Sheridan Smith wins praise for 'shining' in her new West End comedy
Sheridan Smith has earned praise from critics for her 'shining' turn in the new West End comedy Woman In Mind.The actress is no stranger to the stage having earned acclaim for her roles in shows such as Funny Girl and Shirley Valentine, and she's once again earned rave reviews for her role in the production.Following its press night at the Duke Of York's Theatre in London, critics have praised Sheridan's performance as a lowly housewife who struggles with her unfortunate domestic setting, and after a head injury, imagines a life with her perfect family.Romesh Ranganathan also makes his West End debut in the play as Bill Windsor, Susan's psychiatrist.And while some critics noted that the play itself left much to be desired, Sheridan proved why she's an 'unmissable' stage draw who 'elevates' the show.Awarding the play four stars, The Daily Mail's Patrick Marmion wrote: 'Never miss an opportunity to catch Sheridan Smith live. If you loved her in Gavin and Stacey, or any of her many TV shows, you'll surely adore her on stage. Sheridan Smith has earned praise from critics for her 'shining' turn in the new West End comedy Woman In Mind The actress is no stranger to the stage having earned acclaim for her roles in shows such as Funny Girl and Shirley Valentine, and she's once again earned rave reviews for her role'And here she is again with a performance that's joyfully effervescent, yet also dangerously intense and even disturbed.'Her role in Alan Ayckbourn's 1985 play (when Smith was just four) could have been written for her.'London Theatre's Olivia Rook was equally complimentary, while also praising Romesh's 'amiable, bumbling and nervous energy' in the show.She wrote: 'As Susan, her emotions are always bubbling beneath the surface: in the 'real' scenes, she is buttoned up, foot tapping, eyes drifting around the room; in her imagined sequences she grins dreamily, bathed in Lee Curran's warm lighting, and memorably gives herself over to the fantasy during an ecstatic rainstorm. 'Smith often appears to be on the edge of both tears and laughter, but her vulnerability is truly laid bare as the show's hallucinatory quality turns sickly during a bonkers, nightmarish denouement.'The Times' Clive Davis also awarded the show four stars, writing: 'I spent the first half of Michael Longhurst's production wondering if Smith was too genial and smiley to do justice to Susan's anguish. 'By the end of the evening, though, as the visions spin out of control, like an overheated version of Alice In Wonderland, Smith's twinkling eyes grow more and more hypnotic. 'How does she get through a role as gruelling as this night after night, surviving a rainstorm in the process?' Critics have praised Sheridan's performance as a lowly housewife who struggles with her unfortunate domestic setting, and after a head injury, imagines a life with her perfect familyOther reviews were less favourable on the play itself, with a string of three star write-ups, including The Guardian's Arifa Akbar, who wrote: 'Smith plays the part with whimsical daintiness and subtlety, throwing out mischievous or slighted looks. 'You feel her vulnerability, especially in the first act, but the emotional connection lessens as the drama becomes more high-pitched and surreal...'When it works, it is unnerving. The imaginary family is creepy for its wooden perfection and performative warmth. You feel the chill building as they turn into nightmarish tormentors.'Writing for What'sOnStage.com, Sarah Crompton said: 'The problem with the play 40 years on is that, although its truths are universal, its characters are very much of its time.'Smith's Susan seems too contemporary and knowing. A woman as sparky and smart as her Susan would dream bigger than of perfect weddings and domestic fulfilment; at the very least, she’d be volunteering at the Food Bank.'She is infinitely moving, her little gestures and movements of discontent convincing, her face a constant reflection of her shifting moods of disappointment, anger and sadness, utterly convincing as both her worlds spin out of control. It’s a lovely, naturalistic performance, but it exposes the artificiality of the play.'The Standard's Nick Curtis also awarded the show three stars, writing: 'The play puts Susan through the physical and mental wringer and it works thanks to Smith. 'She has a uniquely vivid physical presence, and her emotions are shimmeringly close to the surface. It’s great to see her back on stage again after the unfortunate debacle of 2024’s Opening Night, where she was again required to fall apart. 'Maybe next time she could play a character who isn’t – to quote the Patsy Cline song played before curtain-up – Crazy.'Alice Saville from The Independent also awarded the show three stars, writing: 'Sheridan Smith (Funny Girl) brings both wit and emotional depth to its central role of a suburban housewife who loses her grip on reality after an embarrassing mishap with a garden rake. 