatre.co.uk/

#15 Lynette

Lynette

    Advanced Member

  • Global Moderators
  • PipPipPip
  • 5150 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:London

Posted 12 November 2012 - 11:48 AM

View PostEpicoene, on 12 November 2012 - 07:55 AM, said:

You reckon ? Do you know whose idea this production was ? Here's Patrick Stewart explaining:

"John Logan (screenwriter) and I were sitting on the set of “Star Trek: Nemesis,” working late one night, and somehow the conversation turned to “The Merchant of Venice.” John said to me, “That’s a play I hope I never have to see again.” And I presented an argument for why I thought it was a masterpiece and seriously misunderstood. The next Monday he came back to me and said, “You wrecked my weekend, and I’ll let you know what comes of it.” Three weeks later he said, “I have something for you.” It was a completed screenplay of “The Merchant of Venice” — set in Las Vegas. I was thrilled because in that context it worked beautifully — the play has a great deal to do with gambling, of taking risks both financially and in personal relationships which, in the play, are valued in monetary terms.
I am an enthusiast in setting Shakespeare’s works in periods other than when they were set or written. And as an actor who was going to play Shylock for the fifth time, I felt his character would work admirably in this kind of setting."

Goold was not involved at all in the development of the overall concept. It was really just one of these jobs he takes on as a director-for-hire (like re-directing the Sam Mendes "Oliver").

Well that's interesting. It seemed on watching that PS didn't buy into the concept at all, that he was acting in a traditional production of Merchant and had sadly come up against a concept director. Did you see it? Honestly it was grotesque. Elvis was fun I admit. And I did like the way Portia was in the tv show but hated the ending they gave her. Where did they get that from? Portia is one of the most 'together' heroines Sh wrote. No illusions and very intelligent. To me it was as a jolly idea had everything else bent to it. Well, there you go. [PS v good in telly histories]

#16 Lynette

Lynette

    Advanced Member

  • Global Moderators
  • PipPipPip
  • 5150 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:London

Posted 12 November 2012 - 11:52 AM

Just to answer David above as briefly as possible - The M of V is [ arguably]  about greed but not about chance. It is about calculation in every sense. So ultimately Las Vegas doesn't work.

#17 Epicoene

Epicoene

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1240 posts

Posted 12 November 2012 - 01:45 PM

View PostLynette, on 12 November 2012 - 11:52 AM, said:

Just to answer David above as briefly as possible - The M of V is [ arguably]  about greed but not about chance. It is about calculation in every sense. So ultimately Las Vegas doesn't work.

Las Vegas is entirely fuelled by greed, and the plot devices of M of V turn on chance (Antonio's lost ships, Portia's caskets). Superficially it seems appropriate. I did not see the production as I assumed it would transfer (the reason it did not was not that it was no good but because they couldn't find an appropriate theatre in the period available). I was not too concerned, I have already seen what I consider to be the definitive production of the play (Henry Goodman as Shylock in 1930s Berlin)

#18 Alexandra

Alexandra

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1779 posts

Posted 12 November 2012 - 02:50 PM

:lol: Lynette, you really cannot let this one go, can you? I remember you trying to convince everyone it was bad when it was done. and now you're having another try. I found it terrific, fascinating. Epicoene, my benchmark Merchant was the Henry Goodman one too, and I haven't enjoyed any since, except for this one. It was a very bold setting but it really worked.

#19 Lynette

Lynette

    Advanced Member

  • Global Moderators
  • PipPipPip
  • 5150 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:London

Posted 12 November 2012 - 09:23 PM

I apologise Alexandra. But I was led astray......Now beginneth the era of the Great Doran so hope for all good things from RSC.

#20 musicals fan

musicals fan

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 143 posts

Posted 13 November 2012 - 07:46 AM

May I take this opportunity here to ask a question about the RSC and its "plans" to have a more permanent base in London?
There was some discussion here a year or so back questioning why the RSC is allowed to get such a large subsidy when it obviously did not tour London (or the Regions) as it used to.
At the time there was mentioned a "plan" to have regular major seasons at the Roundhouse.
I am unable to find any subsequent information on this proposal.
Does anyone have news on it?
I am convinced that the present ad hoc performances in London are not drawing large audiences, because there are tickets for the productions regularly on sale at reduced prices.
I am also certain that without REGULAR seasons in London (and tours) it will not build audiences away from Stratford.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users