The Entertainer is by far my worst theatre experience to date, although a humorous play which clearly catered to its target audience, for people such as me the play rendered to be a lot less enjoyable than I would have predicted. The recent film with Michael Cane and Jude Law is an original Harold Pinter script.
Set in the backdrop of the Suez Crisis which took place in 1956 John Osborne introduces us to the Rice family. A family the theatre was introduced to fifty years ago and has reappeared to celebrate the fiftieth anniversary of The Entertainer. Taking the lead role of Archie Rice was television’s Robert Lindsay, the role once played by critically acclaimed actor Laurence Olivier. Not being aware of any of Olivier’s works I can’t compare the performances, nevertheless Lindsay played the cynical, misogynistic, disillusioned entertainer superbly and it appeared that the audience genuinely enjoyed his performance. He had a good sense of comical timing, he engaged with the audience well and appeared completely at ease with his character. Lindsay brought controversy, tension and humor to the play. He became my saving grace for a play that without his presence would have been incredibly boring to watch.
The play set fifty years ago in the home of a working class British family talks of many issues that I found difficult to relate to. The play features a very patriotic set of characters that look back at the British Empire with sentimentality and nostalgia, the characters fear the unknown and with the decline of post war Britain and the decline of Britain’s power the family are set to enter a new Britain, a place where the culture may be affected and traditions lost. Although I am aware of such issues and have an understanding for them I found myself being further and further alienated from the play. The constant casual racist comments which managed to thread themselves throughout the play left me feeling completely uncomfortable, however it is of the understanding that I am not the targeted or expected audience member of the Old Vic theatre and that these issues and traits are clearly what must remain in order to make the play an authentic one.
Of course the play still manages to pluck some contemporary chords, particularly with the questioning of war, power, the deaths of young men and whether it’s all worth it. Even the fear of the loss of British culture and tradition is an issue that is prevalent in people and society today.
Nevertheless I found the play tedious, too long and ultimately going nowhere. The play appeared as though the ending was rushed, two new characters were introduced in the last scene of the play; which in my opinion is careless and messy playwrighting, dialogues ended up appearing to be monologues, as one character spoke there would be no interaction from the rest of the cast and at times they’d go off on a tangent of heartfelt word which ultimately were meaningless and did nothing for the play. The play neither engaged me nor moved me; I wasn’t particularly interested in the storyline and just as well, as the story didn’t go far and revealed nothing of any weight.
Myself and the play could not have had a greater distance between us, yet this needn’t be the deciding factor on whether the play was a success or not. I believe the play did what it had to do; which was to pay homage to the 1950’s, remain authentic to this era and allow its audience to possibly relive the phenomenon of The Entertainer.