GODS–A Mythical Reality

A Real Beginning for Rob Kristie’s GODS–A Mythical Musical at The Grand Theatre.

We have all seen directors cringe as they watch a production they have directed after leaving it in the hands of cast and crew. Imagine if you wrote the script… In this case, Rob Kristie wrote the book, music and lyrics for GODS—A Mythical Musical that was “performed” on the Grand Theatre’s stage in Williamstown, New Jersey.

GODS is Kristie’s second original musical. The first was entitled THE DOLL–a Raggedy Musical, which began as a staged reading at the RITZ Theater in Haddon Township, NJ. Later a full production evolved with eight performances at the Sketch Club in Woodbury, NJ, and that musical was nominated for a Perry award in 2011 for OUTSTANDING ORIGINAL MUSICAL.

Rob Kristie’s GODS was a different kind of stage reading for me in that it was a musical, and therefore contained more elements than the standard play reading. A review of a staged reading is not unheard of, but it, too, must contain the reflection and comment in a proper perspective.

GODS—MYTHICAL MUSICAL took place at the Grand to a nearly full house to see if this pared down realization of his idea resonated with an audience. While the staged reading experience with amplified acting, music, sound effects, and lights was unusual, it was necessary. Obviously if a play contains music–well, that has to be audience-tested, too. With the bigger audience, there was more opportunity for proper input. Hence, The Grand Theatre was a great venue choice.

Edith Hamilton’s Mythology—a book many of us used in school–about the Greek, Roman and Norse gods whose dalliances with humans created an exciting bridge to an immortal world inspired Kristie.

The world in which the gods operate is a little different now. While active in ancient times, the gods (all of them) exist in a passive state, coming to Earth only to observe or participate briefly without getting involved.

As you might expect, immortal gods and mortal humans once again collide. This time it’s on a cruise ship at sea. Here, a beautiful goddess catches the eye of a handsome British performer, and they fall in love at first sight. Of course, they can never be together—or can they? How does a human prove worthy to a god(dess)? For that matter, how do any of us prove our worth to  the guardians of someone we care about? Naturally, there is more, but I don’t want to spoil it for you. We must not anger the gods.

The musical is essentially an interesting variation of “boy wins girl,” “boy loves girl and she loves him,” “girl loses boy,” and “boy gets girl back.” All that and be careful not to anger the gods.

We see the world briefly from the eyes of the gods. We see a detached but meaningful look at world society today. The characters are interesting and the music is engaging, while the story takes us back to our childhood studies of human beliefs.

Making theatre magic is not as easy as it looks…and that is because most of the productions we, audience members, attend have had the benefit of testing, and changes and/or adaptations suggested by another audience.

In this setting, the audience must create each scene in its mind while attending to the action on stage…so the experience is participatory to say the least. The actors/singers themselves have to produce art with the barest of direction, seeing their characters in a stage designer’s environment, in a production that hasn’t happened yet. However, the audience must try to do so as well. Actual productions would differ with the casting and directorial vision. In Rob Kristie’s GODS –A MYTHICAL MUSICAL, there appears to be plenty of room for production style variations. That’s a good thing.

Kristie has created an extra character, a narrator, to tell the audience the stage directions. Accidental or not, the narrator, played by Glenn Fennimore, was quite entertaining and presented an intriguing element in the theatrical storytelling not unlike the mythology itself. Nine actors/singers, including Fennimore: Jeff Blomquist, Cierra Olmo, Danielle Dipillo, Lani Campagno, Chuck Gill, Steve Pracilio, Amanda Peacock and Tyrone Fuimaono gave enthusiastic, finished performances on stage.

The music was consistent and lively with catchy lyrics, although a couple musical numbers and dialogue among the gods seemed to slow down the action in the second act. The first act ended in a “chirp,” rather than an exciting change. A tableau of frozen character action might have achieved a stronger effect or depth of change. Or, a stronger song. Or, any number of theatrical devices. Perhaps, even the opposite of a tableau—a dance number—might achieve the same success.

It takes a staged reading to see those very comments emerge.

Although all the songs had merit, one number in particular stood out for me. It had a country feel to it rather than the typical “musical theatre” sound. By itself, it seems out of place, but such a good song deserves to be heard, and maybe more with same “difference.” Then, the GODS musical would be distinctive indeed.

