u/RockyStonejaw

OMG! Seeing Crawford and Brightman in the boat made the entire evening worthwhile. Speaking as a Phan of 100+ visits around the globe, it’s not the moment for me to dissect/give views about the show itself (I thought it was generally fine, the cast adequate), that stuff can come tomorrow after a happy sleep.

But just to see 84 year old Michael Crawford singing the title song, coming downstage in the gondola with La Brightman, and then singing some of Music of the Night overrides any critical thoughts or perspective tonight.

Genuinely my heart skipped a beat when I heard his first line, but I wasn’t 100% sure it was him - and the name only came up after he started singing. So there was a magical moment of the entire audience holding their breath and then the release when Michael and Sarah’s names came up. It was absolutely electric in that moment. One of the most exhilarating single moments I’ve had in a theatre, even as a Phan who has been to all of these major anniversary events since the 18th for this and Les Mis.

Lovely free brochure too!

OMG! Seeing Crawford and Brightman in the boat made the entire evening worthwhile. Speaking as a Phan of 100+ visits around the globe, it’s not the moment for me to dissect/give views about the show itself (I thought it was generally fine, the cast adequate), that stuff can come tomorrow after a happy sleep.

But just to see 84 year old Michael Crawford singing the title song, coming downstage in the gondola with La Brightman, and then singing some of Music of the Night overrides any critical thoughts or perspective tonight.

Genuinely my heart skipped a beat when I heard his first line, but I wasn’t 100% sure it was him - and the name only came up after he started singing. So there was a magical moment of the entire audience holding their breath and then the release when Michael and Sarah’s names came up. It was absolutely electric in that moment. One of the most exhilarating single moments I’ve had in a theatre, even as a Phan who has been to all of these major anniversary events since the 18th for this and Les Mis.

Lovely free brochure too!

I think this review needs a preface, to give some context on my relationship with the show and why I feel the way I do about this production. I am not a huge Martin Guerre fan - I’ve seen one version of it ever live, plus a couple of bootlegs, and I preferred those versions to this one.

I fully appreciate that many people here are going to absolutely rave about this - first-night adrenaline, an underdog show loved by “theatre people” - and those views are completely valid. I fully expect to be in the minority with what I’m about to say. I also appreciate that many of you know the show far better than I do, so please correct any mistakes in my memory or understanding.

I’ll also add that I was in row D (second back row) of the dress circle, and it did feel quite distant because of the layout. My eyesight isn’t the best either, so please correct anything I might have missed.

I’m not going to dwell on first night hiccups - late light and sound cues, actors not standing in their light, late microphone pickups - all that’s normal and will get ironed out. There was plenty, but I’ve seen way worse. It wasn’t an issue for me. They have still to work outwhich numbers need applause - which was quite subdued, to be honest - except for “I’m Martin Guerre” and “Here Comes the Morning”.

I am also putting down the very strange opening as a technical issue, so not judging that harshly - if it’s intentional then that’s a different matter.

The show went up at exactly 7:30 on my watch, great. Except it didn’t really. There was a very strange and awkward pre-show, where ensemble members did… something with ribbons, at what I’m assuming was Arnaud’s grave/pyre. Unfortunately, I think (I hope) something went wrong with this, because it went on for 7 minutes or so, and the audience murmuring was well underway. They would leave, re-enter, repeat the sequence - several times. I think they were stalling and I was expecting an immediate show stop - if that’s what is intended every night, I’ll eat my hat.

I thought tonight summed up pretty comprehensively why Martin Guerre has never been a big success - it simply isn’t accessible to audiences like Les Mis or Miss Saigon are. From the narrative to the music, it is a musical whose central story ultimately gives the audience very little to root for. This is a capital P Problem for me, because the more critically and commercially successful B&S musicals have a central sympathetic character for the audience to invest in. Kim, Valjean. I think it is meant to be Bertrande in this show, but we see, hear and know so little about her, that everything which follows feels incredibly rushed and any relationship formed with the audience is playing catch up from the get-go.

I know the music has its (huge!) fans, but this version takes repetitive to a new level. We hear the main “I’m Martin Guerre” theme, I would guess, in at least five, and probably several more variations - instrumental, different key, altered melody, but it just keeps coming back. It reminded me of Aspects of Love and the irritation when the next character sang the “Love Changes Everything” melody. There IS some lovely music in the show, but an awful lot of really nice stuff has been completely excised. Now I know this was also the case in prior productions, but because so many of the original melodies and recurring motifs have been completely cut, it means you’re hearing the same tune repeated more often over a much shorter time.

I thought the plot - and thus the evening - was simultaneously very long, yet also incredibly rushed. The opening 20 minutes were brutal. Things picked up a lot in the final scenes, the court scene was very well done and I liked the actor’s voice playing the judge. I say voice, because due to Matthew Warchus’s directional choices in the round, he barely sang or spoke a line in our direction, so I’m judging his acting based on the back of his head.

And this was an issue throughout. The blocking is not fine-tuned for an in-the-round audience. There is no revolve, and often characters take up a position and essentially stay there for the entire song. In their big love duet, depending on which side you were on, you got to look at either Arnaud OR Bertrande’s face for the duration of the song. I really like Warchus as a director, so I really don’t understand so many of the choices made in the staging.

Now people will say this was sold as a semi-staged production - and it is - but top price for this is £72. The cast are in costume. There is some light choreography, there are some benches and a table which serve as a bed, a pyre, some benches, and a table, and a few other carry ons. So the storytelling really needs to be top-notch, and I’m afraid it’s not.

Parts of it, despite knowing the story fairly well, were outright confusing, especially in the first half of the show. Warchus has experience stripping epics down to their core story beats; he worked with Shaun McKenna to adapt three huge novels/9+ hours of movies into one 3 hour show with The Lord of the Rings, for example. But I do remember similar criticisms being made at the time that the plot itself was very hard to follow for newcomers. Obviously, I pooh-poohed these - because I was a fan of the material and took for granted what was happening. Martin Guerre doesn’t have that luck with a wider audience, and I will not be at all surprised if the professional critics pick up on this.

I can see what this production is trying to do: strip Martin Guerre back to something raw, intimate and almost folk-theatrical. And in places it absolutely works. The problem is that in stripping away so much context, characterisation and musical material, it has also stripped away much of what makes the story dramatically compelling.

It is worth outright saying that the entire Protestant/Catholic concept has been scrapped. While the story is still deeply seated in religious hypocrisy as a theme, the town itself simply follows “Christianity”. This has the knock-on effect of the “witch hunt”, and the townsfolk’s constant flip-flopping on what they think/feel/believe coming out of absolutely nowhere - often from one musical line to another. I’m pretty sure their views in previous productions were swayed by religious fervour and Bertrande’s conversion. Now it just makes no sense except to cause conflict, for the benefit of the narrative.

