I really enjoyed the acting performances in this well constructed production.
The play is about the Winslow family. One day the youngest son Ronnie is sent home from the Royal Naval College accused of stealing a postal order. His expulsion and his protests that he didn't commit the crime he was accused of result in his father starting a long legal battle against the college to fight for a fair trial for his son.
The costs of the trial tear the family apart. Ronnie's sister Kate's engagement is in jeopardy, his brother Dickie is forced to drop out of his degree when funds run low and his father's heath rapidly deteriorates leaving him in a bath chair. We are watching someone sacrificing everything so they can stand up for what they believe is right.
The play at times was a little dry and tedious but these moments were dispersed with great displays by the vivid characters which made it all of a sudden a joy to watch. The father, Mr Winslow, was charismatic but not too over the top. He had great comic timing, I particularly enjoyed the scene where he had to discuss with John Watherstone his prospects of marrying Kate which was very funny.
The real star of the show was the actor playing Violet the over famililar maid who the family were 'constantly having to explain to people.' She was I'm afraid too old for the part, the text described her joining them from an orphanage but she seemed far too close in age to Mr and Mrs Winslow. However I'm very glad the company cast her anyway as her interjections were the funniest in the play, particularly her account of the final verdict towards the end.
I also thought the boy playing the young Ronnie Winslow gave a very accomplished performance for his age, his acting was both varied and believable.
The benefit of the play being set all in one room was the company was able to put together an excellent naturalistic set. I did think it was a shame that they chose to have a couple of essential elements of the room invisible on the fourth wall (a bell which Mr Winslow pushed to summon Violet and later the curtains which were discussed at length by a female journalist.) This device didn't fit in with the style of the production and felt a bit like a cop-out. An unnecessary one too: when they had managed to source a gramophone and build French doors surely some fancy curtains would not have proved much of a problem?
On the whole though a very polished production which was a credit to the company. Very well done to all involved.
Friday, 6 May 2011
Tuesday, 19 April 2011
22 - Most Drink in Secret, FellSwoop at The Spring
Daisy and I took a bit of a risk and took my little cousin Aiden to see this Checkov adaptation. Checkov is pretty weighty stuff and I didn't want Aiden to be bored. But as this was a young and emerging company I had confidence they would bring something different to The Seagull, and I was right. The performance was fresh, engaging and funny.
This was a three man show with each actor playing 2 or 3 characters. Fiona Mikel was a joy to watch, she differentiated the characters without making them too over the top or stereotypical. Another favourite was Clem Garritty as the hilarious chirpy doctor character who is sleeping with the gloomy Masha.
The introduction of modern music, with characters stepping out of the action and singing into a mic was interesting. I liked the way it broke up the action and added to the atmosphere, the songs were performed beautifully with the other actors playing props as percussion instruments.
I'm not sure the modernisation of the play was entirely successful. I liked that the play had been made into a film and it made it much more believable that Anna would not be sure about how good the final film was even though she was in it having not seen the final cut. However I think more recent political references could have been bought into the conversations about censorship and the arts as sometimes these felt a bit anachronistic where I wasn't sure what was referring to modern Russia and what had simply been taken from The Seagull.
There was great theatricality in the play, the way it looked has clearly been very well blocked and thought out. Clever moments included Garitty holding a drawer to become a chest of drawers, and Fiona Mikel and Bertrand Lesca standing up holding a duvet in front of them and a bedside lamp with the top of it facing the audience, so it was like we were seeing them sleeping in bed from above.
I also liked that they had a live goldfish on stage in a bowl in the centre of the table. It's funny how having a live unpredictable animal on stage, even if it's just a fish, makes a performance seem more spontaneous, lively and keeps the audience rivetted from the start. Particularly after the line 'swear on this fish's life,' I kept glancing back at the fish to check if it was still alive, and thinking how awful it would be if it died during the show.
