Cry Havoc

Thu, 22 Oct 2009, 08:52 am

‘Cry Havoc’ is written and directed by Grant Watson. Produced by Graeme Watson, it is an Idea ex Machina production, in conjunction with the Blue Room. The play is being performed at The Blue Room Theatre, 53 James Street, Northbridge, until 7^th November. All shows 7.00 pm,

As the US Republican President, James Freeman (Peter Nettleton) is addressing the people he comes to a grinding halt, folds away his papers and says ‘I am fed up with not giving the people what they need, we have failed you all’. The White House Chief of Staff, Marc Douglas (Peter Clark) almost has a fit, it is his job to create policies and advise the Party how to carry out their aims, and here is a loose cannon at the helm. Douglas calls in the Press Secretary, Hank (Michael Lamont – who got a spontaneous burst of applause for a particularly fine piece of acting) and his colleague, Director of Communications, Bronwyn Hopkins (Sonia Marcon) to try and draw up a speech to re-exert the Party’s authority.

The Speaker of the House of Representatives – in the US is a extremely political post, not like our independent, neutral Speaker – Cassandra Ford (Mia Martin) has very powerful feelings on the subject; perhaps replace the President with the Vice President (Kingsley Judd). As all of the dirty tricks brigades are working, they are under the watchful eye of the Intelligence Analysts (Amy Welsh and Clinton Ward). How will the unwanted swing in party line be resolved?

Writer, Grant Watson, has produced an amazing script from what I thought would be a dry subject. With clever dialogue, he most convincingly shows the politicians woodenly, relating the same old insincere platitudes to the people, and then as soon as the cameras are turned off, treating their staff like dirt, whilst plotting the next devious step in their career. The script is as good as any found in TV or cinema.

There were many similarities to ‘Julius Caesar’, with backstabbing, a war in another country, parallels to Cassius convincing Brutus that Caesar has become too powerful and popular. A similar triumvirate is formed and Anthony’s equivalent cried for havoc. All beautifully woven into this storyline. Should there be any confusion, and I doubt if you will have any trouble, the programme has a very good glossary of the terms used.

The set is black, with the cast in grey or black – truly depicting some of the dangerous ‘Grey men’, similar to whom Princess Dianna referred.

At two hours long, with a break of 15 minutes, instead of the ennui of politics, the audience could not wait to get back into the theatre for the second half. With a superb cast, of well-known names from professional and community theatre, the quality of acting was outstanding.

This slick, disturbing and memorable play had the rare honour of the audience stamping feet and clapping enthusiastically, as they demanded a curtain call from the outstanding cast.

Thread (46 posts)

Threaded Flat

Gordon the OptomThu, 22 Oct 2009, 08:52 am

The set is black, with the cast in grey or black – truly depicting some of the dangerous ‘Grey men’, similar to whom Princess Dianna referred.

This slick, disturbing and memorable play had the rare honour of the audience stamping feet and clapping enthusiastically, as they demanded a curtain call from the outstanding cast.

Vic AuldThu, 22 Oct 2009, 09:45 am

Love The "Smileys"

Thanks for the review, Gordon. I will go and see the play. But I have to comment - I love the "smileys" that are displayed alongside your review. Would love to be able to print same so that I can use them more often. Thanks.

LabrugThu, 22 Oct 2009, 10:28 am

Smiles all around

These smilies are available in any post in this site. Use the text as shown in a posting and the site will convert to a Smiley.

Absit invidia (and DFT :nono:)

Jeff Watkins
SN Profile
Photographer

Gordon the OptomThu, 22 Oct 2009, 10:59 am

Smileys

I am not sure if there is a hidden joke here, but I didn't put any smileys on the review and on looking at it again, there are still none there. Is this an appropriate reference to the TV spy series 'George Smiley'?

In fact I thank Jeff for his advice as how to get a bigger selection.

Walter PlingeMon, 26 Oct 2009, 10:27 am

Language!

