Arcadia at Playlovers
Sun, 16 June 2002, 12:43 pmLeah Maher2 posts in thread
Arcadia at Playlovers
Sun, 16 June 2002, 12:43 pmWhat; Tom Stoppard's "Arcadia" Directed by Bethane Cristafulli
Where; Playlovers, Hacket Hall, Draper St, Floreat (WA)
When; Sat 15th June 2002
Well..........
I don't really feel in a position to properly review this show because, despite the fact that I have always loved it, I still don't (and despair of ever managing to) understand it. But that didn't stop me enjoying it, which is the important thing, I suppose.
I am embarrassed of program and therefore apologise for not knowing names or spelling them wrong but here goes;
The set is very good plain enough to translate to both time periods, but elegant enough to be believable as a home of the landed gentry. I felt at times however that the actors did not feel confident on it, as if they were unsure of where to put their feet or slightly afraid the whole thing would collapse underneath them. This may have been just second night jitters, but the families portrayed have, presumably, lived in this house their whole lives and should really be able to move confidently about it, even in the dark.
This slight uncertainty I also felt affected some of the characterisations and relationships, the only couple who seemed to know exactly where they stood in relation to each other were the tutor and pupil. That chemistry could have run the lighting rig for the whole show. The lines of tension between them were perfectly balanced and considered and the characterisations careful and deliberate. The young pupil handled almost impossibly complicated dialouge with the ease of genius but the playfulness of a little girl. She is to be applauded. She also needs to be aware of the terrible acoustics in Hacket Hall and to "open [her] mouth a little wider [when] she speaks", and to slow down.
Where the relationships fell down, I felt were between Valentine and Hannah, and Nightingale and Hannah, I never knew where these characters were in relation to each other. We are told that the reference to Hannah being Valentine's "fiance" is a joke, but the truth in that is never explored. The play is all about "sex and literature" (and chaos theory) but I felt in some places it was a little lacking in sex.
One place it was definately NOT lacking in sex was the exquisite portrayal of the sexual dynamo that was the Lady of the House. Marie Corrigan, magnificent stage manager though she is, belongs on stage as far as I'm concerned. Terry has worked absolute wonders in terms of costume and hair to make her a perfect representation of her time. And every time she opened her mouth, you smiled. She was, I think, the only actor on stage (apart perhaps from the wonderfully cuckolded Mark Blades) who understood every single word she said, and why she was saying it. She handled the hilarious Wild-ean dialouge with consumate ease, without ever descending into simple characature. Her descriptions of the ruin of her garden and her enquiry as to the wereabouts of her hermit had the audience in fits.
Honerable mentions must go to the misunderstood visionary Noakes, played in a slightly bewildered manner by David Young and the lovely Dario Dalla Costa, who showed that to be utterly compelling, you don't even need a line.
Arcadia is not a short play and it's not an easy play to understand, but it has enough "throwing to the peanut gallery" laughs to enjoy it the whole way through, even for a plebian like me. The performances are excellent and, while I maintain that the relationships have not been properly explored, the direction is for the most part, admirably deft for such a difficult undertaking.
It was very full the night I went and deserves nothing less. I suggest you book early to ensure yourselves a seat. And treat yourselves to a Stoppard double header, go see Arcadia then come and see GRADS's Rozencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead at the Dolphin at UWA.
Oh, and if you go and see it with the two smartest people you know, make sure one of them embarasses themselves horribly at interval to make you feel a little bit better about the fact that they understood all the chaos theory bits and you didn't. Hows the finger, Dr J? Maybe you just need a sit down and a nice cup of tea...........
Where; Playlovers, Hacket Hall, Draper St, Floreat (WA)
When; Sat 15th June 2002
Well..........
I don't really feel in a position to properly review this show because, despite the fact that I have always loved it, I still don't (and despair of ever managing to) understand it. But that didn't stop me enjoying it, which is the important thing, I suppose.
I am embarrassed of program and therefore apologise for not knowing names or spelling them wrong but here goes;
The set is very good plain enough to translate to both time periods, but elegant enough to be believable as a home of the landed gentry. I felt at times however that the actors did not feel confident on it, as if they were unsure of where to put their feet or slightly afraid the whole thing would collapse underneath them. This may have been just second night jitters, but the families portrayed have, presumably, lived in this house their whole lives and should really be able to move confidently about it, even in the dark.
This slight uncertainty I also felt affected some of the characterisations and relationships, the only couple who seemed to know exactly where they stood in relation to each other were the tutor and pupil. That chemistry could have run the lighting rig for the whole show. The lines of tension between them were perfectly balanced and considered and the characterisations careful and deliberate. The young pupil handled almost impossibly complicated dialouge with the ease of genius but the playfulness of a little girl. She is to be applauded. She also needs to be aware of the terrible acoustics in Hacket Hall and to "open [her] mouth a little wider [when] she speaks", and to slow down.
