It's time for my review of The Woman in Black.I will be studying The Woman in Black for education purposes in upcoming months, so I attended a school trip to see the play. The Woman in Black had never been a play that had grabbed my attention before, however I was still quite intrigued to see it, considering it has been playing in the West End for so long.
Sadly though, The Woman in Black was not my 'cup of tea' and I found myself becoming extremely disinterested with it for multiple reasons. The biggest problem that I had when viewing the play was that not a single aspect of the play frightened me in the slightest. The purpose of The Woman in Black is to scare and terrify its audience, which sadly just didn't work on me. To not be scared in the least during a 'horror show' defeats the purpose of it. It can be compared to not laughing at a comedy; if you do not find a comedy funny then you are most likely bored. If you are not someone who is easily scared, I would not recommend The Woman in Black whatsoever as a horror play.
When watching The Woman in Black, the story had little impact on me. However, I read the storyline shortly afterwards on Wikipedia and when reading it back, it actually sounded somewhat interesting. I then began to wonder how, when adapting the play, they could make an interesting story so dreary. I personally believe that this can be blamed on the dialogue. The dialogue throughout the play is very tedious and would really benefit with being updated. I found the writing to be extremely dated. With the interesting story that the play tells, I definitely think that this production has the potential to be much better than it currently is. 
Despite finding the dialogue so tedious, I believe that the two actors performing on stage carried it out to the best of their ability. Terence Wilton played the role of Arthur Kipps exactly how it should be played; he was able to master everything needed for the character. Terence Wilton, whilst still playing Arthur Kipps, has to play other characters that are actually still being performed by Arthur (it's a play within a play). I thought all of his characterisations were really good, and there were clear distinctions between every character. Raymond Rose was understudying as The Actor at the performance I attended, and had I not seen the notice I would have had absolutely no idea that he was the understudy. Raymond Rose was perfect for the role and his performance was an utter delight to watch. I would even go as far to say that it was his performance which made this play as bearable as it was.
Overall, whilst I really liked the acting and the majority of the creative aspects, The Woman in Black just was not the play for me. I found it very difficult to engage with the play and felt very disinterested sadly.
The featured star of The Woman is Black is, drum roll please... RAYMOND ROSE!
Both actors were very talented, but in my eyes it was Raymond Rose that stole the show. Almost every understudy I see is outstanding and this performance was no exception. It was clear that he had all the skills necessary for the role and he would be more than qualified to take on the role full time, should the current actor leave.
Now for my final verdict on The Woman in Black. I give The Woman in Black...
I did consider giving The Woman in Black three stars, however it simply isn't as good as some of the shows that I have awarded three stars to. The Woman in Black has gained its two stars due to the brilliant actors starring in the production and the clever creative aspects of the play.
Think it should have got a higher rating? Agree with my rating? Think it should have got a lower rating? If so comment below.
Thanks for reading!
-The Reviewer
No comments:
Post a Comment