Jekyll & Hyde
Mon, 13 June 2005, 09:27 pmWalter Plinge18 posts in thread
Jekyll & Hyde
Mon, 13 June 2005, 09:27 pmI attended a performance of Jekyll & Hyde at the Limelight Theatre on Sat. 11th June with a little tripidation as it is one of my favourites. This was the first time in WA I believe so I was keen to see the outcome.
I was pleasantly surprised and although I can be a little picky, overall most enjoyable. Plus as a relatively unknown musical to most, unless into theatre circles, I saw that the audience enjoy the evening too.
The role of Jekyll was played by David Dockery, he was cast wonderfully not only did he have the look but a voice to go with it. I noticed in the first act he seemed a little stilted in his movements going to where he was 'supposed' to be in an obvious way and none to naturally. However in the second act he seem to have settled into his comfort zone. His voice made up for any picky things I saw.
Mr Hyde played by Ryan Taaffe was a sinister character but at times too sinister in the fact that it was difficult to understand him as it was for the people sitting next to me. Underneath his raged voice I felt that he to had a very decent vocal ability. However I do hope he does not loose his voice due to a bit overdoing the roughness. Once again in the second act he was more understandable.
Nicole, Dr Jekll's fiancee Emma Carew presented a decent part. At times the breaking point in her voice went pop like but overall was nice, her solo 's were good.
The mistress played by Sonni Byrne cast wonderfully also! stole the show! she is in excellent voice, very comfortable on stage and moving in her solos. Can someone grab this young lady and give her a pro go!
I would have liked more depth to the chorus musically although they presented well I felt the needed more omf! Too many higher range voices? Prostitutes beware of the close scenes at the front of the stage a little more is showing than you thought! The elderly lady beside me almost fainted!!!!
Board of Governors you came across just like a board I can imagine from that era! There was a few problems with mic's on the night but we got the gist of it.
All supporting actors you did a great job, worth a metion David Nelson, David Goodall you like just like a Bishop!
Scenery was minamal and effective however I did feel the lighting on faces could have come up somewhat. I know you were looking for effect and to a certain extent it worked. Call me old fashioned but we are used to cues with lighting and seeing faces, I felt too much in the dark.
Orchestra was great and the Musical Director Lyn Brown did a wonderful job as did Director Robert Benson-Parry. Good on the Limelight for taking this on it is well worth a look.
I was pleasantly surprised and although I can be a little picky, overall most enjoyable. Plus as a relatively unknown musical to most, unless into theatre circles, I saw that the audience enjoy the evening too.
The role of Jekyll was played by David Dockery, he was cast wonderfully not only did he have the look but a voice to go with it. I noticed in the first act he seemed a little stilted in his movements going to where he was 'supposed' to be in an obvious way and none to naturally. However in the second act he seem to have settled into his comfort zone. His voice made up for any picky things I saw.
Mr Hyde played by Ryan Taaffe was a sinister character but at times too sinister in the fact that it was difficult to understand him as it was for the people sitting next to me. Underneath his raged voice I felt that he to had a very decent vocal ability. However I do hope he does not loose his voice due to a bit overdoing the roughness. Once again in the second act he was more understandable.
Nicole, Dr Jekll's fiancee Emma Carew presented a decent part. At times the breaking point in her voice went pop like but overall was nice, her solo 's were good.
The mistress played by Sonni Byrne cast wonderfully also! stole the show! she is in excellent voice, very comfortable on stage and moving in her solos. Can someone grab this young lady and give her a pro go!
I would have liked more depth to the chorus musically although they presented well I felt the needed more omf! Too many higher range voices? Prostitutes beware of the close scenes at the front of the stage a little more is showing than you thought! The elderly lady beside me almost fainted!!!!
Board of Governors you came across just like a board I can imagine from that era! There was a few problems with mic's on the night but we got the gist of it.
All supporting actors you did a great job, worth a metion David Nelson, David Goodall you like just like a Bishop!
Scenery was minamal and effective however I did feel the lighting on faces could have come up somewhat. I know you were looking for effect and to a certain extent it worked. Call me old fashioned but we are used to cues with lighting and seeing faces, I felt too much in the dark.
Orchestra was great and the Musical Director Lyn Brown did a wonderful job as did Director Robert Benson-Parry. Good on the Limelight for taking this on it is well worth a look.
Re: Jekyll & Hyde
Sun, 19 June 2005, 03:18 pmI think it's a great idea to split the role into two parts, Jekyll and Hyde. Stevenson's original story had Jekyll and Hyde not only as two very different characters, but physically very different too. Jekyll was a tall, middle aged respectable man, whereas Hyde was younger, almost dwarf-like in stature and physically the opposite to Jekyll. The point is, the two didn't look anything alike, both in personality and physical apperance. Splitting the role reinforces the idea that Hyde is not just Jekyll with a snarl on his face, but a differently motivated character.
Of course, it is very understandable to have the two title roles played by one actor, and that's why some productions will do it that way, for the consistency, as Edward Hyde is a part of Henry Jekyll. But equally, you must remember, there is nothing of Henry Jekyll in Edward Hyde.
Personally, I can't say whether it is better to have Jekyll and Hyde played by one or two actors, as I have only seen the current Wanneroo version where they split the identities, but it remains more faithful to the original idea that Stevenson put forward over a century ago.
E
Of course, it is very understandable to have the two title roles played by one actor, and that's why some productions will do it that way, for the consistency, as Edward Hyde is a part of Henry Jekyll. But equally, you must remember, there is nothing of Henry Jekyll in Edward Hyde.
Personally, I can't say whether it is better to have Jekyll and Hyde played by one or two actors, as I have only seen the current Wanneroo version where they split the identities, but it remains more faithful to the original idea that Stevenson put forward over a century ago.
E
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···