lottathorts-ontis-blog

[lottathorts-ontis-blog]

Didn’t get to see the show myself, so here are some wise words from our friends over at Night Writes.

[lottathorts-ontis-blog]

1988

[lottathorts-ontis-blog]

“In a world that’s scary and hard to endure, if you make art at all you’re part of the cure.”

- Sara Bareilles and Josh Groban (2018 Tony Awards)

[lottathorts-ontis-blog]

On this blog we appreciate and support all of the lead female characters of musical theatre.

We also support and appreciate all the supporting female characters

We also support and appreciate all the female ensemble members

Give these characters and actresses the recognition they deserve!!

[lottathorts-ontis-blog]

let’s make this beautiful!

dead girl walking ; heathers: the musical

[lottathorts-ontis-blog]

Bernadette Peters in Hello, Dolly!

[lottathorts-ontis-blog]

REVIEW- Carrie: The Musical

Telekinesis... abuse... murder... song and dance?

Carrie: The Musical, an adaption of the cult classic Stephen King book/movie, first attracted attention as a Broadway flop. And upon seeing Louis Ellis' debut production of the 2012 rework, you still can see why. The fledgling theatre company did what they could with the cheesy script and excessively average music, however their high production quality was unable to make up for poor fundamentals of the show.

Putting the composition issues, and there are PLENTY, aside, this production was a valiant attempt at a fresh take on the iconic story. Unfortunately, Carrie is not in need of a fresh take. Tonazzi's Director's Vision notes that recent productions have been "moving further away from its 80's horror roots, and has focused more on the essence of Stephen King's writing: how extreme circumstances can lead to such a harrowed ending." This statement, when viewed in conjunction with the actual production, highlights the two biggest interpretational issues: 1) that this story is just as effective when separated from it's intended mode of presentation, and 2) the extremity of the circumstances.

To address the first, Tonazzi goes on to iterate that the focus of the production was "how to navigate individuality". While this is agood subject in and of itself, it is not the point of  Carrie. This is a story that is as critical of the audience as it is of the characters, playing upon the teenage revenge fantasies that we all experienced at some point. We are deeply satisfied when Chris and her pose are brutally executed, because we've all dreamed about having secret powers that would enable us to re-take power that we perceive to have been stolen in a public and terrifying spectacle. It may not have been as extreme as we see in Carrie, but they were there to various extents. It is the gore and monstrosity of 80's horror that turns the tables on the audience, throwing our own desires back in our faces and reminding us of how horrifying our own thoughts can be. This is where the true scare of Carrie lies, within ourselves. That being said, I can see why Tonazzi has opted to move away from this interpretation, as presenting it on stage and with a relatively low budget definitely has the potential to come off a gimmicky and lame (two words I would not apply to this production), which would erode the point even further. It may be better to try and take the show in a different direction than to do the original one badly, so I recognise the difficulty of his choice here.

As for the second, the critique is much simpler. Margaret White's abuse of Carrie was not extreme enough. I will admit that I did a double take upon re-reading that sentence, however it is the abuse of her mother that really hammers home how Carrie got to the harrowing point that she did. We see a shadow of what we need when Margaret forcibly washes between her thighs after that scene- however this is the extent of the discomfort. Some of the fault must lie with the writing, never-the-less, the absence of the infamous closet and escalating violence resulted in her decision to murder her child seeming inconsistent with her character! Michelle Lansdown tried her best to indicate the fanatical murderousness brewing through her vocal and facial expressions- which were brilliant- but this was sadly not enough.

In terms of performances, this production featured some stars to watch. Kirralee Elliott's Carrie was thoughtful and moving, and her vocals were to die for (HA!). Rachel Tunaley and Sinead Cristaudo were absolutely infuriating as Chris and Norma, which is exactly what they're meant to be. I hated Chris with a passion, so Tunaley ought to be congratulated on her visceral and rage-inducing performance. Fantastic work (as ironic as that sounds). Nic Savage's George was relatable and funny, despite the fact that the jokes at his expense were stupidly homophobic. Yet again, bad writing.

