26 January – 9 March
Such is the enduring appeal of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s famous consulting detective, Sherlock Holmes, he remains the world’s most portrayed literary character in film and television. Whilst stage adaptations of his adventures are less common, the Barn Theatre in Cirencester have created a fast-paced and enjoyable take on the Holmes phenomenon for their latest show, cleverly fusing literary fiction with real-life events of the late Victorian era. So how would the fictional Sherlock Holmes have solved the case of the very non-fictional Jack the Ripper..?
There is much to admire about this high-energy, rollicking romp through the mean streets of late Victorian London. The creative team, including writers Toby Hulse and Ross Smith, have hit upon a clever premise which goes beyond a simple retelling or updating of a Conan Doyle tale, and with Adam Meggido at the helm, they have a director with real pedigree as co-creator of the award-winning “Showstopper: The Improvised Musical” as well as considerable experience directing some of Mischief Theatre’s “Goes Wrong” series of shows and their clever brand of slapstick comedy. Then there is the cast: Joseph Chance, Helen Foster, Phillip Pellew and Chloe Tannenbaum are highly talented and versatile actors who work ridiculously hard throughout two hours of non-stop action where they rarely leave the stage, as Holmes sets about cracking the case of the Whitechapel Fiend, London’s most notorious serial killer. The script is also littered with quotes lifted from, and references to, Doyle’s original stories: Meggido clearly knows his Sherlock Holmes!
Artistically and technically, the show impresses too. Jason Denvir’s excellent set design makes clever use of curved steel girders to suggest both a magnifying glass, fittingly, but also a camera lens, whereas the use of a multimedia screen adds some authentic detail to the backdrops as well as juxtaposing some clever contemporary technological touches: the horse and carriage scene is a joy. Sound and lighting are used very effectively too, such as when actors quickly alternate between Doyle’s characters and a range of present-day analysts and experts who look back on Holmes’ London through a 21st century lens. Visually, the show is a treat.
And yet for all of its impressive parts, the show lacks coherence at times and is perhaps guilty of trying a bit too hard. Ironically, the biggest mystery for me was the decision to constantly rotate the main roles, one which left me feeling rather disconnected from the main characters. The cutaways between characters and a range of contemporary commentators are well-intentioned but confusing at times, not helped by the explanatory AV screen being partially obscured by the actors themselves. I was also a little perplexed by the fleeting appearance of several characters who had escaped from tales by Charles Dickens and found their way, rather incongruously, to the 1890s. They looked as lost as I felt. Ultimately, this is a show where some very impressive parts fail to combine consistently into a fluid and coherent narrative.
In summary, you don’t need to be a fan of Sherlock Holmes to enjoy this entertaining reincarnation of the world’s greatest detective: there is plenty of fun to be had here for both the uninitiated as well as the Conan Doyle diehards. It is a vibrant and vivacious mash-up of Victorian villainy but …..it does have some elementary flaws.
★★★☆☆ Tony Clarke 30 January 2024
Photographers credit @ Alex Tabrizi
