When Yasmina Reza's play opened in the West End in 1996 it received rave reviews. Not surprisingly it won an Olivier Award and the Evening Standard Award for Best Comedy. The cast (Albert Finney, Tom Courtenay and Ken Stott) were wonderful but it the play (translated by Christopher Hampton) was the real breath of fresh air. And it still is.
      The current production, this week at Richmond, is directed by and stars Simon Shepherd, along with Russell Boulter as Marc and Michael Garner as Yvan. Shepherd plays Serge, the man who has just spent 200,000 francs on a painting. Marc cannot forgive his friend for spending so much money on what he considers 'shit': a white canvas with perhaps some white lines on it; and Yvan, who is always the peacemaker, cannot understand why they are being so belligerent over a minor issue.
      At first we see only two of the men together, then reporting back to the third. One can feel trouble brewing but also the desire to keep things under control. Then the trio arrange a night out. Yvan is late and Marc is trying his best to remain polite and not let Serge's acquisition annoy him. Just as they are about to give up on Yvan he arrives and pours out a woeful story of wedding-arrangement traumas, hardly pausing for breath. (Garner inspired spontaneous applause with his wonderful timing.)
      But the mood turns in the space of a sentence, from amusement to bewilderment to anger. We are all laughing and expecting Yvan's story to lighten up the tense mood but instead Serge turns on him and accuses him of ruining their evening by being late and Marc attacks him for being too easygoing. But the real tension is still between Serge and Marc. As voices rise and tempers escalate, the gentle Yvan tries harder to calm things down with no success, eventually being physically wounded in his attempt to intervene.
      Having reached a climax all three retreat into themselves. There follows some very funny business around the eating of olives and disposal of the pits, which says as much about their relationships as the spoken words.
      The beauty of the play is in the way the argument develops, begun over a painting and their individual artistic tastes, finally revealing deep-rooted differences between the three men. It examines loyalty and truth, and the part they play in any friendship especially a long-lasting three-way one. It manages to be extremely funny at the same time as being moving and serious. When Yvan reads out a letter from his analyst it sums everything up beautifully; he is laughed at not only by Marc and Serge but by the audience as well. And yet, ultimately, there is great truth in the statement he repeats: if I am who I am because you are who you are, then I am not me at all.
      All three actors are extremely good but I felt that Shepherd as director could have done with a restraining hand at times. The musical effects and the sharpness of the cuts from realistic scene to addressing the audience were a sometimes jarring. And I was puzzled by his decision to make Serge camp. It could have been perceived to be adding a new dimension to the play but actually it detracts from the strength of the relationship between him and Marc. Or rather, changes it into something different. It gives Serge's attack on Marc's girlfriend and Marc's need for Serge to care about him more than the painting a new meaning, and in my opinion, one that Reza did not intend. But, as has been the case since it first opened, whether the actors and the director be the great or the not-so-great, it is the play one really remembers and appreciates.
Francine Brody