Missed Julie
Sat, 10 June 2000, 01:15 amGrant Malcolm3 posts in thread
Missed Julie
Sat, 10 June 2000, 01:15 amMixed reviews have greeted Perth Theatre Company's production of Strindberg's classic Miss Julie. Both in spite and because of this, i was keen to see the production. In spite of the two reviews i'd seen and the few snippets of feedback i'd heard that had been notably short in lavishing praise on the production. And because of what i'd read of the concept behind the production.
When you're intimately involved in a rehearsal process it is easy to be seduced by the flow of decisions and choices, and fired by the journey of discovery. So many moments of startling experimentation, pathways explored and then retraced, that are rarely seen by any but an actor's, director's and maybe stage manager's eye. The quest for "dramatic truths" (let it pass, Leah) is, for those involved, often as important as what eventually arrives on the stage for an audience.
Director Sally Richardson is not the first to toy with the notion of somehow bringing the multitude of meanings exposed in the rehearsal room to an audience. But perhaps many of those moments are best left behind like discarded frames of film on a cutting room floor.
The stage device of playing a scene in one manner, changing lights and replaying it differently might have been used to illustrate how altered objectives can result in significantly different dramatic outcomes. Instead, with the notable exception of one scene featuring Christine, it was used largely as an opportunity for the actors to demonstrate, with some flourish, their dramatic range. Rather than illuminating the text, expanding on themes or building emotional intensity the effect was one of indulgent histrionics that served to distract from the play.
If the replayed scenes were a little like watching a movie with the "blooper" moments interspliced into the flow of film, then the video prologue to this performance was like being forced to watching the "making of" before seeing the feature film. It's something of a given in theatre that if your production doesn't make sense without having to read the programme notes first, then there is something seriously wrong. In this context, screening programme notes as part of the performance was an act of indulgence i could well have done without.
The overall effect of the production for me was one of mild intellectual stimulation and almost a complete lack of emotional engagement on my part.
I was aware that many compromises must have had to be made to the original concept in order to accommodate the type of audience likely to attend this season at the Playhouse. I couldn't help thinking it something of a shame that the production wasn't planned for a smaller venue like the Studio at Subiaco or even the Blue Room. In these environments the director and actors might have given full flight to their ideas and been more assured of a sympathetic audience willing to indulge them. I'm afraid i felt the production can have done little to raise the standing of local theatre in the eyes of broader audiences, whatever the attendance.
I also note, with some concern, that the warm reception from the audience on the evening i attended was _very_ ungraciously received by one of the actors who could barely manage a grimace at curtain call and practically dragged the other two actors off the stage partway through the bows. This behaviour was an absolute disgrace, whatever the circumstances.
Cheers
Grant
When you're intimately involved in a rehearsal process it is easy to be seduced by the flow of decisions and choices, and fired by the journey of discovery. So many moments of startling experimentation, pathways explored and then retraced, that are rarely seen by any but an actor's, director's and maybe stage manager's eye. The quest for "dramatic truths" (let it pass, Leah) is, for those involved, often as important as what eventually arrives on the stage for an audience.
Director Sally Richardson is not the first to toy with the notion of somehow bringing the multitude of meanings exposed in the rehearsal room to an audience. But perhaps many of those moments are best left behind like discarded frames of film on a cutting room floor.
The stage device of playing a scene in one manner, changing lights and replaying it differently might have been used to illustrate how altered objectives can result in significantly different dramatic outcomes. Instead, with the notable exception of one scene featuring Christine, it was used largely as an opportunity for the actors to demonstrate, with some flourish, their dramatic range. Rather than illuminating the text, expanding on themes or building emotional intensity the effect was one of indulgent histrionics that served to distract from the play.
If the replayed scenes were a little like watching a movie with the "blooper" moments interspliced into the flow of film, then the video prologue to this performance was like being forced to watching the "making of" before seeing the feature film. It's something of a given in theatre that if your production doesn't make sense without having to read the programme notes first, then there is something seriously wrong. In this context, screening programme notes as part of the performance was an act of indulgence i could well have done without.
The overall effect of the production for me was one of mild intellectual stimulation and almost a complete lack of emotional engagement on my part.
I was aware that many compromises must have had to be made to the original concept in order to accommodate the type of audience likely to attend this season at the Playhouse. I couldn't help thinking it something of a shame that the production wasn't planned for a smaller venue like the Studio at Subiaco or even the Blue Room. In these environments the director and actors might have given full flight to their ideas and been more assured of a sympathetic audience willing to indulge them. I'm afraid i felt the production can have done little to raise the standing of local theatre in the eyes of broader audiences, whatever the attendance.
I also note, with some concern, that the warm reception from the audience on the evening i attended was _very_ ungraciously received by one of the actors who could barely manage a grimace at curtain call and practically dragged the other two actors off the stage partway through the bows. This behaviour was an absolute disgrace, whatever the circumstances.
Cheers
Grant