Saturday, March 28, 2009

Signs of Intelligent Life with Kellie Stonebrook

So what made you decide to become a Boarshead Intern? I decided to become a BoarsHead intern because I wanted to learn about the daily business of working in professional theatre. I also wanted to earn Equity points to join the Professional Actor's Union.

2. What has the experience been like? My experience has been awesome so far! I had NEVER done anything to do with tech theatre before coming to BoarsHead and I've learned a lot! The interns, or Second Company Members, build the sets for every mainstage show, hang and focus all the lights, operate the lighting and sound boards, assistant stage manage, for at least one production, participate in educational programs for kids of all ages, and plan, produce, act, and direct dark night shows. I learn something new every day!

3. What made you choose Lily Tomlin’s show to perform for your dark night? I decided to do Lily Tomlin's show for my Dark Night because I have always wanted to do a one-woman show and Lily's is probably the best one out there. It's fun, thought-provoking, and extremely witty. Not only is it a challenge to perform, but the material itself challenges the audience. I love having the opportunity to make people laugh and think at the same time!

4. What is your favorite line from the show? My favorite line from the show is "reality is nothing more than a collective hunch." So true!

5. What do you enjoy most about theatre? The aspect of theater I enjoy the most is performing, although working at the theater has introduced me to other aspects I would also like to pursue. Writing, dramaturgy, and stage managing are three areas of theater I would like to learn more about.

6. What do you dislike about theatre? I'm not sure what I dislike most about theater. There isn't any aspect of it that I absolutely loathe, but there are areas I find particulalry challenging. Light hang, for example, scares the crap out of me. I'm always afraid I'm going to drop a heavy instrument and end up injuring myself or someone else. The same goes for handling certain power tools in the shop like the dreaded router, for example. Everytime I use that thing I either get sparks flying at me or the bit breaks off. And to be frank, me with power tools in general is a dangerous thing

7. What comes easy to you about working in theatre? Good question. I'm still learning, but at this point I would say that performing comes the most easily to me. I feel more confident onstage than I do working backstage, although I'm getting better.

8. What is more difficult for you? Anything to do with lighting is the most difficult aspect of theater I have dabbled in thus far. Scary, scary, scary...

9. Any plans after Boarshead? I don't have any concrete plans for after BoarsHead, but I do know that I plan on finishing my degree and moving out of Michigan to hopefully purse theater elsewhere in a climate more conducive to my health.

10. Dream role for you? My dream role has always been Scarlett in Gone With the Wind. Sadly that will never happen...I'm blonde and have no boobs.

11. What have you learned about people from your experiences in theatre? I have observed vast differences in personalities between actors and technicians during my time at BoarsHead. My experience here (in general) is that actors tend to be more needy and less independent than tech people. They also of course love to be the center of attention. Techies tend to be more independent, have better problem solving skills, and are content to fade into the background. Two very different types of people - both essential to the theater process.

12. Why is theatre important to the community? Theater is important to the community because it teaches people more about themselves and the human condition. It challenges us to think critically about ourselves and the world around us.

13. Why is theatre important to you? Theater is important to me because I feel like it is my bridge to the outside world. I can make a difference in people's lives by bringing theater to life.

15. Why should people come see “Signs of Intelligent Life in the Universe” at the Boarshead? People should come see "The Search for Signs of Intelligent Life in the Universe" because I said so. And because Bruce said so too. No, actually, I think people should come to hear Jane Wagner's incredible insights about the world as we know it. She explores many of the questions we all have about life, reality, and humanity. There's a little bit of something for everyone!

Monday, March 23, 2009

Don't Eat the Chili in "Daddy's Dyin'"...!

It doesn’t take much imagination to figure out that Mark Boyd knows what it’s like to be high, and when watching him on stage with Sandy VanLacker in a pig-out scene during “Daddy’s Dyin’ Who’s Got the Will?” it’s fun to observe them both let go and actually enjoy themselves. Ms. VanLacker as Marlene Turnover – married to Orville Turnover – starts a bit hyper and seems to get more and more energetic as the show goes on. She may have started out a little more beaten down in order to build herself up to a final confrontation with her very loud husband, however her perkiness and impertinence are fun to watch.

