Monday, March 12, 2007

Why anonymous?

I have fielded half a dozen seperate emails now, in which I have been thanked for my reviews, but also questioned as to why I choose NOT to sign my name. One reader even implied that I do not sign my name because I am "not confident enough" (untrue) in what I write in this e-journal.

Let me assure anyone reading these e-reviews that I am entirely confident in what I write.

First of all, as any reviewer (professional or otherwise) will tell you, reviews are based on the feelings and observations of the reviewer. Often they are coupled with the reviewer's expectations from a particular production, venue, actor or director. A review - at least from my perspective - is to let readers know whether or not a particular performance moved me or not and then why the performance did or did not achieve the desired result.

I have read numerous articles by the professional reviewers in town - i.e. the Free Times, Plain Dealer, Cleveland Scene and Mr. Berko - and have sometimes enjoyed performances they deemed to be sub-standard. There have been times where their opinions and sentiments echoed my own. Regardless, a review is a statement of opinion based on the writers' love of theater, arts background and estimations of a performance.

That being said, I remain anonymous mainly because I don't want to cause commotion in the theatres in which I review. I have been involved in performances where the entire cast has sent reverberations of "Guys...there's a reviewer out there tonight!" which puts many on edge. That is entirely unnecessary, especially in smaller venues where unpaid individuals give up their time and effort to give something back to the communities in which they live and work.

I like to see shows as they are....not when people are "kicking it up a notch" because the rumor has spread that a reviewer is in the house!

Read these reviews....agree or disagree, as you wish...I am not here to banter back and forth with individuals who disagree, as disagreement is your right and your privilege. What moves me may or may not move YOU.

Thank you, at the very least, for reading - and please continue to support live theatre in our community venues!

Saturday, March 10, 2007

Cast and Crew Shine in "Wife" at Clague

Community theatre relies heavily on volunteer actors and support staff, so often there is a mixture of talent in smaller theatrical venues.

This is not the case, however, with the Clague Playhouse adaptation of W. Somerset Maugham's The Constant Wife.

Set in the 1920s drawing room of the middle-aged (no pun intended) Constance Middleton (Laura Starnik), the show is a period comedy of manners which truly reveals that what is said is often not what is necessarily intended.

As the show opens, we see Constance' mother Miss Culver (adeptly played by Bernice Bolek) reveal that Constance's husband is having an extramarital affair with his wife's best friend Marie-Louise (Candace Lipton). In the catty fashion of high society, this discussion takes place between youngest daughter Martha (Elaine Feagler) and mom, unknown to Constance.

As the play unfolds, the audience is treated to irony after irony, as we soon learn that Constance is acutely more aware of the situation than anyone ever intended!

Director Bill Modic has turned what could easily be labeled an "outdated" piece of theatre into a lively and enjoyable evening. The characterizations of both Constance and her husband, John (Bob Goddard) are entertaining, as it is obvious who wears the pants in this upper-class household. Starnik drips with charm, and Goddard plays an excellent "good-natured, yet tongue-tied" bumble of a husband.

Elaine Feagler as patronizing younger sister Martha and Candace Lipton as the ditzy Marie-Louise are equally good; and Bernice Bolek, who is usually excellent, continues her trend of quality theatre in this role. The cast is capped off with the quality quartet of Maud Holm as Barbara; Lou Will as Bernard Kersal; Matthew Solarz as Mortimer Durham; and Joe O'Brien as Bentley, the loyal butler.

Set designer Ron Newell gives the audience an appealing locale for this intimate show. Due to the close proximity of the stage to the audience, one feels as if they are sitting in the drawing room themselves!

Quick Synopsis - "The Constant Wife" is a great example of community theatre at its best. It's a "don't miss" for certain!

"The Constant Wife" runs during the month of March at Clague Playhouse. For ticket information, contact the box office at (440) 331-0403, or visit their website at www.clagueplayhouse.org

Thursday, March 8, 2007

Ridgeville's "Camelot" Murky but Fun

Since I was in elementary school, my parents made a concerted effort to expose me to the performing arts. I can recall growing up to the sounds of Broadway musicals on the record player, from Man of LaMancha and The Music Man to The Fantasticks and Camelot.

The latter being one of my all-time favorites, I was excited to see that it was being performed in North Ridgeville, by the Olde Towne Hall Theatre.

For those of you not familiar with this classic, Camelot retells in Lerner and Lowe's musical fashion the story of King Arthur, and is based on T.H. White's retelling of The Once and Future King. Rather than focusing on Camelot itself, however, the musical centers on the love triangle between King Arthur, his beloved Guenevere, and the knight Lancelot.

The first thing that struck me about this particular production was the sparse set, and the age of the ensemble (most apparently late teens) during one of the opening scenes. That, however, was seemingly offset by Guenevere (Jodi Bloser), with a moving rendition of "The Simple Joys of Maidenhood" shortly after the questionable ensemble's debut. Having seen Bloser in Dangerous Obsession earlier this year at Westlake's Clague Playhouse, I was uncertain about her in this role, yet she duly impressed me both with her voice and her apparent virginal innocence.

As the story unfolds, King Arthur (Jonathan McCleery) marries his lady Guenevere, and the honorable knight Lancelot (Mark McCarthy) - who is seemingly invincible - joins the court at Camelot, only to spring into a love affair which eventually leads to the downfall of the "perfect" kingdom. Arthur is made to choose between his own laws - which must be obeyed - and his role as husband. Most of you know the ill-fated finale.

Despite a weak orchestra and a very mixed pot of talent in the ensemble cast, Camelot was still a moderately enjoyable evening. While McCleery as Arthur left me cold overall, the relationship and strong performances of McCarthy (his first major role in a musical) and Bloser seemed to carry the show, with lots of fun and clever antics thrown in by the off-the-wall King Pellinore (John Stuehr).

Director Allen M. White does an interesting and admirable job trying to bring a show as large as Camelot to such a small stage. The set - although minimal - was workable, although I think a touch more detail (or simply visible leaves on the plain green tree) would have improved it drastically. His choice to focus on Lancelot as a paragon of virtue rather than a musclebound hero was an interesting touch. A little work on the king himself and the ensemble, however, would have made for a much better production.

Quick Synopsis - You'll still prefer the broadway soundtrack, but for a small venue, the characters of Lancelot, Guenevere and Pellinore make this show worth the price of admission. A brave effort by a small theatre to bring a large-scale production to life.

"Camelot" runs through this weekend at North Ridgeville's Olde Towne Hall Theatre. You can make reservations by calling their box office at (440) 327-2909.

Cleveland Area Theatre Reviews

In this blog you'll find my reviews of Cleveland-area theatrical performances. Some of you may know me from the theatre scene; I'm active in several venues in greater Cleveland.

I'm trying to scrape the rust off the old pen, so to speak, and writing about something I love as much as the theatre seems like a great place to start. There seem to be a few venues which don't get as much attention as they deserve, and I plan to focus largely on those!

So read and enjoy - and remember, these are just the observations (and sometimes perhaps, criticisms) of a theatre afficionado.