Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Going to take two eldest daughters to the theatre. They are good at sitting still and can do the cinema no problem.


Just wondering on thoughts on shows - I am desperate for them to see Wicked, if not Matilda. Heard a range of thoughts on them! Some say Wicked too scary, others say it's not as bad as Matilda?!?


I've seen Wicked and thought it'd be fine, but not seen Matilda before.


Any theatre veterans able to help?!? Thanks!!

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/155337-theatre-for-6yo-and-4yo-wicked/
Share on other sites

Out of the two I'd go for Matilda. It's what you would expect it to be. Clear story line, you can hear what is being said and sung etc. The flow does sag a tad part way through where there is the risk of a moment of boredom but picks up again quite quickly.

Wicked, well, it's noisy and easy to lose track, for little minds, in what's going on. Found the sound set up unnecessarily way too loud.


Hope this helps... of course just my thoughts and experiences.

Haven't seen Wicked so can't comment on that but Matilda is great and not scary - but at 2 hours 40 mins I think it's a bit long for a 4-year-old, even a very patient one. Also I reckon a fair bit of the humour and plot would be over the head of a very little child. Personally I'd wait a couple of years as they'll get a lot more out of it when they're older and they'll remember it more too. I think my youngest was six when we went and I'd say she was just at the very limit of being old enough to 'get' it and enjoy it properly - my (then) eight-year-old was much more the right age.

I agree with redjam that Matilda might be just too long for a four year old, and it is more aimed at around 8 and above.

However if you are looking at some theatre options, an alternative (more local and cheaper) I can highly recommend the Albany Theatre in Deptford which run many plays aimed at this age group.


http://www.thealbany.org.uk/events/Family


There is also the Little Angel Theatre in Islington (easily reached on the overground)

https://littleangeltheatre.com/category/whats-on/

I think they're both a bit too young. You don't want to spoil it for them or waste your money. Maybe wait until they've both read (and understood) the books?


We go to The Polka theatre in Wimbledon quite a bit. They'll have plays that are age appropriate (and much cheaper than the big shows).

Also look at the Unicorn theatre - similar to Polka theatre as all aimed at children and much cheaper than west end. We've seen a few things there which have all been brilliant.

Agree that 4 is a bit too young for west end as a lot of the shows are quite long and they cost such a lot of money (although I guess if you got kids week tickets would not be too bad.)


I've seen both Wicked and Matilda, thought Matilda was a million times better but the children loved Wicked as well. (I know a few people who've seen it and all said the same, adults thought was a bit crap but children loved it!). Is not really scary although a couple of bits that a young child might find a bit frightening.

I agree Lion King is ideal for all ages - and that's because it's basically a fancy panto so I would recommend that - although the tickets are ruinously expensive.


I also think Wicked would be too full-on for little kids and Matilda is too long for the under sevens.


I took my son to Oliver Twist (aged about 7 - too young and it was a very expensive mistake), to Railway Children (probably around the same age and he was bored, another waste of money, to War Horse - he just about 'got that' as he was bit older aged 10). he liked Matilda but was probably 10 or so.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • The current wave of xenophobia is due to powerful/influential people stirring up hatred.  It;'s what happened in the past, think 1930s Germany.  It seems to be even easier now as so many get their information from social media, whether it is right or wrong.  The media seeking so called balance will bring some nutter on, they don't then bring a nutter on to counteract that. They now seem to turn to Reform at the first opportunity. So your life is 'shite', let;s blame someone else.  Whilst sounding a bit like a Tory, taking some ownership/personal responsibility would be a start.  There are some situations where that may be more challenging, in deindustrialised 'left behind' wasteland we can't all get on our bikes and find work.  But I loathe how it is now popular to blame those of us from relatively modest backgrounds, like me, who did see education and knowledge as a way to self improve. Now we are seen by some as smug liberals......  
    • Kwik Fit buggered up an A/C leak diagnosis for me (saying there wasn't one, when there was) and sold a regas. The vehicle had to be taken to an A/C specialist for condensor replacement and a further regas. Not impressed.
    • Yes, these are all good points. I agree with you, that division has led us down dangerous paths in the past. And I deplore any kind of racism (as I think you probably know).  But I feel that a lot of the current wave of xenophobia we're witnessing is actually more about a general malaise and discontent. I know non-white people around here who are surprisingly vocal about immigrants - legal or otherwise. I think this feeling transcends skin colour for a lot of people and isn't as simple as, say, the Jew hatred of the 1930s or the Irish and Black racism that we saw laterally. I think people feel ignored and looked down upon.  What you don't realise, Sephiroth, is that I actually agree with a lot of what you're saying. I just think that looking down on people because of their voting history and opinions is self-defeating. And that's where Labour's getting it wrong and Reform is reaping the rewards.   
    • @Sephiroth you made some interesting points on the economy, on the Lammy thread. Thought it worth broadening the discussion. Reeves (irrespective of her financial competence) clearly was too downbeat on things when Labour came into power. But could there have been more honesty on the liklihood of taxes going up (which they have done, and will do in any case due to the freezing of personal allowances).  It may have been a silly commitment not to do this, but were you damned if you do and damned if you don't?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...