The stand-out member in the cast, with unfortunately the smallest role, is Mr. Boyd. He waltzes in with Evalita Turnover (played to the hilt of the 80s fashion sense and white trash sentiments by Jill Maddix) barefoot, sporting tattoos with a bandana covering long hair and torn jeans. In the stiff, redneck household of the Turnover residence he seems both out of place and very at home, and eventually interjects himself into the insanity of this family’s crisis – which is really about the missing will of Daddy – and leaves with a different Turnover than he comes with. He’s a hippy with a Zen sense of humor – he is happy to live and let live – to a point.

Kerry Waters plays Lurlene – the sister who leaves the family to “answer the call of God” with her husband, thus abandoning her father. Her father, played to sweet and sad success by Steve Shelton, cut her out of his will, but the family knows he’s recently changed it. There are hopes for Lurlene that he forgave her and put her back in the will – although the money in the end never really matters to Lurlene. She plays the role of a dutiful daughter – which is far different than the role of Sara Lee, played by Marni Holmes, who takes it to a higher level and becomes the loving daughter who doesn’t want to see her father die.

Ms. Holmes is convincing as the daughter who not only stays behind to care for her father and the farm, but the sister who is constantly being connived by her youngest sibling, Evalita. Pushed past her breaking point several times, Ms. Holmes reveals a poignancy with a simple phone call, and a rush to her father for comfort – he sings to her, lost in the past and believing he’s putting his baby girl to sleep, and she listens to his voice while crying on his chest as the lights go out at the end of a scene.

Her other confrontation is a bit more dramatic; she scares the hell out of Evalita and pushes her around the living room, tired of her crap, tired of her getting the way, and tired of Evalita taking away the things that she loves…Ms. Maddix goes from confident to being a bit scared from being shoved around, to bouncing back into the bitchy sister role at the end of the scene before running away from the wrath of Sara Lee. Well done, ladies.

Rick Wendorf – if you know him – is costumed in overalls and looks the part of a wife beater despite his well-known and oft’ loved diva ways. He was loud and crude, unafraid to get downright nasty with his wife, Marlene. Towards the end of the show, however, Mr. Wendorf displayed a surprisingly soft side when he asks Marlene to “just leave.” It’s a broken voice and I was touched by it. His presence tends to egg the women of the family on, and he plays dumb quite well (that is, I’m assuming he’s playing at it)…

Steve Shelton as Buford – or Daddy – was quite good with playing befuddled and living in the past, while upset about not understanding his present. While the others in the cast mostly ignore his rantings, Sara Lee takes him seriously and it’s obvious she loves him while her siblings are there for other intentions (to assuage guilt or go after his money). Mr. Shelton portrays a victim with a temper, retreating back into confusion timidly.

There are usually hiccups in a show, and in this one the real disappointment comes in the form of Marie Papciak as Mama Wheelis. She had a few moments when she remembered her lines, and they were funny when she could recall them and deliver them with a bit more speed than a turtle’s pace, however she couldn’t keep up with the rest of the cast and there were very long stretches of the show in which she elongated her speech, for some strange reason. I’m not quite sure if this was because it was her idea of how to act older than her actual age, or if it was because she was searching for her lines and thought the slower she spoke the longer it gave her to remember them. She was painful, unfortunately, to watch at times and even brought the alacrity of conversation between the rest of the cast to a dead stop as she struggled and fumbled over her words. What a shame. What should have been a show that rested just under two hours stumbled it’s way to closer to two and fifteen, and it was because the pacing was off for key scenes that should have clipped along. Except Harmony who has an even temper, everyone else has a sharp tongue and it should have showed. The speed of the dialogue should have been quick and snappy - and it was with the other characters, but when she took the stage and mixed up character names and re-started her sentences, it upset the timing and pace and frankly, was a bit irritating to watch. She should have known her lines. Period.

