Stage Adaptation
Cast and Crew | Materials | Reviews | Images | Effects |Stagework | Playbox | DiscussionThis page archives fan comments, whether on the boards or submitted by e-mail about the stage play, by people who have seen the production. you can let us know what you think of the play (or the script), by sending an e-mail to webmaster@bridgetothestars.net. The first batch of reviews here are all for the first run of the play, with reviews on the second run below them.
Fan Reviews:
Liam's Thoughts (both parts)Andrew's Thoughts (both parts)
Lit Muse's Thoughts (both parts)
Fran's Thoughts (both parts)
Elina's Thoughts (both parts)
Julian's Thoughts (HDM Part II, some Part I)
Unzum's Thoughts (just HDM Part II)
Sagittaire's Thoughts (both parts)
Scaramouche's Thoughts (on HDM Part II)
Julian's Thoughts (just HDM part I)
Mononoke's Thoughts (just HDM part I)
Second Run:
Dante's Thoughts (just HDM part I)Andrew's Thoughts (both parts)
Liam's Thoughts:
I first read His Dark Materials a few years ago, when my mum bought it for me as a Christmas present. Needless to say, I was completely blown away by the power and emotion found within the trilogy, to such an extent that I can truly say, however pretentious or corny it sounds (I don't care), that it profoundly changed my life. The stage play went even further.
I went to see His Dark Materials parts I and II on th 4th and 6th of February. I'm a sixth form Drama student from Northern Ireland, and my teacher took a group of us to London to see it. I have to say, I was slightly apprehensive as to how I would react to the play; as Nicholas Hytner (the director) stated when he undertook the staging of HDM, I was a teenager who ' had read the books and had been dragged to the theatre, sitting with arms folded, just waiting to disagree with everything.' Well, I was a little excited also!! Nothing could have prepared me for what followed. Everything from the lighting to the costume to the music was fantastic. The acting was flawless, the set spectacular. The drum revolve stage completely blew me away - it was utilised in every way possible, to great effect. Apparently there were something close to 127 set changes throughout the whole two plays, and each one was just as breathtaking as the previous.
While it is obvious that any adaptation couldn't remain wholly faithful to the book, I believe that the stage interpretation was absolutely fabulous. Only that which was necessary was absent from the stage; more significant was the absence of Mary Malone. However the fact that Serafina Pekkala took on the role of temptress is more than suitable: she and Farder Coram had lost their chance at love, so she was trying to pass it onto Will and Lyra.
The various ways in which Will was able to believably open windows into other worlds were brilliant. While some of the openings to different worlds required a certain amount of imagination, others were so real you could almost belive that Anna and Dominic were stepping into another world. The ingenuity of the animation of the daemons was another aspect that took my breath away. The puppeteers did an excellent job, actually becoming a character, rather than just 'the person operating the little animal thing'. I though that Sam Barnett as Pantalaimon was particularly good. On the subject of puppeteers, even if you found them distracting (which I by no means did), their presence was explained when Lyra entered the world of the dead. She takes Pan into her arms as she waits for her death to appear, while Sam Barnett all dressed in black (face and all) makes to walk off stage, low status. All of a sudden he draws himself up, peels the dark mask off his face and reveals himself to be Lyra's death. And suddenly we understand why the puppeteers were present - they are the characters' deaths, they just can't be seen.
The most heart rendering moment of the books (for me) was when Lyra and Pan are parted upon crossing to the world of the dead, and it was no less harrowing in the play. The staging of the land of the dead in itself was an innovative masterpiece, the audience being spotlit and ghost-actors appearing in the auditorium to move slowly towards the stage. The closing scenes were again excellently played, with Lyra and Will lying among the flowers, while the temptress Serafina Peffala appears behind them. When they were parted (ingeniously done, with their tree and bench in Oxford being split in two), there wasn't a dry eye in the house, with even thirty year old men blubbering like babies (I must admit I welled up aswell). Recognition must also go to the live musicians who helped set the atmosphere.
I suppose I haven't really mentioned Mrs. Coulter or Lord Asriel, who were both really excellent in the play, though perhaps not as dominant as in the books. They were played brilliantly by Timothy Dalton and Patricia Hodge, and their daemons were great too. But the focus was mainly on Lyra and Will, and their journey.
I would love to just sit and watch the stage-play version of HDM over and over; as it is, I'm already reliving every moment in my head anyay. It was the most spectacular piece of theatre I have ever experienced in my life. It is entirely incomparable to the books, (which are absolutely only equalled by 'The Lord of the Rings'); I couldn't say that the play was better, or the books were better because it is impossible to make such a distinction, when both are so amazing. The cast are absolutely fabulous and deserve all the praise they can get, likewise the technical crew and production crew. It is a masterpiece of the highest degree. Definitely go see it. It is worth queing up over night to see!!
Andrew's Thoughts:
The first time I read the books, I was completely lost for words. The sheer emotion and power conveyed by the ending of amber spyglass affected me more than anything else ever has, I didn't know whether to feel happy or sad for Will and Lyra. I thought to myself, it could make a good film, but then thought it wouldn't be possible, and forgot all about that idea. You can imagine how surprised and eager I was when I saw a staged version being advertised.
