Theatre Australia

your portal for australian theatre

Company

Fri, 15 Apr 2011, 05:11 pm
Daniel Kershaw15 posts in thread
It’s a Thursday night and you want to be entertained. So you head off to the Old Mill Theatre, situated in the hub of South Perth, to go support a show produced by a lot of your friends. You know you’re in the proverbial heart of community theatre when you see a tray of sherries offered before the show. Even though it is absolutely disgusting, you knock back two, just because you can – and because it’s free. Its pungent taste wakes you up a little and makes you seem cool in the eyes of all the old people ... I mean youthfully challenged. I went to see Sondheim’s Company last night. This, a week after I saw two amazing productions by Malthouse and Melbourne Theatre Company, so, to be fair, I probably went in with a more critical eye than usual. But you know what? Despite this handicap, the show impressed me, so much so, that I have decided to write about it. The story revolves around 35 year old bachelor Bobby (If you saw the show you won’t forget his name – they sing about it incessantly), played by Scott Burns, who is trying to decide if marriage is for him, based on the views and experiences of his married friends – a story a bit too close to home for a few people I know. It’s an enticing book and a mesmerising score, but the cast, under the direction of Dannielle Aston, assisted by Shelley Ormerod, brought it to life with flair and gusto. It was a very strong ensemble performance and the direction was slick and seamless. The choreography by Claire Nichols was understated and elegant, a perfect dichotomy for this show. While all the performances were solid, the stand outs for me were from people I have never seen perform before, which is refreshing when you see a lot of theatre. Matthew Kiely and Cicely Binford had great chemistry as the pedantic and bickering couple of Harry and Sally, yet managed to find a great deal of authenticity in their roles. Bonnie Coyle’s portrayal of April was outstanding. It was the most natural and engaging performance I have seen in community theatre for a discernible amount of time. Matt Austin’s musical direction was flawless, but as Gordon previously stated, the levels of the keyboard at times (not very often mind you) made it difficult to hear some of the lyrics, which is more of a observation than a criticism, because I am sure everyone did the best they could in the space and with the resources available. The stage design of this production excited the theatre nerd inside of me. Apartments colour coded. Improvised neon lights. All married with Lewis Johnson’s superb lighting. Amazing. Although, in saying that, the design was a bit of a double edged sword. As much as I loved it, I felt at times that it cramped the stage and it definitely diminished the scenes on the top or ‘blue’ level. I am not sure performing above a live orchestra was the wisest decisions, but it certainly looked great. Overall, a very enjoyable night out, exploding follow spots and all. I think the rest of the reason is sold out, but if you’re keen to see this production, I would try your luck at the door.

I went to see this the

Sat, 16 Apr 2011, 05:07 pm
Walter Plinge
I went to see this the other night. Alas, I also went in with a critical eye... more than I was hoping. Having the knowledge of the music and script to quite a large extent, I feel the director missed a lot of great moments and the spine of a lot of the scenes and characters. They did well with what they had and the space they chose. I didn't understand why Danielle chose to set it in the late 60's when in the director's notes, she stated how she wanted the audience to see how it was relevant today - (set it today then). The mise-en-scene in some of the songs didn't match at all. Eg: why use the wives in "Have I Got A Girl For You" ??? Also, a scene with Bobby and Marta, Amy walks by and acts like Marta's best friend saying "hello" with Robert (who is the actual friend of that character) standing right there and not saying anything or acknowledging. These are just 2 examples of how I think Danielle comlpetely missed the point of the script and mis-judged a lot of the action, comedy, and use of actors. That aside, the use of the space was fairly good and the blending of voices within the harmonies and other sung text was good. Also, it looked like Danielle directed it with the thought of using every prop that could possibly be used. Danielle - He's a pointer for your next production - and I hope you continue. - Take a script and build it like you would a black-box production. No one should ever rely on props, costume, set or lighting to create character, story and conflict. Next time, say to yourself - what is the conflict, what is the spine, why is there and audience and why is each character there. Why is the audience there? Everyone has a purpose. When the script calls for a character to be holding a glass, give them a glass - don't give them a fully decorate kitchen. When someone is in need of a drink at a bar - don't give them a bar-man who stands there too long. SIMPLE SIMPLE SIMPLE. If you ever direct this again - I'd love to see it and see what changes you will have (hopefully) made.

Thread (15 posts)

← Back to Theatre Reviews