Tony Sump should be proud of his functional and appropriate set design, tech work and backstage crew. They all moved quickly and the sound/lights were impeccable. The costumes were likely appropriate for the kind of people we were watching; tacky, ill-fitting at times and even outrageous. I’m not typically a fan of this genre, however the night I saw the show the ponderously obvious flaw was the pacing. Some of it may have been inherent in the script, but much of it was most certainly due to actors fumbling for lines. Ms. Papciak wasn’t the only actor to grasp for words, however she was the most obvious and the most rampantly irresponsible about it. I hope for next weekend Mr. Sump can grill into his actors that they’ve got a good show – but it could be so much better by shaving off about 20 minutes and forcing it to clip along at a pace that leaves the audience forcing itself to have to keep up with the story on stage instead of wanting to shout out words to help the actors keep moving.

Sunday, March 22, 2009

What's Happening with Marni Holmes

1. What made you decide to audition for "Daddy's Dyin'"? I have wanted to work with Tony again since 1999, (we did Fools at RW), and the awesome script didn't hurt.

2. How would you describe your character? And how would you describe the Turnover family? Sara Lee is the glue that holds the family together. Without her they would probably never see each other, until, maybe, her funeral. Of course, she has also felt obligated to take on this role, and resents it, but will slip right back into it because she finds it necessary. It is really the only life she has ever had. This, sadly, makes her a waste of humor and wit, because she has both, not to mention intelligence. Motivation is what she is lacking, but I feel that that will change with the death of Mama Wheelis. The Turnover family is just like any other, but a bit more sheltered in the small town scene. (Small? I meant teeny-tiny, population 40). They all express love in the way they know how, which a lot of times screws up everything. However, their hearts remain pure, and when it comes right down to it, there isn't anything they wouldn't do for one another and people they consider friends.

3. How long have you been doing theatre? Technically since the 9th grade, (my first play), but I have on stage since I was 4 years old, (dance and many character parts).

4. How do you prepare to play a character? I believe that every person has a bit of the character in themselves already, and you just need to find it, draw it out, and nurture it. I was one of those kids that wanted to be everything when they grew up, and finally decided that as an actress, I could do that. Once you find that character in you, you can start the process of bonding with your co-stars' characters, and the background research of the environment you all inhabit. Research is ALWAYS a part of the process.

5. Tell us a little more about yourself! Lansing born, raised and educated since 1966, until 1984 when I left for college in WI and MN, where I studied Theater and English. Returned to Lansing, (ahem), due to life, and pretty much the rest is just a garble. I was destined to be a part of the Lansing community's theater scene because I was following in my father's footsteps most of my life. He was a part of the Community Circle Players since at least 1961, (earliest program of a show that I have), and when he died in 1965, 2 months before my birth, I was predestined to pick up where he left off, so to speak. Although I waited until the late '90's to make an appearance, I have not regretted one minute.

Quick questions:

1. Favorite line from this show: "Daddy, I don't want yew ta die. Yew're the only man who ever really loved me." Close second: "Shut up, Orville!"

2. Favorite moment from the rehearsal process: Many moments: the literally uncontrollable laughter as the characters became more and more real, and the letting loose on an awesome catfight scene.

3. Why is theatre important to you? It keeps me sane, believe it or not.

4. What was the first role you've played and where? I played a diva in a minidress, with high heels and a cigarette in my living room in 1968.

5. What is your dream role? They all hold a special place in my heart, but it has to be the next one where I get paid...

Tuesday, March 17, 2009

Listening to Logophile Eric Dawe

1. Is this the first time you’ve directed at Riverwalk? If so – why did you choose this show to be your first, and if not, what was your first, when, and why did you decide to come back now?
Yes, this is the first time I've directed at Riverwalk. I had directed some Shakespeare in Grand Rapids, and have wanted to direct this show for awhile. When I heard Riverwalk was celebrating its 20th anniversary, I submitted 'Macbeth' because I felt that Riverwalk, as a legitimate theatre, really needed to do some Shakespeare for this important anniversary season.


