Book review: Beginning - Kenneth Branagh

Here’s a question: what have Chloe and Sam from The Only Way Is Essex, Paddy from My Big Fat Gypsy Wedding and Aleksander the fictional meerkat from the Compare The Market adverts got in common?

Bare knuckle boxing? A fanatical devotion to fake tan? Sidekicks called Sergei? All good guesses, but no.

In the past few years all of the above have released autobiographies.

Isn’t that depressing? I’m sure they’re all nice people (apart from the one who’s a fictional meerkat, obviously) but, come on guys, really? The cult of the celebrity memoir, together with the celebrity perfume, is one of the things I find most depressing in the world. I mean, who is buying this stuff? And why have they got so much money to waste?

Cast your mind back 25 years and the situation was rather different. Autobiographies were reserved for people of experience (trans: old) who’d accomplished great things in their lives. The idea that someone young would publish one was ridiculed - they’d barely lived a life yet, how egotistical and ridiculous it would be of them to write their life story.

Such was the general reaction to Kenneth Branagh’s autobiography, Beginning, when he published it at the tender age of 28. The reaction and the accompanying perception that he was a complete egomaniac are something with which he is still associated today as one look at any reviews of his performance as the prototype egomaniac Gilderoy Lockhart in Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets, in which many critics suggested he was sending himself up, will show you. Which is a shame really since, as far as I can work out, that perception is complete and utter bollocks.

It’s also a shame for Beginning which, rather than the self absorbed rantings of an insufferable luvvie, is actually a really interesting, well written and pretty self effacing read. It’s one of only two non-fiction books that I’ve ever reread (Rupert Everett's Red Carpets and Other Banana Skins, since you asked).

It helps, as it always does, that its author has a very interesting life story. Born in Belfast and raised in Reading, Beginning tells the story of Branagh’s life until the age of 28 as he finishes filming his masterful Henry V and takes in his stint at RADA, early career and setting up the Renaissance Theatre Company - a remarkable company featuring the likes of Judi Dench and Richard Briers - en route.

For me it’s the Renaissance story which is the most interesting. For anyone with even a passing interest in theatre it’s fascinating to see the mechanics of someone setting up their own theatre company from scratch; everything from trying to devise an understudy system to securing venues and finding financial backing. Renaissance was designed to be an actor’s company, giving all its members fair conditions and the space and opportunity to create exceptional performances in a repertory context (it’s contrasted favourably with the RSC in this regard). The first season that Renaissance performed, which is discussed in detail in the book, was a cycle of three Shakespeare plays directed by great actors who had played the lead roles before; a concept which just sounds like heaven to me. It also led directly to the making of Henry V which is just another reason to love it. The story of how this was pulled off (or not, in the case of the attempts to get Anthony Hopkins to direct Macbeth) is utterly fascinating. And pretty inspiring too, frankly. I mean the force of nature you have to be to make shit like that happen is pretty awesome.

Beginning is also a beautifully written book. It’s joyously frank (in the preface, Branagh poses himself the question of why the book is being written and answers, “money”), laugh out loud funny in parts and gently self-mocking throughout. I love the stories of his early stories with chronic corpsing, struggling to assert his authority over a maverick Aussie director and attempting to learn to ride a horse. And of course there are a lot of fascinating anecdotes that feature other amazing talents (Gielgud, Jacobi etc etc etc) which all avoid coming off as vanity name dropping. I guess because they’re legitimately included as people he’s known. Which is just damn cool, frankly.

I’m not sure how easy it is to get hold of a copy of Beginning these days (I could just Google it but, y’know, I’m lazy) but if you can you definitely should. I’d offer to lend you mine but I don’t trust you to give it back. No offence. I just love this book too much to take that risk.

Review: Macbeth at Park Avenue Armoury

Do you have someone special in your life? Someone that your prepared to travel half way around the world to see?

If you answered yes to the above then I'm guessing you're thinking of a beloved partner or family member.

Me? Kenneth Branagh. 

