Robert Glenister as West and Roger Lloyd Pack as Draycott in The Winterling at the Royal Court. Photograph: Tristram Kenton
In Jez Butterworth's play The Winterling, at the Royal Court in London, a Londoner holed up in a Devon farmhouse is visited by two men connected with his past. What is the relationship between them - and what does that tell us about violence, power and men? Audiences give their view:
Oliver, 44, London: The play was an anti-climax, but I enjoyed sitting through it. It's about East End gangsters, men being together and men trying to express their feelings. There are things in it that aren't understandable, but that's OK.
Maggie Farrell, 62, Surrey: It's very complex and dark. It was about mind games and what effect you can have on people by not telling them what's going on, by withholding information. It all goes on in your imagination. I think I worked out the play, but I've heard lots of people say they haven't a clue what it was about.
Meg, 27, London: It's a bunch of wiseguys calling each other berks and prannocks - kind of Pinter meets Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels. It's more fun than I expected. There are some wonderful lines and monologues, but I'm not convinced that it meant very much.
John Mortimer, 34, London: I really enjoyed the first half, but I think it got a bit confused. I thought it was about revenge until the plot twists at the end, but now I'm not sure.
John, 24, Essex: It takes many of the same themes as Pinter: domination, male power struggles and the survival of the fittest. But there wasn't much of a payoff, to be honest. I thought there was a huge amount of tension, but it didn't come to anything. It was too ambiguous, and I found that frustrating rather than intriguing.
Emily, 23, Shrivenham: It was very funny and dark. The Patsy character was hysterical. I thought it was like Withnail and I, but with gangsters. It's boys' stuff. Power struggles were going on all the way through. The characters aren't beating each other up, they're trying to outwit each other using banter and verbal games. The violence was under the surface. It was really eerie.
Suzy Coughtrey, 46, Kent: It wasn't what I was expecting. The reviews went on about it being menacing, but I thought it was funny. Daniel Mays is very good. He uses his whole body when he acts. From what I'd read I'd assumed it was about gangland London, but I couldn't really see where it was going until the second act. I'm not entirely happy with the ending. If it were a film I'd say it was wide open for a sequel.
