When That I Was

May 24 to June 3, 2012

Vertigo Theatre

http://www.shakespearecompany.com/performances/

 

While I have no idea why The Shakespeare Company decided to presently remount their 2008 award-winning production of When That I Was, I am immensely grateful that they did. Not living in Calgary at the time of the initial production and not being privy to its subsequent cross-Canada tour, I completely missed what I now know is one of those rare and elusive theatrical moments – A solo show where both the performance and the play can be declared wonderfully remarkable.

When That I Was tells the story of a former child actor in William Shakespeare’s theatre company named Jack Rice (Christopher Hunt).  The play takes place in the creative black hole of 17^th century Puritanical England. By decree, all the theatres have been shut down and Jack therefore is out of a job and living as a homeless man. On a stormy night he takes shelter in an old run down building only to realize that it was once the theatre he performed in with Shakespeare as a boy. Thus begins his 90-minute 2-act monologue that not only tells the story of his boyhood days on the stage, but also provides snapshot moments of Shakespeare’s personal and creative life.

Characters in Shakespeare’s world such as his benefactor, the Earl of Southhampton, his wife and mistress, his son Hamnet (yes that’s spelled correctly) Queen Elizabeth and King James, all make an appearance in the play either as stories told to us by Jack or through flashback sequences fully performed by Hunt. To say that these snippets provide us with a juicy and interesting back story to the great writer, would be an understatement. From the way When That I Was tells it, the story of Shakespeare himself could have held court amongst his plays.

Alongside this insider historical narrative is woven the story of Jack himself told in a similar combination fashion of direct relaying and flashback scenes. From his early days with the company as just a young orphaned boy to his glory days of playing the heroines in Shakespeare’s grandest shows to his outgrowing and out drinking the ability to perform on stage, the audience is just as riveted to Jack’s story as they are to that of the more famous Shakespeare.

Part of the credit for this must go to the beautiful writing of John Mortimer and Edward Atienza who give us a script rich with imagery, emotion and language that mellifluously echoes the Shakespearean tongue while softening it just enough to make it friendly to the ears of a modern audience.

But the words in a script only truly live up to their potential if they are put into the hands of those that can do it justice, and plenty of justice is done in this resoundingly good production. No one deserves more credit for this than Christopher Hunt, who by my rough count takes on ten roles in this play and offers up an inspired performance for each. Whether playing the old Jack or his younger boyhood self, the other theatre company members, Kings and Queens and even Shakespeare himself, Hunt becomes more than simply a master story-teller. Through the force of his actorly talent, he creates mini worlds for us to see and doesn’t jar us when the view is finished and another character takes over. Hunt’s thoughtful portrayals leave breathing room for resonance and his obvious joy in this production is infectious.

Behind the writing and the performance are equally superb elements. At intermission I emailed a colleague of mine raving about the set design and lighting in the show. Both brilliantly mood-setting yet not overly intrusive in a ‘see how clever I can be” kind of way, Terry Gunvordahl’s look and feel of this production provides the perfect punctuation without intruding on or taking away from the action onstage. It’s truly an alluringly haunting design that felt immensely lush in its ability to evoke.

The final kudo must go to Director Vanessa Porteous for her stunning staging and ability to make the play feel populated with just one actor. The scenes between Shakespeare and his son Hamnet alone are worthy of a directorial award for their ability to illustrate and devastate. Moving the play along at a fair speed yet trusting in her actor and script enough to allow pauses to linger, Porteous gives us a show that both entertains and respects the sophistication of its audience.

Entertainment and respect. My Holy Grail of excellent theatre.

