January 19, 2023
The Inheritance Part 1: A Provocative, Poignant Epic for Modern Timesby Randi / December 20, 2018
It’s Theatre Thursday! Today’s show is Antony & Cleopatra, at London’s National Theatre until January 19.
Does anyone else always forget that Billy Shakes wrote plays about historical figures that weren’t kings of England? Well, I honestly forgot that Shakespeare wrote a play about Mark Antony and Cleopatra and their weird manipulative love that drove Rome to war and them to their deaths. I was too busy reading the fun ones. But despite my ignorance of this play, and despite the fact that this production of Antony & Cleopatra clocks in at 3 ½ hours with only one intermission (whereas The Inheritance Part 1 is (10 minutes) shorter and has two), we had to see the big f-ing thing because it stars RALPH FIENNES! That’s pronounced ‘rafe’, to rhyme with ‘the English paaaaaaaaatient’, which if you are like me you hear Billy Crystal singing every time anyone mentions Ralph Fiennes. Seeing him onstage for hours, let’s just say I sang this Oscar opening number (in my head) a whole heck of a lot. Anyway, with Ralph playing Mark Antony, and with Tony-winner Sophie Okonedo as Cleopatra, this production seemed like a must-see. Turns out, it’s more of a ‘see if you have the time but don’t run or risk injury getting there’ kinda thing.
Does anyone else always forget that Billy Shakes wrote plays about historical figures that weren’t kings of England? Well, I honestly forgot that Shakespeare wrote a play about Mark Antony and Cleopatra and their weird manipulative love that drove Rome to war and them to their deaths. I was too busy reading the fun ones. But despite my ignorance of this play, and despite the fact that this production of Antony & Cleopatra clocks in at 3 ½ hours with only one intermission (whereas The Inheritance Part 1 is (10 minutes) shorter and has two), we had to see the big f-ing thing because it stars RALPH FIENNES! That’s pronounced ‘rafe’, to rhyme with ‘the English paaaaaaaaatient’, which if you are like me you hear Billy Crystal singing every time anyone mentions Ralph Fiennes. Seeing him onstage for hours, let’s just say I sang this Oscar opening number (in my head) a whole heck of a lot. Anyway, with Ralph playing Mark Antony, and with Tony-winner Sophie Okonedo as Cleopatra, this production seemed like a must-see. Turns out, it’s more of a ‘see if you have the time but don’t run or risk injury getting there’ kinda thing.
You may think you know all there is to know about Cleopatra because of what, the Liz Taylor movie? Did you know that Julius Caesar was her second husband, and after she died, she had a whoooole thing with Mark Antony, who became ruler of Rome after he and his friends killed Caesar’s assassins? Man alive how OLD were these people? and isn’t it weird for Cleo to be like ‘erma erma you killed the guys who killed my love, so now I love you!’ it’s weird. Anyway we’ll get into the plot. It was worth the trip to see Ralph and Sophie, who are individually great but together they are mmm not so great. If early viewers of the Moulin Rouge! musical are to be believed, Ralph and Sophie are the Shakespeare equivalent of Aaron Tveit and Karen Olivo: Each does a great job, and you can’t think of who you’d replace, but the show would be better if one of them were replaced because together they have zeeeero chemistry. It’s like that. Actually it’s not because I’d replace Ralph as much as I love him. Sophie as Cleopatra is the fireball emoji. I needed a little bit of time to warm up to Sophie’s performance, but after that she was astounding – histrionic and unstable but captivating. Ralph seems miscast as her lover, because Cleopatra and Antony should be fiery, and if they don’t have serious chemistry, what on earth are they risking the future of the republic and of Egypt for? I mean he had more chemistry with Jennifer Lopez in “Maid in Manhattan”. Honestly, I thought at first that it was about their age difference, with Ralph too old to be all lusty with the younger Okonedo, whom I assumed was in her 30s even though she was nominated for an Oscar for Hotel Rwanda and that was like decades ago. Um, she is FIFTY! And he is 56. So they are like the same age. Damn, Sophie, r u magicked? But even though they are IRL about the same age, they didn’t seem it and they just didn’t vibe together.
Oh by the way Ralph’s real name is Ralph Nathaniel Twisleton-Wykeham-Fiennes.
So this play takes place after Julius Caesar is assassinated and his assassins are killed. It would be fun for you to read Billy’s Julius Caesar first and then see this! Remember how much we loved that? (Probably my best review ever.) Mark Antony rules Rome as part of the triumvirate, or three-men-ate, instituted after Caesar’s death, so he is in power alongside Lepidus (who isn’t really important; I think he was tired and was napping) and Octavius. They sometimes call him Octavius, and sometimes Caesar (Julius Caesar was his great-uncle and he is his adopted son and heir, not that they tell you this in the play), but never the most well known of his names: Augustus, as in the first emperor of Rome. Women in the bathroom line thought that it was regular Caesar, not knowing there were several people who used that name. Ugh! Not saying we should cater to idiots but wouldn’t things have been clearer calling him Augustus? I guess it gives away the ending but can you spoil ancient history?
