| Red, Hot & Cole is luke warm | | Print | |
| Written by Martha Haney | |
| Monday, 26 February 2007 | |
 Poquoson Island Players (PIP's) recently opened Red, Hot and Cole. This tribute to the life of songwriter (most notably for his Broadway showtunes) Cole Porter had a two weekend run at Poquoson Middle School.
This tribute comprises many of Porter's most famous songs including the popular "Anything Goes", "You're the Top" and the songs from Kiss Me Kate. A cast of eleven performers and a pit band of three play and perform multiple roles through out the life of Cole Porter, from his beginning to his later years which he spent in a wheelchair due to a riding accident.
There were many nice voices amongst the mix of cast members and when they sang as a chorus it was, at times, impressive. At other times, it became a little bit of a wreck. For instance, all of the guys came to centerstage to perform what appeared to be a barber shop quartet style song, but every individual voice stood out to resulting in an unblended sound.
Amy D. Insley's director's note claimed "I tried to imagine what I would want to see as an audience member, and the thought of watching actors take on various roles, as well as the song and dance element sounded like a lot of fun. I also wanted to provide a challenge for some of our talent here in the area." She did provide a challenge and many of the cast met it by the skin of their teeth - as far as singing and dancing goes. However, as far as the cast portraying multiple characters... well, this didn't go very well.
The script itself doesn't help the actors much as far as character development goes. The show moves quickly through Porter's life, not allowing a lot of time for true emotion, and many of the lines are just downright cheesy. Transitions are awkward and the audience (and cast) is never allowed time to really react to momentous events. For instance, just after the news of Porter's accident that crushed both of his legs, the cast sings and dances to an upbeat tune that is completely at odds with the anxiousness and worry they were feeling seconds before. Though it is two and a half hours of great songs and decent singing, this show leaves you merely "lukewarm" instead of "red hot". Red, Hot, and Cole provides a moderately enjoyable time if you're a Cole Porter fan, and includes many great songs from musical theatre's history. Red, Hot and Cole played through February 25, 2007 with Poquoson Island Players. |
The lighting design was boring and repetitive 
In the end the cast was merely adequate with only a couple of exceptions. One notable performance was Amy D. Insley singing "You're the Top" in true Ethel Merman style. Jerry Sowers impressed the audience with a variety of characters that were varied and enjoyable to watch. Colleen Pettie, a recent graduate of JMU, provided us with the most engaging characters in the show, nicely underplaying the wry humor of her lines.
|
Why is everyone assuming the reviewer/editors didn't take the available equipment into consideration? Maybe the review says EXACTLY what it's supposed to say... I mean, the review comments on the 'size' of the spot (a quarter of the stage) - you can't tell me there no way to shutter the thing. I've seen shows at PMS (love that name) that have used smaller spot focuses. And you can't blame unadjustable lights for the repetitive staging the review also talks about. Personally, I almost groaned out loud every time the spot came on - and it did every single time there was a solo. EVERY single time. Can't blame that on equipment. And Miss Amy, why are you attacking the reviewer for saying that a director shouldn't be in their own show? First of all, how would the reviewer even know what the ins and outs of the situation were? Besides which, you say that problem happened 5 days before the show opened... meaning that you had about 2 months of directing time before that. Don't wave the 'I'm a Professional' flag around here. The others who read this site who have ALSO worked professionally know just how little that really means. Sorry for being a *****(edited), guys, but I agree with the reviewer on this one. I agree with the comments made by Amy. How can a reviewer fairly judge the lights at such a venue. Walking into the builiding, any reasonable person would realize that they are in a MIDDLE SCHOOL and understand that the lighting in the theatre is commonly used for band and choir concerts, and school assemblies, not theatre productions. Considering that the editors of this website have done shows and even served on the board of directors for PIPS, how could they allow this website to critique such minute details as the lights, which obviously the theatre company has no control over. Instead, how about writing, 'With the lighting equipment provided by the venue, the lighting creation for the show served its purpose.' That allows the reader an option to blame the lack of good venue or the lack of cretivity in the director. The way the article was written indicates that the director lacked any creativity or vision (pun intended)for the lighting. A rough draft of the review was accidentally posted with incorrect information throughout including the authors name. This was caught by our editorial staff within 30 minutes and was pulled from the site. The comments made in the first draft about the director being onstage were not used for the very reasons you (Amy) state. We apologize for the confusion. PJ Freebourn As the director of this production I have a few comments to make on this review. First off let me preface it with this fact - I do theatre as a profession, and have for quite some time, so I do not ever get into the nuts and bolts of performance review, because quite frankly one guys opinion will never break me. With that said - I do have a few things to say with regards to the review, or shall I say, reviews that were posted on OHR. It seems odd to me that the first review I read by MJ Garland was there, then gone, and now another takes its place presumably written by someone else - but still containing many of the same words as the first. I will respond to both. With regards to your opinions on acting, my program notes, etc. I take no issue - your opinions are yours as mine are mine, and we can agree to disagree. I do however want to clarify Mr. Garland's information with regards to saying that I should not have as a director taken on such a large role. There was never the intention of taking on a large role, or any role for that matter. As a matter of fact that role was cast at the audition as were the rest of them. However, for reasons that I care not to disclose, the actress playing the Ethel Merman role took her leave of us about 5 days before opening. I am a consummate professional when it comes to this art, and therefore did what any director worth his or her salt would do - I stepped up. So your review of my performance was phenomenal - but you need to get your fact straight before you say a director doesn't need to put themselves in that position. Now for my commentary on the new review ( still confused on why there were two!) I again do not take issue with any of your review other than your decisions to pick on the lighting. Surely you realize that this show was done on a middle school stage - well, with middle school lighting capability. Picking on the lighting would be akin to going to a car show and comparing a Kia to a Land Cruiser, and getting ticked off at the Kia because no matter what it does it just can't have the same features as the Cruiser. Things that are not in the control of a director or theatre company should not fall under scrutiny - it isn't fair game. It is almost laughable to me that anyone would choose that as an element to even discuss considering the space. Either way - I will stay awake tomorrow to set foot in the theatre as my lifestyle, and you can write nasty comments about silly stuff for free! I think this means I win! Touche' |