I'm not entirely sure what the company was hoping to bring to Checkov by adapting it, or whther they wanted to say anything new. Perhaps they were showing that arguments about what is valid as art and what art is for are the same today as they were in 1895. Or perhaps they just borrowed a great story to create an exciting new piece of theatre. Either way this is definately worth a watch, and will transfer to Bristol's Tobacco Factory in June.
This was a three man show with each actor playing 2 or 3 characters. Fiona Mikel was a joy to watch, she differentiated the characters without making them too over the top or stereotypical. Another favourite was Clem Garritty as the hilarious chirpy doctor character who is sleeping with the gloomy Masha.
The introduction of modern music, with characters stepping out of the action and singing into a mic was interesting. I liked the way it broke up the action and added to the atmosphere, the songs were performed beautifully with the other actors playing props as percussion instruments.
I'm not sure the modernisation of the play was entirely successful. I liked that the play had been made into a film and it made it much more believable that Anna would not be sure about how good the final film was even though she was in it having not seen the final cut. However I think more recent political references could have been bought into the conversations about censorship and the arts as sometimes these felt a bit anachronistic where I wasn't sure what was referring to modern Russia and what had simply been taken from The Seagull.
There was great theatricality in the play, the way it looked has clearly been very well blocked and thought out. Clever moments included Garitty holding a drawer to become a chest of drawers, and Fiona Mikel and Bertrand Lesca standing up holding a duvet in front of them and a bedside lamp with the top of it facing the audience, so it was like we were seeing them sleeping in bed from above.
I also liked that they had a live goldfish on stage in a bowl in the centre of the table. It's funny how having a live unpredictable animal on stage, even if it's just a fish, makes a performance seem more spontaneous, lively and keeps the audience rivetted from the start. Particularly after the line 'swear on this fish's life,' I kept glancing back at the fish to check if it was still alive, and thinking how awful it would be if it died during the show.
I'm not entirely sure what the company was hoping to bring to Checkov by adapting it, or whther they wanted to say anything new. Perhaps they were showing that arguments about what is valid as art and what art is for are the same today as they were in 1895. Or perhaps they just borrowed a great story to create an exciting new piece of theatre. Either way this is definately worth a watch, and will transfer to Bristol's Tobacco Factory in June.
Wednesday, 13 April 2011
21- Project Snowflake by Sasha C. Damjanovski at Brockley Jack Studio Theatre
As Brockley Jack studio theatre is right near James' house we thought it was high time we checked it out and headed over there to see Project Snowflake.
It's a cracking little theatre with friendly front of house, really comfy seats and an eclectic offering, round the back of a nice bar which looked like it served very tasty food.
Project Snowflake is set in an Orwellian future, year 2060. The main characters Martha and Jeremy work in the Creativy Institute a branch of the government where their lives are tightly controlled. If they do not meet their targets at work they risk losing their jobs, and in Martha's case, her 'baby licence.' Unfortunately for Martha and Jeremy, their target is to turn their invention, a dream recorder, into a dream manipulator which will make the wearer have happy dreams.
The play started off really well, with a scene between the two main characters Martha and Jeremy in which Martha says nothing but read out case reports which Jeremy repeats as he types them into an appropriately futuristic looking computer. We see the relationship develop between the two of them as they bicker, flirt and sulk, all without saying anything other than reading the reports. When they do not work quickly enough an alarm goes off, and when Martha goes to make coffee she displays the cups to a wheeled security camera she takes with her at all times. Jeremy has a personal camera too, as do all the employees, it monitors their work progress and every word. This first scene cleverly introduced the characters and situation without clunky exposition and I really enjoyed it.
There were several examples like this of clever writing. My favourite was a very funny argument between two high up executives in the organisation, where they prefaced every insult they threw at each other with a lengthy disclaimer to say the following statement was their personal view and may not represent the views of their company or department.
The plot of the play could have used some more work, it seemed to cop out at the end without showing any real conclusion which left us feeling dissatisfied. There were a couple of confusing holes in the plot: why did Martha and Jeremy go from typing up reports, administrative work, to working in a lab on the dream recorder? Also one smaller character came on stage without a camera on wheels, seemingly because they didn't have enough of them backstage. Maybe there was reasoning behind that but if so I couldn't spot it.
The play was billed as if it would tackle the moral dilemma of whether it is ethical for the government department to control people's dreams. But this was only briefly mentioned and the main focus was the fate of the two main characters should they fail. This meant we were rooting for them to find a way to build the required machine, which I'm not quite sure was what the playwright intended.
Despite there being some aspects of the play that didn't work, there were some great ideas here, and some very engaging performances. Well worth the fringe ticket price.
It's a cracking little theatre with friendly front of house, really comfy seats and an eclectic offering, round the back of a nice bar which looked like it served very tasty food.
Project Snowflake is set in an Orwellian future, year 2060. The main characters Martha and Jeremy work in the Creativy Institute a branch of the government where their lives are tightly controlled. If they do not meet their targets at work they risk losing their jobs, and in Martha's case, her 'baby licence.' Unfortunately for Martha and Jeremy, their target is to turn their invention, a dream recorder, into a dream manipulator which will make the wearer have happy dreams.
The play started off really well, with a scene between the two main characters Martha and Jeremy in which Martha says nothing but read out case reports which Jeremy repeats as he types them into an appropriately futuristic looking computer. We see the relationship develop between the two of them as they bicker, flirt and sulk, all without saying anything other than reading the reports. When they do not work quickly enough an alarm goes off, and when Martha goes to make coffee she displays the cups to a wheeled security camera she takes with her at all times. Jeremy has a personal camera too, as do all the employees, it monitors their work progress and every word. This first scene cleverly introduced the characters and situation without clunky exposition and I really enjoyed it.
There were several examples like this of clever writing. My favourite was a very funny argument between two high up executives in the organisation, where they prefaced every insult they threw at each other with a lengthy disclaimer to say the following statement was their personal view and may not represent the views of their company or department.
The plot of the play could have used some more work, it seemed to cop out at the end without showing any real conclusion which left us feeling dissatisfied. There were a couple of confusing holes in the plot: why did Martha and Jeremy go from typing up reports, administrative work, to working in a lab on the dream recorder? Also one smaller character came on stage without a camera on wheels, seemingly because they didn't have enough of them backstage. Maybe there was reasoning behind that but if so I couldn't spot it.
The play was billed as if it would tackle the moral dilemma of whether it is ethical for the government department to control people's dreams. But this was only briefly mentioned and the main focus was the fate of the two main characters should they fail. This meant we were rooting for them to find a way to build the required machine, which I'm not quite sure was what the playwright intended.
Despite there being some aspects of the play that didn't work, there were some great ideas here, and some very engaging performances. Well worth the fringe ticket price.
Wednesday, 6 April 2011
20 - Ballet Boyz at Sadlers Wells
Not strictly a play but I thought I'd include it as I'm ahead with my 52 plays anyway!
Seeing dance at Sadlers Wells is one of my favourite things to do. It's astounding to see people who are allegedly the same species as you moving in ways that to my mind simply shouldn't be physically possible. I also feel like it's one of London's great opportunities, I don't know anywhere else in the country where you can see such variety and quality of modern dance.
The Ballet Boyz were really impressive. When there were two pairs of them dancing on stage it was as if one pair of them were dancing in front of a mirror. The technical lighting and projections were great too: atmospheric and impressive without distracting from the dance. If I had a criticism it was that they did seem a bit full of themselves, showing a little film about their audition process half way through which didn't add particularly to the performance and made them come across as a bit arrogant. But then if I could dance like that I'd probably want to go on about it too.
Seeing dance at Sadlers Wells is one of my favourite things to do. It's astounding to see people who are allegedly the same species as you moving in ways that to my mind simply shouldn't be physically possible. I also feel like it's one of London's great opportunities, I don't know anywhere else in the country where you can see such variety and quality of modern dance.
The Ballet Boyz were really impressive. When there were two pairs of them dancing on stage it was as if one pair of them were dancing in front of a mirror. The technical lighting and projections were great too: atmospheric and impressive without distracting from the dance. If I had a criticism it was that they did seem a bit full of themselves, showing a little film about their audition process half way through which didn't add particularly to the performance and made them come across as a bit arrogant. But then if I could dance like that I'd probably want to go on about it too.
19 - The Mikado in aid of the Japanese earthquake appeal
More opera! This was a scratch performance in aid of the Japanese earthquake appeal, a brilliant idea. Performers made a contribution to take part and pulled this performance together in just a day, and we went along to see the result in the evening.
The Mikado is a Gilbert and Sullivan comic opera. Despite being set in Japan it is all very English and very funny, contemporary references had been added to some numbers too. I really enjoyed it, not that I'm any judge of singing or orchestras but it all sounded totally lovely. I was really impressed it had all been brought together in one day it was very slick. Also because the event was all very well planned (using the wonders of Facebook) the performers even had simple costumes, everyone in red, white and black, which looked really effective.
The church setting was very dramatic, though sitting near the back for the first act I had difficulty hearing all the words becaus of the reverberation of the sound. We moved to the front in the second half so we could get all the jokes.
The Mikado is a Gilbert and Sullivan comic opera. Despite being set in Japan it is all very English and very funny, contemporary references had been added to some numbers too. I really enjoyed it, not that I'm any judge of singing or orchestras but it all sounded totally lovely. I was really impressed it had all been brought together in one day it was very slick. Also because the event was all very well planned (using the wonders of Facebook) the performers even had simple costumes, everyone in red, white and black, which looked really effective.
The church setting was very dramatic, though sitting near the back for the first act I had difficulty hearing all the words becaus of the reverberation of the sound. We moved to the front in the second half so we could get all the jokes.
18 - The Graduate, CODA at the Ashcroft Theatre, Croydon
There were some strong performances in this production of The Graduate which were a joy to watch. Danielle Lautier was an enigmatic and very sexy Mrs Robinson, perfectly cast. Christopher Rudd was engaging as the young graduate Benjamin who she seduces. His wide ranging performance had the right balance of stuttering insecurity and arrogant rebellion. I also particularly enjoyed David Sanders’ performance as Ben’s father Frank which was very funny.
I quite liked the atmospheric set but there were too many clunky and slow scene changes for me which left me feeling like this hadn’t been an entirely successfully adaptation for the stage. The muted palate of the set also made the scenes very samey especially as the characters spend most of the play sitting about talking nonsense.
They just don’t talk or act like real people these characters, and this is a problem with the play rather than the actors in this production. Elaine seems to impress Ben on their first date with her intelligent and sparkling conversation, but later she’s presented as an unoriginal thinker who has simply acted to please her parents all her life. She finds out her mother has slept with her boyfriend, then hangs around drinking with her all afternoon like a world-weary pragmatist. But she isn’t one, she’s supposed to be a relatively naive young women, who surely would react to the news by locking herself in her room, crying and playing pop music.
These undeveloped characters might work in a novel where their changeability and unrealistic nature might come across as existentialism or surrealism. (I can’t be sure, I haven’t read it.) But in a naturalistically acted play they were just irritating.
It felt a bit like this play had been wheeled out by CODA as an audience-pleaser because it was a popular film and men love to see a sexy cougar. But I was less than pleased, because the play pretended to have something clever to say about the human condition and in the end I don’t think it did. I want to see an experienced and well-established group like CODA in the large Ashcroft theatre give me as an audience member a bit more credit and put on some good plays rather than movie blockbusters please. Let’s have some Checkov next time, or better yet some Brecht.
I quite liked the atmospheric set but there were too many clunky and slow scene changes for me which left me feeling like this hadn’t been an entirely successfully adaptation for the stage. The muted palate of the set also made the scenes very samey especially as the characters spend most of the play sitting about talking nonsense.
