Man of La Mancha
Fri, 3 Aug 2001, 12:03 amToby12 posts in thread
Man of La Mancha
Fri, 3 Aug 2001, 12:03 amI'm not really sure where this post will lead, as I have a large number of ideas and arguments racing around in my head.
I went into Man of La Mancha somewhat hopeful - I knew that the score and script were strong, and that the director, Joe McCabe, was quite experienced with and enthusiastic over said script and score.
I emerged disappointed and confused - I was baffled over some of the choices made, but more importantly, I was astonished that such a wonderful story could be so mercilessly butchered by little more than what seemed almost exactly the WRONG venue for such a show. I am expecting protests and complaints, but if you want to send them, email them to me and I will respond in kind. I think the Old Mill is a nice little theatre - and I can see how many of the melodrama-style plays displayed in the foyer from over the years might have succeeded so well in there. It is a cosy, intimate space, and would be perfect for such things as Stoppard for example. I would LOVE to see 'The Real inspector Hound' or 'After Magritte' in that space!!
However. By putting on a show like 'Man of La Mancha' in such a small space, the action is cramped into tiny, convoluted groups on the stage, and such things as fight scenes (I was LONGING for an Andy Fraser touch in the few very poor fight scenes there were) were so limited by space they might as well have not happened, for the effectiveness of it all. Worst of all, however, was the fact that space limitations forced the elimination of an orchestra of any kind, and not only were they not replaced with an almost-passable piano backing, but became a tinny, horrible 'porn-film-sounding' tape of a dodgy old casio keyboard. Often levels of the casio were too high for the actors to sing over, and to make matters worse, the audience was cruelly teased with two instances of the Broadway cast recording underscoring the action. This turned what might have been a nice show into a bit of a mess.
Of the show - there were some bright spots - Hywel Williams was, as always, very strong as Don Quixote, and Danny Ellefsen was an entertaining and refreshing Sancho. The girl playing Dulcinea was in well over her head, and although she was just recovering from Laryngitis (so the grapevine told me after the show) she looked petrified at taking on such a gutsy role. The chorus were enthusiastic and took on their few opportunities with a gusto that is sadly rare in many choruses. However, strengths were overshadowed by such problems as shaky lighting, dodgy sound, and a curtain call that gave me a real giggle - which I don't think was the intention.
Look - I feel bad about saying so many negative things about the show, but I also feel that if this cast had have put on the same show at, say, the Quarry, or even Hackett Hall (as small as THAT is, Playlovers generally have strong MDs with strong orchestras behind them), with a full orchestra, they may have given 'Man of La Mancha a little more of a shake. The question I want to raise, however, is that of suitable spaces. I am not really interested in getting bagged about "you'rewrongIthoughttheshowwasbrilliantkeepyouropinionstoyourselfwearen'tinthisbusinesstogetcriticisedyouknow" (I believe I did read a ssimilar comment in a review reply last year!!) - by all means, I am interested to hear what others think, and of course am inviting extra opinions. I feel that the Old Mill bit off more than they could chew with 'MOLM', and am apprehensive about what they will do with 'A Chorus Line' in similar circumstances. Another rumour I hear is that a grant has fecilitated renovations, meaning that a pit will be added for a future opera season. Forgive my skepticism, but having seen 'play with music' have such trouble in such limited facilities, I must admit I have doubts.
I just feel that if you try to jam a square peg into a circular hole you will have greater trouble than if you realise that circular pegs are the ones you are after - and from the Old Mill's durability in drawing room drama (from what I gather by the foyer ads) - I imagine that they have found a nice niche doing the things that the theatre is best suited for. Trying to produce large musicals in a space smaller than my very tiny flat's very tiny lounge room seems like an avoidable folly. And while I am not saying that the Old Mill should not attempt diversification - I am sure that the company has done musical theatre in the past and will again - I would suggest (if $ allow, and the way theatre is these day, I doubt they will, but it's nice to pontificate) looking into what other companies regularly do - look for a larger venue for a single show, more suited to the show you have chosen. You couldn't do 'Guys and Dolls' in the Blue Room but you could conceivably try 'the Fantasticks' in there - it's just a matter of realising what you have to play with and being realistic, or it might reflect poorly.
