Has anyone seen The Mousetrap?

[inlovewithjerryherman]

Posted: 4/17/06 at 3:09pm

Ok, tell me, I'm curious. What is go amazing about this play that it has ran longer than anything, ever, in the history of the world, and since it has, why hasn't it transferred to Broadway?

[Sant]

Posted: 4/17/06 at 3:15pm

I've seen it and it's a nice "murder mystery" play. At the end of each performance the cast 'makes a deal' with the audience not to give away the ending (= reveal who was guilty), so people just have to go and see it themselves...
Updated On: 4/17/06 at 03:15 PM

[inlovewithjerryherman]

Posted: 4/17/06 at 3:17pm

But what makes it so good that it's been running for over 20,000 performances?

[inlovewithjerryherman]

Posted: 4/17/06 at 3:17pm

But what makes it so good that it's been running for over 20,000 performances?

[Dollypop]

Posted: 4/17/06 at 3:27pm

I played Giles Ralston in a regional production of THE MOUSETRAP many years ago. I could never understand why the play was so popular in London. Perhaps if the version I was in wasn't so lackluster, I might have had a more positive view of the play.

[astonishing1985]

Posted: 4/17/06 at 3:55pm

I saw it in London when I was 13 and it was so good. It had you on the edge of your seat the whole way through.

[Calvin]

Posted: 4/17/06 at 3:59pm

I saw an amateur production years ago and was not impressed. There was one character -- I guess it was supposed to be a gay guy, but there was a woman playing it as a man (she even had a mustache penciled on). Is it written that way, or was that just the production I saw? I thought maybe the southern community that was putting it on just might not be ready to see a gay guy in a play, so they had to soften the blow by casting a woman in the role. But I never really cared enough to look into it.

[mlsheehan]

Posted: 4/17/06 at 4:00pm

I saw the play 20 years ago, and it's typical Agatha Christie. (I was a big fan in High School.) There's nothing really special about the show. It's a fun, little murder mystery (old fashioned). Nothing more or less.

I believe, it's mostly supported by tourists. One of those phenomenons. Little rational reason why it still is playing if you ask me. I'm glad I saw it for the history and to say that I've seen it.

[Dr. Jaykll]

Posted: 4/17/06 at 4:01pm

Just saw it in London last January ... not sure what the big deal is (could have been related to the cast change two weeks prior to our arrival - many of the performances seemed to be forced - not flowing). My fiancee figured out the ending at intermission. Unless you are just "dying" to see this show (and there is certainly something to be said for the history of it - we took our picture next to the performance counter), I'd suggest you check out a different show.

[mlsheehan]

Posted: 4/17/06 at 4:02pm

The one character is typically played as "gay" or "fey", but usually by a man. It's the best part in the show, if you ask me.

[mortgageguy79]

Posted: 4/17/06 at 4:02pm

Really, it has just turned into a London tradition, that's waht makes it so good. It's a great production! I am not really sure if it would last on Broadway like it has on the West End...

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 4/17/06 at 4:03pm

It's a tourist attraction as much as Buckingham Palace and the Tower of London. An obligatory stop for out of towners on their first visit to London. It has NOTHING whatsoever to do with the actual quality (or lack thereof) of the show itself and hasn't for decades. The principal attraction is now (and has been for some time) that it's the longest running show in the world and people want to be able to say that they saw it.

The same was true with THE FANTASTICKS. There were some truly mediocre casts they put on the stage through those 40+ years it ran (it was truly awful one night when I saw it in the 80s and half the audience walked out at intermission), but it kept attracting people who wanted to be able to say that they saw "the world's longest running musical."

[StephanietheStar]

Posted: 4/17/06 at 4:22pm

My London Theatre prof told us that her friend that's a cast member calls the show "Mousecrap"

just sayin'....

[triplethreat101]

Posted: 4/17/06 at 4:26pm

i saw it at my friends highschool, she was the lead girl. and it was incredible. i keep trying to talk my theatre director into doing it but its too small of a cast...so we might to Ten Little Indians instead. but nothing tops Mousetrap

[children&art]

Posted: 4/17/06 at 4:30pm

It was lackluster BECAUSE you were in it

[Matters]

Posted: 4/17/06 at 4:39pm

I read it when I was 14 or 15 and really loved it, and i guess i still do, because the second act had me thinking I knew the ending and then it completly turned around and went in a new direction. Not to say the end isn't completly predictable, but what I think is so great about the mousetrap is that up until the very last moment it has potential to go in alot of different directions. Theres my 2 cents.

Posted: 4/17/06 at 6:11pm

Perhaps years ago it was new and exciting, maybe among the earlier of its genre. But when I saw it in London 2 years ago or so, it seemed so run of the mill and boring. I agree with Margo's Fantasticks comments, which is a show I do like by the way, but both of them were stale after so many years in. I remember Les Mis having half the cast fired and a full re-cast around the time of its Broadway 10th anniversary, it seems like Mousetrap needed one of those when I saw it. No particular castmember was bad, just the entire thing seemed uninspired.

[jo]

Posted: 4/18/06 at 12:50am

I resisted seeing it for years and years when visiting London, until I suddenly decided to give it a try some years ago. Not exactly the most riveting or most exciting play, but since I have read most of Agatha Christie's books, I was curious how her stories translate on stage. Hmmm... I think I prefer the book form

[thats*like*shotastic]

Posted: 4/18/06 at 12:59am

It's a fun play, because everyone likes to guess the ending and try to figure everything out, but it's nothing amazing. It kind of seemed to me like a game of clue being acted out. It's good, though.

[sondheimboy2]

Posted: 4/18/06 at 1:53am

Yes, it stopped being a "good" show to see and became one of those things that you go to see when in London (the Tower of London and Big Ben) a long time ago.

When I saw it in London ages ago, I got more emotionally involved by reading the souvenir program than I did with the show. And I am a big Agatha Christie fan, too.

[gavrochegirl]

Posted: 4/18/06 at 2:08am

My mom directed The Mousetrap when I was around eight years old or so. I thought and still think today that it's a great play.

[Swango]

Posted: 4/18/06 at 2:30am

I saw "The Mousetrap" in London a couple of years ago. Its longevity has nothing to do with its script. The production is well-maintained and the cast skates the fine edge of camp. Everyone in the audience knows it's a tourist attraction, but it's not unlike going to the Sing-along "Sound of Music."

During the same trip, I saw "The Graduate" and "Noises Off", both of which I found dull and forced.

[Jamie Hat]

Posted: 4/18/06 at 7:46am

Saw it this January in London. It was pretty awful. The only mystery is how is it still running? It could use a good re-write.

[alterego]

Posted: 4/18/06 at 8:39am

I saw it in London about 15 years ago and loved it for what it was, an old fashioned British sittingroom murder mystery of an era long gone. And, where else can you be served a cup of tea in your seat at interval (matinees only).

For many years Australian producers have been trying to get the Performance Rights for this territory. These will never be granted, at least not while the show's audience is populated by Australian tourists.

Posted: 4/18/06 at 9:34am

The only mystery is how is it still running?

lol.

I'd like to direct thsi one day with a very, very high camp style. Could be fun.

Although there are mystery plays out there that are exactly that, so that would be a waste of time.