Review: ‘Julius Caesar’ @ Royal Shakespeare Theatre

Having seen an offer for discounted tickets, I couldn’t resist seeing my second play of the Rome 2017 trilogy at the RSC, and I was rewarded for spending my time and money in a turbulent Rome.

Brutus – yes, of et tu fame – was stellar. Alex Waldmann showed us the epitome of the man in conflict; it was obvious that Brutus wasn’t a murderer of a man but a murderer of the corruption coming through the man. His fight with ideology was evident in every action, from his cringing at the first thrust of the knife to his willingness to die in the failure of a Roman democracy. Brutus was an honourable man indeed, just perhaps a man too led by his peers in achieving that honour.

And seeing emotions laid bare wasn’t exclusive to Brutus – the cast were brilliant in their subtle and less subtle mojulius-caesar-production-images_-2017_2017_photo-by-helen-maybanks-_c_-rsc_214266-tmb-img-1824ments, expertly weaving between these for maximum effect. One of my favourite moments has to be at the end, when Mark Anthony (James Corrigan) can barely hide his dislike of Octavius Caesar (Jon Tarcy) – it’s blindingly obvious to everyone apart from Octavius how he has been used by Anthony to exact vengeance, despite finding him a churlish youth.
Caesar (Andrew Woodall), of course, cannot go unmentioned. He had majesty without royalty, and ambition whilst remaining grounded. You saw glimpses of why he had to die but not enough to justify this, and certainly not enough to prevent the horror at his brutal murder.

Speaking of which, the staging was spectacular and yet minimalist. The murder was a highlight, bloodbags aplenty and yet no one betrayed this theatrical trick in their realism. I especially loved the second half scenery, with the broken ruins of war lying around the stage and acting as plinths from which characters could rise and fall. It was incredibly thoughtful and, unlike some productions, not over the top in any manner, which made it all the more resonating.

The only thing I’ll say – and this is at Shakespeare and his era than the production itself – is the lack of women. They were well used by the director, Angus Jackson, despite this, but it seems incredibly sad that Calpurnia (Kristin Atherton) gets no resolution after her desperate pleas to Caesar, and we don’t see more of Portia’s (Hannah Morrish) conflict between her husband and her country. But this was not an age of women, and so we’re left with a lot of men (and a lot of six packs) around the stage (not complaining!).

‘Julius Caesar’ hits cinemas on Wednesday 25th April for the live screening of the performance, and I urge you to see this gripping production and live through the trials and tribulations of an empire on the edge.



Review: ‘Antony and Cleopatra’ @ The RSC

‘Antony and Cleopatra’ is an exotic and wonderful Shakespeare play, albeit one with a rushed second half where we’re told things happen rather than seeing them. Nonetheless, the RSC’s latest production is bold and rhythmical to capture even novice Shakespearean viewers.


The opening musical segment transports you to Egypt and the seductive den of the most radiant Cleopatra, and was an entrancing was to being events. The continuation of dance and music throughout was mesmerising and added that real Eastern feel to the events, separating the cold and calculating Roman empire from the rich and sultry Egyptian lands.


Cleopatra followed suit with this exoticism, although despite her captivating temper and demeanour I have to say it was sometimes difficult to understand her entirely, especially when she was louder; it was purely an accent thing, and it’s just worth knowing so that you know to move on when you don’t understand rather than missing the plot development whilst trying to translate.


However, both Antony and Cleopatra were magnificently regal, despite the clumsiness of Shakespeare’s ending where Antony is dragged up the monument, which (frankly) is mildly ridiculous. As I said, the whole second half is a bit ropey – blink and you’ll miss it explanations as to who likes and hates whom are all you’ve got and they’re so rapid it’s difficult to follow.


The whole cast, as expected, were brilliant; my highlights were Enobarbus and Cleopatra’s handmaidens, who made this less of a history lesson and more of a journey through these foreign climes.


