Let me get this out of the way early on in case you don’t read further and miss the crucial and vital message I have to give to you. It’s easy: Â Do not go to see this play.
I can’t emphasise this enough: do not go to see this play. If you’ve already bought tickets, cut your losses and throw them away. Don’t return them, don’t sell them, don’t give them to a friend: throw them away. Actually, thinking about it you might want to shred them or return them to your pharmacist for safe disposal just to be sure. (I should note that this was a preview; but short of a rewrite…)
The good news is that it’s relatively short (1h 50m, no interval) but the bad news is that it’s not nearly short enough. I’ve rarely hated a play as much as I did this one. And the lack of interval means that only the people on the end of the rows can escape and get their evenings back.
It starts off in straightforward enough style, a fractious family dinner with a pregnant daughter and senile grandfather. So far, so much standard Royal Court fare: a kitchen sink drama where the sink is from John Lewis of Hungerford. It’s all ruined by the arrival of uncle Bob (Paul Ready) who has a few home truths to share. None of this is great. It feels forced and wildly unrealistic and  some of the performances are fairly mixed.
Unfortunately, in retrospect, this short section was the soaring highlight of the evening.
There is an improv game played in drama schools called “Yes, And”. The concept is that one actor makes a statement, after which another actor agrees and goes on to add to the discussion with the phrase “Yes, and…”  Apparently after working on “Yes And†exercises, actors ultimately learn how to do scenes in which they embrace the ideas and concepts offered by fellow performers.
The rest of the production is, essentially, one very long and boring game of “Yes, And” where the characters make seemingly random and unconnected statements which are then repeated and embellished upon by the other characters. And more often than not have the word “cock”, “cunt” or “vagina” added.
I’m making it sound more entertaining and clever than it actually is. I cannot emphasise how deeply unfunny, overwhelmingly unrewarding and unremittingly tedious the result is.  By way of example:
Character 1: Â This is unremittingly tedious.
Character 2: Â Unremittingly.
Character 3: Â Unremittingly tedious.
Character 1: Â This really is …
Character 1 & 3: … unremittingly tedious …
Character 1: Â … and deeply unfunny
Character 4: Â Don’t tell me that this isn’t unremittingly tedious.
Character 5: Â No, don’t tell me that this isn’t unremittingly tedious.
Character 2: Â I know that this is unremittingly tedious, tedious, unremittingly tedious.
Character 3: Â Deeply unfunny and unremittingly tedious.
Character 1: Â Deeply tedious and unremittingly unfunny.
Character 7: Â Tedious, unfunny, unremittingly tedious, deeply unfunny, a woefully written waste of everyone’s time …
Character 4: Â … not least the audience
Character 2: Â Unremittingly tedious.
Character 2: Â Unremittingly.
Character 3: Â Unremittingly tedious.
Character 1: Â This really is …
Character 1 & 3: … unremittingly tedious …
Character 1: Â … and deeply unfunny
Character 4: Â Don’t tell me that this isn’t unremittingly tedious.
Character 5: Â No, don’t tell me that this isn’t unremittingly tedious.
Character 2: Â Vagina.
Character 4: Â How unremittingly tedious …
Character 1 & 4: Â … and deeply unfunny …
Character 4: Â … this all is.
Character 3: Â All of it is.
Character 2: Â All of it is. Â All of it is. Â All of it is.
Character 6: Â It’s difficult to explain quite how unremittingly tedious this is for one hour and fifty one minutes.
Character 1: Â Unremittingly tedious.
Character 2: Â So unremittingly tedious and incomprehensible and just a waste of everyone’s time.
Character 1: Â Vagina.
[Song]
Yes, there are a few songs, which are actually quite good.  And the staging is pretty good.  And I thought the performances were quite good, although my companion rightfully pointed out that it’s difficult to evaluate a performance when the characters are essentially talking in tongues and entirely indecipherable.
Avoid.
(PS. Â This was a preview)
Haha! I think I love you!
I totally agree with you. This is a terrible play. Actually, I cannot even dignify it with the term play as never really launches itself beyond being writing exercises taken from Crimo’s notebook on a bleak Monday afternoon.
