Lonni Olson, Anna Barker and Jennifer Lynn Bain in Crime in the Madhouse. Photo Credit – Teresa Rehmann Photography.

Final Kiss/These Cornfields/ Crime in the Madhouse

October 25 – November 2, 2013

Birds and Stone Theatre

Tickets at the Door – 8pm show

In a black-walled basement space echoing with the sounds of screams and creaky doors, an ashen-faced, humourless nun in full habit approached me in my seat. “Time for your medication”, she announced in a deadpan voice while holding out a tray of Dixie cups full of little white pellets.  I looked around at the other audience members who seemed as creepily amused by this as I was. I downed the tablets (Tic Tacs in case you were worried) and settled in for what I hoped would be a campy, scary, fun Halloween experience. This was Grand Guignol theatre after all.

Final Kiss/These Cornfields/ Crime in the Madhouse is a trio of performances brought to us by Organized Crime Productions in the style of the early 1900’s Theatre du Grand Guignol based in Paris. Purposefully written for maximum shock value, productions at the Grand Guignol theatre were meant to horrify, shock, sicken, amuse and titillate. An evening’s performance was usually a three play affair beginning with a fear-inducing grisly piece, followed by a sleazy sex farce as a kind of palate cleanser and concluded with a return to horror that was not considered a success unless several patrons literally fainted with fear or disgust.

Fast forward a century later and add in the pervasiveness of horror flicks, our bombardment by violent images at every turn and the thick skin we’ve grown as a result, and it takes more than scary theatre to make us collapse. But just because we remain very conscious throughout Final Kiss/These Cornfields/ Crime in the Madhouse (all based on original Guignol plays) doesn’t mean there isn’t disturbing fun to be had along the way in this somewhat uneven but wonderfully designed and directed seventy-minute production.

Whether it’s the tense story of man whose face was burned off in an acid attack by his former fiancée (Final Kiss), the tiresome, unfunny farce about a feuding couple (These Cornfields) or the truly gruesome story of a young woman trapped in a madhouse with those that wish her harm (Crime in the Madhouse), Director Alice Nelson shows her confidence. Guignol theatre is by nature melodrama and Nelson keeps it palatable with simple staging, letting the story itself be the action even in the most ghastly of scenes. Or perhaps its Serena Snively’s wonderful makeup that ranges from grey pallor with sunken eyes to …well… no eyes at all that’s the real accomplishment here.  Either way, visually this is a production that easily rivals what passes for gory effects on larger stages.

The cast (six in all) who all play double or triple duty in the performances had some disappointments but was more notable for the actors that stood out.  Jennifer Lynn Bain as Mrs. Cornfield and a madhouse patient both in the final play and as stage dressing prior to the performance was fascinating in all her ticks, disturbances and vengefulness. Anna Barker as the acid throwing fiancée, a sexy maid and the young woman in the madhouse stunned with her ability to cry and plead with guilt or fear seem both natural and upsetting. There is nothing more exciting than finding new talent on stage and if this performance is any indication, Barker is one to watch.

But the most entertaining flashes came not during one of the three mini-plays, but in the moments in between. Twice the audience was treated to a short puppet show performed by Alice Nelson and written by Kelleen Conway Blanchard. Foul-mouthed, darkly inappropriate and hysterical, these puppet skits stole the show and were a nice counter balance to the varying degrees of success the more formal plays enjoyed.

This is most certainly not a show for everyone and even those attracted to the experience will find fault. But Final Kiss/These Cornfields/ Crime in the Madhouse is silly/creepy fun done well and a great way to celebrate the Halloween season.

RATING

For those that like to be disturbed – There are some good psychologically disquieting moments in this production and the gore factor is impressively present.  SEE IT

For the squeamish – The moments sans gore are not so compelling that this is an experience you need to push yourself through. SKIP IT

For the occasional theater goer – Think of this like a short story version of theatre. If that appeals and you’re up for the off-kilter content, this  may work for you. MAYBE SEE IT

For theatre junkies – Guignol is not exactly excellent theater, there are weaknesses in the cast and the farce is a misstep. But the production is impressive as are some of the performances. MAYBE SEE IT

(l to r) BOB FRAZER (Jay Gatsby), AMY RUTHERFORD (Daisy Buchanan), CELINE STUBEL (Myrtle Wilson), CRAIG ERICKSON (Tom Buchanan).  Photo by Trudie Lee.

The Great Gatsby

October 15 – November 10, 2013

Max Bell Theatre

http://www.theatrecalgary.com/plays/the_great_gatsby/more_info/

 

In one of the last scenes of Theatre Calgary’s production of Simon Levy’s adaptation of The Great Gatsby, the privileged and shallow Daisy Buchanan tells Jay Gatsby that she cannot be with him because the fantasy perfection of their love has been marred by reality. “I wanted it to be beautiful,” Daisy tells Gatsby as an excuse for going back to her cheating husband and unhappy marriage. In far too many ways, Daisy’s words are a metaphor for Director Kim Collier’s treatment of F. Scott Fitzgerald’s famous tale. Like Daisy’s wish, this show is overflowing with beauty onstage but like the blemishes that ruin Daisy’s ability to actually be with Gatsby, the production is beset by problems that ultimately ruin the audience’s relationship to the story.

If you are not one of the twenty-five million people worldwide who has purchased and presumably read Fitzgerald’s 1925 novel, or seen one or both of the screen versions, a quick refresher. Nick Carraway, a decent young man from the Midwest, moves to New York in 1922 to try to make his fortune trading bonds. He rents a house on Long Island next to a huge mansion owned by a mysterious man named Jay Gatsby who is known throughout NY for hosting lavish, extravagant parties that everyone who is anyone attends. We eventually learn that these parties, his amazing house and in fact all of Gatsby’s wealth and success has all been designed to impress  Daisy Buchanan , his first love and by coincidence Nick’s cousin. Daisy used to love Gatsby when they were younger, but Gatsby went off to war and Daisy ended up marrying Tom, a fabulously wealthy, old moneyed, brute of a man who has affairs on her left right and centre. Tom’s most recent fling is a working-class married woman named Myrtle. Nick helps Gatsby reunite with Daisy and it looks at first as if they will get back together, but Daisy backs out at the last-minute and ends up killing Myrtle by accident in a hit and run as she’s driving back to the home she shares with Tom. Myrtle’s husband comes to believe that it was Gatsby who was Myrtle’s lover all along as well as the one who killed her, so he tracks Gatsby to his house and shoots and kills him.