So about the play. They do not follow the book word for word, that would be impossible, and way too long. Instead, you see Lyra and Will sitting by their tree in separate worlds, on a midsummer midnight. They then start to tell their story from the beginning.
Although the daemons look weird to start with, being held by people dressed in black, you get used to it. The same with the other puppets and the bears (who hold their heads - well imagine someone in a bear suit going on all fours, their nose would be pointing towards the ground). The golden monkey was perfect to the book, and its puppeteer was brilliant, and so were the others to a lesser extent.
The play flowed amazingly well, the revolving and escalating stage made sure of that. The story was easy to follow, and although they had to cut Mary Malone out of the story, it still made sense.
It was all brilliant until the end. I never thought that the play version would have anywhere near the effect the books did, and although when Lyra and Will are told they can't see each other anymore wasn't as good as the books, the true ending after that was so heart moving it's impossible to describe. I have never in my life seen so many people crying! I don't know if there are any tickets left to see His Dark Materials, but if there are, or it comes back next year, see it. You will not regret it at all. I would give it a mark out of ten but it really wouldn't show how good I thought it was, it really has to be seen to be believed.
Lit Muse's Thoughts:
Stunning and breathtaking, His Dark Materials is a unique and beautiful adaptation of Pullman's trilogy. Taking liberties with the structure and plot of the books, Nicola Wright's adaptation brings the full vibrant and energetic colours of the story to life. Beginning with a starry eyed Will and Lyra sitting on seperate park benches in their different Oxfords, the play soon switches into a bright and slick beginning which depicts the wildness, innocence and darkness of Lyra's childhood in the first few scenes. This almost irresistable presentation of the world Lyra once had at Oxford sets the precedent for the epic adventure and journey to take place.
The daemons are presented beautifully by puppets. Graceful, mesmerising and symbolic of their ethereal nature, these almost lantern-lit creations are more effective on stage than any "stuffed-animal" cliche. Similarly, the fights and grouping of the bears were visually effective with the part-puppet, part-actor costumes, intergrating the fantastical with more grounded and human elements. Balthamos and Baruch, the angel lovers, were delightfully graceful and stunning as all-white puppets that had an aristocratic and ethereal elegance that could not be portrayed by actors. All in all, the use of puppetry was a touch of magical genius.
The main character, Anna Maxwell Martin, carries the whole play off with effortless energy and a convincing childishness that keeps us with her throughout the journey. Dominic Cooper similarly gives a lively performance, intermingling innocence and duty as Will. Despite a rather thwarted ending with Lord Asriel and Marisa Coulter, Timothy Dalton was brilliantly intense and passionate as Lord Asriel, intergrating his greatness and formidability. However, Patricia Hodge was less enigmatic and ambiguous in her interpretation of Mrs. Coulter and therefore much of her character's mystery was lost. The cast in general was excellent, encapsulating the scale of the adventure very well. The seamless nature of the production has much to do with the revolving stage and scenes could change as easily as it would on a film.
The production moved at full pace, never slowing to be boring but not too fast as to skim the emotion of the piece. As expected, not all storylines and scenes could be squeezed into a six hour production, however, the play still manages to encapsulate the main themes and concerns of the play. Unique, fast-moving, brilliant and moving, His Dark Materials as a play is one of the most thrilling productions to ever grace the stage.
Fran's Thoughts:
I saw both plays back to back on a Saturday in January.
It was good, but... well there will always be "buts" when considering an adaptation rather than something written from scratch, in terms of what is left out, how things are realised compared to how one imagined them, and because some things work better in one medium than another. For instance, on stage, the machine for separating humans and their daemons looks out of place with the rest of the play: too much like something from Dr Jekyll or James Bond, whereas in the book it blends better.
Basically, it is Pullman "Lite". It has the gist of the plot, but very little of the philosophy and theology etc that set it so far apart from and above other novels. This means it's more of a run-of-the-mill children's adventure than the books are: standard family fare, with a bit of added mumbo jumbo! Not necessarily a bad thing, depending on your age and viewpoint, but a difference.
The best and longest book made up the smallest portion of the play (about 25%). Consequently, there is not enough explanation of dust, the "fall" or the need to go to the land of the dead. There is no Mary Malone, no mulefa (mind you, they always seemed a bit too silly to fit comfortably with the rest of the novel), no seed pods dying for lack of dust, and the spyglass is merely incidental.
Anna Maxwell Martin was excellent, and thoroughly believable age-wise. At the beginning (two or three years later than the main story), she seems much older, just by very subtle changes in body language. Will was good in a less conspicuous sort of way, but Roger had the awkwardness of an adult failing to pull off being a child.
Perhaps inevitably, the daemon puppeteers are rather too visible and it takes a while to tune them out mentally - especially when they speak. More fundamentally, the daemons seem somewhat like gratuitous add-ons, rather than the profound and essential element they are in the books; for the theatre, they either need to add some of the explanation overtly, or make more of their roles. The best daemons look beautiful and slightly ethereal and move in a wonderful flowing way (especially Stelmaria), but some characters' daemons are too small and/or discreet to notice (especially Lord Boreal's). It would also help if the daemons' voices were more distinct from the humans. At the beginning especially, it wasn't always immediately obvious who was talking.