2. What is the most alluring feature to you about MacBeth?
The characters and the story. Part of Shakespeare's genius is that even with his most heinous characters, their humanity is always palpable. Macbeth betrays his conscience - and then is torn apart by his guilt. The harder he tries to excise his moral compass, the more he finds himself in its unrelenting grip. Lady Macbeth, likewise, seems so strong and Machiavellian; but when she loses control of Macbeth, we see how truly dependent she was on him. When he casts her adrift, she loses her soul. All the characters in this play are fully realized and impeccably drawn - they all have their strengths and their weaknesses. And we recognize ourselves in all of them.


3. Why is theatre relevant to the community?
For that answer, I'll turn to Shakespeare again. Hamlet tells the players that their charge is to hold up a mirror to nature - "to show virtue her features, scorn her own image, and the very age and body of the time his form and pressure." In other words, theatre is that lens through which we see the nobility and ignobility of the human condition; theatre exposes society's decencies and flaws with unflinching honesty. But it also helps us accept ourselves, with all our virtues and failings. It challenges us often to reach beyond our grasp, to strive for to be better than we are.


4. I know that you act as well as direct – do you like one better than the other? What are the challenges and rewards you enjoy/encounter in both endeavors?
I've often said that as an actor, you are one of the colors on the artist's palette. You bring as much richness and depth to that color as you can, using your imagination, intellect, and emotions. As a director, you determine how all the colors are composed on the canvass, to what degree and intensity. It's a much bigger task, but it is also much more rewarding in many ways. As an actor, you get to focus your energies on your character; you can dig deep and concentrate on the inner life and conflicts of the role. As a director, you get to manage all of the relationships on the stage. It's like mixing a sound track: you can bring the 'volume' up in some moments, or dial them down in others. It's like conducting an orchestra: the script is the score; the characters are the various instruments. Tempo, dynamics, they're all up to the director.


5. You saw Teller’s version of MacBeth – how did it inspire you to re-create this show with your own stamp? What did you like and not like about Teller’s version?
I always intended to do this show with some magical effects. This is a good old-fashioned 'Ghost Story,' with witches and specters and supernatural events. I wanted to see Teller's version to be sure that they could be integrated into the play in a way that supported the action, rather than detracting from it. Teller did that, to a great extent. I also knew it would require my actors to learn some things they don't usually have to do when acting; but then, several of them have had to learn how to fight with swords for the first time, too. Acting sometimes includes challenges; but they can enhance the experience of the play for the audience.


I enjoyed the pace and tempo of Teller's production of "Macbeth." Unlike audiences in Shakespeare's time - who only had the theatre for diversion. Shakespeare could indulge in plays that ran for three hours or more. Today's audiences are conditioned much differently. Movies are two hours long; we have DVDs and Wiis and Play Stations and IMAX. I've pared the script down so that it emphasizes the action while still retaining the genius and integrity of the story.

6. Tell us more about yourself:
I've been doing theatre for too many years to count. Lately, I've been drawn much more to writing. I've won a few awards regionally and nationally for both stage plays and screenplays, and that's encouragement enough to keep me going. I've also just completed my first novel and would like to get that published (www.lastkingoftroy.com). Hopefully, soon. Next year, Riverwalk will produce one of my plays, 'The Watch List,' as part of its 2009-2010 season. It won the 2005 C.T.A.M. Regional Playwriting Competition, and was awarded 'Honorable Mention' in the Writer's Digest 76th Annual Writing Competition - which received over 19,000 submissions.


7. Why is theatre important to you?
When I was younger, it was an outlet, a form of self-expression. As I get older, I find it more of an inroad into understanding the human condition, the conflicts and aspirations we all share. Having lived several decades now, and experienced the joys and heartaches of raising a family, the challenges of finding a path through life, the death of loved ones, I find theatre as a way of connecting with others, sharing their triumphs and sorrows, and discovering those common threads that unite - and sometimes divide - us.