RATING

For the guys and the girls – It’s like an intelligent and juicy reality-show highlight reel of Shakespeare’s life with fabulous acting and beautiful writing. SEE IT

For the occasional theatre goer – the language might scare you away at first as the dialogue does sound Ye Olde English. But give it a couple of minutes and the acting and compelling story will draw you completely in. SEE IT

For the theatre junkie – A great performance where you don’t have to say, “yeah but the play wasn’t so hot”. Note the design, the direction and enjoy the fullness of the experience. SEE IT

 

Avenue Q

May 25 to June 10, 2012

Easterbrook Theatre

http://www.storybooktheatre.org/avenue-q

 

People assume that as a theatre critic I go to see plays with a trenchant eye or a fault-finding meter waiting to go off at the slightest misstep on stage or in narrative. The truth is I go into a play with the exact opposite attitude. One of optimism, excitement and curiosity. But mostly I go to the theatre with the hope of being delightfully surprised. It’s not an easy thing for a show to live up to, I know.  But it does happen, and last night it happened at the most unexpected of places – at a community theatre putting on a production of a musical I’d already seen on Broadway some eight years ago.

Storybook Theatre, deciding to step outside its usual family friendly programming, snatched up the amateur rights to the 2004 Tony-award winning Best Musical, Avenue Q and is now producing the Calgary premiere in a production that had to have its run extended even before opening night due to high ticket demand. Perhaps people are buying tickets on the show’s reputation or because they saw and enjoyed the play in New York and want to revisit the experience. Either way, they’re in for a resoundingly fantastic production that in my mind outperformed the Broadway version on a number of levels. Yes, outperformed. Imagine my delighted surprise!

Dubbed, Sesame Street through a dirty lens, Avenue Q introduces us to a cast of fuzzy felt puppets (whose human operators are visible on stage with them) and human actors living on a shoddy street outside New York. The story centers around a recent college grad named Princeton who, like many well-educated young adults, starts off with idealistic dreams of what life has in store. But soon enough Princeton’s naive dreams get quashed when he moves into a sketchy but affordable area and meet his neighbours who provide a slap in the face reality check of what life is really like. Soon enough Princeton loses his job before he even starts, screws up a budding romance, wastes his money on beer and is left depressed in his apartment moping to the tune of “life sucks”.

And I do mean tune, this is a musical after all.  But not your average uplifting or melodramatic play put to song. Musical numbers in Avenue Q include What do you do with a BA in English?, Everyone’s a Little Bit Racist, The Internet is for Porn, If You Were Gay and It Sucks to Be Me. All the numbers are sung in the mock happy-go-lucky education genre of the Sesame Street oeuvre and are immensely humorous not just because of the mocking lyrics, but also in the disconnect between the meaning of the songs and the way they are sung.

Funny as the tunes may be, they could have been taken down by unimpressive voices and acting, but this was one of the areas where the production offered up my first a heaping dose of delighted surprise. Community theatre it may be, but this cast has voices and performances fit for any professional stage. Of particular note for their superbly funny and touching performances were JP Thibodeau as Princeton and a Bert-like character named Rod and Bart Kwiatkowski who plays the Ernie-ish character Nicky, a perverted monster named Trekkie as well as other characters. But without a doubt the show stealer in the production was Madeleine Suddaby playing Princeton’s love interest Kate, a slut named Lucy and other minor characters. When she arrived on stage with her beautiful voice and impeccable comedic and actorly timing, my first reaction was, who is she? Scrambling through my program revealed that this is only her second role in Calgary (the first being a U of C student production) and that she a musical theatre grad with some recent dance training. Cue another delighted surprise!  Watching a relative newcomer take what can only be described as a star-turn in a uniformly impressive cast is one of those goose bump moments in the theatre that reinvigorates my belief in the magic of the stage.

