A Chorus Line
Tue, 2 Dec 2008, 12:30 pmThomas Stanley13 posts in thread
A Chorus Line
Tue, 2 Dec 2008, 12:30 pmAs a lover of “A Chorus Line” I went and saw Melville Theatres version on Saturday evening the 29th November 2008.
Firstly I have seen several versions of this production and prior to watching this show I was keen to see how Melville was going to hold all of the actors in a "line" across the stage.
My question was answered as soon as the line was formed. There was an absence of 2 characters on stage, and it appeared that 3 male roles had been substituted with females. I guess we all know the struggle of finding male singer/dancer/actors willing to perform without payment. The change of male to female roles seemed to work.
The performances were very mixed. I saw some were outstanding while others were less then impressive. I know this is Amateur, but for a show like A Chorus Line, Dancing and Singing is important. The girl that played Mike (Can't remember her new stage name) was the first soloist performance, and although the acting was reasonable. The Singing and Dancing was disastrous. It was ironic that the song was titled “I Can do That”
“At the Ballet” was well harmonised by the 3 girls, although the taller of the three appeared very nervous throughout and lost focus on a number of occasions throughout the show.
The following solo songs throughout the Montage were well executed although I would have liked to see more fiery personality from Diana Morales.
I think it was a wise decision to add an intermission in this play and an equally good choice to have it at the end of the Montage “Shit Richie” which was well sung and full of energy from the cast.
The 2nd Act started with “Tits and Ass” which I found average. The performer didn’t look comfortable on stage and this number needs such confidence.
The part of Cassie in this show was portrayed more like the movie rather then the stage show which I was a little confused about (Although I did hear after the show that she was unwell so I don’t know if this is why it was different?).
I really enjoyed “One” and the “Bows” I take my hat off to the cast on that one (or should I say, Tip my hat) I know it isn’t easy to get a group of Amateur theatre performers who can dance and all did rather well with the classic “A Chorus Line” style Choreography.
Choreography - Throughout the show was of a high standard and the performers seemed very comfortable with it. Although 2 males (Al and Don – I think) seemed to be a beat behind the others and looked very unsure throughout the group numbers, and the Tap part looked a little unrehearsed.
Singing – A few Bum notes reached by some of the Soloists but group numbers seemed to be carried well.
Acting – I was pleasantly surprised at this. There were some extremely strong work here. Performers that stood out were Paul, Sheila, Bobby and Zak. Some of the other performers really need to watch their accents(I always notice accents).
Sets/Costumes – Basic yet effective
Lighting – I felt could have been better, I found moments where the stage was just not lit enough and therefore some interaction lost. Although I found other moments effective, eg The “Bows”.
I have always disagreed with the ending of this show. I understand that the show is written that the Bow is the chorus staying onstage high kicking however I feel that with Amateur Theatre, The performers don’t get paid. A Bow at the end of the play with audience acknowledgement is their payment. Also the audience always gets confused as they are waiting for the actors to come back out on stage.
I must also comment that a nice touch for this play was that they chose a solo Pianist rather then an Orchestra/band. I don’t know if this choice was made due to lack of room? But it gave a great “Audition” effect.
Over all, an enjoyable night and I am sure that the performances will get stronger before closing night. I wish the cast and crew all the best for the remainder of the run!
P.S. - Just thought I'd add some advice
Wed, 17 Dec 2008, 12:59 amWalter Plinge
I was still thinking about the show the other day, I realise it's finished now but I just thought I'd add a suggestion in regards to casting for the benefit of future productions - if you're going to do a 3 week run with a show like Chorus Line, why not cast more people in the show and assign understudies to each and every role, ensuring everyone gets the opportunity to perform the role at least once. On nights where someone isn't playing the role, they could play the dancers who only feature in the opening act who don't make it through to the final audition. This would help prevent the obvious problems this show encountered - i.e. you're covered if someone is unable to perform and you don't have the dilemma of what to do to make that opening audition scene look realistic. I'd be interested to know why the director didn't do this in the first place, unless of course there simply wasn't enough people who auditioned for the show? Otherwise it's not really fair to expect an audience to still be asked to pay the full $20 for a show that is lacking because of some problems that could have been prevented with a bit more organisation in replacing a cast member who was playing a key character. That's just what I think.
I still liked the show and thought they recovered reasonably from these issues.
Cheers.