Untitled

Observer, Volume 2, Issue 37, 28 May 1881, Page 397

Heji-r Bandmann, who lias been drawing moderate houses to the Theatre Royal during the past week, is an actor of considerable power. There may "be, indeed there are, many things in his conceptions which people disapprove of, but it is impossible to deny their originality. His " Hamlet "_Avas most disappointing. "We have neither time, space, nor inclination to discuss the merits^ or demerits of the performance, but our feeling throughout was that the slouching, un-princely, and occasionally sentimental ranter, was quite unlike Shakespeare's Prince of Denmark. But if Mr. Bandmann is a failure as Hamlet he is a great success as Shylock, and also as Richelieu. We have seen Irving in both parts, and, though his conceptions are far more subtle, we prefer Bandmann's. The latter holes the Cardinal Due de Richelieu. Irving is very picturesque, and gives wonderful force to the soliloquies; but he seems, in truth, a "very weak old man," and it is difficult to conceive him wielding the great sword brought forward in the second act. Bandmann's Richelieu, on the contrary, is the ideal wreck of a once powerful soldier, and we can well understand Baradas trembling at his glance, Talking of Baradas reminds tis Ixoav

badly Bandmann is supported. Miss Beaticlet is a charming little lady, but by no means fit to play Portia or Dcsdemona. As Julie, however, she was perfection. Mr. J. F. Cathcart has all the good points and failings of the old school of legitimate actors. Hislago was wretched, but as Baradas he was at home. Is this, yve wonder, the Mr. Cathcart who travelled with Barry Sullivan so long ?