Reality in Children’s Theatre

The Lucky Nickel Theatre Company and Kids Presents SNOW WHITE

I had the opportunity to see a new theatre (new to me anyway) present the Brothers Grimm version of SNOW WHITE in Oaklyn, NJ. The Lucky Nickel Theatre (LNT) has been around about seven years and this was their 11th show. Nicole DeRosa Lukaitis, along with Beth Truax and an influx of volunteers formed the company. It will be moving its studio to Oaklyn from Barrington, NJ this year.

SNOW WHITE, written for the stage by Jesse Braham White, was funny, charming and delightful. Directed and choreographed by Lukaitis, this production is one of the most complicated I have seen for children, and the children are wonderful as always. Their focus and dedication is apparent, as is the support of the parents and community. The set and costumes are creative and interesting. The choreography is great—especially for such a small stage.

The audience, too, gave its support with its cheers and applause—praise for the children in performance and for the community in the background. It’s appropriate.

I continue to be amazed with Children’s Theatre. It seems our young have the advantage over us in seeing a fairy tale as real, and playing its characters with all their hearts. They are as attached to their characters, making them as real as much as any adult actors would—if not more.

Not all Children’s Theatre involves fairy tales, of course, but usually involves positive life lessons.

Fairy tales and Children’s Theatre work well together for some obvious reasons and some not so obvious. Children, of course, have few qualms about playing fairy tale characters and doing their best to bring those characters out to live in the real world.

We all can relate to fairy tales as part of the growing up process; they nurtured us. If anything, fairy tales are the most universal in their ability to grab and hold our children’s attention. Magic and imagination entice, and no one really gets hurt.

While evil and violence exist in the real world, here evil and violence occur in a fantasy world. My children are not into seeing violence involving real people, and I doubt other children are until they reach an age where it is more appropriate. If the violence and evil exist in a fantasy world, the experience is not traumatic. Children are still sensitive. We know what happens to children exposed to real violence and evil.

Theatre creates a safe atmosphere as well, and is a great vehicle for learning.

Whenever we introduce these children to an art that requires discipline, courage and most of all appreciation, they make us proud with their high energy and the youthful innocence, even those of us who are not parents.

The kids learn intangibles not taught in a classroom, and they learn to work with everyone. They learn cooperation, spontaneous creativity and empathy. Soon, they develop camaraderie and friendships with fellow actors they don’t want to end.

Audience members have a common denominator—a natural love of children and an understanding of nurturing process; they may not be thinking about these things during the production, but it shows through their excitement in the audience. Parents and relatives coming to see “their” kids naturally adopt the entire company as their own.

Theatre needs community support if we are to educate in ways other than the classroom. It’s very reassuring to see it here.

While we don’t analyze individual performances, Children’s Theatre, gives children and the community more than it knows. Children’s Theatre exists to teach its performers where other theatre teaches its audiences life’s lessons.

By the way, Nicole DeRosa Lukaitis adapted this production with segue music and songs to give the children another way to shine. The songs were a combination of musical covers and parodies. While this isn’t strictly the way to go in theatre (I’m more of a purist), I can see where it is a benefit in this case. The audience is charmed nonetheless.

SNOW WHITE
Written by Jesse Braham White from the Brothers Grimm version
Directed and Choreographed by Nicole DeRosa Lukaitis
May 9-18, 2014
Fridays and Saturdays at 7:30, Sundays at 2:00
St. Mark’s Lutheran Church
409 White Horse Pike
Oaklyn, NJ 08107
856-831-8334
www.lntstudio.com

When Theatre Trains Leaders

People often wonder how with my speech, theatre and psychology education/experience that I find it not such a large leap to business practices and from there–in particular, to the training of leadership.

I suspect those of you in theatre or any of the performing arts will understand almost immediately why that is so. You know:

• why actors can grab and hold an audience.
• what we know about establishing credibility.
• what we know about finishing what we start.

