Nach der Press Preview: Noch mehr Berichte, Bilder, Tweets

Danke für das Bild. Als Proctor ist er ja mal in der Bildmitte - übersieht man ja glatt, wenn man - wie gewohnt - die hinteren Ränder absucht.

Hier mal die Meinung zweier Herren aus dem theatreforum

Phantom of London

I found this very hard going and would say A View From The Bridge was a far more rewarding experience.
It didn't help I was sitting in the first row in the circle for 3.30 hrs with no leg room.

und Ryan als Antwort darauf

I didn't even notice the long running time, the production is stunning and even if you know how it ends, how it gets there is still thrilling! The lighting, music and changes from scene to scene are gorgeous. I'd certainly recommend sitting in the side of the theatre which is normally the seated side rather than what would normally be the stage. The cast are uniformly terrific, there really isn't a weak link, and the girls suitably hateful as to sympathise totally with the Proctors, who in Richard Armitage Anna Madeley's hands never really play it for sympathy. I actually think you need the long running time to really get to understand all of the characters.

But oh, Richard Armitage. It's the theatre's loss that he has spent his time on TV and film, you can't take your eyes off him for a single second. That's partly because he is so heartstoppingly handsome but also because he's so brilliant in the role, prowling around the set like a caged lion. He's unafraid of playing some of the less attractive traits of the character but ultimately grabs your sympathy and doesn't let it go. I admit to having wet eyes at John Proctor's end and when he gives his "You will not use me! I am no Sarah Good or Tituba, I am John Proctor!" speech I almost stood up and clapped and cheered there and then!! I'll be surprised if there are many better performances this year. I hope it means he'll do more theatre, he would have wiped the floor with Hiddleston as Coriolanus for example.

Oh and I didn't realise that the dandy Danforth was played by the evil Jim Fenner from 'Bad Girls' either until reading the programme.

I loved it and will probably book again!

So doll fand ich jetzt TH schauspielerisch in Coriolanus auch nicht (guter Durchschnitt)- außer dass er so herrlich weinen konnte.

Danke !

Ich hoffe wirklich, dass ihm TC für die Zukunft weitere hochkarätige ( Theater-) Rollen einbringt, in denen er wirklich zeigen kann, was in ihm steckt.

Ich bin schon auf dem Weg zum Glauben daran.

Dieser Ryan dürfte einmal ein nicht eifersüchtiger Mann sein! "Heartstoppingly handsome", Wow.

Ich sitze hier die ganze Zeit und grinse nur dämlich-glücklich vor mich hin Danke für die vielen Artikel und Tweets

Witzig, dass man sich durch männliche Lobeshymnen um so mehr bestätigt fühlt im weiblichen Well-Wisherinnen-Himmel.
Danke, White Rose!

Witzig, dass man sich durch männliche Lobeshymnen um so mehr bestätigt fühlt im weiblichen Well-Wisherinnen-Himmel.
Danke, White Rose!

Warum? Natürlich gibt es auch Männer, die ihn attraktiv finden - soweit ich das mitbekommen habe, sind das sogar sehr viele in der Gay-Scene - und so wie er seit neuestem aussieht erst recht!

Für mich macht das kein Unterschied, ob er von Fangirls oder Fanboys - sorry, ich hasse diese Bezeichnung Well-Wisher -das hat so den Beigeschmack: wir wollen doch alle nur sein Bestes - verehrt wird

ich glaube den hatten wir noch nicht - Tweet vom 09.07.14 vom Schauspieler Alexander Vlahos - bekannt als Mordred aus Merlin, hat in einer der letzten Produktionen des Old Vic "Fortunes Fool" mitgespielt.

https://twitter.com/vlavla/status/486998352891248642

#TheCrucible @oldvictheatre is one of the best productions I've seen. Richard Armitage & Adrian Schiller both gave a masterclass in acting

Warum? Natürlich gibt es auch Männer, die ihn attraktiv finden - soweit ich das mitbekommen habe, sind das sogar sehr viele in der Gay-Scene - und so wie er seit neuestem aussieht erst recht!

Dann gibt es aber noch die mitgeschleppen Ehemänner, die das Theater weinende verlassen.