Anyway the triumvirate is ruling Rome and taking names but they’re pissed at Mark Antony because he is shirking his duties and living in up in Egypt with his lover Cleopatra, and transforming in his men’s opinions into a ‘strumpet’s fool’. Rude. We meet Cleopatra’s entourage and see how she seems fun but is terrifying too, and we see Antony completely immersed in resort life, wearing loose linen pants and shirts that show too much chest hair. Cleopatra and Antony make funny jokes about how much his wife Fulvia sucks, and it’s so funny, but then news arrives that Fulvia has died, and so they make more jokes about how great that is! Mah wife! She dead! They don’t come across as the most sympathetic of characters (not that anyone thought they would be).
Antony is happily drunk and swimming all day in the sun, but Octavius, tired of his nonsense, calls him back to Rome because their thrupledom is threatened by pirates, and not the fun Johnny Depp kind. In an attempt to heal the rift between the two leaders, Octavius’s general Agrippa (played by a woman who spoke in a really annoying way, I’m sorry) suggests that Antony, newly single heyoooo, marry Octavius’s sister Octavia, who is quiet and blonde, so, perfect. I like that they gave Antony literally a hot minute to mourn before marrying this old fart off onto a young lady whose parents were not too creative with the names. But Antony and Octavius shake hands at their amazing negotiation of the female property and all seems to be well. Except Antony’s right hand man Enobarbus (now his parents were creative) notes that this prim blonde lady will not be enough for Antony since he loves the wildly, mm, interesting Cleopatra. Enobarbus proclaims “other women cloy the appetites they feed, but she makes hungry where most she satisfies”, which sounds dirty. Cleopatra hears of the marriage and blames the messenger for the news, which is like exactly what Shakespeare told you NOT to do. That’s Billy’s Rule #1! But everyone assures her that Octavia is unattractive and boring and, most importantly, short, which Sophie’s Cleopatra uses to hilarious effect in the one scene that made me laugh out loud.
Antony and Octavius go to one of the pirates on his SUBMARINE (more on that below) and they make a truce, and then they all have a raucous drunken party which is my nightmare to even watch, and people play loud drums and you’re like how many hours of this until the interval’, but then after they leave, Octavius and Lepidus decide to break the truce and wage war against the submarine pirate. Antony is not happy, and it does seem like kind of a dick move. So thus begins the war between Antony and Octavius. Cleopatra ‘helps’ Antony, but then they just flee and leave all his troops to die, which is also a dick move. No one in this play comes off too well.
So, A and C are back in Egypt trying to live large while war is coming, and they are sooo toxic together. They may love each other but they also seem to really hate each other and use their love as weapons. It’s not cute for them. The night before a big battle on land, Enobarbus deserts Antony and joins forces with Octavius, for reasons incredibly unclear. This production tried to make it look like he was having a thang with Agrippa, since here she was a woman, but it’s not supported by the text that he would have done it for her so like, why. Antony loses the battle and, like a typical white man burdened with superfragile masculinity, he blames Cleopatra. “This foul Egyptian hath betrayed me!” he shouts, because it’s easier for him/men to condemn women than take responsibility for being shitty and losing battles. He announces he will kill her (still so typical, ya basic), so Cleopatra breaks Shakespeare Rule #2 and decides to fake her own death to make him love her again. Then she’ll pull a Ross at his funeral and come out of the bedroom and be like “I knew you loved me! I’m still alive!” Basic. Of course, Antony hears that she is dead and decides to kill himself, but he’s an asshole so he orders his soldier to do it. The soldier is so upset by this that the soldier decides to kill himself instead, and Antony is like wow what a brave kid I just led to suicide, I should be that brave, oh me, and so he tries to kill himself but it doesn’t take right away. Cleopatra eventually does her famous snake dance in her monument, but not before she kisses one of her ladies in waiting who *dies immediately*, from lesbianism???
Needless to say, there’s some real plot going on. Sure most of Shakespeare’s histories are masterpieces, but is this? I hate everyone in it. And it’s weird to see so much liberty taken with facts. And it was extra weird in that regard to see most of the cast in modern garb in a directorial attempt to make the story relevant to today, when it’s freaking about CLEOPATRA. I’m cool with placing older works in different locations and/or eras, but I always find it strange to do that when the characters are based on real historical figures. Like they didn’t have machine guns in the Battle of Actium, guys. But the modern look did allow for the two best parts of this production: Sophie’s costumes and the set design. The rest of the cast’s costumes overall were just fine, so it seemed clear that all the money and creative vision was spent on draping Cleopatra in the most gorgeous clothes onstage this year, and it paid off. Man alive were they amazing! I really wanted to shout WHAT YASSS every time she entered a scene in a new incredible flowing satin gown with built-in cape. She had so many built-in capes! Who is she, David Rose???
