Watching two seasons of So You Think You Can Dance does not qualify me to review ballet. Hence, these “comments.” My knowledge of ballet is limited to a couple years as a child at the YWCA and watching a friend’s daughter who had trained all through her teens. And the aforesaid TV show.
You can learn a lot that way, but it doesn’t an expert make.
On the other hand, I know what I like – and I liked the Metropolitan Classic Ballet Summer Gala 2008 very much. One thing I noticed, beyond how beautiful the dancers and the dancing, was how graceful their hand and arms moved. One of the judges on Dancing with the Stars has commented on hands and arms which brought it to my attention, but several years ago, I attended a play put on by profoundly deaf actors. Again, I noticed how gracefully the actors moved as they were signing. It is easy to think of dancing as something done only with the feet, but the whole body produces the effect.
Since I know next to nothing about the dancing, I’ll mostly confine my remarks to the staging.
The staging of the first ballet, Tchaikovsky’s Romeo and Juliet, was very effective. I have watched in admiration a couple of directors who moved their characters around the stage almost like a ballet. Some of the techniques used here could be borrowed to use theatrically. I particularly liked the huge “X” made by the Corps de Ballet to separate the lovers. The moving spirals were almost as good. It was amazing how much of the story can be told with nothing but movement. (Of course, the music helped.) Paul Mejia did the choreography.
The Divertissements again demonstrated how little need there is for elaborate props and scenery. Eighty-five to ninety per cent of any show is the people. The bare stage with a statue of Cupid (or Pan or whoever) upcenter was sufficient for the audience to grasp the basics of the stories. I like the way the choreographers used the whole stage and the lighting designer, Tony Tucci, set the mood with unobtrusive lighting. Of course, a little more scenery would enhance the individual shows. Like the decorations on a cake, an added value, an increase in pleasure, but just as delicious without. And anyway, who cares about the story?
I think I’ve made it clear that I really don’t know much about ballet, but I want to mention the performance of North Texas native, Shea Johnson, in Diana and Acteon. He leaped into the air, and I involuntarily murmured “wow.” A collective gasp rippled through the audience. It was spectacular. It may have been “showy;” I don’t know. (But the choreographer, Agrippina Vaganova put it in the dance.) I was impressed, and I wasn’t alone. And then he did it again. We were wowed again. I hope to see more of him.
I’m looking forward to many more interesting and memorable performances in the coming year. I am especially looking forward to Spartacus in the fall since I had a little taste of it.
Romeo and Juliet:
Music: Peter Ilyich Tchaikovsky
Choreograper: Paul Mejia
Juliet: Olga Pavlova, Principal Dancer, Metropolitan Classical Ballet
Romeo: Yevgeni Anfinogenov, Principal Dancer, Metropolitan Classical Ballet
Tybalt: Andre Prikhodko, Principal Dancer, Metropolitan Classical Ballet
Divertissements:
Grand Pas Classique
Music: Daniel Auber
Choreograper: Victor Gzovsky
Dancers:
Olga Volboueva, Guest Artist, Royal Ballet of Flanders
Howard Quintero, Guest Artist, Royal Ballet of Flanders
Spartacus:
Music: Aram Khachaturian
Choreograper: Yuri Grigirivich
Dancers:
Marianna Ryzhkina, Guest Artist, Bolshoi Ballet Theater
Alexei Tyukov, Guest Artist, Colorado Ballet
Spring Water:
Music: Sergei Rachmaninoff
Choreograper: Asaf Messerer
Dancers:
Marina Goshko, Principal Dancer, Metropolitan Classical Ballet
Yevgeni Anfinogenov, Principal Dancer, Metropolitan Classical Ballet
Gopak:
Music: Soloviev-Sedoi
Choreograper: Rostislav Zakharov / Alexander Vetrov
Dancers:
Assaf Benchetrit, Company Dancer, Metropolitan Classical Ballet
Oleksandr Kryvonis, Company Dancer, Metropolitan Classical Ballet
Diane and Acteon:
Music: Caesar Puni
Choreograper: Agrippina Vaganova
Dancers:
Maiko Abe, Company Dancer, Metropolitan Classical Ballet
Shea Johnson, Company Dancer, Metropolitan Classical Ballet
White Fog:
Music: Johan Sebastian Bach
Choreograper: Eric Bortolin
Dancers:
Olga Volboueva, Guest Artist, Royal Ballet of Flanders
Howard Quintero, Guest Artist, Royal Ballet of Flanders
Swan Lake:
Music: Peter Tchaikovsky
Choreograper: Marius Petipa
Dancers:
Olga Pavlova, Principal Dancer, Metropolitan Classical Ballet
Alexei Tyukov, Guest Artist, Colorado Ballet
Don Quixote:
Music: Ludwig Minkus
Choreograper: Alexander Gorsky
Dancers:
Marianna Ryzhkina, Guest Artist, Bolshoi Ballet Theater
Andre Prikhodko, Principal Dancer, Metropolitan Classical Ballet
1st Variation: Marina Goshko, Principal Dancer, Metropolitan Classical Ballet
2nd Variation: Liliya Aronov, Company Dancer, Metropolitan Classical Ballet
Dancers: Melinda Morton, Company Dancer, Metropolitan Classical Ballet; Sunny Wright; Brittany Bollinger: Kayla Giard.