The production’s fatal flaw, aside from Director Kim Collier’s safe presentation that offers nothing unique or exciting in the telling of this story, is the dynamic between Nick and Gatsby. To put it simply, Gatsby (a milquetoast Bob Frazier) has no charisma or emotional authority and Nick (Jonathan Young) has too much. Gone is the awe that Nick feels for Gatsby and absent is Gatsby’s flawed but magnetic persona that keeps the audience so enthralled with his longing for Daisy’s love and admiration. The result is castration of the play’s emotional motivation, leaving it as soulless as the characters that inhabit the narrative.

However soulless can be interesting when done with intelligence. Despite the despicable nature of all of Fitzgerald’s characters in The Great Gatsby, there were some intriguing performances in this production. Jamie Konchak as Daisy’s friend Jordan does an admirable job playing a successful golfer who’s real game seems to be playing a more honest person than she really is. Craig Erikson as Tom turns in a strong but somewhat confusing performance that is more unrefined brute in manner and speech than well-bred, old-moneyed cad.  But it’s Amy Rutherford as Daisy who really catches our eye.  It’s easy to pass off Daisy as nothing more than a vain, shallow and spoilt character, but Rutherford brings a layer of despondency and fear to the role that makes her a far more interesting character than any other portrayal I’ve seen. The more Rutherford ramps up Daisy’s hollowness, the more she allows us to see her behaviour as a pathetic cry for help.

But back to the beauty of the show. Casting and character aside, there is no question this Gatsby wins us over with the way it looks. Judith Bowden’s basic set design is just steel beams with scrims and a catwalk but this allows her the use of some gorgeous projections and props/ larger design pieces inserted into each scene.  Tom and Daisy’s house soars with grand stately art deco columns, Gatsby’s home gains majesty from a huge staircase and a triple water fountain built right into the stage, the Plaza Hotel in NYC is perfectly deco chic and the apartment where Myrtle and Tom meet is shabby cool with a great view of a 20’s billboard outside the window. The costumes are equally stunning with dandy suits for the men and daytime and evening flapper dresses for the ladies, many of which I’d happily pinch for my own wardrobe. All of this was complemented by Collier’s fluid and often beautiful staging which provided great visual interest even when the emotional and intellectual substance of her production waned.

On a personal note, I have never been a big fan of The Great Gatsby in any of its forms. I find the story lacking in satisfying emotional motivation and all the characters neither likeable nor interesting enough to relish as despicable personas. Nevertheless, I do understand why Gatsby has evolved into the iconic story it is today and why the notion of a powerful man motivated by flawed longing for his fantasy version of a particular woman lives on in popular culture. Or at least it will as long as this production isn’t the benchmark.  I would venture to guess that anyone seeing the show for the first time would have no clue as to why the image of Gatsby has become such a standard reference or why this story is considered a classic piece of American literature. What audiences will get are some decent performances and beauty that would make even Daisy Buchanan happy.

RATING

For Gatsby Fans – While this show never strays from the original story, it totally misses the mark in its depiction of Gatsby and Nick. But perhaps you’ll forgive this to marvel in such a beautiful visual depiction of the story you love. MAYBE SEE IT

For Newbies – Entertaining enough and visually sumptuous as it is, you will most likely be baffled at all the fuss. If you want the real heartbeat of the story, I’m afraid you’ll have to sit down with the book. MAYBE SEE IT

For occasional theatre goers – This is a big expensive production that will hit all the familiar notes you need to feel you are getting your money’s worth. SEE IT

For theater junkies – No matter how lovely to look at, an un-Gatsby-esque Gatsby is unacceptable. SKIP IT

Beau Dixon (l) as Ralph D. and  Haysam Kadri (r) as  Jackie. Photo credit, Brian Harder.

The Motherfucker With the Hat

October 15 – November 2, 2013

Martha Cohen Theatre

http://www.atplive.com/2013-2014-Season/Motherf–ker/index.html

Listen to my review on CBC Eyeopener on Monday Oct. 21st at 7:40 am at http://www.cbc.ca/eyeopener/

 

Just because a man is sober, has worked the AA system and finally kicks whatever substance had their claws in him, doesn’t mean he’s a good person. It just means he’s clean. This is the message the less than angelic AA sponsor Ralph D. conveys to the newly sober yet still troubled Jackie near the end of Stephen Adly Guirgis’ The Motherfucker With the Hat. It’s a good message and an interesting jumping off point that is unfortunately quashed by thin narrative and silo acting in this slight but amusing play.

Set in modern-day New York, the play is a funny fast-paced foul-mouthed story about feuding Puerto Rican-American childhood sweethearts Jackie (Haysam Kadri) and Veronica (Carmen Aguirre). Jackie, newly sober, hot-headed but whiny more than dangerous despite his stint in jail, accuses Veronica of infidelity when a mysterious man’s hat appears in their apartment. Veronica, a coke-addicted hell-cat of a gal, stands her ground with Jackie, denying any wrongdoing while dosing out her own brand of spitfire anger. Jackie’s sponsor, the mellow-talking, stay positive Ralph D. (Beau Dixon) tries to keep Jackie from blowing up, but ultimately proves himself to be a very poor advisor indeed. Meanwhile, Ralph is having his own challenges with his ‘in-recovery’, ball-busting wife Victoria (Melanee Murray) who sees Ralph for the dog he really is. Outside this maze of addiction and recovery stands Jackie’s effete but straight oddball cousin, Julio (Francisco Trujillo), who agrees to help Jackie in his quest for revenge despite a history of Jackie’s ill and often hurtful treatment of him.