The traditionalism of the setting was something unusual and the RSC, but their normal modernisation wouldn’t necessarily work through the Rome season; it’s classical nature is what makes it enjoyable and recognisable, no work needs to be done here to make this period of history accessible to all. The use of the trap door to change the stage was very effective; small changes that indicated the mood and processes of the characters well.


The Rome season at the RSC promises to be a memorable run, and ‘Antony and Cleopatra’ is just a third of this brilliance – make sure you don’t miss out on a trip through time.

Review: ‘Cymbeline’ @ the Royal Shakespeare Theatre

The RSC’s production of the much-underperformed and often underrated ‘Cymbeline’ was a different experience for me: it’s the first time I’ve seen a Shakespeare play without having read the script first. As such, it became a small test for me; would I understand it without having studied it?

Answer: yes.

Because the RSC’s production was incredibly accessible and amazingly performed, making three hours of theatre seem like a blur of betrayal, mistrust and reconciliation.

The first thing to note was that Cymbeline was no longer King of Britain; Cymbeline was, in fact, the Queen, with the leering and overly confident Duke preening at her side. It made the play have a different dynamic; suddenly strength was redefined, and to be Queen in such a male-dominated world became a harder task, and instead of being an ineffectual ruler, Cymbeline became a woman with a lot to fear within and without the court. It was an intriguing and wonderful decision, proving Shakespeare still has new dimensions to add hundred of years after the play’s conception.

Innogen became my new favourite female Shakespearean character within this (although technically Guideria could have taken that role, but more gender-swapping means this might not technically be my favourite female). She was feisty, determined, principled and courageous; at least, that’s how Bethan Cullinane played her. I admired her more than Posthumus, a character often proclaimed for his virtues and yet one whose virtues I saw little of. He was easily manipulated and impulsive in all the wrong ways – not the man I would have liked our heroine to pledge her honour to, but still…

I also loved the lighter moments, particularly with Guideria (Natalie Simpson – of Ophelia in ‘Hamlet’ fame) and company in the woods. My favourite lighter moment was when Cymbeline questioned Clotten’s (Marcus Griffiths) fate and, in her best northern accent, Guideria declared ‘I slew him’. It was moments like this that made sure you weren’t fully plunged into the depths of despair, preventing tragedy from becoming all-encompassing and wholly distressing – a feat the RSC has often achieved with wonderful effect.

As I said, having not read the play some of its more delicate symbolism was lost on me until the end; the tree stump in the centre of the stage was a mystery until the closing scenes, where Cymbeline’s tree had regrown with family and honour. It worked, and was a pleasing revelation at the end tying the whole play up neatly. I loved the romantically brutal movements at the beginning separating Innogen and Posthumus, so gently and yet so tragically after their young love was denied.

The only, and it’s absolutely miniscule, thing I disliked about this came from the above scene, where the lovers ended their meeting with Posthumus’ trousers down – a feat unnecessary and a little bit distasteful after all the pledges of undying love. I realised it was so that Cymbeline and the cunning Duke had something to catch more than just Posthumus in a room with Innogen, but something about it jarred with the value of their words for me.

Two questions I would ask of Shakespeare’s play: surely a better resolution than ‘after all that war, let’s give in to Rome’s demands as we should have done in the first place’ could have been found? And where was the comeuppance for Philario (Byrron Mondahl), the erstwhile childcatcher who robber the Queen of her eldest children? These were niggles with the plot rather than production, but suspending disbelief, the experience was still an enjoyable one.

Cymbeline’s reign is short – the RSC and cinema screens host her for a short while, and I urge you to become an attentive citizen and follow a story of love, deceit and family with avid attention…


Review: ‘Hamlet’ @ the Royal Shakespeare Theatre

‘Hamlet’: the play everyone quotes without realising. Ever told someone the dog will have his day? Or to thine own self be true? ‘Hamlet’. It explains its profundity and its endurance through history, and why it’s still one of my favourite Shakespeare plays.

