Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
4 Main Database (record #370) Production response for: Sweeney Todd Produced by: University of North Carolina-Greensboro Respondent First Name: Andrew LastName Vorder Bruegge The Show's Director is: Christine Morris NOMINATIONS BY RESPONDENT: This respondent's IRENE RYAN SCHOLARSHIP Emily Mark AUDITION nominee is: This respondent's BARBIZON SCENIC nominee is: Matthew Emerson This respondent's BARBIZON COSTUME nominee is: Katie Estler Horney This respondent's BARBIZON LIGHTING nominee is: Claire Garrard This respondent's MAKEUP nominee is: This respondent's SOUND nominee is: This respondent nominted the following STUDENT DIRECTOR: This respondent nominated the following STUDENT STAGE Kelsey Daye Lutz MANAGER: This respondent nominated the following STUDENT DRAMATURGE: FacultyDirectorNomName FacultyDesignerNomName FacultyTechnologistNomName RESPONDENT'S NARRATIVE COMMENTS: The respondent provided the following comments on CHOICE OF PLAY: This musical is definitely an appropriate choice for the UNCG theatre program. Sondheim’s musicals always offer many challenges, but this one stands out as the artistic pinnacle in his oeuvre. The demands placed on the singers, the orchestra, the designers, and technicians are enormous. The UNCG program stands as one of the finest in the region, so this musical calls upon the excellent resources of the entire program to do its best work. And the UNCG theatre program certainly affirmed its stellar reputation with this production. For the performance I attended, moreover, the theatre program was hosting a reception for is patrons before the show. The director also brought to my attention that a special matinee performance would occur the next day for 500 prospective theatre majors. A production of Sweeney Todd, especially one done so impressively, is certainly a fantastic vehicle for showcasing the department to these two important constituencies. The respondent provided the following comments on DIRECTING: The director envisioned a conventional interpretation for this production, wisely eschewing any ill-conceived ideas about imposing some sort of “concept” on the script. The director succeeded completely in bringing to life the dark, cynical, cruel, and destructive world that Sondheim and Wheeler originally created. The show is a “musical thriller,” and that’s what the director brought to life. The production told the story clearly and powerfully. Particularly gratifying was the brisk attitude that pervaded the entire production. Curtains rang down quickly. The chorus moved onstage and offstage with grim, purposeful vigor. Moving scenery glided or flew with mechanical precision and speed. Even the stage crew moved at that wonderfully rapid and efficient pace. All the performers seemed to have clear guidance from the director about spacing, relationships, pacing, and performance style—and all the performers were occupying the same fictional world as a result. Everything about the production worked towards the powerful climax of suspense and irony—when Joanna sits in the barber chair. Members of the audience could be heard gasping and groaning. The respondent provided the following comments on ACTING: All members of the cast demonstrated mastery of the technically challenging score and script. Performers spoke the appropriate dialect with consistency and authenticity. Mr. Campbell was most impressive when he unleashed the smoldering rage of his character through his voice and powerful physical presence. Ms. Mark gave a particularly compelling performance. First of all, her vocal ability was extremely impressive. Moreover, she sidestepped the inevitable comparison to Angela Lansbury by capitalizing on her own youthfulness. She brought to the role a younger woman’s sexuality that became all the more dangerous to those around her (and to herself). As a result, Mrs. Lovett was a character whom the audience could easily see was driven like so many of the other characters by her own desire. She was just as vulnerable to self-destructive, impulsive action as Todd, Turpin, Joanna, or Anthony. Ms. Mark’s understated performance became extremely effective in the second act. We saw Mrs. Lovett engaging in domestic chit-chat while sitting complacently on her settee knitting, all in a sociopathic, cynical, ghoulishly pragmatic masquerade of respectability. This tableau embodied the observations in the Directors’ Notes about “the increasingly mechanized world of the Industrial Revolution, where the gulf between the haves and have nots was ever widening, and greed was . . . a great motivator.” It strikes home in this era of torture, suspension of the writ of habeus corpus, imperialistic occupation, mind-boggling corporate profits, outsourcing of services to desperate third-world countries, tax give-aways to corporations, and cancellation of health insurance for impoverished children. Ms. Burrus and Mr. Douglas sang with stunning clarity and sweetness, as befitting their roles. It was easy to warm to their characters as the show progressed and their love intensified. The respondent provided the following comments on DESIGN ELEMENTS: The designers deserve nothing but high praise for their efforts. They all worked cohesively to support the director’s vision of the production. The scenic and costume designers shared a tight color palette, and their visual power came through with stunning force during those few moments when large numbers of characters were on stage. The lighting design succeeded in a difficult assignment—to render that dark mood of the story and at the same time put light on characters so that they can be seen. The moving gears in