Bumpy Angels
Sun, 2 July 2000, 12:07 pmWalter Plinge27 posts in thread
Bumpy Angels
Sun, 2 July 2000, 12:07 pmHello everyone! Well, lets see if we can cause some more controversy!(not that that's what i set out to do)
Bumpy Angels is a strange mish-mash of song, personal revelation (and even) game show. Unfortunately I was put off from the beginning with the intolerably long procession of "brides" which had no relevance to any later scenes - merely some sort of masque to get us in the mood (and failing). Firstly the backstage crew were laughable - taking ages just to move a cupboard and later making mistakes (coming in and off in half light) and then very audiblely chastising/discussing backstage - to was so bad the audience couldn't help but giggle. Mind you, we were already in a bemused state after being subjected to various snatches of song which are incredibly cheesy and I think lent nothing to the play - they could all be cut and play would lose nothing (might even gain a bit of dramatic credibility). By the interval I was pleased with the dramatic tension set up between characters and the audience was certainly emotionally involved - some of us rather uncomfortably so! But then it just kept coming! Coral and Felicity-Elizabeth's monologues were quite touching and well performed - but then everybody had to get in on the act, confessing every dark secret and troubled soul. Destroying most of the poignancy and subtlety of the play we were sledgehammered with emotion until the unsatisfying conclusion. High praise must goto the Mother Superior, who showed excellent charactisation and crystal clear vocal technique. Singing numbers were a little ragged and out of time and of course not all of us can be singers (Angela and Amy's song certainly made us long for a chorus number) but Your CHeatin' Heart was an absolute delight. All in all an emotion packed and interesting show, which cheapens itself through lack of any subtlety and its silly songs.
Bumpy Angels is a strange mish-mash of song, personal revelation (and even) game show. Unfortunately I was put off from the beginning with the intolerably long procession of "brides" which had no relevance to any later scenes - merely some sort of masque to get us in the mood (and failing). Firstly the backstage crew were laughable - taking ages just to move a cupboard and later making mistakes (coming in and off in half light) and then very audiblely chastising/discussing backstage - to was so bad the audience couldn't help but giggle. Mind you, we were already in a bemused state after being subjected to various snatches of song which are incredibly cheesy and I think lent nothing to the play - they could all be cut and play would lose nothing (might even gain a bit of dramatic credibility). By the interval I was pleased with the dramatic tension set up between characters and the audience was certainly emotionally involved - some of us rather uncomfortably so! But then it just kept coming! Coral and Felicity-Elizabeth's monologues were quite touching and well performed - but then everybody had to get in on the act, confessing every dark secret and troubled soul. Destroying most of the poignancy and subtlety of the play we were sledgehammered with emotion until the unsatisfying conclusion. High praise must goto the Mother Superior, who showed excellent charactisation and crystal clear vocal technique. Singing numbers were a little ragged and out of time and of course not all of us can be singers (Angela and Amy's song certainly made us long for a chorus number) but Your CHeatin' Heart was an absolute delight. All in all an emotion packed and interesting show, which cheapens itself through lack of any subtlety and its silly songs.
RE: Bumpy Angels
Sun, 2 July 2000, 02:12 pmWalter Plinge
Well thank you for the few positive comments, Secret. And I have to say that yes, the technical hitches were embarrassing (cast AND crew were to blame for this) so I can but apologise. Most of what you said is fair enough, but I'm afraid you've missed the boat on a few things.
We don't pretend to be experts in the style but has anyone out there heard of Brecht?
Bumpy Angels is DELIBERATLEY a mish-mash. The whole point of 'throwing in' seemingly 'pointless' songs is to keep the audience on their toes, to maintain a distance - what Brecht referred to as "Alienation". Really, the audience isn't expected to get 'sucked into' the emotion of the play, but to take a step back, to examine the indivdual and eventually the united stories of the characters. Hence the somewhat 'jarring' dream-sequences.
I've just spent two weeks teaching year 11's and 12's about Brecht and his Epic Theatre so I won't go into it all now. Obviously its a style that's a little hard to swallow and not to everyone's taste, but perhaps that was Brecht's intention?
Having said that, Bumpy is not purely Brechtian in style. The author has chosen to combine techniques and styles to convey the story. Strange as it may be, this play was commissioned for and performed successfully at Q.U.T and also performed by W.A.A.P.A. If anyone has any problem with strange songs or long monologues I suggest you take that up with Sue Rider, the author, a prominant Australian playwrite and director.
Sour grapes? Maybe. Can't handle criticism? Perhaps. But I would suggest that reviewers tread carefully and perhaps learn more about alternative styles before they review something they don't understand.
However, thank you for taking the time to share your comments about our show. I do not expect everyone to like the play, but do enter into the experience with an open mind.
Cheers ~ Martha (not due until the end of July).
We don't pretend to be experts in the style but has anyone out there heard of Brecht?
Bumpy Angels is DELIBERATLEY a mish-mash. The whole point of 'throwing in' seemingly 'pointless' songs is to keep the audience on their toes, to maintain a distance - what Brecht referred to as "Alienation". Really, the audience isn't expected to get 'sucked into' the emotion of the play, but to take a step back, to examine the indivdual and eventually the united stories of the characters. Hence the somewhat 'jarring' dream-sequences.
I've just spent two weeks teaching year 11's and 12's about Brecht and his Epic Theatre so I won't go into it all now. Obviously its a style that's a little hard to swallow and not to everyone's taste, but perhaps that was Brecht's intention?
Having said that, Bumpy is not purely Brechtian in style. The author has chosen to combine techniques and styles to convey the story. Strange as it may be, this play was commissioned for and performed successfully at Q.U.T and also performed by W.A.A.P.A. If anyone has any problem with strange songs or long monologues I suggest you take that up with Sue Rider, the author, a prominant Australian playwrite and director.
Sour grapes? Maybe. Can't handle criticism? Perhaps. But I would suggest that reviewers tread carefully and perhaps learn more about alternative styles before they review something they don't understand.
However, thank you for taking the time to share your comments about our show. I do not expect everyone to like the play, but do enter into the experience with an open mind.
Cheers ~ Martha (not due until the end of July).
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···