The RSC last performed ‘Hamlet’ in 2013, and I was fortunate enough to see the fantastic Jonathan Slinger in the dark role. However, sling your hook Slinger – there’s a new Dane in town, in this deliciously colourful version of the darkest play going.

Paapa Essiedu is at once a young man and soul older than his years; a man who can laugh and play with friends, causing unexpected mirth amongst the audience and making us remember this is someone barely out of education dealing with a tragedy beyond his ken, and yet a man who can give the gravitas to such infamous thoughts as whether ‘to be or not to be’ with gusto. He was at once energetic and dragged down, frenetic yet depressive, twitching yet still inside. Essiedu is a prince on the rise, and if this isn’t the start to an epic career at the RSC I’ll be hugely surprised – he beats Tennant’s hailed Hamlet hands down.

The set and setting were outstanding; to have ‘Hamlet’ as such a bright and colourful event was jarring in the best possible way, showing the real torments of the world Hamlet had to endure. The use of an all-black cast was inspired, showing ‘Hamlet’ to transcend race and culture, and become a play accessible to all.

There wasn’t a weak member amongst the cast, and it’s hard to pick stand outs. I could have cried when Natalie Simpson’s Ophelia lost her mind, especially when screaming horrendously at Gertrude (Tanya Moodie) before being quiet and meek – the role has never been performed move movingly to my eyes. Laertes too, was the most caring brother I have seen in ‘Hamlet’ thus far – I’ve often thought when Laertes declares he’ll give no more tears to one already drowned after Ophelia’s death, it lacks compassion. Marcus Griffiths was not that actor; his denial of tears was difficult, it was a struggle, and it showed him as the caring man his father’s death had set him out to be. Polonius (Cyril Nri) was hysterical as the windbag, and Claudius (Clarence Smith) the perfect blend of ambitiously corrupted and broken.

One thing that happened that I’ve never seen before was Gertrude saw the ghost. This was the moment where I questioned decisions, wondering how the next lines of denial could be spoken, and yet Moodie’s Gertrude was captivating: the bedroom scene became a moment of mother and son united yet divided simultaneously, showing Gertrude making a choice to deny her son’s rationality and use his madness to protect herself. It was unique and well-considered, and made the known play a new experience.

And the end – tragic, devastating and heartstopping. I’m not exaggerating when I say I haven’t seen such a well-choreographed fight scene in my theatrical history; it was flawless without looking overly-rehearsed or like the actors were holding back. And, yet again, a new twist on an old classic in how the fatal blows were dealt, making the excitement as palpable as Hamlet’s hit.

There is just so much to compliment and rave about in this play it could send me mad – a fitting touch for a play so connected with its audience it was literally breathtaking. ‘Hamlet’ plays until the 13th August 2016, and though something be rotten there, visiting the state of Denmark (via Stratford-Upon-Avon) would be a wise choice in this latest RSC masterpiece.





Live Screening: ‘Othello’ @ Royal Shakespeare Theatre

In a continuation of a pioneering project, cinema screens played host to a live screening of the RSC’s 2015 production of ‘Othello’. It was a riveting version of one of Shakespeare’s most contentious pieces that eradicated the issue of race in favour of camaraderie and mental anguish.

In particular, Lucian Msamati’s Iago was something I’d never considered in such a villainous character before: a victim of his own villainy. Indeed, the emotional response to Othello’s torture when demanding the ocular proof, and his obsessive compulsive need to clean and clear after committing one of his many sins made Iago into something previously unconsidered. This was an Iago that wasn’t pure evil, hatred personified etc. This was an Iago with many sides; a betrayed husband, a hurt friend, and as mentioned before, a victim of circumstance and a lie that grew beyond him.

