"Operation Mincemeat" at Fortune Theatre

 This is one of those shows where we just took a flier on it. We were coming to London and had one night where we could fit in a play, and didn't have a clear favorite for what to see. Operation Mincemeat was getting great reviews, so since nothing else jumped out at us, we decided to check it out.

The Play

Based on real events in World War II that also became a movie, Operation Mincemeat refers to a plan concocted by British Intelligence (MI5) to convince the Germans to move their troops out of Sicily, where the Allies planned to invade. It's an example of some of the Hail Mary chances the Allies managed to pull off. In this case, they planted fake invasion plans (pointing to Sardinia) on a corpse made to look like a British pilot who crashed in Spain. The notion being that if the Germans found these plans they would believe the invasion was coming to Sardinia and move their troops there, thus enabling the Allies to invade Sicily as planned.

So we get a bunch of MI5's smartest guys in the room all trying to posture and promote their own schemes. The story here is as much about the infighting and internal politics in the intelligence service as it is about the actual operation. But it's charmingly and disarmingly done with self-deprecating musical numbers. On the face of it, the whole thing seems a bit daft--both the actual WWII operation and the scheme to portray it in a musical comedy--but it works. It's especially effective that the whole show is Brits poking fun at their own system: prep schools, class differences, bureaucracy, Ian Fleming, etc.

The show was written by four artists, David Cumming, Felix Hagan, Natasha Hodgson, and Zoë Roberts, and all by Hagan are still appearing in the show. It's kind of staged like a musical revue, but also like a more traditional musical theater piece. It's silly, but never veers so far off into the silliness that it gets truly outrageous, which probably saves the whole endeavor.

The Production

The show includes five actors, which as far as I can tell are sort of a revolving group from the nine cast members. Essentially there are two actors who can play each of the five roles/tracks, but I have no idea how they choose who goes on when. Our cast included two of the three original writers (Natasha Hodgson as Montagu and Zoë Roberts as Johnny Bevan). All five actors portray male and female characters and do a lot of quick switching. It's really quite impressive.

Of particular note was Jak Malone in the role of Hester Leggett. He evoked a lot of pathos in a wide-ranging performance. Frankly, all of the actors have to have a lot of range, but Malone in particular showed both breadth of skill and a depth of empathy that was especially impressive.

The Fortune Theatre is pretty small, so even from our seats toward the rear, we had a great view. Also, the full house was filled with a terrific variety of people, from teens to seniors, and all seemed to be enjoying it immensely. I've not seen a theater production in a long time that seems to have such a broad appeal, particularly with the younger crowd. There seemed to be multiple groups of roughly high school aged kids out together, where I would have expected them to be at a movie or something. That was refreshing to see! And particularly surprising since the subject matter revolves around WWII, which doesn't seem like prime teen viewing today.

The Bottom Line

If I had to sum things up in two words, I would probably choose "funny" and "charming". And when I say funny, I mean that in a genuinely comedic sense, where the audience was engaged and amused, but not just yukking it up from one gag to the next. And charming in the sense that although the play pokes fun at almost everyone, it does so in a gentle and affectionate way that engages rather than distances one from the objects of the fun. In that sense, it's a remarkably subtle and thoughtful effort.

We genuinely enjoyed the show. It feels like a truly British theater experience, but even as foreigners (and Americans were definitely among the targets of the jokes!) we felt welcomed and included in the crowd. It definitely felt like a slice of local culture, rather than just a piece of art for art's sake.

So I would recommend this for a light, fun evening at the theater. They're currently selling tickets through September 23rd, but I think it's pretty much an open-ended run at this point.

"Patriots" at Noel Coward Theatre

 

Production photo by Marc Brenner

After a quick trip to Paris, we came back through London for a few days to catch up with friends and maybe another play or two. Peter Morgan's Patriots kept showing up on a lot of lists of good shows, so we decided to check it out. It was an added bonus that it was playing at the Noel Coward Theatre, and we had just heard a lecture on the life and career of Noel Coward, who also happens to be a favorite artist of one of the friends we'd been traveling with. So all signs pointed to this play!

The Play

Even without all the omens, this looked like a play we'd find interesting. It's basically about the rise of Russian oligarchs taking up the power vacuum left by the fall of the Soviet Union in the 1990s, and particularly the story of one of the most visible oligarchs, Boris Berezovsky, the controlling owner of Russia's main state television station, ORT. As a media mogul, Berezovsky was able to both reflect the government's policies and also influence them, including boosting the career of a former KGB officer and low-level party apparatchik named Vladimir Putin.

Berezovsky's position is that he is saving Russia (or at least what he believes to be important about Russia) by exerting his financial muscle to advance his preferred policies. Although he also accumulates tremendous personal wealth and privilege, he believes he is being patriotic by "saving Russia" in the absence of coherent political action. The core conflict in the play is the tug-of-war between politicians and businessmen, each believing themselves to be the true patriots.

In a sort of Frankenstein scenario, we ultimately see Berezovsky's creation, Putin, rise up and thwart his benefactor, with Berezovsky ending up in exile in Britain, trying to find ways to influence, and ultimately return to, Russia.

It's quite involved, and covers a lot of Russian history that is probably not well understood by a lot of Americans. But of course, this is British theater, so they assume a much higher level of involvement by their audience. Morgan's script is clever and clear, bringing out the conflicts both within the character of Berezovsky and between him and the enigmatic Putin.

The Production

I'm always amazed at the quality of the theatre productions in London. It's really good to see support given to thoughtful plays that might not attract a mass audience, but which get full houses for good-length runs in the major theaters. The quality of the acting and the designs is always a pleasant surprise to me, since so few plays get that kind of treatment in the U.S.

This is a case where the production itself isn't terribly glitzy, but it's more complex than you might initially think, and it's very effective. The lighting and sound work is excellent, and the acting is top-notch, starting with Tom Hollander as Berezovsky. I had the pleasure of seeing Hollander a few years ago in the Broadway transfer of a UK production of Tom Stoppard's Travesties, and he was stellar in that. So it's no surprise that he carries this production as well. Berezovsky is the central character throughout, so he has a lot of lifting to do. Will Keen's rendition of Putin is also quite good, managing to evoke the cypher that is the bureaucrat-turned-autocrat, such that we're never sure whether Berezovsky manipulated Putin into office, or Putin manipulated Berezovsky into putting him there. The two play off each other magnificently.

Director Rupert Goold keeps the show moving right along. Berezovsky loves to talk, and he talks fast, so we jump from one scene to the next, one phone call to the next meeting, all at rapid pace. Berezovsky is like a manic Wall Street exec from the crazy 80s, constantly making deals and pulling strings. He's oh-so-confident that he's in control until suddenly, he is not. The supporting cast is consistently strong, particularly Josef Davies as Alexander Litvinenko and Ronald Guttman as Berezovsky's academic mentor and sounding board, Professor Perelman.

The Bottom Line

It's a good play, well written and well produced, so it develops and maintains interest in a subject that might not seem so intrinsically interesting. But it's an intriguing insight into how things happen in post-Soviet Russia, which is an important player in the modern world even as it tries to be something else.

We were quite taken with the overall production, and talked about the show at length for several days after, which is always a good sign. The show currently runs through August 19th in the West End. I'd say it's well worth seeing.