What did the facepaint represent, by the way?

The band sounded fine - good even, at times. It worked in the context of this production and wasn’t an issue. Did I hear a lute?! It’s just a nice, condensed chamber musical sound. In fact, the band, costumes, staging, in the round configuration and accents reminded me a lot of seeing things at places like the Bolton Octagon. The problem is, with no disrespect to the Octagon, where I saw MANY cracking shows and plays, this is the Old Vic.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with a production having that aesthetic. In the right venue, at the right price, I might even find it rather charming. But the Old Vic is selling this as a major London production, and that inevitably raises the bar.

Arnaud (Alex James-Hatton) and Bertrande (Liv Andrusier) both have terrific voices, and I thought James-Hatton in particular sings beautifully. Their duet was easily my musical highlight. Elsewhere, it’s always nice to see Adam Pearce. I liked Aaron Lee Lambert’s voice and presence a lot as the judge. I was far less keen on Barney Wilkinson as Guillaume, who had all the menace of a school prefect.

Which was again, a big problem narratively. There is no antagonist, in this version - not really. Guillaume, in his manner, presence and massively reduced time on stage, reads more like a bratty incel. Maybe this was intentional, but he has gone from a man capable of rabble-rousing a population to commit genocide, to a young lad who looks like he’d struggle to organise a particularly unruly school trip.

I also wasn’t too impressed with some inconsistency with the accents; it felt like many were just doing “Generic Northern”, and throughout the cast we took a tour of everywhere from Cumbria, Yorkshire and Lancashire.

The stakes are so low, but the pace of the first two-thirds so simultaneously glacial yet emotionally wafer-thin. There is very little sense of danger, even when the story is telling us there should be. Characters are threatened, condemned, betrayed and ultimately killed, but because the production has done so little to make us invest in them, the events often feel like things that are happening rather than things that matter.

And I think that ultimately sums up my problem with this production. There are some very good performances, some lovely singing and some genuinely beautiful music, but I never felt particularly emotionally connected to any of it. I can see why Martin Guerre fans will love what this is trying to do, but for me the stripping back has gone too far. I wanted it to win me over; it just never gave me enough reason to care.

I’ve given this 2* I’m afraid. Left me completely cold.

I think this review needs a preface, to give some context on my relationship with the show and why I feel the way I do about this production. I am not a huge Martin Guerre fan - I’ve seen one version of it ever live, plus a couple of bootlegs, and I preferred those versions to this one.

I fully appreciate that many people here are going to absolutely rave about this - first-night adrenaline, an underdog show loved by “theatre people” - and those views are completely valid. I fully expect to be in the minority with what I’m about to say. I also appreciate that many of you know the show far better than I do, so please correct any mistakes in my memory or understanding.

I’ll also add that I was in row D (second back row) of the dress circle, and it did feel quite distant because of the layout. My eyesight isn’t the best either, so please correct anything I might have missed.

I’m not going to dwell on first night hiccups - late light and sound cues, actors not standing in their light, late microphone pickups - all that’s normal and will get ironed out. There was plenty, but I’ve seen way worse. It wasn’t an issue for me. They have still to work outwhich numbers need applause - which was quite subdued, to be honest - except for “I’m Martin Guerre” and “Here Comes the Morning”.

I am also putting down the very strange opening as a technical issue, so not judging that harshly - if it’s intentional then that’s a different matter.

The show went up at exactly 7:30 on my watch, great. Except it didn’t really. There was a very strange and awkward pre-show, where ensemble members did… something with ribbons, at what I’m assuming was Arnaud’s grave/pyre. Unfortunately, I think (I hope) something went wrong with this, because it went on for 7 minutes or so, and the audience murmuring was well underway. They would leave, re-enter, repeat the sequence - several times. I think they were stalling and I was expecting an immediate show stop - if that’s what is intended every night, I’ll eat my hat.

I thought tonight summed up pretty comprehensively why Martin Guerre has never been a big success - it simply isn’t accessible to audiences like Les Mis or Miss Saigon are. From the narrative to the music, it is a musical whose central story ultimately gives the audience very little to root for. This is a capital P Problem for me, because the more critically and commercially successful B&S musicals have a central sympathetic character for the audience to invest in. Kim, Valjean. I think it is meant to be Bertrande in this show, but we see, hear and know so little about her, that everything which follows feels incredibly rushed and any relationship formed with the audience is playing catch up from the get-go.

I know the music has its (huge!) fans, but this version takes repetitive to a new level. We hear the main “I’m Martin Guerre” theme, I would guess, in at least five, and probably several more variations - instrumental, different key, altered melody, but it just keeps coming back. It reminded me of Aspects of Love and the irritation when the next character sang the “Love Changes Everything” melody. There IS some lovely music in the show, but an awful lot of really nice stuff has been completely excised. Now I know this was also the case in prior productions, but because so many of the original melodies and recurring motifs have been completely cut, it means you’re hearing the same tune repeated more often over a much shorter time.

I thought the plot - and thus the evening - was simultaneously very long, yet also incredibly rushed. The opening 20 minutes were brutal. Things picked up a lot in the final scenes, the court scene was very well done and I liked the actor’s voice playing the judge. I say voice, because due to Matthew Warchus’s directional choices in the round, he barely sang or spoke a line in our direction, so I’m judging his acting based on the back of his head.

And this was an issue throughout. The blocking is not fine-tuned for an in-the-round audience. There is no revolve, and often characters take up a position and essentially stay there for the entire song. In their big love duet, depending on which side you were on, you got to look at either Arnaud OR Bertrande’s face for the duration of the song. I really like Warchus as a director, so I really don’t understand so many of the choices made in the staging.

Now people will say this was sold as a semi-staged production - and it is - but top price for this is £72. The cast are in costume. There is some light choreography, there are some benches and a table which serve as a bed, a pyre, some benches, and a table, and a few other carry ons. So the storytelling really needs to be top-notch, and I’m afraid it’s not.

Parts of it, despite knowing the story fairly well, were outright confusing, especially in the first half of the show. Warchus has experience stripping epics down to their core story beats; he worked with Shaun McKenna to adapt three huge novels/9+ hours of movies into one 3 hour show with The Lord of the Rings, for example. But I do remember similar criticisms being made at the time that the plot itself was very hard to follow for newcomers. Obviously, I pooh-poohed these - because I was a fan of the material and took for granted what was happening. Martin Guerre doesn’t have that luck with a wider audience, and I will not be at all surprised if the professional critics pick up on this.

I can see what this production is trying to do: strip Martin Guerre back to something raw, intimate and almost folk-theatrical. And in places it absolutely works. The problem is that in stripping away so much context, characterisation and musical material, it has also stripped away much of what makes the story dramatically compelling.

It is worth outright saying that the entire Protestant/Catholic concept has been scrapped. While the story is still deeply seated in religious hypocrisy as a theme, the town itself simply follows “Christianity”. This has the knock-on effect of the “witch hunt”, and the townsfolk’s constant flip-flopping on what they think/feel/believe coming out of absolutely nowhere - often from one musical line to another. I’m pretty sure their views in previous productions were swayed by religious fervour and Bertrande’s conversion. Now it just makes no sense except to cause conflict, for the benefit of the narrative.

What did the facepaint represent, by the way?

The band sounded fine - good even, at times. It worked in the context of this production and wasn’t an issue. Did I hear a lute?! It’s just a nice, condensed chamber musical sound. In fact, the band, costumes, staging, in the round configuration and accents reminded me a lot of seeing things at places like the Bolton Octagon. The problem is, with no disrespect to the Octagon, where I saw MANY cracking shows and plays, this is the Old Vic.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with a production having that aesthetic. In the right venue, at the right price, I might even find it rather charming. But the Old Vic is selling this as a major London production, and that inevitably raises the bar.

Arnaud (Alex James-Hatton) and Bertrande (Liv Andrusier) both have terrific voices, and I thought James-Hatton in particular sings beautifully. Their duet was easily my musical highlight. Elsewhere, it’s always nice to see Adam Pearce. I liked Aaron Lee Lambert’s voice and presence a lot as the judge. I was far less keen on Barney Wilkinson as Guillaume, who had all the menace of a school prefect.

Which was again, a big problem narratively. There is no antagonist, in this version - not really. Guillaume, in his manner, presence and massively reduced time on stage, reads more like a bratty incel. Maybe this was intentional, but he has gone from a man capable of rabble-rousing a population to commit genocide, to a young lad who looks like he’d struggle to organise a particularly unruly school trip.

I also wasn’t too impressed with some inconsistency with the accents; it felt like many were just doing “Generic Northern”, and throughout the cast we took a tour of everywhere from Cumbria, Yorkshire and Lancashire.

The stakes are so low, but the pace of the first two-thirds so simultaneously glacial yet emotionally wafer-thin. There is very little sense of danger, even when the story is telling us there should be. Characters are threatened, condemned, betrayed and ultimately killed, but because the production has done so little to make us invest in them, the events often feel like things that are happening rather than things that matter.

And I think that ultimately sums up my problem with this production. There are some very good performances, some lovely singing and some genuinely beautiful music, but I never felt particularly emotionally connected to any of it. I can see why Martin Guerre fans will love what this is trying to do, but for me the stripping back has gone too far. I wanted it to win me over; it just never gave me enough reason to care.

I’ve given this 2* I’m afraid. Left me completely cold.

Following my post on another thread, I thought I’d throw this subject out to a wider audience for more views - agree, disagree - all opinions are welcome!

A huge reason why I love this show so much is how much it reminds me of two of my favourite programs - The X-Files, and Jonathan Creek. The former because of the formula of a weekly mystery, interspersed with a wider conspiracy story.

So I feel like this show was written specifically for my tastes. I absolutely adore it, and the comparisons I make are in no way a criticism of either show, or a suggestion of mimicry - it’s simply a winning formula.

But there are loads of things which remind me of Creek (although others will disagree!):

- The premise: A socially awkward fish out of water with a brilliant mind teams up to solve a weekly “impossible” crime, alongside their confident, slightly manic female journalist companion - who is off investigating herself and getting into comic scrapes. Both aren’t just mystery shows - they are “howdunnits”. In both shows, the bad guy is sometimes very obvious - the intrigue comes from the audience discovering through the lead character’s logic and deduction how the trick was pulled off.

- The setting: It has a very Little England-ish “BBC” cosy vibe, it has that distinct BBC Comedy commissioned light drama feel.

- The tone: I find Mark Brotherhood’s writing style and sense of humour to be very similar to David Renwick’s; many scenarios (such as Lucy digging for information in the florist - sorry - florist’s) feel like they could be straight out of JC. The programme is light and easy to watch, despite dealing with serious themes.

- The characters: The other biggie for me and tied to the premise, is just how similar the key duo are. Both feature a social recluse who prefers their own company, who (initially) lives alone coming up with lateral thinking puzzles/magic tricks, and are hugely admired in their own field despite their near anonymity. They team up every episode to solve an impossible crime, with their female journalist companion, who is outgoing, quirky and garrulous. There are hints of underlying romance and a suggestion of a complicated “will they/won’t they” situation.

But both John and Jonathan’s way of thinking is very similar too. Jonathan/John design puzzles/illusions - therefore they both understand the mechanics of how the results of the mystery they are investigating can be achieved.

They can see things the police can’t (to be fair, this one is as old as the hills) - and their lateral thinking rather than by the book police work are what cracks the case.

Finally, the male/female characters are fundamentally different personalities with different skill sets. Both Lucy and John (and Maddy and Jonathan) can do things the other can’t, and it is a combination of the two approaches which provides answers.

What are your thoughts?

As mentioned in another post, I love the humour in this and the character flourishes and interaction. So what are your favourites from John, Lucy or anyone else?

I’ll kick things off with a running gag - struggling with his seat belt. And my favourite character trait of John’s is when he asks DI Carter for reassurance. “Is that right?”, “Can they do that?” 😆

First time building and lighting Lego - aged 40! I’m pretty pleased with it, although I’ve seen other people do really special things which look way better! Came up with the lighting design myself, using what I had from an incomplete kit I had ordered for the main X-Files set. I’ve ordered a lighting kit from somewhere else now for the main set and had great fun doing it!

This will be quite a long review, as I have a lot to say about this production.

We sat in the Royal Circle 23-24, and found the view perfect. We booked these when they went on sale and paid £120 each, which is the second-most I’ve ever paid for a UK theatre ticket(!).

I saw this with my Mum, and in the lead-up to the production we watched both the original 1973 film and the 2000 version by Gale Edwards. I’m really pleased we did this beforehand, as despite my Mum knowing the story as a Christian, we agreed that the way the story is told in this production would have been, at best, rather murky.

In my view, this is a rather baffling production with some very strange and perhaps even rather pretentious directorial choices in staging, leading to unclear storytelling and a distinct sense of style over substance.