8. What is MacBeth’s weakness, and is he truly redeemed at the end of this play? In what way?
Well now, that's a question that could be debated endlessly - and by better minds than mine. For me, Macbeth is a man who has been schooled all his life to follow the rules, but has a driving ambition that, goaded by temptation, overmasters his virtue in a moment - a moment that propels him down a path of slaughter and self-destruction. As I said earlier, even after he murders Duncan, Macbeth cannot cast away his moral compass. The more he tries, the more tormented he becomes.


Is Macbeth redeemed at the end of the play? By no means. He is bitter and morally desolate, his soul as barren as the blasted heath on which he first meets the Weird Sisters. He is remorseless, determined to fight on against the powers of right, even when he knows that the fates have betrayed him and that the fight is futile. In the end, he is bitter and defiant, so I think it's hard to say he's truly redeemed in any sense of the word. He stands in marked contrast to the first Thane of Cawdor, who acknowledges his sins, asks for forgiveness, and faces death with nobility.

9. Should we pity Lady MacBeth, or does she deserve her fate?
The genius of Shakespeare is that we do pity Lady Macbeth, even while we feel that she deserves her fate. She's a woman in a man's world. She's been married before, probably lost her husband and her children to death, knows what it's like to be powerless, and hated it. She knows Macbeth is an ambitious man, and knew it when she married him - seeing in him the avenue to gaining control of her life and the power that will keep her from ever falling victim to the helplessness of being a woman again. Her moral choices are wrong; but we can identify with her conflicts, even while decrying her actions.


10. Any comment on the role of the witches in the play? And one cast one male?
The Weird Sisters, as they are more aptly called, are the catalyst for the entire action of the play. What's open to debate is whether they KNEW Macbeth would murder Duncan (predestination), or whether they simply goad him to the task by inflaming his vaulting ambition (self-determination). Certainly, they are master psychologists. They know Macbeth's psyche better than he knows it himself. Is this some kind of supernatural knowledge? Perhaps - or perhaps not. Lady Macbeth knows her husband's ambition and his dark impulses - but she also knows he is conflicted by a set of high moral values, as well. If Macbeth's qualities are so obvious to Lady Macbeth, why wouldn't the Weird Sisters also recognize these vices and virtues, as well?
Quick Questions:

1. Favorite play:
Hamlet


2. Favorite line from a play:
Way too many to list. Among the favorites are:
'O, for a muse of fire that would ascend the brightest heaven of invention.'
'All the world's a stage, and all the men and women merely players.'
'We are such stuff as dreams are made on.'


3. Favorite character you’d played:
Atticus Finch, 'To Kill a Mockingbird'; Claudius, in 'Hamlet'


4. Dream role for you to play?
Iago ('Othello'); Sir Thomas More ('A Man for All Seasons'); Don Quixote ('Man of La Mancha')


5. Dream show for you to direct?
Wow, right now, 'Macbeth' is my dream show. I'll have to let the dust settle when this is over and see what pops up. When I get a little more seasoned, I'd like to do 'Hamlet,' of course; and 'Othello.'

Monday, March 2, 2009

Living Amongst "The Dead"

Though a little late, I did want to give my take on the musical adaptation of James Joyce’s “The Dead,” as directed by Mary Job. The production had a stellar cast, a gorgeous set, beautiful costumes, and fine actors. There were all the ingredients to make a sophisticated romp, and yet – something was still missing, though it was mostly apparent at the end of the show.

That isn’t to say that the actors didn’t do their part to help tell the story or that the musicians were terrible. The music was enchanting and most of it even rousing – it enlivened the environment of the party and made the stage feel as if you were one of the guests. It was inviting, and though a bit too loud at times for the actors’ voices, very well-played.

The caliber cast that Ms. Job put together included Doak Bloss, Gini Larson, Bill Henson, Rick & LeAnn Dethlefsen, Eve Davidson, Laura Stebbins, Shelly Garyet, Mara Schaberg, Alec Nagy, Emily Aslakson Himebaugh and Casey Shipman.