The witches were a huge disappointment. Not one of them flew for a moment, or even appeared to do anything approximating to it: they just ponced around on a raised bit of stage, talking in a slightly wailing way, wearing not quite enough clothes, and waving sticks with a small lump on one end. "Flying" is a relatively old and low-tech theatrical special effect and I can't understand its total absence (done very well in The Olivier for Peter Pan several years ago). Matters weren't helped by Cecilia Noble playing Ruta Skadi like an over-enthusiastic 14 year old in her first speaking part in a school play, although she was very good as No Name.
The positioning of the armoured bears' heads probably seemed like a good idea on paper, but when they saw how they looked in practice, they should have changed it. Each head was held on the end of its actor's arm, which gave lots of flexibility of movement and thus expression. But the actors' real heads were disconcertingly and distractingly visible, and the arrangement meant they only had one front paw and so they limped about, making them comical rather than ferocious. It would have been far better if the paper heads (which looked very good) were actually in the conventional place, i.e. on the actors' shoulders. In spite of this handicap, Iorek was very good - especially his voice.
The set is clever and well used, emphasising the different, but related worlds; the programme and pull-out are interesting and original, and the music fits very well. However, there were times in the first part where it wasn't always easy to hear the dialogue, especially some of the women. Whether I attuned to it, or a technician adjusted it, I don't know.
All that sounds too critical, but specific criticism is often easier than general or specific praise. Overall, it's worth seeing, but not a patch on the books - but then I never really expected it could or would be. Even seeing both 3 hour plays in one day, it never dragged or felt long, which is pretty impressive. For those unfamiliar with the books, there won't be the disparity between the two media, but they'll understand it less. Which is the better situation to see it from? Who knows.
Elina's Thoughts:
HIS DARK MATERIALS AT THE NATIONAL THEATRE:
'I spread my wings and brush ten million other worlds'
The National Theatre's stage version of Philip Pullman's His Dark Materials seems a production doomed to either triumph or fail miserably. We are talking the scale of adapting The Lord of the Rings here: three popular and well-loved novels, over a thousand pages of prose have been made into two three-hour plays. In a way, NT's starting point may be slightly ungrateful, because the play must compete with two other forms of art/entertainment (let's be postmodernists and not draw the distinction here, because that would just lead into conceptual confusion), namely literature and cinema. Literature, because that is the original form of Pullman's narrative; and cinema, because at the moment 'epic fantasy trilogy' inevitably associates to The Lord of the Rings, thanks to the tremendous success of its recent film adaptation.
Theatre has neither the abstract qualities of literature, nor the illusionist possibilities of cinema - the territory it walks is that between tangible stage presence and evoking the imagination of the audience in the most effective way possible. These days when fantasy literature and cinema are perhaps more popular than ever, it is no easy place to go.
However, NT's production faces the challenge bravely, fights its way through the complex narrative, and finally delivers an emotional closure that is as close to a triumph as any theatre piece of this scale can ever hope to be.
Pullman's original novels follow two 12-year-old characters, Lyra Belacqua and Will Parry, as they travel between parallel worlds and unknowingly play out a destiny foretold in a prophecy. The complexity of Pullman's writing could never be achieved in any dramatisation, because it deals with an extremely wide range of difficult subjects - crossing the line between childhood and adulthood, coming to terms with one's own abilities and limitations, different forms of love, power, war, death, religion, philosophy, parallel universes.
Nicholas Wright's adaptation works well for the most part, making the right choices in which characters and scenes have been executed. The path chosen is that of suspenseful plot development. While this provides a slight sense of fast-forwarding and marginalizes the philosophical and religious musings of Pullman's original text, it is excellent storytelling and keeps the audience glued to their seats, anticipating every twist and turn. The beginning seems a tad too wordy and anxious to explain the way things in Lyra's universe work, but once we get past the compulsory exposition, the right rhythm is found.
Technically speaking, the realisation is dazzling. The stage transforms itself constantly like a daemon whose form hasn't settled yet; some of the imagery is breathtaking and wonderfully inventive.
As for the actors, Anna Maxwell Martin and Dominic Cooper are remarkable as Lyra and Will. There was not a nanosecond I didn't see them as the 12-year-olds they were playing, instead of the 20-somethings they really were. Their performances had sincerity that was truly moving, and easily left more experienced, older actors in their shadow. The whole cast did well, although personally I would have thought the roles of Lord Asriel and Mrs. Coulter could have been even juicier - Timothy Dalton and Patricia Hodge did a steady job, but they lacked the sense of emanating danger and sexual charisma I see as essential to these characters in the books.
