Maximum Fog!

[fancycwabs]

The review for A Christmas Carol came out today, and it's a doozy:

This 'Christmas Carol' needs work to be redeemed
By Jon W. Sparks
Special to The Commercial Appeal
Friday, December 7, 2007

"I am sure I have always thought of Christmas time ... as a good time; a kind, forgiving, charitable, pleasant time."

Ebenezer Scrooge's nephew -- the peppy and persistent relative who annually drives the old miser to spew "Bah, Humbug!" -- voices this sentiment in Charles Dickens' little book.

Nice theory. But sometimes the season is too much of the same ol' same ol' -- hucksters on TV in Santa suits and the annual fruitcake strain our kindness and charitable nature.

And so it is with "A Christmas Carol," the annual chestnut that's been roasted too long at Theatre Memphis.

Actually, it's not the story that's off, it's the telling. Under Marques Brown's direction, it's as wheezy and turgid a production as ever, echoing past years' efforts and bringing nothing fresh.

Not that all of the old stuff is bad. The Bed still spins entertainingly.

Plus there are some fine actors in the play -- Renee Davis Brame and Keith Salter bring particularly good interpretations to their ghosts of Christmas Past and Present, Mandy Lane and Stephen Garrett are fine as that nice Cratchit couple, Michael Khanlarian does a credibly dyspeptic Scrooge; but others succumb to Dickensian floridity, reciting, with unbounded verve the lines, at the expense of acting.

Alas, there is more from this lesser mess.

Why, once again must Marley's ghost be such a wimp? Where's the rage? How about slamming those chains around and really scaring the bejabbers out of Scrooge?

And why, once again, must the smoke machine be set on maximum fog? Obscuring the stage? And rolling over the audience members who, it is hoped, haven't yet seen "The Mist" at local moviehouses?

And why, especially, can't the child actors be persuaded to stop mugging for the audience? This is adorable only to theatergoers who are genetically connected with the young thespians. Other theaters around the area wrangle the youngsters more effectively -- perhaps cutting back on the gruel would be in order?

OK, I don't want to be the, ah, Grinch here.

But if the lightly attended opening night contained any clue, it is that even a classic may need new energy if it's going to connect with first-time as well as long-time viewers.

Redemption, as Scrooge would attest, is possible.

Last night was running pretty smoothly for a first-day-back crowd. Marley had done his scene, groaning like Garth Algar during an extreme close up, with the fog and the lightning effects, and had retreated through the trap door into the basement, and the Ghost of Christmas Past had just flown on to show Scrooge exactly where he'd gone wrong.

Then the fog machine in the basement triggered the fire alarm, setting off 120-decibel buzzers all through the building.

The Ghost of Christmas Past kept going for a minute, INCREASING HER VOLUME TO TRY TO OVERPOWER THE BUZZER, but it was apparent that this was going to take a while to fix. Children were herded outside, the audiences (there are two shows going on simultaneously in the facility) were told to keep calm and that it was a technical problem, not an actual fire, and to please keep their seats. One of our crew is a fireman in Bartlett as a day job, and once the key to the alarm was located, reset the system, after ten minutes of obnoxious buzzing.'

The good thing about near-catastophe is that it makes audiences that much more appreciative of the show, which they were. The good thing about this particular near-catastrophe is that they might turn down the fog machines in the future.

Comments

[ikkarus01.livejournal.com]

So his main complaint is "well, if I'd been the director, I'd have done it differently"? That's not actually a review.

I also like how he complains that it is just more of the "same ol' same ol'", and illustrates his point using the "same ol' same ol'" holiday go-to jokes about fruitcake and chestnuts. Does anyone seriously do the fruitcake thing anymore? Is he reviewing from his home in 1957?

[fancycwabs.livejournal.com]

Actually, his criticisms are fairly valid: A Christmas Carol is an old horse trotted out once a year to make money for Theatre Memphis. It has minimal production costs: the sets are reused from year to year, as are most of the props, and costumes; the script requires no royalties; the actors (in the night production) work gratis. They have real difficulty finding enough adults to play all the roles in the show, and its hard to keep folks motivated through four weeks of sometimes three shows a day. I suffer from no misconceptions about the artistic merit of what I'm doing, but I still give 100% onstage.

[resk.livejournal.com]

True, but are there snarkier words to use than wheezy and turgid?

The "review" amuses me. But then, I HATE A Christmas Carol with a BLINDING PASSION.

So, I'm easy to please.

[fancycwabs.livejournal.com]

"Flaccid" is a snarkier word than "turgid," and probably more appropriate in this case. A production of "A Christmas Carol" where everything on stage was turgid would be refreshingly erect.

[resk.livejournal.com]

ERECTIONS ARE TEH REFRESHING

[fancycwabs.livejournal.com]

During a local production of "Dracula," the stagehand in charge of the fog machine (we'll call her Ashley, although I don't think that was her name) wasn't paying attention to what was going on onstage, and missed the moment to turn the machine on. The following conversation ensued, via headset:

STAGE MANAGER: Ashley, fog cue! Fog cue! ASHLEY, FOG CUE!!
ASHLEY: Well, fuck you, too!

Edit: I'd just as soon have an honest negative review as a dishonest positive one. Besides, reading negative reviews is one of the great joys in life.

[redtheblue.livejournal.com]

That anecdote... is the best. My second genuine LOL of December. *shakes hand*