The story itself, though changed somewhat from Joyce’s original work, centers around a holiday party with Gabriel’s aunts. They seem to be the central focus for most of the show, actually, and the play takes a startling and totally superfluous turn by ending the life of Aunt Julia, played by Eve Davidson. To her credit, Ms. Davidson’s performance was lovely – tender in the right moments, cranky in others, and she could be downright rabble-rousing too. She was fun to watch, as was her sister Aunt Kate, played by Laura Stebbins, and her niece, Mary Jane, portrayed by LeAnn Dethlefsen. Mrs. Dethlefsen’s singing voice is matched only by Shelly Garyet, who plays Molly Ivers – a feisty Irish lass who dishes out her opinions without blinking an eyelash. She goes after Gabriel (Doak Bloss) at one point and we see the beginnings of his personality begin to reveal itself; he backs down at conflict and wants everyone to be happy. Mrs. Dethlefsen and Mrs. Garyet genuinely seem to have fun on stage, and shine as they dance and make merry. What a treat to watch them.

Bill Henson sang a solo, and the harmonics of his voice were quite beautiful to listen to – the words didn’t seem to matter. And then at the somewhat opposite end of the spectrum of sophistication were Freddy Malins and Mr. Browne, played by Mr. Nagy and Mr. Dethlefsen respectively – and they were boisterous and boyish and full of vim and vigor and charm. They were fantastically fun to watch and I genuinely believed they were having a grand time at the party.

Mr. Bloss’ character took several asides during the show to reveal what he was thinking; after all, the original short story centered about Gabriel. The play however, twisted from the story and attempted to incorporate Gabriel’s thoughts into the fabric of the party, which seemed to focus more on his two aunts. Why the author did this I’m not sure; we are not allowed as much access to Gabriel since the story seems to focus mostly on the party.

The script also simply failed to deliver the foreshadowing necessary for the audience to understand the end. As I mentioned, the play centers around the party, and so as Gretta (played by Gini Larson) and Gabriel retire to their hotel after the festivities, many people in the audience were left confused at the sudden switch in the storyline. The play seemed to be about the two aunts and the party and abruptly changed pace into a more intimate setting with Gabriel and his wife. I heard a lot of people say they didn’t “get” the end. Well of course not – the playwright failed to set it up properly, and it is through no fault of the director or the actors it wasn't understood by some patrons.

The party is a foil to Gabriel’s life and his perceptions of his life; there was no death in it, nothing for him to care about in the world – not until he heard of Michael Furey, and so as Gabriel revealed his aunt passing, it felt awkward and out of place, and rather premature. If it was meant as a foreshadow for a discussion of death, it was a poor one. However, Mr. Bloss rendered an amazing performance and I was riveted watching him; I noticed that as other actors were dancing or singing, he watched his wife, Gretta, instead. I don’t know if that was an actor choice or a director choice, but there were many small details that I noticed about his performance and appreciated. I noticed other characters were doing the same thing – Ms. Schaberg wringing her hands and looking worried, Mr. Nagy and Mr. Dethlefsen making jovial motions without disrupting the action on stage, Mrs. Dethlefsen covering her mouth with worry and anxiety – I appreciated the realism these actors brought to their performances.

Unfortunately, the only character that I truly felt lacked personality and development was Gretta, and she is so vital to the plot of the show and is the one of the key characters that you should feel something for. Although I watched Mr. Bloss attempt to connect with her, Ms. Larson did not give back the same energy and it affected their chemistry on stage. I just didn’t feel or see from her the angst and forlornness of losing a lover so young. As she sang the song from her childhood, I kept wishing to see wistfulness brush across her face – but I fear she was focusing too much on singing instead. I do not like to criticize harshly, and I know Ms. Larson is a fine actress given the right role – however this was not the right role for her and her performance at best was bland. In such a talented cast so full of facial expressions and empathy and feeling in a wide range of emotions, I was surprised that she came across so woodenly. Even when she tried to display feeling of some sort unfortunately it looked like she was “acting,” and was un-authentic to the point of being distracting.

