Why I write rambling mixed metaphors

In my mind, when someone reads a review of a film, tv show, art exhibition, book or theatre production they want to know 2 things;

“Is it any good?”

“Should I go see it?”

Luckily, I am currently in the position of being able to choose what fringe theatre shows I can review and consequently I aim for those I think will either likely be high quality (classics such as ‘The dolls house’) or will be up my street (well written, innovative or immersive and dealing with themes I enjoy). As a result, even a poor production usually has redeeming elements (mentioning no names).  This has the downside of meaning that I don’t often have the luxury of leaving the answer to the first question, “Is it any good?” being a simple ‘Yes’ or ‘No’.  Most shows I review are good in some ways

But if everything I review is somewhere on the scale of ‘good’, how do I differentiate between the ‘amazing’ and the ‘crap’. How do I say whether it is worth seeing, if I deem it ‘worth seeing’ to review already?

I cannot say I believe therefore in a totally subjective standard by which to judge fringe theatre. Mark Kermode says in regard to film critics:

“Anyone who believes an individual critic’s personal responses to a film are in any way definitive is a fool.”*

I doubt such an objective viewpoint exists for theatre reviewers, I certainly haven’t reviewed enough to gain it anyway.  But I do have a set of parameters for how I conduct a review.

In regard to film criticism, Mark Kermode says that any review should have 5 elements:*

1) Opinion

2) Description

3) Contextualisation

4) Analysis

5) Entertainment

By and large, this applies to theatre review also.  Allow me to explain my parameters.

Firstly, when judging whether a production is ‘any good’ I believe any review needs to start with description. Answering the question;

“What is the production like?” I try to give the reader an impression on whether it is the kind of production they would like to see. It’s a fine balance between description and revealing too much but hopefully I convey ‘what the production is like’ without describing act-for-act what happens.

Secondly, any theatre production involves a great number of creators so each of these aspects needs to be considered; cast, directors, choreographers, designers, lighting and sounds designers to name a few. All these aspects contribute to whether a production is ‘good’ or not. Some reviewers could argue that these things should all be part of the mix, like music in film so perhaps it is because I am a theatre technician that I like to examine these aspects as well as the acting and direction. Still, I feel it all contributes to the review.

Thirdly, a review needs to address anything problematic in the production. This is important both as almost a BBFC rating system for audiences and feedback for those involved in the production. Productions are not always set in stone come press night and successful shows can often change when they transfer.  This feedback is therefore important for the production team.

Fourthly, perhaps the hardest question to answer is ‘should I go and see it?’ If I have enjoyed the show and am excited by it, then this is easy because the answer is a big YES and 4 or 5 stars.  However, if the show is problematic in some way then it becomes a exercise in hedging the reader’s bets.  Often this comes down to comparisons with other works in order to narrow the field for the potential audience member; “If you like x, you might like it.”

To return the the 5 elements then:

2) Description and 3) contextualisation- ‘what is the production like?’

4) Analysis – ‘Should I go see it?’ ‘Is there anything problematic/challenging I should know about before I decide?’

5) Entertainment – I try and make my reviews engaging, usually through the use of rambling mixed metaphors but at the very least try to keep them succinct and upbeat.  I don’t always succeed, but then I worry if I focus too much on enterainment I would read like Alan Partridge.

Which brings me perhaps to the hardest part.

1) Opinion.  You may have noticed that the other aspects of a review attempt objectivity.  But opinion comes down to personal experience and taste.  One can have a bad experience of an otherwise good show, or due to personal taste an aspect can throw you right out of the story.  I try and flag these up and word them in a way that explains that this is what MY experience was but I cannot say for certain that everyone will see it that way.  In making the reader aware of my own experience they can judge for themselves whether, based on what I have written so far, whether they would have a similar experience.

The other word on ‘opinion’ is that of course, everyone has one but hopefully, as critics, having seen and analysed more shows and a variety of shows we can have a more informed opinion.  I also hope that, knowing me a bit better from my previous reviews (and this blog) that I like certain things and not others so the reader can apply their own filter to it.

