12- Hanging Hooke by Siobhán Nicholas, Take the Space

It's a great feeling when you go to the theatre and are told a new story you have never heard before.

Hanging Hooke tells the story of Robert Hooke. Before seeing the play I thought I knew that Saint Paul's Cathedral was designed by Christophen Wren. Turns out he designed it with Robert Hooke, a man who until now I'd never heard of.

I'm not alone in this. This relatively new play written by Siobhán Nicholas, tells the story of a man effectively written out of history. And not just any man, Hooke is described as the English Leonardo Da Vinci. He is a gifted architect and engineer, he designed a prototype flying machine, a clock that would work on a ship and some of the most sophisticated microscopes and telescopes of the day. He was also a fine artist, drawing amazing illustrations for the books he published on the natural world. He was a scientific genius, he wrote about natural selection before Darwin, figured out gravity before Isaac Newton and is the person who told us all how springs worked.

In the first part of the play Chris Barnes plays the painter Jack Hoskins, describing his friend Hooke who he brought to London as a child. He is working on a painting of Hooke and turns the easel around for the audience to see. When he does so, we realise that the props on stage feature in the painting and he moves them into place to mirror its composition. Then he takes his place amongst them and removes his coat to reveal the same suit Hooke is wearing. As he steps into the painting he transforms before our eyes into Hooke himself. The physical difference between the two characters is starling. As Jack Hoskins, Barnes moved precisely and sedately and the character had a quiet contemplative tone. As Hooke, he hunches over and walks with a limp, but nevertheless darts around the stage with a feverish energy, particularly when describing his scientific theories. One experiment he decribes features Hooke encased in a sealed tank before an audience, from which the air is gradually pumped. Barnes recreates this painful and disconcerting feeling by standing on his head in the middle of the stage while describing it, an impressive feat. The character's passion and enthusiasm for his subject is infectious and we feel as passionate and fascinated as he is. This really drew the audience in to empathise with Hooke, I felt real affection and love for the character. So when Hooke discovers he has been betrayed, his ideas stolen and his name written out of history we are enraged and heartbroken on his behalf.

For this play is no dry scientific lecture, it has a plot as compelling as Dan Brown's Da Vinci code, (only well written and not based on a load of conspiracy theory guff.) Hooke has a brainwave and comes up with a theory of gravity, how it keeps planets in orbit around the sun and how all things attract each other. He writes to Newton who he feels would be the ideal colleague to aid him in working out the specific mathematical ratios for this but doesn't receive a reply. A number of years later Newton publishes a book with Hooke's idea in it and claims it as his own. He destroys Hooke's portrait hanging in the halls of the Royal Society and works to discredit and remove him from office. Finally he sends a fellow member of the shadowy secret college, bound to him by a secret oath, to steal Hooke's folio of papers, the only records Hooke has of his work and ideas. The man Newton sends is none other than Hooke's oldest friend, the painter Jack Hoskins.

It's all just so interesting. Just the facts of the story are gripping but add in the fascinating 17th Century scientific theories and the lovable tragic character bought to life so skillfully by Chris Barnes and you have a real masterpiece.

11 - Richard and Trudy, Exit Theatre Company, Charles Cryer Theatre in Carshalton

Number 11 is a play written by a friend of mine, David Trotter, which I did the lighting for last week.

I had mixed feelings about this production. Exit are very good at special effects and the best bits of the production were definitely the murders. Blood all over the stage, eyeballs being spat into the audience etc, it was all very Nighty Night or League of Gentlemen.

However for me this just didn't fit in with the play's setting, a Faulty Towers-esque hotel in Devon run by a couple who were basically Sybil and Basil Faulty. It was like an old fashioned farce but with a graphic sex scene and gory violence. It just didn't seem to make up its mind what genre it was. If John Cleese had done a Faulty Towers episode where he pulled his trousers down and shagged Connie Booth in the reception, then chopped off Andrew Sach's head with a bread knife, rather than being entertained everyone would think he'd gone raving mad.

There were a few great performances in the play, I thought Matt Lunnemann's panicked hotel owner, Richard, was great, basically a good John Cleese impression and Angel Marinez really stole the show as the lovable but stupid detective Thomas. There was a lack of chemistry between Richard and Trudy making their relationship very unbelievable, which I think was because Matt played Richard as quite naturalistic while Gill Butler was playing a much more of a caricature as Trudy. I just didn't get her performance to be honest, she didn't seem to react to what other characters were saying and it was all in exactly the same tone all the way through which I found irritating. (Hard for me to judge though as I auditioned for the part and would have done it very differently so maybe that's it.)

