 |
| Casandre Elyse Medel, Ian Weber & Michael Mayes in Edgewise. Photo – Theatre[502]. |
Edgewise
By
Eliza Clark
Directed
by Mike Brooks
A
review by Carlos-Manuel
Entire contents copyright
© 2013 Carlos-Manuel. All rights reserved.
Since its inception, Theatre [502] has challenged
audiences to question everything, from its existence in the universe and the
meaning of life to our purpose in the world and the cause and effect of our
actions. This is one of the many reasons I like Theatre [502]. They are not
afraid to challenge our intellect, our fears, our convictions and beliefs. The
company dares to go where most theatre companies dare not.
Another thing I like about Theatre [502] is that,
so far, the acting tends to be some of the best around town. That also goes for
the artistic values of their productions and for the professionalism the
members of the company show at every event. But as the saying goes, “Not everything
that shines is gold.”
Edgewise by Eliza Clark is the
company’s second play in their third season, and like the plays before
this one, it is loaded with philosophical and ethical questions.
The story revolves around three teenagers who work
at a fast food burger joint in New Jersey and the decisions they have to make
in order to survive in a United States that is under siege by “the enemy,”
which in this case seems to be every person who isn’t a patriot.
The entire story takes place within the burger joint:
behind the counter and the storage room. This is important to note because the
environment outside the building is supposed to be chaotic and unsafe due to
the non-stop airstrikes and the many shootings. In other words, New Jersey is
an actual battlefield. And here lies my problem, first with the script, then
with the production.
The playwright places three teenagers in the middle
of a battlefield crisis, where the only “safe space” seems to be the burger
joint itself, and the outside world seems to be a constant threat; having a bloody,
injured man – who could be the enemy – showing up at the restaurant raises the
stakes in the story. Immediately, the alpha of the three teenagers (a funny
Michael Mayes as Ruckus) takes matters into his hands and decides the stranger
(Eli Keel as Louis) is an untrustworthy individual and must be dealt with. While
I was able to accept Ruckus’s decision, I just couldn’t believe, as much as I
tried, that the other two teenagers would follow along with the plan,
especially when nothing is truly forcing them (although they state otherwise)
to stay. Still, I tried to suspend my disbelief as much as possible to go alone
with the story. Yet, at the end, I couldn’t buy the product.
Then I realized why. It was the direction (naturalistic)
and the lack of truly understanding what it really means to be in the middle of
danger that kept me from buying into the play’s premise. I’m not sure if any of
the actors or the director have ever been in a true battlefield or in a place
where you have to run and hide because riots are happening left and right and
you fear for your life, or in a town/country where unexpected gunfire happens
as you are walking down the street. I don’t think the actors have ever been in
such situations and I pretty much doubt the director has ever experience such
realities, except in movies and video games. And if they have, they forgot to
recall the horror, the fear, and the constant uneasiness of knowing that you
might get unexpectedly shot or captured. Trust me, that uneasiness, and fear,
and incertitude makes you a very nervous individual, trusting no one,
especially those around you. And in my case, it also takes years of counseling
to overcome such traumas.
I bring this up because the playwright’s desire to
place the teenagers in such a situation, although seemingly a good idea, at
times fails because some of the story’s inconsistences. Emma (Casandre Elyse
Medel), for example, makes an attempt to go home but never does because “she is
being forced” by Ruckus to stay. Yet, there is really no true evidence (physical
or emotional) to support this intimidation. Perhaps the playwright’s intentions
were to use the outside forces to keep Emma in the burger joint but it never
really feels that the character is ever in danger. Besides, a few times Emma
and Marco (Ian Weber) go to their cars, which are parked outside, and several
costumers used the drive-thru to order their meals, indicating the fact that
life outside the restaurant isn’t really that dangerous. Still, there are
airstrikes happening throughout the day, injured people being tortured,
unexpected guests becoming a threat, and at least two teenagers capable of
killing each other if necessary. Yet, with all these factors surrounding the
story and the characters, it all felt completely artificial.
Don’t get me wrong. The actors did a fantastic job,
especially Michael Mayes as Ruckus. Ian Weber, as Marco, truly portrays the
internal angst of an introvert/insecure teenager; and Casandra Elyse Medel
stood her ground as the worried but easy-to-manipulate female in the cast. Then
there was the work of Eli Keel as Louis and JohnBen Lacy as Paul, both
presenting characters that brought some uneasiness to the situation.
Yet, as mentioned before, it was the directing that
bothered me the most. Because while the actors knew their characters inside out
(and I’m sure thanks to the director working with them), the blocking and line
delivery were perfect, I cannot help but feel that the immediacy of danger, the
tension felt in threatening situations, and the fear of being trapped was never
truly palpable. To me that has to do with a tone that was too relaxed or
naturalistic, if you will, rather than filled with intensity and fear.
Still, the audience laughed and so did I. And there
were even some people who jumped out of their seats or covered their eyes when
hearing or witnessing some of the characters’ actions. But like in an action
flick, those were just the results of the special effects, which in this
production seem to be what the director relied on because, as he states in the
program, “These are characters that are immediately recognizable and relatable,
even if their circumstances and choices are not” – hence, my issue with both the
script and the production.
As I watched Edgewise,
I couldn’t help but be reminded of another play with a similar premise, Death and the Maiden by Chilean
playwright Ariel Dorfman. In this play, like in Edgewise, we don’t really know who is telling the truth, who is a
liar, and who is victim or enemy. Yet, unlike Edgewise, the characters’ situations and their gruesome actions are
right in your face, with no apology, placing the audience in an unnerving
situation and likely to make anyone feel angry and helpless. That tension and
fear is exactly what was missing from this production. Instead, we are
presented with a clearly calculated production that feels like a sanitized experiment
where the actors could go “all the way” but dare not to because it could be too
real for an American audience.
Edgewise
August 16, 17, 19, 22, 23, 24
8 p.m.
$15
8 p.m.
$15
Theatre
[502]
At
The Clifton Center
2117
Payne Street
Louisvile,
KY 40206
No comments:
Post a Comment