If the cast rose above its community theatre status to make this a remarkably good production, then it was precisely because of the production’s community theatre status that it became a stellar show. The Easterbrook Theatre is a small space where the audience is seated in intimate proportion to the stage. The first row of seats is practically on the stage, affording the audience a very up close and personal view of the puppets, their handlers, the human actors and the band that plays just off to the side of the action. It was this close connection that really took the show to a higher plane for me. When I saw Avenue Q in New York, I liked but did not love the production. The cast was great and the songs just as funny, but in a traditional Broadway theatre I now realize that I must have felt removed from the characters and their emotions. The punctuations of sentimentality that creep into the script amongst the raunchy language, the depressing epiphanies, the clever use of video and the hysterical puppet sex, I felt were too neatly constructed and even corny at times. But in this up close and personal production, my distaste for the sweeter moments on the show disappeared as I found myself truly invested and rooting for the characters. Kudos must be paid to Director George Smith for embracing this small space and delivering scene after scene of wonderfully staged performances.

So, I know right……me – loving a musical and not bothered by the hackneyed moments? Well that was the biggest surprise of all, one I’m still trying to wrap my head around to get to the delighted part.  But even if I don’t ever really figure it out, I find myself happily singing The Internet is for Porn (hopefully in my head and not out loud!) and basking in the glow I still get from spending a spectacular night in the theatre.

 

RATING

For the guys – Don’t be put off by the puppet thing. These are decidedly adult puppets doing decidedly adult things. The sex scene alone will leave you laughing long after the show is over. SEE IT

For the girls– It’s not all raunch and four letter words. Although there is lots of it. The story is relatable and the character of Kate will punch a hole right through your heart. SEE IT

For the occasional theatre goer – If you can handle the R-ratedness of the subject matter and are up for a good cynical laugh, the unconventional structure of puppets as actors won’t be a problem. MAYBE SEE IT

For the theatre junkie – I could give you many reasons to go. Community Theatre fighting way above their weight class? Check. Star-making performance?  Check. Clever script and strong production? Check. Need I say more? SEE IT

Photo Credit: Mat Simpson

Big Shot

May 16 to 26, 2012

Pumphouse Theatre

http://tickets.pumphousetheatre.ca/default.asp?SearchText=big+shot&Go=Go

 Listen to my  review on Calgary Eyeopener on Friday May 18^th .

 http://www.cbc.ca/eyeopener/columnists/theatre/.

 

The story I heard goes something like this. Ghost River Theatre had space booked at the Pumphouse Theatre mid-May, but ended up not having a show to produce for that time. Rather than give up the booking, they decided to present a solo show they admired from Edmonton’s Surreal SoReal Theatre called Big Shot written and performed by Jon Lachlan Stewart.

Good for them, I say! As much as I love seeing local theatre here in Calgary, I will always jump at the chance to see something from farther afield if for no other reason than to take the theatrical temperature of companies outside our city.

Big Shot, which has played nine cities thus far, came with rave reviews from the critics and had me very eager to see it. Perhaps I should have tempered my anticipation somewhat. Like many solo shows, Big Shot is really all about an outstanding performance tackling a less than satisfying tale.

The play tells the story of a shooting incident on board a Vancouver Skytrain as seen through the eyes of an eight year old boy. To him, the shooting is a terribly exciting thing to witness, similar to all the action movies he’s totally obsessed with. Something to break the monotony of his everyday boring and not very happy life. This is how he introduces the story to us – like an action movie script with a full cast.

There are 6 different characters involved directly and indirectly with the shooting and we get to meet and watch each of them individually as they act out their part in the events that led up to the incident. This is a solo show, so obviously all the parts fall to Stewart who in addition to the little boy, plays the boy’s depressed mother, his absent father who is himself a wanna-be movie maker, a recovering heroin addict, an old Japanese man, and a Skytrain cop. Apparently many of these characters were inspired by real people Stewart knew or came across when he was living in Vancouver right near the infamous East Hasting area.

The tricky part in this play is that each character, when telling their backstories, how they came to be on the train and what role they played in the shooting, is only acting out their side of the conversation and the action. So it’s a bit confusing at first because you really don’t get the full picture of what is transpiring. But as the play progresses,  the stories build on each other and start to layer and connect and eventually come together to create a comprehensive narrative. But to get there, you have to be prepared to go through a bit of muddy storytelling and plot uncertainty.