This might sound insincere - (it's not) - but I do wish the cast and crew the best for the rest of the season. As I have said, I have a feeling that the problems came partly from infrastructure, and there was some enjoyable signs. I like Joe McCabe - he is a sincere guy and has a lot of talent and enthusiasm for what he does. I am just wishing he had have put it on in the carpark outside, even, with even a tiny orchestra, because I think those little touches might really have given 'Man of La Mancha' the grunt it needed.
Yours, expecting backlash, controversy and a minimum of abuse,
Toby
I went into Man of La Mancha somewhat hopeful - I knew that the score and script were strong, and that the director, Joe McCabe, was quite experienced with and enthusiastic over said script and score.
I emerged disappointed and confused - I was baffled over some of the choices made, but more importantly, I was astonished that such a wonderful story could be so mercilessly butchered by little more than what seemed almost exactly the WRONG venue for such a show. I am expecting protests and complaints, but if you want to send them, email them to me and I will respond in kind. I think the Old Mill is a nice little theatre - and I can see how many of the melodrama-style plays displayed in the foyer from over the years might have succeeded so well in there. It is a cosy, intimate space, and would be perfect for such things as Stoppard for example. I would LOVE to see 'The Real inspector Hound' or 'After Magritte' in that space!!
However. By putting on a show like 'Man of La Mancha' in such a small space, the action is cramped into tiny, convoluted groups on the stage, and such things as fight scenes (I was LONGING for an Andy Fraser touch in the few very poor fight scenes there were) were so limited by space they might as well have not happened, for the effectiveness of it all. Worst of all, however, was the fact that space limitations forced the elimination of an orchestra of any kind, and not only were they not replaced with an almost-passable piano backing, but became a tinny, horrible 'porn-film-sounding' tape of a dodgy old casio keyboard. Often levels of the casio were too high for the actors to sing over, and to make matters worse, the audience was cruelly teased with two instances of the Broadway cast recording underscoring the action. This turned what might have been a nice show into a bit of a mess.
Of the show - there were some bright spots - Hywel Williams was, as always, very strong as Don Quixote, and Danny Ellefsen was an entertaining and refreshing Sancho. The girl playing Dulcinea was in well over her head, and although she was just recovering from Laryngitis (so the grapevine told me after the show) she looked petrified at taking on such a gutsy role. The chorus were enthusiastic and took on their few opportunities with a gusto that is sadly rare in many choruses. However, strengths were overshadowed by such problems as shaky lighting, dodgy sound, and a curtain call that gave me a real giggle - which I don't think was the intention.
Look - I feel bad about saying so many negative things about the show, but I also feel that if this cast had have put on the same show at, say, the Quarry, or even Hackett Hall (as small as THAT is, Playlovers generally have strong MDs with strong orchestras behind them), with a full orchestra, they may have given 'Man of La Mancha a little more of a shake. The question I want to raise, however, is that of suitable spaces. I am not really interested in getting bagged about "you'rewrongIthoughttheshowwasbrilliantkeepyouropinionstoyourselfwearen'tinthisbusinesstogetcriticisedyouknow" (I believe I did read a ssimilar comment in a review reply last year!!) - by all means, I am interested to hear what others think, and of course am inviting extra opinions. I feel that the Old Mill bit off more than they could chew with 'MOLM', and am apprehensive about what they will do with 'A Chorus Line' in similar circumstances. Another rumour I hear is that a grant has fecilitated renovations, meaning that a pit will be added for a future opera season. Forgive my skepticism, but having seen 'play with music' have such trouble in such limited facilities, I must admit I have doubts.
