The Sword and The Stone specialised in an excess of everything, with varying success
Sword in the Stone
**
Pantsoc’s production of The Sword In The Stone was almost certainly overflowing with enthusiasm. Sadly there’s only so much thigh slapping and moustache twiddling can do for a what was essentially a very weak script.
This is not intended to be patronising – the passion which the panto cast exuded was genuinely infectious and enjoyable, with impromptu jokes to the audience frequently lifting the original mediocre dialogue.
Individual performances helped carry the production along – Adam Massingberd-Mundy (King Arthur) and Luke Malkin (Sir Lancelot) gave sterling performances, delivering lines with perfect comic timing, rather than relying on volume as a form of wit, as many others fell into the trap of doing. Max Tyler, who played the lovely seductress (?!) Morgana, also played a charming panto dame, delivering just the right amount of coquettish looks, and what appeared to be evocative nipple stroking.
Frequently however, members of the cast battled it out for stage space. All too often actors at the front found themselves struggling maintain momentum in speeches which were simply too long to be effective, whilst those in the background dominated. Thrusting their tights into the faces of the front row with gay abandon, the frantic silent mimes and gyrations of the chorus tended to steal the limelight away from those gallantly striving to uphold any form of plot.
Strange, Boosh-esque comedy was rife but seemed to be a bit experimental. While the personification of the colours orange and purple, the panto horse arguing with itself and the Frenchest, Frankest and Funkiest, were genuinely original and witty, characters such as ‘Crabsquire’ were far less subtle and after the third appearance became a bit tiresome, being weird seemingly only for the sake of being weird, rather than adding anything particularly clever to the script.
Other good jokes, such as Merlin being old and doddery, were also perhaps a little overdone.
The Sword and The Stone specialised in an excess of everything, with varying success. There was clearly an abundance of passion, wet-look leggings (complete with camel-toe), swords, and stones, but the script did let the cast down. Boundless energy seemed somewhat wasted on the sheer volume of insignificant characters ranging from hobbits to nightmares, with many actors playing multiple roles which seemed to contribute little to the plot, and detracted from those in the show upholding direction. With such a vast number of actors wanting to participate, writing an effective pantomime script to accommodate everyone is no mean feat. However, the Sword in The Stone needed a much more concentrated plot and fewer indulgent tangents, to do justice for what was clearly a highly capable cast.
20 responses below. Comments are open.
Leave a Reply
Related Posts
Popular This Week
Polls
Loading ...
You clearly have missed the point of a panto, it is not meant to be some high-brow form of pretentious entertainment that some people at Nouse would love. Students wrote it and did a fantastic job. The script was not weak, but very funny. The cast were certainly very enthusiastic and brilliant, and i saw no evidence at all of them fighting for stage presence.
Hello there!
I would just like to point out, it’s “Other good jokes, such as Merlin being old and doddery, were also perhaps a little overdone”, rather than “Gandalf”. It’s just I’ve never actually been mentioned in a review before…
Oh Charlotte, as much as we are good friends I must say that this review does slightly miss the point – as much as it’s supposed to be a show to entertain the audience it’s also very much about cast participation. PantSoc has grown from a group of friends running around in tights to a mammoth 40, 50, even 60 strong cast which just goes to show how much people enjoy it.
Thank you very much for acknowledging our talented cast but I must stand up for the script – we wouldn’t have gotten involved if we didn’t have complete faith in it. We got absolutely fantastic audience feedback every night and I daresay that if you were there on the last night you would have seen that too – the laughs don’t lie! It was a fantastically witty script – the hobbits were adorably hilarious, the nightmares brilliantly delivered and each and every cast member did their bit to contribute to the show. I certainly hope we weren’t all fighting for stage presence, the principles did more than enough to constantly command it. And even if people did notice the background characters a little more than usual, so what? We were all amazing!
