LaCageFans: THE HISTORY BOYS Review

[LaCageAuxFollesFan2]

Posted: 4/15/06 at 1:22am

Playwright Alan Bennett can pick his way astutely through contemporary society all while comparing it to the innocence of youth. He does this quite impeccably in “The History Boys” – now in previews at the Broadhurst theatre on Broadway, where it is soon to open after transferring from London.

“The History Boys,” set in a northern grammar school (our equivalent to an American High School ) involves a group of eight, supposed high-school aged boys, with goals towards Manchester Grammar status. The only problem here, and is one of the only problems with the entire play, is the fact that the boys, who are its original cast members from London, are no longer the age these characters need to be, and at times can pull the audience out of Bennett’s tight script.


The boys are under a master from the old school (Clive Merrison), whom advancing years have made doubtful about any form of conscious learning, and his young successor (Stephen Campbell Moore), who shares his headmaster’s philosophy of targets and educational structures.


The precipitous Richard Griffiths as the older teacher, loveable and respected despite his penchant for touching up those boys selected to ride pillion on his motor bike, is an outstanding performer that goes tooth for tooth with Moore’s young pretender who ends up as a TV host. The struggle for the boys between the two conflicting types of instruction is strategy based on cards containing facts and phrases learned by heart and those calculated more traditional educators who teach only to impress an examiner. And Frances de la Tour is splendid as the acid tongued teacher and confidant.


The play is surprisingly well-made, with interesting little mini-dramas scattered throughout- the boy who realizes he is a homosexual, the one who bangs the headmaster’s secretary and ends up as the richest of the lot and the boy who knows he is thick but gets into the posh college anyway because his father was a college servant.


The problem however is that the play feels entirely too much like a well crafted play, instead of a universal language that theatergoers in today’s age strive for. “The History Boys” is anything but mediocrity, but instead an insightful and sometimes too perfectly groomed play for its own good. While theatre audience will adore “The History Boys” for its tale of society; society and the general public may not be ready for “The History Boys”.


Nonetheless, “The History Boys” is a fascinating microcosm, intensely directed by Nicholas Hytner in Bob Crowley’s utilitarian setting and acted for all it is worth by a marvelous cast. With the likes of “Rabbit Hole” off the boards, it is wonderful to have another successful new Broadway play in the same season. (“Well” can’t very well be counted as successful with those figures) Although this drama maybe even less universally appealing than “Rabbit Hole,” (at least to American audiences) it certainly has the power to match it blow by blow.



Updated On: 4/15/06 at 01:22 AM

[QMAN03]

Posted: 4/15/06 at 1:26am

So, in your opinion, better or worse than Rabbit Hole?

[WithoutATrace]

Posted: 4/15/06 at 1:28am

IMO, Rabbit Hole is *much* better.

[LaCageAuxFollesFan2]

Posted: 4/15/06 at 1:33am

I think RABBIT HOLE had much more dynamic emphathy in its script that engaged audiences more through its words uttered by a marvelous cast. HISTORY BOYS is obviously setting out to tell a story, and while crafted and acted very nicely, its just not as convincing in its storytelling as RABBIT HOLE was. Not that HB is bad by any means, its a pretty solid play...if I had to pick though, I would give RABBIT HOLE my pick for better play.

[WithoutATrace]

Posted: 4/15/06 at 1:47am

Totally agree, LaCage. I had very very high expectations going into History Boys tonight and unfortunately, I was extremely disappointed.

Though I must say, I was one of the few who did not enjoy Well, so maybe most people will enjoy History Boys as well.

Definitely see it and form your own opinion.

Tomorrow is Three Days of Rain and Drowsy Chaperone.

[QMAN03]

Posted: 4/15/06 at 1:49am

OOO, I LOVED LOVED LOVED Well, so maybe I'll love this too.

In my opinion, THREE DAYS OF RAIN is not very good and DROWSY rocks the roof off.

[bythesword84]

Posted: 4/15/06 at 1:58am

Actually, LaCage, not to nitpick but its Rudge's Father not his Grandfather who worked for the university.