Bringing daemons on stage must have been tricky indeed. These animal-shaped creatures represent the human soul, or a part of it, and are in my opinion perhaps the most ingenious creation of Pullman's. In the NT's version daemons are puppets. The solution works amazingly well. The puppets are not only beautiful to look at, but their movements and reactions are a delight to cherish. Even the difficult idea of transformation (which is what children's daemons do) was quite well achieved. The actors who play the daemons, i.e. operate the puppets and provide their voices, deserve a special applause for their smooth and essentially important work that goes beyond the limits of usual theatre acting.
Other fantastic creatures, such as panserbjørne, the armoured bears, and Gallivespians, the small people who ride dragonflies, are also realised by a combination of human actors, masks and puppetry. Overall, the result is effective and provides some moments of much-needed comic relief.
There were a few problems that the production didn't quite manage to solve despite its ambition and impressive degree of professionalism. The loss of the literary depth aside, the battle scenes were oddly anticlimactic, especially the final battle. Granted, today's audience has been spoiled by the spectacles we get to see in the cinema, and theatre has no devices to give us anything like that. But the battle sequence and the death of The Authority that followed, as well as the end of Lyra's parents, seemed nearly pointless and didn't have any of the sense of important things happening.
Another thing that bothered me was the representation of the witches. I may be partial here, because they happen to be my favourite species in the HDM universe, but reducing them into a bunch of yelling Xena-like warrior women didn't quite meet my idea. There is definitely a primitive and sensual side to their culture, and they are warriors; but there is also wisdom brought by the long life, and a sense of sadness, because the long life means a loss of so many things - in this sense I think they resemble Tolkien's Elves. I didn't see any of that wisdom in the stage version. There was a hint of it in Serafina Pekkala, who played the serpent instead of Mary Malone, but even she was more of a warrior than a seer.
I remain undecided about how I liked the way my favourite gay angels, Baruch and Balthamos, were brought onstage. Another piece of puppetry, which was completely logical, because angels have no bodies; and they are not the most serious characters in the book either, so the camp humour wasn't totally out of place. But when do I get to see a mainstream production where the gay characters are not the comic relief?
To conclude with: NT's production is not flawless, but it is impressive, and pushes the boundaries of theatrical expression. It is difficult, and courageous, and inventive, and beautiful. It may not be the republic of Heaven yet, but it does its best to exhaust the realm of the possible.
When Will cuts his way with the subtle knife into a different world and the whole width of the dark stage is suddenly divided by a slice of white light, it is a truly effective moment that could only be achieved and experienced in theatre. These are the moments when the production truly spreads its wings and brushes other worlds, something that would otherwise have remained invisible to us. And that is what makes it worthwhile, and important.
Julian's Thoughts:
HDM Part II The National Theatre
I'm writing this a few days after watching both parts of HDM at the National last Saturday. Apologies for the slight delay in posting this but there was a lot to take in and assimilate and I wanted to take a little more time before committing my thoughts to print.
Before starting on Part II, I want to revisit part I for a moment, because what I have to say about Saturday's performance means revising a lot of what went into my review last week. Suffice to say, a week can make a lot of difference. Everything about Part I on Saturday was perfect. It was like watching a totally different play almost. The pacing was excellent, the performances significantly stronger* and at the end of the first three hours what we were witnessing was real theatre magic. My brother who has read the books and is a fan but a somewhat harsh critic sometimes thought it was excellent. Even my mother, who came along at the last minute and has never read the trilogy loved it unreservedly. So much so that she's now reading 'Northern Lights' - probably one of a select few to approach the story that way round.
I have no problem admitting when I'm wrong and I have to say that after watching Anne Maxwell Martin's performance on Saturday, I was wrong. Over six hours she was Lyra and carried the show. Where the week before there had been mere glimpses here was a gutsy performance of poise and assurance that put even seasoned veterans such as Patricia Hodge and Timothy Dalton in the shade. The chemistry between Anna's Lyra and Dominic's Will is also starting to develop nicely. I'm looking forward to revisiting the play a month or so down the line once all the rough edges have disappeared. Now that will be something.
Turning a critical eye to part II, it suffers a little (not a lot) by comparison, in particular before the interval. It's difficult to put your finger on it, the pacing is perhaps a little off. Understandable perhaps given that it's first public performance a week later than Part I. There's a slight air of entering into the unknown. By contrast the final act of the play after the interval is perhaps the strongest section. The portrayal of the land of the dead is particularly effective (I agree with your other reviewer, the boat is great) what really makes it is when Lyra's death reveals itself. It's so simple but yet so clever as to be an inspired bit of theatre. More Brownie points then.
The puppets in Part II are as imaginative as those in part I. Baruch and Balthamos in particular are beautifully realised. The Gallivespians take a bit of getting used to but by the time Lord Roke meets his heroic end the audience has grown to love them. There a bit of improvised dialogue in Lord Roke's final scene which is the funniest moment of the whole six hours and had me in stitches (those who have seen the play will know what I'm talking about). The final battle between the Lord Asriel's forces and those loyal to the Authority is a little underwhelming and the death of the Authority looks a bit ... dare I say silly (the crystal casket is about three foot long!), so maybe a bit of a re think is required there before press night, the final scene though with the breaking of the knife and Will and Lyra back in the Botanical Gardens walking past each other as dawn breaks in different worlds agonizingly close provides a very satisfactory if heart wrenching emotional conclusion. Just another of many inspired moments over the course of the six hours.