Theatre is a collaborative art that has to start somewhere. Somewhere is not always a theatre. It is often a bare room with actors sitting around a table with a small audience looking on. Kristie has done better than that in having both staged readings in established theatres and by doing so was able to add more elements, i.e., sound effects, music and some lighting. Ultimately it will be he who will weigh and make the decisions to sublimate his art.

A staged reading is the first time an audience sees the beginning of theatre magic. It works without the benefit of direction, blocking, creating and setting, costuming and lighting a stage—essentially the minimum of what appears to be the beginnings of a theatrical production. If the “reading” is a musical as this one, the instruments are basic as well. From this, the creator solicits feedback intended to improve the work. A brave move, but it is the next step.

As an actor who has collaborated on several original plays and screenplays, I can tell you that bringing an original work to the stage takes nerve, but it is an exhilarating and innovative time for all involved. Even for the audience. Harder work is ahead.

Of course, this is not really the beginning for a production; the creator has decided it is time for audience input. Long before that, friends and family members gave their input. Often, it takes years for the theatre artist’s conception to fruition on stage even in its barest of forms.

It’s good to see this one made it. The best is yet to come.

For more on GODS – A Mythical Musical, check out its Face Book page.

GODS–A Mythical Musical
Written and directed by Rob Kristie
Coming soon to a theatre near you.

Giant Robots Are Passé

For novels that is… Some who publish young adult books still use them, I suppose. And, graphic novels. Movies, on the other hand, get away with giant robots flying around the sky destroying everything in their paths.

A very smart scientist–an off-the-chart smart scientist–found a way to work around the effects of gravity, the pull of the sun and other space objects revolving around it, and some basic rules of aerodynamics.

We don’t bother to count errors in the science of an action film. Robots can fight on the ground, in the sky and even in space. Spacecraft or other flying machines stop in mid-air so we assume they are equipped with anti-gravity devices. Ordinary machines evolve into superior, “cool-looking” warriors.

It’s exciting…in film.

Unfortunately, if writers do write something comparable in a science-fiction novel today, it would most likely be trashed or sold to Hollywood, but not published traditionally. (Okay, maybe it can pass for a young adult novel, but that’s the market anyway.)

With today’s economic conditions, most any novel dealing with the above would be considered hackneyed by the editors, and I can’t say I’d disagree. Robots, with the exception of microbots and other variants, have lost the top spot in science-fiction genre literature.

Cyber warfare is different. Here we are still dealing with a human-made attempt to create a helpful artificial intelligence and that becomes sentient. What happens after it is created and placed is the story.

So, I broke the publisher’s cardinal rule, knowing that the conflict, war against machines, is passé, over with, and done in. But, I did it anyway. I used the Cyber Bio War as the backdrop for my novel. What my characters experience is an unwinnable war against an evolving enemy with not just some, but all of the resources. Yet, the continue the fight. Humans are and always will be inferior with the usual weaponry, but they will not give up their humanity.

After I extrapolated existing science and societal trends I had to go there–to that world I created. Good writers can break the rules of good grammar in telling a story. Why can’t I explore content in the same way.

In Makr’s Shadow, I broke the rules of the latest publishing trend and paid the price, publishing an e-book instead. But I still think it is worth it.

Robots in science fiction literature seem to be window dressing, an accepted part of future society, but there’s always the exception. A different use, an unusual place. Creative fortune.

However, my “robots” are different. Cyberts, my “robots,” are mobile extensions of a central evolving artificial intelligence. Cyber are not the automatons of the past but a new accepted, sentient species–a race of thinking machines–machines that can do anything a Bio can do, only better.

At the moment, these Cyber are effectively maintaining the planet and pacifying its inhabitants by waging war on dissidents.

We see a lot intelligent machinery in films–especially with the Marvel and DC comic book superheroes. Who else could giant robots fight? Normal humans would be crushed in a minute. The story would read like a metallic Jurassic Park, except there would be no eating the dead. I’ve yet to see a robot that does that. Massive destruction, yes. Eating its victims, no.

Film producers want to create images that astound, not literature that fascinates and discusses the way we interact with our technology. There are a few exceptions like Gravity,  Apollo 13, and a few others that deal with existing technology are still able to do that. Most films that pretend to be science fiction contain little plot or character development.

Now-a-days, most science fiction is about the effect of new science discoveries or technology gone awry, i.e. the atomic bomb. Still, the weird variations get in. You know them when you see them and put the book down, sorry you picked it up in the first place.