I agree with Gordon that the play is well-written and acted, however there seems to be an unnecessay abundance of bad language in it. I stopped counting the 4-letter words after about 20. Surely members of the GOP don't swear that much!? On the other hand, I am glad the actors did not try doing fake American accents. There were lots of 'Americanisms' in the script, but after a while the Aussie accents didn't matter at all.

grantwatsonMon, 26 Oct 2009, 11:22 am

We went back and forth with

We went back and forth with the accents for the first few weeks of rehearsal, but in the end made the choice that the audience should be caring about the characters and not whether or not they sounded authentically American. My reasoning is that if they don't use accents, the audience finds it momentarily odd and then moves on. If they do use accents, and those accents aren't 100% consistent and perfect, then the audience spends the entire play wincing at how bad they are.

nowayMon, 26 Oct 2009, 11:49 am

Isn't though the purpose to

Isn't though the purpose to adopt accent a contextual matter that identifies place and setting? Also, I feel Grant, that the justification you have offered is more of an excuse as oppose to justification based on artistic merit. I always feel that to ignore the convention or adoption of suitable accent is in, essence, the actors appologising for their inability to 'act'. I understand that this is perhaps a harsh reaction to what has already been discussed, but I feel it an interesting point to consider in this forum.

GarrethMon, 26 Oct 2009, 01:20 pm

"Isn't though the purpose

"Isn't though the purpose to adopt accent a contextual matter that identifies place and setting?" I think this is achieved within the first five minutes with Peter Nettleton's fade from a full blown American accent to a neutral Australian accent. Also the audience will willingly suspend their disbelief if you tell them we're in america and this man is the president they will accept that regardless of his accent. "I always feel that to ignore the convention or adoption of suitable accent is in, essence, the actors appologising for their inability to 'act'." Well, I know many fine actors who can't "do" accents. Creating authentic accents is an increadibly hard skill to pick up, requires an extremely well trained ear and vocal apparatus and places a high demand on the audience if the accent is different. For example, Amy Welsh's character is from Boston, which is a difficult accent to perform but it is even harder to understand for an audience that is not used to hearing it. I see what you're getting at noway but it's a very narrow and misguided view of a theatrical tool that if misused can destroy a good production.

grantwatsonMon, 26 Oct 2009, 02:26 pm

Isn't though the purpose to

Isn't though the purpose to adopt accent a contextual matter that identifies place and setting? Also, I feel Grant, that the justification you have offered is more of an excuse as oppose to justification based on artistic merit. Well I don't think it's an excuse, but then naturally I wouldn't. To be completely honest I have seen not one theatrical production in my life where actors have put on accents where I haven't become distracted by it, or haven't noticed that their performance is suffering because they're focusing so heavily on making sure their Irish accent doesn't suddenly sound Canadian, or their American accent shifts from California to Alabama. I saw one particular production in London a few years ago where an otherwise exceptional play was dragged into outright disaster because one actor out of fifteen couldn't sustain a believable accent. So why take the risk? The audience is already accepting a stage as a physical place, and costumes as authentic clothing, and performances as people to engage with and believe in - why is their voice any different? I think suspension of disbelief can stretch a little further than that without snapping - for most of us, anyway.

grantwatsonMon, 26 Oct 2009, 02:27 pm

Sadly we've had to drop

Sadly we've had to drop Peter's opening accent because preview audiences found it more confusing than effective.

nowayMon, 26 Oct 2009, 02:35 pm

How is it misguided? It is

How is it misguided? It is a fact that in order to create a realistic and authentic characterisation then accent must be adopted if the character requires it. If an actor can't do the accent appropriately, then could it be said that the actor is not the person for the job? If such attitudes prevail, then the character being portrayed may have little or no resemblence to the playwrights intention, which in many instances is unforgivable. I think as soon as you make excuses for actors inabilities you compromise the integrity of the piece (An American President with an Aussie accent takes alot of suspending of disbelief). If however, the decision has been made for creative/artistic interpretation then I believe it can be more easily justified but to make such a huge decision such as not using the accents the play calls for because the actors 'can't do it' is criminal. I can also see what your saying Garreth but I'm afraid I would need alot more convincing to accept what you are saying and I certainly don't think its a very narrow view...it's a view plain and simple.

nowayMon, 26 Oct 2009, 02:43 pm

In that case Grant, where

In that case Grant, where does it end? Your right to say its a risk but then again if you cant do it, should you be doing it?? An audience will accept particular conventions that are adopted for artistic and practical reasons, however, to create a convention such as the one being discussed is neither. It is simply a convention created that masks the actors ability to 'act' accurately. I would find it more of a distraction that accents weren't used...however, I do agree taht bad accents are very distracting also...to sum up then I guess there is no solution. If an actor and a director in collaberation with each other decide on such an outcome then I guess they just have to be prepared to suffer the negative feedback they may recieve, after all, each audience member have their own tastes and values when it comes to their art. I think this discussion could rage on for quite sometime!

grantwatsonMon, 26 Oct 2009, 02:49 pm

I think you make a very

I think you make a very fair argument. The bottom line, in this and all other creative choices, is that as artists we do what we think will serve the piece best, and then it's up to each individual spectator as to how he or she receives it. I think opinions will vary wildly too - for my own part I've just seen too many plays with unnecessary bad accents to want to propogate the sin in my own work.

