'Splendour' at the Donmar Warehouse

Last week we went to see the new production of 'Splendour' at the Donmar. I hadn't heard of the play before so it was nice to come to it cold and with no idea where it would go.

It's set in some Eastern European country with a dictatorship or at least a one party state and is set in the reception room of the presidential palace on the eve of revolution. We meet the characters - the photographer who's been invited to take a portrait of the current president, her translator and the wife of the president who keeps them going in terms of conversation and vodka while waiting for him to arrive, and then her long-term friend arrives for moral support. It's a stragely simplistic introduction to the play.

We learn about the four characters as the play progresses, as it restarts and emphasises different aspects of the characters. The translator isn't a terribly good translator but rather from rebel territory escaping her past, the photographer just wants to leave and photograph the revolution rather than stay for a possible portrait, the friend isn't really a friend to the wife of the president, she simply carries on to protect her children, and the wife of the president? Well, she intends to stay the wife of the president come hell or high water, and will stay in the palace whatever happens.

It's quite a strong play and we learn about the characters as it progresses. No-one is quite what they seem to be but they must keep up the charade because that is who they are. The play takes place in the reception room of the presidential palace, with enormous windows that can't keep out the sound of revolution but they all ignore it until the end. The grand chandeleir sputters and goes out, only to shine brightly again for each new scene as the play starts again and again only with a different emphasis each time and eventually we learn more about the characters and their circumstances. We learn that the husband of the friend didn't really commit suicide and why the friend doesn't see her grown up children any more, why the photographer buys bed linen after every asignmnent and why the translator steals.

The play is set within a ring of broken glass (not really glass, but supposed to represent the shattered chandelier after the palace is stormed, I assume) and begins and begins again until the final time when the sordid truth emerges.

I liked the play and liked it's telling and development, Sinead Cusack was the president's wife with Michelle Fairley as her long suffering friend, and Genenieve O'Reilley as the photographer and Zawe Ashton as the translator. I thought they were all excellent but the photographer was a bit one-dimensional and didn't really grow as much as the other characters. I've seen Sinead on stage before and she was, as ever, excellent, but I really liked Michelle Fairley, a very different character to her 'Game of Thrones' persona as Lady Stark, and Zawe as the translator, sly and snide but ultimate fearful except where shoes are concerned. Not a great play but certainly one to make you think.

'Henry IV' at The Donmar Warehouse

I went to see the latest version of Shakespeare's 'Henry IV' at the Donmar last week, the all-woman version set in a prison. I had no idea what to expect so went with an open mind that, sadly, closed as the evening wore on. Rather than go into the theatre we're instructed to meet in a club opposite and wait for instructions. Um, ok. Then we have supposed prison loudspeaker announcements about what to do and we have, quite frankly. scrawny theatre ushers dressed as prison guards escorting us inside and shouting at us. I'm afraid my initial response was 'fuck off' until I realised they were just doing as told and became quieter. Don't shout at me in somewhere I've paid to be or I might get upset. I doubt your scrawny little ushers can handle an upset me.

Sitting watching the stage while waiting for the thing to start and all I could think was, 'this is cheap'. It's probably totally in character for a women's prison but it struck me as cheap as chips and ugly. OK, points scored for realism, but let's see what happens next.

Later than billed and the prisoners are led in through a locked door and they line up. Is this the start of the play? I dunno, but we get a speech and then the prisoners spread round the place. Am I watching a play put on by prisoners or a play put on by prisoners for an audience of prisoners? I dunno. What am I watching? It seems like they're putting on the play and then every now and then there's something that makes me question, such as when Mistress Quickly walks off saying 'I thought we'd agreed not to do this bit' and is then escorted back on by an usher/guard. The play is asking me to think but is it asking me to think the right things?

Harriet Walters played Henry IV in a splayed legs stance and reminded me of Noel Coward in 'The Italian Job', the cock of the prison in charge of everything and can do as he pleases. I thought she was better in the death bed scene. This sort of illustrates what I felt was missing - some light and shade in the characters. Neither Hal nor Hotspur did anything for me, being fully 'on' the whole time and I found Clare Dunne's brash Northern Irish accent very difficult to follow, far too full-on and in your face.