I ultimately felt the production lacked in “place” and was an at-times confused mess of disparate ideas which failed to make a cohesive whole. It felt full of surface-level ideas which on the face of it seemed clever, but when you actually took time to think, didn’t make much sense. Yes, on the surface, it’s a clever idea to have the Roman soldiers don Caesar masks to show they are legion, but it also reads as GCSE drama: “I’m 15 and this is deep”. It looked silly. The show is full of moments like this. Having Judas’s silver represented by silver paint was another moment that had me scratching my head and wondering… why? All this could possibly do is serve to confuse people less familiar with the story.

There are hints of the original 1960s hippie concept; the scaffolded set is reminiscent of the original film. Jesus is almost a wandering minstrel - guitar in hand, he comes off more as a Brightonian busker singing David Gray in the North Laine than a respected and loved leader of men. Mary reads as a 1960’s hippy flower child, fine, so why is Judas acting like he is in a different universe altogether?

Like last year’s Evita, this is a hugely dance-driven production, staged with the feel and energy of a rock concert. Like Evita, the choreography is often completely divorced from the narrative. Unlike Evita, the modern, street-flavoured choreography very quickly becomes an unnecessary distraction, and frequently feels as though Tim Sheader lacks faith in the material itself to keep an audience engaged.

While I’m aware Sheader’s history with this show predates last year’s Evita, the comparisons to Jamie Lloyd’s 2025 summer hit don’t end with the similar choreography. The minimalist static set and costumes (Tom Scutt), booming sound design (Adam Fisher) and rock-concert lighting (Lee Curran) all suggest a very familiar formula.

One of my biggest issues was the usage of hand-held microphones, which I simply cannot attribute to anything other than Sheader’s appreciation of the aesthetic. They certainly don’t do any favours to the sound, with far too much reverb applied; and covering the bottom half of every actor’s face with one hardly helps when there is already a lack of readable emotion from some key cast members. Again, this is a choice which seems like it should be clever, like in Evita; as Eva takes the microphone to symbolically become the voice of the people. Every time I think I’ve got a handle on what something “clever and metaphorical” in this production represents, they do something which completely undermines that interpretation.

“Judas’s Death” is appallingly realised, to the point that, in my opinion, it is unclear what exactly is being represented on stage. Frankly, it looked terrible and I’m not sure what the effect was meant to be with those red ropes.

Similarly, the raising of the huge crucifix set piece and crucifixion itself was very underwhelming, to the point that I thought something must’ve gone wrong. The enormous, impressive cross tilts upwards, and Jesus, covered in glitter and blood, is unceremoniously attached to a tiny little thing downstage, awkwardly raised 3ft in the air above a tiny trapdoor, then judderingly brought back down. What a tease.

Was this because Jesus’s death was actually a pretty low-key affair, on a field with several others suffering the same fate? Or was it because they couldn’t find a practical way to actually utilise the massive cross they already have?

I would have overlooked a lot of these issues with a phenomenal cast. After all, like Evita, the staging and concept of the production are centred around the performances rather than spectacle. Unfortunately, I found the cast mediocre, with a few bright spots.

I really like Sam Ryder’s voice, and he sings the part beautifully, particularly in “Gethsemane” (more on this shortly). His vocals were strong and he had good diction. However, he is out of his depth in terms of acting. He only appears to remember to act (or react) when it’s his turn to sing or to perform specifically rehearsed gestures on certain lines or beats of the music. This can make his performance feel very stilted. There is one very early section where his lack of natural skill and experience is exposed; the choreography calls for his followers to perform a ring-a-roses around him, and he turns to them. An actor here would ad-lib gestures, greet them, scold them - whatever the moment required. But a lack of attention to detail has him blocked to turn, on the beat, two full revolutions with a blank expression. It’s this lack of care which, for me, permeates the performances throughout the production.

But I must take a moment to praise “Gethsemane”, which was easily the highlight of the show and got a standing ovation. This was extremely strong, with a huge amount of detail going into the minutiae of both the vocal performance and the storytelling. With one exception. Towards the end of the number, Jesus has a rock-and-roll moment; he slams down in anger his mic stand - but only after gently setting down his expensive guitar. Can’t be smashing that 8 shows a week! Seriously, cut that. It was naff.

I also enjoyed “Damned for All Time”, and found Tyrone Huntley a much more secure watch as Judas. Things start in quite a low-key fashion with an oddly subdued “Heaven on Their Minds”, but the suicide scene debacle is hardly his fault. But I enjoyed his performance overall.

Desmonda Cathabel is also fine as Mary, with a nice voice and “I Don’t Know How to Love Him” (always a skip when I listen to cast recordings or bootlegs) was pleasant. I found the take on the character quite safe and the look and folk-ish singing style reminiscent of Yvonne Elliman.

Elsewhere - and I appreciate this is an unpopular take - I felt David Thaxton overacted terribly as Pilate. I started the review by saying I felt the production lacked “place”; it also lacked consistency in energy levels and performance style across the cast. Thaxton is giving a BIG performance here, and I didn’t think it worked. It wasn’t quite Fred Johansen’s level of ham in the 2000 film, but it wasn’t far off. I enjoyed Bob Harms as Caiaphas (great voice) and thought Billy Nevers was okay as Simon.

We had Layton Williams as Herod and he was fine, but I wasn’t wowed. I assume they’re all directed in the same way, but it was just the standard high-camp Herod: a few ad-libs and done — big ovation, though.

The band sounded fantastic, and the ensemble singing was generally very good.

Other thoughts:

\- The combined programme/brochure (£14) is quite nice. I have a standing ticket for next week that I won’t be using now, so I’ll be returning or listing that shortly.

\- Being very familiar with the show, I find it hard to judge how easy the lyrics were to make out, but my Mum had difficulty following some of the words.

\- Full standing ovation, packed stage door - Sam Ryder is unquestionably a big draw.

So what to score this…

Well, reading back over everything I’ve wanted to say, it reads like a very negative review overall. But that doesn’t really take into account the fact that I do love the show, and that this production provides a couple of hours that are, overall, well sung and competently put together. I would give this 2.5\*, rounded up to 3\* because of “Gethsemane”.

The production isn’t short of ideas; it’s short of a coherent reason for those ideas to exist together. Some of the directorial decisions are very odd and overly clever, but ultimately I came away feeling ultimately the production was all fizz and no gin.

This will be quite a long review, as I have a lot to say about this production.

We sat in the Royal Circle 23-24, and found the view perfect. We booked these when they went on sale and paid £120 each, which is the second-most I’ve ever paid for a UK theatre ticket(!).