Walter PlingeMon, 26 Oct 2009, 04:42 pm

Well hopefully if your play

Well hopefully if your play is performed in the US and Canada the argument about the correct accent will be completely irrelevant :P BTW in case people are reading this in their heads and imagining what I sound like, I have a bass baritone Yorkshire accent - maybe...

GarrethMon, 26 Oct 2009, 04:48 pm

This may possibly fuel the

This may possibly fuel the fire but... If we approach all plays with your point of view noway, where do we stop? Should I, in the production of Othello I am in at the moment, start performing with an Elizabethan accent? For those of you wondering what that sounds like here 'tis: http://www.pronouncingshakespeare.com/op-recordings/ Or perhaps seeing as the play is set in Venice I should put on an italian accent... You would be suprised what an audience will accept if you tell them that is the case. Shakespeare certainly does it all the time, at the start of any play all the characters will explicitly state three of four times where they are, this is also one of the reasons why shakespeare has his characters announce their deaths or has others do it for them, apart from perhaps a red scarf dropping from the characters hand there would have been no blood packs or gore, so the playwright uses the most powerful tool of the theatre: the willing suspension of disbelief. All this is a moot point anyway considering that Grant wrote Cry Havoc as well as directed it and I don't think that his direction is going to compromise his own intentions. I agree with you, if you are trying to create a play in the style of realism then a strict attention should be paid to the accents, indeed some writers go so far as to write the correct accent in for you, Sean O'casey is probably the best example of this... or David Mamet. However, I don't think Grant was trying to create realism with "Cry Havoc" I would class it as Naturalism and for me it even verges on belonging to the Epic Theatre. In fact the lack of accents creates a wonderful piece of verfremdungseffekt... but I am going to leave that one alone lest I ignite a Brecht war. What I will say is that having seen this production and planning to see it again, the accents don't matter. I was enthralled from start to finish, I even wanted to yell some abuse at some of the characters from time to time and I went away still thinking about this production, its intended messages and its unintended messages and found myself wondering about how twisted are our own forms of government? This for me in every way makes "Cry Havoc" a success, well written, well performed and well recieved. If you haven't seen it, SEE IT!

grantwatsonMon, 26 Oct 2009, 06:14 pm

The similarities to Epic

The similarities to Epic Theatre are intentional, although possibly a bit muddy since I haven't read up on Brecht in more than a decade.

GarrethMon, 26 Oct 2009, 06:53 pm

I think unless you are

I think unless you are Betolt Brecht the whole idea of Epic Theatre is a bit muddy... lol

grantwatsonTue, 27 Oct 2009, 10:03 am

I reckon even Brecht had

I reckon even Brecht had his moments of "and then we... wait, where was I? Crap, I was *onto* something. Stop talking, I'm trying to remember! ...DAMMIT!!"

JoeMcTue, 27 Oct 2009, 11:03 am

Unfortunetly most of wor

Unfortunetly most of wor willy's plays I have sat through tend to be done with a plumb in the gob! I'm sure evven in aude Lizzybeths time, they would have had a 'dolly mixture' of accents. Lets face it for years the yanks haven't bothered with authentic accents on films or whatever, in the moronic belief that the average Septic would not understand it?

So do it all naturaly, our paying BoS's are not wood ducks!

nowayTue, 27 Oct 2009, 12:04 pm

Point taken, however, I do

Point taken, however, I do believe Shakespearean plays have stood the test of time because they are so accessible and open to interpretation, context etc. As an audience we widly accept that Macbeth can have a Bronx accent if the directors vision is to set with a New York gangster twist! Point is, the actor adopts the accent to convey meaning and intention. My original point was that if it is needed, it is needed and not just dropped because the actors aren't up to it. However, like I said I do get your point completely. Also, I have only just realised that Grant wrote the play, therefore, it is completely up to him if the President has an Aussie accent. Good luck and I hope the play continues its success

Freddie BadgeryTue, 27 Oct 2009, 01:39 pm

I've never heard...

