Described as "a gloriously funny re-imagining of a real-life event", this play is about Monty Python, the icon of British humor.
In the programme notes it says that Monty Python "were a self-contained comedy team responsible for both writing and performing their work, allowing them to experiment with form and content, discarding rules of television comedy." The play was written by Steve Thompson, commissioned by Hampstead Theatre in London.
The Plot: the show Monty Python's Flying Circus is set to go to America in 1975, but the network has cut out the "naughty bits" (literally in one case, as the words "naughty bits" are apparently cut from a scene in the original show) and two of the creators, Michael Palin and Terry Gilliam have taken a plane to try to get them back in and preserve the original humor of their creation.
This is a play with eight characters, perhaps the most in any play I've gone to aside from Agatha Christie's Mousetrap, which was produced by an international group and was only in Wellington on tour. The set represented many different locations, which was a first for me as well. The transitions were achieved by Monty Python-esque illustration on a projected screen in the background, followed by a sign with the label of the location, for example, "Airport" or "Court room." I'm not sure how this could have otherwise been achieved, but for me the mix of screen action between the acting scenes was a little detracting to the flow of the production, though the illustrations were definitely in keeping with the theme of the show. In fact, I guess it's what Monty Python does in the television series, mixing illustrations with acting, but somehow it's different when it's all onscreen. Others might see this as a brilliant touch making it more akin to the real Monty Python, but personally it was a little bit off-putting.
Otherwise, the set and costuming was functional and engaging, particularly the costumes of Terry Gilliam, an American turned against his home country living in England. (The real Terry Gilliam did formally renounce his American citizenship in 2006). Played by Gavin Rutherford, this character was the most explicit and outrageous of the show, a feature which was excellently conveyed with a very convincing American accent (even while being silly and shouting, which is where most actors seem to lose their accents) and childish demeanor. (Having seen Gavin Rutherford previously in The Price, I can't help but feel he was perhaps more suited to that serious role and conveying the depth of serious emotions rather than this light-hearted comedy one, but had I not seen him before I probably wouldn't have thought anything of it.) I was a bit confused by the costuming and character of Nancy, who represents the Pythons in America (amongst other groups, such as rock bands). The clothes were an odd mix of professional and quirky, but I suppose that in a way is part of the American "style" that she represented, and the character was "nice", caring, suitably enthusiastic, but a perhaps little bit one-dimensional (which hopefully does not represent the American ideal).
I was also extremely impressed by Andrew Foster's performance in the lead role of Michael Palin. He accomplished that very British feeling of wholeheartedly-silly-humor-while-still-being-slightly-reserved-and-probably-a-bit-disappointed-with-life. One can't help but like his character, and feel a bit sorry for him when he is let down.
The more minor roles of Franklin (a woman representing the American network), Lasker (the judge), and Osterberg (representing the Pythons) were also excellent. Franklin, played by Emma Kinane, was the spitting image of that prim and proper middle-aged lady who you really dislike and don't want to have to interact with. Lasker, played by Stephen Papps, was an unusual character for a judge, a real airhead who actually likes the comedic stylings of Monty Python and doesn't seem to take his job seriously, but still rules against them in their court case. And finally, my personal favorite was Osterberg, played by Jason Whyte. He was superb in both dialogue and movement, conveying the right senses of not-wanting-to-participate-in-ridiculosity while still being on the side of the Pythons.
I suppose the difference in these plays with more characters compared to those with less is that a lot of them will inevitably be more one-dimensional, but it's those portrayals like Jason Whyte's that still manage to add to the show without advertising the fact that it's a role that has less dimensions than the lead role. I'd make a point to go to plays that feature him as an actor (along with those that have Ray Henwood, who I saw in The Price, which I wrote about here).
Overall, this play was funny and really enjoyable, (as you'd expect from Monty Python!) but hard to categorize because in my (very limited!) experience of plays, those with fewer characters and settings (and less plot line) explore the deeper aspects of life and human nature while those with more characters and settings tell a full-blown story, and this play kind of did neither of those things...or, it did both of those things in less depth. Keeping in mind that I am no expert, don't let that deter you from productions like these, after all it is each to his own and it was undeniably a show full of laughs.
No comments:
Post a Comment