Longueville Little Theatre Company

Review by Don Beamish

One of the many problems of me being me is that almost every play that we do I’ve seen, been in, directed or lit. They are a parade of old acquaintances, some of whom I would rather not see again. Charley’s Aunt for example. I saw George Benson play it in 1948 or so, and it was very funny performance. I got involved with it in Germany five years later, but the edge had gone off it a bit, so when I heard that the group was to do it I must confess to a small groan. I did not know then how wrong I could be. I suppose I thought that this would be another Sam French Paint By Numbers clone. Sorry, but I’m just telling what it’s like to be me. Blasé, grumpy and hard to please.

Helping with set alerted me that things were a tad different. Quite a large tad actually, I hadn’t seen that much denim since National Service. Everything was white and extremely virginal, which is not a quality that I have come to associate with the AmDram scene, but maybe I’ve been lucky. I was put in mind of Peter Brook’s 1970 version of “Midsummer Night’s Dream,” and look how THAT is still talked of in theatrical circles. By Saturday I was really looking forward to the performance, (not something that always applies!) and I was certainly not disappointed.

From Paul’s entrance the whole thing took off like an F16, it was dazzling. The action crackled on like a firework show, with everyone giving their best, it was a joy to watch them. The engine that drives farce along is ‘the business,’ that inventive interplay which produces the laughs, it takes a certain type of mind to cook it up, and not everyone has it. It is the main reason why West-End farces don’t always translate well to the amateur stage. But this play didn’t miss a trick; everything that could have been done in this area, was done. A lot of thinking had gone on here.

What Janthea had done with the script was to have skillfully lifted the text from the page and dexterously discarded the dross of italicized stage directions. This gave her the freedom to flesh out the piece to her own liking, and a terrific job she made of it.

A lot of thinking had gone on too, with the use of the projector. This was very clever stuff indeed and it was hard to imagine how it could have been done in any other way. It is interesting to see how these techniques are now being used; we had a taste of it in “Wyrd Sisters” but now it has blossomed into a very useful tool. The synchronization between the hand movements and the magical effect of the script appearing was worthy of Paul Zenon. This demonstrates a close relationship between the creative and the practical, and I guess we must thank Paul for the latter. What a very useful bloke he is!

The acting was as good as it gets, with full marks to everyone. Although if I must be a critic, Amy, Kitty, and Ela could have used a bit more volume. I was taught to project to the man at the back of the theatre and in this case I was that man. While we are discussing the acting, mention must be made of Andrew’s performance. He is always good to watch, but on this occasion he was delightful. His appearance in drag was hilarious; all through this play, I kept getting pictures in my head, and Andrew appeared as Stan Laurel playing Mother Theresa. I would be hard pressed to think of anyone else who could have played the part.

I have already mentioned ‘the business,’ and when Paul, Stephen and Andrew did their Chinese Circus act the business, as well as Andrew’s feet, reached new heights!

I mentioned the pictures that popped into my head; when Chris came in that funny little bowler, he looked just like Vladimir in “Waiting for Godot,” – I half expected him to do things to a tree. The comedy was anticipated before he started to say his lines. The mental picture that came up coincident with Maddie’s entrance was of Woody Allen’s automaton in “The Sleeper.” But enough now, of exploring my mental images, we really don’t want to go down there!

Because they are not seen, the backstage people are sometimes ignored, but in this production they played key parts. Previously mentioned was the use of the projector, it wasn’t Paul Zenon of course, but there was a man up there pressing all the right buttons at the right time. Sitting up there with him was Mark, who was painting the set with coloured light and working just as much magic.

As can be seen from the foregoing I liked this production, I liked it a lot, I liked it because I was watching some CREATIVE theatre. Sure, it looked a bit expensive but with stuff like this the word is certain to spread and audiences will be attracted. But innovation doesn’t equate with cash; it just needs a bit of thinking. Build up on this good work people, and I’ll be first in the queue for the box office.