It was interesting that, in cast interviews before the show, Hugh Quarshie (Othello) said of Shakespeare that it isn’t the plays that keep people coming back for more, it’s the stories behind them, and you could tell director Iqbal Khan had taken this stance to heart; that it’s not the events, but the moral and themes behind them that captivate audiences across eras. This was perhaps most obvious in the rap battle – that’s right, a Shakespearean rap battle. Cassio (Jacob Fortune-Lloyd) and the army officer’s rap battle put some of the race contentions back into the play, showing how situations can go from innocent to enraging in a heartbeat – Cassio’s dismissal became less about Iago and more about the responsibilities of role and rank.

My final thought has to be on the casting of a black Iago. Suddenly, a play considered racist became about everything but race, because not only did Iago have no issue with Othello’s background, but he was part of an army that incorporated all races. It was fascinating to have this element taken out; as someone who knows a lot about Shakespeare’s works, it unsteadied my knowledge and made me sit up and pay attention to see how this reinterpretation would pan out for characters and events alike. It meant Othello was mad from jealousy, and not a victim of birth in a foreign land, and Iago felt aggrieved for his inner qualities, and not just for losing position by a foreigner’s hand.

I could mention a lot more – in particular I feel I haven’t done justice to the female leads – but this could go one forever when faced with a play full of delicate intricacies of character, subtle intonations of situations and so on. But once again, the RSC have turned a masterpiece into something more.

Review: ‘Hamlet’ at the Royal Shakespeare Theatre

‘Hamlet’, without a doubt, is my favourite Shakespeare play, probably because of how much of it translates to today enabling it to show the timelessness of the Bard’s work. Even at the end, my friend and I were commenting on how many of today’s sayings we didn’t realise or had forgotten originated in ‘Hamlet’, a particular one for me being ‘to thine own self be true’.


Obviously the last hype over ‘Hamlet’ was the astounding performance by David Tennant, which I only got to witness on DVD sadly. A lot was resting on Jonathan Slinger’s shoulders as the latest incarnation presented by the RSC, and he did not disappoint. I always think the beauty of Shakespeare is that there are little to no stage directions, and the RSC always takes full advantage of this (not always successfully as I found with ‘Titus’ a few weeks ago, but certainly so here). Slinger came on stage almost like an old man, certainly not what I thought Hamlet would be. Then suddenly, he transformed into this man gripped by the obsession of revenge, turning him into a younger, more lithe man in the process. Before going in, we were discussing whether we thought Hamlet was actually mad or not by the end of the play, something with which I disagree: Slinger’s performance made me question my original perspective, so intense was his performance of insanity as the scheming prince. It was a welcome challenge, showing how differently the play could be interpreted and how no one version could ever really be an ‘accurate’ portrayal as such.

Likewise, I’d never imagined some of the other interpretations as such before. Gertrude went from the pliable wife and mother to a hard-nosed character; every line had an element of exasperation and anger towards her son’s refusal to move on and accept his father’s death (and towards buffoon Polonius!). Her hard exterior crumbled in the bedroom scene with Hamlet, turning her from a two dimensional object to someone with emotions and who actually felt the enormity of her first husband’s death and her son’s rage. Claudius (Greg Hicks) surprised me at one point by showing his softer side in the scene where Ophelia hands out flowers in her madness, with his tone showing his dire sympathy at her being a casualty of his intellectual war with Hamlet. Ophelia herself became more than a victim in her interactions with Hamlet, particularly the moments where speech was absent and you saw passion and anger come through more clearly than perhaps they do with the words alone.

The only disappointment for me was Laertes. His initial leaving was fine and easily dealt with, but his return was so lacklustre it was a struggle to see why he had any problem with Denmark, and it was only due to Claudius and Hamlet that we saw how he fitted into events. There was little anger, his remorse was stiffly portrayed, and his grief over Ophelia was pitiful in itself. Nothing seemed to bother this man, and it wasn’t clear why he chose to continue fighting Hamlet and why he would contest the leadership of Denmark. My friend’s young daughter actually didn’t pick up on Claudius manipulating Laertes’ return because of this, so it was disappointing that the climax was marred by this slight underperformance.