But the most amazing part of the show was the set. Cleopatra’s palace was shown from the back where they lounged around a gorgeous three-section pool, filled with water that various cast members fell into at times (on purpose!). It looked like a fancy hotel in Morocco or something, beautifully tiled and glittering in the light. I think I actually gasped when that set miraculously fell under the cavernous stage and up from the underground came an enormous submarine. And I mean freaking enormous. Where are they storing these massive sets! I can’t fathom the engineering genius that allows for the rapid transition between these truly magnificent pieces. Cleopatra’s triangular monument was also impressively built, and the lighting along with it really nailed Egypt’s brutal sun. I was less enthused about the various triumvirs offices, made to look like modern government offices with a hint of evil billionaire lairs, but that’s mostly due to my aversion to the modernization of the piece in that regard. It’s weird seeing Octavius Caesar do his government work in a room that looks like it has the buttons for an evil billionaire’s illegal nukes while we watch multiple screens there just for their own sake.
So, yeah, the story is not put forth as compellingly as the visuals, sadly, and I found myself wishing the performances and plot could match the incredible magic of the set. But it was great to see Sophie and Ralph live (that’s long-i ‘live’ like in person; they die) and I’m truly obsessed with the set design, so all in all it was worth seeing.
INFORMATION
The program is ATROCIOUS. Actors have headshots for a reason! Use them! What kind of program doesn’t have the pictures and names next to each other? I’m so mad, and as I learned from the show, I should blame a woman for this.
The National Theatre continues to boggle the mind re its staffing decisions. No ushers or managers or staff of any sort can be found at any level of the theatre, outside the main entrance (what, 8 flights of stairs down?) and outside of bartenders, who are too swamped to deal with non-alcohol related questions. It’s really despicable, that if you have someone recording the show – or someone who needs medical attention – there’s no one to be found. They almost deserve to have their show recorded.
Related Posts
London’s Current Opera Offerings Apparently Chosen by E.L. James, Directed by Roman Polanski, with Chris Brown as Consultant
macauley.cuny.edu
WHAT is happening in London’s opera scene? A whole lot of shit, that’s what’s happening. Like there wasn’t enough misogyny in the world and in all forms of entertainment, now London’s opera bigwigs apparently decided that all the biggest summer productions at the city’s most respected opera houses would not only be anti-feminist but anti-female, pro-rape, pro-violence against women, and not good. Big steaming poop messes are at the English National Opera and the Royal Opera House and are unrelated to this week’s heat wave.
First off, the one that has been in the news. Guillaume Tell at the Royal Opera. This Rossini opera is about William Tell, could you have guessed? You know what’s interesting about this show? It was the last opera Rossini wrote even though he lived for 40 more years after it. I think he was shamed by nighttime visions of this future production that kept him up at night and he was all, I’m never giving these futuristic f**kers any more fodder to be assholes with, or something.
So, it starts with the Lone Ranger theme, and then villagers sing about weddings, archery contests occur, and Swiss people get upset that their country is oppressed (by Austria). After two acts of that comes a scene in which soldier baddies celebrate 100 years Austrian oppression in Switzerland. The baddies drink and sing and then notice that Tell and his son aren’t joining in, so they’re like, oh we gotta arrest you, even though we respect what a great archer you are, do you want to tell your son to run or is he gonna stick around?
So that’s the third act of Guillaume Tell. Do you know what happens in the current abomination at the Royal Opera House? When they celebrate Austrian rule, the soldiers drink and sing and sing and drink, and then they take the servant girl who is providing the alcohol, and they force themselves on her, and they pour all the wine on her so she’s soaked through, and then the men put her on the table and take off her clothes (the audience sees her naked), and all the many many men sexually assault her further at gunpoint before Tell rescues her.
That doesn’t sound like the opera as written, does it? It’s not. That is utter bullshit completely added in by the dirty f**kface director Damiano Michieletto, bag o’ dicks director of opera at Covent Garden Kasper Hotlen, and the producers at the ROH. None of that violence adds anything to the show, so there is no excuse for it. I’m sure they argue that they wanted to show how terrible those men were, but it was not necessary to do so, especially to such an extent. All it really accomplished was reminding everyone in the audience that people still consider violence against women to be totally okay and permitted. Luckily, the audience booed during this scene, so much so that news outlets actually did mention the booing, but how many people walked out? How many cancelled their subscriptions? What’s more important, and disturbing: how many people are now buying tickets to the rest of the performances to catch this ‘newsworthy’ production?
