Phanton of the Opera (London)

I went to see this two weeks ago simply because I was wondering what a London production of the show would be like. I had seen it in South Africa many years ago, and, of course, knew the music like the back of my hand.

I was not expecting to be blown away by the show. In fact, I was expecting it to be a little tired. It is, after all, a twenty five year old show, now, and we were watching a matinee showing.

Well, we reached the end of Act One, and I turned to my friend and said, 'this is really good!'

She turned to me and said, I know! Many years ago a singing teacher advised me to perform Amy song I sang as if it were the first time it had ever been heard, and I think it was this attitude of the casts that made this performance so special. Each song was so full of unique expression- these performers weren't singing like Sarah Brightman, they were introducing their interpretation to the familiar words, scenes and costumes. This was a beautiful performance that re-inspired my appreciation of the musical. Well done to the cast!

Chicago - London Stage Production

How interesting that my next post should be about the very show that I kept referring to in my previous post! This, of course, was not the movie, but the current West End production of the show.
It must be hard for any production to compete with a show-goers pre-conceived impression of the version of the show that they have seen on-screen and I think that this production managed that exceptionally well by keeping the staging so simple and by focussing on wonderful choreography, acting and singing.
This show is highly stylized, with all the actors in sexy slinky black outfits and all the choreography remarkably subtle and remarkably slow. It immediately creates the atmosphere of being in a smoke filled 1930's cabaret bar where sleaze is the name of the game. Of course, this show is satirical in every way except for the husband of Roxy: Amos, who is sincere and sweet and loving. He is the only character not in black.
The show is presented with band on stage and taking up most of the space. The actors sing and dance in front of them and the conductor regularily participates in the action taking place. The only props are chairs and two ladders on either side of the stage, so all the audiences attention is focussed on the performance of the actors. This is very different to the usual glamour and decor found in a West End production and left me a little bit surprised and first, but eventually completely won me over.
I was most impressed with the actress playing Roxy. She presented a vivacious, daring and thoroughly corrupt character and (dare I say it) gave a much better interpretation of her than Renee Zelwegger. By the end of the show I became really fond of Roxy, whereas in the movie I felt her to be a little bit whiny and a little bit irritating. Catherine Zeta-Jones' performance of Velma in the movie is a completely different story. Some people are just born to be certain characters and Zeta-Jones' Velma is probably one of the best interpretations around, which gives any other actress who is given this character a bit of a challenge. The Velma in this show certainly had presence and certainly had the dancing and singing skills necessary for the role, but it just lacked the pizazz that Zeta-Jones brought to the role.
The only element to the show which disturbed me was the character Mary Sunshine which was performed in drag. At one point in the show, "her" clothes are ripped off to reveal that she is actually a man (to emphasize the theme of things not being what they seem), which to me was a little bit tacky. I do, however, feel that that is probably a personal point of view as many people can find that type of thing humorous and I do know that male/female identity is a theme often brought up in Cabaret and Vaudeville.
All in all a classy, sexy performance that I really enjoyed.

Nine - the musical

Last week Andrew and I rushed down to South London to watch the Amateur Theatre Production of "Nine". You may remember this musical as being released as a movie last year with actors such as Daniel Day Lewis, Judi Dench, Penelope Cruz and Sophia Loren. It was also directed by the director of "Chicago" (Rob Marshall) and looked like it had the makings of a fantastic movie - however it didn't do very well at all. I never saw the film and only heard bad reviews of it, so had no desire or interest to make the effort to see it. When one of Andrew's collegues landed the lead role in the amateur production, however, it gave us a definite reason to traipse all the way to Kingston to see what it was all about.

I must say that when it comes to explaining the story of some musicals I am at a loss. They can be a little bit like trying to explain the intricate plot of a Mozart opera. Using words alone to explain the plot leave it a little bit limp, but augment it with music and the plot seems to make a little bit more sense. This story is a little bit like that. Essentially the lead character, Guido Contini, is having a bit of a break down. In the midst of this breakdown we are introduced to the women in his life: his mother, his wife, his lover, his muse and his producer. (In many ways, we are shown the various roles that women play in life.) We then watch as he tries to resolve how he comes to terms with being in love with so many women at one time. The simple conclusion to the story is that he realizes that he has been living as an immature nine year old and decides to grow into maturity. I think that there is a whole lot more to the story if you are willing to look for it.

The music is remarkably similar to Chicago, so I can understand why Rob Marshall chose to direct it. I wonder if perhaps it was too similar to Chicago to succeed? Or perhaps it was the more elusive plot that was the problem. I guess I'll have to watch the movie to answer those questions. But now for the musical we saw.

