A bit of level setting before I begin: I did not study British history; I did not read or see Richard II before; and I have not watched Succession. Those I went with told me that the underpinning stringy score reminded them very much of the show. I cannot comment one way or the other, but what I can say, is that especially the part before the interval felt like I was watching a Netflix thriller series being filmed.

And that in of its own was quite a fun experience, not just because of the music, but the entire way the play was put to stage. The juxtaposition of the modern-dress and period agnostic setting with the use Shakespearean English reminded me of the Baz Luhrmann’s “Romeo and Juliet”. And it worked really well – men in suits, drinking whiskey, snorting coke and plotting away a country. It felt strangely current and an apt illustration of the political machinations that I am certain are perpetual at Westminster and number 10, where the anointed and the competent are seldom one and the same.

I have not quite landed on who was who in the zoo of the political swamp. Is Gaunt Heseltine, and Boris Johnson —charismatic, flawed, fallen – Richard II? But Richard II wasn’t a bumbling fool. Crowned young, regal and poetic, he was undone by vanity and impulsiveness – banishing Bolingbroke, seizing Gaunt’s lands, losing his grip. So maybe its “destined to rule prince charming” David Cameron — PM at 43, exuding confidence, with an Eton-Oxford swagger, who, having called the Brexit referendum, quickly realised he was in over his head. Deposed not by a coup but by his own gamble. At the end of the day, does it really matter? It does not need to be just one politician, it is an amalgamation of many, the timeless archetype which is uncomfortably relevant to the “Sceptered isle.”

And Jonathan Bailey does a great job – giving me some hope that maybe a play with a cinema star can still be worth watching, even if it comes at the cost of some near-fainting noises from female fans in the audience. By the end you can’t but help ask yourself, who would you prefer in charge of the country – the competent technocrat who got the job in a treacherous way or the sexy, charismatic, and somewhat unhinged heir? For all his faults, it is difficult not to empathise with the ex-king grieving for the loss of his realm and belatedly recognising the error of his ways. There is something primal in the sorrow and regret he displays having understood his mistakes.

My main criticism is with the staging-in-the-round. Unfortunately, there was a lot of blocking from my vantage point. I loved the rising and falling platforms and they did a lot to alleviate the problem. But nonetheless, there were plenty of occasions when my ability to see was obscured – whilst I can deal with that when it is a major character participating in a scene, it is much more frustrating when it is a person standing guard and not delivering any lines. Similarly, with the fixed positions of the table/desk, for extended periods all I could see was the back of a major character’s head. Why could Richard II be projected onto TV screens in one scene, but not in others?

But putting this aside, overall this was a performance I thoroughly enjoyed and I am really happy to have the Bridge back from the clutches of the all too popular musicals.