'But Smith can’t do much to disguise the fact that this is frivolous fare, unlikely to become a set text for students of either contemporary theatre or psychology.'Writing in Time Out, Andrzej Lukowski said: 'Yes, Smith gives it heart and soul, but it’s mostly about seeing Susan engulfed by the lurid artifice and emotional corkscrews of Ayckbourn’s stage directions. 'Watching Smith switch between families and moods is impressive and even thrilling, but the longer it went on the less I understood what point [writer Alan Ayckbourn] was trying to make beyond a technical exercise.' Romesh Ranganathan also makes his West End debut in the play as Bill Windsor, Susan's psychiatristCompleting the cast are Louise Brealey as Muriel, Tim McMullan as Gerald, Sule Rimi as Andy, Chris Jenks as Tony, Safia Oakley-Green as Lucy, Taylor Uttley as Rick, Katie Buchholz and Michael Woolfitt.Directed by Michael Longhurst, the revival explores Susan's fractured reality after she sustains a bump to the head.Her world splits in two - one mundane, one imagined - and the lines begin to blur.The play's West End run is currently underway at Duke of York's Theatre, where it will run until the end of February before it heads on tour to Sunderland and Glasgow.Following its West End run, Woman In Mind will play at the Sunderland Empire from March 4 until March 7 before heading to Theatre Royal, Glasgow from March 10 until March 14. Woman In Mind: The Reviews The Daily Mail - Patrick MarmionRating:'Never miss an opportunity to catch Sheridan Smith live. If you loved her in Gavin and Stacey, or any of her many TV shows, you'll surely adore her on stage.'And here she is again with a performance that's joyfully effervescent, yet also dangerously intense and even disturbed.'Her role in Alan Ayckbourn's 1985 play (when Smith was just four) could have been written for her.'London Theatre - Olivia RookRating:'As Susan, [Sheridan's] emotions are always bubbling beneath the surface: in the 'real' scenes, she is buttoned up, foot tapping, eyes drifting around the room; in her imagined sequences she grins dreamily, bathed in Lee Curran's warm lighting, and memorably gives herself over to the fantasy during an ecstatic rainstorm. 'Smith often appears to be on the edge of both tears and laughter, but her vulnerability is truly laid bare as the show's hallucinatory quality turns sickly during a bonkers, nightmarish denouement.'The Times' Clive DavisRating:'I spent the first half of Michael Longhurst's production wondering if Smith was too genial and smiley to do justice to Susan's anguish. 'By the end of the evening, though, as the visions spin out of control, like an overheated version of Alice In Wonderland, Smith's twinkling eyes grow more and more hypnotic. 'How does she get through a role as gruelling as this night after night, surviving a rainstorm in the process?'The Guardian - Arifa AkbarRating:'Smith plays the part with whimsical daintiness and subtlety, throwing out mischievous or slighted looks. 'You feel her vulnerability, especially in the first act, but the emotional connection lessens as the drama becomes more high-pitched and surreal...'When it works, it is unnerving. The imaginary family is creepy for its wooden perfection and performative warmth. You feel the chill building as they turn into nightmarish tormentors.'What'sOnStage.com - Sarah Crompton'The problem with the play 40 years on is that, although its truths are universal, its characters are very much of its time.'Smith's Susan seems too contemporary and knowing. A woman as sparky and smart as her Susan would dream bigger than of perfect weddings and domestic fulfilment; at the very least, she'd be volunteering at the Food Bank.'She is infinitely moving, her little gestures and movements of discontent convincing, her face a constant reflection of her shifting moods of disappointment, anger and sadness, utterly convincing as both her worlds spin out of control. It's a lovely, naturalistic performance, but it exposes the artificiality of the play.'The Standard - Nick CurtisRating:'The play puts Susan through the physical and mental wringer and it works thanks to Smith. 'She has a uniquely vivid physical presence, and her emotions are shimmeringly close to the surface. It's great to see her back on stage again after the unfortunate debacle of 2024's Opening Night, where she was again required to fall apart. 'Maybe next time she could play a character who isn't – to quote the Patsy Cline song played before curtain-up – Crazy.'The Independent - Alice SavilleRating:'Sheridan Smith (Funny Girl) brings both wit and emotional depth to its central role of a suburban housewife who loses her grip on reality after an embarrassing mishap with a garden rake. 'But Smith can't do much to disguise the fact that this is frivolous fare, unlikely to become a set text for students of either contemporary theatre or psychology.'Time Out - Andrzej LukowskiRating:'Yes, Smith gives it heart and soul, but it's mostly about seeing Susan engulfed by the lurid artifice and emotional corkscrews of Ayckbourn's stage directions. 'Watching Smith switch between families and moods is impressive and even thrilling, but the longer it went on the less I understood what point [writer Alan Ayckbourn] was trying to make beyond a technical exercise.'
