Review – Emperor and Galilean – National Theatre


It has been nearly 24 hours since I escaped from the Olivier Theater and the production of Emperor and Galilean being paraded in front of a loyal London theater-going audience as someone’s idea of a show worth producing and I admit I’m still scratching my head about what to say. I had to see this show as an Ibsen completist, but I was really worried given 1) its running time (3 1/2 hours, with the first act a punishing 1:50) 2) the fact that for whatever reason 150 years had gone by and no one had seen fit to produce this play. Accident … or thoughtful avoidance? It was also a play written to be read and not produced, and it preceded all of Ibsen’s great works. All in all, it had the orange and black stripes commonly associated with poisonous animals all over it. EMPEROR AND GALILEAN: DO NOT EAT*.

I went anyway, though. The plot (both overdrawn and yet incomplete, feeling a bit like the English language version of Red Cliffs) started with teenage Prince Julian (Andrew Scott) attempting to deal with the pressure both of being in line for the throne (if his uncle, Emperor Constantius – Nabil Shaban, deliciously evil – doesn’t kill him first) and of not being able to make up his mind about religion. He starts the play very Christian, wanting only to return to the hills of Cappadocia and study the bible with his friends. Later he gets into the pagan mysteries (while studying in Athens) and slowly turns away from Christianity. Skipping over a bit, he does wind up becoming emperor and convincing himself he’s being chosen for thte job by the pagan gods, whom he chooses to restore when he takes the throne (he’s not called “Julian the Apostate” for nothing). Then he takes his mojo and decides to attack Persia … and basically hallucinates himself to death.

All of this up and down is done by Andrew Scott at exactly the same tone throughout – moderately hysterical. It was sad to see him out-acted not just by all three of his best friends but also by Ian McDiarmid, playing Maximus, the mystic he hooks up with when he leaves Athens. The thing is, McDiarmid’s voice, which I couldn’t but hear as the Emperor from the Star Wars movies, just put him in a whole ‘nother level of reality when he and Scott were on the state. McDiarmid owned his role: Scott was owned by his (God I love watching the old dudes show the tyros how you do it). I lay an entire star not earned for this play at Scott’s feet; perhaps he will find his way as the show goes on, but I can’t help but feel this flawed beast should never have been let out of the stableyard.

Credit is due the National as they did not stint with this production: the entrance of Constantius is truly amazing; the many-leveled uses of the revolving stage were impressive (it’s a door! it’s a cliff!), though I felt the slaughterhouse-y thing under the church was unnecessary; the simple costuming effective; the music stirring. And there was a very enthusiastic Dionysian ritual orgy-thing at the start of act two just when you thought you had no more energy to get through until the end. Still, I’ll be clear: this show should never have seen the light of day, the National should not have blown so much money on bringing it to life (much less funding a new script), and Andrew Scott, much like Mark Hamill (as Luke Skywalker), needs to find a few more emotions. I cannot recommend this play to anyone other than hard-core Ibsen fans; all others, spare yourself the agony: here’s the Wikipedia article on Julian; read it with a bottle of wine by your side and I promise you you’ll come off far more satisfied than I did after my long and painful night at the theater watching this thing.

*Actually what you’ll want to not do is drink before this show unless you have a bladder the size of a watermelon.

(This review is for a performance that took place on Saturday, June 11th, 2011, at 7 PM. It runs through August 10th.)

Tags: , , , , ,

12 Responses to “Review – Emperor and Galilean – National Theatre”

  1. shyama perera Says:

    This show is a complex mix of the sublime and the ridiculous I thought: the production itself is sublime – top end and visually exciting, but it’s ridiculous that such a dull and one note play that even in shortened form is an hour too long, has had so much time, effort and money thrown at it. I agree about Andrew Scott, but wasn’t sure if he was one note because that was the expectation, rather than it being his limitation. Yikes:(

  2. Ben Says:

    Love this review, absolutely hated this play to the point of anger. I thought Andrew Scott was just a bit camp and actory and annoying. He did nothing for me. As it went on and on, I got more upset and then they got their swords out and I got momentarily excited but then there was some pagan blurtings and God this, God that and I passed back into my fug. An infuriating, pile of shite of a play.

  3. Storm Says:

    Well I dont know what play the previous reviewers saw but I disagree. I,m no theatre “critic/expert” but I (along with the rest of the audience I saw It with) found the whole experience excellent.
    The acting was top rate, staging brilliant and yes it is a long play (dont people know this when they book their tickets!!??) but felt nowhere near as long as It actually was.
    So IF you have an open mind and enjoy an (In my opinion) enthralling night of drama, go and see it.

  4. Joe Preston Says:

    i loved this production – it was everything a production should be – ambitious, challenging, technically wondrous, craftily scripted with several genuinely moving moments. Some reviewers need to open their hearts and minds to what is going on here! Don’t miss this – wonderful!!!

  5. poppyLMK Says:

    You are the only reviewer who has had the same response as me and the other two people I went with (all of us seasoned reviewers/performers/theatre-goers). This play is Emperor and his New Clothes! The timbre of Andrew Scott’s voice is unlistenable to: he maintains the same pitch and tone, lacking colour and inflection in his voice. Worse, he can’t project, which is a problem from where we were sitting in the circle. He was completely out-acted by the brilliant James McArdle as Agathon, and by the other two supporting male parts. Scott’s movement never rings true and only ever appears contrived. Andrew Scott is just not a leading man. An actor must have extraordinary presence is they are to carry a ply for 3-4 hours almost singlehandedly, and sadly Andrew Scott lacks that star-quality.

    I thought aspects of the action came over like a GCSE drama production. It seemed dated, despite the brilliant use of the drum set (it’s only redeeming feature). It was heavy-handed, which is perhaps a reflection of Ibsen’s ponderous prose, and perhaps an error of judgement on the part of Jonathan Kent.

    It was a truly disappointing performance, which is unusual for the National.

  6. Ben Says:

    Joe’s making me angry again. Everything a production should be!!!!! What planet are you on? What’s there to love? It was tosh, pure tosh and balderdash. No I don’t have a blog, I’m not even that funny on twitter – beenbrun but when i get angry I can rant.

  7. Sallymob Says:

    I have to agree with those who found it hard to suspend their disbelief. There were times when I felt as embarrassed as I would at an amateur production when you feel you want to laugh at the serious bits. the script was clunky but of course hard to tell if that was Ibsen or the editors. But I’m surprised no-one has commented on the costumes which I felt really let the play down as there was no coherence and so many conflicting styles. It got off to such a nondescript start with those incredibly dreary outfits all the young men were wearing and they all looked alike, nothing to mark Julianout from the others

  8. A year in blogging – Webcowgirl’s most popular posts of 2011 – and tips for improving your blog stats « Life in the Cheap Seats – Webcowgirl’s London theatre reviews Says:

    […] Review – Emperor and Galilean – National Theatre1,038 […]

  9. 2011 Theater Review Revue « Life in the Cheap Seats – Webcowgirl’s London theatre reviews Says:

    […] years after it was originally written. Per the notes, it wasn’t MEANT to be staged at all; based on what I saw, tradition should have been maintained. It’s about enough to make me think that really, […]

  10. Review – The Fat Man’s Wife – Canal Cafe Theater | Life in the Cheap Seats - Webcowgirl's London theatre reviews Says:

    […] and, rather notably, by my favorite Ibsen (Emperor and Galilean debuted 150 after the fact and will hopefully never darken our stages again). And, sadly, the same is true for Tennessee Williams. But then again, I found Ibsen’s never […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: