Rev Stan's Theatre Blog

London theatre reviews and interviews

recent posts

about

Comments and critics on Timothy Spall’s The Caretaker, Old Vic

Timothy Spall (Davies) in The Caretaker at The Old Vic. Photo by Manuel Harlan (5)

Timothy Spall (Davies) in The Caretaker at The Old Vic. Photo by Manuel Harlan

People are kind enough to stop by this blog and leave a comment occasionally but my review of The Caretaker seemed to attract more interest than normal. The consensus of opinion from the comments seemed to be that the production is "dull and boring" – to quote one – although there was one person who really seemed to like it.

I too liked it, although it didn't warrant the long running time. In liking it I was accused by one person of fawning over Timothy Spall and raving about it because it was at the Old Vic. I don't think I did but I'm going to put that to one side because there is a whole separate post about how some people can't seem to disagree with others without sounding like they are personally affronted.

The play hadn't been seen by critics when these comments were written so I was curious as to whether it would divide opinion just as much. And  I think it is fair to say it hasn't gone down as a resounding success. There are more four star reviews than three star but there are three star reviews and it is interesting that the running time does get mentioned in a few:


"The production already feels a bit water-logged at three hours, largely thanks to the decision to have two intervals which are neither needed nor justified here. " What's On Stage

"Matthew Warchus’s revival protracts the overall experience to three hours with two intervals (that’s almost enough time to walk over to Sidcup, where Davies’s fabled identity records are kept)." Daily Telegraph

I won't pick over the reviews in detail as Megan Vaughan has done a really good job of that on The Stage website except to say that a few comment on how funny it is. Although I did laugh a few times, I can't say I'd describe it as a comedy and definitely not "exceptionally funny". Perhaps the humour is blossoming as it beds in.

Posted in ,

3 responses to “Comments and critics on Timothy Spall’s The Caretaker, Old Vic”

  1. yaya avatar
    yaya

    I’m getting too old for the late night drunk train home so I’ve become a fan of Saturday matinees which helps with long running times!
    The Caretaker could lose an interval easily but I wasn’t bored and Daniel Mays was heartbreaking.

    Reply
  2. Emma avatar
    Emma

    I read the comments on your review and I think the commenter re Timothy Spall was saying they hoped overall critical opinion wasn’t unanimously raving about him rather than a comment either way on what you had said.
    Regarding the comments on The Caretaker and since you see many plays, I’d be really interested to read a post (or hear what you thought) about different seats in theatres. I know personally I enjoy plays in general a lot more if I am close enough to see the actors’ faces and so the nuances of their performance. I know other people though who prefer to not be so close and feel uncomfortable being so. And of course I have sat on front rows and the backmost corner-est seat. I always wonder, when I’ve seen something just once if it has had an impact on what I thought. Especially I guess with something like Pinter which is so much about atmosphere and the things that aren’t said…
    Thinking about this, I’d always imagined that for actors it’d be harder to act in a really intimate venue… but there I suppose at least you know everyone feels the full impact of what you’re doing. If you are on stage at the Old Vic, you must know there are people who can barely even see you, hmmm….
    Well this got rather off topic! Regarding divisive plays, surely it is often the case. I’ve seen plays people have raved over that something about them has not worked for me and I’ve seen plays I’ve loved so much I can barely bear to hear anyone else did not love them… And much in between. All art would be boring if everyone liked the same things. (Also, do you find your opinion on plays can be affected by other stuff you’ve seen recently? I have only seen a few plays I adored so much I could not get over them, but when I do absolutely adore a play I find if I see other plays at the same sort of time I enjoy them less than I think I normally would have done, just as they aren’t as good as the amazing play and I can’t help but compare!)
    So many questions! Sorry!

    Reply
  3. Rev Stan avatar
    Rev Stan

    Hi Emma, thanks for taking the time to comment. In answer to your questions about seats I think it does make a difference. I’m like you in that I don’t engage in the same way if I’m sat far back from the stage. Front row is always my preference with just a couple of exceptions: high stage and subtitles.
    I know actors tend to love The Globe because they can see the audience and are so close to the audience but I imagine it varies from actor to actor.
    And I completely agree about if everyone liked the same thing it would be quite boring. It’s one of the reasons I don’t like to read anything before I see a play or a film because I like to go in uninfluenced – it doesn’t always work out. But then I know people who like to know as much as possible so…
    I think there are lots of things that can influence your enjoyment. I’ve seen stuff that I know I would have liked more had I not been so tired, for example.
    Not sure if I’ve answered all your questions, I hope so. And thanks again for the comment.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Discover more from Rev Stan's Theatre Blog

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading