MUCH ADO ABOUT NOTHING - Wyndham's Theatre ****

We booked for this on the basis of an interview with David Tennant and Catherine Tate that we heard on Front Row. They seemed to be having so much fun we thought it boded well for the production. And how right we were!

The producer obviously decided that the most important thing about any comedy - including Shakespeare's - is that it has to be funny. And this was genuinely hilarious.

David Tennant as Benedick is brilliant - and you could hear every word, and Catherine Tate as Beatrice matched him most of the time.

If you get a chance to go, take it. But you've probably left it too late. Sorry.

THE LION KING ****(Rachel) **(John)

It wasn't the sort of show I (John) would ever choose to go to. I thought maybe my reluctance was just me being snobbish. But no. In reality it was really boring.

There are some wonderful tableaux - especially the opening scene - and some clever theatrical touches, but the story is incredibly thin, the singing (particularly from the kids) often pretty painful, and the acting not up to much.

However, Rachel and our friends really enjoyed it. So maybe I was just in a sour mood... But I don't think so!

STEPHEN SONDHEIM Into the Woods ****

This was the second time we've seen this musical/opera, which on this occasion was put on at the Royal Opera House.

It's a very clever and witty piece, in some ways a bit like an upmarket panto, based on traditional fairy tales which are all interweaved. It's about characters who wish for things (e.g. to go to the ball). By the end of the first act they have all had their wishes fulfilled.

In some ways you could go home then and still have enjoyed yourself. The second half is much blacker as disillusion sets in.

The singing was a bit patchy, but it didn't matter. The chief delight is in the rhythm and the words.

THE HISTORY BOYS ****

We both enjoyed this revival of Alan Bennett's play - John especially.

The 'History Boys' of the title are a group of eight boys in a northern grammar school in 1983, studying for their Oxbridge entrance History exam in the 3rd Year Sixth. Since John was in a group of six boys in a northern grammar school, studying for their Oxbridge entrance exam in the 3rd Year Sixth - albeit in 1968 and studying English - this play rang a lot of bells.

It's about the meaning and purpose of education. On the one side there's 60-year old Hector (with his somewhat dodgy sexual proclivities) who believes in learning for learning's sake and getting people to think for themselves. On the other there's the much younger Irwin, whose only educational aim is to get the boys through their exams. He does this by reducing everything to intellectual gobbets and encouraging the boys to get themselves noticed by the examiner by, for instance, arguing in favour of Stalin. (I remember doing the same thing at school and arguing against Desdemona!)

Stephen Moore as Hector was brilliant, and so were a couple of the boys. The guy playing Irwin, however, seemed a bit weak to me. He didn't have enough charisma.

CHICAGO ***(*)

Note to self: Never buy tickets for the very back row of the top tier of a theatre again. We could hear everything but the stage was a very long way away and you couldn't see faces.

It was the second time we'd seen this musical, and it's still really good fun - especially going with friends.

But the first time we went it was still with the original cast and it was much better.

Aoife Mulholland (she was in How do you solve a problem like Maria) was good as Roxie, but we had a stand-in Velma who couldn't make her character stong enough, which really upsets the balance of the drama.