On the other hand, I loved Ashley McGuire as Falstaff, the anti-role model for the prince, and she seemed to revel in the role as well she should. I loved the tension when she strikes the tray in anger that's carried my Mistress Quickly after she's stormed off stage in protest about lines she thought they'd agreed not to say. That fleeting moment of tension added so much to this production. I also liked Cynthia Errivo, particularly her ninja battle with the king's forces, striking them down with every kick and arm flung wide. Cynthia played Celie in 'The Colour Purple' at the Menier Choccy Factory so it's good to see her add another string to her bow.

Did I enjoy the production? No, not really. It looked cheap and employed cheap effects that didn't really work for me. But I'm pleased to have seen it.

'My Night With Reg' at the Donmar Warehouse

We went to see 'My Night With Reg', the new production of the Kevin Elyot play from the '90s about a group of friends in the '80s. It's a comedy - a bittersweet and sad comedy - and it had me laughing out loud (yes, even me).

The blurb on the site says:

On its premiere, Kevin Elyot’s Olivier and Evening Standard Award-winning comedy, MY NIGHT WITH REG, defined a moment in the lives of gay men and became an instant classic. For its 20th anniversary, rising star Robert Hastie directs the first major revival.

At Guy’s London flat, old friends and new gather to party through the night. This is the summer of 1985, and for Guy and his circle the world is about to change forever. Deliciously funny and bittersweet, Kevin Elyot’s comedy captures the fragility of friendship, happiness and life itself.

It's a play in three acts, only 1:45 hours long so there's no half time and acts are separated by very effectively turning off the lights for a few seconds. Act one is the scene of Guy's flat warming party which introduces the main characters but we don't meet the mysterious Reg. Act two takes place after Reg's funeral in which we meet two more friends and act three takes place after Guy's funeral. Bit gloomy, eh? Not at all, it's incredibly well observed and terribly funny, full of awkwardness and real life and laugh-out-loud moments.

We meet Guy who everyone likes but no-one loves or lusts after and he welcomes John to his flat warming party while Eric finishes off painting the conservatory. Something's not right and we soon learn that Guy has loved John since university a decade earlier but never said anything. We meet Daniel, Reg's partner, who is supposed to be in Australia but whose flight is delayed, and the scene is set. Lots of kissing and flirting, drinking champagne and remembering the old days. Guy hosts a wake for Reg with a distraught Daniel and a remorseful John (who was having an affair with Reg) and we meet Benny and Bernie, a couple who have each spent time with Reg. And then we go back to Guy's flat after his funeral since he's left it to John and we see John and Eric, the painter and publican, talking about what's happened and John wanting to get into Eric's pants.

The play is full of laugh-out-loud bawdiness and the HIV/AIDs tragedy. Everyone seems to have spent a night with Reg and some have died. That really chimed with me. I've blogged before about the unthinking and irrational fear of HIV and AIDs in the '80s and this play brought it all back, laughing one moment and then having the reality pushed in my face. And that's a good way of getting a message across. Some of the younger people in the audience have probably read about 'the plague' years but I lived through it and remember it.

I thought the cast were excellent, particularly Julian Ovenden as John and Geoffrey Streatfield as Daniel with the easy camaraderie of old friends and Jonathan Broadbent as Guy constantly plumping up the cushions on the couch. It's a very touching and human play about a group of friends against a backdrop of the spread of HIV/AIDs which is never directly mentioned but is referred to and hovers in the background.

There was a sign outside warning us that the play contained nudity and smoking (since when do we need a warning that we'll see someone smoking?) and as soon as I saw Lewis Reeves on stage as Eric, painting Guy's conservatory, I thought aha! he's the one who'll get his kit off since that's what the junior players are for on stage. And I was right - partly. Imagine my surprise when Mr Ovenden strode on stage in his all-over tan for a brief scene with them both naked before returning in his pants and a dressing gown. He's got nothing to be embarrassed about.

Well done to everyone involved in the production. Since it's at the Donmar then that means that it's virtually sold out for the entire run and it's only just opened. There are a few tickets left for matinees but that's about it. Lucky me, I've nabbed tickets to see it again!