A giant Margaret Thatcher and a rotund Falstaff.

This week I saw two shows: One a West End musical, the other a Shakespeare history play.


Tuesday I saw Billy Elliot with the USC kids. The musical lacks the charm and sincerity of the 2000 film. Does being a big musical mean that you have to be cheesy? I don't think so. Granted when I think musical, I automatically think spectacle - which, I suppose, could be good or bad. Here it was both.


The story takes place during the 1984-85 coal miners' strike in Durham (that's North East England for all my American friends) and tell the story of 11-year-old Billy who trades in his boxing gloves for ballet shoes. Overall I'm hugely disappointed in the music (by Sir Elton John) and lyrics (by the original screenplay writer Lee Hall). And really - this may be obvious - it's the music that makes or breaks a musical. I can see why this show has been hugely popular but at the same time that really doesn't mean anything - the last time I was here Lord of the Rings:  The Musical was here soo....

Overall the direction is ok -- there's a lot of having the coal miners and the kids overlapping in the songs/choreography which sometimes works. Sometimes. There was one moment where the miners were talking and also acting as dancing partners to the little girls - all whilst acting like everything was normal. I'm one who gives a giant margin for suspension of disbelief - but this part was laughable - and it wasn't a funny part.

For a moment in the film that was barely a blip - where Billy goes to see his friend Michael, who is dressing up in his sister's clothes - turns into a huge musical number that feels like it comes out of nowhere. Although I love love love both Billy and Michael and it was great watching these young boys totally kill it in the dance number - I was completely perplexed by the song itself Expressing Yourself (a song about, uh, expressing yourself but 2 minutes before Michael told Billy that he shouldn't be a ballet dancer) and to make the bad side of spectacle worse, there were giant dancing dresses. Why are the giant dancing f*cking dresses!?

The opening of the second act was even more confounding. After the brother and father yell at Billy for wanting to be a ballet dancer - the second act begins with a Christmas party where the brother is dressed up like an elf and is acting pretty gay. Billy can't be a dancer but you can act like a twat? But this isn't the real problem here -- the problem is the song "Merry Christmas Margaret Thatcher" in which a GIANT MARGARET THATCHER comes barreling out on stage. Why?!

So that's the bad first -- now on to the good. The kids. Seriously, so many talented kids - they really carry the show. In fact the show opens up with the most adorable little boy (who looked like the little boy on Jerry Maguire) The boy playing Billy was absolutely fantastic. He was doing some seriously hard and advanced dancing. At the end of the first act it's basically him running round dancing out his anger and he was simply marvelous. I can only imagine how amazing of a dancer he'll be when he's older. Speaking of which -- there's a scene where he dances with his older self which is definitely a spectacle good -- although there's a moment when he's flying and is just spinning and it looked a little lame but other than that the dance was lovely.

Overall I found the musical to be disappointing. Maybe I was going in with high expectations because of the film. There were just too many ridiculous moments that seemed out of place in what should be a charming show about a little boy who wants to dance in midst of economic hardship.

Wednesday I saw Henry IV, part one at the Globe which was amazing. I was exhausted (and slightly tipsy) so that fact that I was able to stand all the way through it is amazing. Falstaff and Henry (in the picture) were absolutely amazing. This was a very straight forward, top-notch production, exactly what I would expect from a Globe production. Not much else to say at this moment. It seems I like to write a lot when I don't like something. So glad I was able to see this show before the Globe closes for the season.

Sir John Fallstaff (played to perfection by Roger Allam) is one of the most loved baffoons in Shakespeare's plays - he's a liar, gluttonous and a braggart - but he's also so lovable, funny and it's easy to see why Henry keeps him around. Prince Hal played by Jaime Parker foreshadows the charismatic leader to come in Henry V all while being wonderfully drunk through most of the play. Dominic Dromgoole masterful and seamless direction never drags and keeps true to the spirit of Shakespearean theatre.