This production should have been vilified for this gratuitous brutality and I know I will not be giving the Royal Opera House any money until they apologize. Indeed, Holten said they will not apologize for the scene and they refuse to edit it even though it will be broadcast in movie theatres. He described it as “an honest attempt to talk about the reality of war” and said people maybe “felt we should have warned them better, as people may not want to be exposed to sexual violence”. That’s not it, you ignorant douchebag. People don’t want to see in their entertainment depictions of what at least 60% of your audience has to live with and fear every day of their lives if it is not necessary to convey the message you hope to. And this was not necessary. Did you know, Kasper, that that’s the definition of gratuitous? I’m sure it was really fun for all you men involved to be like, ‘oh hey we can do this shit because it makes people realize how bad war is.’ A) People know how bad war is. B) All it did was remind people how terrible modern society still is when it comes to understanding rape culture. You, sir, do not understand it.
***
Now to the one that has not received any media attention that I know of, probably because people with the power to make things known in the media don’t really realize how misogynistic this one is, especially since there’s only so much opera coverage allowed by the populace. “Carmen”, Bizet’s famous opera about the wiles of a Gypsy woman, is playing at the English National Opera. First things first, the ENO does all their productions in English. It sucks. I’ve been there a lot, and the productions are sometimes great, but it’s never my or most opera fans preference to see works translated from their original language. I saw “Rigoletto” once in Austria and it was in German instead of Italian. It was terrible. Oh but they did the famous aria “La donna e mobile” in Italian. Just that part.
Moving on, “Carmen” is a pretty misogynistic opera to begin with, but ENO succeeded in making it even more gratuitously so with this ‘modernized’ production. I don’t understand why directors feel the need to unnecessarily change aspects of great works just for the sake of changing it, when it doesn’t add any artistic value. There are some alterations or reimaginings or revivals that are worthy, like the recent “Spring Awakening” production in California that used many deaf and disabled cast members to highlight the rampant lack of understanding and capability in the show. That sounds brilliant. The half-assed modernization of “Carmen” was not: it kept most of the same ideas – lots of soldiers, being in Spain, smugglers – and added hysterically hideous ‘90s-era-Italy outfits and like 6 cars, doing the smuggling, onstage at one time. I don’t know what they were going for.
So “Carmen” tells the story of a seductive gypsy who seduces men and is a gypsy. She is a cigarette girl among hundreds of cigarette girls who apparently work in the same barracks as hundreds of soldiers. It was a big cast. The soldiers are all disgusting. They treat the women like toys and Carmen like a piece of meat. They grope everyone and repeatedly stick her face in their crotchular regions. But Carmen enjoys it, apparently, because she is seductive, so she is asking for it. Hence it being a super misogynistic show as written, differentiating it from the above monstrosity.
The soldiers beg for her to choose a lover and stop taunting them by existing, so she chooses Jose, who was ignoring her. Smart plan! She sings her super famous aria that goes ‘da dum dum dum!’ about how those who love her should beware. Then all the girls fight like really actually fight, because who doesn’t love women fighting and hitting and scratching each other with their claws? Carmen is accused of whipping out a knife in what should have been merely a skin fight, so the male official says she’s going to be arrested and tells Jose to tie her hands together while they figure out what to do because small man brain. That’s what happens normally.
Here, the men tie Carmen to a flagpole with the official’s workbelt, take off her shirtdress, and position her so she’s on her knees. People I talked to at intermission thought this was disgusting. One woman who knows the opera well felt that tying her up completely, as opposed to just her hands, unnecessarily made her subordinate and submissive and was just gross.
Carmen then beguiles Jose, tasked with guarding her, and he becomes pretty infatuated with her. He lets her escape, whereupon he is imprisoned for a month or two.
When he gets out, he and we find Carmen with her smuggler friends, who are driving regular-sized cars across the stage to show how modern the show is. Three women (and one little girl, sadly) compose the group with 3 or so indistinguishably disgusting men, who assault them and grope them all with no regard for which woman it is or what she’s doing or how drunk she is (very drunk). They meet Escamillo, the famous toreador, who sings the famous toreador song (and not very well, also sadly). Escamillo ‘falls in love’ with Carmen, who is instead in love with her Jose, whom she is now seeing for the second time ever. Jose has to go back to camp for nighttime, and Carmen, being an awful no good female who doesn’t understand that men have to work, gets really upset that he isn’t willing to sacrifice his job for her, because if he really loved her he would. This is apparently how Rossini thought women’s little brains worked. As written, Jose’s superior officer arrives looking for Carmen (every man thinks he is in love with her), and Jose fights him. Having done that, he can’t go back to soldiering, so he joins the smugglers.
Here, he punches Carmen instead, for mocking his need to go back to work. She falls to the ground in fetal position, where she remains while Jose sings not about how he’s sorry but about how much he loves her. Then he cuddles up next to her and declares his love more. And what choice does she have but to accept it? What other kind of love could she possibly know?
Then more cars appear and it’s really just nonsense.