Contrary to what I have read from your other reviewers on this web site, I have no problems with the changes that Nicholas Wright has introduced to the story. In fact, although it might be heresy to some, I would go so far as to say that the changes Wright has introduced improve the story. Certainly from a pure story telling point of view. I've always been of the view that the whole Mary Malone/ Mulefa plot slows 'TAS' down to the point of a crawl at time almost crippling the flow of the story. Reading it is like driving a car with the breaks on! Wright does a great job in shifting the role as tempter to Serafina Pekkala. As for the whole blackberries thing, I'm going to have to disagree with the BTTS staffers' review here whole heartedly. Yes, BLACKBERRIES. SP's a witch, wild and elemental and close to nature. As such it's far more appropriate that wild fruit should replace marzipan. Also it's closer to the original story of Eve. Marzipan is a bit too close to CS Lewis's Turkish delight for my liking in any case. The only change I don't think works is Lee Scorsby's absence from part II. He just disappears after part I. No heroic death and no appearance in the land of the dead. Shame.
It seems churlish to gripe though. Overall, the National Theatre's production is a triumph of the imagination. It deserves to be as well given all of the very talented people involved and the incredible leap of faith the National took in deciding to put on the production in the first place.
*Cecilia Noble's performance as Ruta Skadi is perhaps a bit too strong (putting it mildly), tone it down a bit love, you're letting the side down I heard people laughing her performance was so OTT. Great as No Name though!
Thought I'd write and let you know I went to see Part II of HDM at the National last night. A vast improvement on the very early performance I saw in December. Whereas before it was the spectacle that held it together, now it's the acting performances that are centre stage, drawing the audience into the fantasy further.
The biggest improvement comes from a cast change. Timothy Dalton was unable to appear in the final week of extra scheduled performances because of prior commitments. He's been replaced by Nick Sampson who brings to the role the pride and gravitas of the character in the books. His speech challenging the Authority and his scenes with Patricia Hodge as Mrs Coulter are all excellent, giving the production additional cohesion. The campaign starts here for him to get the part for the Production's revival later in the year! Hats off to everyone involved in the production though. It's an absolute triumph.
Unzum's Thoughts (just HDM Part II):
I've just been to see His Dark Materials (only part 2 unfortunately, I booked the tickets late) and I have to say that it was fantastic. I didn't have a problem with any of the cast, the stage or the story changes.
Will & Lyra were fantastic as actors (Will especially). I know this sounds strange but I don't think that child actors could have played the parts as well as Dominic & Anna. Aside from laws involving children on stage, there aren't that many children who can act well. Children just wouldn't have been able to portray enough emotion. Additionally, Dominic & Anna (who play Will & Lyra) look very young for their age, although not quite as young as 12, more like 14, and in costume it is very easy to believe they are children. The actor who plays Roger is also very convincing though I only saw him for a short while.
As for Mary, yes, she was cut out but in the end it didn't matter very much. Serafina took over the role of the serpent and the maker of the amber spyglass. I know it may sound like the script writer is taking a lot of liberties but the play is mainly concerned with telling the story of Will & Lyra's adventure, not metaphysical ideas of the book.
Mrs Coulter looks quite a bit different to how I had imagined her but she also works quite well in the play, less of a beautiful temptress and more cruel and near the end, motherly. AS for Lord Asriel being played by a former James Bond, well, I don't think I'd ever seen him before. He looked very much like Lord Asriel, sort-of a rugged-explorer type.
The daemons are fantastic. They are puppets and are operated by people on stage dressed all in black with a black mesh mask. What is especially cool is they way the daemons heads are lit up so that their eyes glow. They also appear to float off the ground (their bodies being nothing more than shreds of clouds) and this gives them an eerie, otherworldly feeling. The Galespians are also puppets. You get used to the people in black but (in possibly the best moment of the play) you actually get to see the actor behind the mask in the scene where Lyra meets her death. The actor controlling Pantalaimon actually takes of his mask & reveals himself to be Lyra's death (he was perfect for the part, being dressed all in black). It was just one of those great moments when all your ideas built up during the play were shattered.
The stage was astounding. The play is held in the Olivier Theatre which has the only drum revolve stage in the world. I'll try & explain the stage: The stage consisted of two circles, one inside the other, both of which could rotate in opposite direction. The inner circle is split into two semi-circles & frequently one of these semi-circles would rise up, revealing another room inside. The revolving stage meant that sets could be changed quickly. There were no black-outs, no pauses between scen changes, everything moved effortlessly and quickly.
Some parts in the play are changed (the most notable being the beginning) but these changes are all good. I think that the play is actually as good as the book. I haven't been disappointed at all and the play exceeded all of my expectations. Quite simply, it was the best play I have ever seen. If some of you won't be able to see it I suggest you check out the photo archive from the play in www.bridgetothestars.net and buy the screenplay (great as well).
