BBC NEWSAmericasAfricaEuropeMiddle EastSouth AsiaAsia Pacific
BBCiNEWS  SPORT  WEATHER  WORLD SERVICE  A-Z INDEX    

BBC News World Edition
 You are in: Programmes: Newsnight: Review 
News Front Page
Africa
Americas
Asia-Pacific
Europe
Middle East
South Asia
UK
Business
Entertainment
Science/Nature
Technology
Health
-------------
Talking Point
-------------
Country Profiles
In Depth
-------------
Programmes
-------------
BBC Sport
News image
BBC Weather
News image
SERVICES
-------------
EDITIONS
Tuesday, 24 September, 2002, 16:12 GMT 17:12 UK
Afterplay

(Edited highlights of the panel's review)


NATASHA WALTER:
The play is misconceived from start to finish. Historically, it seems weightless. This is meant to be 1920, yet the whole events of the revolution, the cataclysm that Russia had been through was presented as a continuation of the financial embarrassment the Chekhovian gentry go through, and a visit to the opera might cheer up Sonya. Brian wants to get the level of intimacy that Chekhov gets in his plays, but in Chekhov plays the characters have a historical weight of relationship behind them and you are introduced to them at a moment of crisis, they have known each other for years. He wants to make us believe he can reach that level of intimacy between the characters as they are tippling vodka in a seedy cafe. It is unconvincing and null, there is a great deal of confession but very little feeling. The idea of hitching your characters on to another writer's emotional hinterland is a cheap trick.

ADAM MARS-JONES:
In Chekhov, people tell lies to themselves rather than each other. Chekhov is an unsentimental writer that other writers tend to get sentimental about. I felt there were subtle corruptions of Chekhov's themes. Uncle Vanya ends with Sonya's speech about endurance. In this there are several references to the cardinal virtue of fortitude, which is Catholic dogma. It seemed the Russian in this had been leached away by the process and it is not theatrically interesting. Hurt has the hardest time, charm to the Max, but no part to play.

MARK KERMODE:
It was possible to almost ignore the play. The best thing about it was watching John Hurt. It is always a pleasure to see him in the flesh because he is a fantastic performer, but you realise you are watching John Hurt, rather than a play in 1920. It felt very much like a footnote, an afterthought, as the title suggest, and whimsical to the point of why bother. Worth seeing to see the performance. It was not going anywhere, they didn't know what it was meant to be doing. When you end up just watching the performances and thinking that's a nice touch, it means the play isn't working.

This transcript was produced from the teletext subtitles that are generated live for Newsnight. It has been checked against the programme as broadcast, however Newsnight can accept no responsibility for any factual inaccuracies. We will be happy to correct serious errors.


E-mail this story to a friend

Links to more Review stories

© BBC^^ Back to top

News Front Page | Africa | Americas | Asia-Pacific | Europe | Middle East |
South Asia | UK | Business | Entertainment | Science/Nature |
Technology | Health | Talking Point | Country Profiles | In Depth |
Programmes