Lighting by Toni Tucci
Sunday, June 22, 2008
Saturday, June 21, 2008
Review: Much Ado About Shakespeare Workshop’s Twelfth Night
There can't be a whole lot wrong with a production filled with youth, enthusiasm and energy. Much Ado About Shakespeare Workshop's Twelfth Night demonstrated these qualities and more. Some of the mostly-inexperienced actors started off a little uncertain but quickly overcome their trepidation -- right about the first time the audience laughed. They relaxed into their parts, and before long, we were all carried away to Shakespeare's Illyria. Everyone had a good time.
Director Jeff Dolan's bio indicated a lot of experience as an actor, but this was his first experience as a director. A couple of notes for him: The shifting of furniture between scenes took too much time. He could have eliminated most of the "set changes" by just leaving a couple of benches on stage. We didn't need all the tables and garden furniture. The items chosen were well thought out, but mostly unnecessary. Second, I was taught that the director needs to move around the audience area to be sure that all the action is within the view of the entire audience. I haven't watched too many directors actually move around and examine the lines of sight, but in this case it would have been a good idea. Too much of the action was blocked by the trees planted on the sides of the stage of the amphitheater. (I suppose the school that lent its outdoor arena would have objected if they had been removed. :-)) Still, a director can't count on people sitting where he wants them to. He needs to be sure that all the action is visible no matter what the audience does.
To give credit where it is due, faced with the problem of giving all of participants in the workshop the maximum time on stage, the director solved it neatly by having the students pantomime a street scene. It gave the persons playing minor roles more time on stage, which helps the students get accustomed to being in front of an audience.
Besides, it was cute.
I'm not going to mention the idiot who went out and adjusted the backdrop WHILE THE CAST WAS ON STAGE AND PERFORMING. He is old enough and experienced enough to know better.
I've said it before and I'll say it again. If the cast is having fun, the audience will, too.
In this case, another of my maxims about theater was demonstrated; theater is a participatory activity. The Twelfth Night audience's enjoyment and encouragement helped the actors overcome their initial stiffness. (Unfortunately, I've seen it work the other way, some audiences just don't respond, no matter what. Then, instead of loosening up, the actors become more wooden.) I've told children to remember that the audience for the most part wants them to succeed; they come to be entertained. This is almost always true in youth productions since most of audience consists of the friends and relatives of the performers. But it is generally true of Community Theaters, as well, the audience comes expecting to be entertained and will meet the performers halfway.
The glory of theater is that it is always a group effort: everyone is important; not just the director and the actors, the technical crew, the writer, the box office, the ushers -- and the audience participate in the making of a great show. By that standard, Much Ado About Shakespeare Workshop's Twelfth Night is a great show.
Director Jeff Dolan's bio indicated a lot of experience as an actor, but this was his first experience as a director. A couple of notes for him: The shifting of furniture between scenes took too much time. He could have eliminated most of the "set changes" by just leaving a couple of benches on stage. We didn't need all the tables and garden furniture. The items chosen were well thought out, but mostly unnecessary. Second, I was taught that the director needs to move around the audience area to be sure that all the action is within the view of the entire audience. I haven't watched too many directors actually move around and examine the lines of sight, but in this case it would have been a good idea. Too much of the action was blocked by the trees planted on the sides of the stage of the amphitheater. (I suppose the school that lent its outdoor arena would have objected if they had been removed. :-)) Still, a director can't count on people sitting where he wants them to. He needs to be sure that all the action is visible no matter what the audience does.
To give credit where it is due, faced with the problem of giving all of participants in the workshop the maximum time on stage, the director solved it neatly by having the students pantomime a street scene. It gave the persons playing minor roles more time on stage, which helps the students get accustomed to being in front of an audience.
Besides, it was cute.
I'm not going to mention the idiot who went out and adjusted the backdrop WHILE THE CAST WAS ON STAGE AND PERFORMING. He is old enough and experienced enough to know better.
I've said it before and I'll say it again. If the cast is having fun, the audience will, too.
In this case, another of my maxims about theater was demonstrated; theater is a participatory activity. The Twelfth Night audience's enjoyment and encouragement helped the actors overcome their initial stiffness. (Unfortunately, I've seen it work the other way, some audiences just don't respond, no matter what. Then, instead of loosening up, the actors become more wooden.) I've told children to remember that the audience for the most part wants them to succeed; they come to be entertained. This is almost always true in youth productions since most of audience consists of the friends and relatives of the performers. But it is generally true of Community Theaters, as well, the audience comes expecting to be entertained and will meet the performers halfway.