I saw this with my Mum, and in the lead-up to the production we watched both the original 1973 film and the 2000 version by Gale Edwards. I’m really pleased we did this beforehand, as despite my Mum knowing the story as a Christian, we agreed that the way the story is told in this production would have been, at best, rather murky.

In my view, this is a rather baffling production with some very strange and perhaps even rather pretentious directorial choices in staging, leading to unclear storytelling and a distinct sense of style over substance.

I ultimately felt the production lacked in “place” and was an at-times confused mess of disparate ideas which failed to make a cohesive whole. It felt full of surface-level ideas which on the face of it seemed clever, but when you actually took time to think, didn’t make much sense. Yes, on the surface, it’s a clever idea to have the Roman soldiers don Caesar masks to show they are legion, but it also reads as GCSE drama: “I’m 15 and this is deep”. It looked silly. The show is full of moments like this. Having Judas’s silver represented by silver paint was another moment that had me scratching my head and wondering… why? All this could possibly do is serve to confuse people less familiar with the story.

There are hints of the original 1960s hippie concept; the scaffolded set is reminiscent of the original film. Jesus is almost a wandering minstrel - guitar in hand, he comes off more as a Brightonian busker singing David Gray in the North Laine than a respected and loved leader of men. Mary reads as a 1960’s hippy flower child, fine, so why is Judas acting like he is in a different universe altogether?

Like last year’s Evita, this is a hugely dance-driven production, staged with the feel and energy of a rock concert. Like Evita, the choreography is often completely divorced from the narrative. Unlike Evita, the modern, street-flavoured choreography very quickly becomes an unnecessary distraction, and frequently feels as though Tim Sheader lacks faith in the material itself to keep an audience engaged.

While I’m aware Sheader’s history with this show predates last year’s Evita, the comparisons to Jamie Lloyd’s 2025 summer hit don’t end with the similar choreography. The minimalist static set and costumes (Tom Scutt), booming sound design (Adam Fisher) and rock-concert lighting (Lee Curran) all suggest a very familiar formula.

One of my biggest issues was the usage of hand-held microphones, which I simply cannot attribute to anything other than Sheader’s appreciation of the aesthetic. They certainly don’t do any favours to the sound, with far too much reverb applied; and covering the bottom half of every actor’s face with one hardly helps when there is already a lack of readable emotion from some key cast members. Again, this is a choice which seems like it should be clever, like in Evita; as Eva takes the microphone to symbolically become the voice of the people. Every time I think I’ve got a handle on what something “clever and metaphorical” in this production represents, they do something which completely undermines that interpretation.

“Judas’s Death” is appallingly realised, to the point that, in my opinion, it is unclear what exactly is being represented on stage. Frankly, it looked terrible and I’m not sure what the effect was meant to be with those red ropes.

Similarly, the raising of the huge crucifix set piece and crucifixion itself was very underwhelming, to the point that I thought something must’ve gone wrong. The enormous, impressive cross tilts upwards, and Jesus, covered in glitter and blood, is unceremoniously attached to a tiny little thing downstage, awkwardly raised 3ft in the air above a tiny trapdoor, then judderingly brought back down. What a tease.

Was this because Jesus’s death was actually a pretty low-key affair, on a field with several others suffering the same fate? Or was it because they couldn’t find a practical way to actually utilise the massive cross they already have?

I would have overlooked a lot of these issues with a phenomenal cast. After all, like Evita, the staging and concept of the production are centred around the performances rather than spectacle. Unfortunately, I found the cast mediocre, with a few bright spots.

I really like Sam Ryder’s voice, and he sings the part beautifully, particularly in “Gethsemane” (more on this shortly). His vocals were strong and he had good diction. However, he is out of his depth in terms of acting. He only appears to remember to act (or react) when it’s his turn to sing or to perform specifically rehearsed gestures on certain lines or beats of the music. This can make his performance feel very stilted. There is one very early section where his lack of natural skill and experience is exposed; the choreography calls for his followers to perform a ring-a-roses around him, and he turns to them. An actor here would ad-lib gestures, greet them, scold them - whatever the moment required. But a lack of attention to detail has him blocked to turn, on the beat, two full revolutions with a blank expression. It’s this lack of care which, for me, permeates the performances throughout the production.

But I must take a moment to praise “Gethsemane”, which was easily the highlight of the show and got a standing ovation. This was extremely strong, with a huge amount of detail going into the minutiae of both the vocal performance and the storytelling. With one exception. Towards the end of the number, Jesus has a rock-and-roll moment; he slams down in anger his mic stand - but only after gently setting down his expensive guitar. Can’t be smashing that 8 shows a week! Seriously, cut that. It was naff.

I also enjoyed “Damned for All Time”, and found Tyrone Huntley a much more secure watch as Judas. Things start in quite a low-key fashion with an oddly subdued “Heaven on Their Minds”, but the suicide scene debacle is hardly his fault. But I enjoyed his performance overall.

Desmonda Cathabel is also fine as Mary, with a nice voice and “I Don’t Know How to Love Him” (always a skip when I listen to cast recordings or bootlegs) was pleasant. I found the take on the character quite safe and the look and folk-ish singing style reminiscent of Yvonne Elliman.

Elsewhere - and I appreciate this is an unpopular take - I felt David Thaxton overacted terribly as Pilate. I started the review by saying I felt the production lacked “place”; it also lacked consistency in energy levels and performance style across the cast. Thaxton is giving a BIG performance here, and I didn’t think it worked. It wasn’t quite Fred Johansen’s level of ham in the 2000 film, but it wasn’t far off. I enjoyed Bob Harms as Caiaphas (great voice) and thought Billy Nevers was okay as Simon.

We had Layton Williams as Herod and he was fine, but I wasn’t wowed. I assume they’re all directed in the same way, but it was just the standard high-camp Herod: a few ad-libs and done — big ovation, though.

The band sounded fantastic, and the ensemble singing was generally very good.

Other thoughts:

- The combined programme/brochure (£14) is quite nice. I have a standing ticket for next week that I won’t be using now, so I’ll be returning or listing that shortly.

- Being very familiar with the show, I find it hard to judge how easy the lyrics were to make out, but my Mum had difficulty following some of the words.

- Full standing ovation, packed stage door - Sam Ryder is unquestionably a big draw.

So what to score this…

Well, reading back over everything I’ve wanted to say, it reads like a very negative review overall. But that doesn’t really take into account the fact that I do love the show, and that this production provides a couple of hours that are, overall, well sung and competently put together. I would give this 2.5*, rounded up to 3* because of “Gethsemane”.

The production isn’t short of ideas; it’s short of a coherent reason for those ideas to exist together. Some of the directorial decisions are very odd and overly clever, but ultimately I came away feeling ultimately the production was all fizz and no gin.