Hope this clarifies a few things about how I write reviews!  Thanks for reading!  Do you have any thoughts about reviewing?  Leave a comment!

P

*(Mark Kermode: ‘The Good, the bad and the Multiplex’ 2011)

“Boarding now for existential reflection”

My review of ‘A First Class Death’ at the Vaults Festival is now live on Remotegoat here

If you enjoy challenging, engaging promenade performances which make you reflect during the performance and after then you may enjoy taking the next available train to A First Class Death.

This exploration of the subject of death is framed by the grand re-opening of the London Necropolis railway.  The audience goes on a guided tour of the surrounding area, where the fascinating history of the real railway is explained.  They learn that the railway was first opened in 1854 to transport the dead and mourners to funerals at Brookwood cemetery in Surrey and how it came to be and close.  During the tour however, the audience gets the feeling that not everything is as it seems.

Following the tour the audience enter the dank and cavernous Vaults beneath the railway lines of Waterloo station.  Audience members then take part in various activities designed to make them consider aspects of death, funerals and their legacy.  The Vaults ‘cavern’ space, providing a subterranean feel is ideal for this kind of contemplation, complemented well by the lighting and sound design.  As the trains rumbled overhead like a giant heartbeat the production climaxes with a poignant and melancholic finale.

If all this sounds morbid or depressing, it isn’t, but it does challenge the audience to consider morbid subjects.  Subjects such as inheritance and power of attorney are actually handled in a very gentle and upbeat way by the cast and the experience I had was actually very funny (but then I enjoy gallows humour). Observing fellow audience members engage in the activities is fascinating as one sees attitudes and opinions that are not often discussed openly or one might learn things about those people who you came with that you never knew.  It can also be an opportunity for reflection about one’s own mortality and legacy.

Given the macabre subject and the need to create an air of mystery about the show, some aspects of the production built suspense and as a result, there was an air of tension throughout which was never released.  This could prevent audience members from feeling comfortable enough to engage and is clearly unintentional as Jason Hall’s aim is to provide an uplifting, existential experience for the audience which I feel certain some audience members felt.

As is often the case with promenade performances, the cast want engagement and the more the audience goes with it, the more likely they are to get something out of it.  The cast are well briefed, each having a strong character to interact with and welcoming it.  Having said that, when tackling such a sensitive subject all individual audience members have different thresholds of engagement or bounds of taste so Baseless fabric have tried to balance these sensitive feelings and for the most part they succeeded.

So get a ticket, take the train if you are prepared to engage, learn some fascinating history and be challenged to genuinely reflect upon (and laugh about) your own mortality.

Details about the production (and to book tickets for the short run) can be found here

A big thank you to Everwalker for coming with me and for her thoughts and opinions.

Writing this review has reminded me that I need to post a blog about my own opinions on reviewing as a writing style.  It is unlikely to be framed as ‘advice’, more of a statement of intent and what to expect from me as a reviewer.  So keep an eye out for that soon!

The gloomy shadow of despair

The Rose Theatre

http://www.rosetheatre.org.uk/

(My remotegoat review)
Dr Faustus
Marking the 450th anniversary of Christopher Marlowe, the Rose theatre stages an adaptation of Dr Faustus in the space where it was first performed. Conjuring up such spirits is risky, but this production is creepy, engaging and looks into a pit of despair as gloomy as the shadows of the archaeological site itself.