They just don’t talk or act like real people these characters, and this is a problem with the play rather than the actors in this production. Elaine seems to impress Ben on their first date with her intelligent and sparkling conversation, but later she’s presented as an unoriginal thinker who has simply acted to please her parents all her life. She finds out her mother has slept with her boyfriend, then hangs around drinking with her all afternoon like a world-weary pragmatist. But she isn’t one, she’s supposed to be a relatively naive young women, who surely would react to the news by locking herself in her room, crying and playing pop music.
These undeveloped characters might work in a novel where their changeability and unrealistic nature might come across as existentialism or surrealism. (I can’t be sure, I haven’t read it.) But in a naturalistically acted play they were just irritating.
It felt a bit like this play had been wheeled out by CODA as an audience-pleaser because it was a popular film and men love to see a sexy cougar. But I was less than pleased, because the play pretended to have something clever to say about the human condition and in the end I don’t think it did. I want to see an experienced and well-established group like CODA in the large Ashcroft theatre give me as an audience member a bit more credit and put on some good plays rather than movie blockbusters please. Let’s have some Checkov next time, or better yet some Brecht.
17 - If Destroyed Still True, Sedated by a Brick at Tobacco Factory Theatre, Bristol
Sedated by a Brick is a performance company featuring Fraisia Dunn, Neil Puttick and Gareth Mayer, who has been my friend since we were both five. Gareth and I have a long-standing agreement to differ on our views of theatre and performance: Gareth thinks I don’t ‘get’ his kind of contemporary performance and I think no one does and people pretend to ‘get it’ because they are pretentious and anyway can’t we just go and see a nice Shakespeare? In the good natured spirit of this long-standing clash of perspectives I hope he won’t mind me reviewing their latest production from my perspective.
All three members of Sedated by a Brick are talented performers and they have a knack for presenting strong imagery on stage. If Destroyed Still True is a classic example of their style: a collision between theatre and performance art. However I felt that it was just missing the most vital elements of both, and reinstating these would turn it into a more powerful theatrical experience.
Theatre is about telling stories. This performance hinted at a story, but didn’t present us with any characters so we were not emotionally involved enough to care. And there were not quite enough hints for us to piece together a story out of the string of vaguely connected images we were shown.
Performance art on the other hand, and actually I think all art, should be about emoting an emotional response from the person watching it or putting across a message or thought of some kind. When I have seen iconic performance art in the past I have felt strongly afterwards: whether disturbed, upset, amused, drained. Here too I don’t think this performance quite succeeds. Because we didn’t have any context for the events or characters, we didn’t know what was happening and couldn’t derive anything from it. An image I particularly liked involved Gareth breathing into the mouth of an inanimate Fraisia who is lying next to Neil with their necks overlapping. Gareth then compresses Fraisia’s chest and this action inflates Neil’s chest. He compresses Neil’s chest and as he breathes out, Fraisia’s chest inflates again. This action seems to imply Gareth is resurrecting the inanimate figures and bringing them back to life, but this conflicts with what he does shortly afterwards- removing their clothes and wrapping Fraisia, Neil and the clothes in bin liners. This left me confused and with the impression that the performance didn’t actually communicate anything.
In the bar afterwards another member of the audience said it a disdaining tone of voice ‘there were a lot of people laughing in the audience.’ I said ‘yeah, it was funny.’ And at many points it was. Whether developing this piece further or working on their next project, Sedated by a Brick should look hard at the audience’s response and build on it. Organic performance like this can’t be about deciding how the audience should respond to something and then, if they react differently, dismissing them as not intelligent enough. Happily Sedated by a Brick are a company that is interested in the audience’s reaction to their work, to the extent that in the foyer after the performance we were invited to react to it by finishing a basis line drawing of a face which was printed on the back of the programme. These were put up on the wall for everyone to see and added to the mood of creativity among the audience who had just emerged. Conversations about interpreting the piece were flying around the bar and I liked the way the performance had provoked discussion among so many different people.
Sedated by a Brick are a talented and experimental group. By polishing their production and feeding from the audience responses they have provoked I think they will continue to develop and produce divisive and challenging work. Go and see their next production and let me know what you think, I’ll be there.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)