'Mayerling' at the Royal Opera House

I saw 'Mayerling' danced a couple of years ago by the Royal Ballet so I knew the broad outline of the ballet when I went to see the current production, but there are always sequences and details that you forget, and I'd forgotten a lot. I was there largely to see the return of Steven McRae to the stage with his Royal Ballet colleagues and a long time away with an injury. It was a delight to see him leap about, throw ballerinas around in exotic shapes and jump up to the rafters again. Especially so in this ballet which is really all about the leading man who is on stage for most of the ballet.

The ballet is based on the real tale of Crown Prince Rudolph of the House of Habsburg and his rather strange manias around death and guns. And sex, lots of sex. And getting his own way in everything. He's not a terribly attractive character but seemed to have been popular with the ladies at court and less popular with their husbands. He is forced into a loveless dynastic marriage and treats his wife appallingly, even taking her to his favourite bawdy house to meet his favourite strumpets. He's not a happy person and, despite treating everyone badly, still seems to be popular with some young women. one in particular who shares his morbid fascinations.

It all comes to a head when he shoots one of the courtiers on a family game shoot in the woods and his oddities can no longer be hidden. In the hunting lodge he's assigned to while the Emperor considers his fate he's visited my his latest young lover and they dance up a storm then he shoots up and grabs his pistol that's never far from his hand...

Phew. This an intense ballet, very dark and dangerous. It has a large cast, some exotic costumes and a lot going on around the stage, with sub-plots aplenty to build a rich and compelling tale of power and intrigue, psychological drama and uncontrolled lusts and passions. It's all in there.

Key to the whole thing, of course, is the choreography and dancing. This is one of Kenneth MacMillan's great ballets and deservedly gets revived regularly. It's a star vehicle for the lead male dancer and Steven McRae is certainly one of the Royal Ballet's finest. He's been a Principal since 2009 and knows his stuff, bringing characterisation to every role - it's about acting as well as dancing and there's some spectacular dancing in this ballet. Steven was accompanied by Akane Takada as his lover and together they pulled some amazingly athletic feats of dance, sometimes getting close to gymnastics. I had the pleasure of seeing Akane dance the Swan in 'Swan Lake' early in the summer and it was delightful to see her grace and athleticism again.

It's a very intense ballet and the long applause at the end as the dancers took their bows and the ballerinas received flowers helped to come down from the tense peak. It was a treat to see Steven on stage, alone, to take the first bow which he so richly deserved. Welcome back!

'Anthony & Cleopatra' at the National Theatre

Last week we went to see the new production of 'Anthony & Cleopatra' at the National Theatre. That's one of my favourite Shakespeare plays and it was on the grand Olivier stage so there was lots of space to fill.

I really liked the production a few years ago at the Globe, particularly since it was in period costume, and one of my abiding memories is that Cleopatra spoke her final lines as a mild and defeated woman, not as a mighty queen. Getting those lines right is a benchmark for me, so how would this new production fare?

We all know who Anthony and Cleopatra were don't we? Anthony was a Roman general and politician who was one of the triumvirate who ruled the Roman empire after Julius Caesar's death. Cleopatra was the queen of Egypt. often said to be the last in the Greek Ptolemaic line to rule (although technically that was her son), lover of Julius Caesar and then of Mark Anthony. Both died in the war between the triumvirate for supremacy that resulted in Octavius taking power and becoming the first Roman Caesar.

It's a play about power and intrigue, about love and jealousy, about the fate of nations being decided by leaders and about loyalty. It's about a lot of things - there's a lot going on in this play and is a testament to the creativity and power of Shakespeare. The text is there so, to do it justice, you need a cast of actors and creatives that can bring the work to life. I avoided all reviews and production photos so I could enjoy it with fresh eyes and ears. How does this production fare?

The play opened with Octavius delivering a eulogy to Cleopatra while she lay dead at his feet and he was surrounded by soldiers in modern combat uniform. My heart sank. O, it's a modern dress version is it? Why? Why try to modernise things? what's wrong with a toga or two? Cleopatra is lying on the main stage when the turntable span around, removing the dusty monument and soldiers and revealed a sumptuous palace scene and Cleopatra was miraculously lying beside a pool. Anthony walks out in a Hawaiian shirt and the most ridiculous and flariest linen trousers since the guitarist from Mud in the early '70s. Aha, I thought, this is looking interesting.

