Friday February 14, 2014 / 7:30pmVenus in Fur
How was your experience?
We discovered that our "Goldstar" seats were w-a-a-y up in the "nose-bleed" section. On the other hand, the theater isn't all that large, so, although we viewed the stage from quite a high angle, the sound system was great -- we heard every spoken word!) This isn't just a "ride-along-with-us" type play (as with, say, "Boeing-Boeing"). You need to listen, because it's a modestly literate script, and catching things during the first third of the play will definitely benefit you during the remainder of the play. At first, I thought they might have gone with a slightly "light-weight" actress (I'm referring to her depth and ability). But, it became abruptly clear how skilled of an actress she is when she suddenly-and-abruptly was called upon (in her stage role as an aspiring actress) to take on the mantle of a different woman. Boom! It was an amazing transformation: voice, physicalization, attitude, you name it. At which time it became equally apparent that the other, seemingly ditzy/lightweight character she initially appeared as on stage was every-bit as well constructed of a characterization. The actor in the play did not provide as much of a transformation -- but primarily because the difference between the 2 characters he portrayed didn't involve as much dramatic difference. (Or did the actor simply not create as much difference?) Nonetheless, he was more than adequate to the character's requirements. There are a few "clunkers" in the play -- for example, a couple cases of expository writing. I can't think of precise examples, but akin to something like: "Well, Richard-my-brother, who's forever leaving the rest of the family in the lurch" -- you know, dialogue that is NOT "real," but rather serves solely to move the plot forward by informing the audience of other situations or conditions in unseen parts of the story. I hasten to add, NONE were as obvious as my random example -- but "clunkers" nonetheless. In similar fashion there were lightning and thunder effects that would 'just happen to occur' so as to highlight a particular line or piece of stage business. It's my experience that a director can get away with that once (maybe!) But it was used a few times to accent mood or dialogue. BUT, the directing was much more than just serviceable. Still, though, if you sense that I'm struggling to recall even modest "problems" with the production, you're correct. My complaints are minor nits -- because the production as a whole was engaging, stimulating, clever, funny .... and highly entertaining.