The glory of theater is that it is always a group effort: everyone is important; not just the director and the actors, the technical crew, the writer, the box office, the ushers -- and the audience participate in the making of a great show. By that standard, Much Ado About Shakespeare Workshop's Twelfth Night is a great show.
Monday, June 16, 2008
Review: Stolen Shakespeare Guild’s As You Like It
The audience for Stolen Shakespeare Guild's As You Like It outnumbered the cast by one. That was unfortunate because the cast gave a highly-entertaining presentation of Shakespeare. I won't call them amateurs; this is high-quality work. Among the cast bios, I counted 8 with bachelors degrees or above, several in theater, and three current students. One actor mentioned studying theater, but not graduating. The others may have just not mentioned their college training. All in all, a well-educated cast with the know-how to bring Shakespeare to life.
Jule Nelson-Duac was outstanding as Rosalind. She was superbly backed by Lauren Morgan as Celia. Both women delivered Shakespeare's lines with great naturalness, nothing artificial, nothing I'm-reciting-poetry about them.
Shelton Windham as Orlando and Benjamin Darling as Oliver did this as well, ably supporting the women as they deserved to be supported.
I liked Terry Yates in both his roles, but Duke Frederick could have been more menacing.
Steve Lindsay cavorted appropriately as Touchstone.
Jared Johnson as Le Beau was a hoot, but I thought he tried too hard to make his Sir Oliver Mar-Text distinguishable from his Le Beau.
I absolutely loved the mooncalf expression on Porter Grundy's face when he gazed at Phoebe.
Logan Ball was stolidly befuddled as William. His Charles was okay except that I thought his laugh was too artificial. (It was probably intended to be artificial.)
Sarah Bailey as Phoebe was over the top; too bad this isn't taken to schools. Adolescents would totally get her.
Esther Selgraph as Audrey giggled her way through the part -- a nice contrast to the more refined Rosalind and Celia.
J King as Peter gave the impression of being much older than I think he is. People his age in the Renaissance were much older.
Jason Morgan, Laird Thompson, and, David Kefton all gave fine performances -- ably supporting the comedy without distracting from it.
Lisa D'Alessandro enhanced the show by her lovely singing and guitar playing.
Techie stuff:
I noticed that Stefanie Glenn who impressed me in My Fair Lady at Plaza Theater Company last week did the lighting design. Most of the lighting was well done, but a couple of times the lights were rather abruptly switched off in the part of the stage that was not in use. I would have rather that they faded out, because I saw the change out of the corner of my eye. It called attention to itself. You know I hate that. Ms. Glenn is a member of this company; I look forward to seeing more of her work both on-stage and off.
I liked all of Lauren Morgan's costumes but Touchstone's. His was too short, or too long – one or the other. I think the costumer raided a couple of upholstery remnant shops: the best place to get brocades and patterned or solid, heavy fabrics like these. I noticed some hem problems in the first act that seemed to have been fixed by the time the costumes were worn again. The unsung costume department was on the job! (The program lists Rachel Morgan and Michael Lowery as the costume crew.)
The only thing I didn't like was the set. Rachel Kenneth's multilevel concept was fine, but the highest parts were too high. The steps up and down were very steep. I kept worrying that someone was going to fall. The smaller set at the end opposite the door put the actor's heads up by some sort of air conditioning vent that I found very distracting. The effect of the levels could have been achieved without quite so much height especially at that end.
The director, Jason Morgan, clearly understands Shakespearean theater. He effectively used the different areas of the set to move the play through the different scenes. Renaissance theater with its multitude of scenes can be difficult because the act structure of the modern theater is different. He handled it well.
I mentioned earlier that it is too bad this play is not taken to secondary schools. It has long been my belief that English teachers should not be allowed to "teach Shakespeare." These are plays! Meant to be seen and heard, not read! Many people come away from high school hating Shakespeare. The language is too difficult -- but if they saw the plays on stage acted by well-educated casts like this one, they would "get it." This play in particular, As You Like It, is well suited to present to middle school children. We should start on them when they are young so when they are adults a performance like this won't be attended by only a handful of people. A handful of the smartest people in North Texas, I might add.
Stolen Shakespeare Guild will be presenting As You Like It next weekend as well. If you can get to southwest Fort Worth, it will be well-worth your time. If you are one of those whose high school English teacher gave you a massive distaste for Shakespeare, go see this show; you will begin to understand what all the fuss is all about.
www.stolenshakespeareguild.com/
Jule Nelson-Duac was outstanding as Rosalind. She was superbly backed by Lauren Morgan as Celia. Both women delivered Shakespeare's lines with great naturalness, nothing artificial, nothing I'm-reciting-poetry about them.
Shelton Windham as Orlando and Benjamin Darling as Oliver did this as well, ably supporting the women as they deserved to be supported.
I liked Terry Yates in both his roles, but Duke Frederick could have been more menacing.
Steve Lindsay cavorted appropriately as Touchstone.
Jared Johnson as Le Beau was a hoot, but I thought he tried too hard to make his Sir Oliver Mar-Text distinguishable from his Le Beau.