Cleopatra's palace in Alexandria looks more like a five star hotel for rich people with sun loungers beside the pool and servants to cater for your every whim. That's how we're introduced to the lovers and the story is off and running. Their idyll doesn't last for long, of course, as Anthony is summoned back to Rome, he marries and we see a great scene with the jealous Cleopatra getting a description of her rival. Ah, yes, jealousy.

I quite liked the staging of the play and I don't think I've seen the giant turntable under the Olivier stage used so frequently to change set and tone of a play as in this one. All the quick changes could've been annoying but I liked it. I also forgave the use of modern costumes because the clothes were quite interesting in themselves, although I did find the army fatigues a bit distracting later in the play during the battle scenes. I think some of that was unnecessary and more down to the director's vision rather than the text.

The acting was, on the whole, excellent and lived up to expectations for such a powerful play. Ralph Fiennes was Anthony and Sophie Okonedo was a suitably imperious and fiery Cleopatra. They worked well together as lovers and rulers, commanding their court at the same time as being playful and believable. I also liked Gloria Obianyo and Georgia Landers as Chairman and Iras, Cleopatra's loyal handmaidens - I could easily hear Chairman saying 'keep your hands off my queen, matey' to Caesar. Both turned in excellent performances, I thought. I was less taken with Tunji Kasim as Octavius who didn't really convince me he was soon to be the most powerful man in the world.

I grew to love the staging and rotating set (even though it didn't look terribly Egyptian) and the lighting was excellent, almost like an Egyptian beach in some of the palace scenes. Well done to director Simon Godwin, set designer Hildegard Bechtler, costume by Evie Gurney and lighting by Tim Lutkin. Well done all.

And the final speech. In my head I hear Cleopatra laying down a challenge to the gods for daring to take her lover from her, thunder crashing and lightning flashing as she prepares to join her lover:

Give me my robe. Put on my crown.

I have immortal longings in me...

I am fire and air,

My other elements I give to a baser life.

O yes, Sophie was suitably imperious as Cleopatra prepares to join her lover. I didn't hear thunder crashing but thank you! I now have a new benchmark for that speech.

Go and see this play - I'm tempted to go again. Maybe there'll be thunder?

'Company' at the Gielgud Theatre

'Company' by Stephen Sondheim has opened in the West End with a brand new production and some gender-swapped roles. I've never seen a fully staged production - costumes, scenery, lights - of 'Company' before but have seen an afternoon version as part of the 'Sondheim at 80' season in 2010 that starred Adrian Lester, Sophie Thompson and Haydn Gwynn, all in civvies. That was a 'traditional' version with Adrian Lester as Bobby considering marriage and commitment whereas this new version has Rosalie Craig as Bobbie and, you know what? I think it works better with a female lead.

It's a play very much of it's time - 1970 - on Bobbie's 35 birthday and all her friends are married but not necessarily happily. I can see how it would've been a breath of fresh air in 1970, challenging the traditional form of the musical with it's series of one act scenes with some narrative and a song all around the theme of marriage. Today, though, it seems a bit dated and that's where changing the gender of the lead player worked for me. Not only is there the question of settling down into a relationship (let's use that word rather than marriage) but there's also the biological clock ticking away. And, because it's updated, we also have a gay couple who are getting married (or possibly not).

I couldn't make up my mind about whether I liked the staging or not where most of the scenes took place in big neon light boxes that rolled on and off the stage effortlessly - I can't quite decide if they enhanced the production, detracted from it or were simply annoying. You have that nice big stage so use it, don't confine people in a claustrophobic box. Something that did annoy me was Rosalie Craig's red dress. Please people, give her a costume change? That red dress just really irritated me.

Rosalie Craig played Bobbie who was on stage for virtually the whole time, with friends played my Patti Lupone and Mel Giedroyc. I've seen Rosalie and Patti on stage before but this was the first time I'd seen Mel and I was quite impressed with her acting and (as you'd expect) her comic timing. It's odd to think that, as Chris mentioned, after the Sondheim nerds and theatre queens have seen the production, Mel's will be the biggest name on the bill but she's not very visible in the second half at all. I'm pleased we saw her.

