bigstory.ap.org: Audiences going to New York Theatre Workshop will see something unusual when they enter — a swimming pool. Not a little wading pool or artful images of water. A real pool.
Tony Award-nominated set designer Riccardo Hernandez conceived of the audacious 40-foot-long, 4-foot-wide pool for playwright Lucas Hnath's swimming drama "Red Speedo," which opens Thursday.
12 comments:
This looks really cool. What I really like about this, apart from how amazing it must be to be able to see the actor swimming live in an actual swimming pool under water, is that there is still a set. In the second photo, it is shown that the swimming pool is not the entire/majority of the set. I think the designer did a really good job in creating a world that is true to the world of the play, instead of making the swimming pool the only thing there is to look at just because it's cool. I am very excited to see more photos/videos to come, and how the pool changes under different lighting as well as how the actor will perform and interact with this space and other actors while submerged in water. I think with this set definitely comes more challenges, such as the set will probably require higher maintenance than normal, but I think this production will definitely turn out to be very worth watching.
I saw this article a few days ago and I was waiting for it to make its way to the blog. First of all, I’m impressed that they built a giant aquarium on stage. Looking at the set, I feel like I’m looking at the cross section of a real swimming pool. I’d also imagine that the lighting designer can do a lot of really cool things with the properties of water, especially that much water. I also really enjoyed that this article had the set designers thoughts and process for deciding to go with the pool in this configuration. I would like to know who the outside contractor that built the pool was and how they went about engineering something that would be in budget. I’d also like to hear what it is like as an actor to be working on such an unusual set. I’d also love to hear the playwrights reaction to seeing the set, I’d imagine they’d be pretty excited to see their play performed in such a stunning way.
Building a swimming pool as a set is extremely hard. You have to take in all the structural considerations of the theatre space to make sure the weight of the water doesn't break the floor, and a whole host of considerations that have to go in. I especially appreciate how the pool, while huge, is not the whole set. There is acting space that is the area around the pool, keeping the core of a theatrical production that it is a set. They could have done the show by a pool, renting the facility, but they wanted to recreate it on stage, which is the challenge of theatre. The idea of leaving in the seams in the glass I think was a brilliant addition. It reminds me of an aquarium that we can see the show through. It’s a constant reminder that you are looking at a show on a stage and that it has a pool. And that that is really impressive.
I think this pool is so cool. Not many people have taken on the risk of using actual water on stage especially in the form of a swimming pool. Having water on stage can be very dangerous and damaging if it is not done properly. The pool needed to be very secure and able to hold thousands of gallons of water without breaking and support people swimming in the water as well. It is really cool how they made half of the walls glass so the audience could see inside and watch the actors swim. They made it look like you were getting a side view of a real Olympic swimming pool. It must be a different kind of challenge for the stage manager because they need to make sure everything is safe with the pool and make sure it is at the right temperature and clean for the actors so they do not get sick.
I saw someone post this on Facebook earlier this week and I immediately showed it to one of my roommates who is studying scenic design and his jaw dropped, rightfully so. I kind of see this show as a scenic designer’s dream and a technical director and stage manager’s worst nightmare. We talk in class about what challenges a stage manager would face and typically they involve combat or messy props, but this is a whole new level. I remember talking to someone about a show that CMU did a few years ago that had a small pond in it and that took so much work, so I can only imagine what a full pool would take. However, I think it may all be worth it when audiences walk in and get to see an actor swim on stage. I think that it would make everything in the world so much more real and relatable.
I heard about this production on Facebook, so it is definitely creating some buzz in the theatre nerd circles. I think this is a neat idea but I’m more impressed with their ability to actually construct and have the design realized. There a tons of details to be considered when putting this much water onstage and THEN having someone swim in it. The article notes a couple: the need for heat, lighting, and framing to hold back all of that water. A huge tank of water like that probably weighs a lot, so I wonder if the stage needed any reinforcing / if that was a concern when they were building the set. The article title calling this “a triumph of set design” seems a bit overwrought at first, but when you think about it, a pool this large onstage is quite impressive. Not only is it a triumph of set design, but also for set construction! Something that I’m wondering about is how often does the actor swim in the pool… do they get all clammy? Are they cold? I feel like in the normal temperature I would be cold stepping out of the water! I wonder if the actor is an avid swimmer… I would assume they would have to be. Also, because the depth of the pool causes the level of the pool deck to be raised up, I wonder how high off of the stage floor the actors are standing when upstage of the pool.