the scenery evoked all that is magical about the theatre—not to mention the enormous amount of work invested in them. We wanted to see that wonderful effect put to more use in the production. For example, when the Todd-Lovett partnership is running like a well oiled machine in “God, That’s Good!” the power of that song could be reinforced by the smooth, relentless turning of the monumental cogs. On the one hand, the use of the “hash-mark” gobos and low-intensity illumination on the scenic surfaces communicated the dangerous, dark, ominous world of the show. On the other hand, the lighting designer poured intense, white light in very tight pools on the individual scenes all about the stage. We could SEE performers’ faces! It is no small feat to accomplish these two goals simultaneously as a lighting designer. The respondent provided the following comments on TECH ELEMENTS: The execution of the designs was as impressive as their imaginative conceptualization. Everything about the lighting, costumes, properties, and scenery presented a finished, professional look, including the act curtain and the warming lights upon it. The quality of performance by the orchestra rivaled any professional orchestra anywhere. This production confronted the artists with innumerable technical challenges, and the production staff met these challenges with great mastery. The millinery, make-up and wig craftwork of Ms. Kurtzman, Howell and Foreman deserve special commendation. Electronic amplification of musicals presents an agonizing conundrum to theatre companies that do not have the million-dollar budgets of Broadway. Still the UNCG program used good technology to support the volume of the principal performers. Every solo voice came through with strength and clarity. Such technological achievement made it all the more disappointing that the chorus was not electronically amplified at a level equal to that of the principals or the orchestra. The chorus offered a vital component to the overall story and sang extremely challenging music very well. Their superb vocal contribution to the production was positively overpowered by the orchestra. Use of stage microphones might have resolved that problem, if it was technically possible to use them. The sound engineering triumphed magnificently over one very difficult logistical problem. The performers and the orchestra needed to be amplified so that all could be heard by the audience and so that orchestra and cast could hear each other. This is not an easy task, especially when the orchestra is situated in a Bayreuth-like catacomb beneath the stage. Mr. Shearin deserves special praise for this work on this problem. There are miscellaneous topics worthy of mention that do not fit clearly into any one of the categories, and I will add them arbitrarily at this point. The KC/ACTF response form offers no place to acknowledge the work of the musical director, fight choreographer or specialty craft/technical work by students. I can only hope that the form can be revised to admit those possibilities as award nomination categories. In this production, students worked in all these categories, and so they deserve the opportunity to be honored alongside the student stage manager, for example. I do want to give particular credit to Mr. Matthews for his achievement as musical director. As noted already several times here, this score offers enormous challenges. He obviously brought the entire company to a high level of professional quality for this production. The playbill for the production raised a number of questions. The choice of black ink on red paper made it difficult reading for this aging baby-boomer. A choice of higher contrast colors between background and text would have alleviated this problem. On the cover, there are logos of the School of Music and Theatre Department. This suggests that the production was a collaboration between these two UNCG programs. The rest of the playbill, however, does not give much credit to the School of Music. Theatre faculty and graduate students are listed, for example, but Music faculty and graduate students are not listed. Moreover, there is no credit for a conductor of the orchestra. Was the musical director the conductor? If yes, then Mr. Matthews deserves the appropriate credit for his excellent work in BOTH important and substantial capacities. The listing of the members of the orchestra did not indicate if any of these musicians were hired professionals, faculty, graduate students, or undergraduate students. That would be useful information. Mr. York’s graphic image on the cover of the playbill and on posters for the production baffled me more than anything else. The image looks as if there is an eyeball with a cloud above it, enclosed by an arm. It took quite a bit of work to discern the representation of Sweeney slashing the throat of a victim whose mouth is open in a scream. These expressions of concerns about the playbill should be taken in perspective of the larger picture. The production was impressive, and the playbill should communicate the same high levels of professionalism that radiate from every other aspect of the production. The students, faculty and audiences at UNCG deserve it, indeed. This production validated the reputation and truly fine quality of the juggernaut-like theatre and music programs at UNCG. All who were involved in the production of Sweeney Todd should feel great satisfaction about their achievements. I drove home the next day reflecting about the 500 prospective students who were arriving on campus: Who wouldn’t want to study there? Who wouldn’t want to work there? Congratulations to the Theatre Department and the School of Music.