Then, Carmen gets bored with Jose, because that’s how women are, those fickle people, and the toreador tells her he loves her. Hey guess what, she returns the favor now. That happens really with no build up, I thought she was lying, but that’s how women do, just transfer affection really easily when they’re bored. Then Carmen and her friends do tarot cards, and Carmen gets the one saying she’s going to die. No one else seems really worried, though Carmen tells them it’s probably Jose.
Escamillo invites pretty much all of Spain to see him in his next bull-fight, and during that famous song we get to watch 100 or so actors in neon shorts and smartphones jumping up and down in unison for a good 2 minutes. It’s like they stopped trying. Anyway, outside the arena, Carmen and her two girlfriends are about to enter, before they leave her and are like, ‘Hey don’t get killed, we know that’s a possibility but we’re going to leave you alone now.’ Carmen keeps a watchful eye until she needs to do her makeup, and Jose sneaks in while she is looking in the compact, because oh girls with their makeup! So silly! So Jose is devastated that she no longer wants to be with him, even though he hit her, and even though now she loves someone else, so he kills her. At the end, after Jose kills her, he normally confesses to the murder. Here, instead, he grabs her by the lifeless foot and drags her offstage as the lights go out. Cute!
So ENO is not nearly as guilty as ROH for disgusting and gratuitous anti-female sentiment, because so much of it is in the text, but how they chose to augment what was already a plethora of misogyny reinforces how normal all the people involved considered it to be. This already has violence against women, but let’s make it worse! This one doesn’t have violence against women, so let’s add a lot, for art’s sake. It’s not art, guys. It’s violence, and it’s perpetuating the acceptance and sickening tolerance of rape culture.
So that’s the third act of Guillaume Tell. Do you know what happens in the current abomination at the Royal Opera House? When they celebrate Austrian rule, the soldiers drink and sing and sing and drink, and then they take the servant girl who is providing the alcohol, and they force themselves on her, and they pour all the wine on her so she’s soaked through, and then the men put her on the table and take off her clothes (the audience sees her naked), and all the many many men sexually assault her further at gunpoint before Tell rescues her.
That doesn’t sound like the opera as written, does it? It’s not. That is utter bullshit completely added in by the dirty f**kface director Damiano Michieletto, bag o’ dicks director of opera at Covent Garden Kasper Hotlen, and the producers at the ROH. None of that violence adds anything to the show, so there is no excuse for it. I’m sure they argue that they wanted to show how terrible those men were, but it was not necessary to do so, especially to such an extent. All it really accomplished was reminding everyone in the audience that people still consider violence against women to be totally okay and permitted. Luckily, the audience booed during this scene, so much so that news outlets actually did mention the booing, but how many people walked out? How many cancelled their subscriptions? What’s more important, and disturbing: how many people are now buying tickets to the rest of the performances to catch this ‘newsworthy’ production?
This production should have been vilified for this gratuitous brutality and I know I will not be giving the Royal Opera House any money until they apologize. Indeed, Holten said they will not apologize for the scene and they refuse to edit it even though it will be broadcast in movie theatres. He described it as “an honest attempt to talk about the reality of war” and said people maybe “felt we should have warned them better, as people may not want to be exposed to sexual violence”. That’s not it, you ignorant douchebag. People don’t want to see in their entertainment depictions of what at least 60% of your audience has to live with and fear every day of their lives if it is not necessary to convey the message you hope to. And this was not necessary. Did you know, Kasper, that that’s the definition of gratuitous? I’m sure it was really fun for all you men involved to be like, ‘oh hey we can do this shit because it makes people realize how bad war is.’ A) People know how bad war is. B) All it did was remind people how terrible modern society still is when it comes to understanding rape culture. You, sir, do not understand it.
***
Now to the one that has not received any media attention that I know of, probably because people with the power to make things known in the media don’t really realize how misogynistic this one is, especially since there’s only so much opera coverage allowed by the populace. “Carmen”, Bizet’s famous opera about the wiles of a Gypsy woman, is playing at the English National Opera. First things first, the ENO does all their productions in English. It sucks. I’ve been there a lot, and the productions are sometimes great, but it’s never my or most opera fans preference to see works translated from their original language. I saw “Rigoletto” once in Austria and it was in German instead of Italian. It was terrible. Oh but they did the famous aria “La donna e mobile” in Italian. Just that part.
Moving on, “Carmen” is a pretty misogynistic opera to begin with, but ENO succeeded in making it even more gratuitously so with this ‘modernized’ production. I don’t understand why directors feel the need to unnecessarily change aspects of great works just for the sake of changing it, when it doesn’t add any artistic value. There are some alterations or reimaginings or revivals that are worthy, like the recent “Spring Awakening” production in California that used many deaf and disabled cast members to highlight the rampant lack of understanding and capability in the show. That sounds brilliant. The half-assed modernization of “Carmen” was not: it kept most of the same ideas – lots of soldiers, being in Spain, smugglers – and added hysterically hideous ‘90s-era-Italy outfits and like 6 cars, doing the smuggling, onstage at one time. I don’t know what they were going for.
