GRADS - "How to lose friends and offend some people" Ron Banks
Tue, 29 June 2010, 12:13 pmmillie8112 posts in thread
GRADS - "How to lose friends and offend some people" Ron Banks
Tue, 29 June 2010, 12:13 pmREVIEW IN TODAYS WEST AUSTRALIAN - RON BANKS
WITH FRIENDS LIKE THESE - DOLPHIN THEATRE
Based on what I saw of the opening night, GRADS has made an error of judgment in allowing Edgar Metcalfe's previously unproduced play to go ahead.
No doubt it was motivated by a desire to say farewell to Metcalfe, who retires home to England after the season, in the nicest possible way. To acknowledge this contribution to theatre over 50 years by allowing him to direct the only play of the six he has written that had not seen the light of day.
Big mistake. The first half is embarrassing, simply unfunny and tasteless in the extreme.
I confess to having fled at interval, so I cannot tell you the ending. One sensible couple fled during the scene change in act one. My main objection is the way the play makes fun of a character who is given a very bad stutter.
The poor actor given the stutter's lines (I won't name him because he probably has a day job) must engage in the most egregious vocal contortions to get his words out, and it is embarrassing and uncomfortable to watch. And it is definitely not funny.
To caricature such an afflication is such an offensive move that I'm surprised that Metcalfe surrended to the temptation in his supposed comedy of manners about a group of people gathered for a party to celebrate the marriage of the stutterer to a young woman whi is pregnant to another man.
Surely someone in GRADS was offended by the tasteless portrayal and wanted to speak up about it's inclusion. But with Metcalfe as writer and director - and also a board member of the company - this might have been stifled by fear of offending the playwright.
Well it offended me and I'm speaking up about it.
There is a temptation to let these types of productions slide under the radar because they are put on by enthusiastic amateur thespians.But they do charge money for people to see them and people should be warned. Apart from the problem of the stutter, the first half lacks wit or cleverness .............................
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
We saw that show on Saturday and overall enjoyed it. According to their website Edgar is not a part of the GRADS committee. Wondering if Mr Banks has gone for a final farewell attack hoping to cause an effect? Edgar has achieved many wonderful things in theatre and she be recognised as such - it will be a loss for Perth when he heads home to Blackpool
Mx
millie81Tue, 29 June 2010, 12:13 pm
REVIEW IN TODAYS WEST AUSTRALIAN - RON BANKS
WITH FRIENDS LIKE THESE - DOLPHIN THEATRE
Based on what I saw of the opening night, GRADS has made an error of judgment in allowing Edgar Metcalfe's previously unproduced play to go ahead.
No doubt it was motivated by a desire to say farewell to Metcalfe, who retires home to England after the season, in the nicest possible way. To acknowledge this contribution to theatre over 50 years by allowing him to direct the only play of the six he has written that had not seen the light of day.
Big mistake. The first half is embarrassing, simply unfunny and tasteless in the extreme.
I confess to having fled at interval, so I cannot tell you the ending. One sensible couple fled during the scene change in act one. My main objection is the way the play makes fun of a character who is given a very bad stutter.
The poor actor given the stutter's lines (I won't name him because he probably has a day job) must engage in the most egregious vocal contortions to get his words out, and it is embarrassing and uncomfortable to watch. And it is definitely not funny.
To caricature such an afflication is such an offensive move that I'm surprised that Metcalfe surrended to the temptation in his supposed comedy of manners about a group of people gathered for a party to celebrate the marriage of the stutterer to a young woman whi is pregnant to another man.
Surely someone in GRADS was offended by the tasteless portrayal and wanted to speak up about it's inclusion. But with Metcalfe as writer and director - and also a board member of the company - this might have been stifled by fear of offending the playwright.
Well it offended me and I'm speaking up about it.
There is a temptation to let these types of productions slide under the radar because they are put on by enthusiastic amateur thespians.But they do charge money for people to see them and people should be warned. Apart from the problem of the stutter, the first half lacks wit or cleverness .............................
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
We saw that show on Saturday and overall enjoyed it. According to their website Edgar is not a part of the GRADS committee. Wondering if Mr Banks has gone for a final farewell attack hoping to cause an effect? Edgar has achieved many wonderful things in theatre and she be recognised as such - it will be a loss for Perth when he heads home to Blackpool
Mx
Walter PlingeTue, 29 June 2010, 12:55 pm
Well, Mr Ron Banks has
Well, Mr Ron Banks has always been a see you next tuesday of a reviewer.
MusicalMumTue, 29 June 2010, 01:06 pm
Given that Ron seemingly concurs with your view.....
regarding Metcalfe's contribution & legacy, what is your response as an audience member to his objection & the offence taken by him to the characterisation of a man with a stutter?
Did you notice anyone leaving, as he alleges?
LogosTue, 29 June 2010, 02:10 pm
Well ...
It would be interesting to read another review. I don't know the play but if Mr Banks left at the interval he can have no idea what the writer's final intent with the character was.
Is that all there is? Well if that's all there is my friend, then let's keep dancing.
www.tonymoore.id.au
Walter PlingeWed, 30 June 2010, 05:51 pm
Having seen this play
Having seen this play myself I am not entirely opposed to Mr Banks review. It was unprofessional that he did not stay for the entire duration of the play as it did not allow him the opportunity to vaildate his remarks, nor rectify them if he so chose.