I thought Lucy Hamilton and Joe Webster played the two chav characters very well, and I think they got the biggest laughs after Angel. But although the performances were very good I didn't like these two characters from the time I first read the play, they are an old stereotype now reminiscent of ancient Little Britain sketches. If you're going to write this kind of character I think it should be much more realistic and have more depth to it, like the girl in Misfits, or even the McQueens in Hollyoaks. When middle class Waitrose shoppers like me take a cheap shot at working class people it makes me feel uncomfortable. Maybe I'm just too full of lefty guilt, it has certainly been said of me before.

I thought David did a very good job with the plot, I certainly wouldn't be able to come up with such a neat storyline with just the right amount of twists and turns and I think it is an under-appreciated talent. I would definitely have tweaked the play a bit so it didn't contain black-outs apart from at the interval, as a single setting play taking place over the course of one night it was totally unnecessary to have long black outs. Unnecessary scene divisions are a pet hate of mine and happen all to often in amateur productions. They really slowed the pace down in this play which was a shame as by the end of the run the play had a lot of momentum with snappy entrances and exits through the numerous doors in true farce tradition.

Finally I'd like to add a very well done to Felicity Foregone who gave her first ever drag performance before the show. After doing a similar warm-up for Anybody for Murder? I know how terrifying a warm-up improv is. She got better every night, with just the right amount of audience participation and really got everyone in the mood.

You can buy a copy of Richard and Trudy from Amazon here: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Richard-Trudy-Play-David-Trotter/dp/1840948086

10 - A Midsummer Night's Dream, Gameshow at Broadway Studio Theatre, Catford

One of the things I love about Shakespeare is how adaptable the plays are. It is the constant inventiveness of companies and directors that keep us going to see the same plays reinvented again and again. I have seen A Midsummer Night’s Dream in a big top, with fairies on roller-skates and even performed in several different languages. What made all these productions work was a clear consistent concept, a vision of how the company wanted the audience to see the play with fresh eyes. This was a consistency that was missing in this production.

The set, which I loved, featured two trees with mismatched table lamps attached as branches which flickered to show fairies were flickering about. This meant when we entered I thought we were in for a low-tech kitch style production.

But the four actors were in highly contemporary dress, clashing with this style. There were several childhood themed props: a slide, kazoos, a xylophone. Producing the play as if the characters were children amongst found objects, as if in an attic or similar would have been lovely. But when playing fairies their style changed again, Oberon and Titania standing almost static talking into bulky wired microphones moving only their hands as if signing. Puck moved about more, wearing some white gloves which lit up with coloured lights at the fingertips. This introduced yet another theme, of circus, which again didn’t match anything else that was going on. Puck, played by Sarah Calver also didn’t make enough use of the gloves, just constantly wringing her hands as if speaking sign language.

The production was full of missed opportunities. James Utechin as Lysander threw away so many funny lines in the lovers’ big argument scene I wanted to stand up and shout at him.

When I go to see a production of a Midsummer Night’s Dream I always look forward to seeing the Mechanicals: Bottom and the players’ disastrous rehearsals and hilarious production of Pyramus and Thisbe at the wedding at the end. So when I realised this company had cut all these scenes I was slightly disappointed but intrigued about what they might offer in their place. These scenes were replaced by the actors coming “out of character” and being the foolish actors themselves preparing for the “bonus play” of Pyramus and Thisbe after they had finished the main play. There was a nice touch to this as they drew the audience in, asking us to vote for what kind of Pyramus, Thisbe, Lion and Wall we would like to see enacted at the end. (Resulting in a dog Pyramus and an old male cockney Thisby whispering through a wall created by a till roll with ‘walley’ written on it.) However as an audience accustomed to watching Whose Line Is It Anyway? and similar improvisation shows, this staged and rather contrived version didn’t quite cut the mustard. If you’re going to cut the funniest part of a well-loved play I would expect you to replace it with something that at the very least is funnier than what you have cut. It was also problematic when it came to the scenes between Bottom and Titania with Gabriella Best going back into her Shakespearian character to play Titania but Louie McKenna staying outside the play still playing the overconfident actor with modern speech. He acted surprised when Titania approached him announcing she loved him, a surprise which considering he was supposed to be an actor playing a part in the same play as her, simply didn’t make any sense and was clumsily glossed over.

I love adaptations and rewrites of Shakespeare but they need to have more of an attention to detail than this. The company didn’t seem to love the play enough to stick to one good concept and do it justice. This feeling was compounded by a couple of small stumbles with lines which was surprising considering this was a number of performances into the run. It was particularly strange to hear this, and noticeable to the audience, as A Midsummer Night’s Dream is written almost entirely in rhyming iambic pentameter.

This production promised a lot and was full of great ideas but they were not followed through. While this was enjoyable to watch and engaged the audience, it wasn’t the best Midsummer Night’s Dream I have ever seen and if a professional company chooses to put on one of the most commonly performed Shakespeare plays I expect them to impress. This felt more like a work in progress, a scrapbook of decent concepts but not effective as a whole.

9 - Othello, Swivel Theatre Company at Baron's Court Theatre

In the programme for Othello it says that the company "aims to invite our audience to steal a look into the secret and private world of Shakespeare's characters." This intimate and highly charged production did just that. The close underground theatre with the audience surrounding three sides of a small stage was ideal for a play as psychologically intense as Othello. We could see every facial expression very clearly so the actors were able to include subtle expressions, winks and glances to give a very rich interpretation of the characters.

The director's Baz Lurhmann influence, which she also mentions in the programme, was particularly apparent in the drunken fight scene in which repetition of lines, modern music and over energetic movement really created the atmosphere and put across the mood of the scene very well and reminded me of the Queen Mab speech in Lurhmann's Romeo + Juliet film. The fight, choreographed by Dominic Leeder who also played a fine Lodovico, was first rate; more than once I cringed and looked away at a particularly realistic punch or kick.

This was a high energy production throughout, keeping the pace fast with characters moving around the stage constantly. This also meant that despite the difficulties of having to play to audiences on all sides we were never looking at the back of anyone's head for long. The supporting roles were especially lively and energetic; Gemma Barret as Bianca and Chris Paddon as Roderigo were particularly fun to watch

When El Razzougui first emerged on stage as Othello my initial thought was that he was too handsome for the role, Othello is described in the play as being significantly older and lines such as "In my youth" seemed a bit incongruous with his youthful appearance. However he gave a powerful performance and there was palpable chemistry between him and Devon Lang Wilton as Desdemona which helped draw us in and added to the tragedy of the second act.

Of course the real central character of the play is the scheming Iago, who brings about Othello's downfall by suggesting his wife Desdemona is going behind his back with his lieutenant Cassio. Iago is the ultimate villain, he seems to have no concrete reason for concocting this terrible revenge and shows not a shred of remorse. Tom Fava was truly excellent in the role. He resisted the easy temptation of becoming a pantomime baddy and gave us just the right mixture of the camp super-villian and the creepy guy at the back of the bus. His sneering smile was chilling and I felt privileged to see such a talented actor in his London Fringe debut.

The women in Othello can be problematic for a modern interpretation, particularly towards the end as a blameless Desdemona constantly pleads forgiveness from her husband who murders her. This production balanced the anti-feminist undertones of the play by making other strong women characters. The Duke was turned into a female character played by an excellently authoritative Rowena Lennon. Bianca was also brilliantly reinvented to be a communications private so she came across as more of a modern independent feisty woman than the more usual slutty hanger-on. Possibly the strongest woman though was Iago's wife Emilia whose speech to Desdemona about how men should we wary of how they treat their women was one of my favourite moments. Exposing her husband loudly and with fury in the end scene, fighting her husband all the way, her death was a real contrast to Desdemona's. The only problem was it was difficult for us to understand why, as she seemed so modern and outspoken, she had handed Desdemona's handkerchief over to Iago without demanding to know the reason he wanted it. I thought we could have seen a little bit more of a realisation and dilemma from her earlier on to combat this.


I liked the way the production was not afraid to retain some comedy in the play, lighter moments helped break the tension in order for it to be built back up again. The production ranged from being disconcerting to being darkly funny and this kept it highly entertaining throughout.

8 - The Long and the Short and the Tall, Breakfast Cat Theatre directed by Tia Matthews

Occasionally, maybe once a year, a production comes along that really raises the bar for local non-professional companies. This was that production for 2011.

Willis Hall's captivating play set in British Malaya in 1942 raises questions about war, and what it does to people. The characters are a cross section of British society at the time: a Welshman, a Scouser, a Scotsman, Londoner, Northerner, etc. This alone poses challenges for actors; performing with an accent is one thing but producing a convincing accent when the rest of the cast around you are each speaking completely different accents is quite a feat. This cast rose to the challenge admirably and though I'm sure the eagle-eared could have found the occasional slip I was very impressed by how well they all accomplished this. They also managed to avoid plying stereotypes and each came across as very real, and each very different characters. This meant most people in the audience could recognise ourselves in one or other of the characters, forcing us to imagine how we might act in their situation.

This of course adds to the poignancy when these very ordinary men are faced with the extraordinary circumstances of war. We watch them struggle to fit in together, cope with authority just as we would in their position. And then, when a Japanese prisoner stumbles into their midst, we watch them struggle with the realities of war, and the big question of the play: does everyone have it in them to kill a man?