As for the play on a whole (which I saw this evening) I didn't find any problem with the ages of the cast. It didn't even enter the equation for me. I thought it was so brilliantly acted that their ages being slightly too old wasn't even a factor. I didn't see Rabbit Hole so I'm not going to compare the two, but I will say that I think The History Boys is beautifully written, superbly acted, and over all absolutely wonderful.

I might be slightly biased because I just adore all the historical discussions since I major in history at college. Still, that aspect of it aside, I thought the whole concept of how the teachers influence your learning, your interaction with them, and their faults as well as their virtues was magnificent. I particularly felt that Dakin (Dominic Cooper) and Scripps (Jamie Parker) were standouts, although there was not a weak link in the cast.

[Roninjoey]

Posted: 4/15/06 at 2:56am

I'm so excited for this play.

[tophertilson]

Posted: 4/15/06 at 6:49am

Wow. To each his own, I guess. I loved HISTORY BOYS when I saw it at the National and look forward to seeing it again. RABBIT HOLE was a giant shrug for me. I'm afraid the Lifetime movie comparisons held for me. If someone writes a play about the death of a child, I want to feel something more than, "Aw, that's too bad, Markie Post."

HISTORY BOYS struck me as a great play. But then I was an English public school boy myself, and perhaps it hit closer to home for me than it would most New Yorkers.

TT

[joshy]

Posted: 4/15/06 at 7:39am

Remember, WithoutATrace, you did see their first performance in front of a North American audience!

I think the language in The History Boys is just dazzling.

[joshy]

Posted: 4/15/06 at 7:42am

Double post, sorry. Updated On: 4/15/06 at 07:42 AM

[VinnieTheIceman]

Posted: 4/15/06 at 8:08am

And a long standing ovation after its first preview.

[LaCageAuxFollesFan2]

Posted: 4/15/06 at 9:05am

I'm certainly not saying THE HISTORY BOYS is a bad play...I enjoyed it quite a lot. It is superbly written and wonderfully acted. I do agree on those counts with most of you. The connecting with your teachers aspect of the play is prevelant and an emotional part of the evening. I just give RH the slight edge here, because it really hit home with me, and had more of a relateability factor for me than did HB. Don't get me wrong, I too did have THAT teacher whom I had those types of connection with - and I loved the play for bringing up those emotions.

Actually, as much as I disliked FESTEN having an American cast (and boy did I dislike what they did with that piece of poo), I actually would have perfered THE HISTORY BOYS with an American cast I think. Not saying that who they have is place is anything short of fantastic...I just think I would have connected with the piece more had they been American actors - this work actually could stand up with American actors, unlike FESTEN -which in my eyes, fails miserably.

And THANK YOU bythesword84: I'm changing Grandfather to Father...couldn't remember.

[joshy]

Posted: 4/15/06 at 9:08am

That is great to hear, Vinnie. Even though people say NY audiences are too generous with standing ovations (which is true), I feel Londoners are way too stingy with them. Even when I saw History Boys in the original casts' last week, when the audience was hysterically excited and they got so much applause and screaming, there were still only a handful of us standing. The only big standing o's I've seen in the last year were at Les Mis and for Ewan McGregor in G&D...

[mint0621]

Posted: 4/15/06 at 9:29am

i got student rush tickets for the 2nd row, center...did anyone sit there? How is the view? Is the stage high?

[bythesword84]

Posted: 4/15/06 at 9:38am

I thought for their first performance in front of an American audience they seemed incredibly comfortable. Actually the only complaint I heard from anyone around me was a difficulty "understanding what the heck they're saying." (that was a woman in her mid 60s sitting behind me)

[SueleenGay]

Posted: 4/15/06 at 9:39am

I actually would have perfered THE HISTORY BOYS with an American cast I think. Not saying that who they have is place is anything short of fantastic...I just think I would have connected with the piece more had they been American actors - this work actually could stand up with American actors

Are you saying the show should be re-written to take place in America? Because from what I have read of the show that would take extensive work and may or may not work.Or are you saying you would prefer to see American actors playing Brits because if you know they are American it would be easier to relate to them? Either way, you say the actors are all fantastic, so I am not sure what your point is. I would rather see "fantastic" actors regardless of their nationality...

