I have spent all my morning doing some research. I needed to learn and understand more about what I witnessed on stage last night. I was at The Opera House in Manchester to watch a new production of a musical version of the modern cult classic comedy-romance film by Jean-Pierre Jeunet, Amélie, with a book by Craig Lucas, music and lyrics by Daniel Messe (additional lyrics by Nathan Tysen), and produced for the stage by Hartshorn-Hook and Selladoor Productions in association with The Watermill Theatre.
Where my research took me was to finding out more about the origin of the stage musical - the film. Having never seen the film I was curious. And what I found out was most illuminating, and I was able to answer some unanswered questions from just watching the Musical without the pre-knowledge of what I was witnessing. This got me to thinking that surely, if this Musical is touring and playing to large audiences, it should be able to stand alone, and not rely on audience's previous knowledge. Surely not everyone who has watched Les Miserables on stage has read the wonderful Hugo novel?! So why did I feel as though the Musical wasn't giving me enough information or making the story - especially those of the sub-plots - particularly comprehensible and clear.
Admittedly, with a film you have much more scope, and can cover many different locations, moods, ideas etc much swifter than stage, but the extremely static nature of the Musical's staging by Madeleine Girling made it almost impossible at times to understand locations as ostensibly the whole musical was played out in front of a non-specific Paris Metro station, with Amélie's flat on top of a photobooth-cum-confessional. Whilst I am mentioning the set, then those members of audience seated to the left of the stage would not have been able to see Amélie seated in her apartment as well as one or two other instances throughout where the sight-lines for this side of the audience was either obscured or not taken into consideration.
Lighting, Elliot Griggs, was mostly quite dim and didn't convey fantasy, comedy or lightheartedness anywhere near enough. In fact, looking at the poster which advertises this show, it is a very dark green. Quite apt really as that was the overriding colour memory for me of this show... dark green.
I understand the need to keep the cost of a production - any production - to a minimum. However, for me, this production did seem like a cost-cutting exercise right from the start. A single, multi-purpose, composite set [admittedly cleverly designed] but not optimal; little or nothing in the way of costume changes - the ensemble, and Amélie herself remained in the exact same clothes throughout [except when she wore disguise]; and the cast were actor / musicians meaning that there wasn't a separate band, but instead we had to also accept the premise that all the cast playing large and incongruous musical instruments as they walked and talked in character was just another part of their 'reality' and totally 'normal'.
The show is definitely quirky, off-beat, and a little weird. But then again, so was the original film by all accounts; amd the ways in which this musical presents itself as being distinctly 'French' are very obvious. All but one work. I liked the idea of the Marcel Marceau-esque movements - this brought through a very 'comtinental' atmosphere to the choreography; and much of the music was very reminiscent of French cafe muzack, French Jazz, and French Gypsy music with the use of two accordeons, a hand drum-box and fiddle. The two pianos were more than interesting, and I am still no nearer knowing how they managed to make them both fully playable and also so full of props! However, what didn't work - at least for me - was the almost 'Allo-'Allo style comedy French accents used by the cast. Amélie herself was played by French-Canadian Audrey Brisson, and maybe the team decided that if she had a French accent (natural), then all the cast needed to adopt one too. In this day and age, it was mooted that this might appear a little racist. I just found it distracting and unnecessary.
Amélie tells the story of a young girl in Paris, who, after having had a rather unconventional and strange upbringing, spends her adulthood in self-imposed chastity, yet oozes an enigmatic individuality and introvertedness which makes people like her. She spends her time, between waitressing and dreaming, doing good deeds for others, and acting as a kind of unofficial 'matchmaker'; until of course, the inevitable happens and she finds a match for herself, and as two eccentric people slowly come together, her life is changed forever! The cast were all quite obviously multi-talented and headed by a strong and confident Audrey Brisson, with Danny Mac as co-star Nino, and a host of talented singers and performers, the productiuon team had assembled a lovely cast, who all work together extremely well. There is a lovely chemistry between Brisson and Mac. More emphasis on the acting and story-telling and less on the musical instruments might have helped to move the narrative along and make it more watchable though.
The team behind this Musical have already had three tries to perfect it, and what I witnessed last night was apparently their latest version. It still feels very much like a work-in-progress to me though, and there is obviously a lot of interest in making this musical succeed. I feel sure it will - it's a story with heart and I think it would and could work well. This version was very slow to get going with a long and uninspiring exposition, but the second act was much livelier and made more sense both narrative-wise and theatically. Act one was much more disjointed and musically not very dynamic. We had to wait until the act one finale before there was a real change of pace and tempo. (even if it wasn't exactly clear what was happening!)
Reviewer - Matthew Dougall
on - 6/8/19
No comments:
Post a Comment