Today I saw another great musical called [title of show]. The show was about 2 guys trying to write a musical. The script was absolutely genius. There were 4 characters, plus a piano player. The show was jam packed with laughs and truly an intelligent script that poked fun of many different aspects of musical theatre. Normal conversations were converted into dialogue and the way the script moved just felt natural and (at the same time) original. The stage was set simply with 4 chairs of different colors, lined up in a row center, each under a spotlight. The two chairs on the end of the row both had wheels. There was a keyboard on a stand (and a pianist) & some monitors, just up left of the chairs and also a small end table that held an answering machine down right. Everything about the script just really blew me away. At one point a character said he was going to the park and then he simply dragged his chair on wheels over to the SL side of the stage. The character that was already SL said, "You said you were going to the park and then you just dragged your chair over here." There were so many moments throughout the play where the play was aware of itself in the midst of creation and it just really made the script so much more interesting than anything I've seen at the festival. At one point a character said, "You've been so quiet." and the other character responded by saying, "I haven't had a line until now." The process of creating a musical was difficult and they addressed all the issues they were encountering throughout the musical like: the title of the show was [title of show], they only had 4 cast members + a piano & pianist onstage, their set was only 4 chairs, infighting between the cast members during the writing process, jobs where the actors/writers worked while they were trying to produce a hit musical. Everything just seemed so fresh and new and it was a great pleasure to watch it from the perspective of the audience. It also seemed like a small enough cast and a simple enough set, so that we might be able to do the show at my high school as a 'starter' type of musical with 2 males and 2 females.
Today I also attended a workshop on the Meisner technique. If you are unfamiliar with the process of acting, Sanford (Sandy) Meisner was a great innovator in a new(ish) type of acting process where actors dig deeply to get to the heart of the matter in plays/scene work/monologues. Meisner's goal was to help get the 'mind' of the actor out of the way of the 'impulse' of the actor. The exercise that was demonstrated was the repetition exercise where two actors sit face to face and one makes a neutral observation about the other and then they simply repeat. This can go on for a long time. The goal is to react and observe your partner's behavior, but only while stating the same statements. For example: 'You're wearing a watch' and then 'I'm wearing a watch' and this goes on and on. It is an interesting exercise but it is only the very first step in Meisner's work. When I have allowed students to do this exercise it doesn't always, work but this exercise helped me understand the exercise on a deeper level. At any point the instructor can stop the repetition and ask one of the actors, what are you getting from the other actor and then you must be able to state where they are emotionally. If you don't know what is happening, then you are doing the exercise correctly. You get your 'mind' out of the way, 'react' to your partner, and pursue whatever you want from your partner as the repetition exercise continues. These are one of those types of exercises that you must be present for in order to understand, but it IS quite helpful if you really turn yourself over to the exercise.
The second workshop I attended was taught by Stephen Gregg, a professional playwright out of LA. I took a workshop with him at the Alabama State Thespian Festival in 2012 in Troy, AL. I really enjoyed it so I decided to take another one here at the International Festival. This was called Dramatic Writing: Playwriting 2. It actually built off of the information that I was presented with about 18 months ago in his original Playwriting session. His workshop covered the different types of relationships that can be happening with only 2 characters onstage. There are four different options when 2 characters are onstage. Character A can like character B and character B can like A. OR, Character A doesn't like B, but character B likes A. OR, Character B doesn't like A, but character A likes B. Or both A and B do not like each other. He went on to explain that if you add just ONE more character to the mix and have 3 characters, there becomes 64 different options of character relationships. He continued on to explain that if you can write a play with 2 characters or even 3 characters, you can write any play imaginable. He also spoke about the genius the Anton Chekhov used when he was writing because he could have approximately 8 (or more) characters onstage and they could all be pursuing someone or something different and it all remained subtle. Here is a picture with Mr. Gregg and I.
He also presented us with a test that would measure our aptitude to be a good playwright. I took this test very seriously. The test had 7 questions and he stated that people rarely EVER got all 7 questions correct. He even offered $10 to anyone that answered them all correctly. I was in a room with around 20 students and one other teacher. I was sure that I had answered all questions correctly. We went over the answers one at a time. Each question presented us with a scenario and we were to choose (from 2 options) the option of the scenario that could result in the most interesting scene, based on the setup. Here is an example.