Für mich macht das kein Unterschied, ob er von Fangirls oder Fanboys - sorry, ich hasse diese Bezeichnung Well-Wisher -das hat so den Beigeschmack: wir wollen doch alle nur sein Bestes - verehrt wird

Sagen wir mal, eine Aussage über sein Schauspiel von Personen bei denen man erotische Anziehung ausschließen kann, halte ich schon für etwas objektiver. Obwohl selbst das nicht immer funktioniert. Ich denke da an das lesbische Mädchen, das beinahe vergessen hätte, dass sie nur auf Frauen steht.

Witzig, dass man sich durch männliche Lobeshymnen um so mehr bestätigt fühlt im weiblichen Well-Wisherinnen-Himmel.
Danke, White Rose!

Warum? Natürlich gibt es auch Männer, die ihn attraktiv finden - soweit ich das mitbekommen habe, sind das sogar sehr viele in der Gay-Scene - und so wie er seit neuestem aussieht erst recht!

Für mich macht das kein Unterschied, ob er von Fangirls oder Fanboys - sorry, ich hasse diese Bezeichnung Well-Wisher -das hat so den Beigeschmack: wir wollen doch alle nur sein Bestes - verehrt wird

Ich habe mit männlichen Bewunderern überhaupt kein Problem und habe das auch nur so geschrieben, weil in den Medien immer wieder gerne auf seiner weiblichen Fan-Armada herumgeritten wird. Wie erst kürzlich.
Und den ww-Begriff hat er selber geprägt . Ich fühle mich wahrlich nicht wie seine Ersatzmama, kann mit Begriffen wie "our man" z.B. ganz und gar nichts anfangen, da ich keinerlei Besitzansprüche gegenüber ihm oder irgendjemand anderem hege.
Dass er gerade in der Gay-Szene bewundert wird, ist mir nicht neu und ein Problem habe ich übrigens auch nicht damit.

Worüber ihr euch schon wieder Gedanken macht!

Ich freue mich einfach, dass so vielen das Stück gefällt... ist doch völlig egal ob es nun Männern oder Frauen mehr gefällt. Beide Meinungen sollte man ernst neben, schon alleine der Gleichberechtigung wegen.

Es zeichnet doch einen guten Schauspieler aus, dass er nicht nur das eine Geschlecht anzieht.

Danke für die neusten Tweets, ihr Lieben! Und danke für das Gruppenbild, Jassy!

http://will-think-about-a-name-later.tu ... ore-things

So as I said I wanted to post some more things about my London trip I went to London with wolf-of-baskerville and the spanishdogssay was so very lovely to let us stay at her place for the whole trip!

Anyways, originally we only planned on seeing Richard III but as time went by we also got tickets for The Crucible and Great Britain, while buying the Ghost Stories tickets was rather spontaneous. We didn’t really more than going to the theatre except for a trip to Forbidden Planet. But then, I couldn’t have wished for a better thing to do in London. We also went to LFCC, my first convention ever. How that went you can read here.

My reviews of the plays under the cut to avoid spamming:

The Crucible was my favourite play of all four: it was funny, breath-takingly terrifying at some parts and so well done music and lightening wise. Richard Armitage did a great job as did the whole cast. The play is rather upsetting imho, the story itself being so sad it acutally made me cry in the end. Some of the scenes included several people speaking simultaneously and the cast did a perfect job with that. In that scenes I was also genuinly scared, I’m a sissy okay, and I had goosebumps. The ending left me with tears, as I said, and a very uneasy feeling about the whole topic of the play. And even tho the play was a bit wordy at some points, I still enjoyed every minute of it very very much. The tickets we got only did cost 10 bucks and the seats you have really aren’t worth even one penny more imho. They’re really uncomfortable and if you’re not at least 5’11” your feet won’t even touch the ground. However, the play very much made up for the seats and tbh, I was so engrossed in the story that I stopped caring about the seats anyway. Also great was Richard Armitage himself. Not only did he put on a perfect performance, he also was super patient and nice to all the fans waiting at the stage door!