Every play I see as a critic reminds me of any organization evolving from cradle to grave–well, maybe to prime is a better analogy. I didn’t see it so much as an actor; as a director, I do it. Having lived the theatre life and worked for the government and private sector, I’ve seen it, and lived both lives. With one difference: I’ve always looked at the non-artistic side from another perspective.

What will you do when you’ve stopped performing? Please continue to study the world as you are and you can’t fail.

If only THEY looked at their business or non-profit with a different perspective, too… Who’s they? Organizational trainers and leaders, of course.

First, theatre is a business. Second, actors and other performers use the same skill set as business leaders. “Whaaat!” you say. The following quote may help to summarize what I mean:

The same set of skills that actors rely on to deliver a riveting performance can be found in our most innovative and successful business leaders. Actors must speak with presence, with passion, and intention. Great leaders in all fields rally our emotions, our allegiances, and our commitment in just that fashion.
—Susan V. Booth, Jennings Hertz Artistic Director of the Alliance Theatre

So, how do the top leaders get there? There’s no one way. That’s why I wrote a blog on Why Isn’t All Training Like Training for Your Black Belt? that changes our approach to how we look at training and leadership as a whole. It is similar in what theatre does to put on a show requires the employees share the same vision, dedication, cooperation and leadership, which are absolutely essential aspects necessary in leading a successful company. What does this have to do with training. It means our training charter can change.

Kevin Daum represents the business side of things, and his latest blog article, 4 Great Leadership Lessons From The Arts, gave me this idea for training based on his four points. Kevin published a journal article, Entrepreneurs: The Artists of the Business World, which makes sense since Kevin has an arts background along with more than 15 percent of entrepreneurs, making more than a million dollars a year, who belong to the elite Entrepreneur’s Organization. By the way that million dollars is the minimum requirement for membership in that organization. As Kevin says, that 15 percent “must be doing something right.”

Here’s what Kevin says theatre or any other performing arts leaders do and not-so-remarkable business leaders do not (the comments underneath Kevin’s points are mine):

• Lead a Project from Start to Finish
  • I’m developing and directing a play to performance, which means not one plan but several plans to start with and see to through fruition.
• Manage Dynamic People Effectively
  • I’m holding auditions, hiring technical and design staff and making sure all work together while I am directing a play, and making sure this cooperation will continue during the performance phase.
• Ensure Total Accountability
  • I’m directing a play, responsible for the quality of opening night to the audience, to the board members of the theatre, to the funding sources, and accountable that my employees do not have to work under stressful conditions.
• Implement Big Picture Thinking
  • I’m directing a play and believe I have a unique vision to share that can make the play stronger in the eyes of today’s audience than when it was originally presented, and I have to sell everyone on this vision or it will not work.

It’s rather obvious isn’t it. If you are familiar with my own training blog, What Would a Cave Man DO or How We Learned What We Know About Training; this is a perfect example where outside sources unrelated to your business can provide untold insight. I actually wrote and published an e-book, called The Cave Man Guide to Training and Development; yes, the title is spelled correctly. The “cave” refers to our work place or our home today, but the principle is the same. I also wrote a dystopian science fiction e-novel, Harry’s Reality, available from Amazon and from other major vendors, probably for free since it’s just coming out. It is about what’s real and what isn’t, but beyond that, it’s just a good read in my humble opinion. Actually, it’s full of mystery, adventure and humor, but who wants that these days? And, we blow up a few things, too.

For a more in depth look of the four points from my perspective, see my complete article, Using Theatre to Train Leaders on my training and development site at The Free Management Library.

As for those of us already engaged in bringing the arts to business, we need to keep up the pressure not only the businesses, but in the schools. Businesses say they want certain individuals ready to work, but are they sure that’s they really want. Is an arts degree so bad after all? The media has been saying it all along. We know you need two jobs to do theatre or dance professionally until you hit a touring company, a Regional Theatre, or Broadway or the West End. Maybe, that’s not all there is…

Again, there is the obvious. Just show these four points to business and hope they buy into it. I say incorporate creative arts into your leadership training.