To be more specific, and less stalkery, Kenneth Branagh's Macbeth.

Eagle eyes readers will recall that I've seen - and raved about - this production before. And perhaps the only review it needs is that, having seen it once in Manchester already, I was perfectly prepared to spend hundreds of pounds and fly half way around the world to see it again. And let's face it, that's quite a bit of faff. 

So was said faff worth it? Yes, yes it was.

Once again co-directed by renowned Broadway choreographer Rob Ashford and that man Branagh, the New York production followed the Manchester version's immersive lead. The show was again staged on a mud-and-bark track lying vertically down the middle of two blocks of audience seating with no space between the audience and the action. As before when the play calls for rain, it really rains. When the witches summon fire, there is real fire. 

Except this production was in America and so The Rules dictate that everything must be bigger. The original production was staged in an intimate church. This version was in the cavernous drill hall in the urban castle that is the Park Avenue Armoury (check it out if you get the chance - it's an incredible place, literally a castle in the middle of Manhattan). The extra space allowed for an addition to the set in the shape of a misty Scottish heath that was used as a way of setting the atmosphere as the audience entered the space - effectively too; even though much of the heath was quite obviously made of plastic it was a very otherworldly way to enter a performance space - as well as expanding the space used for certain scenes in the play. Birnam Wood came to Dunsinane via the heath, for example. 

The feeling of being part of the action, so much of what made the Manchester show special, could easily have been lost in such a huge space. It wasn't - thanks to a clever expansion in the scale of the production, good sound production and the hugeness of the performances. The battle scenes were particularly electrifying - proper hair on the back of your neck stuff - and the whole show retained its unique atmosphere. And its smell, which I can still bring to mind now sitting on my sofa in West Sussex weeks later. 

As utterly, utterly glorious as the production was it wasn't the main event, the thing that got me spending money I don't have and travelling thousands of miles. No, that honour goes to its star-slash-director.

It kind of goes without saying that Kenneth Branagh in a huge Shakespearean role is A Big Deal. It's his thing, y'know. Whatever else he may do - and he's done a hella lot - he is Mr Shakespeare. And he's always so achingly good at it. I mean, dude made the definitive Henry V at 28 (twentyfuckingeight!) For quite a lot of people, your author fairly obviously included, he IS Hamlet. His Benedick is sublime and his Iago the best I've ever seen (and Othello is my favourite Shakespeare so I've done my research on that one). 

So how does his Macbeth compare? Well, for me, it's as good as if not better than he's ever been. To see any actor on career best form is exhilarating, to see someone of his talent is mind blowing. It was a pitch perfect performance in every detail; from the world weary soldier to the scheming murderer to the (too often underplayed in Macbeth) besotted husband everything was bang on. I could go on about his performance for volumes and volumes but I'll leave it at this for now: it's the best piece of acting I've ever seen. And I suspect will ever see. He da man, basically, and I feel so lucky to have seen him live for the second, but I hope not last, time.

Alex Kingston as Lady Macbeth was a fantastic match for him too. One of the great joys of this production for me was seeing the relationship between the Macbeths explored and presented as an overtly loved up and sexual one (and I greatly enjoyed the bonus gratuitously topless Ken Bran during the reunion scene in this version!) with a similarly overtly sexy and powerful Lady Macbeth. Her performance was punchy, touching and delightfully unhinged in equal measure, bookended by some fantastic soliloquising. Her 'out damned spot' was great; better, I thought, than in Manchester. A fantastic turn. 

The supporting cast was great too, although I did miss the raw emotional power of Ray Fearon's Macduff from the Manchester original.I was particularly impressed with Alexander Vlahos as Malcolm, a role he played both times. An actor I initially became aware of through the BBC's daft Merlin (he was Modred), I've seen him on stage a few times now and he's always really impressed me. One to watch.

I could go on ad infinitum about this marvellous, beautiful, exhilarating production but you're probably all bored now. All I'll say is, once again, it was a genuine privilege to see this superlative-exhausting show. It was an experience I'll never, ever forget. 

