Glengarry Glen Ross

It was certainly "different" to see one of the actors on stage in an MTC performance with the script in his hand.    This occurred at MTC's Glengarry Glen Ross when we saw it on the Saturday after it had opened on the Thursday - and last minute substitute John McTernan was still easing into the part of Shelly.   At least the show went on, and in all the circumstances, he gave a pretty creditable performance.    It must take a lot of courage to take a part in a play just before it opens and to get up to speed with a cast who have been rehearsing together since the outset.

The play itself, by David Mamet, won the Pulitzer Prize in 1984 and is about the cut-throat, fast-talking, obscenity-ridden and deceptive world of Chicago real estate salesmen.

As with The Speechmaker, MTC had again dispensed with an interval, so it was all over in  90 minutes.  I'm beginning to wonder if intervals are so "yesterday"?

There's the "old school" sales guy in the "new era", and it's all unrelenting.  There are some insights, too, such as, " You don't sell one car to a guy, you sell him 5 cars over fifteen years".    Some salesmen get it, some don't, but it's tough and competitive, with no room for even a moment's humour.   MTC have done it as well as can be expected in the circumstances, and it can only improve as John McTernan gets more performances under his belt.

Update:   I see that it has now been reviewed.

The Speechmaker

We had to change our booking for MTC's The Speechmaker, but on attempting to do so, we were told it was fully booked.   There was only one future performance at which two seats were available, and they weren't together.  We took the seats and had no regrets because we quite enjoyed it, but we were able to see for ourselves why there has been a lack of critical acclaim.

It's a satire with some good one-liners, although perhaps overly-reliant on Australian clichés about the US, and the outcome has a sense of inevitability about it.   Not far beneath the surface is a serious theme about the power exercised by the United States security agencies.

It's been created by the Melbourne-based Working Dog team, and presumably it is this connection that resulted in the production being sold out before opening night.

Many of the reviews haven't been complimentary, such as the Herald Sun, which was critical of the lack of depth and rather frantic movements at times (such as, does the revolving stage really have to be used so much?).  Other reviews are here. and here.

Perhaps the best description came from a friend who has also seen the play, who suggested that there was sufficient content for an enjoyable 30 minute TV satire, rather than the 90 minutes (no interval) that are it actually takes.

Private Lives

Noel Coward's Private Lives is a witty comedy, enjoyable because of the sharp dialogue and farcical story-line.  Of course, it's all very light-hearted and 1930s-ish, but there's nothing wrong with that.

MTC's production has great sets making full use of the revolving stage.  It includes a little music and singing.  The different personalities of each the characters shine through - as do the traits that (it turns out) they share!

A good night out.

The Mountaintop

MTC's The Mountaintop is a bit surreal at times although the acting by the two person cast is great. It's a vision of Martin Luther King’s last night before his assassination, set in a motel room.   Camae - the bold young woman who brings his room service - forces him to confront his own fears and desires. The play assumes a basic knowledge of Martin Luther King, which I guess all Americans would have and as presumably anyone who is likely to attend an Australian production would also have.  Nevertheless, in spite of his fame, I understand that King was a private person behind his well-known rhetoric so of necessity the play is completely imaginary. 

Here's one review of it.  The performance we attended was followed by an open forum with the director and the actors.  One aspect of the discussion that struck a chord with me was a question about the "Americanism" of the play.   This is reflected in Woodhead's review, who refers to that fact that "it's a shade strong on US triumphalism and self-absorption".   The response to this was along the lines that it's an American play, and so that's the way it's been presented.  Fair enough;  on reflection, I don't think there would have been any alternative.

Just for the record, the gunshot that most of the audience were expecting doesn't occur!  However, the play does seek to exhort the audience to "carry the baton" in relation to a whole range of issues, in keeping with King's own work which extended over and beyond his civil rights campaigns.  I think I even recall a reference to "boat people".   Although the exhortation was impressive, the response from the audience was, well, muted.   In the discussion, LaBonté said something to the effect that on different nights, audiences had reacted differently.  There may have been pockets of enthusiastic response on the night we were there, but on the whole the response was fairly subdued.   Notwithstanding that a more enthusiastic result may have been "politically correct", I think it's unlikely that an Australian audience in a theatre would ever rise in their seats in the way that an American civil rights rally might have done!

