Dear Steve and Alex,
Without wishing to seem a toady, I have to hop over to offer my congratulations..! The Guardian claims that "event theatre" is the new buzzword - they should have been there on Tuesday night. Despite / because of the ragged edges, it was an evening of rough magic indeed, and I came away enchanted...and moved and angry and worried. ("We all voted for them.") The boys in this essentially male piece did tremendous, concentrated, dedicated work and had cleary been rehearsing in a very particular manner; of the five I saw, I very much liked the particular manner of Jethro, Colin, Paul, Alan and Steff - they were much better than the others who might or might not have featured in that very particular performance!
I half-wish I hadn't had some familiarity with the script; the offstage noises and interventions would have been more frightening, though that's hardly the production's fault. They could perhaps be beefed up to a really scary level, to menace cast and audience alike, but the backstage crew did a great job in the improvised circumstances. But the sense of threat was certainly there, and yes, the possibilities of torture and sentencing were absolutely credible. In answer to your other specific questions Steve: yes, I did get Moloch; yes, Gandhi did grow to become potentially very dangerous, especially as he had seemed so weak and despondent earlier; yes, I understood what Mark was trying to do and he had my sympathy even if the length of some of his explanations nearly tried my patience! (In spite of Gandhi's death, I would probably vote Mark as the frog most boiled.) Tom's character was all too real, the neat pay-off of him being only a "community support" officer made a great deal of sense.
A Policeman's Lot Is Not A Happy One might be an alternative title - or might it? Apparently I'm only allowed 2000 words, but I've lots more to say... I loved the

1  out of 1 found this valuable. Do you find this valuable? Do you?    

Show Last Reply