The BFG: A Friendly Review of the RSC's Latest Production
The Royal Shakespeare Company, a name synonymous with the Bard himself, has found an unexpected ally in Roald Dahl. Since the phenomenal success of Matilda: The Musical, which premiered in Stratford-upon-Avon over a decade ago, Dahl's stories have become a financial lifeline for the RSC, allowing them to continue their Shakespearean legacy. And now, with an adaptation of Dahl's beloved book, The BFG, the company hopes to bring some much-needed cheer to their coffers.
But here's where it gets controversial... While Matilda exuded confidence as a comedy musical, The BFG feels like a stylistic mishmash. Adapted by Tom Wells, with additional contributions from dramaturg Jenny Worton, the show attempts to blend spoken drama and a unique puppet ballet. It's almost as if the production is trying to be two different shows at once.
The spoken drama segments, reminiscent of Sue Townsend's The Queen and I, feature a charming quasi-Elizabeth II, played by Helena Lymbery, who rallies child superheroes to save the nation. Meanwhile, the puppet ballet, designed and directed by Toby Olié, brings giants and "human beans" to life through intricate choreography and music without lyrics. It's a visually stunning spectacle, but it leaves audiences longing for the characters to burst into song, as if the dialogue is merely a setup for a musical number that never comes.
Visually, the show plays with perspective, with the 12-foot-high mechanical BFG towering over the human Sophie (played by Ellemie Shivers on press night) at times, while the actor John Leader, playing the giant, stands tall above a tiny puppet Sophie. However, the reasoning behind these size and fabric choices seems arbitrary, as if the production team couldn't decide on a consistent approach.
Dahl's work has always been a subject of debate, and in 2023, Puffin Books sparked controversy by releasing expurgated editions of his books, removing language and attitudes deemed offensively outdated. After a public outcry, the original versions were retained and published as The Roald Dahl Classic Collection, giving the RSC a choice between two versions to stage.
Readers of the sanitized texts might find Wells' and Worton's adaptation more palatable, as they've excised a section about how giants perceive the taste of humans from different nationalities. However, by removing this element, they risk diluting the very essence of Dahl's work, leaving behind a bland residue.
Despite the impeccable performances under the direction of RSC co-head Daniel Evans, the characterization of the BFG and the baddie giant Bloodbottler suffers from the division between actors, puppets, and on-stage puppeteers. In contrast, Paddington: The Musical seamlessly integrates acting, animatronics, and backstage voices, creating a more coherent and engaging experience.
The BFG is a co-production with Chichester Festival and Singapore Repertory theatres, showcasing the complexities of theatrical funding in today's world. While audiences will undoubtedly have a good time, this production, sadly, doesn't feel like the giant hit the RSC's finances desperately need. It's a friendly reminder that not all adaptations can capture the magic of the original, and sometimes, less is more.
And this is the part most people miss... What do you think? Is it fair to adapt Dahl's work for modern audiences, or should we preserve his original vision, offensive elements and all? Let's discuss in the comments!
