'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.

'Good People' at the Noel Coward Theatre

'Good People' is a new play put on at Hampstead Theatre which has transferred to the West End for a month or two at the Noel Coward Theatre. It's set in Boston and stars Imelda Staunton as Margie, the mother of a disabled daughter who is desperate to pay next month's rent on their small apartment.

It starts with Margie getting fired from her job at the tills at a dollar shop, and then, talking to a friend, she finds out that an old boyfriend is now a fancy doctor and she goes to his office to see if he has a job she could have. He doesn't have a job to offer but she wangles an invitation to a party at his house in the suburbs on the off-chance that one of his posh friends might have a job and that is where the problems really start.

It's an odd play in a sense, a small cast of six people telling a rather small story of a desperate woman needing to earn some money. On the other hand, that's probably the biggest story there is, the need to survive and keep a roof over your head and food on the table. Her life is work and going to bingo with her loud, opinionated friends and, compared to them, she comes across as the nice one. Being 'nice' is important to Margie and is played on later in the second half when she claims to be nice but the doctor's wife challenges that. And, strangely enough, in the last few lines of the play, it turns out she really is nice.

It's not all desperate and serious. There are some nice comedy moments thrown in to lighten the tension, such as Margie responding with 'How the fuck would I know' when asked if the wine is good since she's never tasted it before. And then there are the hideous bunnies one of her friends makes to sell for $5 each. But the centre of the play is class, ambition, the gap between rich and poor and the lack of choice forced on some people. We learn that the upper middle class doctor's life would have been very different if his father hadn't stopped him killing a black kid back in his teens. The now urbane doctor gradually frays at the edges until he almost attacks Margie in the heat of argument and we see that nothing really changes.

One of her friends suggests early in the play that she tells the good doctor that he fathered her disabled daughter in their summer romance before he left for college and medical school, something Margie doesn't want to do because it's not 'nice'. Later on she says exactly that and explains that she didn't say anything years ago because she didn't want to hold him back from escaping their poor neighbourhood. Then, in the heat of argument, she retracts it.

In almost the final lines of the play, back in the bingo hall when she finds that her boss at the dollar store has paid her rent from his own bingo winnings, we find out that her story is true and her friends have known all along.  Her life will go on living hand to mouth and have a very narrow focus of being trapped in her small neighbourhood but she's done the right thing in her own mind. She's still independent and still optimistic that she'll get another job. That's a powerful scene and confirms that Margie is, indeed, good people.

Imelda gives good Margie and Angel Coulby was good as the doctor's wife (yes, Guinevere from 'Merlin') but I'm less confident of Lloyd Owen as the doctor. It's an interesting play but I left puzzled that the producers had left it in its American setting when it could easily have been placed in any town in Britain. After all, we have enough pound shops of our own these days. 

'Henry V' at the Noel Coward Theatre

We went to see 'Henry V' at the Noel Coward Theatre the other night and I thoroughly enjoyed it. I saw Adrian Lester play Henry a decade ago and now it's the turn of Jude Law to take the part. I've seen him on stage a couple of times ('Hamlet' which I enjoyed and 'Anna Christie' which I enjoyed less so, both of which were Michael Grandage productions) and this was, I think, his best and most immediate performance.

Why did I like it? Well, firstly, it was in period costume (Adrian Lester's version was in modern battle dress and modern weapons) and that worked really well. The acting across the whole cast was really good and the lighting and staging was superb. It all came together nicely to give us a really good production.

The smell of dry ice was in the air in the theatre and the stage was a plain wall painted as if grey timber that moved and opened up for different scenes but kept the background to the action largely the same. There was lots of movement on the stage so that provided some continuity.

I particularly liked Noma Dumezweni as Mistress Quickly - she really knows how to speak verse and kept all eyes on her, as did Ron Cook as Pistol, particularly when he captures a Frenchman for ransom (a truly funny scene) and when he eats leek (the leek nearly flew off the stage that night). It's probably unfair to pick those two out of an all-round excellent cast but I did enjoy their performances.

I also really enjoyed Jude Law's performance as well and the depth of his characterisation was quite impressive. Jude nailed the 'St Crispin's Day' speech

... And gentlemen in England now-a-bed

Shall think themselves accurs’d they were not here,

And hold their manhoods cheap whiles any speaks

That fought with us upon Saint Crispin’s day.

Where's my sword? I'll fight beside you my King! It was a stirring speech and, if we weren't (mainly) British, we would have rushed the stage to join his army there and then. Watch out you French, we have 'Enerey Vee!

It was odd to see the ushers walking round with 'no photography' signs (that some people ignored) that suggested this wasn't a standard 'theatre audience'. I'm not too bothered about that though, if Jude is bringing in people new to theatre and new to Shakespeare. That's a good thing really.

If you get the chance you really should see this production. Bring your sword but leave your camera at home please.