Othello v Titus
Sun, 6 Aug 2000, 11:22 amGrant Malcolm13 posts in thread
Othello v Titus
Sun, 6 Aug 2000, 11:22 amHaving spent the previous night at Bell's Dream I was looking forward to an evening of contrast with Shakespearience's Othello v Titus.
I'll confess it wasn't entirely without some trepidation. While I shared much of Robert Cook's enthusiasm for Gibson Nolte's performance in the recent Macbeth, I'd wished someone had taken a nail gun to his somewhat undisciplined interpretation of Macduff and stapled his feet to the floor!
However, I had seen Gibson's Winters' Tale at Kalamunda last year and I was confident that, as a director, he had a firm grasp of the bard and I was looking forward to seeing how he and his fellow director Claire Hooper tackled these condensed versions.
It's difficult not to draw comparisons between the original sources and Kaiser's shorter versions. Shakespeare's Othello and Titus Andronicus they are not. That said, the stripped down texts stand perfectly well in their own right and succeeded admirably in performance.
The contrast with Bell Shakespeare was at once apparent in the almost complete lack of setting and the very simple costuming - not to mention the size of the venue. For all this, the company filled the space with inventive performances that invited the audience to share their journey.
Each play is performed by a cast of three and thankfully, with skillful editing, each actor plays at most only three parts. Shifts in characterisation together with single items of costume or rearrangments of hair neatly distinguished one role from another.
The plays move quickly. The performances are dynamic and the energy never flagged. Titus is as obscenely funny as Othello is tension packed. The invention and passion held the small Blue Room crowd firmly in its thrall.
Some more work on vocal technique might have assisted to carry the otherwise excellent performances of Booth and Keen, but it was a delight to see the development of Toby Malone as a performer. If occasionally physically understated his almost melodramatic vocal range was admirably suited to the roles. Rebecca Pithers performance was the highlight for me with extraordinary assurance, sensitivity and vocal clarity.
And I have to ask... Rebecca is that you? I thought you looked very familiar, but I didn't read the programme until i went for coffee after the show. Can it be that i really directed you when you were ten years old???
Cheers
Grant
I'll confess it wasn't entirely without some trepidation. While I shared much of Robert Cook's enthusiasm for Gibson Nolte's performance in the recent Macbeth, I'd wished someone had taken a nail gun to his somewhat undisciplined interpretation of Macduff and stapled his feet to the floor!
However, I had seen Gibson's Winters' Tale at Kalamunda last year and I was confident that, as a director, he had a firm grasp of the bard and I was looking forward to seeing how he and his fellow director Claire Hooper tackled these condensed versions.
It's difficult not to draw comparisons between the original sources and Kaiser's shorter versions. Shakespeare's Othello and Titus Andronicus they are not. That said, the stripped down texts stand perfectly well in their own right and succeeded admirably in performance.
The contrast with Bell Shakespeare was at once apparent in the almost complete lack of setting and the very simple costuming - not to mention the size of the venue. For all this, the company filled the space with inventive performances that invited the audience to share their journey.
Each play is performed by a cast of three and thankfully, with skillful editing, each actor plays at most only three parts. Shifts in characterisation together with single items of costume or rearrangments of hair neatly distinguished one role from another.
The plays move quickly. The performances are dynamic and the energy never flagged. Titus is as obscenely funny as Othello is tension packed. The invention and passion held the small Blue Room crowd firmly in its thrall.
Some more work on vocal technique might have assisted to carry the otherwise excellent performances of Booth and Keen, but it was a delight to see the development of Toby Malone as a performer. If occasionally physically understated his almost melodramatic vocal range was admirably suited to the roles. Rebecca Pithers performance was the highlight for me with extraordinary assurance, sensitivity and vocal clarity.
And I have to ask... Rebecca is that you? I thought you looked very familiar, but I didn't read the programme until i went for coffee after the show. Can it be that i really directed you when you were ten years old???
Cheers
Grant
RE: Othello v Titus
Fri, 11 Aug 2000, 12:29 amAlthough the run of the show is not quite done, and I really wasn't meaning to write anything about the show itself on the website (being a little too close the show) but I just wanted to make a comment.