What isn’t uncertain however is Stewart’s performance. There is no doubt this play is a showpiece for his immense talent. His performance, with its energy and variety and nuance is really quite stunning. The six characters Stewart plays are totally different in age, gender and circumstance and with nothing more than simply changing his body language and facial expressions he truly becomes the heroin addict or the old Japanese man or the despondent woman. Set-wise, there are no props in this show for Stewart to rely on, save a screen at the back of the stark stage for very occasional projections, nor are there any costumes. Dressed simply in black jeans and a black T-shirt, Stewart manages to take us beyond his physicality and wonderfully evoke these characters in a performance that is really quite exceptional.

The writing however, I’m less enthused about.  Some of the characters were utterly fascinating. The heroin addict and the Japanese man’s narratives in particular were thoroughly compelling and even gut-wrenching at times. But other characters I felt were a little sloppy in development or long-winded in delivery. It was only a 75 minute one-act play, but it felt like it went on too long and lost some of the momentum that I’m certain a good 10 minute edit could have fixed.

The surprise twist at the end which I won’t spoil, but frankly you’ll see coming a mile away, ties things up so neatly together with such a schematic coincidence that it can’t help but cheapen the story. As far as the theme of the play – which is really about urban violence and our desensitization to it – I get that Stewart was trying to illustrate this by pitching a violent act as a kind of action movie script and his writing does a decent job of that. The writing also does a decent job of making sure the play isn’t a total downer. Despite the heady subject there are actually some breaks for laughter in the script.

But as far as chiming in with raves – well for Stewart’s performance I’ll absolutely say yes to that. It’s a bravura moment and it was a pleasure to watch. For the play itself, I have mixed feelings.  Parts I really liked, parts I thought needed work and parts that I thought could be taken out completely. There is no doubt this is not a play for everyone as its alternative and disturbing in the extreme at times and often hard to follow. While generally I really like those kinds of plays, this one just didn’t hit all the marks I would have liked it to. So note to my laudatory colleagues in Edmonton and Winnipeg, I guess I’m the dissenting voice on this one.

 

RATING

For the guys and the girls – None of the characters are particularly likeable. That’s kind of the point. And the story lumbers at times. But Stewart’s performance is fantastic and the good moments are very good. MAYBE SEE IT

For the occasional theatre goer – The great performance won’t make up for what you won’t like about the play. SKIP IT

For the theatre junkie – In spite of the flaws, this is a daring piece of theatre that succeeds as often as it misses. Even if you don’t like the whole, you will be interested in the parts. SEE IT.

Playing With Fire: The Theo Fleury Story

May 1 to 19, 2012

Martha Cohen Theatre

http://www.atplive.com/The-Shows/PlayingWithFire/index.html

Tune in the CBC’s Eyeopener for my live review Monday, May 7^th at 8:20

http://www.cbc.ca/eyeopener/

Well, it finally happened. I knew it would at some point. Frankly I was hoping for it. After a year and a bit of formally reviewing plays in Calgary, I finally gave my first standing ovation. The fact that it was for a Canadian play, about a Canadian legend in a Canadian sport, just made it all the sweeter. Playing with Fire: The Theo Fleury Story was one of those rare nights in the theatre where the acting is as wonderful as the writing which is as wonderful as the direction which is equally matched by the set design. And I stood and clapped heartily for each and every one of those elements.

The play is written by Calgary’s own Kirstie McLellan Day who also authored the best-selling book, Playing With Fire, that chronicled ex National Hockey League player Theo Fleury’s life.  Initially  she had no interest turning Theo’s memoirs into play, but one year later she found herself in New York watching Carrie Fisher’s one woman tell-all show on Broadway and that’s when it hit her. Theo’s story could absolutely work in a theatre format and people would absolutely be open to seeing his story played out in this manner. So she set about writing her first play ever.