My only other true concern, as a Joycean reader myself and being familiar with his short story of “The Dead,” is with the blocking of the end of the show. Perhaps some of what Ms. Job could do was limited by the actual script, however I would like to briefly explain the end of the short story and why the play as performed failed to deliver the final tenderness, isolation and despair, to a degree, that Joyce creates in his story.

Gretta makes it known to Gabriel that she once loved a boy when she was young, and he loved her. She was to be sent away to school and he came out to see her one last time in the rain, and he caught pneumonia and died, and Gretta believed all her life that he died for her. Gabriel understands as she is telling this story that it has been Michael who was her true love of her life all this time they’ve been married, and all this time he thought that it was he she loved instead. He realizes he didn't understand that kind of sacrifice, nor that depth of love...

Ms. Larson begins the final scene sobbing loudly with no real explanation yet, which of course leaves her no place to go as an actor. If you start a scene with a climax emotion then the rest of the scene can only falter downward. Her wailing was overly loud and cumbersome and as the most important speech in the show progresses by Mr. Bloss, it was very frustrating to try to listen to him as she sat at the desk and then laid on the bed sobbing. He sits on the edge of the bed at the end of his song/speech, the other cast members come out to join his singing in the dark, while Gretta remains on the bed crying. She sits up, and then embraces him from behind as the lights go out, and that is the end of the show. Unfortunately, in this final scene, Ms. Job made some poor directing choices.

Gretta should have been something of an outcast for most of the show, lost in her own world and coming into her own world at night – when she reunites, as it were, with Michael Furey. Gabriel is in his element at the party, which Mr. Bloss portrayed quite well. I wanted to see a meek and nearly broken portrayal by Ms. Larson, her thoughts obviously somewhere else, and perhaps even startled at times by her husband, as the singing commences. I wish I had heard her song played softer, and sung with vulnerability, so that when we see her and Gabriel back in the hotel room it isn’t a shock that she gives in to that vulnerability and the audience isn't taken so off guard by the drastic and sudden change in mood. Her sobs should have been girlish, child-like and soft, finally allowing sleep to overtake her.

Though I confess I didn’t read the adaptation and don't know what the blocking was meant to be, but I wish Ms. Job used the window. She had a perfect opportunity for Mr. Bloss step forward into the gelled window pane light, washed in a blue to reflect the coldness falling around him – outside and in – and make his final speech looking outside, with his back to his sleeping wife, and his life forever changed. The realization that he has been dead his entire life to see in front of the audience, center stage, with the framed spot on Mr. Bloss, could have been a powerful chance for Mr. Bloss to display the inner thoughts of his character more visually for the patrons. How perfect it would have been for him to have simply stepped into the light – which could be metaphorically meaningful in so many different ways – and to understand then, and only then, that he has never really lived – that he is one of the Dead.

Sorry to back-seat direct, but the loud tenor of the end of the show was awkward. The party itself was loud and festive and was the element Gabriel felt at home in, and Gretta not so much, which makes the quiet intimacy of the quiet hotel room much more powerful to utilize.

Aside from Gretta’s performance and the very end of the show, I was amazed by how powerful and raucous “The Dead” was and appreciated seeing it on stage. The accents weren’t too thick, and there was an air of genuine fun, and very few shows achieve that ability to pull the audience in and make them feel like a guest along with the characters on stage. Kudos to all the actors, and especially to Doak Bloss – his range of emotions throughout the performance were fascinating to watch, and he took an incredibly complex character and made him real.

For those who read the short story, one has to truly step back and try not to compare, but it’s difficult. The short story is intricately layered and quite complex, and I understand how the issues of Ireland and Gabriel’s disdain of his own country don’t really come out more in the show, because they would just get lost. It’s also confusing why the party seems to be the central focus, and we lose the inner thoughts of Gabriel and his pomposity and meekness all at once, to a degree. I wish more depth could have been pulled out, but what a difficult story to attempt to tell on stage even on a more simplistic level. I give great credit to Ms. Job for taking on an enormous feat!