Jump to content


Peter And Alice

Grandade Noel Coward Dench and Whishaw

  • Please log in to reply
236 replies to this topic

#101 Kathryn2

Kathryn2

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1255 posts

Posted 19 March 2013 - 10:05 PM

I saw this tonight and enjoyed it, although I went in with lowered expectations after reading comments here so perhaps that helped.

I actually found it quite moving towards the end - performances felt perfectly pitched from the whole cast. I
Didn't know much about the real Peter and Alice beforehand, or about their siblings.

#102 MrBarnaby

MrBarnaby

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1306 posts

Posted 19 March 2013 - 11:13 PM

The two younger actors playing Peter and Alice were dreadful.
Still it's nicely designed and the adult actors are good, particularly Nicholas Farrell and Whishaw. Judi is Judi...
The audience is so classic... Well to do grey heads and rather posh people from Chelsea (one imagines). At 35 I think I was the youngest there by about 20 years. Still, that's the audience they are going for I imagine. Maybe the upper levels were a bit more varied in age range and audience member.

#103 Kathryn2

Kathryn2

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1255 posts

Posted 20 March 2013 - 09:58 AM

Well, I'm still only 30, so you'd definitely be wrong about being the youngest! I was in the balcony and didn't notice many grey heads at all in the Balcony or the Upper Circle below.

And I disagree about the actors playing the fictional 'Peter' and 'Alice' - in fact I suspect you rather missed the point if you thought they were 'dreadful' - they were clearly not being played naturalistically because they are meant to be fictional characters.

#104 Honoured Guest

Honoured Guest

    Dis Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2542 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 20 March 2013 - 10:19 AM

Kathryn2 is very likely on the ball in her comments about the playing of the fictional 'Peter' and 'Alice', but I suspect she rather missed the point that 'MrBarnaby' is also a fictional character, created to provoke and amuse.

#105 Kathryn2

Kathryn2

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1255 posts

Posted 20 March 2013 - 10:33 AM

So, you're saying that MrBarnaby is a troll? I admit I have not been all that active on here for the last few months, so maybe I've missed something, but it doesn't smell like troll to me....

#106 Honoured Guest

Honoured Guest

    Dis Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2542 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 20 March 2013 - 10:45 AM

Not troll but there's an infinity of gradations between true and troll. Even Lynette posts in character.

#107 Kathryn2

Kathryn2

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1255 posts

Posted 20 March 2013 - 10:55 AM

God, what has happened to this forum?

It used to be a nice place to talk about theatre - just in the past couple of days I've seen snide posts about people who go to shows multiple times, and keeping cats, and people generally playing at being piss artists.

#108 Epicoene

Epicoene

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1240 posts

Posted 20 March 2013 - 12:52 PM

View PostKathryn2, on 20 March 2013 - 09:58 AM, said:

And I disagree about the actors playing the fictional 'Peter' and 'Alice' - in fact I suspect you rather missed the point if you thought they were 'dreadful' - they were clearly not being played naturalistically because they are meant to be fictional characters.

I don't understand that at all - why shouldn't fictional characters be played naturalistically ?

As for the debate about trolls, the definition is quite clear - anyone who posts an opinion that I disagree with (so .. the whole pack of you ... Exit)

#109 Kathryn2

Kathryn2

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1255 posts

Posted 20 March 2013 - 05:06 PM

View PostEpicoene, on 20 March 2013 - 12:52 PM, said:

I don't understand that at all - why shouldn't fictional characters be played naturalistically ?


Because they're not 'real'? Because they're Dodgson's and Barrie's idea (idealisation?) of what children are like, which is a different thing to what children, in general, and those children in particular, were actually like?

I haven't read either book for a long old time, but I don't recall psychologically 'realistic' characterisation in them.

The way they were played seemed intuitively correct to me, anyhow. Certainly seemed like a conscious choice had been made to play them that way, rather than being 'bad acting'.

#110 bickypeg

bickypeg

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 343 posts

Posted 20 March 2013 - 06:31 PM

View PostKathryn2, on 20 March 2013 - 10:55 AM, said:

God, what has happened to this forum?

It used to be a nice place to talk about theatre - just in the past couple of days I've seen snide posts about people who go to shows multiple times, and keeping cats, and people generally playing at being piss artists.
Yes and now I'm confused as to whether I'm allowed to go being from unposh Yorkshire and having hair which would be grey were it not expensively dyed...




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users