a different Cabaret -- Gosford Musical Society
Sat, 23 Oct 2004, 06:05 pmWalter Plinge52 posts in thread
a different Cabaret -- Gosford Musical Society
Sat, 23 Oct 2004, 06:05 pmIf you like the musical "Cabaret" you will probably enjoy the current production from Gosford Musical Society, running from late October to early November.
There is much to like: Leigh Collins' sturdy stage setting has 2 staircases, 1 spiral staircase and a fireman's pole, and it consists of 5 discrete areas of the Kit Kat Club, on 2 levels. Once this set was built, it was not going to be moved, so other scenes have to be partially flown in from above ; this leaves a central problem that the club is still visible, as are its many patrons, and this is distracting ; in fact, even in the club scenes, there is so much activity, that it can be hard to pick out the major characters in their scenes.
There is also the usually high standard of lighting from Damian Rice ; always effective but never obtrusive. There is even a strobe segment where the effect is continued for a decent time (as a child of the 60s I love strobe and am always disappointed if timorous directors cut strobes off after a few seconds).
Suzanne Ohrt's characterization of Fraulein Schneider is a revelation, as is her soft-shoe dancing, and her meticulous German pronunciation.
The onstage appearance of Leo Del Oleo onstage with accordion and Tyrolean hat.
Sally Bowles, played by Toni Williams, has breathless dialogue delivered at rapidfire pace, but her speech is always intelligible.
Even the gentle lilting of a slide guitar in "The Pineapple Song".
Chris King has directed the production and it is a formidable tour de force. Chris is a well-known TV actor, and runs a talent school on the Coast. In this production we have characters moving into the audience, moving out from the audience, a ventriloquist (regrettably not speaking!), flashing telephones, even a descending filmscreen which features a great black and white sequence made for the occasion. It simulates a German train trip and for me was the highlight (some trainspotters may quibble over the NSW PTC logo on the upholstery!).
Yet the show was missing something ; was it me, or was it the script itself? Times have changed, and as s & m has moved into the mainstream, the sight of leather and lace doesn't really convey decadence, and certainly not sultriness ; the emcee was menacing, but I couldn't fathom to what purpose ; the overly-familiar risqué jokes and the groping of genitalia and other body parts was less shocking than clumsy, and not titillating at all . I came away impressed by the effects, but not the story ; insead there was a sequence of good performances that were seemingly unrelated, with noone grabbing the vacant position of "Star of the show" ; at no point did the hair rise on the back of the neck.
Don't let my feelings put you off, though ; go and judge for yourself, as there is still much to appreciate, and many in the audience seemed to like it. I can only say that I still don't know how the story ends -- I left at interval.
There is much to like: Leigh Collins' sturdy stage setting has 2 staircases, 1 spiral staircase and a fireman's pole, and it consists of 5 discrete areas of the Kit Kat Club, on 2 levels. Once this set was built, it was not going to be moved, so other scenes have to be partially flown in from above ; this leaves a central problem that the club is still visible, as are its many patrons, and this is distracting ; in fact, even in the club scenes, there is so much activity, that it can be hard to pick out the major characters in their scenes.
There is also the usually high standard of lighting from Damian Rice ; always effective but never obtrusive. There is even a strobe segment where the effect is continued for a decent time (as a child of the 60s I love strobe and am always disappointed if timorous directors cut strobes off after a few seconds).
Suzanne Ohrt's characterization of Fraulein Schneider is a revelation, as is her soft-shoe dancing, and her meticulous German pronunciation.
The onstage appearance of Leo Del Oleo onstage with accordion and Tyrolean hat.
Sally Bowles, played by Toni Williams, has breathless dialogue delivered at rapidfire pace, but her speech is always intelligible.
Even the gentle lilting of a slide guitar in "The Pineapple Song".
Chris King has directed the production and it is a formidable tour de force. Chris is a well-known TV actor, and runs a talent school on the Coast. In this production we have characters moving into the audience, moving out from the audience, a ventriloquist (regrettably not speaking!), flashing telephones, even a descending filmscreen which features a great black and white sequence made for the occasion. It simulates a German train trip and for me was the highlight (some trainspotters may quibble over the NSW PTC logo on the upholstery!).
Yet the show was missing something ; was it me, or was it the script itself? Times have changed, and as s & m has moved into the mainstream, the sight of leather and lace doesn't really convey decadence, and certainly not sultriness ; the emcee was menacing, but I couldn't fathom to what purpose ; the overly-familiar risqué jokes and the groping of genitalia and other body parts was less shocking than clumsy, and not titillating at all . I came away impressed by the effects, but not the story ; insead there was a sequence of good performances that were seemingly unrelated, with noone grabbing the vacant position of "Star of the show" ; at no point did the hair rise on the back of the neck.