Zara Stanton as Musical Director presented a wonderfully tight ensemble and polished band. The high quality of the performances and direction could not completely distract from the averageness of the composition, but I can honestly say that she did the best job possible with what she had to work with. Balboni's choreography was for the most part effective, except for some overly and unnecessarily sexual moments in the ensemble and the constant rocking on "You ain't seen nothing yet, it's gonna be a night you'll never forget". While it came across as ominous the first time, by the fourth it had lost it. She did a great job in the mass murder scene, timing the deaths fantastically. This is a hard scene to do on a low budget, but again, I think she did the best job possible. I also enjoyed her costume design, which featured an 80's vibe, but remained sufficiently modern to compliment the use of iPhones throughout. Tonazzi's set was excellent, presenting a minimalist but creepy atmosphere that was an appropriate backdrop for the show. Tragically, Elliott was not under the blood when it tipped and had to stretch out her arms,which really detracted from the scene, but you could see what was intended and had it been pulled off it would have been brilliant.

All in all, this show demonstrated that there is a deep well of untapped potential in Louis Ellis Productions. I am excited to see what they create in the future, and can only hope that they pick better shows to do to their clearly high standard.

Carrie: The Musical is showing at The Depot Theatre 25 July- 4 August.

[lottathorts-ontis-blog]

Review of Carrie: The Musical at The Depot Theatre coming soon!

You must renounce this power. You must give it up. You must never use it!

Carrie (1976)

[lottathorts-ontis-blog]

Monsters are real, and ghosts are real too. They live inside us, and sometimes, they win.

Stephen King (via itsmeslb)

[lottathorts-ontis-blog]

REVIEW- First Date

Returning for their 6th year and production, The Intercollegiate Musical Society has once again presented a showcase of some of the best musical theatre talent at the University of Sydney Colleges.

First Date is a quirky show based around the (you guessed it) first date between Aaron, an awkward but mostly well-meaning blind date virgin, and Casey, an artsy blind date veteran. While seeming to be completely different, the show follows the development of their relationship and gives life (in the form of literal characters) to the voices inside their heads that help and hinder its progression.

Co-Creative Director Robert Meek acknowledges in his Director’s Note that First Date is not without some pretty substantial challenges, one of which is that it is “a static show”. Set entirely within a New York restaurant, the focus is mostly on the dialogue between Aaron and Casey with interjections from various characters that operate within their minds. In particular, Lauren (Casey’s married older sister) appears to remind her that she has a terrible dating history- along with her two ex-boyfriends who show up for “That’s Why You Love Me”- and Gabe (Aaron’s best friend) is the testosterone fuelled embodiment of Aaron’s desire to get laid and move past his ex-fiance Alison (who of course also swans in). The additional characters act as patrons of the restaurant when not causing havoc for the budding lovers, and this production does an excellent job of navigating the difficulties of making it clear that these characters are not actually present. At no point does it seem like the characters are literally interrupting the date, with the exception of Christopher the singing waiter, who totally interrupts the date to make things hilariously awkward.

Angel Opie (Casey) and Ziggy Harris (Aaron) clearly have the most demanding jobs in the show, and they complete them to great effect. On paper both of these characters present as utterly unbearable, however these actors breath the necessary life and sympathy into them. Opie has created a cool and sexy Casey, with a humorous dryness that transforms her from self-involved into troubled but charming. Harris achieves the mammoth task of making Aaron sympathetic, despite some exceptionally outdated lines. His horror at calling Casey a “blind date slut” within the first 10 minutes of their interaction justifies her not leaving immediately, and while he can’t escape the frustrated sigh inducing monologue of complaining about Casey friend-zoning him that every woman has heard before, he has constructed an Aaron who, while falling into outdated ideas of entitlement, never-the-less makes genuine efforts to connect with Casey on a meaningful level. It is clear from these aspects of the show that it was written by a bunch of men in the very early stages of Fourth Wave feminism, before the movement really broke into the mainstream. However, the shows directors’ are clearly aware of their context and do not shy away from allowing Opie and Harris to demonstrate the ridiculousness of these ideas.