I personally agree that the play seems to have been produced mainly to appease the director and a lack of true consideration was employed when dealing with the dramatic material. The play is not aimed at a particular audience - except those who might share the playwright's sense of humour. The humour therein is not transcribable to a lot of the people who go to see it.
The addition of a character with a stutter was not, in my opinion, intended to bring offense - the reactions of the other character's to the affliction even invokes sympathy to that character.
I found the play to be watchable, the performers do a convincing portrayal of their characters - notably the loud mouthed Sandy. The pregnancy storyline however was fairly transparent and also highly unbelievable - I doubt someone who looks as beautiful as Nell (at least from the 4 or 5 metres distance) would actually sleep with a man of Frank's stature and age - particularly when her own fiance is quite aesthetically pleasing.
The main failing of this show is not in its execution but in its conception - the show could do with a rewrite and a discussion with someone more aware of modern day humour. The set and performance I found to be adequate enough.
All in all I did not mind this show - such a long run was not advisable however as it results in the need to sell tickets via word of mouth. I would not advertise this production as it did not standout. I just think it deserved a review from someone objective who stayed for the whole duration of the show
Walter PlingeWed, 30 June 2010, 06:19 pm
Frank ... sorta!
The old overweight bloke playing Frank, has a 34yr old blonde German girlfriend ... must be his personality!
Walter PlingeThu, 1 July 2010, 04:14 pm
Frank... Sorta!
Good on them... Method acting maybe?!
Walter PlingeThu, 1 July 2010, 08:12 pm
Frank... Sorta!
Well, isn't life ironic sometimes?! And even though Ms Dyer may have a point when talking about Edgar Metcalfe’s humour as being very difficult to see for some, I wonder whether it is this kind of unintended irony inherent in her own comment she would accept as “modern day humour” instead. I doubt it somehow, but I certainly do!
Walter PlingeThu, 1 July 2010, 08:49 pm
Well, some people actually
Well, some people actually fall in love with someone's personality, Mrs Dyer, believe it or not. True beauty (as well as true love) is found within!
Greg RossThu, 1 July 2010, 11:16 pm
Pride & Prejudice
I would dearly love to write a few words about the review in Tuesday's West, however, as I'm in the cast, I think it would be circumspect to wait until the season has finished, so I shall, in the meantime, a couple of things:
I am aware the staff at the West debated long and hard as to whether to run Ron's review, eventually deciding to do so, as they had already printed the two page article on Edgar - a question of balance and as a freelance photo-journalist, I have the utmost respect for that decision.
Secondly, two people did indeed leave at interval on the Saturday night - we (the cast) didn't see them, however the Stage Manager made us immediately aware, although I'm not sure what the motivational point was in telling us at that time.
It’s interesting to see that the comments centred around my age and body shape are being voted down – perhaps people feel I might be offended? I’m not remotely – I am who I am and I really like the bloke (faults and all!). But what is worse, Ron Banks outrage at what he saw as cruel ridicule of a speech impediment, or the comment from the young lady assuming / taking / of the name Charlotte Dyer, who exhibits her prejudice, ridiculing the concept of a pretty young girl and an old fat bloke?
I suspect she meant no malice, she’s just too young and inexperienced in life to understand the subtext of what she was writing / saying, which is why it is so often absurd to have young people playing mature roles, although they may have the craft, they don’t have the experience of life to flesh-out a mature role.
I really believe all of us can learn from criticism and not let pride get in the way, but prejudice defines us and gets in the way.
All Good Things
Greg Ross
Minister for Good Times
crgwllmsFri, 2 July 2010, 02:10 am
No excuse
Hi Tony
I didn't see the play either; I'm simply responding to your comment.
While it's true that someone leaving in disgust at interval can have no idea of what the writer's final intent was, surely that's a bit irrelevant?
The point is, the writer did nothing in the first half to encourage the audience member to care.
I have stayed through many performances where I thought the writing had merit, even though the acting or other production elements might not have been up to scratch. It can still be engaging.
A little less so if the writing is really bad, and I recognise that good actors and directors are doing their best with flawed material. But I can still be motivated to follow through to the end.
But if it's dying on all counts, why would I feel that it will be any better in the second half? And even it WAS much better in the second half, that's still an epic fail of the production!
The writer may have all good intentions (in fact I'm sure it's safe to say most do). But if they can't deliver in an entire first half, you can't defend them with a statement like that, no matter how clear their final intent was.
A play is a journey. Regardless of the promise of the destination, if the bus breaks down anywhere en route, you're simply not going to get there.
Cheers,
Craig
~<8>-/====\---------
LogosFri, 2 July 2010, 10:02 am
Perhaps ...
... intent was a bad word. I guess what I meant was that the writer could have been setting up a situation for that character through the first act which only reached its denouement in the second act. Failing to stay for the second act then means that you miss the resolution of the situation. From what Mr Banks says it seemed to me that the stuttering character was his main reason for leaving. I may have misinterpreted what he meant however.
I do generally agree with you however, if the writing and the production have not generated sufficient interest in me to stay for the second half then the production has indeed failed.
I don't think I'll say anything more at all on this as I still didn't see the play.
Is that all there is? Well if that's all there is my friend, then let's keep dancing.
www.tonymoore.id.au