The definitions and types have grown far and wide with the interest and imagination of those who read SF. Still, the genre experts (call them publishers) say science fiction literature should focus on the “higher levels” of hard science for the most part; however, some publishers like to throw in fantasy (personal choice?), wars fought against superior alien technology and war’s that end the world, leaving a few survivors. All of these conflicts and situations, too, are obvious and overused.

However, there was a time when robots (uncool now) served in the background and often played a leading role in a novel of ideas. Isaac Asimov started a trend in 1946 when his I, Robot was published. It was also made into an science fiction action film with Will Smith.

Asimov created the Three Rules of Robotics:

1. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
2. A robot must obey the orders given to it by human beings, except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.

For the most part, these rules have been respected by colleagues whenever robots are in contact with human beings.

In Makr’s Shadow was influenced by the work of Isaac Asimov (a highly underrated author) and Kurt Vonnegut, Jr. (a mainstream writer). Both were writers of the literature of ideas. I hope I’ve managed to merge the essence of each, and have done so respectfully.

Unlike Asimov, who wrote science fiction and was delighted by it, Kurt Vonnegut, Jr. denied that any of his fiction fit in the science fiction genre, when all of his novels have elements of SF by definition, and easily fit a definition of SF very well.

It may have been an act, but I think he wanted to be accepted totally in the mainstream rather than appear side by side with that SF trash–genre fiction. You know, the kind that had aliens or robots in it?

Because it’s satire, does that make it mainstream literature. Vonnegut made fun of science fiction in The Sirens of Titan, but if you look at all his books you will find they either fit the definitions or contain elements of science fiction. And, unless he’s poking fun, you won’t see any robots. Ironically, his imaginative and thought-provoking novels make excellent cases for writing soft or social science fiction.

With the exception of Cat’s Cradle (atomic bomb), he uses the soft sciences of psychology, sociology, economics, history, time travel, and alternate realities or universes to make his point, as opposed to the “hard” sciences like chemistry, physics and biology.

In Makr’s Shadow, the ongoing conflict is the background in the same way as Vonnegut’s parody of science fiction masks his underlying idea. That one day we will develop artificial intelligence one day is certain. How we choose to use it will be more important than the development itself.

My dystopian digital novel, In Makr’s Shadow is a rock and roll, roller coaster of action, suspense, humor and character development– highlighted with positive values–and, if you can believe it, an evolving family.

According to Tricia Johnson, The Word Weaver, UK, In Makr’s Shadow is ” a superb read…edge of seat stuff until the very end!!”

And, she should know because she helped fine tune it. The ending is, of course, to be kept secret; however, it can be said the story is more about people than the machines.

Divergent — a Science Fiction Dystopia Grown-Ups Can Love

The question everyone who hasn’t seen the film, Divergent, wants to know: is Shailene Woodley as effective as Jennifer Lawrence in playing similar roles? The only difference, I see, is in the plot, something neither actress could do anything about.

Woodley is as engaging as the rest of the cast that includes Theo James, Ashley Judd, Jai Courtney, Kate Winslet, Maggie Q and Ray Stevenson. Woodley, who looks like she could be Lawrence’s sister, was seriously considered for The Hunger Games, and was expected to have the lead in Catching Fire, but Lawrence made it back. Catching Fire has a more decipherable plot than The Hunger Games. Woodley’s “Tris” in Divergent is as wonderful as Lawrence’s character, “Katniss.” It’s easy to love them both.

Divergent, a young adult book transferred to film, is as entertaining as any following the dystopian trend, including The Hunger Games and its sequel, Catching Fire. For adults who enjoyed those films, then Divergent does it one better.  The Hunger Games was a good film in many ways. The basis for the story is convenient rather than realistic if we extrapolate our own world trends; the society and logic for the games don’t work for all some of us reality-thinking adults. It still makes for a good romance adventure tale.

If we were thinking on a broader scale, we might ask a lot of questions if we wanted to, but we don’t. Divergent, as others based on young adult books, is voyeuristic in that it involves prying observation of “our own children” represented on screen. We want to see our children brave, heroic and caring. We’d like them to save the world we messed up. For grown-ups, Divergent and The Hunger Games fill our need for vicarious thrills. We yearn to be young and adventurous again. We love watching the young win–even it is against others the same age. As long as those hurt or killed are deserving (meaning bad guys), or going to kill the good guys.