I absolutely loved the mooncalf expression on Porter Grundy's face when he gazed at Phoebe.
Logan Ball was stolidly befuddled as William. His Charles was okay except that I thought his laugh was too artificial. (It was probably intended to be artificial.)
Sarah Bailey as Phoebe was over the top; too bad this isn't taken to schools. Adolescents would totally get her.
Esther Selgraph as Audrey giggled her way through the part -- a nice contrast to the more refined Rosalind and Celia.
J King as Peter gave the impression of being much older than I think he is. People his age in the Renaissance were much older.
Jason Morgan, Laird Thompson, and, David Kefton all gave fine performances -- ably supporting the comedy without distracting from it.
Lisa D'Alessandro enhanced the show by her lovely singing and guitar playing.
Techie stuff:
I noticed that Stefanie Glenn who impressed me in My Fair Lady at Plaza Theater Company last week did the lighting design. Most of the lighting was well done, but a couple of times the lights were rather abruptly switched off in the part of the stage that was not in use. I would have rather that they faded out, because I saw the change out of the corner of my eye. It called attention to itself. You know I hate that. Ms. Glenn is a member of this company; I look forward to seeing more of her work both on-stage and off.
I liked all of Lauren Morgan's costumes but Touchstone's. His was too short, or too long – one or the other. I think the costumer raided a couple of upholstery remnant shops: the best place to get brocades and patterned or solid, heavy fabrics like these. I noticed some hem problems in the first act that seemed to have been fixed by the time the costumes were worn again. The unsung costume department was on the job! (The program lists Rachel Morgan and Michael Lowery as the costume crew.)
The only thing I didn't like was the set. Rachel Kenneth's multilevel concept was fine, but the highest parts were too high. The steps up and down were very steep. I kept worrying that someone was going to fall. The smaller set at the end opposite the door put the actor's heads up by some sort of air conditioning vent that I found very distracting. The effect of the levels could have been achieved without quite so much height especially at that end.
The director, Jason Morgan, clearly understands Shakespearean theater. He effectively used the different areas of the set to move the play through the different scenes. Renaissance theater with its multitude of scenes can be difficult because the act structure of the modern theater is different. He handled it well.
I mentioned earlier that it is too bad this play is not taken to secondary schools. It has long been my belief that English teachers should not be allowed to "teach Shakespeare." These are plays! Meant to be seen and heard, not read! Many people come away from high school hating Shakespeare. The language is too difficult -- but if they saw the plays on stage acted by well-educated casts like this one, they would "get it." This play in particular, As You Like It, is well suited to present to middle school children. We should start on them when they are young so when they are adults a performance like this won't be attended by only a handful of people. A handful of the smartest people in North Texas, I might add.
Stolen Shakespeare Guild will be presenting As You Like It next weekend as well. If you can get to southwest Fort Worth, it will be well-worth your time. If you are one of those whose high school English teacher gave you a massive distaste for Shakespeare, go see this show; you will begin to understand what all the fuss is all about.
www.stolenshakespeareguild.com/
Pygmalion and My Fair Lady
News Flash: The ending that I so hate to My Fair Lady is not Shaw's ending.
Okay, I should have read the play, Pygmalion. In my defense, I can't read every great play, and Shaw is not in my field of concentration. I have always intended to read it. Finally, I did. (Actually I didn't, but I skimmed through to get the gist and to see if the ending matched My Fair Lady.) Not only does Eliza not go back to Higgins, but the play ends with her determination to marry Freddy. Shaw leaves the rest ambiguous. We don't know what she does, but fall at Higgins feet and fetch his slippers, she doesn't.
My estimation of Shaw went up several notches.
Apparently, he hated the "romantic" happy endings that directors insisted on tacking on to Pygmalion. My Fair Lady has one of those sappy, happy endings -- Eliza returning to Higgins to accept being his downtrodden what? Not wife, certainly. Dependent, perhaps. A fitting 1950's Stepford-Wife ending.
Shaw wrote a long essay about what happens next to the characters. He thought it was pretty obvious – and so do I. Based on the play as he wrote it, the happy ending of Eliza and Higgins getting together just doesn't work. Of course, he is not the only author to be forced to change his ending or to have his ending changed for him. People in general -- and publishers and producers in particular -- have a hard time accepting ambiguous endings, that life is ambiguous. They seem to want it tied up in a nice little package with nothing real leaking out.
Life leaks out.
So I was right to hate the ending. My storyteller's instincts were right; it didn't fit the rest of the play.
Not that anything is going to change.
As I've said before, when you're right, you get to be right.
Okay, I should have read the play, Pygmalion. In my defense, I can't read every great play, and Shaw is not in my field of concentration. I have always intended to read it. Finally, I did. (Actually I didn't, but I skimmed through to get the gist and to see if the ending matched My Fair Lady.) Not only does Eliza not go back to Higgins, but the play ends with her determination to marry Freddy. Shaw leaves the rest ambiguous. We don't know what she does, but fall at Higgins feet and fetch his slippers, she doesn't.
