Hamlet, Crucible Theatre
Would it get better? Could it get better? It got better…..
Unforced verse speeches, dramatic and hard hitting sequences set against a minimalist backdrop provides, for even the lesser Shakespeare experienced, an enigmatic and intelligent performance, directed by Paul Miller, which sneakily draws you in until you are fully engrossed in the inevitable tragedy of the troubled prince of Denmark.
John Simm, better known for his award winning television work, takes on the role that many would shy away from in portraying one of Shakespeare’s more complex characters. Mixed reviews followed his opening night with praise of a “touching boyish Hamlet” (Lynne Walker) opposed to “a boy sent to do a man’s work” (Charles Spencer). Maybe first night nerves were the cause of this latter critique as there was no sense of Simm being out of his depth in his final performance; a performance which had flair and complexity, bringing an oxymoronic maturity and wit to his portrayal of the innocent Hamlet.
Many comparisons have been made to David Tennant whose impressive portrayal of the role led to great critical acclaim. However, it would be unfair to make a direct comparison in this case as Simm brought a new dimension to the role, a naivety and subtlety which moves away from the more exaggerated and arguably ‘obvious’ performance given by Tennant.
As for the staging of the play, orchestrated by Tom Scutt, it complimented Simm’s acting perfectly; not fussy, just stylish and with the elegant air of post-war modern Europe. It was the little details that gave it an edge, with the falling snow in the background and Oliver Fenwick’s mood lighting to illustrate the emotional shifts, so prevalent in the plot.
John Nettles, best known for Midsommer Murders, took on the dual roles of both Claudius and the Ghost. A sinister and unnerving interpretation of the Ghost was one of the highlights in the play as a whole; however his Claudius left little to be desired. An adequate interpretation yes, but the internal malevolent nature of the character was lost and there was definite scope for further development.
This can also be said for the characters of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern (Dylan Brown and Adam Foster). Considering Tom Stoppard went on to make a spin-off comedic play about these two characters, their part in the original is considered to be of great importance. The supposed comic element to the play, there was no punch to their performance and there impact was a little flat.
Overall, when Simm was absent from the stage, it was all a bit lacklustre, as if he was the glue holding the whole performance together. Yes, there were scenes in which life was brought back in, such as Hugh Ross’ comedic interludes as Polonius and later the grave digger, but a feeling of collusion between the characters was never fully achieved.
Aside from this however, it was a production very worthy of its acclaim and maybe, due to its obvious improvement from the first to the last show, it just needed a little bit longer to prove itself, a little bit longer to become a classic.
Anna Pintus.
8.5/10
