Theatre Review: Much Ado About Nothing
Nov. 13th, 2023 02:40 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
madbakerSaturday, we dressed up and went out for dinner (again!) to a Moroccan restaurant, mostly because it was close to the theatre where we were seeing Much Ado. Because we were dressed up (the wife was in heels and a white fake fur, looking tres elegant) we rolled the dice and drove. We scored easy parking close by; my usual parking karma was thankfully not in effect.
The restaurant was... okay. As a number of the reviews indicated, everything needed more spice. (Not necessarily more heat - just spice.) I doubt we'll go back.
Then we walked a couple blocks to the small theatre. It's apparently the oldest operating theatre in the city. Nice enough, with a decent-sized stage. When I bought tickets, plenty were available. I could have gotten front row center, but the last time we did that we were two feet from the stage - and got crotch-staring views of the action. So we went one row back, and found out that the seats were 10 feet back. Oh well.
For the play itself, I will (mostly) steal the format of my Resolution Recipes.
Inset: What was meh, neither working nor failing:
The setting was '50s Hollywood. Messina was an estate in the Hollywood hills, with the ladies being varied starlets and the men returning from the Korean War. It didn't add anything to the production but didn't not work, I guess. They didn't try to change the dialogue to update it (which I appreciated). There was a small cast, so a number of the parts were doubled.
What worked:
The actors playing Beatrice and Benedick were good. They kind of have to be, since they are the core of the production. Benedick in particular was fascinating to watch; he was in constant motion, like an early Dick Van Dyke. Not in pratfall sense but he had amazing physicality to back up his line delivery and emoting.
No major script cuts. Dogberry was played as a Hollywood gossip reporter, a la Hedda Hopper. Her final speech is usually cut, but here it wasn't - so it went on and on in its incoherent glory, which I found hilarious. (The wife suggested I memorize the whole thing for our production... which is vaguely tempting in abstract, but would be Wrong and elevating my ego above the needs of the shortened production.)
The dancing was good. The actress playing Margaret is a professional and it showed. Don Pedro was also adept on his feet. Speaking of, he seemed to be channeling early Tom Cruise - which weirdly worked.
What didn't:
The costumes. On the face of it they were okay; Beatrice was in a Marilyn Monroe white dress, for example. But none of the ladies had period-appropriate undergarments (which was obvious when Beatrice leaned down, as she was busty). And the men were in modern trousers, with some being in low-rise pants -- far from the '50s high-waisted lines.
Two acting/casting choices just did not work. Don John was played by a woman. She was an okay actor, but because she looked like a young man, the role's flat, plot-device evil just came off as brattiness. And Claudio was basically a nerd - glasses and artificial slight belly pudge. This is supposed to be a war hero? Both physically and personality-wise, why on earth would Hero find him interesting? Just... no.
Finally, a chunk of the audience were friends/family. They were, shall we say, overly enthusiastic. The "WOO!"s got to be so much it felt like we were at a drunken hen party.
Will we see them again?
For a community theatre production it was fine. Depends what they do next.
The restaurant was... okay. As a number of the reviews indicated, everything needed more spice. (Not necessarily more heat - just spice.) I doubt we'll go back.
Then we walked a couple blocks to the small theatre. It's apparently the oldest operating theatre in the city. Nice enough, with a decent-sized stage. When I bought tickets, plenty were available. I could have gotten front row center, but the last time we did that we were two feet from the stage - and got crotch-staring views of the action. So we went one row back, and found out that the seats were 10 feet back. Oh well.
For the play itself, I will (mostly) steal the format of my Resolution Recipes.
Inset: What was meh, neither working nor failing:
The setting was '50s Hollywood. Messina was an estate in the Hollywood hills, with the ladies being varied starlets and the men returning from the Korean War. It didn't add anything to the production but didn't not work, I guess. They didn't try to change the dialogue to update it (which I appreciated). There was a small cast, so a number of the parts were doubled.
What worked:
The actors playing Beatrice and Benedick were good. They kind of have to be, since they are the core of the production. Benedick in particular was fascinating to watch; he was in constant motion, like an early Dick Van Dyke. Not in pratfall sense but he had amazing physicality to back up his line delivery and emoting.
No major script cuts. Dogberry was played as a Hollywood gossip reporter, a la Hedda Hopper. Her final speech is usually cut, but here it wasn't - so it went on and on in its incoherent glory, which I found hilarious. (The wife suggested I memorize the whole thing for our production... which is vaguely tempting in abstract, but would be Wrong and elevating my ego above the needs of the shortened production.)
The dancing was good. The actress playing Margaret is a professional and it showed. Don Pedro was also adept on his feet. Speaking of, he seemed to be channeling early Tom Cruise - which weirdly worked.
What didn't:
The costumes. On the face of it they were okay; Beatrice was in a Marilyn Monroe white dress, for example. But none of the ladies had period-appropriate undergarments (which was obvious when Beatrice leaned down, as she was busty). And the men were in modern trousers, with some being in low-rise pants -- far from the '50s high-waisted lines.
Two acting/casting choices just did not work. Don John was played by a woman. She was an okay actor, but because she looked like a young man, the role's flat, plot-device evil just came off as brattiness. And Claudio was basically a nerd - glasses and artificial slight belly pudge. This is supposed to be a war hero? Both physically and personality-wise, why on earth would Hero find him interesting? Just... no.
Finally, a chunk of the audience were friends/family. They were, shall we say, overly enthusiastic. The "WOO!"s got to be so much it felt like we were at a drunken hen party.
Will we see them again?
For a community theatre production it was fine. Depends what they do next.
no subject
Date: 2023-11-13 11:38 pm (UTC)