Where the relationships fell down, I felt were between Valentine and Hannah, and Nightingale and Hannah, I never knew where these characters were in relation to each other. We are told that the reference to Hannah being Valentine's "fiance" is a joke, but the truth in that is never explored. The play is all about "sex and literature" (and chaos theory) but I felt in some places it was a little lacking in sex.
One place it was definately NOT lacking in sex was the exquisite portrayal of the sexual dynamo that was the Lady of the House. Marie Corrigan, magnificent stage manager though she is, belongs on stage as far as I'm concerned. Terry has worked absolute wonders in terms of costume and hair to make her a perfect representation of her time. And every time she opened her mouth, you smiled. She was, I think, the only actor on stage (apart perhaps from the wonderfully cuckolded Mark Blades) who understood every single word she said, and why she was saying it. She handled the hilarious Wild-ean dialouge with consumate ease, without ever descending into simple characature. Her descriptions of the ruin of her garden and her enquiry as to the wereabouts of her hermit had the audience in fits.
Honerable mentions must go to the misunderstood visionary Noakes, played in a slightly bewildered manner by David Young and the lovely Dario Dalla Costa, who showed that to be utterly compelling, you don't even need a line.
Arcadia is not a short play and it's not an easy play to understand, but it has enough "throwing to the peanut gallery" laughs to enjoy it the whole way through, even for a plebian like me. The performances are excellent and, while I maintain that the relationships have not been properly explored, the direction is for the most part, admirably deft for such a difficult undertaking.
It was very full the night I went and deserves nothing less. I suggest you book early to ensure yourselves a seat. And treat yourselves to a Stoppard double header, go see Arcadia then come and see GRADS's Rozencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead at the Dolphin at UWA.
Oh, and if you go and see it with the two smartest people you know, make sure one of them embarasses themselves horribly at interval to make you feel a little bit better about the fact that they understood all the chaos theory bits and you didn't. Hows the finger, Dr J? Maybe you just need a sit down and a nice cup of tea...........
Leah MaherSun, 16 June 2002, 12:43 pm
What; Tom Stoppard's "Arcadia" Directed by Bethane Cristafulli
Where; Playlovers, Hacket Hall, Draper St, Floreat (WA)
When; Sat 15th June 2002
Well..........
I don't really feel in a position to properly review this show because, despite the fact that I have always loved it, I still don't (and despair of ever managing to) understand it. But that didn't stop me enjoying it, which is the important thing, I suppose.
I am embarrassed of program and therefore apologise for not knowing names or spelling them wrong but here goes;
The set is very good plain enough to translate to both time periods, but elegant enough to be believable as a home of the landed gentry. I felt at times however that the actors did not feel confident on it, as if they were unsure of where to put their feet or slightly afraid the whole thing would collapse underneath them. This may have been just second night jitters, but the families portrayed have, presumably, lived in this house their whole lives and should really be able to move confidently about it, even in the dark.
This slight uncertainty I also felt affected some of the characterisations and relationships, the only couple who seemed to know exactly where they stood in relation to each other were the tutor and pupil. That chemistry could have run the lighting rig for the whole show. The lines of tension between them were perfectly balanced and considered and the characterisations careful and deliberate. The young pupil handled almost impossibly complicated dialouge with the ease of genius but the playfulness of a little girl. She is to be applauded. She also needs to be aware of the terrible acoustics in Hacket Hall and to "open [her] mouth a little wider [when] she speaks", and to slow down.
Where the relationships fell down, I felt were between Valentine and Hannah, and Nightingale and Hannah, I never knew where these characters were in relation to each other. We are told that the reference to Hannah being Valentine's "fiance" is a joke, but the truth in that is never explored. The play is all about "sex and literature" (and chaos theory) but I felt in some places it was a little lacking in sex.
One place it was definately NOT lacking in sex was the exquisite portrayal of the sexual dynamo that was the Lady of the House. Marie Corrigan, magnificent stage manager though she is, belongs on stage as far as I'm concerned. Terry has worked absolute wonders in terms of costume and hair to make her a perfect representation of her time. And every time she opened her mouth, you smiled. She was, I think, the only actor on stage (apart perhaps from the wonderfully cuckolded Mark Blades) who understood every single word she said, and why she was saying it. She handled the hilarious Wild-ean dialouge with consumate ease, without ever descending into simple characature. Her descriptions of the ruin of her garden and her enquiry as to the wereabouts of her hermit had the audience in fits.