I just feel that if you try to jam a square peg into a circular hole you will have greater trouble than if you realise that circular pegs are the ones you are after - and from the Old Mill's durability in drawing room drama (from what I gather by the foyer ads) - I imagine that they have found a nice niche doing the things that the theatre is best suited for. Trying to produce large musicals in a space smaller than my very tiny flat's very tiny lounge room seems like an avoidable folly. And while I am not saying that the Old Mill should not attempt diversification - I am sure that the company has done musical theatre in the past and will again - I would suggest (if $ allow, and the way theatre is these day, I doubt they will, but it's nice to pontificate) looking into what other companies regularly do - look for a larger venue for a single show, more suited to the show you have chosen. You couldn't do 'Guys and Dolls' in the Blue Room but you could conceivably try 'the Fantasticks' in there - it's just a matter of realising what you have to play with and being realistic, or it might reflect poorly.
This might sound insincere - (it's not) - but I do wish the cast and crew the best for the rest of the season. As I have said, I have a feeling that the problems came partly from infrastructure, and there was some enjoyable signs. I like Joe McCabe - he is a sincere guy and has a lot of talent and enthusiasm for what he does. I am just wishing he had have put it on in the carpark outside, even, with even a tiny orchestra, because I think those little touches might really have given 'Man of La Mancha' the grunt it needed.
Yours, expecting backlash, controversy and a minimum of abuse,
Toby
RE: Man of La Mancha
Sun, 5 Aug 2001, 05:04 pmMadame Mouse, is it?
Well - I really don't know where to begin in responding to this. I had nothing to gain from writing my critique, and considered not posting it at all, or using an ingenious 'Anon E Mouse' (Oh - I get it - Anon y mous - that's fantastic!) pseudonym such as you did, but I, along with many other people on this site, have the courage of my convictions to say what I thought - yes, that's right, I am allowed my opinion!!
It's true - my wife was cast in the role, a role she was forced to regretfully decline a short time into rehearsal because (and this is none of your business) we were having great difficulty in the half hour drive to rehearsal three times a week, having only one car, which we had to share. It was in no way reflecting Meg's brief involvement in the show with the comments I made about the lady playing Aldonza. I am an actor, not a singer, not a dancer, so the area that I commented on referred to her actoing, which I found to be sadly lacking - it's a brilliant, gutsy role, which was hampered by a disconnected performance (and considering I saw the show - a week after opening, where she sang her entire role and there was NO announcement made - laryngitis can hardly excuse what I saw as inadequate line delivery. Before you ask - yes, I believe my wife could have done the role better, but that influenced my review in no way.
What else? Yes, I had heard that Hywell had had trouble with his lines, and I have worked with him before, but I enjoyed his portrayal of the character (again, as a non-singer, you will find I did not mention his vocal work in the show, and incidentally, I did find it to be the weakest part of his interpretation) - he is a strong actor who has an excellent stage presence, and I ENJOYED IT. (Note: in our democracy, people are STILL allowed their own opinions! Anonymity, however, is cowardice, when criticising others. Take note, Ms Mouse.)
In conclusion (I can't believe I have wasted ten minutes of my life responding to this rubbish) - I would like to know who you are. Obviously you have some idea who I am, knowing who I am married to (again, none of your business) and perhaps you also know I worked with Hywell in 'Much Ado' a few years ago, and yes, I do know Danny (the other person I so discriminately complemented in my review) from 'HMS Pinafore'. You might note that my review was not especially negative (and if I wanted to dwell on the faults, believe me, I could have been scathing) - I tried to focus on the positives and highlight the points which I felt detracted from the show's effectiveness - and my words are not gospel, nor do I think my constructive review (he probably won't like me mentioning this, but Joe McCabe emailed me personally and thanked me for a well-balanced review...) deterred prospective ticket holders.
I will stop now. I don't mind being contracted on a review, and I would have left this lie if you had not been so gutless as to reply anonymously - especially since you appear to know me and feel that it is your business to mention my personal life on here. Email me at home, will you Ms Mouse? My email address is right above - just cllick on my REAL name, and it will give you my REAL email address. Maybe you'll have the guts to tell me your real name - although if you were cristened 'Anon E Mouse' then I will stand corrected.