[VinnieTheIceman]

Posted: 4/15/06 at 9:59am

The stage is low. *SPOILER* The only problem sitting close is seeing the video projections.

[LaCageAuxFollesFan2]

Posted: 4/15/06 at 10:02am

I simply believe I could connect more with the American Actors playing British in this piece. Not true for Festen, but here I believe it would work. Again, the acting is super strong here, so it doesn't matter that much...but, I think I would have enjoyed it more had I been drawn in more or had been able to relate more with the acting. It's good, just not top notch...if that makes any sense.

[SueleenGay]

Posted: 4/15/06 at 10:06am

Not really, but whatever.

[everythingtaboo]

Posted: 4/15/06 at 1:51pm

I has previously read the play and quite enjoyed it, but in the hands of the remarkable cast and superb direction, I was just spellbound. After watching an extremely uneven cast cripple the otherwise wonderful Festen, and the talented cast of Well suffer with underdirection, it was great to see what great direction and casting is all about.

Hysterically funny and quite touching in its emotional honesty, the audience just ate it up! I will say there were parts you couldn't hear, it was a delicate first couple of minutes, but I chalk that up to first preview glitches and nerves. But once the audience and the cast were on the same page, the show just kept rolling along. Even though there was language and references that stumped people here and there, I think in the end the final product elicted probably the strongest reactions to a straight play I've experienced all season. And it's just the first preview!

I have to say I am very happy they kept the show British. I think it's too easy to Americanize the show, not in terms of the actual process, but that desire to make it more easily accesible. I say, what's wrong with forcing the audience to keep their brains working? And the magic of watching this cast, already having done the West End, the tour, and the film adapation before reaching Broadway, I think is priceless.

And let's face it, when was the last time people got excited about a cast that didn't have a "star" in it? That simply by reputation alone, a writer, director and relatively unknown but acclaimed cast can sell a show as well as this, and get people excited about a straight play?

Updated On: 4/15/06 at 01:51 PM

[joshy]

Posted: 4/15/06 at 2:43pm

" I think in the end the final product elicted probably the strongest reactions to a straight play I've experienced all season."

It makes me so happy to read that, everythingtaboo. :) Because I really think THB deserves it.

I'd be very interested to know which language and references seemed to stump the audience! I wonder if they'll be changing anything in that respect.

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 4/15/06 at 3:09pm

"I simply believe I could connect more with the American Actors playing British in this piece."

That makes no sense. It's so meta it's practically post-modern.

[Dollypop]

Posted: 4/15/06 at 3:34pm

An American version of THE HISTORY BOYS?

Hmm...maybe I can work up something here. I think I'll entitle mine: HEY, MISTUH, CAN I GO TO THE BATHROOM?

It's the one question I've answered more than any other in 34 years of teaching.

[pattifan2]

Posted: 4/15/06 at 5:12pm

I'm really interested to read the comments about this play. It was, for me, one of the highlights of the theatre year in London. The writing is brilliant and the play is superbly cast. Wrong to pick out favourites among the boys when the standard of acting was so high but I did think Dakin and Posner were gems.

I found the play hysterically funny and incredibly moving, too. *SPOILERS* Favourite scenes included the French 'hospital' and the classic film re-enactments. I also loved Posner's 'Bewitched, Bothered And Bewildered'. Richard Griffiths doesn't miss a trick and his Act I exit line leaves you with a lump in your throat. Frances De La Tour spits out her lines and relishes every moment. I thought the projections and soundtrack really enhanced the play. too.

I don't see the play working as well at all if it were removed from its northern England setting. Bennett is writing from his experience and sets the play in his home area which has a particular 'type' of humour and language. You can almost hear Bennett himself speaking some of the lines. Although the story and characters are given a specific time and place, their relationships and stories are universal.

I did see the play on tour in the UK a few months ago. The cast were very good but that superb original cast which you're all enjoying so much is difficult to top. I'm looking forward to reading more reviews and thoughts of the play from BWW posters.