These four points resonated with some of my theatre friends who applied for jobs in business and were turned away. Perhaps they shouldn’t have been turned away. With what we know now–these very people are the creatives and creatives innovate. And, those people that innovate?

My thanks to Kevin Daum for his inspirational post of the four points here and ideas that might have been triggered by him for me to put on my own particular twist. An Inc. 500 entrepreneur with a more than $1 billion sales and marketing track record, Kevin Daum is the best-selling author of Video Marketing for Dummies. @awesomeroar

If you like this blog and others you’ve found on this site, please follow me. Or, if you are more business-minded, check out my international training and development blog, or my training and development group on GovLoop.

The Difference Between Stage and Film Acting – LES MISERABLES

This is probably a good time to talk about the merits of the musical, Les Miserables, the film and the play. Some the most moving moments in song in the film are close-ups and are sung entirely different than they are on stage. On stage, you can barely see a face and have to make up for it in the song itself. We’ve come a long way with sound in film and Les Mis was the show to demonstrate it. Its power can be felt in either medium.

When Les Miserables first came out in film, many of my theatre friends were aghast when the singing didn’t meet their standards. I thought it was fine and the acting Oscar-worthy. It seemed some of my friends simply didn’t understand the difference in Film acting versus Stage acting. Many had done commercials or short, simple training films, and a fair amount of stage work. I had, too, but I also had a few films under my belt and opportunities to stand behind the director as he worked.

As a professor of speech and theatre now, I talk about the difference that space and distance means in your communication (acting or speaking-it doesn’t matter).

As others have said, with film acting it’s more about making your mark than hitting your light, and it is not chronological. As for rehearsal time, there is none. The character is alive the minute you get the script, if you even have one, or you have a clue what the director wants your character to do and you have to ad lib a scene. Don’t be spoiled there either. The director could just as easily turn to you and ask you what you think your character would do in this particular scene with no hints or prodding.

There is no wind up in film, no build while you’re acting in a film; you have to be “on” instantaneously. The build you can see in post-production.

For the films I did, I learned quickly I needed to be at my peak or that footage would end up on the cutting room floor. You truly have to feel the moment, ignoring cameras and boom mikes hovering close to you for either a close-up or an over-the-shoulder moment. You have to ignore the many disinterested others with other jobs to do who don’t care if you are comfortable. Days can be long even though you may not have the rehearsal time, and it could years before you see the final product. In some ways, doing film for a stage actor seems as surreal as doing a brand new kind of theatre. Not only are you letting the audience in, but everyone can invade your personal space. People in the scene with you stand closer, also invading personal space, in film; however, you have to get them in the frame. That’s why your home movies don’t look as good as an actual film. It isn’t just the music and special effects. On the other hand, you have to tone down everything you say and do to micro-moments. Forget projection. When you whisper, you will really whisper. When you scream, you will really scream.

And some parts may include a disembodied you. No way to get good sound–so you will do it in the studio later.

I’ve always joke that people who do film (even commercials) have to have a near rubber face–a face that reflects all the intended emotion with a look actors might need a short monologue to express on stage. The biggest problem for me was the out-of-sequence takes, and seeing the film in the end, which didn’t resemble what I thought I was doing.

Finally, back to Les Miserables. I can’t say I have ever been down on musicals or dramas presented as film. Some plays have been turned into effective films and others fail at being one or the other. Some succeed ironically at both. Of Mice and Men comes to mind. I’ve done stage plays that flopped as a film, but were dynamite as a play. Romantic Comedy is one such play. It was a horrible movie that even star power couldn’t save, but live something happened. There is something about being alive in the moment, when anything can and does happen, when the audience is there with you. With musicals, one never expects reality. It’s not often we break out in song walking down the street unless we’re Muppets. 

Here’s where Les Miserables was different. Older musicals would dub the singing voices they needed; they wanted a similar result to the Broadway version. Films of that kind weren’t making a statement, but broadening their musical fans to include the film theatre audience. With Les Mis, film took advantage of the differences between stage and film acting, using close-ups and angles, bringing the intimacy that is hard to bring on stage without full-blown music, and took three months to train Russell Crowe, a non-singer with Academy Award-winning star power, to manage some range. Anne Hathaway’s singing probably the most famous song in the musical on her knees and character’s crying out on her face made everyone’s hair stand up end and won her a much-deserved Academy Award. She carried on her face the torture she had endured enhanced by tremendous song-acting. As I recall, this scene on stage is usually done from a bed. Not nearly as powerful.

