Peter Pan - A Comparison

2009-01-11T06:47:00.000-08:00

This week I saw two pantomime productions of Peter Pan - one at the Richmond Theatre, and the other at the Theatre Royal Windsor. If it had been possible to combine the best elements of both shows, the result would have been truly magical. As it was, one was good-ish, and the other approaching dreadful.

It was at least partly due to Bonnie Langford's note-perfect performance as Peter that the flaws in the Richmond production didn't seem to matter too much. Although the quality of the acting generally was patchy and some of the musical numbers didn't work as well as they might have, everything suddenly seemed better when she was onstage. Langford made the most of her role, giving Peter all the childish arrogance, whimsy and occasional pathos that the character demands. Her flying, naturally, was a delight - of course you could see the wires, but you could almost believe that they weren't there as she danced and spun around the set as effortlessly as if she were strolling down the street.
Simon Callow's performance was another highlight, giving Hook the complexity he deserves, while still functioning well as a nasty, boo-able panto villain.
The comedy sequences relied too heavily on impressions of characters from Little Britain, but were still good fun, and on the whole the script stuck to the original story - there was room for something to be made of emotional scenes like the departure of the Lost Boys and the poison scene, and some excellent stage-fighting in the exciting final confrontation between Hook and Pan.
Despite its problems, Richmond's Peter Pan was a delight to watch, thanks largely to its faithfulness to the sentiment of the original, a couple of magnificent central performances and the obvious enthusiasm of the whole cast.

In contrast, it didn't seem as though most of the cast of the Windsor production had actually met one another, let alone rehearsed and performed together for weeks. Perhaps it was the fault of the script, which rushed clumsily through the most important parts of the story to make more room for lacklustre custard pie scenes, but none of the characters seemed to have any emotional connection to one another, or in fact any emotional responses at all, with the notable exception of Elisabeth Sladen, whose lovely performance as Mrs Darling was lamentably brief.
Christopher Parker, as Peter Pan, was the biggest disappointment. Perhaps my expectations had been raised too high after the Richmond production, but Peter needs so much more than a baby-face and the ability to force an exclamation mark onto the end of every sentence. He was entirely lacking in any mystery or unearthliness, and looked extremely uncomfortable being dragged around the stage on a wire, for the few brief flying sequences.
Jack Ellis as Hook was good fun, as was Christopher Beeny as Smee, and there were a couple of really excellent dance numbers from the talented chorus. On the whole, though, I was glad when it was over.

Jersey Boys - Prince Edward Theatre

2008-12-23T08:26:00.000-08:00

I hate jukebox musicals. That's what I tell people, anyway. And mostly it's true. While I admit they can be fun, it annoys me that people are going in their droves to see things like Mamma Mia! over and over again, and really good original musicals like the short-lived Marguerite are being overlooked.
The one jukebox musical for which I make an exception is Jersey Boys, which uses the music of Frankie Valli and the Four Seasons. I first went to see it several months ago, having heard that Glenn Carter, who had really impressed me in several productions in the Derby Playhouse, was going to be in it.
That time, I have to admit that I wasn't expecting too much. So it was a surprise and a delight to find that it was one of the best musicals I'd seen in ages.
A lot of it, of course, is down to the songs. Hits like Sherry Baby, Beggin' and Who Loves You can still get audiences on their feet and clapping. For me, though, the thing that really sets Jersey Boys apart is the fact that, instead of picking the songs and coming up with some sort of story to fit around them, like many jukebox musicals do, it actually uses the music to tell the story of the group's rise to fame.
The all-important central performances are terrific - I was glad that Glenn Carter, as Tommy DeVito, was every bit as good as I expected, but all of the leads were excellent - Stephen Ashfield is impressive, funny and sweet as the young but astute Bob Gaudio, and Ryan Molloy's Valli-esque singing is a highlight.
Having enjoyed Jersey Boys so much the first time, it seemed the ideal show to go and see again recently as a pre-Christmas treat. I was disappointed to find that Stephen Ashfield was not performing on the day I went, but I needn't have worried - his replacement, Kieran Jae, was terrific and seemed very comfortable in the role. The show was just as good as I remembered, and if anything I enjoyed it more for being familiar with it already.
I left the theatre wanting to go right back in and stay for the next performance, and I confess I'm seriously considering going for a third time. Oh dear. Is this my Mamma Mia?

Adventure Girl

Peter Pan - A Comparison

Jersey Boys - Prince Edward Theatre