Like the book, Day’s play tells the story of Theo Fleury’s life from when he was a little boy and first strapped on skates, to his early successes in minor hockey, to his sexual abuse at the hands of his coach, to winning the Stanley Cup and representing Canada at the Olympics, to his struggles with addiction and depression that eventually forced him to leave hockey altogether, to his recovery and public admission of the abuse he suffered, right up to what Theo’s life looks like today. I call it Day’s play, but the truth is that when she brought the initial script to the folks at Alberta Theatre Projects, it was a bit of a mess. Seems that turning a thick book into a two act play was a lot harder than she had realized. So ATP Artistic Director Vanessa Porteous and Director Ron James agreed to work with Day to fine tune the play. Two years later and many rewrites and workshops undertaken, the finished script was delivered.

What a script it is. The play starts out with Theo (Shaun Smyth) telling the audience that he knows they are all there to see a famous hockey legend behaving very, very badly. No doubt this show gives us plenty of bad behavior to gawk at, but what makes the writing so compelling are the stories and motivations behind all the wild–boy antics. Delivered in a monologue format, Theo tells his story to the audience as he recounts, and at times relives the various stages of his life. Sometimes sad, sometimes triumphant often funny and occasionally upsetting, the writing gives us an unflinchingly honest look at Theo Fleury as a brutally flawed, aggressive and angry character. Underneath all the bluster however we also get to see a man who is tragically broken and in desperate need of healthy love.  With this vulnerability exposed, no matter how badly he behaves, Theo’s character elicits empathy and hope for redemption from the audience.

If the writing takes credit for a great story told, then equal credit must go to Shaun Smyth for taking that story and brilliantly bringing it to life. Smyth doesn’t so much play Fleury as he becomes him.  Not content to rely on mere imitation (although he has Theo down to an art) Smyth’s gift of character penetration allows him to bring more to Theo’s personality then the story alone dramatizes. Whether recounting Theo’s hockey glory, his confusion when the abuse started, his out of control addictions or his near suicide, Smyth hits the emotional notes perfectly, never overplaying the strings or relying on shock to take the place of smart acting. Which doesn’t even cover how funny he is. Smyth’s portrayal of Theo imitating and occasionally mocking everyone from Don Cherry to team owners to the players he fought make for some of the biggest laughs I’ve had in the theatre in a long time.

And did I mention he does it all on skates? If Smyth is the superbly mesmerizing star of the show, then the set should get a close second billing.  Turning a stage into a hockey arena is no simple feat, but Director Ron Jenkins said he knew he wanted to set the play on a rink, but not a fake rink where the Theo would have to skate around on roller blades. Jenkins wanted to get the story right and so he demanded that the ice be real and that Smyth wear real skates. While genuine ice may have been pushing it, the synthetic ice that covered the stage and allowed Smyth to lace up and skate for the duration of the entire production worked beautifully and made it possible for Jenkins to strongly direct an immeasurable dose of believability into the story.  It made the experience of watching truly thrilling.

The rest of David Fraser’s set was just as believable. From the boards with corporate logos (ATP sponsors – cute!) to the digital scoreboard suspended over the stage to the various jerseys and hockey equipment worn by Smyth, everything looked authentic and can be credited for taking this production to a higher plane. Behind the stage was a long horizontal video screen that showed footage of the Canadian flag as we all stood to sing the national anthem at the start of the show to old hockey footage and other illustrations of the narrative throughout the play. Kudos to Andy Thompson and Corwin Ferguson for their measured use of video projections that added to rather than competed with or overpowered the live action on stage. Fraser might want to take better note of their approach as I found his lighting a little heavy-handed at times. Dramatic shifts from light to dark to signal mood shifts in the play were unnecessary and broke the spell just a little, reminding us that this play was being “directed” rather than simply happening.