The tale is familiar to many, Faustus; a learned man tired of his studies seeks knowledge and power and so sells his soul to Lucifer. To achieve his ambitions he is given the demonic spirit Mephistopheles to serve him. Faustus makes the world his playground but as the end of his bargained time draws near he despairs at his inevitable end. What is unique is that this adaptation is a one man show with Faustus, in the form of plainly dressed Christopher Staines. As such it is a stripped down tale with Mephistopheles as a disembodied voice and some scenes played out with paper dolls (which is much better than it sounds). In making this decision and Martin Parr’s direction makes this production feels like a supernatural Beckett-esque monologue. Faustus (if indeed it is he) wrestles with himself and sees images in his mind’s eye making the audience question whether what he experiences is real or this is a self-tormenting ritual for this character. As this is obviously not a traditional adaptation do not expect to see any of the comedic scenes or characters who are not essential to the central storyline. However, the strength of adapting the play in this way is that the central story feels more like a universal tale of the feeling of self-loathing, desperation, neurosis and lonely despair.

This production has the eerie and spacious backdrop of the archaeological site of the Rose Theatre; filled with candles it conjures the idea of a cavernous pit. The subtle yet effective sound design by Chris Traves as well as Staines voice echo into it, the candles throw shadows around and Faustus stares into the darkness of his despair. The stage itself is small, allowing Staines to interact with the audience a little, holding the gaze of everyone there and using it to his advantage every time – drawing the audience in to his world or sending shudders down their spine with a penetrating glance. Overall the direction and production is powerful, taking the audience on the journey of forbidden knowledge, elation and terror. It is a very energetic and haunting performance, supported by the eerie space, direction and sound. Please consider supporting the Rose Theatre to continue the excavation and to produce exciting work such as this.

Prologue to a dark future

review on remotegoat

In the dark future, a conglomerate corporation runs London as a City-State, making themselves wealthy and suppressing artistic creativity and dissidents. Within this nightmare vision of the future there are many stories. The main thread is the poet-activist-messiah Johnny O and his love and muse, the Pop Princess turned rebel Alaya. We also learn of the journalists who refuse to bow to the Corporation media bias, the Conglomerate seeking popular support while hunting the resistance and the reluctant Mr J, an Everyman caught by accident in the struggle.

The Old Boys Club is filled with sofas, plants, bunting, stuffed animals, busts and paintings. A real fireplace serves as backdrop and a black cat wanders the space. The time between arrival and the show starting is blurred and the audience remain close to the performers throughout. It serves as an unfamiliar antechamber to the world writers Jonathan and David Herman have created. The tales spiral out in various directions conjuring a dystopian future with a simple setup and a few pieces of kit.

Performances from Noah Young and Gabby Wong are very strong; often alone speaking directly to the audience. It seemed as though they were more comfortable in the dynamic, satiric and comedic aspects rather than the soul-searching of the drama but the impact of the tales were not lost.

The tale of Orpheus and Eurydice is retold in cyberpunk melodrama and there are nods to many dystopian creations; ‘1984’, ‘Brave New World’, ‘Sleeper’ and ‘Brazil’ to name a few as well as cyberpunk influences. Mixing Kafka’s Trial with a dash of Noir narration and characterisation delighted the audience and engaged them but purists might feel it is too directly interpreted.

What conveys the feel and sense of the dystopian future most however is the music by Jonathan Young and David Herman; at first intruding in the bar, then building a soundscape and atmosphere of dread.

The use of video is also integral and well done. With only two performers, the use of news bulletins and video calls projected on the screen at the end of the hall really adds to the story and experience.

The piece felt very much like a prologue to a greater creation. It felt as though there was a rich dystopian world background behind the tales. These characters and more could be made into a larger anthology because there are sadly limits to the storytelling in this production that leave many questions unanswered and open to interpretation. As a uniting thread, the tale of Johnny O and Alaya is left unresolved which is a shame. The Orpheus Project is raw and unrefined but with many enjoyable, daring aspects that show promise. It is this sort of storytelling that should be encouraged in the arts and so it acts as a prologue to these artists for the future.

Tiny space holds skylark prisoner

Howie Ripley and Laura Kenward in ‘A Doll’s House at The London Theatre, New Cross. 21-26 Jan 2014

(My remotegoat review)

The tiny space of the London theatre holds the living room of the Helmers and is the cell for the central character of Nora; wife to Torvald, mother or two and frantic in everything she does. A tangled web of deceit, guilt and love envelops her and desperately she struggles; a torment which so many women must have felt when Ibsen originally penned the script and still feel today. This production has energy, truth and emotion.

