Broken Limb's MacBeth

Firstly a few qualifying remarks. Most of you seem entirely ready to dismiss me on the basis that I am "uninformed" or "ignorant". Never at any time did I say "I know everything about theatre, therefore my opinion is gospel". What I have to say can also very easily be contradicted and of course it is up to the individual as to who he/she believes. To this end, yes I could refute others' claims, but I see no end in an argument where both sides are diametrically opposed. Just because (supposedly) I didn't "understand" the Brecthian style of Bumpy Angels I must be stupid, mean and a "nutmuncher". I say Bumpy Angels was a poor and badly excuted example of brecht, rather ragged and lacking any power in its alienation affects, cheapening any dramatic power of the show. As to Higgin's speaking most of is songs, of course I know they are very "spoken" in style and this is essential to the character, but that does not mean you speak almost every word of every song - it is a musical and poeple come to hear the songs. Anyway, I could go on at length trying to defend every challenge to my opinion, but in the end you all want to believe that what I have to say has no value.

In any case I shall sally forth and review Broken Limb's Macbeth, which I had the pleasure of seeing last night. Firsty, I love the venue of Rechabites Hall (having performed there), it is a dynamic space which has seen many interesting uses. The design was fabulous. Simple and highly effective, I loved the use of both coloured and dim light on the screens and stage. It complemented the modern effeciency of the interpretation (Macbeth in the business world, suits, briefcases etc) and was quite striking at times most notably in the witches scenes (with excellent dancing). Altogether, the opening of the show was fresh and engaging. The actors kept a good pace with the dialogue and in the 3 and half hours I was not once aware of time dragging, or it being too long - although there were a few overly "dramtic" pauses, just long enough to make you think there had been a mistake. The second half was by far the best, immersive and energetic especially towards the end- here I make special mention of the doctor scene which I found highly compelling. Costumes were simple and evocative, keeping a distance between the modern interpretation and the medieval/elizabethan dialogue. Where I had a problem with direction/interpretation was that becuase the play was "modernised"/"streamlined" I felt there was a lack of energy. Most dialogue was given quite casually and the audience lost a few speeches to mumbling and/or speaking too fast. A few sections were also quite difficult to hear, being whispered at the corner of the stage, so overall I would suggest working on projection and energy. The use of music was well intergrated and leant a great deal to the production.
Overall a well though-out interpretation that gives something new to the play. Great design was slightly marred by underenergised/underspoken performances, which while consistent with the mood and style of the production lost contact with the audience a few times and just turned into "words". A good show. =)

SS