This will be quite a long review, as I have a lot to say about this production.

We sat in the Royal Circle 23-24, and found the view perfect. We booked these when they went on sale and paid £120 each, which is the second-most I’ve ever paid for a UK theatre ticket(!).

I saw this with my Mum, and in the lead-up to the production we watched both the original 1973 film and the 2000 version by Gale Edwards. I’m really pleased we did this beforehand, as despite my Mum knowing the story as a Christian, we agreed that the way the story is told in this production would have been, at best, rather murky.

In my view, this is a rather baffling production with some very strange and perhaps even rather pretentious directorial choices in staging, leading to unclear storytelling and a distinct sense of style over substance.

I ultimately felt the production lacked in “place” and was an at-times confused mess of disparate ideas which failed to make a cohesive whole. It felt full of surface-level ideas which on the face of it seemed clever, but when you actually took time to think, didn’t make much sense. Yes, on the surface, it’s a clever idea to have the Roman soldiers don Caesar masks to show they are legion, but it also reads as GCSE drama: “I’m 15 and this is deep”. It looked silly. The show is full of moments like this. Having Judas’s silver represented by silver paint was another moment that had me scratching my head and wondering… why? All this could possibly do is serve to confuse people less familiar with the story.

There are hints of the original 1960s hippie concept; the scaffolded set is reminiscent of the original film. Jesus is almost a wandering minstrel - guitar in hand, he comes off more as a Brightonian busker singing David Gray in the North Laine than a respected and loved leader of men. Mary reads as a 1960’s hippy flower child, fine, so why is Judas acting like he is in a different universe altogether?

Like last year’s Evita, this is a hugely dance-driven production, staged with the feel and energy of a rock concert. Like Evita, the choreography is often completely divorced from the narrative. Unlike Evita, the modern, street-flavoured choreography very quickly becomes an unnecessary distraction, and frequently feels as though Tim Sheader lacks faith in the material itself to keep an audience engaged.

While I’m aware Sheader’s history with this show predates last year’s Evita, the comparisons to Jamie Lloyd’s 2025 summer hit don’t end with the similar choreography. The minimalist static set and costumes (Tom Scutt), booming sound design (Adam Fisher) and rock-concert lighting (Lee Curran) all suggest a very familiar formula.

One of my biggest issues was the usage of hand-held microphones, which I simply cannot attribute to anything other than Sheader’s appreciation of the aesthetic. They certainly don’t do any favours to the sound, with far too much reverb applied; and covering the bottom half of every actor’s face with one hardly helps when there is already a lack of readable emotion from some key cast members. Again, this is a choice which seems like it should be clever, like in Evita; as Eva takes the microphone to symbolically become the voice of the people. Every time I think I’ve got a handle on what something “clever and metaphorical” in this production represents, they do something which completely undermines that interpretation.

“Judas’s Death” is appallingly realised, to the point that, in my opinion, it is unclear what exactly is being represented on stage. Frankly, it looked terrible and I’m not sure what the effect was meant to be with those red ropes.

Similarly, the raising of the huge crucifix set piece and crucifixion itself was very underwhelming, to the point that I thought something must’ve gone wrong. The enormous, impressive cross tilts upwards, and Jesus, covered in glitter and blood, is unceremoniously attached to a tiny little thing downstage, awkwardly raised 3ft in the air above a tiny trapdoor, then judderingly brought back down. What a tease.

Was this because Jesus’s death was actually a pretty low-key affair, on a field with several others suffering the same fate? Or was it because they couldn’t find a practical way to actually utilise the massive cross they already have?

I would have overlooked a lot of these issues with a phenomenal cast. After all, like Evita, the staging and concept of the production are centred around the performances rather than spectacle. Unfortunately, I found the cast mediocre, with a few bright spots.

I really like Sam Ryder’s voice, and he sings the part beautifully, particularly in “Gethsemane” (more on this shortly). His vocals were strong and he had good diction. However, he is out of his depth in terms of acting. He only appears to remember to act (or react) when it’s his turn to sing or to perform specifically rehearsed gestures on certain lines or beats of the music. This can make his performance feel very stilted. There is one very early section where his lack of natural skill and experience is exposed; the choreography calls for his followers to perform a ring-a-roses around him, and he turns to them. An actor here would ad-lib gestures, greet them, scold them - whatever the moment required. But a lack of attention to detail has him blocked to turn, on the beat, two full revolutions with a blank expression. It’s this lack of care which, for me, permeates the performances throughout the production.

But I must take a moment to praise “Gethsemane”, which was easily the highlight of the show and got a standing ovation. This was extremely strong, with a huge amount of detail going into the minutiae of both the vocal performance and the storytelling. With one exception. Towards the end of the number, Jesus has a rock-and-roll moment; he slams down in anger his mic stand - but only after gently setting down his expensive guitar. Can’t be smashing that 8 shows a week! Seriously, cut that. It was naff.

I also enjoyed “Damned for All Time”, and found Tyrone Huntley a much more secure watch as Judas. Things start in quite a low-key fashion with an oddly subdued “Heaven on Their Minds”, but the suicide scene debacle is hardly his fault. But I enjoyed his performance overall.

Desmonda Cathabel is also fine as Mary, with a nice voice and “I Don’t Know How to Love Him” (always a skip when I listen to cast recordings or bootlegs) was pleasant. I found the take on the character quite safe and the look and folk-ish singing style reminiscent of Yvonne Elliman.

Elsewhere - and I appreciate this is an unpopular take - I felt David Thaxton overacted terribly as Pilate. I started the review by saying I felt the production lacked “place”; it also lacked consistency in energy levels and performance style across the cast. Thaxton is giving a BIG performance here, and I didn’t think it worked. It wasn’t quite Fred Johansen’s level of ham in the 2000 film, but it wasn’t far off. I enjoyed Bob Harms as Caiaphas (great voice) and thought Billy Nevers was okay as Simon.

We had Layton Williams as Herod and he was fine, but I wasn’t wowed. I assume they’re all directed in the same way, but it was just the standard high-camp Herod: a few ad-libs and done — big ovation, though.

The band sounded fantastic, and the ensemble singing was generally very good.

Other thoughts:

- The combined programme/brochure (£14) is quite nice. I have a standing ticket for next week that I won’t be using now, so I’ll be returning or listing that shortly.

- Being very familiar with the show, I find it hard to judge how easy the lyrics were to make out, but my Mum had difficulty following some of the words.

- Full standing ovation, packed stage door - Sam Ryder is unquestionably a big draw.