I will reiterate what I said in my first review. I wish the cast and crew of MOLM my best for the rest of the season, and hope they continue to sell so well. My review is nothing more than my opinion, unbiased at that (you note I didn't say in my first review 'Aldonza wasn't as good as the girl she replaced' - and I really hope it wasn't Karen who wrote this response - I really do) as is yours. But I feel readers have the right to know who is writing such reviews, and you will get no respect from me if you continue to do so.
Cheers and best of luck for the rest of your ghostwriting career,
TOBY MALONE (and christened as such, June 1978)
Well - I really don't know where to begin in responding to this. I had nothing to gain from writing my critique, and considered not posting it at all, or using an ingenious 'Anon E Mouse' (Oh - I get it - Anon y mous - that's fantastic!) pseudonym such as you did, but I, along with many other people on this site, have the courage of my convictions to say what I thought - yes, that's right, I am allowed my opinion!!
It's true - my wife was cast in the role, a role she was forced to regretfully decline a short time into rehearsal because (and this is none of your business) we were having great difficulty in the half hour drive to rehearsal three times a week, having only one car, which we had to share. It was in no way reflecting Meg's brief involvement in the show with the comments I made about the lady playing Aldonza. I am an actor, not a singer, not a dancer, so the area that I commented on referred to her actoing, which I found to be sadly lacking - it's a brilliant, gutsy role, which was hampered by a disconnected performance (and considering I saw the show - a week after opening, where she sang her entire role and there was NO announcement made - laryngitis can hardly excuse what I saw as inadequate line delivery. Before you ask - yes, I believe my wife could have done the role better, but that influenced my review in no way.
What else? Yes, I had heard that Hywell had had trouble with his lines, and I have worked with him before, but I enjoyed his portrayal of the character (again, as a non-singer, you will find I did not mention his vocal work in the show, and incidentally, I did find it to be the weakest part of his interpretation) - he is a strong actor who has an excellent stage presence, and I ENJOYED IT. (Note: in our democracy, people are STILL allowed their own opinions! Anonymity, however, is cowardice, when criticising others. Take note, Ms Mouse.)
In conclusion (I can't believe I have wasted ten minutes of my life responding to this rubbish) - I would like to know who you are. Obviously you have some idea who I am, knowing who I am married to (again, none of your business) and perhaps you also know I worked with Hywell in 'Much Ado' a few years ago, and yes, I do know Danny (the other person I so discriminately complemented in my review) from 'HMS Pinafore'. You might note that my review was not especially negative (and if I wanted to dwell on the faults, believe me, I could have been scathing) - I tried to focus on the positives and highlight the points which I felt detracted from the show's effectiveness - and my words are not gospel, nor do I think my constructive review (he probably won't like me mentioning this, but Joe McCabe emailed me personally and thanked me for a well-balanced review...) deterred prospective ticket holders.
I will stop now. I don't mind being contracted on a review, and I would have left this lie if you had not been so gutless as to reply anonymously - especially since you appear to know me and feel that it is your business to mention my personal life on here. Email me at home, will you Ms Mouse? My email address is right above - just cllick on my REAL name, and it will give you my REAL email address. Maybe you'll have the guts to tell me your real name - although if you were cristened 'Anon E Mouse' then I will stand corrected.
I will reiterate what I said in my first review. I wish the cast and crew of MOLM my best for the rest of the season, and hope they continue to sell so well. My review is nothing more than my opinion, unbiased at that (you note I didn't say in my first review 'Aldonza wasn't as good as the girl she replaced' - and I really hope it wasn't Karen who wrote this response - I really do) as is yours. But I feel readers have the right to know who is writing such reviews, and you will get no respect from me if you continue to do so.
Cheers and best of luck for the rest of your ghostwriting career,
TOBY MALONE (and christened as such, June 1978)
- ···