What makes Divergent different from the rest (and I don’t pretend to know all the films made or being made in this vein today) is that the scene is on a larger scale and the young people are entry-level to the scene. Their journey is just beginning. Grown-ups have already screwed things up by dividing society by its values. Evil has the usual melodramatic pervasiveness in these films; there is always a villain to wants to make what seems to be a good plan (the world as it is presented to us) even better.

Hollywood has the habit of latching on to a particular approach and milking it for all its worth, which, of course, makes dollar sense. In this case it is another dystopian science fiction (SF) young adult novel and made into a film, rated PG-13. While not particularly trendy in adult science fiction, dystopian fiction is perfect for adolescent fiction–and films, it seems.

Filmmakers are able to attract large numbers of those who go out to movies the most: teenagers, and without spending hundreds of millions of dollars. Divergent was made for a mere 85 million–very economical by today’s standard.

 

Cruise Entertainment — Looking for Theatre

While the rest of the mid-Atlantic and Northeastern U.S. was in the midst of a Nor’easter, I had the pleasure cruising over the holidays–a Christmas cruise in the western Caribbean–aboard a Holland America cruise ship. To any young Philadelphia actor, singer or dancer who has the opportunity to audition and perform on a cruise ship, I say, “Go for it!” It is a great opportunity! And you should read no further, lest you be disillusioned.

Wilmington does not have a cruise port as yet, but cruisers who don’t wish to fly to another destination to catch the ship, can go out of Philadelphia or Baltimore and not have to drive terribly far.

As a platform to refine the performing artist’s craft, as an opportunity to try all of it, cruise shows can’t be beat; it is still a super platform for experience for a young actor.

Cruise entertainment that looks like theatre is still more like a Vegas revue.  Let’s take it as it is.  With the brassy and booming feel of the WWE (professional wrestling), the cruise director announces the show, “Let’s hear it for the entertainment crew of the MS Noordam, and if you see anything you like in particular during the show, please let them know with your applause—so here they are–!” So, open your eyes and ears and let us entertain you.

I am an experienced cruiser, but unlike many who delight in cruising 20 times or more, I am fine with my several cruises. Just so you know, I have not traveled on all cruise lines and I’m sure there are exceptions.  In those cruises I have traveled on, the following has been my experience:

Something for everyone is the rule. Let nothing offend—except the skimpy costumes with lots of shine and sequins—the more “Vegas” the better, which, of course, seems a contradiction. No inappropriate language, only the slightest sexual innuendo. The overall stage-show experience for me is an in-your-face entertainment with very little true audience interaction or emotion. The entertainment is so pat, it lacks the feeling of live theatre. If you want that, see the magician or comedians; they connect with audience at least.

To be perfectly fair, I found the shows to be very entertaining–just not terribly genuine.  It is the usual performance fare though, with all that comes with a high tech cruise ship; resources a small professional company would die for, a dedicated triple-threat trainedvcast, a stage that moves with various levels, perfect lighting and sound, costumes with color and glitz.

The last show I saw sealed my opinion that highlighting theatre on ship can be wrong.  It was called SIMPLY BROADWAY and it was far from that. The Broadway tunes were familiar, and the cast did say they would take liberties with the numbers; however that was the big mistake.  And the changes to the arrangements were not very simple.

Different arrangements are necessary with different singers, but the changes here were more than that; they were also more than making a medley of popular numbers.  I found those changes distracting when applied to the already proven numbers less entertaining than the originals.   I liked what they did with two male singers, singing “Maria” from WEST SIDE STORY; but I did not like the two numbers by female singers, one from GUYS AND DOLLS that was totally devoid of “acting,” which made particular number so memorable in the original show, and a mediocre version of the most famous soprano number from PHANTOM.

A show directed, choreographed and performed creatively can enhance the original and add to the music and songs’ appeal, yet here it seemed no one could decide who should take the lead on this song or that–so they did something that let everyone play an equal part. Sometimes a duet needs only two people and more is a crowd.

Now the difference between a cruise show and another form of entertainment, the cabaret musical you might find in small venue like a restaurant or club on land. The cabaret approach seems to be the only approach to a show on ship, combining the talents of music and song, dancing and acrobatics, with “scantily clad” showgirls and “glitzy” showguys.  I’ve used the clichés on purpose–in case you missed that I think the shows are clichés themselves. The shows are truly in the hands of professionals, but perhaps it is that they are almost too perfectly re-enacted–like Star Trek’s “Data” re-creating a work of art.  By re-creating it perfectly, it loses the “art” part.

