Like the opening of Hamlet, trying to find the venue for this play was fairly dark, disturbing and disconcerting. Ushers stand at dark niches and corners on the labyrinthine journey to a warehouse-like Art Gallery secreted between some Gormenghastian style warehouse area. This could be another metatextual comment in keeping with the metatextuality of the play, or it could be down to the restrictions placed on the company by the authorities. Whatever floats your boat... Once in there, the theatre itself is rather cost and charming. The lobby has a gallery annex with some fairly kitsch paintings and the auditorium is pretty charming and cosy, despite being fairly dilapidated. The play itself opens with an improbable coin toss, denoting the lack of sense in this universe. Hopes were not high for this production, I learned, but I was pleasantly surprised with the quality of production and acting in the play. The only thing unforgivable is the coarsening of the players' mime which pleased the peanut gallery section of the audience (who spent their idiotic time sighing, muttering, playing on their mobiles and making so much noise that they put off the players at one point. Unforgivable and loutish). But this vulgarization showed a lack of confidence in the material and the actors- a cowardly directorial decision. Other than that, despite the clunkiness of the actor who played the main Tragedian who once again needs to learn his lines before getting on the stage, the young women (great idea) playing R&G muddled through competently with Rosencrantz being the standout. She brought a lightness of touch and energy that counterpointed a rather too glum and sometimes inarticulate, mumbling Guildenstern.... Or was it the other way round?

My stupid iPad put "cost and" before "charming". Stupid effing auto-corrector.