~ by Servetus on October 3, 2016.
Posted in Richard Armitage Tags: Love Love Love, richard armitage
I totally don’t remember retired Kenneth wearing that cardigan in any of the performances I attended.
DaphneHS said this on October 3, 2016 at 10:47 pm | Reply
Servetus said this on October 3, 2016 at 10:50 pm | Reply
Me neither. Didn’t he wear a suit jacket?
csprof said this on October 4, 2016 at 12:49 pm | Reply
[…] my sourcemy source […]
#LLLPlay Stage Shots – All Ages | Armitage Agonistes said this on October 3, 2016 at 10:50 pm | Reply
Snaffled yours. Can’t wait! I just wish they had gone a different way from the down and out John Porter look in Act 1 – but the chest makes up for it.
Perry said this on October 3, 2016 at 10:56 pm | Reply
Closeup it’s not so bad as I had feared … I can kind of imagine him brushing his hair out of his face in that adolescent way …
Servetus said this on October 4, 2016 at 12:04 am | Reply
Well it’s some comfort that Amy Ryan (who is very lovely) looks equally terrible de-aged. I haven’t read the play yet but why do you think that Bartlett wants the same actor to play the character at three different stages. If anything we know that the youngest stage will look the most unrealistic – so is Bartlett relying upon that dissonance for some reason?
mimreckoner said this on October 4, 2016 at 2:15 am | Reply
Huh. I don’t think she looks that bad.
In terms of the play — there are no directions that the character must be played by the same actor in all three scenes, but it makes sense dramatically in that you don’t have the audience asking “who is this now” after a relatively short act. In practical terms, it also saves money to have five rather than seven actors. I’ve read 3 of Bartlett’s plays now and they all have relatively few characters. If you see yourself on some level as an experimental playwright, it’s a lot easier to produce things that have minimal sets and casts.
Maybe somebody else has a better answer.
Servetus said this on October 4, 2016 at 2:23 am | Reply
Yes, all true. I wonder whether it’s ever been staged where the younger actors play all three “ages” I.e. They play the younger version of their parents in the 60s rather than the way it is.
mimreckoner said this on October 4, 2016 at 4:03 am | Reply
I wonder how that would go. They would have to find really talented actors in that case.
Servetus said this on October 4, 2016 at 5:11 am | Reply
Joanna said this on October 4, 2016 at 6:42 am | Reply
I assume you’re being sarcastic!
I just thinking from an audience perspective I would have a different reaction to watching the older actors “de-age” to play the 60s versions of their characters versus the younger actors playing the younger versions of their characters’ parents.
The requirement to play three different ages may rule out some actors who are great but cannot convincingly look younger even with a shaggy wig! For example say somebody like Roger Allam – he could play somebody in his 40s but not 19!
mimreckoner said this on October 4, 2016 at 7:53 am | Reply
This is how I feel — you can call it ageist if you like. When I was 19 I did not have a clue as to what it would be like to be physically older — 47 as I am now or 65 or older. You can say that I am not very much “in my body” in comparison to the average person; however, it something contemporaries of mind say all the time: I could never have imagined what it would be like physically to be middle aged. There’s a parallel in this point to my assertion a few weeks ago that Chloe Moretz does not appear to be in her mid-20s. There’s a very difficult to put one’s fingers on thing about the various effects of growing older and in my experience, it’s harder for younger actors to appear older because they have not experienced it.
Someone in their 40s knows what it was like to feel 19 and has to imagine 65. Someone in their late teens early twenties has to imagine both of those states. I’m not saying it’s impossible — just that I would find it much more difficult for that actor.
I do not disagree that some great actors cannot plausibly appear to be in their late teens.
Servetus said this on October 4, 2016 at 3:41 pm | Reply
Why get someone else when you can get Amy Ryan and Richard Armitage?
Perry said this on October 4, 2016 at 2:25 am | Reply
The first production had Daniela Denby-Ashe (2010) and she was essentially playing a nineteen-year-old only a few years earlier. It wouldn’t have been implausible, I think. In this case you get Amy Ryan who’s apparently an amazing artist.
Servetus said this on October 4, 2016 at 2:27 am | Reply
That’s my point. Better to stretch credibility and have finer actors all the way through.
Perry said this on October 4, 2016 at 2:32 am | Reply
2011 is hilarious at the mere sight.. great actors! 😀
Joanna said this on October 4, 2016 at 6:46 am | Reply
he’s still manspreading as a retiree … somehow not as sexy 🙂
Servetus said this on October 4, 2016 at 3:42 pm | Reply
Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:
You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. ( Log Out / Change )
You are commenting using your Twitter account. ( Log Out / Change )
You are commenting using your Facebook account. ( Log Out / Change )
You are commenting using your Google+ account. ( Log Out / Change )
Connecting to %s
Notify me of new comments via email.
Notify me of new posts via email.
Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.
Click on the image to see fan support and donate!
Like / Friend / Follow me on Facebook [click here]
Blog at WordPress.com.