My estimation of Shaw went up several notches.
Apparently, he hated the "romantic" happy endings that directors insisted on tacking on to Pygmalion. My Fair Lady has one of those sappy, happy endings -- Eliza returning to Higgins to accept being his downtrodden what? Not wife, certainly. Dependent, perhaps. A fitting 1950's Stepford-Wife ending.
Shaw wrote a long essay about what happens next to the characters. He thought it was pretty obvious – and so do I. Based on the play as he wrote it, the happy ending of Eliza and Higgins getting together just doesn't work. Of course, he is not the only author to be forced to change his ending or to have his ending changed for him. People in general -- and publishers and producers in particular -- have a hard time accepting ambiguous endings, that life is ambiguous. They seem to want it tied up in a nice little package with nothing real leaking out.
Life leaks out.
So I was right to hate the ending. My storyteller's instincts were right; it didn't fit the rest of the play.
Not that anything is going to change.
As I've said before, when you're right, you get to be right.
Review: Plaza Theater Company’s My Fair Lady
I love Community Theater! I know people who look down on amateurs, but not me. Most of the time the standard of acting in Community Theaters is very high. To some extent we all go through life acting our parts so I suppose that high standard isn't too surprising.
Community Theater productions of musicals are almost always high energy shows. And, as I've told actors before, if the actors are having fun, the audience will, too.
The actors in Plaza Theater Company's production of My Fair Lady were definitely having fun!
JaceSon Barrus who played the role of Henry Higgins was excellent. I will remember his delivery of the line "I hadn't quite realized you were leaving" for a very long time. I can imagine the temptation to over act in the role or channel Rex Harrison, but I thought he did a great job of slightly underplaying Higgins, except when it was appropriate to let loose. He gave the role emotional range.
Eliza Doolittle sang beautifully. I'm not sure who I saw because the program lists two actresses in the role. I liked her interpretation, but I would have liked her a little bit better if she had stood up straight. Just as Richard Gere never quite convinced me that he was a naval officer in An Officer and a Gentleman, she never quite convinced me that she was a lady. Posture, my dear, posture. (But David James Elliott convinced me that he was a naval officer on JAG. Oh, he did.) Standing up straight with her head and shoulders properly aligned would not only make her more convincing as a lady, but give her voice more resonance.
I liked James T Long as Colonel Pickering very much. In one scene, Col Pickering is sprawled on a sofa exhausted when Eliza suddenly "gets it." His body tenses and he opens one eye. Superb!
Judy Keller as Mrs. Higgins and Jay Lewis as Alfred Doolittle gave spirited performances.
Stefanie Glenn, Mrs. Pierce's, mike wasn't working at her first entrance. I wondered if she was even miked, but I checked after the show. She was.) I thought she responded with the proper amount of exasperation with Higgins. I especially liked her hand gestures when Higgins was signing "Why Can't a Woman Be More Like a Man." She was one of the three whose interpretation I liked better than the actors in the movie.
Michael Sizemore as Freddy is one of those singers that make me itch to get him to a good vocal coach. He has a very nice voice, but he is strangling it. A good coach would have him singing from his diaphragm. Other than that, he was another of the actors whose interpretation of the character I liked better than the movie. He projects great warmth.
On to the technical stuff so dear to my heart.
Costumes: The costumes were lovely. I especially liked the Pearly King (costermonger) costume. However, the cockneys' clothes were much too clean. The costumes were probably rented, in which case the cast was not free to dirty them up and make them properly ragged. Too bad. This is one of the realities of Community Theater. I understand the problem and the compromises that have to be made, but the critic's job is to point out what would make the show perfect. In this show, perfection would have dirtied the costumes.
Makeup: Given the costuming problem, the make up could have been tempered a bit. A good director strives for balance. If the costumes couldn't be dirty, the makeup should have had a lighter touch. After the show it occurred to me that the ensemble must have spend most of their time backstage changing their make up from dirty to clean to dirty again. :-)
Set: The set was well planned for an arena stage. The stagehands did a great job of the set changes under the blue lights.
Lighting: One of my mantras is that if one watches a show and has a comment about the lighting – it isn't very good lighting. This applies only to general audience comments, of course, and not technical people like me. I felt that for most of the show the lighting was suitably unobtrusive. There were a couple of jarring changes, but mostly it was okay. Then, toward the end, in the Henry Higgins solo on the street, it was almost like some kid got a hold of the light board and started playing with it. At that point it became a light production – very inappropriate.
Sound: It is too bad that the show used canned sound, but I guess a small orchestra was out of the question. This is another of the realities of Community Theater; live music is often unachievable. Other than that and the possible problem with one mike the sound quality was fine.
Directing: Theater in the Round is very difficult. My hat is off to the directors, JaceSon and Tina Barrus, for blocking their actors to give all three sides (four if they had sold enough tickets to fill that fourth side) of the audience a clear line of sight of the actors and the action. But speaking of that, there was a little too much motion in the opening garden market. I found it distracting at times. I also didn't like the way they kept standing Eliza on a chair. But I know how difficult directing on an arena stage can be. The directors carried it off with finesse. I was impressed. Bravo!
