TribLIVE: City Theatre Company begins its 2012-13 season with an intriguing question: What would you give up for a chance at happiness and a less complex life: Your iPad? Sushi? Your high-pressure, but meaningless job? What about some of your privacy and civil liberties?
4 comments:
I'm so happy to be going to Carnegie Mellon. Before I read this article I clicked through the pictures and thought to myself how fantastic I thought the set was. Then I read about the play and I was instantly intrigued. And then I found out a CMU professor was the scenic designer. I feel really fortunate to be going to a university where the working professionals are currently working in theatre that I'm interested in and impressed by.
I'll be seeing this.
I saw the show on its opening night Friday and haven't stopped raving about Narelle's design for it - as someone who has seen several shows and worked at City Theatre before, she dramatically changed the space in a way that upped the intimacy and increased the voyeurism in the story. I felt like I was staring in at the uncomfortable private lives of the 1950s because I actually was, and I could see others doing so too! In contrast, the first act was more open, giving the feeling of a sparse world where everything (and everyone) is somehow distant, which was broken down in the second act.
WARNING: Spoilers ahead.
The play was, in general however, less effective at displaying the repressions of the 1950s short of homosexuality, which plays a primary role in the story. Once the couple made their way to the SDO, there were gender roles to be played, sure, but never anything that actually provided a challenge short of a small moment of social awkwardness. And indeed the aforementioned homosexuality was an acknowledged situation which didn't come to a head because of anything the characters did. I was just left disappointed by the play because it felt misguided, or mismarketed - it wasn't the story of the modern couple entering the period piece, it was the destruction of the period piece from the repression of modern ideas into trying to be someone you're not.
Sorry to those who haven't seen it yet - you should still go see it for all the design reasons lauded (and rightly so) in the play.
Like Brian, I was lucky enough to have caught this show on opening night. The design elements were successful in conveying a story but it was the script that left me uneasy. The entire first half seemed to lag and was void of significant moments whilst the second half really perked up the plot. I almost wonder how the story could have been presented with the removal of the first act entirely. Definitely a must see.
Actually being able to see the play on opening night was quite interesting. I had no idea what the play was about prior to cue 1 on Saturday night. The play reminded a lot of a movie called The Village. The premise are very similar. Go to a simpler time and try to enjoy life. Well in both the movie and play LIFE is invaded by the real world. So it did pose some very interesting questions within the play, that the play did not answer.
Some of my questions or thoughts are more on self responsibility. If there are to many choices limit yourself. If you are distracted by technology, then sell it. My sister did not want her daughter to be addicited to television growing up. So my sister plays with her daughter and I know to this day my niece has watched a fraction, very small fraction, of television that other kids are age has watched.
I appreciate the play for making me thinking about these things. Know my questions to myself, what will I do about it for my own life.
Post a Comment