Laura Kenward is the standout performance of this production portraying Nora with such verisimilitude that the audience shakes as she wracks her conscience. Her sincerity as Nora carries the entire play. Opposite her, Howie Ripley plays Nora’s husband Torvald; a bank manager and product of his time. He calls Nora his ‘lark’ and kindly patronises her so she feels all she can do is dance and play for him. Ripley’s performance is subdued where Kenward’s is vivacious, a stark contrast to the state of their character’s marriage. Their chemistry together sparks and makes the final confrontation all the more powerful, having seen them seemingly so blissfully happy in Act One.

Supporting cast are good; Tom Collins as Dr Rank gets to deliver some of the plays most poignant lines, which he does with a sweet frailty. Hilary Cordery as the nanny is given brief melancholic characterisation. Maleesha Adjaye-Tabansi as Kristine and David Scott-Lucas as Krogstad add to the tension as friend and foe to the Helmers.
Pauline Armour’s direction turns what could be a very static play in a small space and makes it dynamic, rarely are any characters sat in one place for long and when combined with the snappy dialogue keeps the audience’s attention. The design of the play from the set to the sound and light is stylised to give the feel of the period without overshadowing the characters.

This is a production that is not afraid to tackle the many issues raised by the play head on, from law versus morality, to gender politics, to personal identity and freedom. It does so with energy, truth and emotion.

Quick wits and stiff upper lips

The Misfits of London

Bridewell Theatre – lunchtime theatre

(my remotegoat review)

If you like irreverent music hall comedy mixed with radio detectives tales told using witty wordplay and a dash of satire The Misfits of London is for you. Squeezed into 45 minutes is the hilarious tale of an alternative post-war radio drama and those who make it.

Anthony Carruthers, played by a sharp-suited and moustached Nicholas Cowell is the writer of a radio comedy-drama which is hoping to get a new series at the BBC.  With their leading lady injured, the hopeful Phllis Ingleby (Sophia Sivan) steps in and the cast and crew give a performance of the detective story to the executives.  What follows is intelligent, witty and hilarious.
 
The audience are treated to a feast of voice acting.  The comedy duo of Arthur (Robert Blackwood) and Fred (Gareth Davies) trade banter with speed and agility, as well as doing justice to a Cole Porter Classic ‘You’re the top’.   Sophia Sivan as Phyllis is a wonder as the sweet English rose who changes voices and demeanour with ease during the radio drama.  The supporting cast are just as impressive; Laura Rugg rushes about as the perfectionist producer Beryl.  But it is Georges who stands out, played with a touch of melancholy by Ben Cutler. The mute foley artist makes the audience smile with his presence (even when they don’t fully notice him doing the sound effects of the radio play).  It is credit to Lucy Appleby’s direction that all the characters gel so well, they all come across as so lovable and the energy of the production crackles and pops.
 
Blackwood and the sketch group from whom this production was born are clearly fans of 1940s Britain; the script is laced not only with historical references, riffs in the humour and attitudes of the time but also satire of the modern day.  Blackwood also plays themes against type, juxtaposing modern alternative comedy against post-war humour, stereotypes and history for comic effect. For the most part this is excellent but while the satire is very welcome and fits it is a little on the nose.
 
But any rough edges are smoothed over seamlessly by the energy of the cast and the quick witted wordplay.  It is these elements that make this show a joy to watch.  It is a delightfully clever idea to stage a radio play in a lunchtime theatre because the audience gets the whole detective story, plus the drama of the meta-plot of the radio cast and a musical number. You won’t regret spending your lunchtime with The Misfits of London.