I've already stated my opinion of the movie/play My Fair Lady. I am not going to reiterate it here. (You can check the archives of my blog if you are interested.) Throughout the second act I was hoping for a better ending than the movie – and I was disappointed. I know, however, that the Company really had no control over the ending. Contracts and things, you know.
Overall, in spite of a couple of things like obtrusive lighting, too-clean costumes, and the lack of live music, I thoroughly enjoyed myself at the performance of My Fair Lady. Why was that? Because the cast was having so much fun! Since they were having a great time, so was I. The cast's infectious good spirits communicated itself to the audience. That is the strength of Community Theater. Everybody, cast, crew and especially audience, has a good time.
I'll be back to this see this company again.
www.plaza-theatre.com
Community Theater productions of musicals are almost always high energy shows. And, as I've told actors before, if the actors are having fun, the audience will, too.
The actors in Plaza Theater Company's production of My Fair Lady were definitely having fun!
JaceSon Barrus who played the role of Henry Higgins was excellent. I will remember his delivery of the line "I hadn't quite realized you were leaving" for a very long time. I can imagine the temptation to over act in the role or channel Rex Harrison, but I thought he did a great job of slightly underplaying Higgins, except when it was appropriate to let loose. He gave the role emotional range.
Eliza Doolittle sang beautifully. I'm not sure who I saw because the program lists two actresses in the role. I liked her interpretation, but I would have liked her a little bit better if she had stood up straight. Just as Richard Gere never quite convinced me that he was a naval officer in An Officer and a Gentleman, she never quite convinced me that she was a lady. Posture, my dear, posture. (But David James Elliott convinced me that he was a naval officer on JAG. Oh, he did.) Standing up straight with her head and shoulders properly aligned would not only make her more convincing as a lady, but give her voice more resonance.
I liked James T Long as Colonel Pickering very much. In one scene, Col Pickering is sprawled on a sofa exhausted when Eliza suddenly "gets it." His body tenses and he opens one eye. Superb!
Judy Keller as Mrs. Higgins and Jay Lewis as Alfred Doolittle gave spirited performances.
Stefanie Glenn, Mrs. Pierce's, mike wasn't working at her first entrance. I wondered if she was even miked, but I checked after the show. She was.) I thought she responded with the proper amount of exasperation with Higgins. I especially liked her hand gestures when Higgins was signing "Why Can't a Woman Be More Like a Man." She was one of the three whose interpretation I liked better than the actors in the movie.
Michael Sizemore as Freddy is one of those singers that make me itch to get him to a good vocal coach. He has a very nice voice, but he is strangling it. A good coach would have him singing from his diaphragm. Other than that, he was another of the actors whose interpretation of the character I liked better than the movie. He projects great warmth.
On to the technical stuff so dear to my heart.
Costumes: The costumes were lovely. I especially liked the Pearly King (costermonger) costume. However, the cockneys' clothes were much too clean. The costumes were probably rented, in which case the cast was not free to dirty them up and make them properly ragged. Too bad. This is one of the realities of Community Theater. I understand the problem and the compromises that have to be made, but the critic's job is to point out what would make the show perfect. In this show, perfection would have dirtied the costumes.
Makeup: Given the costuming problem, the make up could have been tempered a bit. A good director strives for balance. If the costumes couldn't be dirty, the makeup should have had a lighter touch. After the show it occurred to me that the ensemble must have spend most of their time backstage changing their make up from dirty to clean to dirty again. :-)
Set: The set was well planned for an arena stage. The stagehands did a great job of the set changes under the blue lights.
Lighting: One of my mantras is that if one watches a show and has a comment about the lighting – it isn't very good lighting. This applies only to general audience comments, of course, and not technical people like me. I felt that for most of the show the lighting was suitably unobtrusive. There were a couple of jarring changes, but mostly it was okay. Then, toward the end, in the Henry Higgins solo on the street, it was almost like some kid got a hold of the light board and started playing with it. At that point it became a light production – very inappropriate.
Sound: It is too bad that the show used canned sound, but I guess a small orchestra was out of the question. This is another of the realities of Community Theater; live music is often unachievable. Other than that and the possible problem with one mike the sound quality was fine.
Directing: Theater in the Round is very difficult. My hat is off to the directors, JaceSon and Tina Barrus, for blocking their actors to give all three sides (four if they had sold enough tickets to fill that fourth side) of the audience a clear line of sight of the actors and the action. But speaking of that, there was a little too much motion in the opening garden market. I found it distracting at times. I also didn't like the way they kept standing Eliza on a chair. But I know how difficult directing on an arena stage can be. The directors carried it off with finesse. I was impressed. Bravo!
