Play On!

This is a play within a play: an amateur group are putting on Murder Most Foul!, a play by Phyllis (Calvert according to the programme – will the real Phyllis Calvert sue?). Phyllis, pernickety, pretentious and anxious to change the cast’s lines up to and including the dress rehearsal, was played by Shirley Ellick who can play this kind of part without any trouble whatsoever, as the programme implied. There are several problems with this sort of play: one is that the real actors have to play poor actors in Murder Most Foul! But need to be good actors in Play On!. The cast were remarkably effective and assured in doing this. This is an ensemble piece and that is how it was played. There were no weak players. In particular, it was pleasing to see how much Jon Langley and Elaine Wylie have improved over the years.

            I understand that this is an American play and that it was originally intended that the cast should struggle (and fail) with the required upper-class English accents in Murder Most Foul! Perhaps wisely, the cast didn’t aim for American accents, but, more subtly, spoke in ‘Forest Hill’ yet still had to struggle with the posh accents. I thought it would have been funnier if Dominica Burgess, effective as the cockney maid, had reversed things by having a posh accent in ‘real life’. This is not a play that stretches its cast, but it is good training in that most of the actors each have to project two different characters. John McGuire’s was the most subtle of the characterisations: stiff in Murder Most Foul! With his upper-class accent slipping in the stress of the disasters in Act III.

            What play Graham Wagg thought he was in, I don’t know! Not so much Murder most foul! as Maria Marten and the Red Barn – he was a murderer straight out of melodrama with a black moustache that twitched so much that the whole audience must have wondered how it stayed on. I for one welcomed this scene-stealing performance, for this brings me to another problem with this sort of play: it is usually more fun for the cast than the audience (unless they’ve been involved in am. dram. themselves). Somehow, audiences find backstage plays resistible – the more realistic, the more resistible (e.g., On Monday Next). It is the outrageous that find favour: the Farndale Avenue farces, the ‘coarse acting’ plays, and Michael Frayn’s technically amazing Noises Off. These sort of plays tend to run out of steam by Act III, but at least in Play On! that was the most entertaining of the acts.

            Because this was such a successful ensemble piece, it is invidious to single people out, and so I shall also mention the remainder of the cast. Kathryn Clark had stage presence and I tended to watch her even when she was not speaking; Margaret Brightman was new to me and is obviously a walcome addition to St. George’s Players; Emma Jaeger as stage manager had less to do, but appeared most natural in her part; and Katrina Pancucci as the exasperated director was, well, exasperated (I wasn’t clear if there was much opportunity in the script for her to be anything else).

            The play was directed by Denise Pitt with the assistance of Andrew Steven, and no one would have guessed that this was their debut in production: it was a credit both to the cast and the directors that the former’s timing and fluid movement was so good.

                                                                                                Stuart N Clarke

ADDITION TO STUART’S REVIEW

As Stuart omitted to mention the set and technical side of things, I thought I would take the liberty of commenting on same!

Firstly, I would like to comment on the extremely good turn out of people to help with the set – the flat stripping, painting and papering and all the other jobs associated with set construction were tackled with great enthusiasm by the people who turned up to help. This was very much appreciated, as on some previous occasions there has been a noticeable lack of support and enthusiasm when it comes to this sort of thing! Thank you all and well done!

The same comments as above apply to set destruction. I was amazed to see all the people who turned up to help out there too and although it took some time to clear it all, without the help of these people it would have taken an awful lot longer. Well Done!

The set itself – despite all the problems that occurred from set building weekend onwards – was a great success. I have had feedback relating to it and it was all extremely good. Many comments mentioned how professional it all looked (comments that were directed at the actors too!).

Many thanks to Robin for his efforts regarding the lighting and special effects, both sound and sight. The chandeliers were a brilliant idea and gave off a much nicer light than the awful strip lighting. Friends, acquaintances and work colleagues who came to the production were full of favourable comments relating to the visual effects and the sounds off. Denise and I would like to thank Robin for his hard work.

Also mentioned by various people was the appropriate pieces of music used. The bright and bouncy “Reach” for the main curtain music (although I know we were all sick of it by the end!) and the “murder” music between curtains.

Finally, I think for possibly the first time ever, favourable comments were made about the actor’s make up. I personally didn’t notice it too much myself, but then I don’t notice things like that, but remarks were made to Denise about it and she herself thought it looked very good. So big thanks to Liza and Hannah for their skills.

                                                                                    Steve Pitt