So “Carmen” tells the story of a seductive gypsy who seduces men and is a gypsy. She is a cigarette girl among hundreds of cigarette girls who apparently work in the same barracks as hundreds of soldiers. It was a big cast. The soldiers are all disgusting. They treat the women like toys and Carmen like a piece of meat. They grope everyone and repeatedly stick her face in their crotchular regions. But Carmen enjoys it, apparently, because she is seductive, so she is asking for it. Hence it being a super misogynistic show as written, differentiating it from the above monstrosity.
The soldiers beg for her to choose a lover and stop taunting them by existing, so she chooses Jose, who was ignoring her. Smart plan! She sings her super famous aria that goes ‘da dum dum dum!’ about how those who love her should beware. Then all the girls fight like really actually fight, because who doesn’t love women fighting and hitting and scratching each other with their claws? Carmen is accused of whipping out a knife in what should have been merely a skin fight, so the male official says she’s going to be arrested and tells Jose to tie her hands together while they figure out what to do because small man brain. That’s what happens normally.
Here, the men tie Carmen to a flagpole with the official’s workbelt, take off her shirtdress, and position her so she’s on her knees. People I talked to at intermission thought this was disgusting. One woman who knows the opera well felt that tying her up completely, as opposed to just her hands, unnecessarily made her subordinate and submissive and was just gross.
Carmen then beguiles Jose, tasked with guarding her, and he becomes pretty infatuated with her. He lets her escape, whereupon he is imprisoned for a month or two.
When he gets out, he and we find Carmen with her smuggler friends, who are driving regular-sized cars across the stage to show how modern the show is. Three women (and one little girl, sadly) compose the group with 3 or so indistinguishably disgusting men, who assault them and grope them all with no regard for which woman it is or what she’s doing or how drunk she is (very drunk). They meet Escamillo, the famous toreador, who sings the famous toreador song (and not very well, also sadly). Escamillo ‘falls in love’ with Carmen, who is instead in love with her Jose, whom she is now seeing for the second time ever. Jose has to go back to camp for nighttime, and Carmen, being an awful no good female who doesn’t understand that men have to work, gets really upset that he isn’t willing to sacrifice his job for her, because if he really loved her he would. This is apparently how Rossini thought women’s little brains worked. As written, Jose’s superior officer arrives looking for Carmen (every man thinks he is in love with her), and Jose fights him. Having done that, he can’t go back to soldiering, so he joins the smugglers.
Here, he punches Carmen instead, for mocking his need to go back to work. She falls to the ground in fetal position, where she remains while Jose sings not about how he’s sorry but about how much he loves her. Then he cuddles up next to her and declares his love more. And what choice does she have but to accept it? What other kind of love could she possibly know?
Then more cars appear and it’s really just nonsense.
Then, Carmen gets bored with Jose, because that’s how women are, those fickle people, and the toreador tells her he loves her. Hey guess what, she returns the favor now. That happens really with no build up, I thought she was lying, but that’s how women do, just transfer affection really easily when they’re bored. Then Carmen and her friends do tarot cards, and Carmen gets the one saying she’s going to die. No one else seems really worried, though Carmen tells them it’s probably Jose.
Escamillo invites pretty much all of Spain to see him in his next bull-fight, and during that famous song we get to watch 100 or so actors in neon shorts and smartphones jumping up and down in unison for a good 2 minutes. It’s like they stopped trying. Anyway, outside the arena, Carmen and her two girlfriends are about to enter, before they leave her and are like, ‘Hey don’t get killed, we know that’s a possibility but we’re going to leave you alone now.’ Carmen keeps a watchful eye until she needs to do her makeup, and Jose sneaks in while she is looking in the compact, because oh girls with their makeup! So silly! So Jose is devastated that she no longer wants to be with him, even though he hit her, and even though now she loves someone else, so he kills her. At the end, after Jose kills her, he normally confesses to the murder. Here, instead, he grabs her by the lifeless foot and drags her offstage as the lights go out. Cute!
So ENO is not nearly as guilty as ROH for disgusting and gratuitous anti-female sentiment, because so much of it is in the text, but how they chose to augment what was already a plethora of misogyny reinforces how normal all the people involved considered it to be. This already has violence against women, but let’s make it worse! This one doesn’t have violence against women, so let’s add a lot, for art’s sake. It’s not art, guys. It’s violence, and it’s perpetuating the acceptance and sickening tolerance of rape culture.
“Macbeth” at the Royal Shakespeare Company: Stop Trying to Modernize Billy and Just Let the Genius Be
IT’S THEATRE THURSDAY! Today we are talking about ‘Macbeth’ at the Royal Shakespeare Company Theatre in Stratford-Upon-Avon. I KNOW!