Richard III was most likely the play I was most nervous about because I had some troubles imagining Martin Freeman doing theatre. I admire him as a screen actor - obviously - but yeah, I wasn’t sure what to expect really. All my doubts got blown away once Freeman entered the stage. He had great stage presence and I loved his speech pattern as well as physical mannerism. The setting of the play was nothing I had seen before and even with the play being quite serious it caused some moments of laughter. Also the amount of fake blood they use for the play… god it was really cool! By the end some actors were literally covered in it from head to toe. And if you got first row tickets please consider that you’ll most likely get some on your clothing. Not kidding here, I saw people coming out of the theatre having blood splatters all over their faces. There were only two things that I didn’t completely like: (spoilers?) the scene where Richard kills his wife - I just couldn’t deal with it. Not the killing itself, but the fact that it took ages until she was dead. That must sound completely weird, I know, but seeing her struggling while getting strangled and Freeman doing moany and grunty noises kinda disturbed me. If anyone of you has seen the play already, I would love to hear your thoughts about that. The second thing I didn’t like was the the overuse of flashy gimmicks and very high-frequency noises. I mean, I see why they used it, I just don’t agree on that as I think toning it down a bit wouldn’t have hurt. For all the critique I can totally recommend the play as it’s realyl well done and the whole cast does a fabulous job. Also you totally have to see it in order to see Freeman making a standing jump over two tables! Ticket wise I can advise getting the 29,5 bucks tickets. The Trafalgar Studios are rather small so you’ll have great view even if you sit in the last rows. With the room being one level we had a perfect view from the last row. Also Martin Freeman was cool as hell while doing stage door. Selfies with him weren’t allowed

Hier ist noch ein weiteres stagedoor Video:

http://elderberrylove.tumblr.com/post/9 ... om-the-old


You will never recover from seeing this play:
http://meandrichard.wordpress.com/2014/ ... this-play/

Witzig, dass man sich durch männliche Lobeshymnen um so mehr bestätigt fühlt im weiblichen Well-Wisherinnen-Himmel.
Danke, White Rose!

Warum? Natürlich gibt es auch Männer, die ihn attraktiv finden - soweit ich das mitbekommen habe, sind das sogar sehr viele in der Gay-Scene - und so wie er seit neuestem aussieht erst recht!

Für mich macht das kein Unterschied, ob er von Fangirls oder Fanboys - sorry, ich hasse diese Bezeichnung Well-Wisher -das hat so den Beigeschmack: wir wollen doch alle nur sein Bestes - verehrt wird

Ich denke nicht, daß die meisten, die Richard gut finden, zur Gay-Szene gehören, obwohl er da klarerweise auch Fans hat. Ich wollte auch keine diesbezügliche Diskussion auslösen . Mich freut, daß er nicht mehr nur als Heartthrob und Hunk (naja, mit wenigen Ausnahmen ) gesehen wird mit seiner verrückten Weiber-Army. Das war ja auch das Gute an Strike Back.

https://twitter.com/VictoriaJSadler

Victoria Sadler ‏@VictoriaJSadler 2 Std.
You know, I really didn't believe those who said that the 3.5 hours of #TheCrucible @oldvictheatre would fly past but it really did.

Victoria Sadler ‏@VictoriaJSadler 2 Std.
It's a production that beautifully balances the fever and the hysteria with moments of real tenderness and poignancy #TheCrucible

Victoria Sadlers Review:

Review: Richard Armitage in The Crucible, Old Vic Theatre
Posted by Victoria, on July 15, 2014
0

Michael Gove may not like it on our syllabus but The Crucible remains one of the most important and influential plays of the twentieth century. Arthur Miller’s tale of religious hysteria in the Salem witch trials of 1692 is a masterpiece of profound social and political commentary mixed beautifully with human emotions and relationships on a small, interpersonal level.

Directed by Yaël Farber, this production at the Old Vic balances the madness with moments of real tenderness and poignancy, driving up all the emotions necessary for this play to succeed – anger at the injustice, sadness for those who lose all they have and heartbreak for those who face their deaths with the one thing they have left, honour.

At the heart of this production is an immense performance from Richard Armitage who captures beautifully the profound inner conflict within John Proctor, a man increasingly at odds with both his wife and the society in which he lives.