In what could be described as an all you can eat profanity buffet, Guirgis’ script is littered comically with gutter language at every turn. In one of her softer moments, Veronica prefaces her admission of love for Jackie by saying, “You know I’d rather kick a fucking three-legged kitten down a flight of stairs than admit something like that”.  Jackie doesn’t abandon his litany of f-bombs either when Ralph suggests they pray. “God?”, Jackie says. “Hello again. You may remember me. I’ve prayed like fifty-seven fucking times to you already.” To Guirgis’ credit, these moments get great laughs from the audience, long after the shock value of the words wear off. We laugh because the language shrugs off any consideration. It’s real and appropriate and often renders these characters funny without their meaning to be. But laugh as we do, the script fails to deliver anything more than an entertaining moment-by-moment experience that wears thin as a satisfying story. Of course not every show needs a grand epiphany at its close, but that doesn’t excuse the ‘so what’ feeling we are left with here, ultimately rendering the humour pointless.

The shallow narrative construction however doesn’t stop the cast from giving it their all with the minor characters decidedly stealing the show. Aguirre’s Veronica is full-out Latina-tigress without once devolving into stereotype. She manages to internalize her character deep in her belly and  gives us a high-octane performance that is both hilarious and thoughtful. Murray has the difficult task of playing the only non-funny role as Victoria, an angry and betrayed woman grasping for relief. Her failed sexual scene with Jackie is one of the play’s few truly interesting moments and Murray gets the credit for making it work. But really, it’s Trujillo that shines the brightest as Cousin Julio with his hysterically swishy yet macho character that is as quick to talk about hair products as he is to reference Jean -Claude Van Damme. Going full camp without devolving into tired typecast is no small feat and Trujillo commands this fine line brilliantly. However, it’s his ability to show his dramatic side in two stunning scenes where he drops the comedy and explains to Jackie his hurt then his allegiance that finally brings real substance and heart to the play.

The thread in these supporting performances is that their best moments come not in dialogue, but effectively in monologue. Guirgis’ patter is meant to be automatic-weapon-fast, but in this production the interaction between characters feels more than slightly off.  To my ear it felt as though everyone was so focused on getting the language down pat that they forgot to actually listen to each other. Dixon’s serviceable performance as Ralph suffers somewhat from this but it can really be felt with Kadri’s Jackie who hits all the right dialogue notes but never really evolves into a fully present character.  As a classically trained Shakespearean actor, playing a substance abusing, potty mouthed Puerto Rican loser may be too much of a stretch for Kadri who seems uncomfortable in the role despite working hard in the production.

Director Ron Jenkins does his best to keep pace with Guirgis’ megawatt script but strangely resorts to gimmick with nonsensical bicycle riding during scene changes and nudity that is either unnecessary or more egregiously, in bad taste. A naked man emerging post shower from the bathroom is understandable if not needed, but a naked man riding a bicycle around the stage for no reason  is a cheap ploy that belies a confidence problem. No fault can be found with Narda McCarroll’s wonderful set design featuring the interior of a shoddy New York apartment easily changed-up to represent three different homes. Her lit windows hanging in elevation above the set representing the cramped and populated reality of life in the Big Apple are the perfect icing on her design.

The Motherfucker With the Hat was a good enough show when it premiered on Broadway in 2011 that it was nominated for 6 Tony Awards. But it wasn’t a good enough play to have walked away with single one. The Calgary production is a good enough play to entertain you in the moment, but as the usually quick to rise to their feet audience showed on opening night by overwhelmingly remaining seated, it’s not necessarily completely winning us over either.

RATING

For the profanity sensitive – This is by no means a family show or a production for those offended by language. Never mind the full male nudity. You are best to stay at home and watch re runs of 80’s sitcoms. SKIP IT

For potty-mouth lovers – Sure you’ll love the language and how expletives are thrown about like they are candy on Halloween. But please do take a moment to realize that unlike less sophisticated scripts, the language here is not simply to shock or titillate, it’s actually in deft service of the characters who use it. SEE IT

For occasional theatre goers – Sensitivities aside, this is a fun, entertaining play that moves quickly and asks nothing more of you than to watch and laugh at some pretty pathetic characters who stay that way. SEE IT

For theater junkies – It’s a toss-up between some impressive performances and occasionally interesting writing and a script that is ultimately weightless and a cast that often operates on a ‘my line, your line’ dynamic. MAYBE SEE IT

Ins Choi, Subway Stations of the Cross. Photo Credit Alex Feilpe.

Subway Stations of the Cross

October 2 – 6, 2013

Engineered Air Theatre – EPCOR Centre

http://www.fireexit.ca/

 

At the risk of sounding parochial, I have a difficult time enjoying spoken word poetry as a theatrical experience. I either find that my pleasure in the words would increase dramatically if I could just read them privately and ignore the person on stage acting them out for me, or I find that while the performer is engaging, the words fall flat. Maybe I’ve just been going to the wrong kind of spoken word shows. Or maybe it just took Ins Choi and his intriguing if somewhat widely woven solo show, Subway Stations of the Cross, to show me that watching a man reading and singing poetry on stage could hit many of my theatrical and intellectual sweet spots.

Choi’s sixty minute show which he wrote and stars in, introduces us to a nameless homeless man with nothing but a cardboard platform to stand on, a small guitar to play and a microphone and amp to ensure his message is heard. He may look like a cross between Captain Jack Sparrow and Godot’s Vladamir and Estragon, and he probably smells worse than all of them put together, but this is a man with profound ideas to share. Ideas that while referencing everything from icons of 80’s pop culture to Japanese Anime love metaphors, all come back to the notion of faith through the character of Jesus Christ.

Choi says his poetry was inspired by the homeless and mentally ill men he met out in parks and public spaces in Toronto. These men would wax haphazardly poetic about all things mystic and religious while at the same time launching into non-sequitur tangents on whatever direction their uncaged minds took them. It’s these souls that Choi is channelling in his charismatic performance with a gravelly voice and stunned, sometimes stuttered but forceful delivery. And it’s with them in mind that Choi offers up some beautiful and challenging notions on faith in his poems and songs.