A teacher is trying to convince her principal not to fire her. The teacher is
A) two years from retirement
B) in her second year. She's still trying to decide if teaching is the career for her.
So which option (A or B) would give us a stronger starting point for a play or a scene?
The correct answer is A, if you chose B, then the teacher gets fired, who cares, they go and find another job. If you chose A, the teacher is close to being retired and not being worried for work for the rest of her life, there are greater STAKES in that scene and that is all that matters from a dramatic perspective.
I answered the first 6 correct and so did the other teacher. None of the students had gotten the first 6 correct, so it was down to the other adult in the room or myself. I missed the last one and the other teacher won the $10.
In the end he laughed and said that the test was irrelevant. He said in the end that he did think that the answers he selected were the stronger choices, but that the test didn't really measure playwriting aptitude. It was just a test he created. He also reminded us that we were in class with him for 1 1/2 hours and then we'd probably never see him again, but that we all took it very seriously because of the stakes he set up for us (saying no one ever got them all right, saying it could tell us if we were a playwright, offering money to the winner, and also telling us that people who scored 3/7 or below would be forced to go stand in the 'corner of shame'.
It was all an example to help illustrate that STAKES are the most important part of a scene or a play. If the stakes are there, no one in the audience is going to care.
Finally, the real highlight of the day was the production of Peter Pan by Faith Lutheran Theatre Company from Las Vegas, Nevada. At this point I have seen 15 productions in 13 days during my fellowship, including lots of professional theatre shows in Chicago. This production was definitely one of the best that I've seen. The technical theatre elements were astounding, the actors were great, the story was uplifting and the music selected for the play was incredible. There were 4 actors flying (literally) around the stage at one point of the show. This was not the musical version, but the play version and it was unbelievable. I could not believe I was watching a high school show. Granted, this was a school that must receive great financial support, because the production value was that of a show similar to Broadway. The costumes were magnificent and the sets were mind-boggling. When Peter Pan made his first leap into the air, I couldn't believe it. I never once saw the wires, my seat is near the top of the house, but I couldn't see them at all. 'The Savages' came out and did a dance number that was absolutely flawless to some great upbeat dance music. 'The Pirates' were bumbling and foolish and served as great comic relief. Capt. Hook commanded the stage and used his voice a powerful element, but also knew how to hold and play for laughter. 'The Lost Boys' did a great job at their roles along with all the members of the family. The show was directed Emily Ball and the technical direction and adaptation of the script was done by her husband. There was a fight Choreography, a puppeteer coach, a flying effects crew & a choreographer. There were 32 cast members and 2 understudies. There were 55 people involved in the technical roles for this show. It really goes to show that NO GREAT SHOW can be done without enormous support from the technical theatre participants. I wish I could have taken pictures, but that is against the rules in live theatre and I will not break that rule. That is the beauty of live theatre, you actually have to be there in order to enjoy it. .
I am a director of a one-man theatre program. One day, hopefully there will be someone else there to help me manage the ENORMOUS amounts of volunteers, students and parents that it will take to mount a production like this. The technical aspects of a show on this scale are overwhelming and knowing that there were at least 6 other adults working full time on this show gives me some relief because I know that we are simply not there yet. One day we will be, and we might get there sooner if I can get some students and parents to attend this festival with me next year.
One of the most touching moments came after Tinkerbell was killed and Peter Pan rallied the 2,000 seat theatre to scream, "I do, I do, I do believe in fairies; I do, I do, I do believe in fairies; I do, I do, I do believe in fairies!!", until finally Tinkerbell came back to life. I saw grown men and women crying during this rally of hope. You have never in your life been in the presence of so much love and support as I was tonight in a theatre of 2,000 young actors rooting on their fellow young actors in a celebration of art and culture. It was something to believe in and I've never witnessed so much unity in a theatre. The theatre was chanting it all in unison and I was truly moved.
Tomorrow we will see the musical Shrek that came down from Wisconsin and I'm sure it will be great as well.
Posted with Blogsy
No comments:
Post a Comment