The Human Body (Donmar): Oof. First half OK, if overlong (there were some departures around us following the interval), a bit derivative, both of Brief Encounter and of Jamie Lloyd’s cameras. Saved by Keeley Hawes’ exquisite face and acting. I’m afraid it went completely off the rails in the second half, when the war hero husband Turned into a monster. There might have been some subtleties in that scene that we missed, as we were completely unable to see any of the action, so I’m afraid I’m going to have to go on what we heard. Then there was a second scene just to reinforce it (this one was a little more plausible). Then there were some attempted parallels between the birth of the health service and her personal life, which I’m afraid I didn’t understand at all. It was just so long, and I’m afraid I didn’t feel the chemistry between Hawes and Davenport at all. Two stars, all for the acting, which I can’t fault. But the play was awful. And it made me feel very capitalist at the end (Team Dior), which I can’t imagine was the intended result.

Till the Stars Come Down (NT): I really loved this. A bit melodramatic but so well written and acted, and the plot twists really worked (why are adolescents the way that they are?) There was a school group in this evening and I’m not sure they were ready for the material, but they were engrossed and generally well behaved (apart from a few shrieks at the plot twists) and one lad raised his fists in the air in triumph when a particularly significant plot twist landed. It is always nice to see young people falling in love with theatre.

Plaza Suite (WE): I had few expectations about this but it was exactly what it said on the tin. Very Broadway, dated in the sense that a lot of posh public spaces in New York (or at least, Manhattan) are dated (Plaza, Pierre, dare I say it St Regis, most museums, madison square garden, grand central etc etc). But it was kind of reassuringly expensive, in the way of SJP’s Henri Bendel shopping bag in the first act. I thought they were both utter pros and worth the price of admission (which was whatever I paid for it when this first went on sale, under £100).

MJ the Musical (WE): Wow wow wow, what a show. 4 stars for the show (they leave you wanting more after the first act, although there were amazing moments (I do agree there was a lot of talk about budgets)) and a fifth for Myles Frost, who was just phenomenal. His singing, dancing, body language, everything! How can someone born in 1999 manage to do that. All the cast was great (little Michael was amazing!) with particular praise for Ashley Zhangazha, who made it utterly clear through body language and voice whether he was portraying Joe or Rob and switched effortlessly, and Mitchell Zhangazha, who has such a tough role as young adult Michael, and does it stunningly. Thriller was jaw-dropping, and this might sound odd, but it had the menacing energy I wanted to get from Moulin Rouge and didn’t. What a brilliant production. I booked again for May. In terms of seats, there are side seats in the front stalls at £20 less than the rest of the front stalls, which as an aisle seat devotee I think are a bargain. (Oh, and if I’m going to nitpick, US accents were great all through, except “Newark” is pronounced “noo-ark” (or “noark” if you’re really from there), not “nyoo-ark”. And I don’t think most of the audience knew who Don King was. But that’s ok).

Alma Mater (Almeida): Rupert Goold gave a kind of introduction explaining the situation and asked for kindness. Justine Mitchell was using a script which was a bit distracting but generally ok, she is a wonderful actor and will be great in the part. The acting was generally very good. My issue is more with the play itself. It may be that I particularly think it’s flawed as I work in academia, and a similar situation would never occur as it is set out in the play. Essentially the play itself deals well with issues like the feminist generation gap (although it doesn’t touch trans, which is what seems to me to be the main feminist issue dividing the generations). But I just couldn’t help constantly thinking that particular events would never happen in reality.

A first year student is sexually assaulted and is befriended by two other university students, a strident woman third year who has her own reasons for wanting publicity, and a male third year who likes her a lot but has no idea about romance. Then there’s Justine Mitchell’s Master of the College, who is a tough former journalist coming back to the college, where she was a student. She doesn’t like social media and thinks young women should worry about real concerns (like her friend who was raped and murdered at the college in the 80s). Her cohort include a male professor friend who is the chair of the board and his wife, another professor. They were all at uni together.

The levels of unreality are several – first, students and lecturers may have been buddy-buddy as is set out in the play in the 1980s, but that does not happen now. The way Justine Mitchell’s character speaks to the students (one in particular) is incredibly unrealistic. Parents of students get involved and are spoken to without any regard for confidentiality (hello, GDPR). People who have very close personal relationships take decisions about employment without recusing themselves. And there would have been many, many threats of lawsuits a lot earlier on in the process, the way this is set out. I haven’t even really explained the meat of the play, which as I mentioned deals with the generation gap amongst feminists with respect to sexual assault, social media etc. That part is ok, if completely unrealistic in terms of what would actually happen when “rapists” are named online.