Sagittaire's Thoughts:
"His Dark Materials" Part I and II, seen on 23rd December 2003
Where on earth do I begin?
When the audience leaves the theatre in tears, when six hours feel like one, when there is applause at the beginning of each act before anyone is even onstage, then there has been a magic that it is beyond me to describe.
The harmony between all the different elements of the show is astounding, but it is Anna Maxwell Martin and Dominic Cooper who have made it such a success. Not only was I convinced that they were no older than thirteen, but the were unbelievably genuine as these brave, extraordinary children, and the chemistry between them was perfect. The supporting cast was, almost without exception, uniformly outstanding, and every actor looked so different in each role they played that it was hard to tell whether it was the same person. The only actors I could find fault with were Timothy Dalton and Patricia Hodge as Lord Asriel and Mrs Coulter - although they captured the essence of their characters when separate, they did not play well off each other, and didn't seem as violently and passionately in love as I had imagined. Also, although the witches' acting was very good, they seemed more like African tribeswomen than ancient beings from another world - perhaps there were just a few war cries too many. Jopari also did not come across as I had imagined him, but I know that I am very much influenced by my own reading of the books.
I was very glad to see that the backstage crew took a curtain call at the end of the second part. The technical complexity of the show was such that I believe I saw the first performance when everything went correctly. Perhaps the cleverest piece of set was a wall of television screens used to show, among other things, Will cutting through. The most amazing and noticeable part of the design was, of course, the puppets. The daemons were made of wire frames covered with silk, with lights in their eyes (these lights went out when their human died). The larger ones of them were operated and voiced by actors dressed all in black, including black mesh masks. The Gallivespians were wooden puppets operated in a similar way. It was odd how easy it was to ignore those operating the puppets, and to see the puppets as characters in themselves.
The changes in the plot did not disrupt the story, and in most cases it was easy to see why they had been decided on. The complete removal of Mary Malone surprised me slightly, but Serafina Pekkala takes her place as the serpent by telling Lyra how she fell in love with Farder Coram. It did surprise me, though, just how many people had met Jopari - many more than in the book I am sure. I thought that showing Lyra and Will in the Botanic Gardens several years after their adventures was a very nice touch, and that the quick summary scene at the beginning of Part II - really just a montage of scenes and lines from Part I - helped the audience to get back into the story after their dinner.
I cannot come close to describing everything wonderful about this production, but there are so many I cannot keep out of my head - the boat to the land of the dead, Lee Scoresby's balloon, and, above all, the moment when Will breaks the knife by shouting Lyra's name. A production that passes so quickly as you watch it but haunts you for so long afterwards cannot be anything other than magical.
Scaramouche's Thoughts (on HDM Part II):
I saw this on Wednesday 17th December - preview week for Part 2. They were having some technical problems on stage right. One of the sliding wings wasn't moving properly and I don't think they were able to fully correct this problem during the interval. For the most part it didn't seem to matter too much - there was an odd moment when the outer revolve wouldn't, but the actors carried on and covered this. Possibly set had to be loaded or people moved into place slightly differently because of this fault though.
A nice recap at the start with characters speeding by from all directions on the bare stage and throwing in just one or two salient lines. But why did they bother having Lee Scoresby in? He is never seen (or commented on) again after he takes Will to his father and the balloon isn't even used in this part of the stage version. I think they might have got away with leaving him out and just having somebody else get Will to meet with Jopari because you really don't notice until you wonder where that lovely hare daemon and it's glowing eyes have gone.
There were less variations in set for this part. A lot of the time the stage was quite bare and vast, the rest of the time it seemed to have various rock formations on it. This created a beautiful effect for the cave in which Mrs Coulter keeps Lyra.
To my mind the Church were dealt with much better in this part - sitting on a row of benches in front of the 'stained glass' wall rather than in the pokey 'room' complete with altar as in the first part. I was still not keen on the characterisation of the President though and his strange accent, but Brother Jasper was brilliant. I also liked the way he took a lot of care with his daemon manipulation - something many of the other people when playing 'chorus' roles should take note of.
The angels were achieved by being sort of a mannequin top half with the puppeteer's arm pushed through into the puppet arm providing movement. The lower half was that floaty cloth that the daemons are made from and they wafted quite ethereally for the most part. Their humour was retained and they were not lovey-dovey, crooning or cloying as someone who had only read the script was fearing.
Mrs Coulter controlling spectres and getting them to only take who she wished them to, when she wanted them to seemed far too convenient, but I guess was necessary. Likewise the "effect" for people being devoured by spectres is not that great (also varying from actor to actor) and there is a lot of it happening in Part 2. Although the golden monkey never speaks in the books, it is strange that he does not in the stage version as he is reduced to communicating with Mrs Coulter by tapping and miming all of a sudden, which can't be right.
Really the witches (who bizarrely are never seen witha daemon, apart from Serafina) covered the Mary Malone/Mulefa areas of the story and Asriel doesn't have a true sense of going anywhere as he just 'appears' on stage and expounds. I also had trouble hearing some of what he was saying when he dipped his voice (a tonal problem with lower register I think) - especially since there was a continual surrround soundtrack of sniffs, coughs and splutters from the audience.