Finally I have to take serious issue with your comment about Merlin. By far my favourite part of this pantomime since rehearsals began, Sion Clarke’s Merlin was a constant joy to behold, – certainly an audience favourite and above it all, it’s them who matter. Overdone? I certainly think not, Sion’s comic timing is perfect and he knew just what to do and how to do it. Crabsquire WAS weird for the sake of being weird, it was a fun and silly character we could just sit back and laugh at – and Heather Wilmot performed it excellently, perfectly complementing Miranda Crowhurst’s insane portrayal of the Lady of the Lake!
PLUS Russell Truran as Bruce Forsyth was phenomenal, shame he wasn’t lauded either!
In any case, it’s a shame you thought the pantomime was too crowded – any smaller a cast and you would have missed out on some serious talent.
It’s a five star review from me I’m afraid! I’ll see you soon for that Nouse podcast.
Thanks for coming to see the pantomime- personally I loved the script and think the writers did a great job and everyone should be really proud of everything the pantomime acheived.
I’m baffled to see that in this year’s regular panto bashing from Nouse, it’s the script that’s taken the harshest beating when the script was one of the best things about it – and certainly the best one a panto at this uni’s had for years.
Whereas most of Pantsoc’s previous efforts suffered from meandering plots and scenes that went on so long they kicked themselves to death (something Nouse never failed to point out), Sword in the Stone’s triumph was its succinct, well-crafted and really entertaining storyline. Not one line or character was out of place and surely even this miserable reviewer must have enjoyed the superb final scene, where all the subplots crashed satisfyingly into each other for the epic battle!
It’s even more baffling that they’ve called it “an excess of everything”, when it was easily the most low-key and stripped down panto in living memory. (and the shortest!) Pantsoc have proven that they can put on a fantastic show without lavish scenery and even without Will Seaward!
And as for the performance, there were so many show stealers it’s impossible to pick a favourite! Well done Pantsoc! I loved it!! Don’t worry about the review. Next year, you’ll put on another terrific show and Nouse will endeavour to be disappointed by it all over again.
p.s. you can NEVER have too much moustache twiddling!
I appreciate this review. Before I read this I only had the opinions of the majority of the audience to go on, and it’s always nice to see a completely contrasting perspective.
The pantomime got a standing ovation on the last night. Are shows which get standing ovations usually given 2-star ratings?
“If you can’t have fun…Have fun”
It’s a pantomime
, thanks for coming!
I didn’t even see the pantomime and I could smell its brilliance all the way from London.
Tut tut, Nouse…..tut tut.
I would like to congratulate the reviewer for the hard work they must have put into this review to give this year’s Summer Panto a bad rating. It must have been an especially difficult task this year, as the Panto was so spectacular.
So, hats off to the reviewer for keeping with Nouse’s proud tradition of slandering the Panto despite completely contrasting with public opinion.
In all seriousness, well done to every single person who was involved with the Sword in the Stone. An absolutely fantastic job all round.
i have yet to meet a single person who attended the panto, that would agree with this review. Everyone that i talked to thought that all the performances of the cast were excellent and that the plot was highly entertaining. I think everyone involved in this panto did a great job, and should listen to overwhelming public opinion rather than this review.
I’m not a member of Pantsoc or Nouse; I went along to the panto simply to enjoy it – and did enjoy it. Certainly, the script wasn’t Shakespeare – why would it be? It’s a pantomime – but it worked well, and certainly seemed a masterpiece of dramatic clarity in comparison to my (admittedly rather hazy) memories of Peter Pan (funny, yes, but far far too long, and I still have nightmares about the badgercorn).
And it was certainly an enjoyable way to pass the evening: from the sprinting scene-placards, to the nightmares (“I’m orange!” “I’m yellow!” “Nothing rhymes with us!”), to Merlin (easily the best character on stage) and his rivalry with Gandalf, and the Lady of the Lake and her poor unfortunate Crabsquire. I’m very glad I went, and I’d be interested to know how many people agree – and how many take the view of Miss Hogarth-Jones. It is good to see that Nouse have, this time around, tried to understand what is to be expected of a pantomime (and credit to the writer there); it is a shame, however, that they still seem to arrive at the event expecting to see something very different to the promised event (consider a reviewer criticising the work of an Impressionist painter because it “isn’t sufficiently realistic” – it may be true in some respects, but it’s completely missing the point of what Impressionism is).