So what to score this…

Well, reading back over everything I’ve wanted to say, it reads like a very negative review overall. But that doesn’t really take into account the fact that I do love the show, and that this production provides a couple of hours that are, overall, well sung and competently put together. I would give this 2.5*, rounded up to 3* because of “Gethsemane”.

The production isn’t short of ideas; it’s short of a coherent reason for those ideas to exist together. Some of the directorial decisions are very odd and overly clever, but ultimately I came away feeling ultimately the production was all fizz and no gin.

This will be quite a long review, as I have a lot to say about this production.

We sat in the Royal Circle 23-24, and found the view perfect. We booked these when they went on sale and paid £120 each, which is the second-most I’ve ever paid for a UK theatre ticket(!).

I saw this with my Mum, and in the lead-up to the production we watched both the original 1973 film and the 2000 version by Gale Edwards. I’m really pleased we did this beforehand, as despite my Mum knowing the story as a Christian, we agreed that the way the story is told in this production would have been, at best, rather murky.

In my view, this is a rather baffling production with some very strange and perhaps even rather pretentious directorial choices in staging, leading to unclear storytelling and a distinct sense of style over substance.

I ultimately felt the production lacked in “place” and was an at-times confused mess of disparate ideas which failed to make a cohesive whole. It felt full of surface-level ideas which on the face of it seemed clever, but when you actually took time to think, didn’t make much sense. Yes, on the surface, it’s a clever idea to have the Roman soldiers don Caesar masks to show they are legion, but it also reads as GCSE drama: “I’m 15 and this is deep”. It looked silly. The show is full of moments like this. Having Judas’s silver represented by silver paint was another moment that had me scratching my head and wondering… why? All this could possibly do is serve to confuse people less familiar with the story.

There are hints of the original 1960s hippie concept; the scaffolded set is reminiscent of the original film. Jesus is almost a wandering minstrel - guitar in hand, he comes off more as a Brightonian busker singing David Gray in the North Laine than a respected and loved leader of men. Mary reads as a 1960’s hippy flower child, fine, so why is Judas acting like he is in a different universe altogether?

Like last year’s Evita, this is a hugely dance-driven production, staged with the feel and energy of a rock concert. Like Evita, the choreography is often completely divorced from the narrative. Unlike Evita, the modern, street-flavoured choreography very quickly becomes an unnecessary distraction, and frequently feels as though Tim Sheader lacks faith in the material itself to keep an audience engaged.

While I’m aware Sheader’s history with this show predates last year’s Evita, the comparisons to Jamie Lloyd’s 2025 summer hit don’t end with the similar choreography. The minimalist static set and costumes (Tom Scutt), booming sound design (Adam Fisher) and rock-concert lighting (Lee Curran) all suggest a very familiar formula.

One of my biggest issues was the usage of hand-held microphones, which I simply cannot attribute to anything other than Sheader’s appreciation of the aesthetic. They certainly don’t do any favours to the sound, with far too much reverb applied; and covering the bottom half of every actor’s face with one hardly helps when there is already a lack of readable emotion from some key cast members. Again, this is a choice which seems like it should be clever, like in Evita; as Eva takes the microphone to symbolically become the voice of the people. Every time I think I’ve got a handle on what something “clever and metaphorical” in this production represents, they do something which completely undermines that interpretation.

“Judas’s Death” is appallingly realised, to the point that, in my opinion, it is unclear what exactly is being represented on stage. Frankly, it looked terrible and I’m not sure what the effect was meant to be with those red ropes.

Similarly, the raising of the huge crucifix set piece and crucifixion itself was very underwhelming, to the point that I thought something must’ve gone wrong. The enormous, impressive cross tilts upwards, and Jesus, covered in glitter and blood, is unceremoniously attached to a tiny little thing downstage, awkwardly raised 3ft in the air above a tiny trapdoor, then judderingly brought back down. What a tease.

Was this because Jesus’s death was actually a pretty low-key affair, on a field with several others suffering the same fate? Or was it because they couldn’t find a practical way to actually utilise the massive cross they already have?

I would have overlooked a lot of these issues with a phenomenal cast. After all, like Evita, the staging and concept of the production are centred around the performances rather than spectacle. Unfortunately, I found the cast mediocre, with a few bright spots.

I really like Sam Ryder’s voice, and he sings the part beautifully, particularly in “Gethsemane” (more on this shortly). His vocals were strong and he had good diction. However, he is out of his depth in terms of acting. He only appears to remember to act (or react) when it’s his turn to sing or to perform specifically rehearsed gestures on certain lines or beats of the music. This can make his performance feel very stilted. There is one very early section where his lack of natural skill and experience is exposed; the choreography calls for his followers to perform a ring-a-roses around him, and he turns to them. An actor here would ad-lib gestures, greet them, scold them - whatever the moment required. But a lack of attention to detail has him blocked to turn, on the beat, two full revolutions with a blank expression. It’s this lack of care which, for me, permeates the performances throughout the production.

But I must take a moment to praise “Gethsemane”, which was easily the highlight of the show and got a standing ovation. This was extremely strong, with a huge amount of detail going into the minutiae of both the vocal performance and the storytelling. With one exception. Towards the end of the number, Jesus has a rock-and-roll moment; he slams down in anger his mic stand - but only after gently setting down his expensive guitar. Can’t be smashing that 8 shows a week! Seriously, cut that. It was naff.

I also enjoyed “Damned for All Time”, and found Tyrone Huntley a much more secure watch as Judas. Things start in quite a low-key fashion with an oddly subdued “Heaven on Their Minds”, but the suicide scene debacle is hardly his fault. But I enjoyed his performance overall.

Desmonda Cathabel is also fine as Mary, with a nice voice and “I Don’t Know How to Love Him” (always a skip when I listen to cast recordings or bootlegs) was pleasant. I found the take on the character quite safe and the look and folk-ish singing style reminiscent of Yvonne Elliman.

Elsewhere - and I appreciate this is an unpopular take - I felt David Thaxton overacted terribly as Pilate. I started the review by saying I felt the production lacked “place”; it also lacked consistency in energy levels and performance style across the cast. Thaxton is giving a BIG performance here, and I didn’t think it worked. It wasn’t quite Fred Johansen’s level of ham in the 2000 film, but it wasn’t far off. I enjoyed Bob Harms as Caiaphas (great voice) and thought Billy Nevers was okay as Simon.

We had Layton Williams as Herod and he was fine, but I wasn’t wowed. I assume they’re all directed in the same way, but it was just the standard high-camp Herod: a few ad-libs and done — big ovation, though.

The band sounded fantastic, and the ensemble singing was generally very good.