These same girls and guys who, as ship board life gets old and as do they, will hit the stages of New York and other big cities, some traveling companies, and any other venue that will take them.  Great resume credits. They are truly great performers, but it is the venue that is different and the approach by the director and choreographer.  If the entertainment director is correct in his or her assumption, this shipboard audience is there just to be entertained.  It could have more.  It’s a shame, in my opinion, that a cruise line may assume the audience may not want any more than that.

The good news is that some of the larger cruise vessels on the moderately priced lines like Royal Caribbean, and some of the more exclusive cruise lines are importing theatre from Broadway.  Naturally, the cost is high. I hope one day it is possible to bring “little” professional theatre to the medium class cruise lines. Then, we can be stimulated as well as entertained.

THIS IS THE WEEK THAT IS: Political Satire—Philadelphia Style

~ A STAGE Review ~

When you’ve seen the Capitol Steps, you’ve seen political satire.  When you experience 1812 All Comedy Theatre Company’s production of THIS IS THE WEEK THAT IS, you’ve experienced political satire–Philadelphia style and more.  Start off with local color with The View from Patsy’s steps (stoop), add lots of local color to warm up the audience, weave in the usual what to do in case of fire, introduce the comedy troupe, and you’re now in cleverly deft comedic hands you won’t want to escape.

THIS IS THE WEEK THAT IS at Plays and Players Theatre in Philadelphia was a political satire lover’s dream come true.  I consider myself a fan now and will endeavor to see whatever else they might produce.  The All Comedy Theatre Company was full of IT—all of IT.  It was an excellent night of entertainment.  The company made sure the audience laughed and if one joke didn’t work they threw out the joke.  Maybe. The cast worked together, worked off each other, worked off the audience seamlessly.  Audience participation, always a question mark, came off without a hitch and with chuckles from the audience.  Even the cast was having a good time.  Hey, they could stifle a smile, pull it off with aplomb, and still have fun with the audience.

As performance, the art on stage was consistent and pure.  We were on the set of a TV show, but the large screens showed life in the neighborhood, not news.  The stage had to blend video and live action and it took exceptional vision to make it happen.  It had to reflect each period part of the show with accuracy and style, while staying true to feel at the beginning of the show.  Totally functional, the set design certainly worked great for the dance numbers and other bits, while giving other spaces adequate places to be used by actors without crowding.  Nothing seemed out of place even on the normally small stage.

The stage was home to all the actors and they used every bit of it, right up to the ceiling.  Seriously.  Levels on a narrow stage like this one take on new meaning.  But they work here. That’s important.  As important to the whole experience as faultlessly bringing in the technical audio-visual treatments, the sound effects, music and lighting; and moving the set pieces discreetly.

If perfection doesn’t exist, it can’t have been a perfect show.  It was, however, superbly dreamed and executed.  I could complain about the shiniest guitar I ever saw, but who would care.

I have been a regular follower of the Capitol Steps since I lived in the D.C. area.  Believe me, there is no comparison to the method of delivery.  Don’t get me wrong I still appreciate the Capitol Steps (still great, too), but 1812’s production of THIS IS THE WEEK THAT IS can’t be compared with the other guys.

I wanted to try a comparison; it wouldn’t work.  The only common thread is political satire.  It would be like comparing a Neil Simon play with an Abbott and Costello bit.  Both are comedies, but different.  In the end, I totally enjoyed this show.  This was a different approach to the same subjects with local jabs thrown in.  The approach was indeed original.

This is a year many of us would like a do-over of the year, and I think this show says it all.  It’s all about why we shouldn’t want a do-over.  THIS IS THE WEEK THAT IS runs through December 31^st.  Let this be your Holiday “do-over.”

Musical Theater – How to Do It Right and Call It What It Is, Part II

It is possible for a musical theater show to direct every number at the audience; but should it?  It would appear to me, as reviewer or critic, that the director sees this as a music production, not a musical production.  If I came to see a traditional musical, my experience is lessened because that experience would involve all the theatrical elements—not just the one being presented. Community theaters often make this mistake because they have so many actors in the show, which may be well for supporting the community, but it does not serve the show.  Except maybe in ticket sales to friends and families. And, it doesn’t make new theater aficionados.

