July 25, 2007
Other Plans @ The Fringe Festival
You’ve got to know you’re tempting fate when you decide to call the show you’re staging as part of a festival of more than a hundred, Other Plans. The name sure ain’t sexy, but at least it’s descriptive: This anthology of one-act plays, written by Stephanie Alice Scarpinato and directed by Ty Hallmark, isn’t a total loss, but it’s hardly essential.
Of the four pieces here, three could use another rewrite while the other, And the Meek Shall Inherit, ought to be shelved entirely. Set in a hospital room, Meek concerns two sisters’ squabble over the ownership of a rosary. Bad news: It’s first in the lineup. Good news: It’s the shortest. Note to the stage manager: While we’re all for suspension of disbelief, a show that uses a rosary as its MacGuffin probably ought to have, you know, a rosary as a prop instead of just a set of beads on a string. When a "rosary" doesn't have a cross on the end ot it, you notice. We’re just sayin.’
Next up is Hungry No More, a study of a none-too-bright young woman who settles in at a diner booth to get to work at her ethically dubious new job as a ghostwriter. It's too long by a third and the story goes nowhere after it offers up, quite early, its one meager surprise. But Melissa Schick (as the writer) and Sheri Ratick Stroud (as a waitress driven to distraction by the girl’s yapping), manage to imbue it with some life.
If I Had a Hammer is Scarpinato’s wild, awkward swing at a socially-conscious history play. Set in Montgomery, Alabama in the mid-60s, it takes two gifted actors, Steve Beall and Matthew Cannon, and stuffs their mouths with dialogue so nakedly expository and on-the-nose that were its author around in the 60s, she’d probably have been laughed out of the Leave It to Beaver writers’ room. Son Cannon has been arrested in a civil rights protest; father Beall wants him not to make waves, because that’s not the way things are ‘round these here parts, etc., etc. But deep down, the dad knows that racism is wrong, too! The always-watchable Beall brings, well, his B-game to this C-minus of a one-act.
That leaves That’s Amore, an aren't-families-wacky comedy about a young woman (Grace Anastasiadis, way better than she was in that rosary-that-isn’t-a-rosary play) trying to coax her grandparents out to meet her new boyfriend. It’s the best of the four and not by a little, with Stroud (who was silent in Hungry No More, but talks here -- does she ever) and Walt Smith as the Sicilian grandparents who’ll find any excuse to avoid leaving the house. Yes, we already know from Moonstruck that Italians are passionate, argumentative people with a cra-a-a-zy zest for food, wine and life, but the actors here are all charming enough that you’ll actually want to spend the time with them. Given that That's Amore is last on the bill, that's not nothing, as they say.
So: One clear winner out of four. If you like those odds, then you can make Other Plans to catch this show Thursday at 7 p.m. or Saturday at 4:45 p.m. Both performances are at the charmingly restroom-free Scientarium at 709 D St. NW. Tickets are available online.
|
To quote Callie Kimball from the Washington City Paper blog:
Jul. 24, 2007, at 12:36 pm
Last year there was such a gorgeous celebration of heart for the first annual Fringe.
This is a non-juried festival, so anyone’s grandma can put in an application to do a one-woman show about newfangled microwaves or whatnot. Everyone pays the same application and venue fees. It’s very democratic.
And this is what Fringe is–you’re gonna get some standout shows but you’re also gonna get a healthy dose of people who have never been on stage before, who are taking baby steps toward expressing their ideas. In short, you’re gonna get a lot of flops.
I can understand that people don’t want to waste their time or $15 on a ticket to something not very good. But maybe then Fringe isn’t for you–it’s about risk on both sides of the proscenium. People have been asking me what to avoid seeing and I refuse to answer that because it’s not in the spirit of Fringe.
And by the way, the review above of R&J makes me curious enough to want to see it! I picked a show last year because I’d heard that not one single ticket had been sold to it and it was one of the funniest, most inventive shows I saw at the Festival. My own show, “Nutshell,” was called “astoundingly misguided” by the Washington Post this morning but ticket sales have been climbing steadily. We had 200 people Sunday night who seemed to dig it. Opinions are just opinions. Go form your own. And when you publish that opinion online, keep in mind the artists are going to read it.