Thankyou, Pantosoc, for a great production, and congratulations. I hope you all, as ever, remain polite. Nouse – please, next time around, do try a bit harder to get into the spirit of things; criticise where relevant, certainly, but do be more aware of the standards and limits of the genre.
Well done Nouse, you’re the best panto villain they’ve ever had! And given Mordred’s cracking performance, that’s no mean feat.
Ugh, I liked! So clear and positively.
Thank you
Dirnov
Tut Nouse!
I really dont think a published review is an appropriate place to point out people’s camel toes. Maybe if you were in Ziggy’s, having a cheeky vodka-based drink and someone walked past wearing PVC hotpants revealing a vertical precipice, a sideways grimace if you will, you may lean over to your best pal and whisper breathlessly… ‘Camel toe…’ But not in a review darlings. What if plays at the RSC were reviewed on camel toes? There would surely be oblivion.
I thought the pantomime was spiffing! They did incredibly well… do you know they performed it entirely outside??? They had to cope with no lighting, no acoustics and frequent fowl and they did it with great panache!
Sorry to kick up a fuss sweeties, but you are clearly in no place to criticise people’s knickers, as when it comes to panto, yours seem to be perpetually in a twist.
panto’s are NEVER funny. especially this one.
i did not laugh once at the same bunch of unfunny campus comedians in their horrible comedy clique.
pantsoc should get off their high horse and take a bit of criticism rather than start crying about this nouse review. it could have been an awful lot harsher. it really was rubbish
For such light hearted and fun entertainers PantSoc sure do take themselves seriously. Once again they get a bad review and once again it is the fault of the reviewer (note — different on every occasion) rather than the cast and crew themselves. Maybe this is an indication of where the lack of ability lies — not in the different reviewers but in unchanging PantSoc.
Making each other laugh is not a mark of whether a production is successful. Rather it is making those with no involvement laugh and it seems that once more PantSoc failed to do so. Then again why would you guys want to change a losing formula? It would rob you of the chance to be indignant that you seem to relish every time you stage a new production.
This review is perhaps fair in places, I wouldnt know because I didnt see the Panto! BUT, saying this, I would like to congratulate everyone involved. I know a lot of the cast and they worked extremely hard, missing several rehearsals for HSM in the process!! The people involved are extremely talented, I am glad this review highlights this crucial point. Congrats to Tom Crowley and Henri Ward in particular (directors)!!
Georgiou, pantomimes are definately not for everyone but I’m slightly perturbed that you are labelling pantsoc as cliquey. As a newcomer to both pantsoc and performing pantomime in general I have never been made so welcome by a group of (mostly) complete strangers. In no other acting society to my knowledge will everyone who auditioned be given a chance to perform. There is no pre-destination of parts or aloofness from production team and panto old guards.
If anything defines pantosoc it’s going to be the first booming words I heard from Will seaward, “Come into my arms”, followed by a hug from the guy I met 5 seconds ago.
Pantosoc is about inclusiveness and generally trying our best to make people laugh. If we did the first I’m happy, the second is just icing on the cake.
Hi!
I just want to point out to Georgiou Kinkladze, that many of the more indignant comments above are from people who came to see the panto, not those that were actually in it. Though granted anon comments too.
We’ve just come to accept that Nouse don’t really like Panto and that’s all good, its not for everyone. Pantoers shouldn’t get annoyed because Nouse have the right to review it as they want to, and thats fine, free press and all that.
No more comments from Pantsoc, its all done and dusted, we loved it and the audience seemed to love it and that’s all that really matters! Standing ovation woop woop. Well done one and all, we had an awesome time and made amazing friends! Yay for Pantomime.