To celebrate Jesus’s zombification this past week, my family took a wee little trip to Stratford-Upon-Avon, the birthplace of that other influential man, William Shakespeare, or as I call him endearingly, Billy Shakes. We visited the wee little house where he was born and grew up, and the not so wee cottage where his future wife, Anne Hathaway (not that one) grew up down the road, as well as the truly authentic Ye Olde Souvenir Shop of yore where my mom could buy magnets of Meghan Markle. But that’s all for a different post. Today is Theatre Thursday, and so we will talk about the most exciting thing to me about visiting Stratford – seeing a performance by the Royal Shakespeare Company. Our dates coincided with their performance of Macbeth, which despite reading a lot and knowing in various inspired-by forms, I’ve never seen performed as written. Exciting! Guess what, Macbeth is forked up. Like reals forked up. It’s so gory and troubling and violent and creepy. That Billy tho.
To celebrate Jesus’s zombification this past week, my family took a wee little trip to Stratford-Upon-Avon, the birthplace of that other influential man, William Shakespeare, or as I call him endearingly, Billy Shakes. We visited the wee little house where he was born and grew up, and the not so wee cottage where his future wife, Anne Hathaway (not that one) grew up down the road, as well as the truly authentic Ye Olde Souvenir Shop of yore where my mom could buy magnets of Meghan Markle. But that’s all for a different post. Today is Theatre Thursday, and so we will talk about the most exciting thing to me about visiting Stratford – seeing a performance by the Royal Shakespeare Company. Our dates coincided with their performance of Macbeth, which despite reading a lot and knowing in various inspired-by forms, I’ve never seen performed as written. Exciting! Guess what, Macbeth is forked up. Like reals forked up. It’s so gory and troubling and violent and creepy. That Billy tho.
If you don’t know, Macbeth tells the story of this guy named Macbeth who is close to the king and calls everyone cousin and his wife is cray and he is visited by three prophetic witches who tell him that he will become king while reciting names of Olsen Twins direct-to-video movies. Macbeth is like okay I guess I’ll kill the king so I can become king, even though he’s not next in line of succession but bully for him, the king’s children flee, wisely assuming that whoever killed the king will likely go after them, the princes. Macbeth becomes all consumed by murderous ambition and keeps killing anyone who might figure out his evil deeds or get in his way and it’s prettayyy prettayyy scary. He kills or orders to be killed guards and waitstaff and his best friend and poor Macduff’s entire family, even the little baby (and, in this production, the wife was pregnant again). He’s a bad guy. And his wife is a bad lady. At first she talks shit about how they should totally kill whoever they need to in order to rule Scotland, no big deal what a good plan, but she also makes passing comments about how she would happily kill babies if they were suckling at her breast and you’re like wait what, the fuck did you just say? So a lot of Shakespeare scholars think that she’s probably killed babies that she had and didn’t want, which is a whole other thing we don’t need to talk about, but suffice it to say that she starts out at a pretty high level of evil and doesn’t have far to go in order to become completely crayballs bananapants real quick.
This production of Macbeth attempted to modernize it just a wee little bit, by performing the original text (I mean thank god; no one coming to the RSC wants to hear anything but the original text) but with the actors dressed in modern attire: gowns at the dinners, regular suits, and the kingsmen and army people wearing camo and bulletproof vests during battle scenes. It was unnecessary. I understand the desire to put your own stamp on a production of a play that has been performed innumerable times, but there’s no need to update Shakespeare. I mean it’s Shakespeare. It’s been performed a billion trillion times because it is pretty solid as is. And if you are going to try to modernize it, changing up the costumes is a half-assed attempt that really isn’t going to cut it. Go big or stick to what’s foolproof. But don’t go big if you are the Royal Shakespeare Company because people are coming to see og Shakespeare, you know? Just do it og. The few set pieces were also modern: desk chairs, dinner set, water cooler, &c. I don’t actually get the water cooler bit, because that and a few waiting-room style chairs made an area look like, well, a hospital waiting room, and at first I thought it was going to be directed to make it look like all the action was just inside a deranged person’s head, and I was all ‘hey I liked this better when it starred Alan Cumming on Broadway’ and while there are indeed two deranged persons onstage, there was never anything hinting at it being a mental patient’s hallucination or anything like that.
But forget everything I’ve said so far. Really, the only thing you need to know was that they had the witches portrayed by three little girls in pajamas and slippers carrying creepy baby dolls and it was the CREEPIEST FORKING THING YOU’VE EVER SEEN. Like, the witches are already scary. Little girls in horror movies are the scariest things. And baby dolls of the sort they were carrying are beyond terrifying. You put them all together and what do you get, the most bloodcurdling rendition of the witches in the history of time. NOT OKAY. NOT APPROVED. Their tiny little voices in unison will give me nightmares for years.