I have been following with interest in the last few days the attacks on 'Secret Squirrel', who it was revealed was Simon Baldwin, an old friend of mine. I felt that some of Simon's criticisms on this site were a little harsh, but I was also glad to see someone have the guts (albeit anonymously) to say what they actually THOUGHT about a show in review. Simon was at 'OvT' tonight and I asked him if he was thinking of going home to write a scathing criticism of the show - and was surprised to see that he was very much reluctant to do that, even under his own name, because of the nasty rebukes he had received from offended cast and crew. I really do think this is a shame, because it is nice to get a bagging every now and then - I mean, how often do we as performers read a review that is 100% complimentary? Not really all that often. Being bagged lets you know what other people thought could do with improvement, and you are free to take or disregard those opinions as you wish. I don't want to get into a rant about this - I certainly don't want to get into an argument over this. What I am saying is that Simon didn't sound all that interested in continuing to review shows honestly (remember, everyone - it's just an OPINION) on here anymore because some people didn't like to hear that their show wasn't perfect. I am not asking everyone to throw their arms wide and receive a bagging with gratitude, but it's what makes us stronger as performers - noting criticisms and opinions and using them to help sculpt our performances. Nobody likes being told that they did something that they have worked so hard on (especially community theatre whose focus is fun and personal fulfillment) is crap, but you can't always be in Findlay winners. I will wind this up here, but I just wanted to say that I think it is a shame that a bit of criticism - even if it is from someone with a pseudonym or whatever - was so uproariously received that the critic in name (who, by the way, I felt had plenty of good points, but also plenty of others I didn't agree with) feels he can't contribute anymore.
I hope I haven't offended anyone, and Simon - apologies for speaking for you, but that's my opinion about the whole situation and I just wanted to air it. Thanks to everyone who has seen and reviewed Othello v Titus - we are all overwhelmed by the reception we have gained.
Thanks again.
Toby Malone
Michelle Sowden wrote:
-------------------------------
I must confess to not having seen much professional (or amateur) Shakespeare in the past, so I have very few performances to compare 'Othello v Titus' with.
But, from my few experiences, I can say that this blew nearly all of them out of the water. It certainly blew me away.
Unfamiliar with both plays (and I call myself a theatre student?) I was certainly in for some surprises. I couldn't believe that Shakespeare could actually conceive some of the gruesome ideas that came up in these plays (particularly Titus, 'cullinary' in the program synopsis has a rather different meaning to what I had expected...).
The plot was dense with action. So much happened in the forty or so minutes that each performance took that I could hardly find time to sip my glass of wine. And even though each performer played several roles, it was still fairly easy for the unaware audience member to get the gist of what was happening. It definitely helped with such strong and well characterised performanc....
I have been following with interest in the last few days the attacks on 'Secret Squirrel', who it was revealed was Simon Baldwin, an old friend of mine. I felt that some of Simon's criticisms on this site were a little harsh, but I was also glad to see someone have the guts (albeit anonymously) to say what they actually THOUGHT about a show in review. Simon was at 'OvT' tonight and I asked him if he was thinking of going home to write a scathing criticism of the show - and was surprised to see that he was very much reluctant to do that, even under his own name, because of the nasty rebukes he had received from offended cast and crew. I really do think this is a shame, because it is nice to get a bagging every now and then - I mean, how often do we as performers read a review that is 100% complimentary? Not really all that often. Being bagged lets you know what other people thought could do with improvement, and you are free to take or disregard those opinions as you wish. I don't want to get into a rant about this - I certainly don't want to get into an argument over this. What I am saying is that Simon didn't sound all that interested in continuing to review shows honestly (remember, everyone - it's just an OPINION) on here anymore because some people didn't like to hear that their show wasn't perfect. I am not asking everyone to throw their arms wide and receive a bagging with gratitude, but it's what makes us stronger as performers - noting criticisms and opinions and using them to help sculpt our performances. Nobody likes being told that they did something that they have worked so hard on (especially community theatre whose focus is fun and personal fulfillment) is crap, but you can't always be in Findlay winners. I will wind this up here, but I just wanted to say that I think it is a shame that a bit of criticism - even if it is from someone with a pseudonym or whatever - was so uproariously received that the critic in name (who, by the way, I felt had plenty of good points, but also plenty of others I didn't agree with) feels he can't contribute anymore.
I hope I haven't offended anyone, and Simon - apologies for speaking for you, but that's my opinion about the whole situation and I just wanted to air it. Thanks to everyone who has seen and reviewed Othello v Titus - we are all overwhelmed by the reception we have gained.
Thanks again.
Toby Malone
Michelle Sowden wrote:
-------------------------------
I must confess to not having seen much professional (or amateur) Shakespeare in the past, so I have very few performances to compare 'Othello v Titus' with.
But, from my few experiences, I can say that this blew nearly all of them out of the water. It certainly blew me away.
Unfamiliar with both plays (and I call myself a theatre student?) I was certainly in for some surprises. I couldn't believe that Shakespeare could actually conceive some of the gruesome ideas that came up in these plays (particularly Titus, 'cullinary' in the program synopsis has a rather different meaning to what I had expected...).
The plot was dense with action. So much happened in the forty or so minutes that each performance took that I could hardly find time to sip my glass of wine. And even though each performer played several roles, it was still fairly easy for the unaware audience member to get the gist of what was happening. It definitely helped with such strong and well characterised performanc....
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···