Behind the Garden Wall, Courtyard Theatre

Behind the Garden Wall, Courtyard Theatre

My review of ‘Behind the Garden Wall’ at the Courtyard Theatre is up on ‘Remotegoat’

“Behind the Garden Wall is a claustrophobic, intense, gloomy study of the Brontë’s, their lives and seeks the source of their inspiration.

This is a studio piece so still rough around the edges, but for such gothic subject matter that is apt. The audience enters past the cast in situ as tableaus of the family which are often re-framed during the play. The play opens with poetic lines from each of the siblings, while Patrick Brontë (a frail yet patriarchal Marcus McMahon) gives biographical detail about how they came to live in a parsonage Behind the Garden Wall from his desire to shelter them from the strife of the world.
Charlotte, Emily, Anne and Branwell seek to find a place in the world, having been separate from it for so long, after the deaths of their two elder sisters. Here we get to the beating heart of the piece, where the portrayal of each of the siblings is unique and convincing. India Martin as Charlotte draws in the audience with a strong performance of sincerity, earnestness and unrequited desire. Amy Christina Murray bares the heart and soul of Emily on stage, her every move is shot through with Emily’s passion, creativity and angst. In contrast to her is the starkly-lit, Ruby Padwick whose spiritual Anne holds tension and worry. Jack Smithson pounds the stage as Branwell, his melancholia hovering like a cloud wherever he goes. The direction uses the intimate space well and haunts the audience; strong eye contact pulls the audience roughly into the play and there are good moments where the action pauses; where the audience can see the emotions play across the faces of the characters, providing both a breather from the drama and a stretching of tension. Some may find that the subject is too heavy and gothic without much relief but fans of the Brontë’s work will expect this and enjoy the way Farren Morgan has woven details from their lives and novels into the tale.

The lighting design expands and contracts the space, giving sharp lines, then painting with broad strokes to create effects such as the looming shadow of Branwell over the family’s fortunes. It is an impressive design, so essential to such a small space. Use of projection, while giving some more flair to some scenes felt either underused or unnecessary. Indeed its absence from the second act went unnoticed. But being a studio piece, one forgives these rough edges.

The play walks a confident line between the heavy drama of the lives of the Brontë’s and their work avoiding collapsing into melodrama. However, because the feelings hang so heavy, the biographical detail sometimes gets lost. While the characters and their emotions are well expressed and understood by the audience, a sense of wider context beyond the garden wall and the theatre is unexplored. It is a powerful script that draws in everyone in the space through strong performances from all the cast and good design; it will be interesting to see what they do next.”

Fair Em – Union Theatre

Caroline Haines as Fair Em, Robert Donald as Trotter

This apocryphal Shakespeare play (written around 1590) cheerfully starts with a song and a joyful music pervades this romantic comedy throughout. As Director Phil Willmott says, it is ‘quirky and slight entertainment’ which it is; sweet, light but a treat, a bit like a cupcake. William the Conqueror (a bombastic Jack Taylor) sees the image of Blanch, Princess of Denmark and sets off to woo her for his Queen. Once in Denmark he finds her not to his liking but prefers Mariana of Sweden, the love of his friend Marquess Lubeck (Tom Gordon-Gill). Meanwhile, fleeing William’s conquest Sir Thomas Goddard (James Horne) and his daughter Em (Caroline Haines) disguise themselves as a miller and daughter in the English countryside. Em is courted by three suitors of noble descent. Both Mariana and Em concoct plans to resolve their situations, though things work out in unexpected ways.

This spirited comedy is framed in a beautiful illustrated set (designed by Philip Lindley) lending a period, yet cartoon quality to proceedings which is fitting to the exaggerated comic action. The set is uncluttered which gives a great feeling of space in the tiny theatre which gives the cast room to move. It requires a strong cast to hold the piece together and this talented group does well. The Fair Em herself is the spirited Caroline Haines, showing the purity and loveliness of an English rose without being a wallflower. Her suitors are all excellent in their tragi-comic fawnings; David Ellis plays the shallow Manville with just the right level of villainy, countering the shy heroic blunderings of Robert Welling’s Lord Valingford. For the true romantic hero however one must look to Tom Gordon-Gill as the honourable yet torn Marquess Lubeck; Gordon-Gill is compelling as the tormented lover. Paired with Alys Metcalf as Mariana, who wins hearts and minds this makes a fascinating couple to watch. Comedic moments come from Robert Donald as the doddery Trotter, the larger-than life Gordon Winter as the King of Denmark and Madeline Gould as his daughter Blanch all have great comic timing – essential for this work. Willmott also introduces dances and fights to liven up the action and explain plot points later on.