The Gallivespians are realised beautifully. The dragonflies are pretty and their wings buzz speedily. The little people themselves have such a range of movement and expression that it is a shame that if you are sat in the circle or back of the stalls you must miss the smallest details.
The Land of the Dead - this is marvellous. This whole section is very cleverly done and my favourite part by far. There is a motif of a concertina shape which begins with the eerie boatman rowing in (on the top of the 'post' and concertinaing down to Will and Lyra) with his light up oars and carried through the costumes for the Harpies which have to be seen to be appreciated. Clever use is made of the entirely bare stage by way of a huge circular mirror tilted and suspended above the stage and the whole audience becomes involved as the characters look out into the theatre, where some actors have appeared, and state rather poignantly "There's so many children here".
There is a great secondary meaning brought into the term "Your death is always with you" when Pantalaimon's puppeteer removes his black face mask to reveal himself as Lyra's Death, although rather annoyingly he only remains so as long as it takes to walk a third of the stage. And the escape looks almost exactly as I imagined peering through the crack would be, if the smoke effect for spirits returning to dust could use a little work (and maybe an amber light?).
The final battle was a bit... weak. It seemed an excuse to use a bunch of the puppets again for the hell of it. The Authority - I am really not sure if something was supposed to happen with him and there was a technical problem but you did wonder why they bothered. His casket was brought on in the battle (for no discernible reason) and then left when everyone goes. Lyra and Will open it up and lift the body - which just looks like some large doll - and then he simply sighs and dies. Asriel and Coulter turn up, Asriel takes the Authority's crown off him (but I think then puts it back on him, it wasn't particularly defininte) and then Coulter closes up the casket and puts the cloth back over it. Asriel and Coulter jumping into the abyss was odd. Their justification seemed merely to be that they had "played their part"(?!!) although there was some muttering of exploring so possibly that could be construed another way.
The ending seemed cheesy. The lines were a bit stilted and sounded very clunky. The end of the first half was much clearer then the end of the whole play. Maybe pacing will help sort this out as the run gets further along. The bows had been rehearsed this time and the actors relished them as much as the audience enjoyed congratulating them with applause.
Julian's Thoughts:
I'm going to try to post a full review of the production next week as I'm due to watch both Parts I & II with family on Saturday. When I saw last Friday that there were some tickets still on offer for last night's performance I couldn't resist going along. I know it's not entirely fair to try to judge the production after only having seen half of it. At the same time I'm conscious that HDM fans are hungry to know how it plays out.
I guess the real question has to be, does it live up to expectations. On the evidence of last night's performance I have to say the answer is both yes, and, disappointingly, no.
As a spectacle, the production is admittedly stunningly realized. In particular, Michael Curry's puppet designs are wonderful works of the imagination. The armoured bears and cliff ghasts in particular are great fun and look terrific. The idea of illuminating each daemon from the inside is also a masterstroke.
The use of the Olivier stage's drum is also very clever and is applied in such a way to emphasize the idea of multiplicity in respect of the various worlds through which the story is woven. The initial technical hitches of the first week now seem to be well and truly behind the production. Certainly I didn't notice any. In addition, Video is also used to great effect to demonstrate how Will cuts windows to other worlds. Won't spoil it for people, but it is a real piece of theatre magic.
As for Nicolas Wright's script, it's perfect. I'm a fan of his previous work, including 'Vincent in Brixton' and had already read the script before going into the performance. The narrative device of starting the story with Will and Lyra as young adults sitting on the bench in the Botanical gardens, talking to each other but separated by worlds is an inspired narrative framing device and gets round the problem of suspension of disbelief in terms of adults playing children.
Where the production is let down though, and it pains me to say it, is in the performances. In the first act in particular, before the interval, the performances are particularly flat. It's as if the players are overwhelmed by the scale of the production around them. By contrast, the second act sees the performance begin to take off. Dominic Cooper in particular is outstanding as Will. By contrast, Anne Maxwell Martin as Lyra still seems to be finding her feet. She certainly looks the part. In fact on appearances at least she is Lyra from the books brought to life. What is missing though, particularly in the first Act is the untamed feral qualities Pullman invests in Lyra in the novels. It's frustrating, because at times she does really capture the essence of the character. It's elusive though and what we are left with though for the main part are fleeting glimpses. A shame really as much of the weight of the production rests on her shoulders. Anne Maxwell Marin is not the only culprit in this respect though. More it is a general malaise that even extends to Timothy Dalton's performance as Lord Asriel, which is, at times, muted. . I've no doubt though that as the production continues the cast will start to become more comfortable in their respective roles taking them on to a new level, investing the production with some of the magic that it demands but sadly currently lacks.
Finishing on a positive note, the final scene of part I with the various main players making their declarations of intent almost makes up for some of the disppointment that has gone before and represents a rousing end to the evening, wetting the appetite perfectly for part II. Roll on Saturday!