Armitage has such a wonderfully deep, rich voice that brings authority to his character but as an instrument, his voice really takes the strain as his character runs the gamut of emotions as his life unravels at the hands of Abigail, a young girl he has a brief affair with and who takes her revenge by whipping up accusations of witchcraft throughout Salem. One can only hope Armitage’s voice holds up for the whole run.

Creating hysteria on stage can be tricky, with the high risk that it can tip over into overwrought acting. A couple of performances fall on the wrong side of that fine line (though, interestingly, not from any of the young women) but they are balanced out by some excellent performances elsewhere in the cast.

Anna Madeley as John Proctor’s wife Elizabeth gives a performance of great restraint as the dutiful wife trying hard to reconcile herself with her husband’s infidelity. Adrian Schiller is also superb as Reverend John Hale, a man struggling to come to terms with the increasing injustice in the trials that he had, at first, been only too keen to start.

But the real star of the show remains Arthur Miller’s writing. What’s interesting, 50 years on after McCarthyism, is how this play speaks to us about so much more than anti-communist hysteria. We live in a world of increasing fear about religious fundamentalism – whether that by Muslim, Jewish or Christian – and this play serves as a warning on how profound religious loyalty can be manipulated by those seeking to serve their own ends.

But more than the political, through John and Elizabeth, Miller captures a broken relationship where trust has gone but love and duty remains. The two scenes between husband and wife – before the trial and after – are the tenderest scenes in the play and really give it its heart.

However Miller might not readily be described as much of a feminist and I wince still as Elizabeth takes a lot of the blame for her husband’s infidelity because she “kept a cold house.”

The cast is ably served by a stark set from Soutra Gilmour, the very talented designer also responsible for the very busy 1970s set in Jamie Lloyd’s Richard III. The minimal set here though could not be more different.

With the stage in the round, the stripped floorboards, wooden chairs and rusty bedframes not only reflect the impoverished condition of the Salem community but give the cast much room in which to whip up the mania, with some impressive choreographed movement from the young girls in thrall to the rejected, volatile and dangerously charismatic Abigail (a passionate performance from Samantha Colley).

Much has been said about the play’s running time – it comes in at three and a half hours. I had seriously doubted those who had seen the show and said that the time just flew by but really, it did. I was completely enwrapped in this very dramatic but also moving production.

Accompanying me to the show was a grandma and an 11 year old girl, neither of whom were that familiar with the text. Both of them though were completely engrossed in the play and distraught with the injustice of the story. The power of Miller’s writing lives on.

Old Vic Theatre, London to September 13, 2014

http://www.victoriasadler.com/review-richard-armitage-in-the-crucible-old-vic-theatre/

Ich bin etwas unentschlossen hinsichtlich der Einordnung hier, da Mrs. Sadler Profi ist und u.a. auch für 'Huffington Post' schreibt.



Außerdem von gestern:

The Crucible Review

07/14/2014

0 Comments


Ok, the good stuff first: The play itself.
Just wow. I don't even know what to say. The fact that almost all reviews have given this performance five stars (ignoring that ridiculous piece in the Daily Mail of course) speaks volumes, and they're not exaggerating one bit. It was absolutely breathtaking from start to finish. The source material they had was brilliant of course; Arthur Miller was a genius. But even so, they really brought it to life in such an amazing way and gave it so much depth and emotion that you just don't get from simply reading the play.

Richard Armitage was great of course, but so was everyone else. There was no bad performance. No average performance either. They were all absolutely great. I'm not just gushing, it's actually true. The amount of energy all the actors put into their performance was incredible. I absolutely adored William Gaunt as Giles Corey. He offered some much-needed comic relief. There was actually quite a bit of comedy there for a play that deals with such a heavy subject, but it never seemed inappropriate at all. Again, that's the sort of thing you don't really appreciate when reading the play. It's the way the lines are delivered that makes it funny. Samantha Colley also gave a really good performance as Abigail. She was just as odious and conniving as she was meant to be. I once saw another rendering of The Crucible in which Abigail came across as far too nice and actually made you feel some sympathy for her which was just weird.
Richard was as brilliant as could be expected. He's just so good at playing those conflicted characters! There was so much energy in the delivery of his lines and he has that awesomely powerful voice too which was perfect for the role. That moron from the Daily Mail who said he had a weak voice, seriously? Was he taking the piss? If that's a weak voice, what the devil does a strong voice sound like? Maybe he's got a weak voice compared to Smaug, but certainly not compared to the average human.
Almost everyone gave a standing ovation at the end and the applause got about twice as loud when Richard was on the stage on his own. Then he smiled in this really sweet, humble, unassuming way. It seems like after all this time he still can't quite believe that so many people admire his work.
Overall I'd have to give it five stars too. I can't see how it could be improved really. Would I see it again? Absolutely. In fact, I've already decided I definitely will go again. I actually saw it once already but I had pretty much the worst seat in the entire place and I wasn't feeling well at all that evening so I thought I'd wait to do a review until I'd seen it again under better conditions.