Other thoughts:

- The combined programme/brochure (£14) is quite nice. I have a standing ticket for next week that I won’t be using now, so I’ll be returning or listing that shortly.

- Being very familiar with the show, I find it hard to judge how easy the lyrics were to make out, but my Mum had difficulty following some of the words.

- Full standing ovation, packed stage door - Sam Ryder is unquestionably a big draw.

So what to score this…

Well, reading back over everything I’ve wanted to say, it reads like a very negative review overall. But that doesn’t really take into account the fact that I do love the show, and that this production provides a couple of hours that are, overall, well sung and competently put together. I would give this 2.5*, rounded up to 3* because of “Gethsemane”.

The production isn’t short of ideas; it’s short of a coherent reason for those ideas to exist together. Some of the directorial decisions are very odd and overly clever, but ultimately I came away feeling ultimately the production was all fizz and no gin.

Ice white shoes, ice white socks with navy blue double cadet stripe, a pair of shorts, T-shirt with chevron action flash - l’homme du sport (man of sport). It’s a look which says “I’m in Paris, and nothing is going to stop me!”.

Patrick directed the show - and appeared out of nowhere for this snap! 😅 What a legend.

Beetlejuice Thursday night. I quite liked this! After the first 10-15 minutes I was a bit worried I might hate it, but I think I adjusted into its style once I accepted the 4th wall breaking and style of humour.

I had seen and liked the movie in the recent past, without being a huge fan. Completely unfamiliar with the musical, never seen or listened to it, because I wanted to come in completely fresh and with no preconceptions.

I believe we had the full principle cast (is there a cast board? All I could find was a little screen in the main doorway, but that was a generic cast list, not performance specific), it was definitely David Fynn as BJ. And I thought he was really good - I can’t imagine going back and seeing someone else and thinking they were hugely better to be honest. He did exactly what I expected and I think he was the highlight of the show for me. Some genuine belly laughs. The rest of the cast were decent.

I must echo other common opinions of the production itself, though, unfortunately. The combination of no fourth wall, a lot of mugging (from everyone, not just BJ), and scene changes behind front tabs made this feel closer to a high-end touring production than a major West End event, if not high budget regional panto because of the type of show it is. It felt very old-school and not necessarily in a good way. I thought the
SPOILER: Click to hide
sandworm (singular) was a huge disappointment, as was the very crappy looking flying effect at the end
. Lots of flash paper. Lots of blinding LEDs. And lots and lots of mugging. The sets didn’t blow me away, but I liked the costumes. It didn’t feel “premium” like Paddington though - it felt like a tour stopping in London, basically.

Onto the plot. It’s fine, kept the attention generally. I can see why this has a young audience, it taps into what so many shows have found success with - mourning, humour and teenage angst. And, most importantly, a relatable “cool outsider” female lead role (and in my opinion Lydia is a co lead character, the plot revolves around her) that teenage girls can relate to. She’s the angsty, quirky draw for kids. She’s Elphaba, Natalie Goodman, Carrie White, Evan Hansen, Wednesday Addams, Veronica Sawyer, Moritz and Melchior, Alison Bechdel.

One could argue that Lydia is written almost cynically from a commercial perspective. She’s an amalgamation of traits that have repeatedly proved successful with young audiences. The daddy issues, the outsider status, the feeling of being misunderstood, the dark aesthetic, the sarcastic humour - it’s all very familiar territory.

Unlike many musicals I’ve seen and heard for the first time, I do actually remember several of the songs - Maitlands 2.0 (?), the creepy old guy song at the end and a few others. They weren’t all to my taste. One of Lydia’s songs in the Netherworld, about wanting to go home (or perhaps not wanting to go home - I admittedly lost the thread - just felt like five minutes of unpleasant shout belting to me.

One other thing which struck me was the number of children in the audience - tweens and even younger, being brought by a parent. I am genuinely surprised at this, because the show is overtly and fairly non-subtly sexual with numerous “hard swears” and adult themes. Even several jokes about paedophilia, and BJ’s constant groping, touching himself, etc. Far be it from me to be prudish, but I really don’t think some of the audience were old enough to watch this show without Mum or Dad answering some awkward questions later. But hey ho, if it’s not against the rules it’s up to them.

The show feels about 20 minutes too long at 2hr 40 including interval. They could easily cut the Miss Argentina song and lose nothing, for example. I got out at 22:15.

All in all 4*, I thought it was quite good but not a new favourite. I got third row Dress Circle via Weird Wednesdays for £30 and was very happy with the value. At that price, I’d be tempted back if I needed to fill a slot in a two show day.

Absolutely wonderful visit to The Producers for Thursday’s matinee. The show was absolutely ELECTRIC yesterday with easily the best audience in all the times I’ve been - they were hot for everything, huge laughs throughout and even bigger ovations. The cast were on fire and were having an absolute an absolute blast.

I won’t go on and on about how good this production is, I’ve said most of it in the past. At this performance we had the full cast, except a couple of swings on and Michael Franks covering Franz.

Some general thoughts;

- Sat in one of the £19.26 seats in the centre of the second row, I felt almost guilty at what a bargain it was. One of the best shows in town, for under £20? Mad. The stalls were very full so hopefully it’s shifting some extra tickets for them.

- As I said, this was the best show yet - the cast were absolutely on fire. Andy Nyman is absolutely phenomenal in this, he’s just so, so good. “Betrayed” got the biggest ovation of the night, with an opt up(!!) and the ovation basically stopped the show. One of the best performances around, he is absolutely perfect as Bialystock.

- The rest of the cast, even a couple of ladies short, were firing on all cylinders. Joanna Woodward is just glorious as Ulla, and the audience adored her.

- An instant and full standing ovation (I know this doesn’t mean much nowadays, but it felt like the audience couldn’t wait to leap to their feet to acknowledge such a great performance - I know I couldn’t!

- Lots of new business I noticed, Nyman genuinely corpsed at one point, which was fun - but kept it together when he briefly dropped his hat in “Leo and Max” at the end. What happened was I think someone near me in the audience said something loud enough for him to hear, and he did a double take, and had to catch up while laughing. Very cool moment. Something I’ve not noticed in any of my visits before (has this always the case?) - his costume is SO grubby (deliberately). It’s absolutely perfect.

- After such an incredible performance, I decided to stage door - something I don’t do that often but I really wanted a selfie, hopefully with Andy and Joanna. And I got them! They were both so lovely! Had a nice little chat with both and got my selfies, when it came to Andy, we were photobombed by a familiar face - Peter O’Hanrahanrahan (Patrick Marber) - the director himself!

A brilliant end to cap one of the best performances of anything I think I’ve ever seen.