“God is calling you to dance”, we are told along with lines alluding to our disco pants. We are given a list of all those creatures that fall from heaven to earth – ET, Superman, and Lucifer. We hear that, “forgiveness is for them, but forgiving is for you”. We are told to repent via a stunning poem that could serve equally as a trial judgement on white-collar crime as it could on old-fashioned sin. And we are asked to consider if Jesus would recycle and want to bring Elvis back if he were with us today.

Interspersed among the heavier Christian themes in this piece are some fun and purely entertaining ditties. Chief among them is an ode to 80’s sitcoms that will have anyone old enough to remember when the gals on Facts of Life all got a little hefty laughing out loud.

If it sounds to you like Subway Stations of the Cross is all over the place narratively without a definitive structure, then you’d be correct. This is not traditional storytelling in any sense of the word. Choi is starting from nowhere in particular and trying to achieve nothing conclusive. No doubt this will pose problems for many audience members who go to the performance expecting to have their faith tickled or to see an inspiring story. Choi is there to do neither. His musings are just that – musings on the faith he grew up with and still has connection to set to a modern, multifaceted and fragmented consciousness.  It’s all done with a smartly light and fascinating touch right up till the end where Choi jumps the shark by bringing physical representation of the body and blood of Christ into the mix. It’s an effective crucifixion sight gag, but ultimately cheapens the experience by shoving a metaphor down our throats that had previously been beautifully only alluded to.

RATING

For the faithful – Choi’s inclusion of modern references only enhances the splendour of his belief and the message in his poetry and song will no doubt resonate on many levels. SEE IT

For the faithless – This is not a lecture or a sermon. Choi is not preaching here. Yes he talks about forgiveness and repentance, and Jesus is a character in his prose. But the cleverness in this piece is that from a purely intellectual and historic point of view, the poetry and performance stands up as intriguing entertainment. SEE IT

For the occasional theater goer – No doubt some fans of Choi’s hit show Kim’s Convenience will want to see this piece thinking it’s more of the same. I can imagine the shock on their faces when they do. This work is niche to the extreme. With no story, arc or even narrative structure, this one is best left to those seeking very alternative modes of theatre. SKIP IT

For theatre junkies – How nice to see range like this from an artist. From Kim’s Convenience to this performance, Choi is proving himself to be a man of many types of talents. This show has risk written all over it and while it might not resonate perfectly as a fully formed theatrical experience, Choi’s performance and writing deserve your attention. SEE IT

Robert Klein (Titus) Photo: Benjamin Laird Arts & Photo.

Titus Andronicus

September 25 – October 5, 2013

The Studio at Vertigo Theatre

https://tickets.vertigotheatre.com/TheatreManager/1/tmEvent/tmEvent432.html

Listen to my  review on CBC Eyeopener http://www.cbc.ca/eyeopener/columnists/theatre/2013/09/27/jessica-goldman-titus-andronicus/

Not every creative genius is a child prodigy. For every Mozart who composes symphonies at age eight, there are artistic masterminds who don’t find their voice until well into adulthood. William Shakespeare falls into this latter category. But that’s not to say he wasn’t already trying his hand at playwriting years before he penned his now famous works. Titus Andronicus is one of those early efforts and it shows a young artist unsure of his voice, struggling to keep up with trends and bereft of the dramatic and poetic beauty he would later create.

In fact, Titus is often referred to as the worst play by the best playwright. Others, such as TS Eliot went one step further calling Titus, “One of the stupidest and most uninspired plays ever written.”

While I fear Eliot was employing hyperbole to make his point, I don’t disagree with the sentiment. Titus Andronicus, here performed by The Shakespeare Company and Ground Zero Theatre with the support of Hit & Myth, is a decidedly tedious wisp of a play. Which is astonishing given that it’s one of the bloodiest, goriest and most violent pieces of theatre you’ll likely see.

Best described as an Elizabethan slasher/horror/black humour/revenge play, the story introduces us to Titus (Robert Klein), a fictional Roman general returning from a war where he has conquered Tamora, Queen of the Goths (Natascha Girgis). As if conquering her and her army wasn’t enough, Titus sacrifices her eldest son as penance for the loss of Roman life thus setting in motion the spiral of revenge that drives the play. As payback for her anguish, the Queen encourages her two other sons (Roger LeBlanc and Trevor Matheson) to rape and brutally mutilate Titus’ daughter, Livinia (Leanne Govier). Titus then exacts his revenge by killing the Queen’s remaining sons, baking them into a pie and serving it to the Queen. There’s other violent side stories that involve the Queen’s Moorish lover Aaron (Edward Ogum) who manages to frame the murder of Livinia’s husband on Titus’s sons, two of whom are beheaded for the crime. And of course there’s the behanding of Titus who volunteers the extremity when he falls for the false offer to save his son’s lives. Apparently someone counted and there are 5.2 atrocities per act, or one for every 97 lines of script.

So why then, with all this blood lust and gruesome viciousness and dark humour (all of which I normally adore) was I struggling to stay awake during the production? Part of the blame lies squarely at Shakespeare’s feet and the remainder rests with director Haysam Kadri and his cast.

The best thing I can say about Shakespeare’s writing here is that I hope at some point he looked back on this early creative attempt with the same embarrassment as I have looking back at my sense of style in old prom photos. I picture him saying….Oy! What was I thinking! Titus was written to emulate the gory revenge plays that were all the rage at the time, so yes; this is Shakespeare trying to be trendy. Hey, we’re all vulnerable to popular whims when we’re young (this would describe the inordinate amount of neon I wore in the 80’s). The problem is that trend aside, there is simply no weight or poetry or dramatic engagement in this thinly constructed script. Titus goes from killing his own son for ego sake, to weeping over the loss of his remaining sons at the hands of others. He’s mad one minute and then totally sane the next and then possibly sane but twisted to finish off. We learn all of this not through the wonderful language Shakespeare became known for but through short-lived scenes that move the plot along without making any effort to hook the audience beyond curiosity at what the next gruesome act may be. When the next piece of violence comes (we never have to wait long) our reaction is an emotionless, huh, ok, that happened….next. Hardly a winning formula.