The big draw for many people will be Patti Lupone, a Broadway legend who I saw in Sondheim's 'Gypsy' a decade ago. I saw her again five years ago in a short series of song and chat shows at Leicester Square Theatre. I liked her world-weary performance as the friend who's seen it all and then some, and her big song was 'Ladies Who Lunch' which was great fun.

I enjoyed the production and I'm pleased I saw it. It did rather make me want to see new productions of other Sondheim shows like 'Sunday in the Park'  and I'm sure that'll come back one day. In the meantime, enjoy 'Company'.

PS: I also liked the blue balloons that were all over the public areas of the theatre to mimic the poster for the show. Well done Gielgud!

Bronzino

Agnolo Bronzino (or Agnolo di Cosimo) was a Florentine painter in the 1500s, a painter I've never really paid much attention to and have glanced at his paintings in galleries (such as the famous 'Allegory with Venus and Cupid' in the National Gallery). I've never really 'looked' at his paintings - they're all very professional with clear, smooth surfaces, but not really anything out of the ordinary, at least to my eyes (although this Allegory is rather strange in composition).

He was clearly a very good painter but, then again. there have been lots of very good painters. It usually takes that something extra to make me actually 'notice' a painter and start looking at their works in a different light. That's what happened with Bronzino.

I first 'noticed' Bronzino at the very good 'Charles I' exhibition at the Royal Academy earlier this year which featured loads of works from his collection. Including a painting by Bronzino, 'Portrait of a Woman in Green'. When I saw this painting form across the room I had to take a closer look. It's a portrait of a woman, a real life, living and breathing woman, in amazing detail that brings her to life - give her modern day clothes to wear and you could see her on a bus any day of the week. Looking at that sumptuous gown and I put it in the category of 'show off' paintings with Bronzino saying 'look what I can do so effortlessly, commission me and I'll do the same for you'.  I went back a couple of times to see that painting before leaving the exhibition. Bronzino was now on my radar.

A few months later, I went to Florence, not looking for Bronzinos but I couldn't help but find them in his home town.

The first painting I found was at the marvellous basilica of Santa Croce, a very large painting of 'The Descent of Christ into Limbo'. This was, apparently, one of the first acts of the risen Christ, to save the 'good' souls of people from their eternity in Limbo, starting with his forefather, Adam. We see an athletic Christ helping the old man out of the morass of bodies consigned to Limbo, surrounded by lots of other very individual-looking people - there's no homogenisation here. I think the thing that first attracted me to the painting was the skin tone - I'd recently finished a course in portrait painting and I'd started looking at paintings and wondering how they'd achieved different colours, wondering what paints had been mixed to arrive at those tones.

In particular, there's the two slightly elongated women in the front of the scene at bottom right, with one looking out at the viewer. I've got no idea who they're meant to be but they do pull the eye away from Christ. The skill that's gone into this painting is quite incredible.

A day or two later I went to the Uffizi to look at paintings and, in a small corridor, I found a series of paintings that Bronzino had completed of people in the Medici family.

The 'Portrait of Eleanor of Toledo and her Son' is gorgeous with that elaborate dress, the stately, almost stiff, pose, with her arm around her son. She looks impassive, an almost total lack of emotion in her face but it's an incredible rendering of a young woman at the peak of her almost cold beauty. Apparently she was aged 22 when this painting was made and that was one of her favourite dresses.

It's the detail of the face that kept me looking at this painting, the almost photographic realism that brings it to life.  What was she thinking while she sat there, probably wanting to be off doing something else while he son fidgets at her side. I think the frame is a bit too ornate and detracts form the beauty of the painting.

Another incredible portrait is that of Bia de Medici. The painting was commissioned after the child had died and is based on her death mask. It's a lovely little painting and, as ever, it's the details that add to the whole, like the hints of movement in her hands, almost as if she's fidgeting on the chair to get comfortable as she sits still for the painting, bringing her back to life. There's little emotion in the face but it's still a warm and welcoming portrait.

The rather impassive, if not cold, nature of his portrait faces seems to be a trademark of his particular style but that doesn't affect their beauty or the skill exhibited. You can't really look into the soul of his sitters, their faces are a mask which the real person hides behind. Does that matter? I don't think so.

There are a few paintings by Bronzino at the National Gallery and a painting attributed to his studio in the Wallace Collection so he's not under-represented in London. I'll certainly keep my eyes peeled for more when I'm wandering around galleries.