This all because film acting and stage acting is different. Crowe may not be able to sing, but he has one of those “rubber” faces where one look or two translate to a page of monologue. And he’s one helluva a film actor. What he can do on stage, who knows? I suspect he’s probably pretty good… A final note: while film and stage acting very often need dialogue to tell the story, those who made the film, Les Miserables, made no attempt at altering the story or the music as in times past. For example, Guys and Dolls had an extra song for Frank Sinatra. Les Mis took all the advantages of film, including acting, and let the music drive the story just as the stage musical does. Patrick Stewart was with the Royal Shakespeare Company for over 20 years, and many other well-respected theatre names, and to anyone who watches TV and Film, he is a household name. He made the transition very well, wouldn’t you say? Some actors make that transition easily, while some choose one medium over the other for the reasons listed above.

THE DROWSY CHAPERONE is Fantastically Magic or Magically Fantastic

Large scale musicals generally make me groan. You have play the stage just right, move people around without bumping into each other, and still have room to dance and otherwise perform. I couldn’t have groaned if I wanted to I was so busy laughing.

If you missed THE DROWSY CHAPERONE at Haddonfield Plays and Players tonight, you missed the magic of musical theatre. I could start laughing at any moment just thinking of any single moment in the show. This comedy musical (and yes I said it that way on purpose) has no comparison to any large musical in my recent viewing history. I thoroughly enjoyed my musical theatre experience of 1928 mixed with today’s commentary by The Man in the Chair.

This rip-roaring 1920s-style musical is filled with the Vaudevillian comic bits that have become classics. You know the ones so well that you can finish the bit yourself. Still, we laughed until there were tears, and were wowed again with another dance number. It was magical then in that age; it is magical now.

The storyline in musicals then was simply to set up elaborate song and dance numbers. In a typical story, a situation arises that seems like a crisis to characters on stage and, of course, it is resolved in the end. Forget that the plots didn’t make sense. They weren’t meant to have any resemblance to reality anyway. The story was a gap filler as were the comedy bits between the larger acts. Still, we loved the fantasy place it took us with the bigger-than-life actors, acting badly or badly acting.  Usually both, but that was the way it was. Now we have TV, and sometimes that’s not nearly as entertaining.  Well, maybe reality TV.  Kidding.

The direction was super and considering the director, Craig Hutchings, played a fantastic character role as well–that’s just amazing.  I’m sure Craig won’t mind if I say everyone gave a performance of a lifetime.  The acting, singing, dancing and the music that came from the wings was all excellent. The performance was a true demonstration of what musical theatre can do.

Michael Hicks was totally believable as The Man in the Chair who wants to get rid of the blues by playing his favorite musical soundtrack from 1928–a show called THE DROWSY CHAPERONE.  As he shares it with us with such lovely zeal, the stage suddenly comes alive with the players acting, singing, and dancing the numbers in his living room–right down to the record skips and stops. In between the grand numbers, there are the comedy bits–ridiculous and predictable–yet hilarious nonetheless.

The play isn’t about The Man in the Chair, not really, but about us and our affection, better make that adoration, for the musicals we fashioned in the past.  The music and choreography was terrific here as well as every individual number. I won’t talk about standouts here because everyone was great. As near a perfect cast as a director could find, but you know it wasn’t so; it just seemed that way. There were of course talented major players, to be sure, but when a show goes so well you don’t want to set anyone a part.

I like it when I am so pleasantly surprised–when my preconceived notions (like big musicals) are shattered and I am moved to laugh.  Did I mention there was a rare well-earned standing ovation?  Bravo!  If you saw my Acting Smarts post urging you to see this show and you don’t, you’ll wish you had!