Rupert

We had seen the 7.30 segment dealing with David Williamson's play Rupert, so when we saw the play at MTC, we had a general idea of what to expect.  In the interview with Leigh Sales, Williamson made no secret of his dislike of Rupert Murdoch, so I guess it wasn't surprising that the ABC saw fit to give the play a plug!

Obviously to compress events covering a (very busy) lifetime into a little over two hours requires that the play move at a fast pace, and doubtless there has been much simplification.   The actors (with the exception of the "old" and "young" Murdochs) change roles repeatedly, often before your eyes.  Yes, Murdoch comes across as quite driven, but in a way, Dean O'Shea's performance portrays him, if not as likeable, then as somewhat captivating.  In fact, Sir Frank Packer and his sons (Clyde and Kerry), and Bob Hawke (although just a cameo appearance) fare worse at Williamson's hands than Murdoch.  In one review the point was made that Williamson leaves it to the audience to make up their own mind about Murdoch, but in the Age,  Rebecca Harkins-Cross  accuses Williamson of pulling his punches!    No doubt there's no love lost at Fairfax for Murdoch, but this seems an odd sort of comment.  Does the reviewer really have more information or is she suggesting that Williamson ought to have dug deeper (or made something up)?  

From 7.30

As I've said, it's fast-moving, so a pre-requisite to appreciating it is to have at least a basic knowledge of Murdoch's life.   But it's good to see Williamson breaking out from his familiar style, and the full house at the performance we attended appeared to like what they saw.

One Man, Two Guvnors

The full house at the Playhouse obviously enjoyed One Man, Two Guvnors .....but is it a play?   Perhaps "circus" or "pantomime" might be equally apt descriptions.   The blurb describes it as a "unique, laugh-out-loud mix of satire, songs, slapstick and sparkling one-liners".    Yeah, maybe.....

The British cast of 17 (11 main roles and an ensemble of 6) plus a band of 4 don't miss a beat in a well choreographed, fast moving production, the band was terrific and the humour didn't overdo the slapstick (my tolerance of  this is limited).   There is some audience interaction (although not as much as it seems at first, when one of the selected "members" of the audience turns out to have been planted).


Not exactly "comic perfection" (this quote is attributed to the Daily Telegraph), but certainly, all in all, an enjoyable night, watching something a little different from MTC's usual offerings.

Queen Lear by MTC

I have never seen King Lear, so it was all new to me when we attended MTC's production of Queen Lear.    It might have been better if I had glanced at the Wikipedia summary beforehand, although I am not sure.    Yes, Shakespearean dialogue is not always easy to follow, and there are many twists and turns in Lear, but I don't think my ignorance of the story was the only reason that I struggled with this performance. 

In fact, I read on one website - which was otherwise generally favourably inclined - that "While it is difficult at times to tune the ear to all of Nevin’s speech......" (see http://simonparrismaninchair.wordpress.com/2012/07/13/queen-lear-review/).  

 At least one reviewer is not kind to this production, see

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/arts/stage/queen-lear-cheerless-dark-and-deadly/story-fn9d344c-1226424964382  (sorry about the paywall, but even the bit that is accessible gives the idea!)

However, there is still much to appreciate.    Nevin's performance is certainly powerful, and the rest of the cast are pretty good, too.  The set during the storm scenes is dramatic, although I wondered at times whether there needed to be such a large expanse of stage during some of the other scenes.

The production is at the MTC Theatre, which looks pretty good at night!

EDIT:  Here's another review which I think makes a number of valid points:
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/entertainment/arts-books/a-shakespearean-role-reversal/story-fn7eul6a-1226427002048