A celebration of life, and a reminder that the fight is far from over.

Shakespeare’s tale of deceit and malice is not an easy one to stage. Even with an interesting re-contextualisation set in the British Raj in 1919, the production at the Union Theatre fails to fully own this mammoth play.  The ‘green-eyed monster’ and the quintessential Machiavellian baddie Iago provide enough juice, drama, and betrayal to make a real meal out of. But to enjoy a meal one needs cutlery (bear with me on this metaphor), and that would be the actors. ...

In late 19th century Paris, a bawdy new dance was born. The can-can grew from the seductive dances of Moulin Rouge courtesans into a high-energy show involving high kicks, splits, and exposed undergarments. Back then, you would have to go to French cabaret for the can-can. Now you can see it in railway arch in South London. Can-Can! promises fun and frivolity, and boy does it deliver. The show is a stunning, sugary confection of acrobatic feats and lavish design. ...

Pros: A couple of strong performances Cons: Wavering American accents, stodgy direction, humourless script In 1882 Henrik Ibsen, reeling from the public outcry over the sexual frankness in Ghosts, wrote An Enemy of the People about one man daring to speak the truth at any cost. In 1950 it was adapted by Arthur Miller, keeping strictly to the same plot and scene structure but removing some of the more unpalatable references to eugenics – and it’s Miller’s version that appears ...

Pros: A 15 minute interval that lets you mentally prepare for the fact that there’s a second half. Cons: Shockingly bad and self-absorbed dialogues, lack of dramatism, cheap reactionary propaganda. When you hear that there’s a new play written by Julie Burchill, you obviously run to see it. She’s one of the wittiest and funniest living British journalists, even if you happen to disagree with pretty much everything she says or writes about when it comes to politics. Refreshingly unapologetic ...

Pros: Soaring harmonies, immersive set design, and some truly terrific choreography throughout Cons: Several questionable directorial decisions plague the production Based on the novel by Jules Verne, Phil Willmott’s adaptation brings a musical theatre version of the Victorian classic to Union Theatre – sewn together by the talent of a young and aspiring cast. This reworking, which sees the addition of a variety of song and dance numbers to keep things interesting, stays true to the original in other respects, ...

A right Royal romp through an alternative 2011, where prince-in-disguise Bertie and his fiancée, pub chef Chelsea, are about to turn Daily Express readers potty.

Pros: Fun choreography, daft puppetry, huge energy. Cons: Heavy on smut, light on good songs. When Much the Miller’s son gets lost in Sherwood Forest, salvation comes at a price: the ragtag bunch of men who come to his rescue have a tiresome habit of breaking into song and dance. Because this is Nottingham, where life is a musical and everyone knows their lines, their steps and their place. Anyway, a few escapades later, and having won the hand of ...

Pros: The obviously enthusiastic cast make a decent attempt at Chekhovian drama. Cons: An awkward adaptation, misguided direction and a lack of depth let this production down. Why do we still love and perform Chekhov? Over a hundred years since the great Russian playwright’s death, this is a valid question, and one that director Phil Willmott tries to answer in his programme notes for Cherry Orchard (theThe has mysteriously vanished) at the Union Theatre. He wants to make the play ...

A lively and enjoyable mix of operatic and west end musical style songs, incorporating some excellent dance routines, with passion, betrayal and humour thrown in.