Monday, November 22, 2010

Oddly satisfying

Sup?

So I went up to the wonderfully smelly town of Atchison to see the Benedictine College production of...

"The Odd Couple (Female Version)"
by Neil Simon


This isn't there poster, they didn't have on online. Back in my day...
Let me start by saying that if you honestly have no idea who I am, yes, I graduated from Benedictine College. I was a very active member in their theatre department when I went to school there. I know the people, know the space, all that stuff. So it was a real treat to see the show and know that good stuff still gets done there ;-)

From the moment I sat down in the theater I had a sense of disorder. The set was in pieces - doorways without walls - and there was high contrast in the designs on the floors. Upstage were hardwood floors, downstage were tile floors, with smaller, more colorful square tiles as facing in some areas. Hah! I just got it! The little colorful tiles were Trivial Pursuit colors! Hah! Cool stuff!

Ahem. Anyway. The play focuses on the odd couple - the strange friendship between Olive and Florence that turns into a living situation from hell - but the opening scene focuses on the group of friends in which Olive and Florence are a part of. It was a crucial scene in establishing the sense of friendship between these girls and would either convince us they were all friends who liked each other or convince us we wasted $5 tonight. The former was achieved.

From the moment the friends leave, we start to see the obvious dynamic between Olive and Florence. Yeah, you guessed it, one's a slob and one's a neat freak. It's such an obvious formula for comedy that you'd think it'd be impossible to screw up... But community theaters screw it up all the time, so would this small college fall into that niche?

No, of course not! Haha

Olive and Florence could not have been any more different. The transformation of sympathy turned into hatred that Olive goes through in the show matched the energy of hopelessness turned hopeful that Florence transforms into. And then, of course, what could be funnier than seeing two white boys in dark skinned makeup play the ridiculously romantic Spaniard brothers? Hilarious stuff all over.

From the start and going all the way through the show, the fast pace, witty delivery of dialogue, and intense emotions sent the audience on a near non-stop laugh trip. I would guess that in a "normal" crowd outside of Benedictine College it would have been literally non-stop, but some of the only times the audience wasn't laughing were the uncomfortable silences after a slightly dirty joke. Risky as it was to keep that type of content in the show at a Catholic school, I commend the director for staying true to the intention of the playwright.

Updating the show's lines to fit certain cultural and social standards that have changed since the show was written (cell phones, Facebook, Twitter, etc) was also risky idea. However, the additions and their execution were brilliant and the audience reacted in due form.

Overall, it was a very funny and very enjoyable show. The set, lights, and music all augmented the show's brilliance, and, of course, all actors were top notch. Strong, believable characters coupled with an obvious and clear direction made the show a great performance to witness. The technical side met the strength of every other facet, with tight technical cues and fast, efficient stage hands.

If you'd missed the show, don't let it get you down. Just make sure you make it to the next shows up at Benedictine College. Nestled into that smelly little town is a theater which produces work worth seeing. I can't wait to see what comes next. :-)

Wonderful job all,
Corbin

Wednesday, November 17, 2010

too stupid for Stoppard

Okay, I'll just get this out of the way right now. I'm kind of an idiot. This is a hard fact of life to deal with sometimes, especially when trying to read someone as literarily daunting as...

Tom Stoppard.

And so begins my   . . .  review..? . . . of ...

"The Invention of Love"
by Tom Stoppard


This, uh, play... is ... about... Well, let's start from the, start, shall we? A. E. Housman is the main character of this play, and he just died (in the play, not in time, this was the early 1900's). His journey down the River Styx to Hades brings him along the shores of his memories, and especially the love he had for his friend, Moses Jackson. Housman was a real dude, writing poetry about the same time Oscar Wilde was making waves. You may have heard of a little book called "The Shropshire Lad"?   ......Ok, well I haven't, but apparently it's really famous.

Anyway, the play   .... uh, it's, like, well... So his memories are floating by, sorta, right? But then, there are also people talking about his work, or talking about... other...things... Things that, uh... I don't really know what they were talking about, or why, but, there were people, LOTS of people, talking, and....

Ok I'm sorry I can't really do this. It was supposed to be a comedy and I did laugh a few times. But I really wasn't sure what the hell was going on most of the time, or what they were talking about, or why, but I did get bits and pieces. Oscar Wilde is a character in the play, too, which is kinda cool.

I know it talks a lot about literature, the classics, poetry, ancient history (Greeks, Romans), art, science; and, obviously, love. So if that sounds like your cup of tea, you can go for it. Hope you have better luck than I did. I didn't hate it, but then, how can you hate (or like) something you didn't really understand? Oh well.

Fun fact: This play lost to David Auburn's "Proof"  for the Tony Award for best play in 2001.

Until next time,
Corbin


Monday, November 15, 2010

where do i begin

Yes hello.

I know what you're thinking: "But Corbin, you barely fill up one blog! You think you can handle TWO? Psh!"

Well, I've created this one to talk about theatre. Thoughts on theatre, reviews of shows I've seen, thoughts on plays I'm reading, etc.... I felt like it merited its own place instead of gettin tossed into my "life" blog. So here we go!

I've been reading a LOT of plays lately. As a result, some friends of mine and I have started an official "script club", if you will, and now we're on round two. We're going to be reading 4 plays between the 4 of us and then discussing once all the passing around has been done. Here's #1 for me:

"The Violet Hour" by Richard Greenberg


(in case you can't tell, yes, that's Robert Sean Leonard)
 Where do I begin? I must say I'm surprised I haven't heard of the playwright, after looking over his scriptography (there's a new word for the day)... He's been a very active and consistent playwright, winning lots of rewards for his work, and this is one of his "best" (according to critics).

The year: 1919. The city: Manhattan. A period piece, you're thinking? In New York? Hm. And then I'll be interested to tell you it's essentially about time travel. Oh yes, this was an interesting piece.

So this guy John is starting a publishing company and he only has one problem: What in the hell does he publish? A good friend wants him to publish his book (which is, literally, millions of pages long, but uncannily good) and his love interest wants him to pubish her book (a captivating memoir that John is as much in love with as he is her.) John's problem is, as with most men, commitment. He doesn't want to commit to either one for fear that they won't sell, and he'll be left shirtless in the process. And then, on the one day this all comes together, a machine is delivered to his office.

By whom? What does it do? We don't know the answer to the first question, but we eventually find out the answer to the second: it spews out, page after page after page, books from the future. Books from the end of the current century. And the revelations these books provide are shocking and disturbing.

The play is a poetic and insightful journey into the age old question of our decisions and their far reaching consequences. Can what we do ever be undone? If we could we change the past or the future if we wanted, would we? Should we?

The writing in this play reminded me of the style of August Wilson: sometimes it took poetic liscence to dialogue but for the good of the play and its message. The characters were all very interesting, each with brilliant and lively personalities. The story was rich, fun, and page turning. I really liked it over all. It certainly has my recommendation.

Anyway. Work's almost over and I've got to go. I think this is a good start.

Until next time,
I am THEATRON!
gOD of the THEATRE