This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/stage/2014/jul/13/richard-iii-martin-freeman-trafalgar-studios-review

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Richard III review – Martin Freeman is a contained and cautious king Richard III review – Martin Freeman is a contained and cautious king
(2 days later)
The warnings about Richard III were misleading. The only sonic disturbance I was aware of on press night came when British Gas texted me a quarter of an hour into the show. The theatre was not crammed with Hobbit and Sherlock fans clapping Martin Freeman at the end of each speech. In any case, surely clapping is better than pudding-like inertia. Nor is Jamie Lloyd's production completely drenched in blood. True, some young women near the front were shrewdly supplied with Trafalgar Studios T-shirts to protect them from spattered gore. But a few rows back the bloodiness was pretty much par for the Shakespearean course: one dripping severed head, some slimily incarnadined hands and several lacerated bodies.The warnings about Richard III were misleading. The only sonic disturbance I was aware of on press night came when British Gas texted me a quarter of an hour into the show. The theatre was not crammed with Hobbit and Sherlock fans clapping Martin Freeman at the end of each speech. In any case, surely clapping is better than pudding-like inertia. Nor is Jamie Lloyd's production completely drenched in blood. True, some young women near the front were shrewdly supplied with Trafalgar Studios T-shirts to protect them from spattered gore. But a few rows back the bloodiness was pretty much par for the Shakespearean course: one dripping severed head, some slimily incarnadined hands and several lacerated bodies.
Other warnings might have been issued. These would concern imposing a complicated back-story on an already knotted plot. In line with the theatre's policy of bringing "politically charged, socially conscious" theatre to the West End, Lloyd has updated the action to late 70s England. Soutra Gilmour's design shows an office conference room with spider plants and Anglepoise lamps. Military and civilian personnel yell at each other, sometimes through mics. There is strangulation by telephone cord, demand for oxygen cylinders, and electrical sizzling noise. Almost as long as any soliloquy is the grunting grapple over a desk as Richard kills off another unwanted wife.Other warnings might have been issued. These would concern imposing a complicated back-story on an already knotted plot. In line with the theatre's policy of bringing "politically charged, socially conscious" theatre to the West End, Lloyd has updated the action to late 70s England. Soutra Gilmour's design shows an office conference room with spider plants and Anglepoise lamps. Military and civilian personnel yell at each other, sometimes through mics. There is strangulation by telephone cord, demand for oxygen cylinders, and electrical sizzling noise. Almost as long as any soliloquy is the grunting grapple over a desk as Richard kills off another unwanted wife.
A programme note explains (and an explanation is needed) that this takes place after a coup has followed Britain's 1978-79 "winter of discontent". This maps not very clearly and not very easily on to Shakespeare's dynastic drama. Jo Stone-Fewings's insinuating Buckingham – physically and morally bendy – is utterly plausible as a spin doctor. On the other hand, Maggie Steed's stentorian Queen Margaret, always looming up, handbag dangling, to deliver a curse, is awkwardly stranded between two worlds. She is part historical harridan (you know she has gone mad when her hair comes down) and part 70s power-person, with that bag presumably meant to signal Mrs Thatcher.A programme note explains (and an explanation is needed) that this takes place after a coup has followed Britain's 1978-79 "winter of discontent". This maps not very clearly and not very easily on to Shakespeare's dynastic drama. Jo Stone-Fewings's insinuating Buckingham – physically and morally bendy – is utterly plausible as a spin doctor. On the other hand, Maggie Steed's stentorian Queen Margaret, always looming up, handbag dangling, to deliver a curse, is awkwardly stranded between two worlds. She is part historical harridan (you know she has gone mad when her hair comes down) and part 70s power-person, with that bag presumably meant to signal Mrs Thatcher.
Martin Freeman is an original, not massively humped Richard, who coolly examines each phrase as if it were a poisoned proposition. Contained and caustic, he gets his way not by seductive snarling; not even exactly by fear, but by careful planning. He has strong support from a hollowed-out Gina McKee.Martin Freeman is an original, not massively humped Richard, who coolly examines each phrase as if it were a poisoned proposition. Contained and caustic, he gets his way not by seductive snarling; not even exactly by fear, but by careful planning. He has strong support from a hollowed-out Gina McKee.
Yet for all the frenzy, this is not a frightening Richard III. It is hard to feel that much hangs on these nasty skirmishes bunched up among the office furniture. This is a play that is full not only of political crisis but also of dreams and prophecy. The long reach of its wildness is diminished here.Yet for all the frenzy, this is not a frightening Richard III. It is hard to feel that much hangs on these nasty skirmishes bunched up among the office furniture. This is a play that is full not only of political crisis but also of dreams and prophecy. The long reach of its wildness is diminished here.
Susannah Clapp reviews The Crucible at the Old Vic