I think the Court should be ashamed of themselves for putting this on. I can only imagine that Crimp managed to convince them it was all rather deep and hinted at some secret of the universe that only he an a few other intellectuals intent on wanking each others egos understand.
AVOIDAVOIDAVOIDAVOIDAVOIDAVOID
Fully agree. Do not be misled by the funny review, the play is really bad. My wife and I did not leave out of respect for the actors, who seemed genuinely embarassed by their lines. By the way, most of them were quite good. I didn’t like Uncle Bob’s girlfriend at all, but her singing was absolutely brilliant – I save that and the first part of the first scene, until Uncle Bob enters the scene. BTW, a bad play may happen, but the smugness you could feel behind this one was intolerable.
All comments correct. I was staggered that the Royal Court would put such a terrible production on. As advised don’t use any pre-bought tickets – smoke them! you’ll get more enjoyment.
This review is utterly perfect. I couldn’t possibly do a better job of describing all that is wrong with this play, especially the example dialogue which is spot on.
I saw this play last night (still in previews), and have to say that I was so taken by it that I stumbled upon this blog by googling for online reviews.
I accept that the play is not exactly a mainstream offering – in fact it is most probably deliberately obtuse and off-beat – but I found it completely compelling (once Uncle Bob arrived anyway) – with the “rules” of the play continuing to morph and reconstitute themselves throughout.
And in relation to the reviewer’s assertion that the play is a protracted game of “Yes. And.” – it seemed to me that in the “studio audience” section of the play the actors were sharing the text live; that they had all learnt that entire section of text, and spoke when the impulse drove them to (which inevitably leads to overlap and false starts). For me this device just added to the unified universal voice of the play – without a fixed identity, beyond a marked classification.
But as a series of reflections on modern society – and the quest for self-fulfillment and self-improvement, and the need for individuals to be perceived as content with their lives – I found it very rich indeed. But I appreciate that I may seem to be in the minority.
I entirely agree with this review. Unmitigated rubbish. By good fortune, there was a technical malfunction this evening, which enabled us to escape 10 minutes before the scheduled end. What a relief.
This review is spot on. I saw it tonight (11/12). About 3/4 way through there was a technical hitch and the stage manager came on to explain they were trying to fix it. Cue my escape. One of the staff helpfully said if I went in the bar, they would announce when the play would resume howevr I felt compelled to say it was the worst play I had seen all year and had no intention of returning.
I agree with the majority of the other reviews – this is a very poorly put together piece.
may have been innovative about 40 years ago – but is now incredibly dated deconstructed drama. Tedious in the extreme. Avoid.
Martin Crimp has run out of ideas.
Dominic Cooke’s tenure at the Court needs to end fast.
I tried to fall asleep. I have never tried to fall asleep during a play before. Spot on review.
I feel ashamed to say it reading the above comments but I enjoyed it. I thought it was extremely funny but also very dark and intriguing. I read Sanstaste’s review before I saw it so was expecting the worst – low expectations are always good of course. On the radio the critics said it was a smug play to tickle a parochial audience – so that’s me I suppose.
A horribly boring play, waste of time and money. Glad this reviewer said it like it is, so many critics in the moandtream press are too intimidated by big names like Crimp to tell the truth. The worst play of 2012.
I found the play and the ensemble one of the most enjoyable productions that I have seen all year. Totally original, disturbing and darkly funny. However, I see a great deal of theatre and am more open to experiment than some of the respondents here. I would advise readers not to be put off by some of the comments here which say more about the responders than the play, but to go see the production for yourself. It is not to everyone ‘s taste, for sure, but it is refreshingly unique and I was mesmerized by the cryptic nature of the piece. If you want all your t’s crossed and I ‘s dotted, go see Kiss me Kate instead. There is a lot of craft here in the writing, acting, design and directing. Thumbs up from me. It is a nervy unnerving piece.
Don’t listen to Steve. Anyone who says “people who disagree with me are stupid or inexperienced”… well, those seem to be the people who like this play.This is not good theatre. It is not challenging. It is not innovative. Good lord, how I wish it was.
The middle bit I actually quite enjoyed. But that didn’t make up for the rest of the play. Very few things could.
This is the worse play I have ever seen. A low for the royal court