There are no easy answers to be found in the play. The officers Mitchem and Johnstone find the decision to kill the prisoner and give their patrol a better change of survival easier to make. They are more experienced at war, hardened towards making these decisions. Peter French as Johnstone was scary and a bully with just the right amount of menace to be intimidating but managed to avoid playing the character as a snarling stereotype. Scott Nicholson had a difficult role as a likable Sergent Mitcham. His obvious concern for his men was apparent but he has still just harsh enough, keeping them in line with an authoritative tone.

What was really impressive about the acting performances was the actors' performances when they had long amounts of time on stage without any lines. At one point I glanced at Jay Rolfe, playing the young Private Whitaker, during a tense moment and his face was such a wonderful expression of wide-eyed fear I wanted to go on stage and give him a hug. Of course the actor who had to do the most of this silent acting was Andy K as the Japanese soldier. His shaking with fear when he was first captured was brilliant and he really made us sympathise with him right from his entrance.

Roberto Prestoni brought the energy and pace to the stage as the rebellious Private Bamforth. He coped particularly well with the period slang, putting across what he was saying even though we didn't always understand every word. He and Tony Bannister as a lovable private Evans both brought out the humour in the play and really made me laugh.

The costumes were excellent and had real attention to detail, down to chocolate squares wrapped in brown paper and realistic sweat patches (added, I am reliably informed, artificially). These and a simple but effective set gave this production a professional feel and I was so pleased the cast lived up to this presentation and gave such polished performances. There really were no weak links. Next time you get the chance to get involved with Breakfast Cat, or see their next production, make sure you jump at the chance.


Photograph by Vicky Walters.

7 - Macbeth - Ashcroft Theatre Croydon

Walking into the theatre to see this production of Macbeth there was a thin cloud of fog in the air, setting the scene for an atmospheric production.

The witches, not as ghoulish as in some productions but quite creepy, were seated on the floor as they were for most of their scenes. This rather static staging meant their performance, while accomplished and interesting, was rather reined back. I don't quite like the modern idea that over the top dramatic and gory witches detract from the play and always find it a bit disappointing when they are just sitting there talking.

I was also slightly disappointed by Banquo's ghost scene, in which Banquo was noticeable by his absence. Instead Macbeth shouted at a spotlight on an empty chair while the others watched amazed. At first I thought, as other productions have done, they would play the scene again after the interval with the bloody spectre visible to the audience this time but this didn't happen. Strange, as this wasn't a production afraid of showing violence, later Macduff's family and Macbeth himself are killed on stage.

A great cast and a well cut script made this production enjoyable and pacy. Christopher Lane as Macbeth shone in the later scenes, emerging through the fog like a demon. His transformation from loyal soldier to inhuman tyrant was electric and highlighted the way his soul had been warped by the act of murdering his king. I didn't think his relationship with Lady Macbeth, played by Joanna Nevin, had much chemistry in their scenes together. However she too really shone in the later scenes and her wail in the sleepwalking scene was heartbreaking.

One thing I really didn't like about the production was the odd lighting. Whenever someone was giving a soliloquy they would suddenly change the lighting and put a spotlight on them. I would prefer a lighting designer to give me a bit more credit as an audience member. Yes. I get it. They are talking to themselves and other people can't hear them. It's not that complicated. And the moment in Macbeth's death scene when he moved and the spotlight had to move with him, rather slower than he did, was just painful. However this would make the play easier to follow for someone less familiar with the text. Other touches, like the army marching in holding actual trees, and the way the text had been cut down, made me think this would be an ideal production for school or college groups, and I hope some will go to this and Romeo and Juliet which the company will also be performing later this week.

There was a really great moment at the end of the production where Macduff stabbed Macbeth with his own crown, then in the next scene placed the still bloodied crown on the head of Malcolm. (Yet another) spotlight highlighted a young Fleance stood stage right looking over at Malcolm. It suggested that the violence in pursuit of power would inevitably continue, a modern twist reminiscent of a thriller film.

Great to have such an enjoyable Shakespeare production on our doorstep in Croydon. Go and see it.

6 - Il barbiere di Siviglia - Royal Opera House

Number 6 is an opera! My lovely boyfriend James suprised me by taking me to the Opera for the first time ever. I can't really review the opera because I have never seen one before and don't know anyting about it, but I would definately recommend going if you never have before. The opera house was really beautiful and posh, the music was amazing and it was great to watch the orchestra from our seats in the balcony. There was a great bit at the end of the first half where everyone started singing about how they were so confused their heads were beating like a drum and the whole stage started shaking and tilting really randomly. This was also a good first opera to see because it was really funny! Loved it.