Read today?s post here. Follow with Flickr pics here.

I?ve just come back to the hotel after being treated to a trip to Limelight Theatre in Wannaroo. You see, Graeme from Theatre Australia offered to take me to a non-puppet show while I?m here, and this is the show that was picked. 

Fatal Attraction is a so-called thriller, about the murders surrounding a fading actress. The question ? why did her husband die? Is the actress involved? And will the good cop relent and fall under her spell? 

Well, that?s the premise anyway. 

Limelight Theatre have their own venue ? lucky them! ? a large foyer, with a 100+ seat venue. The stage is proscenium, and we entered with the curtains closed and a few small props on the apron (for non-theatre people, the apron refers to the area of the stage floor that is visible in front of the curtains). 

The curtains open, and what struck me was the overpoweringness (ok, I just made that word up) of the set. It?s a large room, laid out using flats, and absolutely chock full of props, furniture and and nicknacks. The set is supposed to be a cabin in the mountains, based on the hints in the script, but it was just too much! Most of what was on set was not necessary to the story, and though I respect the director?s right and wish to be realistic and represent the location, in amongst all the stuff onstage, it was hard to watch the actors. Imagine it like trying to find a small number of dots in the middle of a large plaid design? Put another way, do you really need a box of tissues on a side table, when the actors never use it, isn?t integral to the story, and doesn?t add to the overall theme of ?cabin in the woods?? Additionally, the costume design was so simple ? everyday modern clothes ? that sometimes it was hard to distinguish the colours of the set from the colours of the clothing. 

Jarrod Buttery, who plays the good cop, bothered me in a number of ways. First, his American accent was terrible (same with his cop companion, played by Lynda Jane); second, that I did not see or feel any thought changes in regards to his idea to go along with the wife. He may have shown feeling towards her, but at no time did I see a reason for this good cop to suddenly ignore the faded actress? confession and decide to go off with her, even considering killing someone else. There was no clear decision, or internal change, that I saw, and I found it totally incongruous with the character. 

And finally Buttery, I have this to say (and is simply because I?m Jewish and have grown up with Yiddish in the house): don?t say ?chutzpah? if you can?t bring the ?ch?. 

For both Buttery and Wade Ellis, who plays the soon-dead husband, I have a little bit of a tip about eye contact. Although it?s something I?ve learned over the week from my puppetry workshops, it applies just as well to actors. One of the most important things for the audience in terms of relating to the characters onstage, is the ability to follow the eyeline of the actor, as they look at things on the stage. Both Buttery and Ellis had a habit of walking around on stage and looking at things, but not actually looking at anything in particular. Your eyeline was hard to follow, there was no clear fixation on which object in the room you were looking at, and therefore, it?s hard for us as the audience to either know what you?re looking at, or react to what you?re looking at. I say this because your first introduction to the audience is when you walk in and look around the set. There was no definitive focus for your eyes, and so it was hard for me to connect with the characters. 

Megan Kelly, playing the faded actress, had a great American accent ? not perfect, but pretty damn close ? and if she?d brought her performance down a notch, as I saw her do momentarily, I believe she could be quite fantastic on stage and a very natural stage presence. 

In general, the acting was somewhat over the top, and if it had been toned down a bit, it would have been a little less pantomime-ish and a little more realistic, which is what the director seemed to be aiming for. There were moments in the play that simply made no sense to me: Kelly screamed loudly when her husband gets stabbed, but barely screams at all when being attacked herself. The spa seemed to be empty at first, because the bad guy, played by Troy Hall, came out of it and wasn?t wet; but then later Buttery steps out and is soaking. 

Lighting design was quite simple, and worked for the most part. However, two comments: one was that Kelly walked over to a lamp and switched it on, then walked to the other side of the set and turned another one on. The problem was that the first lamp didn?t actually turn on (ie. become bright) until she was on the other side of the set. An obvious oops, and although Kelly shared in our laughter, she carried on with the scene. My question is to the lighting designer: why didn?t you have the lamps faded up all the time, and simply turn them off at their natural switch, so that when Kelly walks over, she?s the one actually ?fading? the lamps? Why leave it to the operator, when it?s much easier to get Kelly to do it? 

My second comment has to do with the lighting during the drowning scene, using the blue side light. I loved the effect, but unfortunately, where the actors were standing, they were for the most part in the darkness. It?s fine for them to be dim, but it?s very hard for the audience to know exactly what?s happening ? is someone getting murdered or not? ? if they?re not actually standing in the light. If only they had been in the blue light, it would have been much more effective. 

(Personally, I found the whole set/lighting not quite right in another respect: it didn?t seem dimensional enough, and I?m not sure whether it was the non-textured green paint of the cabin walls, or the fact that there might not have been enough back or side lighting. Either way, it wasn?t very dimensional for me) 

Sound design was good, combining simple sound effects with the scripted musical numbers. However, I found that when the thunderstorm started ? for the first time ? it was too soft and muddled in with the sound of the orchestral music. I didn?t realise what the thunderstorm sound effects were until one of the characters mentioned rain; for me, the addition of a short chase or a single flash of the lights, would have greater suggested the idea of a thunderstorm. 

Overall, I have to say to the cast and crew: less is more. Not just in terms of set design, but also in terms of acting. There was so much action onstage all the time, you never got to rest, and I would have liked to have seen a few moments of stillness or silence. Trust yourselves and take a chance: screw the fast pace of the lines, and go slower. I didn?t see any clear thought changes, and felt that the characters were one dimensional, simply because the actors were scrambling through the lines like they were in an obstacle course. However, it?s no use speaking the lines speedily if you lose all sense of the direction, emotion and conflict of those characters. 

I have been giving each show I?ve seen in Perth a rating, but I don?t feel comfortable doing so with this one: I?ve not seen amateur theatre for probably ten years, and I can?t possibly compare it to professional theatre. Perhaps that sounds wrong, but I just can?t: the people who did this show are doing it for fun, whereas the pros are doing it for money. All of the above is said knowing that full well, and perhaps being involved in pro shows I expect a lot more. I?d also like to add that the audience was mostly seniors or middle aged, but all of which appeared to have a good time and at least a little laugh in the funnier moments. For me however, I?m afraid that the show would need a lot of improvement for me to enjoy it. 

Tomorrow, my last two shows of the festival, a few more exhibitions and the final goodbye to UNIMA 2008! UPDATE: Read next day’s post here.