But it’s not like Kadri and his cast didn’t know the limitations of the work going into the production. To his credit, Kadri trimmed Titus’ bloated narrative to a lean two hours and pumped up the gore value of the show by utilizing lots of fake blood, entrails and a severed hand. But dousing this production in body parts and fluids does not distract from its failings. From the opening battle scene with its slow-motion flash-lighting treatment right through to the final pie eating scene, Kadri rushes the violence as though apologetic, thereby sapping all the drama and enjoyment from these scenes. In between these bloody acts Kadri seems content to shuffle the cast on and off C.M Zuby’s minimal and unattractive concrete block-looking stage in quick succession relying on recorded drum beats to fill in for actual flow.

Perhaps all of this could have been forgiven if the cast was up to the task of taking Shakespeare’s weak script and rising above it. Sadly, this was only seldom true. Klein and Girgis do fine jobs embracing Titus and Tamora and both actors deliver the cadence and emotion necessary to make Shakespeare’s words flow naturally. The rest of the cast fell somewhere between adequate and abysmal. The worst offenders were those that proved that yelling your lines does not connote true emotion (Scott McAdam as the Emperor Saturnius, Ogum as Aaron) and those actors that strangely brought a modern-day speaking pattern and pronunciation to the Elizabethan-era prose (Matheson).

This was my first time seeing Titus Andronicus staged and I had been assured that this lesser work fared far better in live action than it does on the page. Alas for me, this Titus may have had loads of blood and guts but it was distinctly lacking heart and brains.

RATING

For fans of gore – There is lots of it accompanied by a decent amount of fake blood to keep things messy. But the gore here feels hollow, unsatisfying and often impotent. MAYBE SEE IT

For Shakespeare fans – On the one hand it’s always good to get a full picture of a playwright’s work. On the other hand, not only is this a lesser work, it’s a pretty atrocious one. MAYBE SEE IT

For occasional theater goers – I’d hate for this to be your only, or one of your only Shakespeare experiences. Save your theater dollars and wait for the next production. SKIP IT

For theatre junkies – There is nothing more frustrating than seeing a theatre company who has wowed you in the past fall flat. I suppose you can’t hit it out of the park every time, but part of me wishes I hadn’t tarnished my opinion of these folks with this misstep. SKIP IT

L to R: Blair Irwin, Jay Davis, Justin Bott, Lindsey Frazier, Daniel Abrahamson and Steffi Didomenicantonio. Photo Credit: John Watson for Stage West Calgary

 

I Love You Because

September 5 – November 10, 2013

Stage West

http://www.stagewestcalgary.com/ticket_info.html

 

Given the ridiculously simplistic and predictable narrative recipe that forms the plot of Stage West’s latest musical, I Love You Because, it seems only fair that my review be crafted with as little creative effort and panache as the show itself. In this vein – the following are my thoughts on the production:

 

I disliked I Love You Because, because:

–          Ryan Cunningham and Joshua Salzman’s story of two 20/ 30-something New Yorkers who have both recently been burned by love and come together, not to actually be a couple, but to either get over an ex or make their ex jealous is predictable to the extreme. When the audience knows from minute three of a production how the entire plot is going to unfold yet doesn’t care enough about the characters to happily anticipate the obvious – there’s a serious problem.

–          Speaking of New York – apart from one song that mentions that they are in New York and one or two lines referring to the city that never sleeps – there is absolutely no conjuring of the vibe of the city or the personalities that reside in it. This play could have just has easily have taken place in the deep south or the mid-west and nothing would have changed. In other words – the feel of the play and the relation to its place is totally void of personality.

–          The men in this production were fairly lackluster and not just because their lines were clichés and their characters one-dimensional. Daniel Abrahmson as leading man Austin, Jay Davis as his brother Jeff and Justin Bott as a barista/bartender/waiter may have had the pipes to carry the singing in this performance but their acting felt forced with try-hard timing that resulted in wooden and soul-less deliveries.

–          Darcy Evans direction had actors playing so hard into the musical numbers that every word sounded obligatory as opposed to internalized and rushed instead of allowing the script to breathe – all this in order to hurry into the next song in a mechanical fashion.

 

I found some bright spots in I Love You Because, because:

–          Scott Penner’s set design is gorgeous. A cross between every hipster boutique hotel lobby mixed with a Crate and Barrel floor model design, Penner’s multi-purpose set is as attractive as it is functional. Mid-century modern wooden bookshelves packed with designerly clutter right out of the pages of Dwell Magazine provide the backdrop of two apartments, a coffee-house and a dive bar. Free standing island shelves spin around to reveal slight differences in clutter arrangement to connote which space is which without taking away from the entire mood of the set.

–          Steffi Didomenicantonio in the lead role of Marcy is cute as a button conjuring  Liza Minnelli’s boho quirkiness as Sally Bowles in Cabaret, right down to the dark-haired pixie cut of her hair. She is the only performer in the cast able to bring real personality to her role elevating it somewhat beyond the severe constraints of the hackneyed script. Add on her strong voice which is delightful to listen to in all its musical forms and at least we had one character that roused us marginally from our apathy.

–          Darcy Evans clever choreography in the bitter break up number “What Do We Do It For” finally injects some life into the production with the routine’s energy and visual interest. There’s a reason this number gets the biggest applause.

 

I have nothing more to say about I Love You Because, because:

Even with a few bright spots, I found myself so drowned in predictability and frustrated by a production that lacked excitement or originality that I had checked out mentally long before the climax we knew was coming. Early in the first act, Austin blabs on about his ex-girlfriend to Marcy, all the while claiming not to want to talk about it. I certainly have nothing to blab about when it comes to I Love You Because, but unlike Austin, I’m so over this tedious script and production that I truly don’t want to talk about it any further.

