I know I'm a bit behind on the blogging, and I'll do some serious updating today and tomorrow. However, I returned late last night from the Trafalgar Studios production of Shakespeare's Richard III, one of his most politically driven and famous plays.
This production was FANTASTIC! I was giddy by the intermission and exploding with thrills by the final curtain. For those who are not familiar, the actor playing Richard was Martin Freeman, who is known for playing Watson on the BBC Sherlock series, co-starring in the Simon Pegg movies like Hot Fuzz and The World's End, and starring in The Hobbit as...well...the hobbit. When I first heard Martin was starring in this play, I knew I had to see it. Two weeks ago I tried to purchase my ticket, but the show sold out as I was trying to buy one! Talk about disappointment!
Last weekend (July 13th), I heard my friend Sarah was going to the show again on the 24th and that there were still tickets available. I bought one immediately and have been thrilled about this opportunity ever since.
We had a lovely dinner at Pizza Express, which, despite its name, is actually a nice sit-down restaurant with locations throughout London. When we got to the bus to go to the theater, I realized I forgot my Oyster card! I managed to sweet talk the bus driver into letting me on the bus, and we made it to the theater in plenty of time.
The setting of this production was intriguing. Taking a nod from the play's famous opening line ("Now is the winter of our discontent made glorious summer"), the director decided to set the play in what truly was the winter of Britain's discontent, the winter of 1979. The post-war years notwithstanding, the seventies were the worst decade Britain has known, full of economic turmoil, massive strikes, and impending violence. Evidently, there was even talk of overthrowing the Labor Party with a military coup. Margaret Thatcher took office in 1979, which did not exactly solve anything. Setting the play in this era was a gutsy move, in my opinion, and really enriched the play, making it very relatable.
The entire play took place in what looked like a military/office meeting. There were two long tables facing each other (perpendicular to the audience) with tacky snot-green colored chairs to capture the seventies look. The stage resembled an office, complete with a coffee station. One really clever addition was the seventies TVs that faced the audience. There were two flanking the edges of the stage, and they projected Richard's image during his monologue and during Richmond's final monologue after he defeats Richard, becoming King Henry VII. There were also posters on the outer edges of the stage with different king's pictures, depending on where we were in the play.
There were seats on the stage, which was an interesting touch. The stage was very long, and the seats were behind the action, so to speak. My friend Sarah sat there and was really "in" the action. I envied her a little, but overall I was happy to sit where I was: the "L" row (fortuitous rather than deliberate seating) and in the middle. However, the seats have no arm rests and are very close together. I had the misfortune of sitting between two men with very broad shoulders. As a woman with broad shoulders herself, I was very uncomfortable, and my back and shoulders were hurting only 10 minutes into the play. Finally, I just sat on the edge of my seat, which the play kind of encourages anyway, with erect posture, giving myself space away from the two men.
For those who are not familiar with this play, Richard III is the final play in Shakespeare's historical series, which includes King John; Richard II; Henry IV, Parts I and II; Henry V; Henry VI, Parts I, II, and III; and concluding with Richard III. The last four plays, Henry VI, Parts I, II, and III and Richard III, constitute Shakespeare's Wars of the Roses tetralogy. This play takes place after the end civil war between houses York and Lancaster, which York won. King Edward IV has brought peace to the country, but is now sickly and dying. Richard, his younger brother, resents Edward's power and decides to capture the throne. This thirst for power is certainly born out of Richard's insecurities over his physical deformity, which is something that has been debated for a long time. Archaeologists recently uncovered Richard's skeleton and learned he really did have a severely twisted spine due to scoliosis. According to historians, this means Richard was not a hunchback as he was depicted in the play, but that Shakespeare exaggerated his physicality to underscore the ugliness of Richard's reign.
Essentially, Richard begins to take out anyone in his way to the throne, first killing Lady Anne's husband, then seducing her next to his corpse (one of the best scenes in all of Shakespeare, and I'll get to Martin Freeman's interpretation momentarily). He then executes his own older brother Clarence, causing his sickly brother King Edward to die. Richard's killing spree escalates, with him whacking anyone in his path, including his now-wife, Anne. While this is going on, the Earl of Richmond is closing in on Richard and kills him in an epic finale to the history plays, becoming King Henry VII and beginning the Tudor line, which ended the centuries' long reign of the Plantagenets. This is a gross oversimplification, so you should consult a history book and the actual play for more details! Additionally, Al Pacino made an excellent documentary/performance of Richard III in his film Looking for Richard, which I highly recommend. Here's the trailer.
Martin Freeman's performance was so good! He brought a level of comedy to the role I've neither witnessed nor considered. His tone and timing were impeccable: I've never seen Richard played that way. One of my favorite scenes is, of course, the famous wooing scene in which Richard seduces Lady Anne while she is crying next to her husband's corpse. Basically, imagine a Rebecca-era George Sanders wooing a woman in that situation, and you get a clearer picture of how Martin played it. He was hilarious and creepy at the same time, having just the right timing and tone with his delivery. For instance, when Anne asks him where he wants to be, he says "Your bedchamber" so matter-of-factly I just burst out laughing. I've seen the Ian McKellan movie version, which is excellent, but it was fascinating to go from Ian's playing Richard as a lecherous villain to Martin's Richard who is insecure, witty, and out-right scary. I laughed and felt repulsed, often at the same time, during the production last night.
Martin made it clear through his body language that beneath the wit was malice and violence. He was especially scary during the murder scenes--I was terrified during his murder of Lady Anne. She is alone on the stage, and then Richard appears out of no where. Seriously! He entered the stage with such stealth that it was terrifying to see him standing there. My friend Sarah had one of the privileged seats on the stage, and she said she could always hear the actors coming up to the stage. However, in this scene, she said she did not hear him at all and was completely startled to see him standing next to her out of the blue.
When he entered the stage, he stared at Anne with such intensity for several moments that I trembled at the tension. Then, she tried to run and he chased her. It was a grim, high-action scene, with Martin leaping across the tables and both he and Anne trying to strangle each other. Richard finally defeats her, strangling her with a telephone cord. Truly gruesome.
There was a good bit of blood in the play, which I liked given Shakespeare's play is extremely violent. For instance, after Hastings is beheaded, Tyrrel, one of Richard's handy-men, brings out a box. The actors, both Martin and the other guy, built up so much tension by opening the box slowly, then rummaging to pull out the head.
Richard's death scene was equally scary, with Richard and Richmond facing each other with the thickest tension of the play. Martin Freeman was so great in this scene (as with the rest of the play): he is holding a knife when Richmond enters the stage, holding a gun. Martin looks at the knife briefly, kind of chuckled and shrugged, then gestured for Richmond to come fight him anyway. Again, this is just another example of how Martin blended comedy into the gruesomeness of this play. The scene ends with Richmond shooting Richard, and the gun shot was so loud it sounded real. Everyone, including me, jumped. Richmond's final monologue was extremely creepy, as they "televised" it on the two seventies televisions.
When the play was over and the cast came out to bow together, I clapped vigorously; when Martin came out alone, however, I was the first one to jump up and give him a standing ovation. Some girl threw a bouquet at him, which made him laugh. He took one flower and held it through the subsequent curtain calls.
This was a fantastic, exciting, and, above all, brilliantly acted play. I am beyond sad about leaving London in the next 48 hours, but I am overjoyed I had the opportunity to see this production here. Whenever I watch Sherlock, I'll be able to watch it with pride. Benedict Cumberbatch, eat your heart out. :)
