I went to see
this at the NT last night. The reviewers of this play seem to be mostly on crack. I mean, they agree it was heavy-handed, and generally not great, but ... in
The Times:But the excitement of Pizarro’s arrival in Peru in Act I, followed by his capture of Atahuallpa, isn’t matched by the more intellectual excitement that Act II is meant to bring.
Anyone else think that Act I was better than Act II rather than, say, an orgy of bombastic excess? No, didn't think so. And in
The Independent:Also, thank heavens, Joseph is wonderfully canny, warm and vibrant as Atahuallpa. Theatrically, if not politically, he nearly saves the day.
Beg pardon? Is this the same Atahuallpa who was speaking in an embarrassing pidgin-English screech the whole time?