And if it's ever reprised in any other cities around the world, you know where I'll be.

Review: Paul Hollywood - Get Your Bake On

You know what's fun? Spending an afternoon drinking a quantity of wine with your best mates and then spending the evening with Paul Hollywood.

Not like that. 

Though I imagine that would also be fun. Lots of fun... 

But I digress. Having spent an afternoon drinking wine and eating Indian street food on the South Bank, three of us headed off to the bright lights of Croydon to see Paul Hollywood's theatre tour, Get Your Bake On.  

The tour is essentially hardcore bakery porn masked as a series of demos: pie porn (apple pie), cake porn (black forest gateaux), enriched dough porn (couronne) and bread porn (multi-seed loaf, plus a freakishly quick eight strand plait). Man that's a lot of uses of the word porn in one sentence. The porn is supplemented by 'an audience with' style anecdotes, chat and the general cheekiness that you'd expect if you're familiar with Paul's solo shows plus some audience participation segments (complete with judging, obviously). 

The atmosphere is pretty relaxed. Phones don't have to be switched off, ostensibly so you can tweet questions throughout but actually used to take photos and videos, and despite the size of the venue and the intrusive-but-necessary onstage cameraman it feels pretty intimate too. 

Sound fun? That's because it is.

Of course the main thing that makes is fun is the man himself. For all the slightly laboured reminders of his northern working class roots, Paul is a fantastically engaging host. His anecdotes are fun and refreshingly unpretentious, his jokes about Mary Berry are just the right side of cruel and obviously his baking is fab. I think even the most experienced baker would've left on Saturday feeling that they'd learned something, I know I wish I'd taken some notes. Also, he's super hot in person and there are A LOT of lingering close ups on his hands for those of us who like that sort of thing. I refuse to believe it's just me. 

If you like merchandise - and I really like merchandise, especially when I've had like five glasses of wine - there is much for you here too. I bought the programme, which as well as being aesthetically pleasing tackles at least one very important question as you'll see below, and a t shirt because my friends are terrible enablers. 

Frankly, there's disappointingly little to criticise. I wasn't fussed by the audience participation stuff - in the time spent on that there could've been another of Paul's demos which I'd have rather seen than some random members of the public. And I think someone on the production team would do well to check out one of the Strictly pros' tours and incorporate a proper Q&A the way they all do. But those are tiny things though. Otherwise it's excellent. 

If you want to check the tour and its bakery porn out for yourself then it starts again in the autumn (dates on paulhollywood.com). And if anyone who wishes to get into my good books for any reason happens to be reading this, I'd like to see it again. Just saying.

Cannes Film Festival: Best Dressed

The Cannes Film Festival is ace isn't it? Two weeks devoted to film and fahion; it's like the Oscars are happening for two weeks.

I'm not gonna lie, I'm mostly in it for the fashion. Cannes fashion has a very particular aesthetic: glamour, glamour, glamour. The Couture houses are kings here and I love it.

Here's my top five (well, fiveish) ladies on the Croisette this year...

Blake Lively in Gucci Premiere... Twice

Image source

Image source

Cannes must have a Queen and this year there's no question in my mind that it's Blake Lively. One beautiful actress, one super talented design house and two completely different looks. The first is the definition of modern glamour - simple, slick and stunning. I love the rich burgundy hue and the slick styling. The second look is classic old school glamour at its absolute best. I think this might be the best Blake Lively has ever looked (Ryan Reynolds, also in Gucci, looks ok too I suppose). Everything about this look screams old Hollywood and I adore it. Spot on styling again too, especially the amazing up do.


Uma Thurman in Aterlier Versace

Image source

Yellow is tricky to pull off but this proves that it can be done to stunning effect. The colour is perfect for Uma's skin and the fit is beautiful. The cross over detailing on the bodice and the cape detailing to the shoulders seals it for me.


Lara Stone in Calvin Klein Collection

Image source

Proof that a simple cut when executed well is as effective as the most voluminous ball gown, but then would we expect anything less of Calvin Klein? The colour of this is spectacular. Minimalist styling just adds to the overall affect. David Walliams is a lucky, lucky man.


Freida Pinto in Oscar de la Renta

Image source

I loved this gown when it walked down the catwalk and I love it even more on the beautiful Freida. It's opulent and regal - classic Oscar de la Renta really - and the embellishment is to die for. Top marks for the bang on trend pointy metallic heels too.


Natasha Poly in Oscar de la Renta

Image source

This look is so much fun, so glamorous ans so sexy. More low key than most OdlR red carpet gowns (see above) but no less beautiful. I love the detail of the layered skirt and the fit is perfect. A perfect example of a dramatic smoky eye too.

Politics and emotion: in praise of the human beings

"It is objectionable in both men and women to cry over a political defeat, but more so in men. Clegg is an embarrassment."

So thinks Louise Mensch apparently. What utter, utter rubbish.

I don't usually 'do' politics on this blog (regular readers fear not, regular service will be resumed shortly) but I'm going to make a very brief exception.

The past few days have been horrible - horrible - for the Lib Dems. Even as someone who's been taking a horribly selfish ('hey guys, you've made me redundant twice now so if you don't want me then I don't want you') sabbatical from active involvement in the party until very recently, I'm hurting right now.

For all the things that annoy me about the party, all the people in it that I don't agree with or straight up don't like (looking in your direction, Matthew Oakshott), it's my party. It's part of who I am, for better or worse. So yes, for all my affected nonchalance, when it takes a kicking I get upset. When it takes a kicking as hard as it has done recently, I get very upset. And maybe there's something weirder about people that don't than there is about me.

It's much more personal than that though. I've made most of the best friends I've got through the Lib Dems; people who've made my life much richer and who I know I'll be friends with for a very long time (not forgetting those who I really wish we're still around - Andrew you're so especially missed at times like this). And a lot of those people have had their lives completely turned upside down by the events of the past few days. Fantastic, hardworking politicians and their, in my admittedly very biased view, even harder working and more fantastic staff woke up on Monday morning wondering what the hell to do now. I've been there, I know how much it hurts, how frightening it is and it's breaking my heart to see people I care about going through it now. Maybe there are people in other parties, even in the Lib Dems, who haven't made these sort of connections or who just don't care about them. I feel really sorry for those people.

That's why I'm in no way embarrassed to admit I've cried over a political defeat in the past few days. I've been hurt and so have the people I care about - why wouldn't I? And if I've shed a tear or several - someone who's delivered maybe three rounds of leaflets, artworked a couple of tabloids and helped out at one count in the past year; who's career and financial security are in no way at stake - then why shouldn't others? Why shouldn't Nick Clegg?

I've only been a Lib Dem member for 10 years. I've never been elected and nor would I want to be. I think anyone who's prepared to be publicly associated with a political party in that way at any level is incredibly brave. To be leader? I think that's frankly a bit insane. To be leader of the Lib Dems at the moment? Well, that's something else.

I think Nick is incredibly brave. I think he's a fantastic leader and a gifted politician. From my experience he's also a genuinely nice guy who cares about this party and what it stands for. Of course he's upset about the last few days and, given how some people seem to think it's entirely his fault (they are of course 100% wrong), he arguably has more reason to be than anyone else. And I know if I was being subjected to the sort of nonsense from people in my own party, let alone the actual opposition, as he has been I think I'd be upset too. He gives a shit, y'know. I like that.

So Louise Mensch can keep her unfeeling automatons. I'm glad we have a leader who actually cares, who hurts along with the rest of us, who isn't so ridiculously backward in outlook that he's afraid to show it.

And, by the way, I hope we have him for a while to come.

So what's to be done now? I'm not much of an expert (you've likely noticed this by now) but for me personally the answer is pretty simple. Put my battered ego back in its box and get back on the horse. I hope a few others will join me. Because if there's one thing that's for damn sure, I have no intention of feeling this bad again come May 2015.