Don't let my feelings put you off, though ; go and judge for yourself, as there is still much to appreciate, and many in the audience seemed to like it. I can only say that I still don't know how the story ends -- I left at interval.
WORLD CHAMPIONSHIP VERBAL WRESTLING - CRAIG V ROSS
Thu, 6 Jan 2005, 07:25 amWalter Plinge
In the red corner weighing in with name-dropping and theatrical connections we have Craig - arguing that an excerpt is worthy of review - even if the excerpt is not sufficiently illustrative of the final product to warrant mention.
In the Blue Corner, weighing in with passion, loyalty and an admirable attachment to the 'completion thing' we have Ross, arguing that no one cares what someone thinks of half a play, after all - most people go to a play intending to see the entire thing.
The palsy affectations, grammatical parries and existential thrusts have been a bonus but a few things have been overlooked...and they are, in no particular order:
Auditions are there to give a director an indication of the acting ablity of the candidate, as well as the physical suitablity for a role. The director is looking for an 'x' factor - he or she is not looking for the entire story, because that should already be in his or her head - to be conveyed to the actor during the course of rehearsals.
And Craig, you could only review what you saw when Judging that thing, so your point isn't really relevant to the issue at hand. You couldn't judge the whole thing, just the excerpts you saw.
I could name any number of movies that I wasn't overly fussed on in the first half, only to be pleasantly surprised by how much I enjoyed the movie in retrospect, once it reached it's stunning/ironic/comical/tragic/illuminating(etc) conclusion.
Richard felt entitled to his opinion, and everyone who disputed his opinion also felt entitled to their's, but have been rapped over the knuckles for having their opinions about Richard's opinion (how is that fair?). No one was really arguing the negativity or positivity of his opinions, just the validity and relevance. An opinion is really only valid, if someone's absorption of a point is complete and comprehensive - otherwise it's mere speculation based on an undercooked understanding.
One would think...but then consider this:
I saw 'that' Barry White concert in 2000, and had I walked out at half time (which I wanted to do, but was praying to God things would get better) I would have received a refund for my ticket. I stuck it out - and feel perfectly justified in calling it the worst concert I ever witnessed.
But you know what? Some people actually enjoyed it - there's no accounting for expectations, summed up in the timeless quote: "I don't know a lot about art, but I know what I like". The purpose of Art is to move and those of us that seek to be the arbiter of good taste should give ourselves an uppercut.
This is merely a healthy debate and who doesn't enjoy a good mass debate? Certainly not us wankers who frequent this site.
Time to not take ourselves too seriously - it's not rocket surgery ya know.
: )
In the Blue Corner, weighing in with passion, loyalty and an admirable attachment to the 'completion thing' we have Ross, arguing that no one cares what someone thinks of half a play, after all - most people go to a play intending to see the entire thing.
The palsy affectations, grammatical parries and existential thrusts have been a bonus but a few things have been overlooked...and they are, in no particular order:
Auditions are there to give a director an indication of the acting ablity of the candidate, as well as the physical suitablity for a role. The director is looking for an 'x' factor - he or she is not looking for the entire story, because that should already be in his or her head - to be conveyed to the actor during the course of rehearsals.
And Craig, you could only review what you saw when Judging that thing, so your point isn't really relevant to the issue at hand. You couldn't judge the whole thing, just the excerpts you saw.
I could name any number of movies that I wasn't overly fussed on in the first half, only to be pleasantly surprised by how much I enjoyed the movie in retrospect, once it reached it's stunning/ironic/comical/tragic/illuminating(etc) conclusion.
Richard felt entitled to his opinion, and everyone who disputed his opinion also felt entitled to their's, but have been rapped over the knuckles for having their opinions about Richard's opinion (how is that fair?). No one was really arguing the negativity or positivity of his opinions, just the validity and relevance. An opinion is really only valid, if someone's absorption of a point is complete and comprehensive - otherwise it's mere speculation based on an undercooked understanding.
One would think...but then consider this:
I saw 'that' Barry White concert in 2000, and had I walked out at half time (which I wanted to do, but was praying to God things would get better) I would have received a refund for my ticket. I stuck it out - and feel perfectly justified in calling it the worst concert I ever witnessed.
But you know what? Some people actually enjoyed it - there's no accounting for expectations, summed up in the timeless quote: "I don't know a lot about art, but I know what I like". The purpose of Art is to move and those of us that seek to be the arbiter of good taste should give ourselves an uppercut.
This is merely a healthy debate and who doesn't enjoy a good mass debate? Certainly not us wankers who frequent this site.
Time to not take ourselves too seriously - it's not rocket surgery ya know.
: )
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···