Ambition, madam, is a great man's madness

The latest in an occasional series of theatre reviews...

The Duchess (of Malfi) : Trafalgar Theatre

Having seen Matt Smith earlier in the year in this and failing to get tickets to see David Tennant in Hamlet, I decided to continue the Doctor Who theme by going to see Jodie Whittaker in my third visit to the Trafalgar Theatre this year. I actually wasn't a fan of her Doctor, but I've heard she's a great stage actress and this is one of those classic plays (albeit an updated version) which it won't hurt me to watch, even if I suspect I probably wasn't going to understand it.

On entering the theatre, it doesn't give you a lot of a clue as to what's coming up - and what comes up is certainly a game of two halves!

The first half basically introduces the characters - The Duchess (Jodie) is recently widowed and her two brothers would very much like it to stay that way so they can control her and their family's status. So obviously she scandalously marries her steward Antonio - and let's just say her brothers don't take it well. There was intrigue and gender-based politics aplenty with affairs and espionage thrown in for good measure - an awful lot of the motivation felt very peculiar to me, but I was happy to take that as being "what they did back then". The characters also spent a lot of time acting quite hysterically, which I found to be quite tiresome - overall, it was all a bit confusing and a bit boring...

...which was certainly not what we got in the second half. The woman next to me left at the interval, which I understand because I was certainly expecting more of the same, but it's a shame she didn't hang around for what came next! At this point, I should warn you there are spoilers ahead but the play was written in 1612, so I feel the statute of limitations on such things has probably passed now.

If the first half was a bit confusing and a bit boring, then the second half has to be described as a lot confusing and not in the slightest bit boring - because it’s utterly, utterly bonkers! The play has a cast of eight main characters and, over the course of about thirty minutes, seven of them get killed - along with a further minor character for good measure. But does this stop them continuing to appear on stage? Does it bollocks…

I did find myself surprisingly engaged by it all - but more in a “wtf am I seeing here?” way than anything else. However, I do have to admit that some of the deaths are quite shocking, even if the impact is reduced as the body count piles up. It also manages to come to some sort of satisfactory ending, even if it makes very little sense how it gets there.

Despite it being an updated version the plot is pretty close to the original (according to Wikipedia) - apparently that's just what happens in Jacobean revenge tragedies. The update is certainly an “interesting” one - whilst most of the dialogue sounds authentic, I have a slight suspicion that the original version doesn't contain the phrases "fuck like rabbits" or "suck my cock". There are also, particularly in the second half, a load of REALLY annoying sound and light effects which, whilst I understood the reason for them, I could have done without. There are also a few songs scattered throughout the show which were most peculiar - they were very nicely sung (Jodie has a lovely voice) but they added absolutely nothing to the production.

Within the context of the production, I'd say the acting is good but it feels like everyone is somewhat hamstrung in their efforts. Jodie is obviously fine but, in this version at least, it’s not as huge a role as you might expect from the title character. I also got the feeling she was supposed to be more likeable than she came across as - I felt like she didn't deserve her fate, but I also struggled to overly care about it. Bizarrely, in these days of star name casting, she just felt under-utilised - I don't think anyone would have complained if she'd be on stage more.

Of the other actors, Jude Owusu (who we previously met in this) as Busola stood out for me - he felt like he had more of the original dialogue than most and he used it well, bringing out the poetry nicely. He also had more of a journey than most - although conversely he also has less of a journey than most because he doesn't end up dead. Joel Fry is also good as Antonio (although he disappears for a large portion of the play) and Kerrill Kelley gets a namecheck for appearing as the understudy in the role of Ferdinand (one of The Duchess's brothers), who has one of the more bizarre character journeys going from jealous brother to sadistic torturer to werewolf. I also only realised when writing this up that The Cardinal (the other brother) was played by Paul Ready who is Kevin in Motherland - it's fair to say this character is slightly different from Kevin.

Given there are obvious themes of toxic masculinity and female empowerment in this play, it feels like its relevance has not waned as much as you might have expected over more than 400 years but I'm afraid this production merely left me baffled or annoyed as to what was going on. From what I heard from other audience members, it felt like people either agreed with me ("Well that was, errr, something") or very much didn't (the guy next to me theatrically whispered "Oh, bravo!" as the lights went down). If you fancy it (and it's certainly a theatrical experience), it runs until 20th December and there are a surprising number of tickets still available (and you get a great view from the cheap seats at the back).

I just now need to decide if I should book and see Ncuti Gatwa in The Importance Of Being Earnest to make it a Doctor Who hat-trick for the year...

Spirited Away - Impressive, yet disappointing
Waiting For Godot - Not as much of a slog as it could have been