Delivering the Bard can be difficult

“Yes, delivering the Bard can be difficult but TOADS made it look easy. As an avid fan of Shakespeare of 20 years standing, an ex RSC-employee and devotee of the Globe, TOADS "As You Like It" was for me all Shakespeare intended it to be - just delightful! The text was thoughtfully cut and directed, bringing home through (actually, I thought) very good delivery of the poetry and language, Shakespeare's themes of the court pomposity unfavourably contracted against the ideal of bucolic paradise. The set was realist and technically brilliantly put together, which was complemented by bold traditional Elizabethan ballads drawing the audience deeper into that mythical Warwickshire Forest of Arden fused with Devonish country accents to make you giggle and feel right at home.

A fine and strong performance from the goodly Orlando (Jolyon Tuck) which made you feel that (after the love romp around the forest and the Damascene realisation that a brother's love is enduring) the court would now be in safe hands. Roger Heath's bearded gentle Duke Senior was everything it should be, thoughtfully delivered, wisely, proudly, with just a dash of snobbery to give the Duke depth, contrasting against the country folk, including Ben Tisdall's devoted, ruddy Silvius who was funny and deliciously painful to watch with Becca Lamburn's Phoebe's excellent suitable disdain and, sinking even lower, Audrey (Suzie Powell), sporting a perfectly vapid expression while carrot-munching Bugs Bunny-style. Thrown into the middle of the madness, Jacques (Iain Douglas) was hauntingly melancholic. The 30's period costumes and casting of Jack Sutton as Oliver and Sarah Davies as Duchess with their blonde Arian looks as the court's bad boy and bad girl added a suitable hint of menace to the proceedings provoking me to ponder genocide and its relationship to Shakespeare's theme of feuding families in the context of Nazi Germany. I enjoyed this production very much. But if you didn't…. as you like it. It's just a bit of fun.

And, Rosalind (Lydia Dockray), after 20 years of Shakespeare, I don't believe I've ever been so well conjured.”

“Michael Winner is a film director but he's not a film critic, neither is he a theatre critic, even though he is qualified to be one. No, of all things he's a food critic. He is not a chef and as far as I know he can't cook, but he knows what he likes to eat and drink. He goes into a restaurant and if the food is or is or is not to his liking he writes about it. He doesn't have to be a Michelin star chef to do this. The restaurant may get upset, the young waiter who only started that month may get offended, the young lady who prepared the gravy that he was particularly critical about might be devastated. But at the end of the day, that's what he does. He's a food critic.

I see no difference when a journalist from the local newspaper gives an honest opinion about a performance in a local theatre that he/she did or did not like. It's his/her personal opinion and it is just as valid as yours or mine. The only difference is that other people read it and there's the rub. No one likes to be criticized in public.
I would suggest that amateur actors who go on stage should be aware that some members of the audience might not think that they are as wonderful or as talented as they themselves think. If you are going to stick their heads above the parapet then they must be prepared for a few pop shots. We all like to be told "Darling you were absolutely wonderful!" but occasionally it does us all good to be told that we weren't as good as we thought we were albeit from someone who didn't go to stage school.”

“Agree with the above comments. We should encourage the several young people in this play, who have shown great courage and determination in performing on the open stage before a paying public, rather than subjecting them to a criticism more appropriate for the RSC. Hopefully this experience for them will begin an understanding of the works of the world's greatest playwright with some insight into his characterisation and comedic writing. They may not yet be Geilguds, but who knows! Amateur drama needs young people with enthusiasm that must be nurtured to succeed, and amateur productions are essentially local, with all the characteristics of the family that needs kindness and consideration to thrive. These young actors are the future of a theatre that not only provides Torbay residents with consistent entertainment and enjoyment, but also offers our vital tourist population an additional 'cultural' attraction to enhance their visit. So, critics, remember they are amateurs, not professionals (although the standard of the Little Theatre does come across as very professional) and please give them more positive guidance rather than negative censure. Perhaps also a better knowledge of Shakespeare would help - Le Beau (he or she!) is not necessarily French. Shakespeare describes the character as 'a courtier attending on Frederick' (or the Duchess), so the accent may well have been impeccable for Le Beau's undisclosed nationality. The a cappella songs (incidentally the hardest way to perform) are all Shakespearean and germane to the play, and would have been well understood by the 'groundlings' as adding a more 'courtly' touch to the rural comedy. They should be regarded as part of the text and not necessarily a solo act to be evaluated in isolation.”

“Perhaps the reviewer should spend a little more time involved in local amateur theatre rather than slating it. His comment that the lack of men should set alarm bells ringing is laughable. This is an issue that very many local societies experience, there simply are not that many, young, men who can and want to be on stage.

Yes it was a brave decision by the director to alter elements of this play, but it worked. Some people will be against it from the start just because it breaks from the norm; that I feel is the case here. Setting it between the wars did not, for me, confuse matters at all. The script remains the same and surely that is the foundation for the entire show.

For me, and others around me this evening, the addition of music brought more lighter moments to the show. It is also commendable to see performers singing unaccompanied, surely many 'more professional' actors would not have done this.
There are some lovely characters created by the cast and that should be applauded rather than criticising elements.

I gather that some critics have been told they need to be tougher in their reviews; this I feel was a step too far and a little too personal. Please let's get behind local am-dram and give it our full support, without it perhaps the reviewer will be out of a job and many of us without a much loved hobby.

Mark Smith”

“When is this paper going to use a reviewer who is capable of constructive and positive comments when watching a piece of local theatre? I am involved with the show having designed and helped building the set and am surprised with Jonpaul Hedges review. I have heard many complimentory comments from the loyal, paying members of the audience who have suggested that the show is enjoyable and entertaining.
Why is it that this particular reviewer is unable to be more structured and helpful with his comments rather than being cruel to those people who enjoy the stage as their hobby?
Also Jonpaul's comments are damaging to those younger ones in the cast who are at their time of theatre experience, in need of quality comments to support their performances which in some cases are of a better standard than some adults I have watched previously.
May I suggest that the paper thinks seriously as to who and what reviews are put to press as this is again another very bad piece of news affecting the local Amdram when it is not correct in its comments. Did Jonpaul not find out what the audience thought at the end of the performance on Tuesday evening?

Peter West”

“I can see why the reviewer did not like the play from their own points but for me, I liked it so much that I went back to see it again.
Having only gotten in to watching theatre over the past 6 years I had never seen a Shakespeare play before and was sadly expecting not to like it but went purely because of my love for the Little Theatre and the welcoming atmosphere there. I watched the opening night on Saturday and quite shockingly, thoroughly enjoyed the play although my uncultured brain did struggle at points to keep up with Ye Olde English language. I went back and saw the play again last night (Wednesday). I enjoyed the play even more after my initial introduction earlier in the week and the cast now in full flow were amazing. I failed to see how having it set between two world wars detracting in any way from the meaning of the play as the script sat right in to this. The cast were brilliant and as I so very often see at the Little Theatre, they were far from amateur. The worst acted shows that I have seen in Torbay have been touring professional shows at the Princess where the cast are doing it for a job and not their own enjoyment. Admittedly not all of the cast were amazing but for an amateur society the overall standard is far higher than anyone should expect. The chemistry on the stage between some of the cast is absolutely great and even the set got an applause when the curtain opened. If you are thinking of going to see this play, do it as I doubt you will be disappointed live the reviewer was”