So, one teeny-weeny criticism aside, I am unabashedly glowy about this show. But what about if you don’t like or don’t follow hockey? Well, I’m not exactly a hockey aficionado nor was I even living in Calgary when Fleury was playing for the Flames, so I have no great loyalty to the sport or the story. Sure there is LOTS of hockey talk – games played, players fought, coaches admired, owners trading – but these details are just tentacles that spread out from the real story of the play. Playing With Fire is a story about an innocent talented kid, who makes it big, loses it all and works hard to get some of it back again. A kid that was both a victim and a perpetrator of his own tragedy, who overcomes his demons and lives to tell us about the journey. You can add hockey onto the plot all you want, this is a tale that everyone can empathize with and find inspiration from. But, if you do own a Calgary Flames jersey – I suggest you wear it to the show…..it was a big wardrobe choice for the audience and I strangely found the sea of red very moving. Maybe I’m more of a hockey fan than I realized.

RATING

For the guys – Seriously, you need to ask? You’ll love every minute of it. And if you are worried that the abuse parts are too much to handle – let me assure you it is discussed with class and intelligence. SEE IT

For the girls – There were LOTS of female hockey fans in the audience – but regardless if you like hockey or not, this is a fabulous character story that will have you rooting for Theo despite his many flaws. SEE IT

For the occasional audience – Foul language, some uncomfortable story elements and a two act monologue may make you wary. You shouldn’t be. This is great theatre that will make you laugh and cry and tell you a great story. SEE IT

For the theatre junkie – This show is a fourple threat (I just made that word up). The writing, the acting, the directing and the set will rival some of the best theatre you’ve seen. SEE IT 

 

 

We’re Gonna Die

May 2 – 5, 2012

Theatre Junction

http://www.theatrejunction.com/2011-2012-season/were-gonna-die/

 

Regardless of whatever criticisms I have about the state of theatre in Calgary, I am immensely thankful that there are so many productions going on in any given week that I cannot possibly attend and review them all. Thankful, yet sometimes frustrated. I occasionally miss a show I’d really like to see, or in the case of We’re Gonna Die at Theater Junction, only get to see it on the closing evening, leaving no time for a review. In my defense, the show only runs for 4 nights and is concurrent with the opening of one of the biggest and most anticipated Calgary premieres this year (think the hockey hero and tales of abuse). But We’re Gonna Die is a show I very much want to see – so closing night it is and therefore, instead of a review, I’ll attempt to give a preview that explains why this production is a must-attend for me.

The show is described as storytelling about human sadness and coping through a mixture of monologue and song as a kind of existential pop-concert one-woman show. That woman is none other than New York playwright Young Jean Lee, an American-Korean artist that has been hailed by the New York Times as, “One of the most adventurous new playwrights to emerge on the New York scene in the past decade.”

That alone intrigues me to the point of making sure I’m in the audience. But even though I do love being theatrically discomforted, I will admit to a healthy dose of hesitation on this one. I mean, c’mon….a show about sadness and the masks we wear to deal with the depths of our isolation accompanied by a live back-up band? Talk about postmodern downer-ism. Not exactly date-night entertainment.

Yet the blurb Theatre Junction supplies for the production calls We’re Gonna Die a “life-affirming show” that points us towards shared connection and comfort in the face of human despondency. So I figure it’s either one of those shows you just need to see to fully get, or the communications people at the theatre are trying desperately to spin this show into something you won’t want to slit your wrists after.

Either way, it isn’t often we get an up and coming hot young New York playwright presenting her Canadian Premiere in Calgary and I for one will be there with bells on. Whether those bells will be ringing with excitement or trying to drown out the memory of the show remains to be seen. But I’m excited at the opportunity to see which it is.

If you get a chance to see the production before I do, please drop me a note and let me know what you thought of it. And for those of you that would like to read the New York Times review of Lee’s performance of We’re Gonna Die from April 2011, here you go:

http://theater2.nytimes.com/2011/04/11/theater/reviews/were-gonna-die-by-young-jean-lee-at-joes-pub-review.html?ref=youngjeanlee