Special mention must go to Tom Hicks as Christopher, Stephen Witts as Gabe, Alex Hindmarsh as Grandma Ida and Gabriella Vella as Reggie. Hicks’ Christopher is as suave as he is hilarious, oozing charm while navigating the unfortunate fact that he’s yet to make it on Broadway, so still works as a waiter (a singing waiter, mind you). Witts is the productions newcomer having only performed in one musical previously and lacking singing training. Despite this, he brings a fantastic vivacity to Gabe, with his energy at times stealing the show from the leads. Hindmarsh’s Ida is a major highlight of Act 1, presenting the stereotypical Jewish Grandmother in a delightfully funny but never gratuitous manner. Finally, Vella had her task cut out for her, as she was cast in a male role. To address the issue of gay erasure (Reggie is meant to be a gay man), the production team had many more women audition than men and this is why the choice was made. By treating the character not as an overly flamboyant gay man but a neurotic yet fabulous woman, Vella transforms the role from a worn out stereotype into a brilliant champion of extra-ness.

Unfortunately, the show falls flat when it comes to choreography. Despite some valiant efforts in Act 1 on the part of McNamara and Meek, neither of whom have dance training, the movement becomes repetitive and at times obviously improvised as the show progresses. This absence of a choreographer or dance captain is exceptionally clear in the ensemble numbers, most notably “The World Wide Web Is Forever”, where Hindmarsh is left repeating basic and static movements as the cast stands in a line on either side of her. This is a saddening lapse in judgement on the part of the directors, as it is obvious that they bit off a bit more than they could chew in this area.

This production is a fantastic demonstration of the artistic talent within the USYD Colleges, if it does lack the polish of a more professional or well established musical theatre company. Still, they navigate the issues of the script in a modern and respectful manner, which is a great credit to all involved. I look forward to seeing what they present next year.

First Date is showing at the Seymour Centre from June 6 – 9.

[lottathorts-ontis-blog]

Anastasia at the Broadhurst | Review

Maybe this season’s most overlooked show. Which is odd because it’s been two decades in the making.

Anastasia is not a perfect show. It’s not political enough (especially for this particular historical moment) and the stakes are a bit low and the direction is just serviceable but I’ll be damned if it isn’t one of my favourite new scores of the season with five fabulous performances at its centre.

I am an Ahrens and Flaherty fangirl, but I think it’s fair to say their mostly new score keeps pace with the classic ‘Journey to the Past’ and ‘Once Upon A December’ and they have chosen exactly the right moments to musicalise. 'Journey to the Past’ becomes the Act One closer which is the right place for it to not overshadow the rest of the show, and Christy Altomare nails it to the back wall of the intimate Broadhurst. Every solo she gets is a revelation; she plays an Anya who may be suffering from PTSD, quick to lash out, quick to panic, but always tender, always headstrong, a princess before even she realises it. The show wisely ages Anya up to a more sensible, world-weary, mid-twenties and the show benefits from a less naive Anya than the film.

Derek Klena is perfect prince material as Dmitry, his 'My Petersburg’ is driving and 'Everything to Win’ is such a wonderful choice, to focus on Dmitry’s mental state as the scene that the whole plot hinges on occurs offstage. John Bolton and Caroline O'Connor sparkle as the secondary couple and they wring every ounce of available comedy out of their fairly standard numbers. Bolton is especially tender is his relationship with Altomare’s Anya. The trio numbers, 'Learn to Do It’ and 'We’ll Go From There’ are some of the show’s most intoxicating moments. Mary Beth Peil is a beautifully dignified Dowager Empress until she isn’t, and the transformation is heartbreaking.

