Make a Donation

Consider making a donation to support SHAKSPER.

Subscribe to Our Feeds

Current Postings RSS

Announcements RSS

Home :: Archive :: 2003 :: March ::
Re: The Real Beale
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 14.0541  Wednesday, 19 March 2003

[1]     From:   Thomas Larque <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Tuesday, 18 Mar 2003 20:04:41 -0000
        Subj:   Re: SHK 14.0531 Subject: The Real Beale

[2]     From:   Jan Pick <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Tuesday, 18 Mar 2003 22:09:29 -0000
        Subj:   Re: SHK 14.0531 Subject: The Real Beale


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Thomas Larque <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Tuesday, 18 Mar 2003 20:04:41 -0000
Subject: 14.0531 Subject: The Real Beale
Comment:        Re: SHK 14.0531 Subject: The Real Beale

When a bad review of Charles Weinstein's performance as Bottom was
posted here, Weinstein responded with his scrapbook of positive reviews
of his own performances, as though this cancelled the bad review out.
Strangely, when it came to himself, Weinstein failed to follow his usual
method - applied to all other actors - of only citing the bad reviews
and acting as if the good reviews didn't exist.  What happened, in
Weinstein's posting about himself, to all the other bad reviews written
about Charles Weinstein?  I am guessing that he has received more than
one negative review.  What happened in Charles Weinstein's recent
posting about Simon Russell Beale to all the wonderful reviews that
Beale has received (along with acting awards from left, right, and
centre), which rather outnumber the bad reviews?

Incidentally, Brustein is deceiving himself if he thinks that the New
York Times reviewer is responsible for Beale's reputation.  The British
Press have been raving about Beale for a good long time, and I find it
very difficult to believe that they universally read American newspapers
to find out what to say about British actors.  In this instance, at
least, Brustein seems to be intellectually stuck on his side of the
Atlantic, and completely unaware of events on the other side of the
pond.

As for whether Simon Russell Beale is a great actor - I can't comment on
productions that I haven't seen, but I have seen him give a brilliant
Richard III, and a strong Ariel.  He may not be to all tastes - who is?
- but he is certainly a very effective actor, and - judging by the
reviews that we have seen posted here - he consistently gets better
reviews than Weinstein.

Thomas Larque.

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Jan Pick <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Tuesday, 18 Mar 2003 22:09:29 -0000
Subject: 14.0531 Subject: The Real Beale
Comment:        Re: SHK 14.0531 Subject: The Real Beale

No it wasn't.  Beale's reputation was hard earned by acting his way
through the ranks and he was highly rated as an actor by those of us who
can recognise a good actor when we see one long before Ben Brantley
hopped onto the bandwagon.  Good actors - Great actors, always split the
critics because they often dare to be different.  A great actor takes
risks and sometimes they don't come off - they dare to fail.  When they
succeed they are brilliant.  There are too many safe actors around these
days and that is why theatre is dying.  Tiny spaces for re-actors rather
than big spaces for actors.  Too much film and tv work, too little
theatre.  Leave SRB alone - if you don't like him don't go to his
performances and leave a ticket spare for those that do.

Jan

_______________________________________________________________
S H A K S P E R: The Global Shakespeare Discussion List
Hardy M. Cook, 
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 
The S H A K S P E R Web Site <http://www.shaksper.net>

DISCLAIMER: Although SHAKSPER is a moderated discussion list, the
opinions expressed on it are the sole property of the poster, and the
editor assumes no responsibility for them.
 

©2011 Hardy Cook. All rights reserved.