I think this scenic design is a great example of how crazy, unedited ideas can create the most impressive theatrical realities. Water is a tricky thing to try and seamlessly include in a theater set, since it captures attention so quickly. I saw a production of Eurydice that had a fairly minimal set, save for a working shower that acted as the elevator between worlds. While it was very very cool and visually impressive, it kind of took me out of the piece since it was so much more elaborate and realistic than any other part of the set. I think this set works past this problem by making the water the clear focal point of the set, and by making the surrounding playing areas just as true- to- life. I can’t imagine how difficult of a show this must be to maintain; I wonder how often they refill/ clean the water, and how the stage management team accounts for the safety of the actors in and around the water. The stage- wide shot of the set looks simplistically beautiful. I can see why the designer originally didn’t want to have any vertical support bars visible, since they do disrupt the horizontal flow of the set a little bit, but I don’t think they take away too much from the elegance of the design.
An executed design like this that required so much effort and research to produce makes you think a lot about the theory behind design and what a design really means. It was obviously no small feat to create a functional swimming pool onstage, so why choose that route instead of a water effect? I think sometimes we can get so bogged down in trying to design something that we forget the function of the design and what we're trying to evoke. The use of an actual pool was essential in nailing the feelings and message the director wanted to convey, so that's what they did. It seems like a pointless thing to note, but I think that sometimes an unusual set like this can leave us so much in awe that we forget why it's there in the first place. I would be interested to hear the alternate designs they came up with in case of technological difficulties or budget constraints, because it seems like such a big leap to "real pool" that I'm not sure what else could measure up to it.
I watched a couple clips from the show online before seeing this article, and I wasn't necessarily too impressed from a design standpoint. My reaction to the set is definitely a "oh, someone actually managed to do a pool that wasn't a total disaster, and it was probably ridiculously expensive". After reading the article, I pretty much feel the same way, and my only moment of surprise was finding that the pool only ended up costing $100,000. It brings back memories of my stagecraft classes in high school, where being told that a pool could never really be done on stage unless you had an unimaginable amount of money and a ridiculously large team. I was told you would need to have it heated for the actors (which, this pool doesn't seem to be heated" and that it would need an extremely complicated filtration system because it would have to meet architectural code for an indoor pool. It's nice to see that a theatre managed to pull it off, and it sure does look cool, but it does somewhat feel like a cop out. Also, I'd be interested to see what kind of versatility the set really offers in terms of playing space, because every scene would have to take place...by the pool.
I, like most of the people who commented on this, saw this article on Facebook first. This is obviously really really cool. However, is it worth it? How important is it to have a real pool onstage? Clearly, the designer cared a lot about making the environment very realistic, but that is a technical nightmare. It is definitely very impressive that it was created and functions successfully, but it seems kind of unnecessary. However, if it means that much to the designer, then it must be necessary for the show. Either way, it is definitely incredible how they made this. It will look amazing from the audience perspective, and it will add a lot to the show to be able to actually see the swimmer swimming. However, I feel like the initial wow factor of watching the live swimming might wear off pretty quickly. Yeah it will be cool the first couple times, but staring at the same set of a pool might get a little boring after a while. Either way, congratulations to the whole production team for making a whole swimming pool onstage.
This is definitely very cool and very well made, but at the same time it seems kind of unnecessary. Clearly it means a lot to the designer that there is real live swimming occurring onstage since he is willing to go through the ridiculously difficult process of constructing an onstage swimming pool, but it just seems like such a waste. Yes, it gives another level of realism to the set, since there is actual water, rather than an imitation or representation of it, but it is such a technical nightmare that it hardly seems worth it. It would certainly be incredible from an audience's perspective, though that still seems like it would get a little dull after a while. After the initial wow factor wore off after the first few scenes in the pool, it seems like it would be a little boring to just be staring at this pool for two hours. Regardless, a huge congratulations to the entire production team for being able to make this happen.
This is so cool! I do think that in some situations, there really is no substitute for the real thing. While it may seem overkill to some, the simplicity and austerity of the rest of the set makes for a very compelling image on stage. It manages to be a pool, and nothing but. The comment in the article about the supports in the glass front aid the realistic quality of the pool: if you're going to put a real pool onstage, put a real pool on stage. As we are told again and again, there is no substitute for the real thing. In a way, the reality of the pool enhances the theatricality of the production. What a fun experience to sit in a theatre and see a real swimming pool! It both transports the audience to the world of the play and simultaneously reminds them that they are in a theatre.
Post a Comment