A very belated review: Trial of Wild Gil Hiccup
Fri, 23 May 2008, 10:07 amStuartP2 posts in thread
A very belated review: Trial of Wild Gil Hiccup
Fri, 23 May 2008, 10:07 am[Edit: I actually wrote this review a couple of weeks ago and never got around to posting it. Sorry for the delay, I hope it's still of interest to someone...]
Well, it's a few weeks on since the final performance now and I've finally collected my thoughts. So, what can someone say in this somewhat redundant review?
Before I begin, I should warn that I am known to be a critical bastard, so if you were involved in the play either do not read on or keep in mind that I'm very critical and my views probably don't represent everyone's views 100%. Having said that, on we go...
The Good
The set was wonderful. Really great, gave the entire thing a nice dose of atmosphere. Likewise the costuming was good. I kept an eye out for anyone wearing a digital wrist watch or Nike sneakers and could find no obvious slip ups. The two lawyers should be commended for their very characterful facial hair.
I found the accents on what I would consider the 4 main characters to be well performed and quite consistent throughout. From memory the performance by *Checks the programme* Paris Romanis was also quite good with, as far as I can recall, two distinct and fairly decent accents for both his characters.
The characterisations by the entire cast were quite good. In fact, I should say before we get to the nasty end of this review, that John Grimshaw has a gift. This is the second "A Lad In Sane" production I've seen, the other having been the one act "No Strings Attached". In both cases John has managed to take an idea which on paper looks catastrophic and turn it into something quite engaging. It's quite the skill.
The Bad
Distractions. Distractions distractions... Sorry, what was I saying? For some reason I don't understand, distractions abounded throughout the play. The charming Otis seemed to spend half his time running off stage, arms laden with bottles. The judge was constantly playing with some thing or other and paying almost no attention to the actual trial. I feel that this was a mistake. You don't want the audience constantly watching the sideline characters for their wacky antics and not paying attention to the main action as it were.
Which brings me to the second problem. The dialogue needs a bit of a trim I feel. It seemed to be laden with needless exposition and these great winding tales that became difficult to follow.
I also found various things inconsistent. When the judge first came out, he put on ridiculous coke bottle style glasses. But as far as I recall, after the first 5 minutes they vanished, never to be seen again. Like I said, nit picky. Ok, I said very critical but it's potato potarto.
As far as I recall Otis stopped typing for no reason and no other attempt was made to record the proceedings... Now this might seem like needlessly trying to bind the sort of play where a Cowboy shakes his money maker to a portable MP3 player to some semblance of reality but I feel in any play you need to be consistent. You need reasons. Have the judge tell Otis to forget about typing or have the judge say that he'll take notes by hand. Something would be nice.
Which brings me in a round about way to the trial. As a fan of law shows, in particular the the ridiculous and incredible Boston Legal, I found the proceedings of the trial seemed a bit.. Wishy Washy? According to a lawyer friend of mine, the first person to question a witness is the person who called the witness. But the prosecution and defence in this production seemed to take it in random turns, questioning characters who all seemed to attest to the guilt of Wild Gil. Though something I personally found frustrating was that the defence did not seem to pick up on or mention that half the witnesses had a financial reason to see Wild Gil convicted, making them somewhat less than impartial.
I also found the 'charming' Otis threatening a witness with a gun to the head and getting off with no more than a tired verbal warning a little.. Weak.
I feel you gave the actor playing Hyatt Twerp a bit too much rope. He started off good, but seemed to become more cartoonish and sleazy as the play progressed. I feel a more reserved approach would of brought him more inline with his legal opposition. They don't both need to be reserved but there was just a bit too much of a juxtaposition.
The Ugly
Dancing girls. The young lady who performed these two roles was fairly vibrant and energetic but unfortunately she needed some serious voice coaching. Her accents were painful. I also found a 17 year old flirting with the audience a little morally questionable... But her flirting was also a bit.. Odd. She seemed to repeat the same little tease moves towards the judge again and again. Interacting with the cast is good but a bit more control and direction here would of been good. The old lady could also use some kind of voice coaching.
I'm really not sure if the bit with Jacob Honeybee and the rubber band was necessary... I feel you lost more to the actor having to look constantly pained than you would of gained from what seemed to be a vaguely crass throw away joke.
Racism. Now. This is an interesting one. Setting things in a period when Racism was rampant gives a writer a bit of a green flag to indulge in some period appropriate and tastefully handled racism. But you need to be careful not to abuse that license and in this case I think it was. Obviously you were trying to snub your nose at the whole PC thing which, being not the most PC person I can understand. But the bit about the Windmill and the KKK? This just seems horrific.
And the terrible racial stereotype that was "Lim Too Tan"? Well. Less said about that the better.
The wrap up
Overall the play was watchable and I did laugh once or twice. If it could be evened out a little, a little more subtlety and a little more taste and consistency, you'd have a great little play. Just remember, if your actors can't do an accent, don't force them.
Good l... Sorry. Break a leg John. This show had a definite glimmer to it. As objectionable as I found some of the material I think A Lad In Sane is definitely one to watch...
What's the 17-year-old's
Sat, 24 May 2008, 10:46 amWalter Plinge
What's the 17-year-old's phone number?