David Ellis as Manville, Caroline Haines as Em with Green Willow in background

This is a quality production, the music and sound design by Nick Morell brings the audience into the English countryside both with sound effects and with the joyful music of the Green Willow group. The addition of music and dance lends a slightly farcical element which some may find overeggs the comedy but it is well in keeping with the tone Willmott is creating. Overall it feels crisp, sweet and bubbly like a summer wine. By rights this production should performed in summertime open air theatres and the grounds of stately homes for enraptured audiences to enjoy alongside their cakes. It feels a bit like a cupcake, slight, sweet but a treat. The main and only real fault is that it is not Shakespeare. Lacking the Bard’s poeticism means it never delivers the same impact as a Shakespeare comedy. But that doesn’t mean it isn’t an enjoyable evening entertainment and the authorship is not really the point of this production. I found, as a fan of Shakespeare’s comedies, Fair Em was a treat.

At the Union Theatre, Southwark until 9 February 2013
http://www.fairem.co.uk/

King John – Union Theatre

Strange that death should sing

My review of Shakespeare’s ‘King John’ at the Union Theatre is now live on Remotegoat!

There is always a question of judgement when interpreting Shakespeare.  A thousand balancing scales must be set between comedy, tragedy, reverence and relevance.  King John is the paradigm of such judgement and this is obvious from each aspect of this production.

Nicholas Osmund as King John (Photo: Scott Rylander)

Rikki Lawton as Philip the Bastard with Nicholas Osmund as King John (Photo: Scott Rylander)

A dim smoke filled hall where chanting echoes is the stage for a plot that swiftly slithers back and forth with narrative and directive flourishes.  John (Nicholas Osmund) clings to his kingdom while Philip of France (an emotive Damian Quinn) seeks to put a young relative of John’s onto the English throne.  Both powers move at the behest of strong women; Elanor of Aquitaine (the regal Maggie Daniels) and Constance (Samantha Lawson).  The tale is set up quickly and moves along at a swift pace, encompassing an epic tale of kingdoms and wars with numerous heartfelt sub-plots.  There are familiar Shakespeare motifs, such as honour versus politics, love versus duty, prejudice, power, tragic and comedic misunderstanding and the heavy weight of a crown.

Rikki Lawton as Philip the Bastard (Photo: Scott Rylander)

The casting is very well judged.  Rikki Lawton brings both energy and poignancy to Philip, bastard son of Richard the lionheart; desperate to climb socially yet with a great national pride.  His fervent delivery must infect the cast as it does the audience.  Nicholas Osmund cuts a comedic and tragic figure as John; sometimes scampering with glee but also capable of being regal, conveying perhaps being the lesser relative of great men and women.  Maggie Daniels as his mother, Queen Elanor of Aquitaine embodies all of the poise and power of that family.  On the other side of the channel there are excellent foils to them both. Damian Quinn as King Philip of France is a reflection of John but with greater statesmanship.  Samantha Lawson’s Constance verbally flagellates herself in her speeches, her grief ‘filling up the room’; the opposite to Eleanor’s confident presence.  Supporting performances such as John Last as Hubert, conveying a gruff but good man and Leonard Sillevis as Lord Falconbridge are understated but strong.  The young and innocent are but pitiable pawns in this game as played Daisy May and Albert De Jongh. All the cast drive for gravitas, clarity and representation without exception which makes each line feel very precise in delivery.