I hope this gets posted in time for you to see it and take yourself out to the theater for a real treat.

That’s my told you so.

SEUSSICAL: Magic at Haddonfield Plays and Players

~ A STAGE Review ~

It took a genius like Theodore Suess Geisel or Dr. Suess to create the remarkable characters, with the delightful story and truly unique dialogue, but it takes a theatre company to make the fantasy he created come to life on stage. I saw that magic happen tonight with Haddonfield Plays and Players’ production of SEUSSICAL, the MUSICAL.

I have seen SEUSSICAL the MUSICAL several times, but this time was the most vibrant and alive. I could feel the children excited and enthralled, taking in everything happening on stage and throughout the theatre. The experience brought out the “child” in all of us. Never has my experience with this show compared with what I saw tonight. The enthusiasm and love the community theatre performers had for the show came through—a tribute I think to director, Craig Hutchings, who pulled it all together.

The excellent choreography and teamwork on stage was apparent as many actors moved fluidly in this fantasy world–part of a picture, part of many pictures–weaving when necessary but smoothly and deliberately.

The staging was different from previous productions I have seen at HPP.  Using a modified thrust area (not a raised stage), the entire theatre became the stage as characters perched, hung or darted in from various locations. This kind of staging can be distracting, but I had to smile, saving that thought for another show, as I watched the kids and some of the adults delight in finding some character posed in some way that brought the audience into the action.

I would recommend that the back row seating be elevated where possible. In those back rows, adults and children alike twisted and shifted constantly to see the action. This, in a theatre when conventional staging and seating is used, there is not a bad seat in the house.

As with most musicals, small stages make fancy dance moves difficult at best and the choreographer restrained, having to use less creative movements. Not so here. I was pleasantly surprised. Brian Peeke, who was a perfect “The Cat in the Hat,” doubled as choreographer, and did a wonderful job not crowding the stage with too many actors. Crowding a stage is a pet peeve of mine. Not here. Although I wasn’t sure what to make of the “judge” scene; it worked in an odd sort of way. The judge was upstage and the actors addressed the judge through the audience–downstage center, left and right. I’m not sure it worked completely for me, but I accepted it in the spirit of the show’s unusual style.

The music is thoroughly engaging, although I think sometimes the orchestra overwhelmed the singers’ voices volume-wise, or the microphone audio not set high enough for the singers. At any rate, this was not a frequent occurrence.

The singers were all terrific, especially young Antony Post, who did an amazing job as “JoJo.”  He definitely has a gift.  Mike Dumbleton as “Horton,” Brian Peeke as you-know-who, and Cara Davis as “Gertrude McFuzz” gave standout performances as well. Where would we be without “Mayzie LaBird” (Gina Rongone), “Sour Kangaroo” (Sara Stouff) and “General Gengus Khan Schmitz” (Donald Davis)? They all had terrific acts. Speaking of “Sour Kangaroo,” there was not a sour note anywhere. I don’t want to leave anyone out who performed tonight because I saw magic everywhere–in every one of the cast. Pssst, the singers I mentioned just sang the most by themselves, but the cast as a whole was excellent.

When it comes to great theatre, it is never about one performer, one director or designer; it’s about pulling the magic out of a hat—actually a script. Sure, the show’s been tested on audiences before. Funny thing about audiences; they’re different every time.

For me to appreciate a musical play the story has to have a message, be precisely and passionately performed, and leave me feeling something—or at least like I have experienced some emotion. SUESSICAL the MUSICAL did all those for me—a truly amazing bit of magic and happiness.

THE ELEPHANT MAN Comes to Town

~ A STAGE Review ~

Fever Dream Repertory brought a stirring production of THE ELEPHANT MAN by Bernard Pomerance to the Second Stage at the Adrienne Theatre in Philadelphia tonight.  Most of us are familiar with the “classic and poignant true story about the man who looked like a monster, but whose luminous spirit captured the heart of a nation.”  THE ELEPHANT MAN won the 1979 Tony for Best Play and several other prestigious awards that year, as well as in later revivals.

The current stage production, deftly directed by Gary L. Day and performed by a stellar cast, reveals a world of monsters within us, and the innocence of the monster outside.

The story is about more than that, isn’t it?  It’s also about striving to be like everyone else.  What’s worse?  Being so different you scare people?  Or, trying to change other people to conform to your way of thinking?  Or, to change yourself to please those people you have affected or afflicted?  Who has the right to ask you?  Is it okay if it’s in the name of God or Science?

The saying, “It’s a cruel world,” must have come from this play.  I have no proof of that—just a feeling.  It fits so perfect here.  At times sad, mean, witty, or uplifting, the play does not depress but forces you to stop what you’re doing and think.  Sometimes plays do that, and that’s a good thing.

Contributing greatly to the show’s success were the superb performances by both Wade Andrew Corder as the good doctor, Frederick Treves, who rescues Merrick; and Joe Matyas, whose masterful contortions and acting transformed a young man into Joseph Merrick, the Elephant Man, without disguise, costume or make-up as in the original play.

Matyas begins his contortions nude on stage with Dr. Treves describing him to an audience of medical professionals.  As the doctor describes what effect the massive deformity is having on the normal parts of his body, Matyas adjusts his body accordingly, ending with a believable character for the rest of the play.  He was even able to increase his handicap later as he was deteriorating and losing more normalcy as time went on.

I was very impressed by the craft and consistency of Corder and Matyas throughout the show.  You can’t flinch in an intimate theatre like the Second Stage; there’s simply no place to hide.

Then again, all the actors gave fine performances.  Apart from the outstanding leads, I found Brittany Brazill (Mrs. Kendal) very convincing in a subtle, yet pivotal role.  Daniel Patrick DeRosia as Ross shined as well in a tough role, especially after he deserts Merrick and returns a broken wreck of a man.

The stage, pretty bare most of the time, was changed only as much as it needed to.  It was a simple stage as in the original Broadway production.   It contained two cut-away walls to give actors exits and entrances, and then furniture and props were added as needed.  This way, we are focused more on what the characters say and do rather than looking for a nineteenth century re-creation of London and Brussels.

The first conversation introducing us to Dr. Treves and his story was a bit staid.  Once Dr. Treves started telling his story, the play really began to move.  Ross was too in-your-face at first.  I grant you he is supposed to be crass, but I think in the intimacy of the setting, it was overkill.  Too much audience recoil is distracting.  I was surprised by the nudity on stage but thought it was used appropriately.  Treves’ dream sequence later was nicely staged and effective.

Even though most of us know this story, sometimes it is hard to follow the action if you aren’t listening closely.   For audiences that like to think and feel deeply for the characters, then this is the show for you.  THE ELEPHANT MAN will start you thinking and leave you speechless.  It may even be a little cathartic.

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.

The Art of Fearless Auditions

Whether it be at a professional theatre or a local community theatre, auditions are never easy for anyone unless you have done a million of them, did all your homework, exercised your brain and body, and just love competing with the unknown.

For anyone who auditions regularly you do develop a tough skin, but starting out and staying with it is tough because rejection hurts.  It hurts more at the beginning because you haven’t worked out all the behavioral defenses, but deep down it still hurts even the most experienced performer.

Performers in particular want to be loved by everyone.  An audition is an example of their talent.  If you reject their audition, you reject their talent–or so it seems.  I’m here to tell you it’s not true.  Good talent doesn’t always make the cut, often for reasons you have no knowledge of.  Here’s one example I hate:  the director has pre-cast the show and didn’t tell anybody.  He or she sees a blond in that role, and you are not.  It’s sometimes that simple.  Some directors are a stickler for rules so if you violate one, you’re out. If you are late for your audition appointment, nothing may be said, but it may be cause to eliminate you.  Some things you may think are ridiculous, may be–but not to the director; it’s a way to eliminate potential problems.