Mononoke's Thoughts:
I saw Part I last night and it was fantastic. For those of you, like me, who display reservations about seeing the characters that we have imagined in our head portrayed visually, don't worry about Lyra. Anna Maxwell Martin does an excellent job, truly believable.
Even if you're not interested in the play, the stage will blow you away. Congratulations to the National and Hytner for a truly innovative and inspired piece of techinical theatre.
Of course, there are a few disappointments. Mrs Coulter, for me, reminded me of a Tory politician, or Camilla Parker-Bowles. Not the dangerously seductive woman that I was expecting. And hoping for, as she is one of my personal favourite characters in the book.
I was also a little disappointed by the Gyptians. Less noble river folk, more fagin's band of dirty drunks! Perhaps a little cruel.
The puppets were excellent, and with a little imagination, totally believable. The Cliff Ghasts were truly frightening and I saw a few younger children clinging to their parents for protection. The grace of the pupeteers is commendable and I'm glad Nicholas Hytner opted not to hide their existence and they play an integral part of the believability of the Daemons.
The storyline is pretty much spot on, with some ingenious weaving of scenes to fit it into the 3 hours.
Apart from one slight noticeable line fluff, the actors seemed well relaxed and at ease for one of their very first performances.
Congratulations all round, and I look forward to Part II!
Dante's Thoughts:
After over a year's waiting, on the 22nd of November I finally got a chance to see the second run of the His Dark Materials play. It was only the first part- the second part I will be seeing in January 2005- but after part one, I have high hopes.
I have one gripe with the play, which I'll get out of the way first- the characterisation of the Church. No longer are the members of the Magisterium the fanatical, dark, complex characters they were in the book. The director of this play has transformed them into camp boo-hiss. Fra Pavel has gone from being a feeble old man into a cape-swishing, intimidating overlord that resembles Ming the Merciless from Flash Gordon, as if the writer wanted a clear villain for part one. The President of the Constitorial Court has a portrait behind his desk with bright, glowing eye, and the chamber at Bolvangar containing the dreaded dæmon-parting apparatus looks like something from out of a cheap sci-fi / video nasty.
Gripe over, because everything else about the play is excellent. The dæmons were handled brilliantly (much to my surprise), and while puppeteers in black operating the dæmons sounds like an absurd idea, it was in fact very skilfully done. It added a lot to the play that the dæmons were done well; as such a key factor being messed up would have detracted significantly.
As for the actors, all were convincing in their roles. While I was initially surprised at black actors playing Lord Asriel and Roger (David Harewood and Darren Hart respectively), they both gave great performances, though in my opinion Harewood should have been a little less cheerful and a little more domineering. The same can be said of Mrs Coulter (Lesley Manville), who was not nearly as ruthless as she was in the books.
A mention should also go to Michael Legge and Elaine Symons (Will and Lyra), who consistently performed well and completely convinced as their characters; Symons, in particular, will always be Lyra in my mind from now on.
There were many changes from the book in this adaptation; that was always expected. However, none of them detract from the enjoyment of the play, even to someone who has read the books about twenty times. Settings have been changed much from the book, presumably to shorten the play's length, and the play also has a sense of humour the books lacked.
As a play based on a book, the production of His Dark Materials is excellent. As a play in its own right, it is almost perfect. If you have read the books, see it. If you haven't, see it anyway- it'll be the best thing you see in a long time.
Andrew. C's Thoughts:
Back in the early part of the year I was a disappointed man. I had heard that the National theatre were doing an adaptation of His Dark Materials, unfortunately the same article informed me that it had completely sold out. Then the search engine pointed me in the direction of bridgetothestars.net which told me that not only was the play being revived but also gave a link to the box office and a password to get tickets a week before they became available to the general public. So I blew a considerable chunk of my credit rating to get a number of tickets for the first date on which both parts would be performed. Then it was just a matter of waiting.
I am bound to say that I hardly noticed the passage of time, and having watched the first part I was willing the clock forward to the start of the second part. It is incredibly hard to single out a particularly good performance by any one actor when they were all so uniformly first rate. Nevertheless for anybody who is likely to be reading this there are one or two character's portrayals that will be of interest! Elaine Symons does a wonderful job of playing Lyra: attractive, appealing, feisty, compassionate and occasionally vulnerable. Likewise she is perfectly complimented by Jamie Harding as Pantalaimon and by Michael Legge as Will.
Personally I thought the portrayal of Will hit the right balance of determination tempered by doubt that tallied with how I imagined him in the books. David Harewood was excellent as Lord Asriel, his stage presence was such that he was absolutely convincing as a man who could not only conceive of a plan to rebel against the Authority but also to actually carry it out. Finally Lesley Manville as Mrs. Coulter was fantastic: beautiful,charming and chilling.
Frankly I could wear out this keyboard with praise for the performances, the costumes and the set, so I'll just say that at the end of the performances the applause was both loud and sustained for the actors, the musicians and the backstage crew.
How good was it? Frankly I have been looking forward to watching these plays so much that I half expected to be a little disappointed by them. I wasn't. In fact I could quite happily was the whole thing again. And again. In fact I hope the National revives these plays frequently, because I would love to take my daughter to see them.