An excellent show fits well on the stage.  Just as a book contains just enough description, or a film the most important scenes to their jobs communicating and entertaining us, so should it be with musical theater.  I’d rather see a smaller show that integrates all the elements well–the triple threat at work—and leave that show satisfied.  Instead, I am faced with saying, “The leads were great singers, but this or that needed to be better…”  Could not some musical productions be made better if smaller and focused?  The difference is amazing.

I have nothing against a community project, but if a theater presenting musical theater is not performing it in the traditional way—give me a heads up so I don’t expect something else.  Otherwise, I hold you to the same standard of being true to the originator of the play; it is, after all, a different product.  For some artists, to be involved in this kind of show is a disappointment; they signed on for real theater.  All performers have been in shows where they felt they did their job and the overall result was less than satisfying; it may have been less than satisfying because the show failed at being true theater and was something else.  I usually point out that “something else” when I review a play.

The next time you see a musical, don’t see just the music.  There is so much more at work.

Musical theater in it various forms has been around since the ancient Greek theater, but the first modern American musical comedy is credited to be a show called, The Black Crook, which added dance and original music that helped to tell the story.  It premiered in New York on September 12, 1866 and ran for 474 performances, a record at the time.  Interestingly enough, the show was five and a half hours long.  It would take quite show to make audiences today sit still for that long. I suspect audiences persevered because of the novelty, but today with electronic media, we compete with instantaneous entertainment and immediate gratification.

The Musical Theater, incorporating all the elements of music, acting and dance that came to us in the 19th century, is considered to be the one truly American theater art form.  It’s held our attention a long time in its present form.  To preserve it, we need to respect the classic form we developed.  If you want to do something else, just call it like it is.  I do.

The Certainty of DOUBT Bodes Well for the Wellbilt Theater Factory

A review for STAGE MAGAZINE.

I just saw a very fine production of DOUBT, presented by the Wellbilt Theater Factory and Haddonfield Plays and Players.  It was well acted and directed, and, in this sitting, audience members even reflected a reverent mood.  After Father Flynn’s first monologue, which he ends with a sign of the cross, a woman in the front row started to do the same–as if in church.  It is a tribute to convincing acting, the part of the priest played naturally by Pat DeFusco.  By the way, Pat also directed DOUBT.

All the actors gave fine performances in the tiny black box theater in Haddonfield.  Hilary Kayle Crist plays Sister Aloysius with all the dogged conviction of someone who knows with certainty the ways of the world.  Carly J. Mooney is excellent as the innocent and optimistic Sister James.  Monica Bennett’s soft spoken Mrs. Muller does a superb job of shaking Sister Aloysius’ reality by sharing her reality.

John Patrick Shanley’s play deserves some serious thought, which is good.  It is good because DOUBT is about a serious subject.  Granted, molesting a student is serious business, but that’s not necessarily the point.  So, what’s the point, if I’m not talking about the obvious “did he or didn’t he?”

Guilt or innocence aside, the fact that people know and act on matters they feel certain about can be problematic.  “Feel” being the operative word here.  And, acting on facts (unfeeling) may come too late.  Yet, after we see the consequences of our actions based on certainty, we “doubt” ourselves and what we think we know.  We ask ourselves and others if we did the right thing.  What began as a certainty is not.  It always ends as doubt.

The Forge Theater’s performance of DOUBT was just reviewed and posted on STAGE Magazine so I won’t reacquaint you with the show’s story.  Instead, as a reviewer, I feel it is my job to comment, not only what I saw, but what I think I should have seen.

In spite of fine performances, I felt the power missing.  I can’t know for certain that it was missing because it wasn’t in evidence.   I’m going to nitpick now, so please don’t let this reviewer keep you from an otherwise fine show.  I’ll also grant that it easier to see it from the seats than when you are on stage in the moment.  In “intimate theater,” every acting nuance shows.  You can’t wipe the sweat, or fidget, or look somewhere you shouldn’t.  Here, what shows is what’s missing:  the blank look that people give you when you’ve said something without substance, and they don’t get it.  It was apparent no one except Sister James seemed particularly taken back by the hint of impropriety by the priest.  There is a reason the play is set in 1964.  This is 1964, when it is shocking all by itself to be gay, let alone the shock of molestation by a priest.  Unthinkable!   I know some Catholics who still deny any impropriety by a priest is possible—so strong is their faith.  Faith that’s something akin to certainty without facts, wouldn’t you say?