In terms of the 'need' for accents... I've never heard Hamlet performed with Danish accents I've never seen Amadeus performed with Italian and German accents I've never heard an Ancient Greek play performed with Greek accents I've never seen the Phantom of the Opera performed by a Phantom with a French accent (try to imagine it for a moment) I've never seen a Brecht performed with German accents I've never seen the Von Trapps performed with German or Austrian accents, though the Nazis in the same production WERE. Accents should only be used for two things: 1. To denote a character(s) in a play who is 'other', often for comedic or plot purposes (think of French or Welsh characters in Shakespeare, or the German characters in Peter Schaffer's "Black Comedy", or the Nazis in the Sound of Music) 2. To give comfort to directors/actors who don't have faith in the power of the story they are telling, or the intelligence of their audience. freddie the rocking jedi badger

Walter PlingeTue, 27 Oct 2009, 05:28 pm

I think point 2 is a little

I think point 2 is a little unfair, Freddie. If a director has a cast who can all do the accent and the director's vision is that all the actors perform with those accents, then I don't see that as a sign that the director is lacking faith in the story they are telling. Film isn't the same - but as an example, I didn't think the uniform use of accents in Schindler's List harmed the film at all.

GarrethTue, 27 Oct 2009, 06:49 pm

"I've never seen a Brecht

"I've never seen a Brecht performed with German accents" Oh, yes you have!

Freddie BadgeryTue, 27 Oct 2009, 07:07 pm

And I found it very

And I found it very alienating, I must say. freddie the rocking jedi badger

Freddie BadgeryTue, 27 Oct 2009, 07:08 pm

No, you're right...

Film ISN'T the same. freddie the rocking jedi badger

Walter PlingeTue, 27 Oct 2009, 07:37 pm

i just didn't think your

i just didn't think your comment was fair and seemed like a bit of an unwarranted attack on directors who decide to use accents. whether or not a director uses accents is up to their discretion...sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. Streetcar Named Desire, History Boys...recent stage productions with accents. Are you criticising their directors?

Freddie BadgeryTue, 27 Oct 2009, 08:07 pm

Streetcar Named Desire and

Streetcar Named Desire and History Boys are both realist plays that examine the lives of people THAT ARE DIFFERENT to the experience of most audience members. The use of accents in those plays is therefore using point number 1- These characters are 'other'. And as such we can watch them from a more intellectual and less emotive viewpoint. Ergo- realism. So, NO, I'm not criticising those directors. Having said that, I do wonder exactly how 'visionary' a director is if they do a play set in an area such as the American South (for example), and then say, 'Hey, how's this for a wild idea? Let's do it in American accents!" freddie the rocking jedi badger

Walter PlingeTue, 27 Oct 2009, 08:10 pm

Yeah I must admit 'A

Yeah I must admit 'A Streetcar' did have the accents and they were pretty darn good. But then again I was in it :P

nowayWed, 28 Oct 2009, 10:36 am

Unfortunately, I didn't see

Unfortunately, I didn't see Streetcar, however, I have read the reviews and know of people who were fortunate to get tickets (old Mill)! Apparently the characterisation in that play and significantly, accents, more than helped the appeal of the performance and the apparent appraisal that has been heaped on the actors in the lead roles and those that supported, therefore, the success of that production had alot to do with the ability of the actors to portray the characters accurately (with authentic accents). Again, this really could go on and on, but its great to hear opinion and debate, cheers Freddie

GarrethWed, 28 Oct 2009, 01:08 pm

All it shows is that people

All it shows is that people were actively listening out for flaws in the accent and were pleased when they found none or few. It's not a reflection of the quality of acting at all. A director once told me that you will know when you have truly mastered an accent because no one will comment on it. There are numerous examples of this in the film world. Liam Neeson has quite a broad irish accent, but nobody comments when he changes to American or English. Ewan McGregor has a scottish accent but again no body comments when he deviates. The point is that these actors have mastered these other accents so well that nobody even notices. As well as this, in productions like streetcar the audience walks in with the expectation that Blanche will have a southern accent. This would be a case where doing an accent is necessary for keeping the majority of your punters happy. Also none of the accents in streetcar would have been "authentic" because, as as far as I'm aware none of the cast are American. Also as a Director if people came to see one of my shows and the only thing they could find worth talking about it afterwards was the actors ability to portray the accent then I will have failed my audience. By all means it should be commented on, but as I remember the discussions about streetcar the majority of the praise was heaped on the accents, what about the rest of the play?