And now for the bad stuff: The stage door.
Oh dear. I never thought I would be saying this, but my first time meeting Richard Armitage was more disappointing than I could ever have imagined. I don't mean the man himself was disappointing, but the whole thing was pretty much the most rushed thing ever. There was a pretty long line of people waiting by the stage door and when he came out he moved down the line very quickly, signing a few autographs. I was really hoping to get a photo with him too, but he'd moved on before I could ask him. Hi and thank you were the only words I actually got a chance to say to him. I was hoping I might be able to catch him again at the end of the queue but then he vanished into thin air. Literally. I turned around for a split second to make sure I wasn't about to fall off the pavement, and when I turned back he was just gone. I was so disappointed and so bloody sleep deprived that I literally almost started crying. Only almost, thank God. I know it shouldn't be a big deal but if you spend a lot of time looking forward to meeting one of your favourite actors and then end up feeling like you may as well not have gone at all, that's a bit shite.
Maybe I just chose a really bad night to go on. There were several big groups of people who were all taking each other's picture with him and I think it's easier to get overlooked if you're on your own. I know that a few other people who have been said it was all a bit rushed and they didn't get as much time as they'd hoped, but I didn't imagine it would be THAT rushed.
I can't blame him of course. He must have been pretty keen to get home. I would have been too, but I do wish I could have at least spoken to him for a few seconds and got that bloody picture. Suddenly the approximately 30 seconds I've had in the past to speak to actors at comic cons seem like an eternity!
It's weird. I've met him now, but it doesn't feel like I have at all. I have a hastily signed poster which is the only evidence I have that he was really there; otherwise I'd probably feel like it never actually happened.

I decided to get this poster. Is it just me or does the one where he's looking directly at the camera look oddly like Joe Armstrong (Allan A Dale in Robin Hood)? It's weird because they look nothing alike really but I can't get over the strange resemblance in that picture.
Oh well, I suppose it's still a lot better than for the people who meet their favourite actor and are disillusioned by the fact that said actor turns out to be a rude cocky bastard. At least that certainly can't be said about Richard. I think he just still after all this time feels a bit uncomfortable with the crowds, and I also got the impression that the bouncers had put some kind of time restriction on how long he could spend moving down the line. It seemed like he hadn't even reached the end before he was gone. I'm guessing they took him back inside. Obviously I can understand that he wouldn't want to spend ages talking to people after such a long performance, and the bouncers were just doing their jobs too, so I'm not annoyed with anyone, just very disappointed.
One thing I will say for him is photos don't do him justice. Believe it or not he's even more devastatingly handsome in real life.
Anyway, rather than admit defeat I decided that the only thing for it was to go back a third time and hope that he'll have a bit more time or there won't be as many people. And even if there are, I won't get him to sign anything this time. I'll just ask for a photo straight away. Oh, and I'll make sure to tell him what a brilliant performance it was. That's something I meant to tell him tonight, but I didn't even get the chance to say that. I will get that picture if it kills me. Thankfully The Crucible is one of my favourite plays so I have no problem sitting through it a third time. Now I desperately need to go to bed. Tomorrow I'll do a recap of LFCC which was a rather more positive experience.

http://peregrinscorner.weebly.com/

Danke, Laudine !

Hier ist ein Bericht von fangurl4 RA, die bei allen 12 (!!) previews war und sie miteinander vergleicht- inklusive neuer stagedoor pics:
http://fangurl4.tumblr.com/