The actors were supported by an orchestra who were seated on the stage. This was a wonderful thing to observe especially for an amateur theatre production. The music and singing was wonderful and all the actors where exceptionally well cast. It is clear to me that the secret to a successful amateur theatre production is a good director who is able to set everything up so smoothly that it is impossible for the amateur actor to feel insecure when on stage. Amateur actors have much less time to rehearse than professional actors and so need as much support as they can get. I feel this director did a brilliant job. I was completely swept away into the action of the story and well entertained, and the actors on stage looked like they were having a lot of fun. In fact, I felt a little bit grateful to have been able to see this show live rather than as a movie.

One thing this interpretation of the musical did for me was encourage me to think about the roles women play and about the labels we give each other. Why is there this belief that the image of "wife" is seperate to that of "lover" or "mother", when the truth is that women are constantly playing all these roles at the same time? Is it possible for us to be content living as both the supportive wife and romantic lover? Is it possible for men to recognize all those elements in one women, rather than needing more than one woman to play each role? It is these questions that have made me consider this an excellent musical, one with a little bit more to think about than usual.

I stayed at home and read this one!

And I've now spent one week thinking about this book and about how more people should read it. It's a love story - but not in the style of Marianne Keyes! In fact not in the style of any love story I have read for a very long time, which has made it totally refreshing and very very beautiful.

It is called One Day by David Nicholls and I was drawn to it because of the subtext above the title of the book "twenty years, two people". "It's not often a love story decides to cover twenty years of a romance," I found myself thinking. So, I picked it up and read the back cover which informed me that if I read this book I would be following the lives of two people who hooked up one drunken evening at university and then went their separate ways the next day. I would then re-visit them on that day the following year, and then the year after that, and then the year after that. Intriguing, don't you think?

Emma is very much another Bridget Jones character, except she's a little bit more down to earth and she manages to get her life sorted out before she is swept off her feet by her Prince Charming. (Which, is a little bit more like real life, and a much more positive idea for single women to embrace). Dexter is the typical bad boy, and, like happens to all bad boys, he gets himself into a lot of trouble and is irresistable to women. But what David Nicholls manages to convey to us about this guy is that he actually gets hurt by all of these mistakes and as life goes on he doesn't want these things to keep happening: it's as if he keeps getting knocked down before he's ever able to stand up and regain his stamina. Emma and Dexter manage to maintain a friendship over twenty years, sometimes they are close, sometimes they are not (Speaking as someone who has a few friendships that are heading towards their second decade I know that this is what these friendships are like. They become more precious over time, but have gaps in them where our lives have been too different to be compatible.)

I do not want to ruin this page turner of a book. I want people to read it. I happened to be reading it at the same time as "Eat, Pray, Love" which is a MUCH WORSE read when read in tandem with this book. As "Eat, Pray, Love" becomes more and more decadent and self-obssessed, "One Day" becomes more and more sincere and tender. I lost compassion for Ms Gilbert, but fell in love with Emma and Dexter as they were trying to live their lives, rather than figure them out. They were just like me, and the love stories that they were living were just like mine. I didn't feel quite as alone after reading that book.

If you are looking for a book that is refreshingly different, but also an amazing reflection of real life and real love, then try "One Day". If you want to feel a little bit more inspired about the love you already have, and have had for many years, then read this book. It is beautiful!

Sister Act, The Musical

Yesterday, very spontaneously, my friend Janine and I decided to go and catch a matinee. This is one of the wonderful things that London has to offer - who needs movies when there is live entertainment to be seen? And, always a little bit cheaper when you head down to one of the half price places in Leicester Square.

I have been curious about Sister Act for about a year now, but reviews kept putting me off going and seeing it - yes, even when Whoopi Goldberg was in town acting as the Mother Superior. I was sceptical about how a movie can go from screen to stage and had not heard nice things about Alan Menkin's music. I think both Janine and I felt that it was a show well worth seeing, but not worth spending too much money on!!

The musical is a celebration of seventies music with some great tributes to the Beegees. The male singers (the trio of bad guys and the cop, Eddie) were just wonderful in the Beegee/ Saturday Night Fever impersonations and brought great humour to the show. They were the touch that was added that was not in the movie, therefore unexpected, and that was what made the show for me. I must add that one of the trio, Dinero, sings and speaks in Spanish which gives such wonderful comic effect to the show.

The dialogue is just as it was in the movie, but because a movie can change scenes a bit quicker, it just came across a little bit laboured at times. The music was completely different to the movie, however. I only heard titbits of Alan Menken's Disney days in two songs, Bless our Show, which was remarkably like Be Our Guest from Beauty and the Beast and The Life I never Led which had a similar feel to Part of our World from The Little Mermaid. One reviewer had been disappointed with Menken's music and I can understand that from the point of view of there not being a song with the same stature as Colours of the Wind or Beauty and the Beast, but the ensemble music was pretty spectacular. Those nuns can sing!! All the ensemble sections were simply amazing and that is why I think everyone should go and see this musical before it closes because you won't get to see the amazing staging that goes hand in hand with the music. I had listened to the music before going and was not as impressed as I was when I saw it hand in hand with the dancing, energy of the actors and all those sequins!!

