Zur Ausgewogenheit ein paar nicht ganz so enthusiastische Reviews aus dem theatreforum:
Spice shack
Zitat:
The running time is 3H 45M.
This is the final running time as stated by the theatre.
There are no plans to cut the duration or remove any scenes.
I think it was the fastest 4 hours I have spent in a theatre ever.
However, I do appreciate some people have to travel from afar and this is a gross oversight on the part of the theatre.
Some people started to leave at 10:50 and it's a dreadful shame- starting the play at 19:00 would have been the right thing to do.
I consider a finishing time after 23:00 to be outside of acceptable theatre etiquette in London.
I also asked the director why she had not chosen to stage the "dancing naked in the woods" and she highlighted this was a liberty directors have taken over the years and it was not in fact in the stage directions from Miller.
This was an interesting point and in fact it adds to the unreliability of the girls and their hysteria.
It was a wonderful staging and the acting is incredibly intense.
Yael Farber has harnessed her skills from the political pieces she has directed and given us a fresh perspective on the play.
The themes in The Crucible echo the subjects I have seen in her other stage work and resonate with sexuality, power and abuse.
I preferred this marginally to the RSC version a few years back but both are excellent.
Really the play is the star.
I might court controversy by saying that the weakest link is Richard Armitage.
By a mile.
He has incredibly poor diction and his harsh vocal quality combined with a tendency to shout meant the clarity of his lines was consistently compromised.
If they recast him it would be a perfect play.
Actors playing Abigail and Mary stunning.
Standing ovation this evening.
I just hope the critics can see past the running time and not focus solely on this in their reviews.
und
Zitat:
I think (and I know it sounds very odd) but the rate of speech is just insanely slow.
Yes there is some extra "stage business" but this does not account for the running time being 1 hour longer than the play should run.
It was noticed by my friend who thought there were lots of stylised pauses and huge gaps between lines and words.
But PLEASE don't be put off.
It is as good as, if not better the RSC staging (which was critically acclaimed, a sellout success and won an Olivier for best revival).
That ran at 3h 10m so people wanting the duration axed to 2.5 hours are being ridiculous.
theatrefan777
Zitat:
For me it was definitely far too long and I don't think I'm in the minority judging by conversations with patrons during the interval. I enjoyed it in general but this could be either a masterpiece or a big stinker.
It would need to be shorten to 2 hours 30 minutes maximum to make it work. And it could be done, the scene changes are overlong and terribly self indulgent. Some parts should really be much shorter.
In spite of the great quality of the piece it really feels like an endless night, really long and most people start fidgeting half way through Act I and it gets much worse during Act II around 10.30ish with lots of patrons constantly checking the time in watches and mobile phones. Some people started leaving around 10.45 creating some distraction. It normally annoys me when people leave a theatre before the play ends but in this case I totally understand that people need to catch their last trains.
The staging was good in general and I can't fault the acting which was excellent. It is such a great play that it's really difficult not to enjoy even in an unnecessary overlong production like this one.
Right now this is a 3 star production imho, but it could easily become a 5 star one with the right cuts.
Jon
Zitat:
Aside from the scene changes which I agree need to be either shortened or cut completely, I'm not sure what could be cut from the text because I thought while Act 1 did drag a little, Act 2 didn't feel long at all. I think as I've mentioned before, they should start it earlier either at 7pm or 6.30pm for evening performances and 2pm or 1.30pm. Long plays like King Lear and Othello at the National start earlier so it shouldn't be a problem for the Old Vic
David J
Zitat:
I can say for certain that yesterday's matinee ended at 6.05, making it 3 hours and 35 minutes.
Even the usher we talked to at the interval was surprised that the first act ended sooner.
Whether or not I saw this with the glacier scene changes I still think this is a fantastic production thanks to the acting
But still, did we need to see Goody Proctor making bread? Are you trying to allude to the LSD theory Yael Farber? No.
1234chainsaw
Zitat:
It's not great -- not yet anyway -- but worth seeing. The opening dance sequence is incredibly atmospheric, it sets the mood and takes us to that time in history. The first half, now at 1h 50m, flew by despite the already noted self-indulgent set changes and slow diction. A main weakness is Armitage. As Spice shack said: poor and harsh diction, shouty. (And how many times have we seen an actor beat their chest to convey that they are feeling things?) Abigail, Mary, and Reverends Hale and Parris are notably strong. More as a note on the play than this production: the subject matter of the play is so rich that I understand that choices of focus have to be made, but I found myself wishing that Abigail and her power over the whole community were explored more; the patriarchy, unleashing of petty jealousies, and group think which are the primary focus here feel overly familiar.
_________________
Hedda Gabler, Amadeus, Lazarus, Red Barn, Mary Stewart, Love in Idleness, Hamlet, Who's afraid of Virginia Woolf
http://thedayaplay.wordpress.comhttp://kirstenstheaterblog.wordpress.com