A big other directing decision that I understand but highly disapprove of was the use of a digital timer right in the middle of the stage, counting down two hours from when Macbeth kills the king until Macbeth himself dies (do we need spoiler warnings? you’ve had 400 years). It’s saying something lofty about how we have limited time and everything is a matter of time and time is of the essence or WHATEVER but all I could think was how on earth did that entire scene take only 4 minutes? what time do you think it stops at for intermission? is it going to keep running through intermission or do I really have an hour and 40 minutes left? wait what just happened I was too busy watching the seconds tick? So, yeah, it was incredibly distracting and everyone I was with and everyone we spoke to at intermission agreed that it was too distracting for what it was worth. It made the play seem longer than it is and it took me out of it. It’s hard enough to understand the Elizabethan language without having your attention spar with a distracting clock.
The first act did drag a big even aside from the timer situation. Maybe because there wasn’t enough of Lady Macbeth, as the actress playing her, Niamh Cusack, was the strongest in the cast. Maybe my wee little brain just needed the time to acclimate to the language; it’s been a while since my last Shakespearean outing. Also I was counting the minutes (well, tracking via the timer) until I could yell at my dad for whispering. Also the person behind us was super sick and coughing the entire time and I couldn’t wait until the lights came up and I could say ‘hey did you mean to go to the hospital because you went to the wrong place.’ The second act was much more captivating as all the shit went to shit and as you felt the comeuppance of our leading evildoers getting closer and closer. You really wanted them to get comeupped; they’re REALLY bad people. I thought the actor playing Macduff, Edward Bennett, did a fantastic job with his scene when he finds out about his family. What he did by simply repeating the word ‘all’ over and over with clearly changing emotions and realizations was quite moving. And our leading man, Christopher Eccleston, was no slouch either. He did seem to be ramped up the entire time, with a Macbeth that operated at or above a certain level of intensity and never dipped below it, so I was kind of like ahh chill dude the whole time, but I suppose that Macbeth never should dip below a high level of intensity anyway so it was a good performance. It’s just so hard to watch this show with anything other than a cringey feeling of ‘ahhh just someone anyone please kill these monsters already!’ Which they do, yayy.
The best part of this production was honestly the actor playing the porter. Michael Hodgson could have easily been a character in Beetlejuice, or maybe Addams Family Values, with his creepy but hilarious manner and his deadpan, matter-of-fact delivery. He was seated onstage (near the water cooler) pretty much the whole time, so he was almost an all-knowing character. I loved when he was eating a little snack pack of something while talking to some murderers, and one of them snatched it out of his hand, and he just pulled out another little pack from his pocket. I love when someone came out looking for Macbeth, who was cowering in a corner, and the porter pointed over to him. But the best was his subtle tracking of Macbeth’s victims, by drawing chalk tallies on the brick wall at the back. Well, it was subtle in Act I. In Act II, he spends most of his time tallying up all the deaths, I imagine to come, as the battles get under way. Hundreds and hundreds of chalk marks cover the walls in a pretty dramatically effective use of the porter’s time, though not as fun as when he was talking.
As I said, I haven’t seen a different straight production, so I’m not sure if our ending was special or regular, but it did seem special. Maybe it’s because I just saw a production of Pippin where they use what’s called the ‘Theo ending’, where the little boy playing the little boy actor playing Theo comes back onstage after the regular ending and hints to the audience that maybe one day he would be ready to take Pippin’s place. It’s really disturbing and it works really well. Here, they did a similar thing that made me think of the Theo ending, something I’ll call the Fleance ending because oh my god, that name. So one of the witches’ prophesies was that Banquo’s heirs would inherit the throne after Macbeth is king, yet after Macbeth’s death, og King Duncan’s eldest son, Malcolm, is rightfully crowned. So when does Banquo’s son Fleance get in on that to fulfill the prophesy? Usually audiences just assume that at some point, the crown falls to him and his line. Here, however, Fleance comes onstage while Malcolm is being crowned, and stares at him, and then draws his sword menacingly. Hella spine-chilling, especially from someone named Fleance.
All in all, it was a very solid production, acting-wise. All the stuff that’s supposed to be in there – the text, the acting, the ability to be creative with stage directions like that ending – was good. It was the unnecessary bits – the modern costumes, the modern ‘setting’ that was half-assed, the gd m*f*ing timer that should have been cut from day 1 of rehearsals – that was extraneous and hurt the production, I feel. Yet there’s only so much damage you can do to a show like this, so overall I still enjoyed it verily.
AUDIENCE
Ugh that person coughing behind us was really annoying. It was like nonstop. Also I still can’t believe my dad was the one talking. Otherwise it was fine I think! I guess people who go to Shakespeare don’t need to check their phones every ten minutes.
THEATRE
The toilets for the mezzanine/dress circle NEVER had a line! It was epic! So well designed. I can’t say for the stalls.
It’s about 2 hours and 20 minutes with intermission, so it’s a pretty short show, actually. One of the ushers told me, when I asked about the length, ‘Oh we love Macbeth! It’s so short!’