Posted with Blogsy

Book Review: Philomena

Did you see the film of Martin Sixsmith's book, Philomena, last year? 

I did, and I loved it. The film is based on Martin Sixsmith's book of the same name and, given that the book is almost always better than the film, I snapped it up when I spotted it in a Waterstones two for one offer recently.

If you're unfamiliar with the story, Philomena the film follows Irish pensioner Philomena Lee (Judi Dench) who enlists the help of cynical journalist Martin Sixsmith (Steve Coogan) as she attempts to track down the son that she, then an unwed teenager, was forced by the Catholic Church to give up as a baby. Philomena the book is the story of that baby.

It's a remarkable story too. Antony Lee, rechristened Michael Hess, was adopted by an American family, moved across the Atlantic, excelled in school and university and went on to a successful career as a lawyer, eventually becoming Chief Counsel to the Republican party. Michael Hess was also gay, had a crippling need to fit in and be accepted by the establishment and died a grisly death from AIDS.

The themes of 'outsiderness' and the psychology of being adopted are given a really interesting exploration in this book. Michael's need to fit in is desperately sad and the fact it leaves him working for a government who are actively blocking funding for AIDS treatment at a time when he is dying of it is the most awful logical conclusion of that need. It makes for a great narrative as well - one of those great biographies which is as good as any fictional stories you'll read.

I don't think you need to have seen the film to enjoy the book. Nor do you need to have read the book to enjoy the film. The film is essentially the story of the book being written, so it is genuinely interesting to look at them as companion pieces. Michael isn't a character in the film - we're shown Philomena searching for him in America, but she arrives far too late and he's already dead. On the flipside, Martin Sixsmith himself is only fleetingly a character in the book (and then only to explain his research at the end of each section) whereas in the film he looms large. 

The other major difference I found between the two is that the sense of anger at the Church that pervades the film is absent from the book. In the film, it's the character of Martin who brings this in; Martin the author does not. I think this is probably for the best - the story of Michael Hess is much more interesting than just a rant against the Catholic Church in Ireland. And frankly if you can read this book and not get angry at the Church then I question your understanding of the story. It doesn't need to be reinforced.

So if the book better than the film? I'm not sure. Both are equally good at telling different aspects of the same story and as such both are worth your time. The film is out on DVD now so pick up the two when you next have a free weekend. Go on treat yourself. You deserve it (probably).

Best Dressed: Met Ball

I find it weird that until a few years ago I was largely unaware that the Met Ball was even a thing given how utterly in love with it I am now.

Technically, the purpose of the evening is an annual fundraising shindig for The Metropolitan Museum of Art's Costume Institute. In reality it's the most exciting fashion event of the year with anyone who's anyone (and Kim Kardashian) rocking up on the red carpet to show off their fashion cajones.

It's all about the outfits. It's not about looking pretty - it's about making a statement.

It's go big or go home made flesh.

So who rocked my world this year?

Blake Lively in Gucci Premiere

Image source

I mean, do I need to explain why this is good?! Best dressed of the night by some way for me. This look just takes my breath away: the dress, the accessories, the hair and makeup are all just perfect. Also +100 for the cape.


Charlize Theron in Christian Dior Haute Couture

Image source

God I love this. Proof that going big doesn't have to mean a million colours and crazy embellishment, this is polished and stunning. The insouciance of the tux jacket thrown over her shoulders is to die for. Glamour personified.


Arizona Muse in Ralph and Russo Couture

Image source

A classic ballgown in a classic colour executed perfectly. The diamond necklace is the perfect accessory. So simple, so classic, so huge.


Rihanna in Stella McCartney

Image source

Style is all about being yourself right? And this is Rihanna being Rihanna at her best. Edgy and cool but without trying too hard. White haute.


Reese Witherspoon in Stella McCartney

Image source

ELLE WOODS WENT TO THE MET GALA AND IT WAS AWESOME! Ok, bit over excited there, sorry. But seriously, this colour + this neckline = all kinds of win.