I have now decided to buy the music to this show, because it is so uplifiting - just like the movie - and well worth listening to and playing durng this cloudy and rainy Autumn! I have also decided that this is a great choice for Amateur Theatre, be it at a school or with a group of adults. It looks like so much fun to perform. This is a fantastic show to go and see with the girls on a Saturday afternoon, and it is closing soon, so don't miss it!!

Brandenberg Concertos - Feinstein Ensemble

The last few events that I've been to have all been a little bit different for me, so, to sit back at St Martin-in-the-Fields and listen to the Brandenberg Concertos was a little bit like coming home. The lights began to dim, and the musicians arrived on stage and began such familiar music that it felt like a welcome hug from an old friend.




The joy of this concert was the way in which the Feinstein Ensemble made the music dance. They move to the music as they play, they smile and look like they are having an absolute ball on stage which makes it is impossible to not be drawn into the magic that they are creating. If their performance style is not enough, there is the added benefit of experiencing the sound of the original instruments. It made me feel a little bit closer to Bach himself to hear the music performed the way that he would have heard it performed.

I don't think I've ever heard Baroque style french horns (trompa, see the image) and my first thought when they blasted out was was: if only Bach could have heard this performed with our more subtle and easier to pitch modern day instruments. Those original horns blast out so loudly that they really dominate over all the other instruments! The French originally used to keep brass instruments seperate from the strings and classed them as "outdoor instruments". I can understand why now. They are far from the delicate and subdued sound that we now associate with the French horn. The trumpet has a similar antiquated look to it, so when the musician began playing the second concerto in such a high register with such clarity and control, the performance was even more impressive than had it been on a modern day instrument. What was interesting was the similarity in sound between the trumpet and the oboe. At times it was difficult to tell which of the instruments was playing!



Another extraordinary mention needs to go to the harpsichord player. He only had one cadenza which he played with flair and extravagence - I was almost standing in order to see what he was up to! In fact, the more I think about it, the more musicians I want to mention. We have seen this ensemble perform before and are familiar with the recorder player (Martin Feinstein) and his brilliant musicianship, but I must also mention the violinist who held everything together with such aplomb (especially when sometimes all we could hear were those trompa!!) The most apt comment came from him when he was busy tuning the strings, saying that these original instruments were so hard to tune, and surely we could come up with something better!!

I have to agree with his comment. It was wonderful to hear the music as Bach had heard it, but I left the concert feeling that our instruments have definitely improved over time and we are much better off for it!!

The Habit of Art - by Alan Bennett

Once again I found myself attending a genre that I'm not altogether familiar with: a play. Our decision to attend this was really so that we could spend some time with a friend who had said he was happy to go to a show with us as long as it was "not a musical"!! So, the challenge had been set and the googling began and we found this play that was showing at the National Theatre.

We read the synopsis, thought it looked interesting and booked out seats. It was going to be a tale about an imaginary meeting between Auden and Britten in 1972, many years after their collaborations in the 30s. As I'm aware that there had been a possible relationship between the two men, I thought it would be interesting to watch an imagined encounter between them so many years later.

The play itself was designed as a play within a play: a play about actors rehearsing a play about Britten and Auden. The set is a set within a set: a central set where the actors were acting out Britten and Auden and then a set around that which was the rehearsal room for the play. All rather apt for a play which is an artistic creation about artistic creation.

The biggest surprise was that the show was full of humour. When the actors were not acting the play there was plenty of banter actors, writers, and even audiences. This greatly relieved the intensity that we felt when watching the play within a play, which was an intense study of these two great men. This imaginary encounter was being expressed through the eyes of the man who would later write the biographies of both men.

When the show ended and we were heading for post-theatre drinks we began wondering about the meaning behind the play. It was one of those shows where it was clear that the writer had a message to share with us, but what was it? There seemed to be so much that we could have taken from it and had we taken the "right" message. There were definite literary and musical references that I simply did not know about - in fact at one point one of the characters says, "I don't even know what I don't know" which I could easily have said myself. We observe all the unknown people that revolve around a famous person's life and are made aware that they matter too. We are made aware of all the work behind the scenes of a production, like the pianist sitting silently reading his book and jotting notes down until his cue to play the piano or the stage manager and assistant stage manager as they read out the lines belonging to the actors who are unavailable for that rehearsal because of being in another production. The lines of art and reality are blurred to such a degree that some actors are on the stage drinking tea and chatting during the interval, making us question where the one begins and the other ends. Then there are the two main characters themselves, both being presented as "not nice people" which, according to Auden, is because "all their best feelings go into their work and life has the residue".

I suppose its enough that I took something from the play, even if it wasn't the exact thing that the playwright had hoped for. It suprised me and entertained me and gave me some food for thought about the artistic temperament. I'll certainly be mulling over it for the next few days.....