Waiting for Godot is one of the great staples of twentieth century theatre. This, in itself, poses problems for any new production, particularly one by a student group, such as this. The status of the play is such that the concept of "waiting for Godot" has passed into the popular consciousness, and that fact colours the manner in which a modern audience responds to it.

The play centres on two characters, Vladimir (Sam Thomas) and Estragon (Clem Hitchcock), who wait, in vain for the enigmatic "Godot". As they pass their time talking of everything and nothing, their task is enlivened by the entrance of Pozzo (Ollie Brock) and his servant Lucky (Will Pooley), who pass by the pair en route to market. It is a play about non-events, about repetition and anticipation.

The current production, running this week at the Old Fire Station, is the third version I have seen, and although it is not the strongest, the cast and crew certainly do justice to the piece. The set, consisting of a tree in silhouette and a mound that serves as a seat, is minimalist but effective; certainly the material calls for nothing more. The costumes are well chosen, fitting the characters perfectly. I was, at first, a little taken aback by the decision to put Vladimir and Estragon in whiteface, however as the play progressed I found that it suited them well; they are, after all, essentially clowns, acting out their little comedy for the benefit of the world in general.

Sam Thomas gives a solid performance as Vladimir, although Clem Hitchcock's softly spoken Estragon was perhaps the more memorable of the two. The interplay between the two characters is well observed (which is fortunate, since it is central to the success of the play). Pozzo is superbly larger than life, and played with a creditable panache by Ollie Brock.

The character of Lucky is always a difficult one: silent for the entire play, save for one long stream-of-consciousness monologue in the first act. Will Pooley makes a very good attempt, but I did not find his rendition entirely to my taste. The speech in particular felt a little more forced than I had expected. The speech can be delivered in such a way as to knock the audience backwards with a torrent of words; here it seemed to be an ordinary, if somewhat incoherent, soliloquy.

As always, the big question is: should I go and see this play? As always, the answer is: it depends on what you're looking for. This isn't any great tour de force, but neither is it actually substandard in any way. It is a competent production of a classic play. If you have never seen Waiting for Godot at all, go and see this production - the play is worth it in itself, and this is a perfectly good version to see. If you have already seen the play, and want to see it again, then once again, this could be worth your time, but don't expect anything you haven't seen before.

Daniel Hemmens 8/2/05