|
|
|
|
|
|
Stars explained: * A production of no real merit
with failings in all areas. ** A production showing evidence of not
enough time or effort, or even talent, and which never breathes any real
life into the piece – or a show lumbered with a terrible script. *** A
good enjoyable show which might have some small flaws but has largely
achieved what it set out to do.**** An excellent show which shows a
great deal of work and stage craft with no noticeable or major
flaws.***** A four star show which has found that extra bit of magic
which lifts theatre to another plane. |
|
|
The war of Bruno’s teeth
God of Carnage
Highbury Players
Highbury Theatre Centre
**** FERDINAND Reille, aged 11, has knocked
out two of 11-year-old Bruno Vallon’s teeth with a stick in a children’s
squabble in a Paris park. So the Reilles, Annette and Alain, are invited by
the Vallon’s, Veronique and Michel, to an uncomfortable tea-party to
discuss the matter in a civilised manner – at least that is the theory. But in Yasmina Reza’s 2006 play it seems civility
is held together by very fragile threads as the meeting descends into a
level of name calling, irrational argument and shouting and screaming
that even the most delinquent children would be hard pushed to match. As the grown-up, civilised meeting starts, with
both sets of parents defending their sons, there is perhaps a hint of
what is to come when Alain, a corporate lawyer, played by Phil Palmer,
objects to the term “armed” with a stick in a statement of fact being
prepared by photographer and writer Veronique, with “furnished” being an
acceptable alternative. As to why Veronique, played by Eléna Serafinas,
is typing a statement in the first place? An indication of her fussiness
in wanting everything just so perhaps? As a non-drinker she has the
dubious distinction of the only one managing hysteria without the
assistance of alcohol as the meeting heads south. Annette, played by Liz Webster, is in wealth
management, the look from Alain suggesting it is his wealth she is
managing, and also manages to drift from reasonable conciliator to rabid
pitbull as the meeting goes on, aided by a liberal contribution of
15-year-old rum. Michel, played by David Weller, has his own
wholesale business selling household hardware, and starts as the
understanding, children will be children, all friends together f
The cast of four pace the changing faces of their characters beautifully. Palmer's Alain makes it more than obvious he does not want to be there and has much more important things to do. In rehearsal: The fathers Michel and Alain, two men who really did not want the parental meeting You can feel his frustration at being trapped in
a pointless meeting and his thumbs must hurt from his constant texting.
The constant phone calls he is receiving about a dodgy pharmaceutical
firm client is his only concern. Eléna Serafinas’s Veronique wants everything to
be just right, ‘I’s dotted, ‘T’s crossed, although we are never quite
sure what she wants beyond Ferdinand realising what he has done and some
form of punishment. She glories in a social conscience, wanting what is
right for Bruno . . . and the poor in Africa. Then there is Liz Webster’s Annette, prim and
proper, the perfect sophisticated wife of a successful international
lawyer, that is until she throws up all over the coffee table and
Veronique’s precious art books – a nice touch of simple yet effective
special effects incidentally. Her projectile vomiting is just the start
of the bile which she is about to unleash. Veronique’s reaction and repulsion as she cleans
up are a picture as Michel fusses about trying to smooth things over –
and dry out vomit splattered art volumes with a hair dryer. Annette then proceeds to become tired and
emotional as a newt as she works her way through Michel’s rum.
Portraying drunks with any authenticity is one of the more difficult
techniques on stage Too often it ends up as pantomime drunks falling
about with slurred speech which might work in farce but in a drama, even
one laced with comedy, it needs to be more subtle and she manages it in
some style as she gets the knives out for her husband, and indeed anyone
else, in a screaming finale. Alain there under protest, shows his impatience
and disdain some lovely looks and glances while the other three slowly
change stances, attitudes and alliances from couples to men against
women, woman against woman, man against man as the arguments range through
hamsters, the place of women, schoolboy gangs, hints of racial prejudice
with the battle of the stick and missing teeth long forgotten. There is a simple, clean set of a modern Paris
flat from director Nigel Higgs and Malcolm Roberts and Higgs, with his
director’s hat on, has kept up not only a good pace but brought out some
lovely gestures and looks from his cast to add a touch of realism to
proceedings. The original English translation production in
2008 won the Olivier award for best comedy, whether it really is a
comedy or drama with laughs is debatable, but it certainly has a good
quota of humour with the quartet squeezing every ounce of fun out a
situation which makes you cringe at times but always stays the right side of believable. The title is perhaps
not its best friend, as seen by a sparse opening night - perhaps it
means more in the original French, Le
Dieu du carnage - but don’t let a
somewhat esoteric name put you off trying a fine production. To
23-05-15. Roger Clarke
12-05-15 |
|
|
|
ather,
almost effusive at first, before heading his own bandwagon on its own
random journey.