LabrugWed, 28 Oct 2009, 01:52 pm

Not Entirely True

I disagree MARGINALLY with "A director once told me that you will know when you have truly mastered an accent because no one will comment on it."

I have quite regularly been complimented (read Ego Stroking) on my accents.

I Hate Hamlet where one reviewer made particular reference to the American Accents
Brigadoon where we all had a slight Scottish lilt (apart from the American Leads) was praised in certain Finley Judging Comments
Italian Straw Hat where I was congratulated on the most convincing Cleft Palate buy an orthodontist (I was also asked by a few young women if I was gay!)
Irma Le Deuce where my French Accent was so good no-one could "understand a word I said!" I sounded TOO authentic (huh?)

Just to name a few.

I said I disagree Marginally in that MOST people only notice the accent when it DOESN'T work. When it does, most of the audience would walk away thinking, "where did they get all those Americans from?" and think nothing more of it.

However, those that know better (they either know the actor, or have heard far too many renditions of a bad Cleft Palate) will spot a good accent, and will more often than not make an effort to point it out.

So in summary, a Bad Accent will be universally CONDEMNED where as a Good accent will mostly go under the radar, but not completely.

Don't mind me. I'm picking Nits

Absit invidia (and DFT :nono:)

Jeff Watkins
SN Profile
Photographer

grantwatsonWed, 28 Oct 2009, 02:28 pm

Actually whenever Ewan

Actually whenever Ewan MacGregor tries an accent I instinctively flinch because he's so incredibly bad about it (such as in any film ever where he's supposed to sound American). Liam Neeson is the same to a lesser extent.

grantwatsonWed, 28 Oct 2009, 02:29 pm

I disagree MARGINALLY with

I disagree MARGINALLY with "A director once told me that you will know when you have truly mastered an accent because no one will comment on it." I have quite regularly been complimented (read Ego Stroking) on my accents. Maybe you simply hadn't mastered them. (ducks and runs)

LabrugWed, 28 Oct 2009, 02:34 pm

Ouch! ;-)

Mr Watson! I never pictured you as a member of the peanut gallery!

...

Welcome fellow peanut.

Absit invidia (and DFT :nono:)

Jeff Watkins
SN Profile
Photographer

nowayWed, 28 Oct 2009, 03:23 pm

Garreth, I'm afraid you are

Whilst I agree with the notion that accent is not the be all and end all of a succesful production, I must take issue with the fact that audience members go looking for flaws. The point about what the director said to you depends totally on context, eg in Community Theatre, the majority of audience have a connection with the cast, therefore, the convention of adopting accent and moreover doing it successfully is very significant, not only do people comment on it, they are in awe of it

Walter PlingeWed, 28 Oct 2009, 03:27 pm

talking of history boys and

talking of history boys and streetcar when are the finley nominations announced??

LabrugWed, 28 Oct 2009, 04:14 pm

All the Shows

Usually about a month after the final shows of the year, and considering that most will end early/mid December, you should probably expect Finley Announcements not later than (about) early Jan.

Absit invidia (and DFT :nono:)

Jeff Watkins
SN Profile
Photographer

kwyloThu, 29 Oct 2009, 12:01 pm

Cry Havoc

All this talk about the accents, ...and here we were worried that people would be concerned that our black and grey minimalist set was not significantly like the White House. Graeme Watson

Daniel KershawThu, 29 Oct 2009, 08:45 pm

Can we please stay on

Can we please stay on topic? This thread is for a REVIEW of "Cry Havoc" written and directed by Grant Watson, not 'Let's have a debate about using accents in theatrical productions". Much of the so called criticism here has been directed by people who haven't even seen this production. Why don't you follow my lead and purchase a ticket in the next week and a bit and see it? Then you can return here and give an informed opinion.

