|
I have yet to read or watch anything Mike Bartlett which I haven't loved. There is a certain slickness to his writing and the vivid characters he draws so three-dimensionally that without fail, have me suspending belief and surrendering to the narrative, something, which as I am so regularly involved in theatre, doesn't happen much anymore. Bartlett is known tackling some serious issues in his writing too, in indirect, domestic and dramatic ways, and this clever merging of theatrical intention is what particularly interests me. This production, directed by Simona Hughes, assisted by Ed Malcomson, was full of lovely surprises and thought provoking challenges.
Love, Love, Love is about family. In particular, a somewhat dysfunctional family on three specific days, decades apart. In June 1967, teenaged baby boomers Kenneth (played by Martin South) and Sandra (Joanna Nevin) meet and fall for one another in awkward circumstances. Sandra has arrived at the flat Kenneth is crashing in because she's come home for the first time with his brother Henry (Matthew Cranfield), who owns said flat. We catch up with them again in the early nineties. Now they are the middle class working parents of Rosie (Ashleigh Togher) and Jamie (James Bowman). Finally, we meet them in 2011, divorced, retired and disconnected from their children and London based Rosie is visiting. She's home, with a request.
The production was tremendously well acted. The five actors appeared to jell into a strong ensemble and Simona Hughes' beautiful direction, was very apparent during collective moments of warmth and tenderness. Credit also to Ruth Sullivan for Movement Direction because moving together can play such a huge part in the development of this. Martin South and Matthew Cranfield played the love-hate, chalk cheese relationship between the two brothers, the lazy entitled student and the hard grafting young manual worker, in Act One with just the right combination of cheeky humour and light hearted venom. One ached for Cranfield's character as the woman for whom he was ill-suited but still excited about and much preferred his ethics and character to that of Kenneth.
Making an excellent debut for the Tower was Jamie Bowman who made a dark and expected turn from a somewhat cruel but energetic and spirited fourteen into a thirty five year old on the brink of a nervous breakdown.
Joanna Nevin gave another standout performance as the alcoholic, neglectful mother that Sandra became. She developed the character with clear sensitivity and thoughtfulness, but with a healthy, very important inclusion of creativity and bravery. Her choices were bold and committed throughout as she turned from the spirited teenager to the bitter middle class working mother to the retired divorcee, unsuccessful in all of her familial relationships. Her comic timing impeccable throughout, I felt it only a shame for Nevin that the rather vile Sandra seemed to have nothing redeeming about her. No explanation for the constant, damaging alcoholism, nor her early ruthlessness or later uncaring nature, and as an actress I think the opportunity to play the other side would be a treat and a challenge Nevin would rise to with real integrity and relish.
Another significant debut was made by Ashleigh Togher. Rose, or Rosie as she was referred to, was the most sympathetic, lost soul of a character and Togher's performance was the most internalised. She was particularly lovely as the tortured teenager, overthinking, worrying and thoroughly embarrassing, exploring the new concepts of commitment and sexuality and Togher always excelled in Rosie's most caring moments.
Huge credit must be given to Jude Chalk's beautiful set, or to describe it more truthfully, sets, as each time period had its own well-constructed set with detailed design.
One set was changed during the interval, and the audience entered the auditorium to a delicious feast for the eyes as the previously rather dingy set had been completely transformed
into a beautiful light and airy apartment. The other sets were changed before our eyes by a mixture of crew and cast with a slickness and efficiency, the rehearsal time for which it would have required, must be appreciated. Huge credit must also go to Stage Manager Louisa Brimacombe-Wiard, Hal Arnold, Andrei-Tudor Cotonou and the rest of the team for this. Hughes, Sullivan and the cast used choreographed, creative movement, demonstrating character, situation and time.
Passage of time was also shown to great effect by Colin Guthrie's very enjoyable sound design. An upbeat musical medley taking the audience through half a century of music. An addition which proved to be both enjoyable, atmospheric and also thematic, with musical taste an important ingrained element of the writing and the titular Love, Love, Love directly taken from the Beatles' All You Need Is Love. Alan Wilkinson's lighting was well designed and considered, overpowering at times, but this worked to good effect during intense scenes. Costumes by Anna Pearshouse were imaginatively and thoughtfully designed, demonstating taste, style and period knowledge, especially Nevin's luscious pink and orange dress in Act One. Her wig was also beautiful. Make up design by Claire Henshaw was similarly effective.
Hughes' direction was very strong. Particularly poignant moments occurred when there was deliberate juxtaposition of mood and character. Early moments of intimacy between Kenneth and Sandra showing the differences between their attitudes to relationships over that of Henry's. There was equally effective juxtaposition between the raucous but obviously innocent antics and woes of the two teenagers, directed playfully and with humour, and their dysfunctional, self-important parents who appeared to carry genuine weight on their shoulders. This came to light again when we saw the difference between late thirties Sandra with late thirties Rosie in Act Three. She appeared lighter and more resolute, yet far more irritated and internally wounded. Hughes and Togher clearly worked well to show Rosie's pain and discomfort throughout the piece. Timing and I'm sure meticulous rehearsal combined with first class instinct allowed for many memorable moments of comedy. The comedy I felt was more designed for deeper thought and could be appreciated for an extended period of time as opposed to it being laugh out loud funny to be taken at face value.
On reflection, when considering my love of Mike Bartlett, I felt that the play itself was not his strongest. Much of his other work, Bull, for instance is so specific in its form and genre that it makes a formal point of being different and that in itself serves the narrative. Love, Love, Love seemed to be a strange confusion of comedy and drama. At times it was too funny to be taken altogether seriously and about too serious a topic to be found funny. The characters, whilst sympathetic, were not particularly likeable and although inherently political, it was difficult to know exactly what political message to take from it. Although clearly about the impact of the generation of the baby boomers and the experience of the children of the baby boomers, the children of the baby boomers in this play were also the children of alcoholics. In any generation, this would be a difficult upbringing and I felt this played made enough of an issue of alcoholism for it to be noticed, but then left it strangely unaddressed.
This said, Love, Love, Love is another clear success for the Tower. First rate acting and directing with production values of the highest quality. It raised more questions than it answered, which I think is a crucial purpose of theatre. It was a visual delight and incredibly powerful. It was, as expected, a very interesting examination of an important topic from a domestic angle and was a highly enjoyable night at the theatre.
Photography by Ruth Anthony
|