I've already stated my opinion of the movie/play My Fair Lady. I am not going to reiterate it here. (You can check the archives of my blog if you are interested.) Throughout the second act I was hoping for a better ending than the movie – and I was disappointed. I know, however, that the Company really had no control over the ending. Contracts and things, you know.
Overall, in spite of a couple of things like obtrusive lighting, too-clean costumes, and the lack of live music, I thoroughly enjoyed myself at the performance of My Fair Lady. Why was that? Because the cast was having so much fun! Since they were having a great time, so was I. The cast's infectious good spirits communicated itself to the audience. That is the strength of Community Theater. Everybody, cast, crew and especially audience, has a good time.
I'll be back to this see this company again.
www.plaza-theatre.com
Sunday, June 15, 2008
Review: La Fille du Regiment
I wrote this several weeks ago and didn't post it then.
Opera plots are scant, to say the least. Any novice screenwriter, any aspiring romance writer, any tenderfoot western writer could devise a better plot than the average opera. In general, boy meets girl, boy and girl separate/are separated, boy and girl are reunited, and then, depending on whether it is a comedy or a tragedy, they either die or live happily ever after. Original?
Hardly.
Ah, but the music.
Yesterday, I felt such joy! After watching a performance of La Fille du Regiment filmed at the Met and presented at my local wide screen movie theater, I felt that I was almost walking on air. An abnormal response I assure you, considering the three most joyous moments in my life, the births of my three children, I spent flat on my back!
A friend of mine has structured his life around the idea that people should never leave a theater without feeling something. Unfortunately, to him, the "feeling something" is most nearly akin to the Greek ideal of Catharsis. I don't entirely disagree with him, but joy is something, too; something too seldom felt. I admire this friend who has accomplished much with his life, but I want joy in my life, as well as catharsis.
In La Fille du Regiment, coloratura soprano, Natalie Dessay's, mobile face and sparkling singing meshed with the effortlessly dazzling Juan Diego Florez. He was even awarded the honor of an encore at the Met for his aria "A mis amis." (Unfortunately, we were not given that opportunity.) I have seldom felt so much from one singer singing. There are not words. The performance went beyond my enormous vocabulary to only what can be felt and not said.
When the euphoria wore off last night, I started to wonder why I have denied myself this joy for so many years. I love music, vocal music of any kind I have been almost phobic about going to events alone. In the past I have bought two tickets for events thinking I could find someone to go with me. I'm not really sure why I've always thought that I couldn't go alone. But I'm over that now. (I hope) You can expect me at all kinds of performances by myself.
Opera plots are scant, to say the least. Any novice screenwriter, any aspiring romance writer, any tenderfoot western writer could devise a better plot than the average opera. In general, boy meets girl, boy and girl separate/are separated, boy and girl are reunited, and then, depending on whether it is a comedy or a tragedy, they either die or live happily ever after. Original?
Hardly.
Ah, but the music.
Yesterday, I felt such joy! After watching a performance of La Fille du Regiment filmed at the Met and presented at my local wide screen movie theater, I felt that I was almost walking on air. An abnormal response I assure you, considering the three most joyous moments in my life, the births of my three children, I spent flat on my back!
A friend of mine has structured his life around the idea that people should never leave a theater without feeling something. Unfortunately, to him, the "feeling something" is most nearly akin to the Greek ideal of Catharsis. I don't entirely disagree with him, but joy is something, too; something too seldom felt. I admire this friend who has accomplished much with his life, but I want joy in my life, as well as catharsis.
In La Fille du Regiment, coloratura soprano, Natalie Dessay's, mobile face and sparkling singing meshed with the effortlessly dazzling Juan Diego Florez. He was even awarded the honor of an encore at the Met for his aria "A mis amis." (Unfortunately, we were not given that opportunity.) I have seldom felt so much from one singer singing. There are not words. The performance went beyond my enormous vocabulary to only what can be felt and not said.
When the euphoria wore off last night, I started to wonder why I have denied myself this joy for so many years. I love music, vocal music of any kind I have been almost phobic about going to events alone. In the past I have bought two tickets for events thinking I could find someone to go with me. I'm not really sure why I've always thought that I couldn't go alone. But I'm over that now. (I hope) You can expect me at all kinds of performances by myself.
Review: My Fair Lady
First posted: August 11, 2007
I've never really liked the movie, My Fair Lady.
A lot of people thought the Julie Andrews should have had the part and considered her Academy Award for Mary Poppins that year a kind of rebuke to the producers. They cast the star, Audrey Hepburn, for her drawing power rather than the woman who was famous for the role on Broadway.
Looking back -- the controversy benefited the box office of both movies.
When I remember that I didn't really like My Fair Lady, I think about the controversy and think – get over it. I should give the Audrey Hepburn movie a chance. I should watch it again with an open mind, not comparing her to Julie Andrews, but evaluating the movie on its own merits.
I watched it again. I still don't like My Fair Lady.
Or more correctly, I hate the last minute or so of My Fair Lady.
