Introducing Professional Development Workshop for Adjudicators

As part of Theatre Ontario’s Adjudicator Professional Development series, we are excited to offer a new workshop for Ontario’s adjudicators “The Adjudicator’s Voice: How to Say What You Mean Without Saying What You Think”, lead by Annette G. Procunier.

Suitable for both emerging adjudicators and for established adjudicators interested in enhancing their skills, this workshop will help adjudicators with the art of critique and strengthening their communications.

Adjudicators at the workshop will:

• Explore style, language, content and focus in establishing rapport and creating an environment for learning
• Discuss public versus private adjudication
• Discuss how to engage participants in dialogue without allowing them to take control of the situation
• Discuss professional judgement versus personal opinion

As an adjudicator, our instructor has participated in festivals in Europe, Canada, Japan and the United States having judged more than 125 festivals in 30 years including Theatre Ontario Festival, and festivals for QUONTA and EODL. She has adjudicated the World Theatre Festival in Monaco for IATA and the national festival for the American Association of Community Theatre four times. She is the author of Do You See What I See? on adjudication.

The workshop is being held on Saturday May 18 in Richmond Hill. This is during the Theatre Ontario Festival, and gives participants an opportunity to also attend performances and Festival adjudications, and to meet with members of the community theatre sector from across Ontario.

Learn more about Theatre Ontario’s “Adjudicator’s Voice” workshop

Welcome Carolee Mason as Theatre Ontario Festival 2019 Adjudicator

Carolee Mason

Theatre Ontario welcomes Carolee Mason as adjudicator for Theatre Ontario Festival 2019 in Richmond Hill. Carolee most recently adjudicated as the Western Ontario Drama League Festival preliminary adjudicator in 2017/18 and the Association of Community Theatres—Central Ontario (ACT-CO) Festival in 2015/16. This will be her first time adjudicating Theatre Ontario Festival, and marks the first Theatre Ontario Festival adjudicated by a graduate of Theatre Ontario’s Adjudicator Training Program, initiated in 2010.

Carolee has taught in the Theatre Department at Brock University, instructed practicing teachers and teacher candidates with the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, and has been the teacher/director of generations of high school drama students and countless community theatre groups. She is a frequent workshop leader with the Council of Drama and Dance Educators of Ontario, and has presented for drama educators internationally with the American Alliance of Theatre Educators and the International Drama and Education Association.

“Creative collaboration is one of the most engaging of human endeavours,” said Carolee. “Couple that with the spirit of community and discovery at the Theatre Ontario Festival, and the experience is heady! I am thrilled to adjudicate the 2019 Festival, to foster learning, and to celebrate achievements with my theatre colleagues from around the province.”

Learn more about Carolee Mason

Theatre Ontario Festival 2019 will be held in Richmond Hill from May 15 to 19, 2019 and is co-hosted by Theatre Ontario, The Curtain Club, and the Association of Community Theatres—Central Ontario.

Learn more about Theatre Ontario Festival

Join Us at the Theatre Ontario Adjudicators Symposium

Adjudication at Theatre Ontario Festival 2018

Registrations are now open for our annual Adjudicators Symposium, running Saturday, September 22, 2018, from 10:00am to 4:00pm at the Theatre Ontario office in Toronto.

The Symposium will open with a discussion of the past year of adjudication. Adjudicators who were engaged at community theatre festivals in 2017/18 are invited to share their experiences during the season.

In the “Adjudication Techniques Roundtable”, we will discuss techniques and practices in a variety of areas of adjudication. Participants will suggest topics for conversation.

This year’s Symposium will also feature a “Meet the Engagers” panel with representatives from Ontario community theatre festivals.

Join us at Theatre Ontario’s Adjudicators Symposium

Save the Date for the Theatre Ontario Adjudicators Symposium

Annette G. Procunier leading a Detailed
Adjudication at Theatre Ontario Festival 2017

Mark your calendars!  We've booked the date for our next Theatre Ontario Adjudicators Symposium – it will be Saturday, September 22, 2018, from 10:00am to 4:00pm at the Theatre Ontario office in Toronto.

The Symposium is one of Theatre Ontario’s professional development and networking events for adjudicators of all experience levels. Adjudicators discuss techniques, approaches and strategies for public and detailed adjudications; and their adjudication experiences during the past year. This year’s Symposium will feature a “Meet the Engagers” panel with representatives from community theatre festivals.

Registration will open in late July.

Learn more about Theatre Ontario’s Adjudicators Symposium

Highlights of the Detailed Adjudication of “Dead Accounts” at Theatre Ontario Festival 2018

Ottawa Little Theatre's production of Dead Accounts

by Brandon Moore, Community Theatre and Communications Manager

Highlights of the detailed adjudication by Maja Ardal of Ottawa Little Theatre’s production of Dead Accounts by Theresa Rebeck (representing EODL, the Eastern Ontario Drama League.)

As always, this is my best effort to record the conversation at the Detailed Adjudication, with apology for any misrepresentations of the ideas of the members of the company and the adjudicator. Corrections and clarifications are always welcome in the comments.