 

RATING

For musical lovers – There is no doubt that the cast voices in this show are good. Some are even better than good. And if all you want from your musical are songs sung with talent – they you’ll be happy. However, if you want a compelling performance and unique script  around your singing, you’ll find much lacking in this show. MAYBE SEE IT

For the occasional theater goer – Maybe you haven’t seen this story played out on stage a millions times over in various forms. Maybe you haven’t seen the same tired story on multiple TV or movie screens. If that’s the case, then perhaps you’ll find some fun in it. MAYBE SEE IT

For theater junkies – The plot is obvious, the characters thinly drawn, the music forgettable, the lyrics not clever enough and many of the performances feel like they are being called in. SKIP IT

Mikaela Cochrane (l), and Sarah Wheeldon (r). Photo credit goes to Cassie Molyneux, Cassie’s Camera.

i-ROBOT

September 11 – 22, 2013

Artbox on 17E

www.swallowabicycle.com

 

Wow, have I really been reviewing plays for that long in Calgary? That was my first thought when I learned that i-ROBOT Theatre, a play I first reviewed in June of 2011, was being remounted/reworked as part of the Beakerhead art and engineering festival. My second thought was, I wonder if they fixed the parts that didn’t work? Not that there were many of them. I quite liked this lo-fi quirky robot cautionary tale inspired by the poetry of Jason Christie the first time round. The writing at times was equal parts humorous, creepy and beautiful, the majority of the performances were outstanding and most importantly, it was a truly unique and risk-taking piece of theatre. My issues with the original production had mostly to do with the play’s go-nowhere conclusion, a risibly unnecessary dance sequence and some weak links in the cast.

So, fast forward over two and half years later, and what do we have?

Well the basic story is the same. Dreamcorp employee, Jonathan (Paul Welch) is attempting to expand the company’s already booming innovative robot business by creating human-like robots that have all the functionality of machines but the look and versatility of humans. These Perfectly Human robots (Mikaela Cochrane, Amy Sawka and Adam Schlinker) can solve hypothetical problems, anticipate the needs of their human owners and even take the role of a wife as Jonathan’s own robot spouse (Holleay Rohm  ) illustrates.

But when the big day comes for Jonathan to show major investors his new concept, they balk at the idea saying that robots with this level of emotional upgrade are more trouble than they are worth. In response, Dreamcorp CEO Jill Gerrard (Jennifer Roberts) orders the robots destroyed. But apparently human-like robots do not go gentle into that good night. The robots rebel and are either destroyed or end up in Satellite World, a kind of robot after life.

Gone thankfully is the dancing and uneven cast. Added to the production are some decidedly high-tech elements in the form of pretty flashy video and graphic projections (designed by Kaely Dekker & Tyler Klein Longmire), several extra plot trajectories in the second act and a more definitive concluding message. The problem is that some of the previously dodgy bits have been removed, but they’ve been replaced with far more problematic elements.

For a show that spends an inordinate amount of time explaining the emotional upgrades allotted to the robot characters, Director Charles Netto manages to squeeze out very little actual emotion in this production. The performances feel flat, the timing feels stilted and Jonathan’s previously very funny talking household appliances barely register a giggle from the audience. Not helping matters is a space that unless retrofitted dramatically, should never be used to house a play. Artbox on 17E may be a new, funky and much-needed art space in Calgary, but the industrial high ceilings result in terrible acoustics that completely muddy the sound causing much of the dialogue to sound garbled. In addition, several thick posts blocking key stage sight lines makes following the action hit and miss.

The new high-tech effects are certainly visually appealing, but they completely strip away the lo-fi quirkiness that made the show so enchanting in the first place. Technology is often a barrier to connection in the theatre and here it removes the audience so far away from the story-line and performers that it reduces much of the second act to utter impotency. Or maybe it was the painfully indulgent and often pretentious over-writing of the second act that stuck the knife in. The Satellite City narrative has been verbosely flushed out with multiple story lines about data mining and creating code and what robots do while they float around in this after world.  The problem is that we aren’t made to care about any of these spirit robots, so to listen to them drone on about who they are and what they want is an exercise in watching the clock hoping it will be over soon. To make matters worse, when the exhausting play does come to an end, the audience is treated to a clichéd ‘moral of the story’ conclusion that is a cross between a Hallmark greeting card and an amateur sci-fi comic book.

i-ROBOT Theatre remains risky storytelling and for that I applaud the Swallow-A-Bicycle gang. This is not your traditional boy meets girl or ubiquitous family dysfunction story.  But it was the risk they took in telling a futuristic story with little to no budget and low tech charm that make this play such a compelling piece of theatre in its original form. Dressing it up, giving it a plot enlargement and passing it off as a ground-breaking piece of tech theatre is neither risky nor interesting. It’s just more for the sake of it. Or more correctly in this case, more at the expense of it.

RATING

For Robot lovers – Well there are certainly a lot of androids in the play and you might be more intrigued by the data-mining love fest and tech references in the second act than I was, but that doesn’t mean you’ll actually connect to the story or find it thrilling. MAYBE SEE IT

For poetry lovers – Christie’s verse features more prominently in the second act and is at times quite intriguing and even beautiful. But it is so bogged down by hi-tech hubris and an endless parade of unnecessary narrative tangents that much of the enjoyment is sucked from his writings. SKIP IT

For the occasional theatre goer – While the first act does have the drama and tension you need in a narrative to keep you interested, it isn’t compelling enough to wow you nor will you feel anything but confused and bored once act two sets off. SKIP IT

For theatre junkies – It’s hard to see such a good idea overworked to the point of tedium. Those that saw and enjoyed this play first time around should keep that memory safe by avoiding this iteration. Those that have not seen it, well you will be impressed by the uniqueness of the concept but the flatness of all execution will leave you cold. SKIP IT

Albert and Joey -Andrew Veenstra (Albert) with Christopher Mai, Derek Stratton, Rob Laqui(Joey). Phto credit Brinkhoff/Mögenburg

 

Listen to my review of War Horse on CBC’s Eyeopener at:

http://www.cbc.ca/eyeopener/columnists/ae/2013/09/11/jessica-goldman-reviews-war-horse/

 

 

(l to r): Esther Jun, Paul Sun-Hyung Lee, Andre Sills.  Photo by Kristian Jones.