If one is going to hate a minute or so of a movie, the worst possible minute to hate is the last minute. Think about it. If one doesn't like a minute or so in the middle, something that one likes will probably happen soon, before one gives up and leaves or turns off the DVD. Of course if one is annoyed or finds distasteful the first few minutes, one can always turn it off or leave, but most people will give it a few more minutes to see if things start looking up. Especially in a theater, where people have paid to be there, they seldom walk out too early.
But hating the last minute leaves a really bad taste. There is no getting over it.
Audrey Hepburn has given Rex Harrison a large piece of her mind and walked out, saying she won't be back. He sings his realization that he loves her in the beautiful "I've Grown Accustomed to her Face" and goes home. What does he do? Nothing. She just comes back. He asks for his slippers. Curtain.
I never could figure out why, with all the maids in his house, the slippers were downstairs in the first place.
It appears to me that he hasn't learned anything, that he will just go on as he has before. She stood up for herself – and then just capitulates. She didn't change anything either.
One of the problems is that apparently the Shaw estate required them to stick very closely to Pygmalion. If this is Shaw's ending, it gives me a very poor idea of his opinion of women.
Compare this to the ending of Can-Can. Shirley MacLaine is the proprietor of a café notorious for showcasing the Can Can. Frank Sinatra plays her lawyer who is always on call to defend MacLaine and her dancers from the law. They are having an affair. She wants marriage; he doesn't. She decides to move on and look for a more stable relationship. He realizes he loves her, singing to Juliet Prowse, "You have a lovely face, but it's the wrong face." He goes to elaborate lengths to fake an arrest. She is thrown into a paddy wagon screaming "Call my lawyer!" He is waiting there saying, "See, when you are in trouble, who do you call for? Me. Let's get married."
Sinatra has learned his lesson and is doing something to win his lover back. Much better than "Where are my slippers?"
Of course, in the fifties, marriage was the only possible outcome.
MacLaine is a strong and independent character. Hepburn never develops a backbone. Her outburst is that of a petulant child. Who comes back contrite. Give me a break.
Both movies have lovely music, great costumes, wonderful supporting actors, but when Can-Can is over, I'm content, when My Fair Lady is over, I'm annoyed.
I've never really liked the movie, My Fair Lady.
A lot of people thought the Julie Andrews should have had the part and considered her Academy Award for Mary Poppins that year a kind of rebuke to the producers. They cast the star, Audrey Hepburn, for her drawing power rather than the woman who was famous for the role on Broadway.
Looking back -- the controversy benefited the box office of both movies.
When I remember that I didn't really like My Fair Lady, I think about the controversy and think – get over it. I should give the Audrey Hepburn movie a chance. I should watch it again with an open mind, not comparing her to Julie Andrews, but evaluating the movie on its own merits.
I watched it again. I still don't like My Fair Lady.
Or more correctly, I hate the last minute or so of My Fair Lady.
If one is going to hate a minute or so of a movie, the worst possible minute to hate is the last minute. Think about it. If one doesn't like a minute or so in the middle, something that one likes will probably happen soon, before one gives up and leaves or turns off the DVD. Of course if one is annoyed or finds distasteful the first few minutes, one can always turn it off or leave, but most people will give it a few more minutes to see if things start looking up. Especially in a theater, where people have paid to be there, they seldom walk out too early.
But hating the last minute leaves a really bad taste. There is no getting over it.
Audrey Hepburn has given Rex Harrison a large piece of her mind and walked out, saying she won't be back. He sings his realization that he loves her in the beautiful "I've Grown Accustomed to her Face" and goes home. What does he do? Nothing. She just comes back. He asks for his slippers. Curtain.
I never could figure out why, with all the maids in his house, the slippers were downstairs in the first place.
It appears to me that he hasn't learned anything, that he will just go on as he has before. She stood up for herself – and then just capitulates. She didn't change anything either.
One of the problems is that apparently the Shaw estate required them to stick very closely to Pygmalion. If this is Shaw's ending, it gives me a very poor idea of his opinion of women.
Compare this to the ending of Can-Can. Shirley MacLaine is the proprietor of a café notorious for showcasing the Can Can. Frank Sinatra plays her lawyer who is always on call to defend MacLaine and her dancers from the law. They are having an affair. She wants marriage; he doesn't. She decides to move on and look for a more stable relationship. He realizes he loves her, singing to Juliet Prowse, "You have a lovely face, but it's the wrong face." He goes to elaborate lengths to fake an arrest. She is thrown into a paddy wagon screaming "Call my lawyer!" He is waiting there saying, "See, when you are in trouble, who do you call for? Me. Let's get married."
Sinatra has learned his lesson and is doing something to win his lover back. Much better than "Where are my slippers?"
Of course, in the fifties, marriage was the only possible outcome.
MacLaine is a strong and independent character. Hepburn never develops a backbone. Her outburst is that of a petulant child. Who comes back contrite. Give me a break.
Both movies have lovely music, great costumes, wonderful supporting actors, but when Can-Can is over, I'm content, when My Fair Lady is over, I'm annoyed.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