Albert de Jongh as Arthur (Photo: Scott Rylander)

The set is minimal, which allows the text to fill the room and tell the tale, aided by clarity of direction.  The costumes are a master class in suggestion; long military coats, splattered with mud over breastplates imply both medieval and cold war times.  Colour and heraldry show state and allegiance but in an understated way so as not to overshadow nor cause confusion over the action.  The music and sound similarly add to the atmosphere in a range of poignant or comedic ways without detracting from the text.  Lighting is appropriate, getting darker and moodier as dark times loom.  Each aspect is designed to bring forth the text and never overshadow it.

(Photo: Scott Rylander)

King John is staged here as a black comedy; smiling, singing and dancing with the weighty subjects.  Some may find this jarring if not to their tastes but considering the content, I feel this production brings the text and the meanings within to the forefront with consideration and precision.

One for all city-dwellers

New Review of The Lights by Howard Korder up on Remotegoat.

http://www.remotegoat.co.uk/review_view.php?uid=7668

The audience arrives into a warehouse full of strangers.  The seats are pallets and no stage is obvious so almost anyone in the space could be part of the show.  Everyone retreats into themselves, reading the newspaper/programme and not making eye contact as if on the bus or tube.  This is the initial atmosphere of The Lights; a journey through the soul of a city.  The action unfolds around the audience, conjuring the city before them through a day with shop assistant Lillian and her boyfriend Frederic.  The Lights is a morality tale for all city-dwellers and this is a great space to see it in.

The diverse skill of the cast is one of the real strengths of this production.  Frankie Haynes as the vulnerable Lillian is the heart of the play – whose horror at the morality of the city around her is conveyed with meek charm and echoed by the audience.  Lillian’s experience is framed by her scrimmaging boyfriend Fred, played with irresponsible pride by Brendan Murphy, her colleague Rose (Catherine Nix Collins) and by Erenhart (Paul Ham).  Rose seems drunk on her selfishness but Nix Collins makes her likeable despite this.  Erenhart is like a shadow of Lillian, his embrace of the twisted morals of the city is subtly played by Peter Ham.  The supporting cast are so good at differentiating their characters that it is hard to believe there are so few of them.  Yet each have a moment of poignancy, from Graham Dickson as the vagrant wanting to change to Peter Halpin as the defeated Bill, clinging to a hope, to Akpore Uzoh as Scab, whose life is the city.  Lauren Reed turns characters over like cards and Tom Shepherd spins the audience from pity to fear in a few scenes.  There is not a weak performance there and each is memorable.

Appropriately enough, the lighting design by Miguel Vicente is fantastic as it focuses the view and the mind; bringing intimacy to the large space.  What appeared as very sparse surroundings initially are flawlessly transformed into towers, tube trains and abandoned buildings.

The site-specific direction by Hamish MacDougall makes dynamic use of the space; busy streets, crowded red carpets and back alleys are all brought to life within the production.  This is perfect for the play as it demands this kind of attention to detail.  The only flaw in the warehouse space is the echoing sound, but for the most part this is not a problem.

The Lights speaks to all who have lived in a city and this review could be filled with all the many nuances and morals within the play (for there are many and many that spoke to those who have faced similar difficulties), but far better that you experience them yourself.  Attention should however be drawn to two messages significant to this production.  The first is that the titular ‘Lights’ of the play are both the lights that one can see within the city and the lives of the audience.  Sitting within that warehouse one can see the city (and city life) reflected amongst the scenes and that is an important thing to contemplate.  The second is that when The Man in the Chair (Gwilym Lloyd) outside Fred’s apartment stops Lillian and says how he finds it amazing that he can manage to live on what others throw away he speaks of the production itself.  The warehouse is about to be destroyed, the set and seats are all perfectly functional but thrown away or borrowed yet here they bring to life an entire city and show that it is not only things that are thrown away but lives, people and compassion.  A worthwhile experience to see for all city-dwellers.