Thoughts on Jamie Lloyd’s Romeo and Juliet

I was recently made to feel basic for admitting that my favourite Shakespeare play is Romeo and Juliet, this preference for the bard’s most famous play being a far from original choice. However, after attending The Duke of York Theatre I am reassured that this classic love story is not only my favourite but also a play with the potential to be incredible. There have been many opinions circulating regarding this particular production, with critics divided on both the acting and the creative decisions of Jamie Lloyd. The only consistent statement running through reviews from critics and audiences alike is that Francesca Amewudah-Rivers’ Juliet is a piece of artistry. With all of this in mind it was with curiosity that I attended the play yesterday.

What can I tell you of my reaction? Well, I believe that the first word I uttered to a steward during the interval was ‘wow’. There are so many things to discuss within the production, but this statement I feel encapsulates all of that. For those who have not been following the media storm around this rendition of the Shakespeare play, this is the most stripped back version you will ever come across. The walls of the stage are visible, as are the ropes that control much of what would typically move upon a stage. This is so far in the extreme that when onstage lighting needs to be readjusted the audience can see the crew members. It is an interesting decision to make, but one that is becoming increasingly more popular currently. I have touched on this before and maintain the belief that it reminds audiences that this is in fact a theatre and what they are witnessing is a play rather than a submersion into real life. This is further reiterated through the district lack of props – the only things present on the stage being microphones on stands. With much of the play being performed directly to the audience, naturalism is arguably a word which does not belong in a description. And yet…

And yet there is nothing dramatic or overdone about the performances of the actors. Emotionally raw and at times incredibly subtle, there is not a sense of dramatic performance – stylised yes, but still very much within the realms of naturalism. The moment in which it was clear the sort of performance we were in for as an audience was undeniably the second that Tom Holland walked onto the stage with tears tracking down his face. I know that opinions are divided upon Holland’s performance, but I am firmly of the opinion that he is phenomenal. By far the most depressed of any Romeo that I have seen, every second is a pleasure to watch. Likewise, Amewudah-Rivers brings the character of Juliet to life with outstanding capability. In fact, all of the performances are excellent, not one leaving anything to be desired. Amongst the array of characters it is clearest the adaptations that had been made to the script, with certain smaller roles being cut – notably both lovers have only one parent. There are of course other adaptations to the script, these perhaps being clearer to be than to other audience members due to my familiarity with the play. At times lines are modernised, many chunks are cut (a fairly standard practice), some scenes are interwoven so that they coexist and some conversations become monologues delivered as direct address (notable amongst these is Romeo’s conversation with the apothecary)… no one can say that the production isn’t innovative.

Naturally what anyone who has read about this production will be most curious about will be the use of filmmaking, cameramen being present upon the stage at many points. This blending of film and theatre was an unusual choice, which leads to a very new perception of what a play is. Just to note before I go any further, all of the filmed elements are performed live. With a screen at the top of the stage, these moments present often two conflicting views of the same scene. While large amounts of the play are delivered in simple direct address (think a poetry reading), others are performed facing the back of the stage or simply not on the stage at all. This gives the actors a freedom that is rare to see upon a stage where there is not the restriction of needing the audience to see their faces, as no matter which direction they face the cameramen will follow. Through this the lovers are able to life flat upon the stage and more notably some scenes do not take place upon the stage. Most powerful of these scenes is without a doubt the introduction of Romeo. As he is being discussed for the first time, we see Romeo upon the screen: his back is to us, hood up, he smokes. And then he moves, travailing the corridors of the theatre and entering the performance space without the audience seeing his face. That first sight of the tear tracked face is all the more powerful for this suspense. Juliet is similarly introduced, the party takes place partly in the foyer of the theatre, and Mantua is in fact the roof. There is no way to truly explain the impact of this choice, but I am curious to see whether it is something that takes off within the community.

Finally, wrapping up somewhat, allow me just a little more leave to discuss the deaths. Given that there is no use of props, some questions surely come to mind – how do the various characters die? The fight to take place following the wedding becomes a battle of words, relying largely upon blackouts and loud music, the lights rising suddenly at the deaths to the sight of characters coated in blood. Similarly the deaths of the leads leave them sitting at the edge of the stage with their mics removed… until the blackout in which the friar arrives which lifts to reveal their prostrate bodies lying in his arms. So many of the images created are striking, particularly this ending but also the sight of blood dripping from Holland’s hand following the opening fight… intertextual? Maybe. With one last mention, I will draw this to a close. And that mention is Joshua-Alexander Williams’ performance of the Queen Mab monologue – this is the first time that I have seen this portrayed quietly and not only did it work, it was strangely eerie. Suffice to say, this production gave me a lot to think about, the play itself being incredible but also bringing to light questions about future trends and the nature of theatre itself.