Thursday, April 22, 2010
Richard III
Pittsburgh City Paper: I've rarely seen a Shakespeare play in Pittsburgh so superbly realized: Richard III, produced by the Carnegie Mellon School of Drama, stuns and stirs. Director Matt Gray's remarkable conception surges with disturbing vitality. In every role, even small ones, the students do remarkable justice to the text. Clearly they have been excellently prepared by voice coach Janet Madele Feindel; their words come across with clarity and depth.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
16 comments:
This is probably one of the first truly positive reviews I've seen from the City Paper. They seem to go out of their way to find something negative to say, with the review being entirely positive I'm guessing that either they got a new reviewer or else they finally found a play that they really liked. The latter wouldn't surprise me, I've always liked Richard III as a play and this is probably my favorite production of it so far.
If you compare this review to the one in the Tartan they both seem to agree that it was done very well, the main difference between the two is that in this review they managed to get the names and dates correct, the Tartan seemed to not be as concerned with those details.
I'm very happy to see such hard work and effort get a great review like this. It's not often that a review for a mainstage at CMU gets such blatant praise, so I think this is really an achievement. I haven't seen the show yet, but I think that the artistic and technical accomplishments of the show are really astounding in a lot of ways. The payback is so much greater when it seems to spread beyond the production team.
This is a fantastic and well deserved review. I saw the show yesterday afternoon, and while it is rather long, the work from the cast and design team is amazing. I really enjoyed the show and all that it had to offer. The projections were amazing, especially the ghost scene. Congratulations to the cast and crew on fantastic show!
I think one of the recurring themes of my classes this year has been the importance of collaboration. From what I gathered from listening to conservatory hour, this show started out strong by having a strong sense of collaboration. After listening to the Director's vision for how he wanted to attempt Shakespeare's famous text, I felt the designs coincided very nicely, really highlighting and complimenting Professor Gray's description. I am very happy to see all the work, headaches, and long nights paid off, and the results are something to be proud of. I also hope this sense of collaboration is noticed by others and its example will be followed by other cmu students in their productions.
I have to agree with Jon, this production really appeared to have fantastic collaboration between the designers and director. To me, from what the designers told us at their design presentation, this show really became exactly what they envisioned (if not better).
I agree with the critic as well. For once a critic actually tells you what they liked and why, and gives wonderful detail about the performance. The critic also paid great detail to the acting and design, a category often completely ignored by critics. I am excited to see the public react so wonderfully to this production.
I agree with the above comments and the many positive remarks made by the author of the article. However, it was amazing how many people agreed with it being a fantastic show and yet a third of the audience left after the first half. What was missing? Is it just the fact that it was Shakespeare? One would think people know by now if they can sit through a Shakespeare show or not. Was it because it was long? How is it that out culture can no longer sit through a 2:45 min show without feeling bored or falling asleep, or, worst case scenario, just walking out.
It's great to see such positive reviews for a CMU show, especially one like Richard with such an overall fantastic production. The set, the acting, the music, lights, projection all came together beautifully throughout the show, and it shows a great amount of communication and collaboration between the all the different departments as some other commenters as noted. To touch on Sylvianne's comment, it is unfortunate to see people not willing to stay through the entire production, and I think part of it is due to Shakespeare, and that the old English language used is sometimes hard to follow for someone who doesn't have a good grasp of the script already. I know I had decided to go into this blind without looking at the script, and even though I've read and seen other Shakespeare, I still had trouble following what was going on on stage.
It's pretty cool that the reviewer took time in his article to praise the voice coach, movement choreographer, and dramaturgs for their contribution to the production; usually reviewers who want to prove that they were paying attention just take the last paragraph to give a sentence of acknowledgment to each designer. It's great that a production with such a huge team that put in so much work got such high praise.
Aving been on the run crew for the show and having a close personal connection to the show, o believe that it is amazing that all the hard work of the actors designers and technicians has been noticed. I love the idea that people around the city of Pittsburgh are able to access to work of the carnegie Mellon school of drama. I feel that this show is a great example of the work that can be done to modrnize and update the work of shakespeare. I think that too often the works of Shakespeare are often dismissed and old and unorginal forms of theater that shod not be performed becuase they are produced many places
Richard III was definitely my favorite show this season. I was a bit confused during the conservatory hour, and went in knowing nothing about the show and having very little knowledge about the design mentality. The show was superbly executed, and put together so ridiculously well. I had very few critiques. I'm also really happy that they made the effort to single out Gabe's performance. In my opinion, he carried that show with such an ease, but maintained that dominant presence. I never really questioned the fact that the show was about him, despite all the other spectacular performances. I was really astounded by his work, as well as all the designs. I think my favorite design element would have to be the set. Something I couldn't put together in my head just came out looking so stunning, especially the floor. Congrats to all involved! You're all fabulous.
I'm really glad to see such a great review for the direction and cast of Richard III. After seeing the hard work that everyone has put into the show, it's great to know that it has been appreciated by the public and can receive such impressive remarks from the City Paper. It is definitely true that there was a great deal of collaboration in this production, and the fact that it came across into such a well-received show is wonderful.
I agree that this article was truly positive and was really refreshing to see. I personally thought that the show was incredibly well done, from the design to the stage direction. At first, it was a little hard to get into the story for me just because I am not that familiar with it, but after a bit, I was very enthralled. I have to say though that my absolute favorite part of the show was Krystal Gomes' costume design, I was absolutely floored, I loved everything about it.
I too am glad to see good a good review of the production. I believe there was a lot of unease towards the end of the the tech process, as to whether perhaps we had bit off more than we can chew. Its good to see, that by the second weekend, that the show had really become a show. It was one of the more fully realized productions I think I've seen or been a part of at CMU which was great to have come to fruition, and I think the reviewer latched on to this as well.
I saw Richard today with the high schoolers. At first I didn't really get the whole concept behind it but, now I have a positive view on it. The high schoolers were a really good audience and yet, I'm not sure if there were some jokes that they didn't really get since they didn't laugh too much but seemed to laugh at all of the physical humor that was provided. This is always a challenge when putting up Shakespeare: the use of language in today's modern world. Although the ideas may be universal and withstand the tests of time, the language certainly is not.
I can honestly say that Richard is one of the shows I'm proudest of being a part of. It was a fantastic experience all around, and seeing such a positive review (even if they touched on some things that weren't totally relevant) is a wonderful reward. I was a little confused by the Post-Gazette review. For a paper that usually has such a decisive opinion about what we do, they didn't seem to be able to make up their minds about whether they liked it or not, or whether or not it succeeded.
This was a fantastic show. I took one of my non theatre friends to see it opening night and they loved it. I could go on and on about the scenic design because it was so beautiful and the costumes were as well. The acting was phenomenal and I thought that the design goals of the show were met. I think it was the best play of the whole school year and that is saying a lot because there were really great productions. I am so glad that the show received such a great review in the paper.
Post a Comment