As luck would have it, my employer saw it fit to lockout me out for the two weeks that coincided with this city's festival of fringy delights...well, in theory anyway.
I have to admit I did not get to see nearly as many shows as I would have liked (I woulda seen all of them if it weren't for the $$ and the fact that I was creatively documenting my employment adventure so I had very little time off the picket line) I did manage to see six in total and speak to a few fringers at the fringe tent...
I did take notes at all six shows I attended (I tried to stay in the back with the rest of the notetakers but sometimes I couldn't resist a closer view); but instead of sharing them with the world I wondered if simply making general statements on my experience at the fringe without getting too into the specifics of each show (you can ask me for that later if you'd like) would be a better choice.
Generally I thought the Fringe this year was boring...I hesitate to compare it to other fringes over the last 15 years as I was not around for the last one nor did I experience much of the 2009 one...but others had the same pained look on their face when trying to answer the simple question of "How do you think the fringe is going this year?"...
1. Where was the networking? Granted I wasn't around after dark so I wonder if I just missed it, or if there was very little of it going around.
2. What kind of marketing tools/techniques were being employed...I had one person thrust a handbill at me after a show and I saw no other person trying to draw a crowd after that...again was I just in wrong places at wrong times, or what?
3. Since when can people bring outside food/drink into the Fringe tent??
4. I miss the theatre workshops that were offered in Fringes of late (we're talking 10 years ago)...are all professionally recognized performers/directors unavailable to do a few hours of community service for their fellow artists? I woulda used my picketing cheque to attend them (monologue, voice/movement)...
5. Did anyone count the number of "students/young people" in attendance...I was kinda impressed.
So perhaps now is as good a time as any to share my "general" thoughts on the shows I did manage to see.
PRESHRUNK
This show did not have a heart...and the actors where not having any fun and that showed throughout the performances. Actors have to be coaxed into trusting a new work especially if the new work is under edited or a first draft. This show had/has a lot of potential and the actors good instincts but I felt as though everyone was holding back or hesitating. Actors also have to take what they are given and make something out of it--even if what they have is nothing...I also had a hard time accepting the stage as it was dressed (not to mention some of the costume choices)--the couch was nice but the rest of the furniture didn't say "hospital or therapy" environment to me.
FRUITCAKE
This was a great piece of writing. But I found it really hard to keep up and understand what was going on because the lines were rushed through (I know, for pacing) without much inflextion or clear process to take on thought into another. There were no clear characters though the actor conjured some. Granted half the audience I would say laughed through out -- the rest of the audience (the ones towards the back of the room like me) were still interested but not as engaged. Also sight lines were bad--in the Library space the platform is good because it raises the actors to be seen by the audience, but use a stool instead of a chair when sitting down!
MOONFLEECE
I really enjoyed the writing of this piece. I highly recommend it (just watch out for the "contreversial" parts of it). However, the kids in this show (ages 15-18) needed a little more work. Their physical conditioning was weak and unsupportive. This cast had a tonne of energy and presence but very little flexibility in both movement and voice. One actor looked as though he were hyperventilating while being told some "horrible" news...others would just freak out in a rage because the lines were "clearly aggressive"--what happens when you remove anger out of the equation?...it frees the actor up to explore other ways to "get what he/she wants"--it's also much more interesting.
I AM BLUE
This was interesting...but I couldn't help but keep comparing it to Kristen Wiig's style of sketch humour. It was "funny"; people laughed. But I felt the interaction with the audience (this is a general note for the all the shows I saw) was flat and that the performance had trouble reaching the back room (she played to the first two rows and that was really it). However I enjoyed the style of her one-woman show (good transitions).
CANUCK CABARET
I love variety shows. This was a great variety show. Both performers enjoy performing -- especially in front of an audience (at least that's the impression I got)...it was so nice to see actors on stage engaging willingly with an audience. The sketches were the right length, the variety good (loved the Prairie Fire numbers, and the Dirty Dancing sketch), and the fact that they included new "Fringe people" every show was a real interesting gimmick -- I think the Fringe should do something similar.
REQUIEM FOR AUGUST AND (OH NEST) HONEST INSANITY
Woah...first I applaud the company that chose to do this piece. It's a weird and complex piece (technically) so ambitious is a word I would use. Performances were blah. I do not know if this was typical "verbatim theatre" (where the show is done as though reading off a sheet with no emotion or thought process whatsoever) -- but it sure was boring. After the first scene they lost me--I didn't hear or see the imagery of the words, I didn't get the sense that the actors really understood what they were doing (the pronunciation of words was horrible -- did anyone work with the language?) -- the story progress but the performances do not...screaming and yelling, and having no intention behind the lines, no grounding in their bodies (constantly moving).
Somethings I discovered during my wanderings at the fringe:
1. Arts Court was it's own little courtyard of debauchery...everyone doing everyone/everything at all hours of the day and night...
2. Never try to smoke drugs beside the Volunteer Tent, kiddies...try the trees behind the bar.
3. The St. Ambroise Oatmeal Stout Ale that was on tap--was the best Fringe beer I've tasted...bravo! (the food was also quite good)
4. It never fails that everytime I use the port-o-potties at the Fringe Tent, I inevitably end up peeing on myself...I tried to resist it this year, but had to use them and sure enough, all down my leg...
5. The fringe gave the impression of being Lack Lustre for more people than just yours truly...
My passion and excitement for the Fringe Festival and what it stands for was renewed this year. Sure, the festival itself my not have been "eye popping, or gut grabbingly funny" but the spirit that is conjured when that many companies get together and do that many new works, interesting tales, and leaps of faith in a condensed amount of time, magic can only happen -- even when the show is slapped together at the last second. What I would like to see is more of an emphasis on creation/development of the script (it happens every year, so why is it always a shock when it arrives??), more interest in the actor involvement (work with them more!), and less of a (performer vs. audience) perception of the theatre going public...the audience wants to be encouraged to enjoy themselves, to participate, to support the shows they're seeing -- it's not just about looking them in the eyes, it's about entertainment and having fun telling a story to a room full of people...
No comments:
Post a Comment