Effects were also well played; my particular favourite was how the Ghost was dealt with, with the lighting and music literally making the hairs on the back of my neck prickle, it was so haunting to watch this creature with his helmet make his way towards the central action that it meant when Hamlet finally got his audience with the Ghost the enormity of the moment was felt. A bizarre ending was also a shocker of a way to end, with alarm bells ringing (considering the fire alarm went off when I went to see ‘Macbeth’, also starring Slinger, I was almost heading for the door!) and rain pouring down. Once I’d decided not to flee the building, it was a suitably dramatic ending for a play based almost entirely on words and overthinking – the intensity was finally burst in an act of catharsis.

I was glad at the end that, for a brief moment, Jonathan Slinger came back on stage alone. His performance, as is probably true with most Hamlets, was the glue that held the performance together, and he was astounding. To be that intense and working at such a furious pace throughout is (ironically) an insane challenge, and one he rose to magnificently; move over Tennant, there’s a new Prince in town.

Review: ‘Macbeth’ @ Royal Shakespeare Theatre

Jonathan Slinger as Macbeth

Despite a fire alarm trying its best to halt the performance of ‘Macbeth’ at the RST, nothing was able to stop this absolutely breathtaking performance of one of Shakespeare’s most renowned plays.

The characterisations were all spot on: Macbeth (Jonathan Slinger) was both scared and lustful of the power awaiting him, whilst Lady Macbeth (Aislin Mcguckin) was brilliantly ferocious and manipulative. Lady Macbeth was, for me, fantastically portrayed: she was the source, strength and support of Macbeth’s power, and the only tragedy regarding her was that she died offstage, which I’ve always thought to be one of the travesties of ‘Macbeth’, as it does not do this fierce and strong woman justice, nor does it reflect the descent she faces in the wake of her wicked deeds, particularly after her handwashing frenzy had built her mental state to a dramatic climax.

Macbeth himself was perfect: he moved from benevolent to destructive convincingly, and his mental agitation was portrayed so as to justify his movement between the two. This was particularly well done either side of the interval: the scene where Macbeth confronts Banquo’s ghost was done with Banquo in sight before the interval, and then again without Banquo after the break, to show how Macbeth appeared in ghostly and real terms. Equally, Banquo (Steve Toussaint) was a brilliant balance to Macbeth, showing the positive lineage of the prophecies to contrast to Macbeth’s downfall.

The highlight of the production, though, was how it was altered from a witches story, to a ghost story: the use of children instead of witches, and the later inclusion of these children in Macbeth’s destruction, was absolutely stunning, and one of the most moving moments of any play I’ve seen. The deaths of these children and Lady Macduff (Caroline Martin) were absolutely heartbreaking, which was particularly enhanced by Lady Macduff’s screams of desperation when she could not act to save her family. The use of the ghosts, haunting the play until its just resolution, was a genius idea, changing the play from one of spectacular magic to one of ethereal hauntings to build tension until the climax of action.

The use of the cellos was another welcome addition to the play, as it followed the tension until the end, building the play towards its final note of resolution. The only trifling issue with these was, occasionally, it was difficult to hear the actors above the music, but this wasn’t a frequent problem as the actors clearly knew how to work their stage.

The conclusion to each characters life, through the doorway to heaven or hell, was wonderfully planned, so as to send everyone to the same place but not the same fate, and provide a definitive ending. Also, the rebuilding of the stage, moving from the ruins of the beginning, to the reconstruction of the stain-glass windows by the ending and removal of signs of destruction, was a powerful visual image, providing scenic as well as dramatic resolution and restoration. It was an elegant touch, and definitely succeeded in providing an aesthetic realm to Macbeth’s tragedy.

There is literally little fault to find with the RSC ‘Macbeth’: it was beautifully acted, and filled to bursting with emotion, so as to sweep you along in the tide of Macbeth’s reign. Although helpful hint if you book tickets: avoid the first three rows, that Reverend enunciates to the point of spitting several feet!!