Categories Reviews

Review: Uncle Vanya

Uncle Vanya

by Michael Billington | Sep 18, 2002  | The Guardian

I have measured out my life in Uncle Vanyas from Olivier’s legendary Chichester production to Peter Stein’s luminous Italian version. But Sam Mendes’s revival, with its mixture of visual clarity and emotional charity, unquestionably belongs in the premier league.

My one doubt concerns Mendes’s use of Brian Friel’s “version” of Chekhov’s play: more a Friel-isation than a faithful realisation. For a start Friel builds up the character of Telegin by giving him a running gag about his unstoppable perspiration; but “Do you sweat much yourself?” is not the kind of question a family dependent would ask of a privileged guest like Yelena.

There is also something faintly judgmental about Friel’s version, so that when Yelena scorns the idea of teaching “snotty brats”, you feel she is being portrayed as a hoity-toity urban snob.

But although the version is over-assertive, Mendes’s cast capture brilliantly the characters’ journey from ignorance to knowledge in the course of a disruptive summer. Simon Russell Beale’s Vanya is simply amazing. He offers you the spectacle of an ironic, intelligent 47-year-old man gazing at Yelena with the dotty helplessness of a moonstruck adolescent: aware of his own absurdity but powerless to prevent it.

But Russell Beale is at his finest in the great scene where he wakes from his dream at the news that the professor plans to sell the estate: he seethes with impotent fury at the realisation that his self-denying existence has been totally without point. And, as he denies the professor’s charge that he is a “nonentity”, Russell Beale extends a charity to the character that beautifully matches Chekhov’s.

What Mendes conveys, however, is the extent to which all the characters’ lives have been changed in the course of a summer. Emily Watson’s marvelous Sonya is no dowdy drudge but a passionate woman who grasps Astrov’s hand with sensual fervour only to come up against his emotional indifference. And Mark Strong gives us an unsuually arrogant Astrov whose ecological ideals are touched with sexual vanity but who in the end is forced to confront his essential solitude. Equally, Helen McCrory’s Yelena comes to understand that her destructive magnetism is a way of making up for the barrenness of her marriage. The one character resistant to change is David Bradley’s perfect Professor who departs wreathed in pedagogic smugness.

Crowning an excellent evening is Anthony Ward’s design. But the ultimate test of any Vanya is whether it stirs you to the depths of your soul; and that is one which Mendes’s production passes with flying colours.

· Until November 20. Box office: 020-7369 1732.

 

Categories Interviews Print Media Uncle Vanya

Mendes’s Dream Team

Helen McCrory talks to Jasper Rees about her roles in Sam Mendes’s valedictory double bill at the Donmar Warehouse

It’s only French actresses who will tell you in that detached, nonchalant way of theirs that, yes, they are beautiful. British actresses are more used to telling you that they’re not.

Take the following strident example. “I think I’m very lucky not to be beautiful,” says Helen McCrory. “I know more actors unhappy about being beautiful than the other way round. I find it really baffling, this modern obsession with people wanting to look good on screen or on stage. Why? Why?” She spits out the words. “I’m an actor, not a model.”

The oddity is that McCrory plays a lot of beautiful women. Yes, she took her first big lead in the television film Streetlife as an owl-eyed, bleach-blonde, child-murdering single mum on a Cardiff sink estate. But her square cheekbones and violently black eyes are better known to television viewers as the face of Anna Karenina, the most head-turning woman ever to hurl herself under a train in the pages of a classic novel.

Continue reading Mendes’s Dream Team

Categories Platonov Print Media Reviews

Platonov at the Almeida Theatre – Review

Anton Chekhov in a new version by David Hare

by Philip Fisher | British Theatre Guide

“My life is in ruins and all you can do is joke about it”. This sums up the effect that Mikhail Platonov has on everybody that he encounters. There are four young women in this play and each of them falls desperately in love with the eponymous hero. After a brief spell of great happiness, suicidal disaster inevitably follows.

The set for David Hare’s new version is designed by Paul Brown to fit in the larger auditorium at the Almeida King’s Cross. It is one of the most impressive that can ever have been seen on a stage in England. In part, this is because the old railway sheds that make up the Almeida’s temporary home are so wide. It is possible to contain within the space a field of sunflowers, a wooden bungalow that also symbolically looks like a mausoleum, a garden, a stream which suddenly yields up a railroad track and the edge of a wood.

Continue reading Platonov at the Almeida Theatre – Review

Categories Platonov Print Media Reviews

Platonov at the Almeida – Review

Helen McCrory Navigates a Full Spectrum of Emotion

“She’s an astonishing woman,” the terminally idle and self-loathing schoolmaster Platonov (Aidan Gillen) says of young widow Anna Petrovna (Helen McCrory), one of the many women buzzing about Platonov like moths drawn to a lethal and devouring flame. Coming nearly three hours into Jonathan Kent’s Almeida Theater premiere of David Hare’s fresh take on Chekhov’s once-abandoned and unruly play, Platonov’s assessment is equally applicable to the staging’s leading lady, McCrory, who navigates such a full spectrum of emotion that “astonishing” doesn’t seem to do her justice. (The actress’s previous legit credits include the London preem of “How I Learned to Drive.”)

Continue reading Platonov at the Almeida – Review

Categories Platonov Print Media Reviews

Platonov at The Almeida: Review

Platonov

by Michael Billington | September 12, 2001 | The Guardian

What do you do with Chekhov’s unwieldy first play, written when he was just 21? In 1984 Michael Frayn brilliantly turned it into a much tidier Gogolian farce called Wild Honey. David Hare’s new version sticks closer to the original, acknowledges its inconsistencies, and yet still demonstrates why Chekhov is one of theatre’s great dramatists.

Chekhov does two extraordinary things in this early work. The first is to take a literary prototype, Don Juan, and recast him in Russian terms, so that he becomes a 27-year-old provincial schoolmaster, Platonov, who is “slightly married” but immensely attractive to other women, including a widowed landowner, her young stepdaughter and an earnest chemistry student. The Chekhovian irony is that Platonov is an essentially passive figure – the pursued rather than the pursuer, the superfluous man as sex object and, as he himself confesses, one of the living dead. Chekhov’s point is that only in a world of quack doctors, land-grabbing merchants and rapacious horse thieves would Platonov acquire such fatal attraction.