Hey kids, we’re all in this together, so let’s keep Fringe fun! Even for the people in sucky shows!
*applause*
Look, being a part of this show, I'll readily admit I'm not exactly the voice of objectivity here. But, as the sound designer, I do feel like I have the freedom and vantage point to say this:
The writer, director and actors are all well aware of the show's imperfections, and all realize there are more than a few. Does that excuse these flaws altogether? Absolutely not. But should it prevent these folks from at least trying -- at a Fringe Fest -- if only to gauge audience reaction?
I get that "Well, this is the reaction," but does putting oneself out there at a Fringe Festival make one completely fair game for unrelenting target practice?
Just sayin'... While having an opinion is natural and fine, even encouraged, Fringe is for everyone and their grandma, so we could all try not to be flat-out mean-spirited or insulting about it. (I'd pinpoint the guilty passage, but really, the entire tone is rather scathing. Even Nelson Pressley offered more redemption than this, even if only for the sake of tact and good spirit... and he's not necessarily known for being remarkably forgiving.)
Look, all I'm saying is, maybe reveling in tearing something to shreds or holding every piece to highest standards isn't exactly what the Fringe Festival should be about. As you said, "Other Plans" doesn't draw much attention to itself or claim to be much more than it is, and it's hard enough as-is to warrant any notice in such a large festival... such that when this one write-up is the most prominently displayed acknowledgement you've received, well, unless you're out to break spirits...
Dunno. Just a thought.
im bored of fringe.
biggest problem with fringe is that while some shows are good and others are very far from good, each show costs $15. would anyone go to see a noname band at the red and black for $15? no. certainly not if the show was in a venue that didnt have bathrooms. if these shows were like $5-7, people wouldnt have expectations that come with $15 shows.
As someone both in the business and who has seen and participated in Fringe shows, both in DC and elsewhere, I gotta say to all the kumbaya/Fringe is a Giant Hug Fest crowd, "lighten up."
Just because it's a non-juried festival doesn't mean there is no room for criticism. Plenty of people have told me "pass on Show X" or "run to Show Y." With so many plays in so little time, it's useful to hear frank discussion of what works and what doesn't.
Besides, if you want to simply have everyone love your work, either go to camp or put the show up in your living room. Sorry if your feelings were hurt by anybody's words, but the Business of Show is not for people who cannot take the heat. You might feel bad because someone didn't love your show, but my time and wallet will also feel bad if I waste time at something that's not ready for an audience.
And, no, I have not seen this production, but I didn't find this work scathing AT ALL. You want scathing, read Ben Brantley on one of his bitchier days.
Very true, Guest 4 -- the words "scathing" and "tearing...to shreds" were admittedly, ridiculously and ironically harsh. Thanks for calling me out there. Judgment retracted.
Further, the counterpoints are good ones. Both the reviewer's points and yours are ones we also made ourselves and again are all aware of. We went forward anyway, which was maybe a folly, who knows. And I can certainly personally see the value and utility in an honest, even if harsh, review. And agreed -- artists who can't take the heat should probably just stay home.
That said, just thought I'd put the counterpoint out there that Fringe is indeed considered *The* avenue for works in progress. As such, it'd be nice (though not essential) if the feedback were as constructive as possible and if patrons and reviewers expect that some pieces will be unfinished and/or novice. The avenue should simply be taken into consideration.
And maybe it was. The fine line in what's going a step too far is, of course, subjective, and again, can't claim objectivity here. I'd just hate to see a burgeoning artist prematurely discouraged, almost as much as I'd hate to see a few theatre patrons (who admittedly are often themselves artists on a budget) feel cheated out of $15. (I do wish the shows were cheaper to attend.) But, you're right: That's the biz, and maybe we "Feelgood Fringers" need to adjust our expectations (or plans, as it were) accordingly.
-Guest 1
A Christian rosary is either a series of prayers (usually divided into decades), or a string of beads used for counting those prayers; there's no requirement that there be a cross attached to the string, and for most of history, there wasn't one.
That is to say, when you talk about things you don't really know anything about, people notice.
We're just sayin'.