Sometimes the present-day colors our acting of times past.  As in this close setting, I would expect some of Sister Aloysius’ suggestions to get an incomprehensible look at first rather than an immediate reaction.  Similarly, Sister James was a little too whiney from the beginning and needed to hold back a little more, although I do think she was perfectly cast.  Sister Aloysius’ threats seemed hollow from the beginning, and the result is an ending that falls a little flat.

This was the second time the Intimate Stage has been used since Haddonfield Plays and Players brought it back to regular use; the first time was for THE FANTASTICKS.   So, it’s understandable the techno-ghosts can play havoc until the kinks of the space are totally worked out.

The lights for this show seemed to need a little tweaking to get rid of some shadows.  If the shadows were intended, I missed out.  I would have moved the bench further upstage (there seemed to be room) to open the acting area some; scenes in that area were rather static especially compared to scenes in the office.  The sound effects and music choices were perfect, albeit a little soft.  Still, a great show for a small audience.  A play that makes you think–with players who hit the ideas home.  Not a thing wrong with that in my book.

Excellent WAIT UNTIL DARK Thriller at Tri-County Performing Arts Center

A Theatre Review for STAGE MAGAZINE

By

Jack Shaw

WAIT UNTIL DARK, by Frederick Knott, has to be one of the most suspenseful and thrilling plays performed since its debut on Broadway in 1966.  After seven previews, the Broadway show, with Lee Remick and Robert Duvall, lasted 337 performances.  The London West End production, with Honor Blackman, lasted twice as long.  The 1967 film was also successful earning an Oscar and Golden Globe nomination for Audrey Hepburn and Efrem Zimbalist, Jr.  Knott’s other major play, is DIAL M FOR MURDER another well-known thriller.  It has been said of Knott that he is one of the most performed contemporary playwrights of the 20^th Century (we’ll see how he does in the 21^st); I think there may be other playwrights like O’Neil and Shepard, “the publicist” has overlooked, but I will certainly agree that it can be said for that Knott’s plays are certainly classics in the genre.

In WAIT UNTIL DARK, theatre audiences want to experience the vulnerability of Suzy Hendrix and her husband, Sam, the helplessness and desperation of all its characters, the realistic set, and a thrilling climax.  The Tri-County Performing Arts Center in Pottstown, Pa. presented WAIT UNTIL DARK to one of these audiences and we weren’t disappointed.

This was my first time at the Performing Arts Center and I was immediately impressed with its theatrical practicality of its space.  In a theatre that has no bad seats, I found the realistic set in front of me was a treat in itself with what appeared to be a working refrigerator, stove, washer, sink with running water, and ceiling lights and lamps.  I could only hope the other elements would be on par, and, for the most part, they were.  The sound and lighting were both perfect in design and execution, by the way.

Tara McFalls as Susy Hendrix was quite believable as a woman who lost her sight in an accident and is adapting to life without it.  McFalls performance is outstanding and consistent throughout the play.  Her relationship with husband photographer Sam, played by Paul Recupero, showed a natural and easy chemistry, a tribute to both actors.  I was also impressed with ten-year-old Hannah C. Paczkowski’s performance as Gloria, an initially bratty little girl who comes to Susy’s aid later in the show.  Anthony Marsala did a fine job with his Mike Talman character, who I felt needed the soft touch he gave it later when the real Talman or whatever-his-real-name-is comes out.  He was the “not so bad guy” and he got it perfect.

Overall the cast did a fine job with a show that can easily lose momentum and suspense if some goes awry.  Naturally, this is something a director does not want to happen; when something is amiss, it distracts from show.  In spite of some truly wonderful performances, there seemed to me some blocking that lacked purpose, which made for some slow moments for me in Act I.  I did not care for the circling of the “bad” guys in the beginning.  Circling would be for bad guys of somewhat equal standing.  I think Harry Roat needs to dominate the moment as he dominates the lesser criminals, and that he doesn’t do as they dance around each other.  I understand where the idea comes from; however, the more powerful the “bad” guy, the less he needs to worry about his underlings.  This is a weakness, albeit it may be a weakness in the script.  When Harry Roat comes on the scene, he does not see himself equal to the petty criminals he sees before him, and he should be able to intimidate them with a look, a beat of silence or a slow steady hand gesture; here he dances around and acts the “crazy” bad guy, which is not what I think Knott is after.

I wasn’t sure why he had to smoke (a joint?) and refer to needle marks on his arm—at least his gestures seemed to indicate that.  Now, I’m confused.  If he is a junky himself, he makes himself an even weaker bad guy.  Drug dealers, especially smart ones, don’t generally partake of their own product.  His flipping the knife around made its appearance later less menacing.  Perhaps, it is more stereotypical, but a switch blade or gravity knife might have made a better weapon prop.

