We take a look at what is being said abut Richard Bean’s take of David Mamet’s screenplay…
The Guardian: *** “Despite the efforts of Lisa Dillon as Margaret, Richard Harrington as Mike and especially Oscar Lloyd, the show’s standout as Billy, this is a low-stakes enterprise overall. Then again, perhaps none of its bait-and-switch tricks could ever compete with the ultimate real-life plot-twist: Mamet going Maga.”
Time Out: *** “Slickly directed by Jonathan Kent, the production may be light on heart or emotional depth, but it more than makes up for it in style and fun. Here, the grift is the point – and it’s a thrill to watch it play out.”
The Standard: *** “Both film and play rely on multiple plot twists and shifts of perception over who is exploiting whom, and on the idea of an upstanding figure energised by a walk on the wild side (see also Henry IV, Equus, 50 Shades). The film seemed arch and stagey back in the day but this does not make it a natural fit for the theatre, where the audience is more complicit in the suspension of disbelief.”
WhatsOnStage: *** “Although lacking in the ability of make you gasp in shock, there is much to enjoy about House of Games. A very solid and entertaining production that might make you think twice about believing everything you are told.”
The Arts Desk: *** “There is so much that is right about Jonathan Kent’s new production of House of Games – the casting, the staging, the direction. But the flaw it can’t overcome is that the 1987 David Mamet screenplay on which Richard Bean based this stage version in 2010 has been transformed from a vicious psychologically tough caper-movie into an almost jaunty puzzle-play, its sharp teeth removed.”
The Stage: ** “Flat revival of Richard Bean’s 2010 con-trick caper”
Theatre Vibe: “I loved Richard Bean’s insertion of wit into the script and his believable and exciting ending. Bravo to him for his excellent adaptation of Mamet’s grim film, into something much more fun with clever adaptations of the twists and actual improvements on those in the movie.”
Everything Theatre: ** “Despite flashes of wit and a striking set, House of Games never grips. The cons fall flat, the tension never shows up, and the central relationship lacks spark. It wants to draw us in, but this con lacks the charm, stakes or sleight to put their marks on the spot. “
The Telegraph: ** “There’s pleasure to be had in watching the main ruse unfold, but Richard Bean’s take on Mamet’s 1987 film about con artists is a hard sell.”
The Reviews Hub: *** “It’s an entertaining piece of theatre overall, but the resounding feeling is ultimately unsatisfying. When Margaret steals her receptionist’s bracelet (an allusion to her newfound love of the thrill of crime), it feels awfully on the nose. It’s got the workings of something quite compelling, but House of Games fails to land a meaningful blow.”
London Unattached: *** “But beyond the fun, twisty-turny plot and the big names involved in the production (Mamet’s film, Bean’s adaptation, Jonathan Kent’s direction), I can’t help but feel that a deeper or fresher work than House of Games would make better use of the Hampstead Theatre stage this summer.”
West End Best Friend: *** “Ultimately, this adaptation of House of Games at the Hampstead Theatre doesn’t break new ground, but it is slick, pacy and enjoyable. If not quite revelatory, it still makes for an entertaining night at the theatre.”
All That Dazzles: ** “There are some solid performances from the cast, but many of them struggle under the weight of David Mamet/Richard Bean’s self-proclaimed ‘sarcastic insight, a sign of good writing’ that becomes insufferable after 10 minutes. For me, the underdog of the night, Joanna Brookes as Kathleen, Margaret’s office assistant, was a treat. With the few scenes she had, she grounded the play and injected some sharp humour. Robin Soans as the gentleman scammer Joey was refreshing on the stage, precise and collected; he was wonderful.”
House of Games continues to play at the Hampstead Theatre until the 7th June.