So, how to fix it?  Unfortunately, the best way is to prepare for the audition in the way above, preparing mind and body.  Do not disregard specific audition instructions unless you are prepared to take the hit for it.  For actors, develop two monologues, comic and serious.  Two more are even better with a good classical and modern take.  Get a copy of the play–especially if the auditions will involve cold readings, and practice lines.  Read the entire play, if you have time, and read character discussions if available, and if you have trouble sight reading, get help and practice so you can make the words roll off your tongue naturally.  Too many auditioners lose to a lack of reading ability.  It’s fine to miss a word or change one to another that means the same.  Don’t go back to correct.

Most importantly, pick your parts, your plays and your theatre.  Decide if you want to work in a theatre that has such a great reputation as to launch your career that you don’t care how they treat you, or if you want to have a good time and ply your craft.  Pick directors you can learn from.  Performing of any kind is an ego business.  Directors have egos, too, and I have seen them be unnecessarily rude to an auditioner because they are too important and too busy to be polite.  The quickest way to lose your zest for performing is to have too many situations you don’t enjoy.  It happens occasionally because you can’t predict every outcome, but you can have some control.

I have a three theatre rule.  I audition for three productions I seriously want to do, in theaters where I want to work and directors with whom I want to work.  If I get cast in one out of the three shows, I am delighted.  I don’t expect to get cast in two of those for whatever reason.  You could pick more auditions if you have less experience.  Three seems to work for me, but I’m really picky. It’s not that I’m that great an actor; it’s more I know what works for me.  Sure, you may be disappointed but that one that comes through makes up for it.

The biggest mistakes an actor can make is not preparing.  I almost blew it on my last audition because I thought I was still young enough for a particular part, and too young for another.  Guess what?  I kept being asked to read for the older role.  I asked the director (who I had worked with as an actor and consider a friend) if he thought I was “too damn old” for the other part.  I was being dramatic and asked with a smile, so he answered honestly, “yes.”  But I spent a lot of time preparing for the other role and not really giving this one much thought.  Turns out though that this role is pivotal in the play, an important role with fewer lines (an advantage sometimes for me), and I think I’m really going to love doing it.

All is never lost.  There is always another play, and the odd chance you will be asked to take on a role you didn’t even read for–not necessarily a bad thing.  Sometimes it’s good to take advantage of a lesser opportunity; it shows you to be a trooper, and it can help you find a real niche.  It can be your secret weapon–that kind of role you wow them with later.   I’ve performed some leads in my younger day, but I can tell I’ve enjoyed and am equally proud of my character roles.

You’ve heard it before.  It’s not about being a star; it’s about the creative process and making something unique because you and others are in it, or backstage, making magic.

A WONDERFUL LIFE Musical in Haddonfield

Should our standards for holiday plays be any different for theater at any other time of the year? Because a show is performed as a way of sharing the holiday with friends rather than audience members, can we take it any less seriously? It seems to me local community theaters seem to care enough for their patrons to share regardless; these patrons are friends and relatives. It’s what community theater is all about.

It’s not a bad thing to care about your patrons and want to share the holidays with them because it’s good to care. In theater, it can come with a price.

It was, perhaps, one of those nights at the Haddonfield Plays and Players opening night production of A WONDERFUL LIFE. Sometimes shows mean well, and a producer way back when tried to make it more than it is by adding music, and so it is with A WONDERFUL LIFE. Other shows have been made into musicals in order to breathe longer life into their stories.  Some make it; some do not. This play has a wonderful message.  I’m not sure it should have been made into a musical, but it was.

Who said everything needs to be put to music?   When Mary sang about her cooking “meat so hard you could barely chew it but you’d patiently do it”–that’s about as awful as it gets.

What’s done is done.

A show like this needs every bit of help of a talented cast and crew. Unless every single performance is crisp, the acting believable, the songs beautifully sung, and the players perfectly cast, the show won’t work. It’s another way of saying a show where the songs are unremarkable and the tale so classic that the audiences can recite the lines, the theater ensemble must take all it has and make it a “remarkable” production, or it falls flat. That’s what happened in Haddonfield on opening night, but not for a lack of trying.

From the moment Scott Reynolds, the director, introduced the show, it seemed this was indeed a love fest between the theater and its audience—a sharing of the holiday spirit—the Christmas show. The show was a product of that love.

It’s hard to dislike a show with so much heart, but the show had its problems—and that’s why the audience seemed to cringe occasionally as something went wrong. It had some very nice moments as well. I thought Katy Gentry as Mary gave a standout performance as George’s love interest and later wife, and Craig Hutchings, playing George’s guardian angel, Clarence, did a great job as well even though I hated his moving to the back of the auditorium for some of his scenes—a directing choice I found distracting. Pat DeFusco, as always, gave a terrific performance, but in this show he was just wrong for the part of recently graduated high school student taking over the family business.  I agree that Jimmy Stewart in the non-musical film we see every year didn’t look much younger if at all than Pat, but I’m not reviewing the film.

Back on stage, I liked the backdrop and thought the black and white set pieces an interesting touch; however, I think they would have worked better if they had been used to highlight the dark times of the show instead of the period. Contrast the early days, the gay days of the twenties with color and brightness, and the “dark” days of the depression that followed might have worked better. The black and white set is a nice creative idea, but it didn’t serve a real purpose used throughout and grew old in time. And, I can understand finding period costumes a problem and finding the colors…

Add some screwed up lines, some weak singing and music, and miscasting and, I’m sorry, but the show falls apart.

Someone has to put it in perspective; someone needs to have critical eye or how would we know when it doesn’t work. Tell an audience to applaud and they will. Your friends will adore you. However, I will always respect you and your work. I could make excuses because it is Community Theater; however, I don’t think this theater or its patrons would stand for it. Actors and crew–paid or not–want to do the best job for the show; but sometimes it isn’t possible.

A WONDERFUL LIFE is always a nice holiday treat. The show runs until December 19th and there’s still time to see it. Opening night jitters have been known to cause weak moments before and have those weak moments dissipate in time. I’m sure brighter days are ahead. Loyal patrons and friends attend, please, because it’s all for you. Happy Holidays!

How to Enjoy Community Theater

We’ve all experienced community theater and we appreciate all the hard work of the actors and crew, director and designers and other critical folks who work on the show. The quality of shows can range from poor to near-professional level. Should near professional quality shows be the aim of Community Theater? But should we expect it—especially this time of year?

As a reviewer, and an honest critic, I try to go to Community Theater holiday productions with an open mind. I remember my circumstances–who, what and where because, in some cases, I may know people involved in the show.

This is a time of year that every community theater wants to do a Christmas or holiday show. It is part of the theater’s tradition and it is expected by the season ticket holders.

Note that I said “community” theater and not just local theater that would include professional and non-profit status theater groups, whose very existence depends on the quality of shows they provide the public.

Although not true with all groups, especially those that have no trouble getting a lot of auditioners and have decent budgets to community theaters, most shows are over-ambitious and fail the quality test. Most theatergoers are willing to accept honest attempts by local theater in the spirit of the holidays regardless—some are not. Take that young couple, who were sitting next to my daughter and me, that left at intermission. Will they come back the theater to see another show? It’s doubtful, and ironically they are the right age to keep the theater going with season ticket holder attrition over time.

I’ll write an actual review of the show I saw in my next article, but for now, let’s enjoy the attempts at trying to celebrate the season regardless of the result.

Actors willing to work for nothing are hard to find in holiday times. Try not to see this show as representative of the whole. It may be the company’s worst show of the season, but it is probably the one most heartfelt. With this show, the theater is trying to share with its loyal following for most of the year.

Successful professional theaters fill the house during the holidays, not always with musicals, but shows that have a holiday theme or message. They make sure actors can make the rehearsals rather than vacations, and that the theater is capable of doing the same quality. No cheap tricks to get the show on, no short cuts in the name of creativity. There is the difference.

Community Theater should, but doesn’t necessarily seem to scrutinize its holiday show to fit the theater, the director and the available actors. While a big musical can bring them in the audience—especially friends and family-members, good quality smaller shows can bring in the growing and staying power of new audiences as well.