Honerable mentions must go to the misunderstood visionary Noakes, played in a slightly bewildered manner by David Young and the lovely Dario Dalla Costa, who showed that to be utterly compelling, you don't even need a line.
Arcadia is not a short play and it's not an easy play to understand, but it has enough "throwing to the peanut gallery" laughs to enjoy it the whole way through, even for a plebian like me. The performances are excellent and, while I maintain that the relationships have not been properly explored, the direction is for the most part, admirably deft for such a difficult undertaking.
It was very full the night I went and deserves nothing less. I suggest you book early to ensure yourselves a seat. And treat yourselves to a Stoppard double header, go see Arcadia then come and see GRADS's Rozencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead at the Dolphin at UWA.
Oh, and if you go and see it with the two smartest people you know, make sure one of them embarasses themselves horribly at interval to make you feel a little bit better about the fact that they understood all the chaos theory bits and you didn't. Hows the finger, Dr J? Maybe you just need a sit down and a nice cup of tea...........
Where; Playlovers, Hacket Hall, Draper St, Floreat (WA)
When; Sat 15th June 2002
Well..........
I don't really feel in a position to properly review this show because, despite the fact that I have always loved it, I still don't (and despair of ever managing to) understand it. But that didn't stop me enjoying it, which is the important thing, I suppose.
I am embarrassed of program and therefore apologise for not knowing names or spelling them wrong but here goes;
The set is very good plain enough to translate to both time periods, but elegant enough to be believable as a home of the landed gentry. I felt at times however that the actors did not feel confident on it, as if they were unsure of where to put their feet or slightly afraid the whole thing would collapse underneath them. This may have been just second night jitters, but the families portrayed have, presumably, lived in this house their whole lives and should really be able to move confidently about it, even in the dark.
This slight uncertainty I also felt affected some of the characterisations and relationships, the only couple who seemed to know exactly where they stood in relation to each other were the tutor and pupil. That chemistry could have run the lighting rig for the whole show. The lines of tension between them were perfectly balanced and considered and the characterisations careful and deliberate. The young pupil handled almost impossibly complicated dialouge with the ease of genius but the playfulness of a little girl. She is to be applauded. She also needs to be aware of the terrible acoustics in Hacket Hall and to "open [her] mouth a little wider [when] she speaks", and to slow down.
Where the relationships fell down, I felt were between Valentine and Hannah, and Nightingale and Hannah, I never knew where these characters were in relation to each other. We are told that the reference to Hannah being Valentine's "fiance" is a joke, but the truth in that is never explored. The play is all about "sex and literature" (and chaos theory) but I felt in some places it was a little lacking in sex.
One place it was definately NOT lacking in sex was the exquisite portrayal of the sexual dynamo that was the Lady of the House. Marie Corrigan, magnificent stage manager though she is, belongs on stage as far as I'm concerned. Terry has worked absolute wonders in terms of costume and hair to make her a perfect representation of her time. And every time she opened her mouth, you smiled. She was, I think, the only actor on stage (apart perhaps from the wonderfully cuckolded Mark Blades) who understood every single word she said, and why she was saying it. She handled the hilarious Wild-ean dialouge with consumate ease, without ever descending into simple characature. Her descriptions of the ruin of her garden and her enquiry as to the wereabouts of her hermit had the audience in fits.
Honerable mentions must go to the misunderstood visionary Noakes, played in a slightly bewildered manner by David Young and the lovely Dario Dalla Costa, who showed that to be utterly compelling, you don't even need a line.
Arcadia is not a short play and it's not an easy play to understand, but it has enough "throwing to the peanut gallery" laughs to enjoy it the whole way through, even for a plebian like me. The performances are excellent and, while I maintain that the relationships have not been properly explored, the direction is for the most part, admirably deft for such a difficult undertaking.
It was very full the night I went and deserves nothing less. I suggest you book early to ensure yourselves a seat. And treat yourselves to a Stoppard double header, go see Arcadia then come and see GRADS's Rozencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead at the Dolphin at UWA.
Oh, and if you go and see it with the two smartest people you know, make sure one of them embarasses themselves horribly at interval to make you feel a little bit better about the fact that they understood all the chaos theory bits and you didn't. Hows the finger, Dr J? Maybe you just need a sit down and a nice cup of tea...........
Walter PlingeFri, 21 June 2002, 04:23 pm
Re: Arcadia at Playlovers
Thank-you, Leah, for a very perceptive review of Arcadia. I'm rather too close to this production to be commenting on it, but I thought I'd just correct one reference, in fairness to the people involved. The conceptual design of the costumes was done by Bethne, and creatively interpreted by Sue Newland, ably assisted by her lovely daughter Melanie.