Now the missing link. The show’s new villain (mercifully replacing the film’s out of left field Rasputin) Gleb, played by a tortured Ramin Karimloo, has improved slightly since the Hartford run but not enough to bring up the overall quality of the show. Throughout, the stakes are too low, does anyone really ever think he’s going to kill Anya? The show suffers mightily from its unwillingness to confront Gleb’s politics in juxtaposition to that of the Dowager Empress’; a street urchin like Anya would almost certainly be slightly better off under a socialist system than the old imperial system and yet she never questions why someone like the Dowager should have so much while she has so little. The communists in the play are McCarthy-era cartoons, not fleshed out people who think their system is flawed but better. If we saw a Gleb who tried to win over Anya on that account and perhaps their having a more fleshed out flirtation, I think that could fix the show’s central problems.

The other main issue is the only serviceable direction and the sometimes ugly sets. There’s nothing innovative here, and with the Russian Great Comet dominating this season, it’s easy to see how lush without being naturalistic works wonderfully but this just ends up looking cheap. Maybe there is a classy way to do projections, I just don’t really think this is it. The staging does suffer from the static set. On the other hand, the costumes are worth the price of admission.

It must be noted that I’m always happy to see female-led musicals but the casting of this could have used some more diversity. It’s not as white as Bandstand, but that’s a very low bar. All in all, it’s worth seeing for a killer new Broadway score and some killer, unrewarded performances. I’m sure it’ll have a long life on Broadway, touring, and eventually in communities that I feel will be able to innovate on this almost-gem of a show.

[lottathorts-ontis-blog]

Dear Evan Handsome

   I, like probably most other Americans, thought that after the wildfire success of Hamilton, that Broadway had peaked, patted itself on its back for a job so well done, and clicked off the lights. Thankfully, that’s totally untrue. Broadway is still churning out works of art and it turns out that at least one of them is bloody brilliant - that one being Dear Evan Hansen.

   Dear Evan Hansen is new Broadway musical that tells the story of a socially awkward misfit, Evan Hansen, who, at the advice of his therapist, writes a letter to himself each morning: “Dear Evan Hansen, today is going to be a good day, here’s why…” Well, one day as Evan writes this letter to himself at his school’s computer lab, another lonely misfit named Connor finds it and berates Evan about the letter. Connor steals the letter and storms off.   Days later, Evan is called to the principals office. When he arrives, Connor’s parents inform Evan that Connor killed himself and that they found a letter addressed to Evan Hansen in his pocket. Connor’s parents, under the assumption that Connor and Evan must have been friends that wrote letters to each other, ask Evan through tears about their relationship and Evan, riddled with anxiety and unable to tell the grieving parents that their son was actually a bully who had stolen Evan’s self-addressed letter, goes along with it. What starts out as a little lie grows and grows as Evan fabricates a mass exchange of emails to serve as evidence of the nonexistent friendship between Evan and Connor. As the emails go public, other students come together to start a viral online presence they call The Connor Project. Meanwhile, Evan is becoming closer and closer with Connor’s family and distancing himself more and more from his own mother.

   Evan Hansen is played by Ben Platt. Ben Platt is insanely talented. I got to see Book of Mormon in Chicago a couple of years ago where Ben Platt played the role of Elder Cunningham and I thought he was absolutely terrific and his delivery and comedic timing was side-splitting.    Because so much of what Evan does throughout the show is morally ambiguous, the role demands a certain level of vulnerability from the actor portraying him in order for the audience to remain on his side. Platt plays the role flawlessly. He will give you all the feels you could ever ask for plus half a dozen extra free of charge.

   Another aspect that helps with the moral ambiguity of the show is the fact that the music is damn near perfect. The music allows us to glimpse into the soul of the characters in a way not otherwise achievable, which allows the audience to relate and empathize with what the characters are going through and where they’re coming from.