Rob Patey (Sergeant Carlino) did an excellent job at being similar to his bud in background, Mike, but different in personality.  I didn’t much care for the apron bit at the beginning.  True, it fits what we know of his past, but he didn’t have to put it on.  When he did, it became shtick.  One thing that seems to have been missed is that these guys aren’t just con-men (this is the role they are playing with Suzy), they are desperate ex-cons.  One person is pushing them, and hard.  We weren’t feeling it until we learn of the consequences in the second act.

It is so hard in a play where an actor has to look for things, fiddle with things, and remember lines, character and blocking, all the keeping the scene tense, tight and suspenseful.  One thing is to make it real.  One of Carlino’s jobs, it seems, is to come into the apartment and continually search for things; in fact, everyone searches for things.  When “looking for something,” give it a register.  The audience doesn’t always read a quick glance at something and notice you actually saw it.  I thought the props throughout the set gave performance all a sense of realism.  Seeing a fridge that actually looked like it was filled with food was a wonderful realistic touch.  And so it should go with the rest of the show.

Realism is what this show is about, but is it?  Why doesn’t Suzy leave when she has the chance?  Of course, the guys would have nailed her leaving.  One murder aside, why not just torture the information out of her?  If any of those situations had occurred we wouldn’t have the show.  That wasn’t the show, Knott wrote.  Still, The Tri-County Performing Arts Center’s, WAIT UNTIL DARK is an excellent show;  so much hard work and attention to detail is necessary for authenticity and the outstanding individual talent and a fine group effort definitely shows here.

http://stagepartners.org/2010/10/excellent-wait-until-dark-thriller-at-tri-county-performing-arts-center/

Materializing the Theatre of the Mind

Can you do that?  Materialize a theatre of the mind?  Second question: what exactly is that?  If you have the words, the voices, sounds, but no visible actors or stage–it seems to me you have enough to experience a “theatre of the mind.”  In its simplest form:  audio books.  Good narrators and audio book artists blend narration with voices to drive a storyline, the action and give its characters life.  The best of audio books I think, excluding those with failed production values, come from the heart of theatre, with life, fanciful or otherwise, portrayed as its author intended. 

If you have been following my blogs you may know I have been mulling over the idea of using multi-casting for doing audio books that might require many characters, for example, historical novels. I have one now for which I’ve been asked to write a proposal.  Because it focuses on a female character and has many male characters, I’d like to see both a female and male narrator, obviously switching female and male characters as we go.  I have been contemplating doing a joint project with one or two other actors, or one with many more players.  The book is not exciting on its own. but I think with some editing for presentation, a good narrative touch, sound effects, and music, it could set a new precedent for first-timer audio books.  Sure, some really fancy audio book productions exist produced by fancy studios–just not for the new self-published or e-published authors unless they can afford to spend tens of thousands of dollars.  This standard concept may not seem really new at all, but more a retro standard like the old time radio shows.  The difference is that here we have a more conscious effort to bring the author’s intentions to light and people who might not take their self-published or eBook for audio book publishing will suddenly see a new market, and a new product. 

I asked Kate Capparelli (www.katecapparelli.com), a LinkedIn colleague, what she thought of multi-casting an audio book and putting sound effects and music underneath. 

Here’s what she said:   “First, a compelling storyteller will always captivate a listener and keep their attention.  That in itself will oftentimes help to promote the piece.  Listeners develop somewhat of a real appreciation for the reader, and their unique storytelling abilities.  They, the listener, will then share their experience as a positive with others.

“Now, your idea of adding music and sound effects in my opinion is bringing the art to the next level.  Music, and sound effects, when combined with the talents of a great storyteller will create a ‘theater of the mind’ experience.”  My heart skips.

I am grateful to Kate for her kind words and from what I can hear she is the epitome of the compelling storyteller of whom she refers, so please check out her website.  Because of her I am more hopeful than ever that this kind of project can break new ground and significant life to works that might not get a second chance.  

I agree that it seems as though “a good director will be able to insert the music background and SFX quite effectively, and take a somewhat dry piece of material and add significant life.”  I have feelers out.  Actors, technicians, and anyone else who wants to be a part of this possibly groundbreaking exercise should email me immediately so we can get started.