'The Inheritance' at the Noel Coward Theatre

'The Inheritance' is a new play in two parts by Matthew Lopez set in present day New York and which plays for over three hours each. That's a lot of play. It immediately draws comparisons with 'Angels In America' which is of similar length and, while the subject is broadly the same (the lives of young gay men) it's very different. I first heard about it a couple of years ago during a discussion panel that included Stephen Daldry (the director of the play) after a staged reading of 'Bent' at the National Theatre.

We had tickets to see it at the Young Vic on its original run but were there the night the electricity went off for some reason so were given tickets to see it on its West End transfer to the Noel Coward Theatre on St Martin's Lane. It's a bit of a marathon but it doesn't feel that long since it's so engaging and I'm so pleased to finally see it.

It's an epic tale - as it would be at over six hours - of Eric and Toby and the ups and downs of their lives. Long-term lovers, they live together in a rent-controlled apartment in Manhattan surrounded by good friends in a safe middle-class life. Eric works for a right on social enterprise and Toby is a writer whose first book is picked up as a play and their friend Adam is picked to play the lead on stage. Toby wants to sleep with rich-boy Adam and the relationship with Eric is wrecked. In the meantime, Eric has become good platonic friends with Walter, an older man and partner to rich Henry, who has an apartment upstairs in the building. And Toby finds down and out rent-boy Leo, who  looks like Adam and has a thirst for books and education.

Of course, it's not that straight forward and the play opens with a creative writing class with the group of friends all wondering how to start their novels. Luckily, EM Forster appears as their guide and inspiration and narrator of the first half of the play. Coincidentally, he's also Walter who has a house out in upstate New York where he helped young men with the HIV virus in the 'plague' years. There are lots of references to the 'plague' of the '80s and '90s, a time before the group of friends knew about it and understood the consequences.

There's a lot going on in this play which is deliberately modelled on EM Forster's 'Howard's End' and 'Maurice' while telling the story of modern day gay young men in the present time. The men are all middle class with good jobs and worthy politics, some married and a couple adopting a child, something unimaginable to the previous generation in the 'plague' years. Their freedom has come at a cost. In an angry exchange between Henry, the older man who wants to marry Eric, and the youngsters he shouts 'There are no gay men my age ... or not as many as there should be'  to throw the realty of his life at them, a life in which he might be rich but he's also a survivor of the 'plague'.

The only woman in the play is Margaret who's son died of HIV in the '80s at Walter's house and she's helped Walter look after his young proteges ever since, burying their ashes in the private grave yard in a grove of trees around his house. By the end of the play Leo has contracted HIV and Eric takes him to the house to wean him off drugs and sex work and help him recover and they meet Margaret who looks after the house.You could've heard a pin drop during the scene where Margaret tells Leo about holding her son's hand while he died in that house. That's class acting.

There are lots of scenes to pick out and say 'look at this' and 'this' and 'this' but that would spoil the play for you seeing it. It's a strange play in a way, with the characters narrating what's going on as well as acting it out and I think that's one of the strengths of the play, that it plays with the form rather than following it. There are also some very engaging performances with Kyle Soller and Andrew Burlap as Eric and Toby, Samuel H Levine as Adam/Leo, and Paul Hilton and John Benjamin Hickey as Walter and Henry. Vanessa Redgrave played Margaret. The play is directed by Stephen Daldry who was in the audience on both nights I attended and the writer, Matthew Lopez, was there when I saw part two of the play.

I liked the virtually empty set with a custom-built stage that raised or lowered depending on the scene, and I loved the cherry tree that appears from time to time. The lighting was excellent, sometimes crystal clear and sometimes warm and sultry. All told, it's a great production.

The audience was predominantly male, either in their '50s/'60s or '30s with the younger tending to be in groups. There was also a group of women in their '60s to make me feel embarrassed on their behalf with the talk of orgies. There's a lot of talk of explicit sex in the play and why not? it's part of life, after all. There's also talk about the recent American election and Trump to bring it slap bang up to date. Part of me wondered what the younger section of the audience really thought and understood about the 'plague' and everything that was going on back then.

This is a very good play with a great ensemble cast. I'm very pleased to have seen it and you should get tickets as soon as you can.