Richard III
Fri, 7 Nov 2003, 11:06 amWalter Plinge20 posts in thread
Richard III
Fri, 7 Nov 2003, 11:06 amWHAT: Richard III
WHEN: Thursday, November 6
WHERE: Nexus Theatre, Murdoch University, WA
"No-one else seems to have written a serious review of this production, so it falls to me to provide some hopefully useful feedback." :-)
I'll try and keep this short - there are only two performances left (tonight and tomorrow) so I haven't much time to push the show. I've said before that I'm not a Shakespeare aficionado. I have never read or seen Richard III and am only familiar with the story from what I've seen on Blackadder. I haven't even seen Richard I or Richard II, so I apologise for my confusion coming in at the end of the trilogy.
Nevertheless, I LOVED this production. I'll freely admit that, early on, I had no idea what was going on. It took quite a while to work out who was related to who, why such-and-such wanted so-and-so dead, and who was trying to bonk who. (Thanks for the excellent programme which helped somewhat.) However, the production was presented so entertainingly that little things like plot coherency didn't seem to matter.
As advertised, the production was performed in the style of a Bollywood Musical. At the drop of a hat, the cast would burst into huge production numbers - singing and dancing to mostly original (and extremely catchy) music. ENORMOUS congratulations to Musical Director Nick Choo. The choreography was clever and appropriate for the style, the acoustics were perfect, the set was lovely and the costumes were absolutely stunning - particular favourites included Kayti Fryer's backless dress, Kristan Smith's fetching suit, Dana Lisman's shimmering gown, Alexa Taylor's translucent frock and Melissa Merchant's dominatrix outfit. What? Don't look at me like that!
The tremendous liberties taken with the script may raise the hackles of some Shakespeare purists, but it's all done in good fun. It's quite rightly emphasised that the desire for power, and corruption therein, is just as relevant today (if not more so) as it was 400 years ago.
My vested interests? Apart from one close friend in the cast I don't know anyone involved with the production. I only went to the show because of my friend and I'm certainly glad I did. I paid for my tickets like everyone else and at $10 per head it's cheaper than most other shows and GREAT value. And how close a friend, you ask? Well, I COULD have gone and seen The Matrix Revolutions....
Like I said, I'm trying to keep this short, but this really was a tremendously entertaining production. All performances were fine and everyone got their moment in the spotlight. Special mention should go to Paul Grabovac who was obviously enjoying himself immensely as Dirty Dick. It's about 1 hr 45 mins long and has no interval. Thanks to director Serge Tampalini, and all involved, for a wonderful evening's entertainment. Two performances left!
JB
WHEN: Thursday, November 6
WHERE: Nexus Theatre, Murdoch University, WA
"No-one else seems to have written a serious review of this production, so it falls to me to provide some hopefully useful feedback." :-)
I'll try and keep this short - there are only two performances left (tonight and tomorrow) so I haven't much time to push the show. I've said before that I'm not a Shakespeare aficionado. I have never read or seen Richard III and am only familiar with the story from what I've seen on Blackadder. I haven't even seen Richard I or Richard II, so I apologise for my confusion coming in at the end of the trilogy.
Nevertheless, I LOVED this production. I'll freely admit that, early on, I had no idea what was going on. It took quite a while to work out who was related to who, why such-and-such wanted so-and-so dead, and who was trying to bonk who. (Thanks for the excellent programme which helped somewhat.) However, the production was presented so entertainingly that little things like plot coherency didn't seem to matter.
As advertised, the production was performed in the style of a Bollywood Musical. At the drop of a hat, the cast would burst into huge production numbers - singing and dancing to mostly original (and extremely catchy) music. ENORMOUS congratulations to Musical Director Nick Choo. The choreography was clever and appropriate for the style, the acoustics were perfect, the set was lovely and the costumes were absolutely stunning - particular favourites included Kayti Fryer's backless dress, Kristan Smith's fetching suit, Dana Lisman's shimmering gown, Alexa Taylor's translucent frock and Melissa Merchant's dominatrix outfit. What? Don't look at me like that!
The tremendous liberties taken with the script may raise the hackles of some Shakespeare purists, but it's all done in good fun. It's quite rightly emphasised that the desire for power, and corruption therein, is just as relevant today (if not more so) as it was 400 years ago.
My vested interests? Apart from one close friend in the cast I don't know anyone involved with the production. I only went to the show because of my friend and I'm certainly glad I did. I paid for my tickets like everyone else and at $10 per head it's cheaper than most other shows and GREAT value. And how close a friend, you ask? Well, I COULD have gone and seen The Matrix Revolutions....
Like I said, I'm trying to keep this short, but this really was a tremendously entertaining production. All performances were fine and everyone got their moment in the spotlight. Special mention should go to Paul Grabovac who was obviously enjoying himself immensely as Dirty Dick. It's about 1 hr 45 mins long and has no interval. Thanks to director Serge Tampalini, and all involved, for a wonderful evening's entertainment. Two performances left!
JB
Reviews v Critiques
Fri, 14 Nov 2003, 10:14 amWalter Plinge
I honestly do not recall having seen a serious review of 'Noises Off' before I posted mine. If there was one then I apologise for being such an ass and for missing the subtlety of the quote.
I guess this 'exchange' raises the question of what should a review be?
My opinion is that it is essentially a spectator's reaction and hence contribution to a performance. It is not meant to be addressed to the performers personally but rather to other spectators and the production as an entirety. It is not meant to be but may of course be used as publicity and for that reason the reviewer should declare any bias at the outset.
My review of 'R3' was admittedly biased but nonetheless well-considered and hopefully constructive. It was summarily dismissed by the intelligentsia (sorry, no name-calling) as 'not serious', apparently because it was not critical enough of the performance. I do not believe a review necessarily has to be critical, although that is obviously one of its functions.
Anyway, it looks like we have finally canvassed all the plusses and minuses of R3. A pity we had to waste so much bandwidth and taxpayers' money on the slagging match to get there, but that's show-biz, I suppose.
Thou puny doghearted pignut!
I guess this 'exchange' raises the question of what should a review be?
My opinion is that it is essentially a spectator's reaction and hence contribution to a performance. It is not meant to be addressed to the performers personally but rather to other spectators and the production as an entirety. It is not meant to be but may of course be used as publicity and for that reason the reviewer should declare any bias at the outset.
My review of 'R3' was admittedly biased but nonetheless well-considered and hopefully constructive. It was summarily dismissed by the intelligentsia (sorry, no name-calling) as 'not serious', apparently because it was not critical enough of the performance. I do not believe a review necessarily has to be critical, although that is obviously one of its functions.
Anyway, it looks like we have finally canvassed all the plusses and minuses of R3. A pity we had to waste so much bandwidth and taxpayers' money on the slagging match to get there, but that's show-biz, I suppose.
Thou puny doghearted pignut!
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···