My! people are getting testy on this forum. who would have thought a simple review would spark such heated responses concerning religious paraphenalia. However, we are talking theatre. While we can forgive things for being fringe, when a play says that it is about how "cherished momentos become a divisive centerpiece for changing expectations," (taken from program) you better have the "memento". And while a rosary may not always have a cross, it traditionally does and traditional Catholic is what's implied in the characters' names in this particular piece.
On another note entirely this reviewer found several positive things in the overall performance, so "scathing" is hardly the word I would use and as for Fringe, well it seems that the same shows have been reviewed over and over again in the various forums so if I were you I'd consider myself lucky that I got one, since it's "....better than no review".
As for Criticsm related to fringe shows in general, you can take it or leave it. If you put something in the public eye expect feedback. Critics/reviews are there to tell you what worked or didn't work (in the reviewers opinion). There are a lot of shows in the festival and just as the various groups are taking a risk, the audience might be expected to take a risk as well. Don't just go after the hot ticket. Perhaps you can alternate between things that you are sure to like versus things that haven't been reviewed or haven't been as favorably reviewed.
View the fringe fest as your community service to the theatre community and not just where your next $15 dollars should go. After all, the play you weren't thrilled about after a few rewrites might premiere at Woolly. It's an investment. The critic/reviewer has their job and you have yours. Everyone needs an audience although, it doesn't mean the audience can't be critical and criticism is part of the process. There is always something to be learned from both sides of the stage.
Just curious, guest 7, what were the "positive things" mentioned in the review? Unless you just mean the reviewer found several positive things and didn't post them. Honestly, the nicest terms used were "not a total loss" and "good news: it's the shortest." I haven't even seen this show and I felt defensive for the folks involved.
And plenty of rosaries don't have crosses, as mentioned above, and while it's usually customary to try and go for "most obviously recognizable" and therefore a cross, it is a pretty strong nitpick. The review was picky enough.
Well lemme just say that I'm from out of town, and where I'm from, we think most people who like to do plays and dance and sing for the people and suchlike don't mind much when someone comes along and says right out what they think about there singin' or their dancin' or even the song they sung or danced to, for that matter.
Back home, we just figure "everyone to their own notion, said the old lady as she kissed the cow" - though most folks'd prefer she kiss a bull, ya know? Other way's not natural, in most folks' way of seein' things. But I guess that's her point, right?
Anyway, just let me say that back home, we often talk about Steve Beall, The Actor, and we all agree his "B game" is just about as good as his "A game," and you can take that to mean whatever you like. If that's his "B" game, though, I dunno what I'd say about his "C" game.
Just sayin'.
As an audience member, I want to thank the reviewer for some honest comments about this and other plays. It's hard to choose among the many productions, and comments like these are one way to sift through the offerings. It's a shame the cast and crew seem offended, but that's not what this is about.
I, for one, agree that the scripts were pretty shallow, though I give a lot of credit to the actors for striving for depth in the telling and to Ms. Hallmark for artful management of that space. Yes, some of these were more successful than others, and they did improve in order of presentation. Not a brilliant night of theater, but better than some of the other Fringe offerings.
Isn't risk taking what Fringe is about? Isn't this a wonderful opportunity for a new author to get her work seen, and to get some constructive feedback? Isn't this a good lesson for this young company on the importance of choosing good scripts? And it seems it's also a good lesson for actors in not taking reviews to heart.
It isn't personal, folks. It's theatre.
Hi guest 10 and others ... thank you all for your comments, it's been a lot of fun popping back into this entry to see what people are saying. I would like to clarify, however, that the cast and crew are not offended and that, to my knowledge, only one of us has made a comment since this thread began. Just wanted to clarify so there is not an impression we're spoiled sports or anything.
I absolutely agree with Guest 10 that Fringe is a wonderful opportunity for playwrights like Ms. Scarpinato to present her work and try things out. That's why we did this -- I had a general idea of what worked and what didn't before we even opened -- but I still get surprised when I hear what resonated with some audience members and reviewers and what didn't. Mr. Klimek did not like Meek and yet I've had several audience members tell me it's one of the stronger pieces -- so to each his own. I appreciate the comments of everyone and love that Fringe has given us all the opportunity to spread the word about theatre in DC.
Ty Hallmark