Kim’s Convenience

September 3 – 29, 2013

Max Bell Theatre

http://theatrecalgary.com/plays/kims_convenience/more_info/

Listen to my review on CBC’s Calgary Eyeopener at http://www.cbc.ca/eyeopener/episode/2013/09/09/jessica-goldman-reviews-kims-convienence/

 

As a critic, it’s my job to think hard about plays. To watch the stage with analytical eyes that appraise and question every motive, move and mood that is performed. It’s also my job to take that thinking and turn it into commentary that not only critiques, but fingers-crossed, captures some deeper essence of the experience that expands the reader’s engagement with the performance one way or another. It’s heady work that is often frustrating and difficult, but I wouldn’t have it any other way. Except maybe this time. Perhaps just this once you’ll permit me to delay all that deep thought and specificity in analysis and instead just lead with my gut on this one. Yes? Good, so here it is, my purely simple emotional reaction:

I love Kim’s Convenience. I loved it when I saw it in Toronto last year. I think I love it even more this time around. I love that it made me laugh and cry all over again. I love the set and the performances and the writing and the direction and the messages we take away from the show. I love that Toronto theatre company Soulpepper is taking this show on a national tour with the original cast and that Theatre Calgary was smart enough to say yes to hosting it. Most of all I love that I got to my feet applauding last night’s performance with exclamations of, ‘wheeeeee, yippee, rah rah rah!’ running thorough my head.

In other, more considered and professional words, Kim’s Convenience is an all-round superlative show. One that I will now give the full critic treatment to as is my duty.

Written in 2011 by Ins Choi, Kim’s Convenience is about a Korean-owned convenience store in a downtown Toronto neighborhood in the early throes of gentrification. Appa, the fiery  patriarch owner of the store, is visited by a real estate agent offering him a large sum of money to sell the space. Appa refuses, citing his store’s importance to the community and hoping instead that his 30-year-old daughter Janet will take over. Janet of course wants nothing to do with the store, at least professionally. Despite her burgeoning career as a photographer, Janet is still happy to live both above and off the store, taking food when and if she feels like it and profiting from her immigrant parents hard work. But just when we think Janet may be a spoiled brat we learn that she too has put in her time at the store, especially since her older brother Jung’s falling out and disappearance from the family. The brilliance in Choi’s script is his ability to allow the audience equal empathy for both the strong-willed Appa and Janet and later for her mother Umma and Jung. We care about each and every one of these characters and are utterly and addictively invested in their stories. We may not be Korean, we may not have had parents that ran a corner store and we may not even have experienced immigrant issues in our upbringing. None of that matters. Choi is giving us a story about family. A story that examines parental expectation and generational differences and how ultimately love, when finally expressed, can bridge the divide and make change less scary.

But despite some very touching and teary-eyed moments, Kim’s Convenience is without a doubt a comedy. Riotous, hysterical, side-splitting take your pick of adjectives – Choi’s other bit of brilliance in this script is the creation of one of the all-time greatest comedic characters to grace the stage. Appa is the perfect study in how to craft a stereotypic, hot-blooded ethnic lead, with full accented broken English, awkward situational racist leanings, chauvinistic tendencies, bombastic views and yet still be adored and respected by every single member of the audience as they laugh with and at him. Whether he is explaining his theory of which types of races, genders and sexualities “steal or no steal from store”, ranting about illegally parked, Korean enemy Japanese cars or putting people in arm locks to get his way, Appa is a constant, deliriously exhausting streak of laughs. Choi can be credited with putting the show’s comedy on the page, but it is actor Paul Sun-Hyung Lee that must get the credit for taking these lines and turning out a performance that defies expectation in its brilliance and brings new gravitas to the term show-stopping. With pitch-perfect comedic and dramatic timing, Lee’s Appa has us roaring with laughter one minute and choking up with tears the next. He blends slapstick physical comedy, subtle emotional acting and intense explosive delivery into a complex cocktail of a character that we believe has genuine depth and history far beyond what the script allows. Kudos to Director Weyni Mengesha and Remount Director Albert Schultz for giving Lee the space and confidence to unleash this gem of character.

With such a tour de force performance it must not be an easy job keeping up for the rest of the cast, but they do so with verve. Esther Jun as Janet holds her own with Appa and was far more emotionally flexible than the first time I saw the play. Her thin-ish voice however was at times lost on stage and the performance would have benefitted from a pump in volume. Regardless, Jun’s flirtations with a potential boyfriend in the show were so sweetly played that it must be counted as one of the highlights of the evening. The look of stress and worry that populates Jean Yoon’s face as Umma, the mother, the entire show tells you everything you need to know without a word spoken. Yoon in fact gets little dialogue in the play but makes the most of what she is given.  Her Korean-spoken scenes with Appa where she is able to convey meaning in spite of the language barrier is a testament to her talent. But it’s Yoon’s scene with Jung, where she shows great forcefulness and strength through very subtle and meek delivery that truly impresses. Andre Sills in a variety of roles, but most noticeably as Alex, a cop and love interest to Janet, nicely blends his non-Korean characters into the mix with ease.  Playwright Ins Choi as Jung shows his double talent by acting this small part as wonderfully as it was written. A bundle of anger and anxiety and disappointment, Jung’s longing for his estranged father leaks out in little ways and provides one of the most beautiful juxtapositions of laughter and tears in the entire play. It is a uniformly strong cast who’s collective serves to make Lee’s Appa an ever greater presence for us all.