   The music for the show was done by Benj Pasek and Justin Paul, who also wrote the lyrics for the contemporary movie-musical La La Land. Steven Levenson wrote the book, meaning he’s the mastermind behind the brilliant and original story and all the characters involved. Michael Greif, whose name you might recognize because he’s a Broadway legend, directed the show. He also directed Rent and Next to Normal.

   Get this soundtrack. See it on Broadway if you can. Try to find video clips of it online (if you’re into that.) This show is spectacular and, let’s be one-hundred, you can use a break from Hamilton. It’ll still be there when you come back.

[lottathorts-ontis-blog]

How Performance Affects Meaning:

An Analysis of Be More Chill’s “Michael in the Bathroom”

Michael in the Bathroom has been sung and performed by George Salazar and Will Roland. While the song doesn’t change, the final product differs drastically in presentation. In George Salazar’s version, Michael’s anxiety shines through and it is clear the character is having a panic attack. Will Roland’s version highlights the anger and self-pity the character feels. 

This song is from the musical Be More Chill centers around two friends, Michael and Jeremy. With the advent of a new drug, Super Quantum Unit Intel Processor (SQUIP), that implants in the brain and tells the user how to gain social standing. When Jeremy takes this drug, he distances from Michael, which culminates in Michael hiding in the bathroom at a party after attempting to speak to Jeremy at the start of Act 2.

In George Salazar’s version, anxiety is the main emotion portrayed. Salazar begins singing rather calmly. Once the refrain begins, Michael’s anxiety creeps out. By the last “Michael in the bathroom,” of the refrain, it becomes clear the character is having an anxiety attack. In the second verse, Michael’s anxious thoughts continue. There is a brief reprieve as he listens to the girl singing Whitney, but these thoughts just lead straight back to his situation, and Michael remains anxious. This anxiety keeps building into and through the second refrain. When the knocking begins, Salazar’s tone and movements become more frantic, showing the character’s anxiety increasing exponentially, until he splashes water in his face, effectively calming himself down to open the door. When he finds he doesn’t have to leave his bathroom space, the character’s anxiety builds back up. His thoughts begin spiral out of control, and become more self-deprecating, wishing he was never born. These negative thoughts continue as the character loses control of his anxiety, until the very end. At this point, Salazar’s singing becomes less desperate and more sarcastic, showing that while the character does not feel better, but rather has calmed himself down enough to exchange the necessary pleasantries. Salazar’s version follows the ups and downs of the character during his moments in the bathroom and his thoughts as his anxiety spirals out of control, and the audience can feel these emotions in listening or watching along. 

When Will Roland sings “Michael in the Bathroom,” his tone is much more bitter.  He starts off singing quietly, expressing his awkward feeling at being alone, locking himself away in the bathroom, as he is friendless at the “hottest party of the fall.” When he begins singing about Jeremy ditching him, he sounds sadder. In entering the first refrain, he starts off self-pitying, but midway shifts to an angrier tone. In this version, Michael is resentful of being left alone, and it shown through Roland’s tone. This anger is carried into the second verse. When he quotes the girl singing Whitney Houston, he mocks her in singing, “I wanna dance with somebody.” When faced with the knocking, his anger shines through, and he bites back at the knocking, rather than, as Salazar’s Michael, spiral down into a much more anxious state. Later in the song, the lyrics are self-deprecating, but Roland sounds sarcastic, which further highlights his resentment. In the final line, Roland is at his most sarcastic, showcasing the characters anger and resentment.

These two versions of the same song have vastly different tones, and the character’s emotions are represented vastly differently. Roland presents the character as bitter and self-pitying. Salazar showcases Michael’s anxiety, and the roller-coaster of emotions he experiences locked in the bathroom. While both singers work with the same notes, music, and lyrics, these interpretations are vastly different. By singing the exact same song, these performers are able to tell completely different stories. Through their acting and tone, these two artists present two completely different characters.