Walter PlingeSun, 1 Nov 2009, 07:42 pm

It's amazing. There are 38

It's amazing. There are 38 postings on this site but only three concern a review of the play. The rest goes on and on about accents. It's disappointing really.

grantwatsonMon, 2 Nov 2009, 11:11 am

But it's been a fairly

But it's been a fairly interesting conversation about an artistic issue, so as far as I can see there's not a problem. It's the reviews thread, and there was a review at the top.

nowayMon, 2 Nov 2009, 11:54 am

Agreed Grant

jmuzzMon, 2 Nov 2009, 02:27 pm

A review (of sorts)

Went and saw this Friday (I think it was Friday anyway). Quality production all round and yes they came, they saw, they conquered. Seems churlish to single out people when there was such a quality cast onstage so please don't feel slighted if I don't mention you - you were all a great ensemble however.... Peter Clark was magnificent. Peter always gives a believable acting performances whenever I've had the fortune to watch him and this was once again on display. What I mean by this is that every nuance, every mannerism is natural and there is no telegraphing of the performance before it's out there - something that actors of lesser ability (myself included) do in abundance. Peter really inhabits his characters and brings a lot of light and shade to them which not only makes them believable but interesting to watch as well. The only downside is I found myself watching his performance from an analytical point of view to try and pick up tips I could use myself. Not Peter's fault or Grant's either because the text itself was absorbing - it was just nice to watch a really good actor at work in a role he played with excellence. Michael Lamont - totally different character to that of Peters but an equally convincing performance. His "blood on the shirt" speech at the end was extremely touching and delivery throughout was beautifully judged - his character had quite an arc - pain in the arse one moment and a character of conscience in the other. Nice work. Amy Welsh - takes the award for character actor of the evening as she inhabited a few roles so as someone who enjoys that sort of acting challenge personally, hats off to you. The characters were differentiated very well and her vulnerability as the character who had stumbled onto what was going on was sold to us with great conviction. As I say, seems churlish to single these three out particularly when the rest of the cast reads like a "who's who" of Perth theatre but the key thing here is everyone works very nicely together to weave a believable tale of intrigue, deception, betrayal, and reflection. This is of course aided significantly by a script that is tight, intelligent and easy to follow. Grant could have tried to dazzle us witrh his knowledge of US politics but he has wisely stripped back the text to serve the story and move it forward and for those with a limited knowledge of the terminology there is a handy glossary of terms in the programme to consult before or after to reinforce some of the references made. Make no mistake - this is a play about people, their choices, the ramifications of those choices - the setting serves the story and the characters not the other way round. The show involves a number of set changes and I realise the reasons were to illustrate the set had changed to accomodate the space a particular character inhabited but they were frequent and I wonder whether or not you needed to bother. If we buy that a character with an aussie accent is playing an american, can we not buy the fact that the bloke in the comfy black chair indicates whose office we're now a fly on the wall in? I think this would cut down significantly on the blackout time. Just a thought. Also (and this may be a deficiency of the Blue Room itself) there were times when characters at the rear of the stage or on the sides disappeared into the dark. I liked the idea of the screen to indicate news conferences being broadcast on the telly but from time to time it took a while for the focus on the camera to kick in - this may because poor Grant was running a one man technical crew comprised of himself so I'm guessing you were juggling lighting, sound and a temperamental camera. It was however noticeable and it did take away from the effect you wanted to create. These are very trifling issues in the scheme of things in an overall well polished production. Congrats to all involved - you should be extremely proud of the production. If you haven't seen it yet, get along to the Blue Room for the closing week. This is quality theatre deserving of a larger audience.

Walter PlingeWed, 4 Nov 2009, 09:44 am

lighting

"Also (and this may be a deficiency of the Blue Room itself) there were times when characters at the rear of the stage or on the sides disappeared into the dark" I think this is probably a lighting design flaw rather than a "deficiency of the Blue Room itself"

John GrimFri, 6 Nov 2009, 09:55 pm

I wish I had a french accent

Saw the show last night. I presume, that I, like the majority who saw the play would agree that it didn't matter what accent the actors were using, the important thing to note, is that the actors ability made the accents totally irrelevant (my humble opinion of course). A terrific script, with quality actors and a superb production crew. What more could you ask for? PS: It did peeve me somewhat that the venue wasn't sold out, for here was a play that deserved to be. anyway, got to go, I think I hear Ernest calling...'Ernest! this had better be important!' Well done to all! Especially the brothers Watson (I presume you guys are kin?) Great show! Johnny Grim

kwyloSat, 7 Nov 2009, 12:09 pm

Last Chance

Thanks to everyone who has come to see 'Cry Havoc' at The Blue Room. If you haven't been yet, tonight is your absolute last chance! Show starts at 7pm ands runs through to 9pm with a 15 minute interval. Hope to see you there, Graeme Watson

← Back to Theatre Reviews