But in a cast of five there is a sixth character on stage in Kim’s Convenience and that’s Ken Mackenzie’s hyper-real set design. Save for one scene where the lights are dimmed to portray another space, all the action in the play takes place inside the convenience store. Mackenzie hasn’t so much created the interior of a store for the set as much as he has seemingly broken into a corner store, hijacked everything inside it and reassembled it onstage at the Max Bell Theatre. To my eye, there was not one bag of chips or energy drink or price stamper or lottery ticket sign out-of-place. Ins Choi says his play was inspired by his father, the men in his family’s church and his uncle who had a convenience store. All real experiences that Mackenzie honours by making sure the space is as real as the men who inspired it.

Kim’s Convenience has stayed in my head and my heart since the first time I saw it as a patron. Now having seen it as a critic, it will stay with me just as strongly in different ways. But regardless which viewing or how hard I’ve had to think about the play, my initial ‘yippee, wheeee, rah rah rah!’ reaction stands. Hey, even us critics are allowed to keep it simple sometimes.

RATING

For the theatre junkie/occasional theatre goer/never goes to the theatre/Korean/non-Korean/immigrant-born/non-immigrant born/male/female/old/less old/and everyone else I can think of  – Yes, the declaration of, ‘yippee, wheee, rah rah rah’ was meant for your consideration – SEE IT.

David LeReaney, Tracy Dahl, Colin Ainsworth and Jennifer Sproule in Calgary Opera’s The Pirates of Penzance.  Photo by Trudie Lee.

Pirates of Penzance

August 22 – 25, 2013

East Village

http://www.calgaryopera.com/arghh

Well, Sullivan might have been pleased but I’m sure Gilbert is rolling over in his grave somewhere. Calgary Opera’s inaugural outdoor summer opera festival, this year featuring Pirates of Penzance, just may be the first time an English Canadian audience needed surtitles to understand a Victorian-era comic operetta.

The fifth of librettist W.S. Gilbert and composer Arthur Sullivan’s collaborations, Pirates of Penzance, tells the story of Fredric, who at 21 years old is released from his promised apprenticeship to a band of fairly ineffectual and rather nice pirates. A free man, Fredric falls in love with Mabel, the youngest daughter of Major-General Stanley and vows to help arrest the pirates.  However he soon finds out that while he has lived 21 years, he is actually only five years old due to his leap year birthday. A man of duty first and foremost, Fredric agrees to go back to the pirates to serve out his remaining 63 years. The couple is devastated by the news but Mabel swears to wait for him which turns out, due to some convenient twists, isn’t as long as either of them dread. Like many comedic stories, the plot wraps up neat and tidy if not altogether plausible.

If plot put to music is all you planned on getting out of the show, you’d be in luck because any essence of the inspired and witty language Gilbert infused into Pirates is frustratingly missing in this production. Gone are the wonderful tongue twisters and humorous wording tied to Sullivan’s ear-wormy music, not because the lyrics have been changed but because they are so poorly enunciated as to render them unrecognizable. Part of the issue I’m sure has to do with the challenge of singing underneath an open-air tent and all the competing outdoor noise that accompanies it. But the majority of the problem were the performers themselves who simply failed to enunciate and instead treated the libretto as grand opera (singing with the majesty of vocal acrobatics) rather than operetta (opera-like vocals treated more lightly with attention paid to recitative style).

In addition to the muddy lyrics, the show also suffered from a disappointingly weak male chorus that seemed to at all times be performing through a foam filter. Whether it was the pirates singing the beloved, “Cat-like tread” or the constables delivering the equally hummable, “”When a felon’s not engaged in his employment”, the result was underwhelmingly banal due to lack of vocal power.

Thankfully the leads helped make up for this deficit. Both Tyler Fitzgerald (Samuel) and Brett Polegato (The Pirate King) channelling Johnny Depp-like fey pirates, held strong with clear baritone voices that were equally matched with Colin Ainsworth’s (Frederic) sweet tenor delivery. David LeReaney (Major-General Stanley) stayed the truest to the operetta style of performance and was rewarded heartily by the audience for it. Soprano Tracy Dahl (Mabel) outshone everyone with her range and control even if her operatic flights of fancy rendered her words comprehensively impotent.

Comprehension was not a problem when topical barbs were dropped into the libretto throughout the show.  Jokes about parliamentary proroguing or lines nodding to the recent flooding and name-dropping Calgary’s mayor brought great bursts of laughter from the audience despite the obvious and forced nature of their inclusion. The late Elmore Leonard said that if something sounds like writing you should erase it and start again. To my ear these attempts to bring familiar modern references into the show stank of try-hard writing and going for the easy laugh. Not exactly the way Gilbert wanted his lines to play out, I’m afraid.

But play out it did on a serviceable set designed by Terry Gunvordahl, with a tight stage that seemed to challenge Director Robert Herriot’s ability to move his actors around in a fluid or confident manner.  In fact, much of the stage direction looked like fits and starts to real action that fizzled out before it really gained momentum. Conductor Gordon Gerrard led the orchestra in a fine interpretation of Sullivan’s music but rarely provided the large sound that might have propelled the chorus to amp up the energy or the musical direction needed to help performers be better understood.

The inaugural performance of Canada’s first outdoor summer opera festival is a great accomplishment for Calgary and something we can all be proud of. But it looks like it might be another year before we can be as proud of the performance as we are about the idea of it.

RATING

For Gilbert and Sullivan lovers – Pirates of Penzance without the language is a tragedy and while you may know the words, you still want to hear them performed. Some lovely singing and a fun atmosphere won’t make up for the deficit. SKIP IT

For the occasional theatre goer – It’s a fun night out at a silly, casual show that doesn’t require much attention and has a few impressive voices. You’ll recognize some of the music and might not care that you aren’t hearing everything being sung. SEE IT

For the theatre junkie – You could almost say that Gilbert and Sullivan have been strip-mined they have been so often performed. But classics are classics for a reason –that is until they are stripped of what made them good in the first place. Language and big choral performances are crucial to Pirates of Penzance and without it, it just isn’t good theatre. SKIP IT