• This text moves from high energized comedy to deadly serious text: that collision makes for good theatre
• Set features an intense naturalism: a rich, detailed set; impression of a convex mirror with everything stretched; actors skin colour blended with the wall colour; company acknowledged lighting needed tweaking, walls should have been brighter
• Fit precisely: stage dimensions were similar to Ottawa Little Theatre; they have a wrap-around cyc at home which they used to fully surround the set
• Music needs to have a presence: it must match both the high energy of the play and the crispness of the performances
• Because they needed blackouts, they must be earned because we are seeing nothing: How do you “reward” the audience in a blackout? Suggestion was louder music that matched the play’s energy (sound tended to be cloudy and unclear)
• Opening scene: Jack is frantic; raises the concern: is this the level we will see all show? Instead, used to establish urgency for character
• Jack demonstrated incredibly physical expression; director’s job was to edit the actor who gave more and more; this is expected: actor will work on impulse and director must edit that
• What is driving the frantic-ness: Is it a guilty conscience? The adrenaline from doing a terrible thing? Drugs?  The most interesting choice is the one driven by circumstance
• On the surface text can seem shallow, but the production found depths in it
• Lorna carries the theme of the play (e.g. planted a stick and had to wait for it… a metaphor for her relationship with Phil); also embodies the middle-class, the mid-west, tough economic times (living at home)
• Applauded the company for not getting sentimental
• Barbara represents the generation before (e.g. keeping religion central, etc.)
• The company earned the quieter scenes by playing comedy
• Finale describes “splitting the kitchen apart”; could not figure out how to drive the execution of that; chose the lighting gobo effect to suggest the trees
• What makes Jack come home?  Text is unclear (in a positive way) giving opportunity to play—he’s a casualty and a winner; some remarkable writing for this character
• Did the play need a natural set? Designer felt you needed to recognize a 1950s home and a safe place for Jack; set also gave the feel of a space for a live-studio-audience sitcom (reflecting some of the tone of the play); details that show Lorna’s influence (e.g. the Keurig machine); working appliances to help the audience experience the kitchen feel (smell the coffee, the toast, etc.)
• The sequence when the father is going to the hospital: showed passage of time through a series of blackouts and images of Jenny in the house—challenging to do
• Transitions between scenes took a long time; new stage manager for this performance and her first time calling the show
• Barbara talking over Lorna on the telephone—well-executed; most of the content itself is not critical (necessary information which was well-communicated), and Barbara dealing with various props helped us connect with what was going on
• Phil’s performance demonstrated someone trying to use all his senses to gather information
• Use of real food helped with the sensual experience (working freezer, real ice cream, etc.)
• Also very Cincinatti-specific—recognizable and authentic (cast member had Ohio in-laws that helped supply props).
• Text also has a love of the mid-west that tends to be lookerd down up on from the urban, financial world
• Jenny is a challenging character: described so terribly, how do you find the qualities that Jack could love

Learn more about Theatre Ontario Festival 2018

Highlights of the Detailed Adjudication of “Tempting Providence” at Theatre Ontario Festival 2018

ELATE's production of Tempting Providence

by Brandon Moore, Community Theatre and Communications Manager

Highlights of the detailed adjudication by Maja Ardal of Elliot Lake Amateur Theatre Ensemble’s production of Tempting Providence by Robert Chafe (representing QUONTA, the northeastern Ontario community theatre association.)

As always, this is my best effort to record the conversation at the Detailed Adjudication, with apology for any misrepresentations of the ideas of the members of the company and the adjudicator. Corrections and clarifications are always welcome in the comments.

• Strong opening: no pre-show music, lighting at half for the play`s beginning, the nurse came in as if from abroad
• Quickly established the convention that the style will be the transformation of objects into set pieces
• Minimalism can make you creative (e.g. particularly liked two chairs with a blanket spread overtop to make the shape of a cradle)
• Actors then embody the script
• Off the top, the actors seemed unsettled and nervous—breathing exercises are encouraged to help manage that
• Costumes were neutral; inspired by images they had seen of other productions: always take the best of what we can find
• Goal of actors is to live inside the story, and bring it alive fully
• Who is the audience and why are you compelled to tell the story?
• For Myra, it was internal – that “other self” you can tell your worst things to
• For Angus, an amazing story that his pals need to hear; he clearly had the most fun, adding a twinkle his eye to demonstrate his enjoyment
• For Man and Woman, it was the gossipy community
• In a moment, actors need to see it, feel it, smell it—experience it; the performers’ nervousness meant that they were “selling it” before “experiencing it”
• For example, one quality of Newfoundland is that vigorous, robust smell
• Myra states she has no time for emotion; her journey is admitting to her emotion, so she can’t start with emotion
• Also, emotion is a by-product of your objective—be careful of trying to show the emotion or letting the emotion be the driver; if you “over deliver” the emotion, it doesn’t give the audience space to appreciate the story
• This is a community of denial, and Woman is our first example of that as someone from the community; we saw too much of her breakdown rather than the denial of her breakdown, never let go of your objective and focus on one thing at a time
• Woman as Mrs. House: She is testing Myra, putting her through an examination as well, finds out that she’s tough enough (she passes!)
• In every scene, always identify who am I here with this person in this moment
• Text is lyrical, and Myra brings the lyricism
• Angus’ delivery tended to finish a sentence and come to a stop; became a pattern of delivery that the performer needs to be aware of
• Be rigorous with your pace: first act was supposed to run 70 minutes, but it actually ran closer to 90 minutes; for example when Man as Alex comes with the news about the baby coming, Myra needs to be rushing (rather than going back to her baking); moving into a tableau could show us the rushing
• Pace DOESN’T mean rushing: keep the objective alive, breathe
• For actress playing Myra, this was her first major role; she brought presence and charisma, encouraged to keep focusing on what will bring a character alive
• Yawning is always another good warm-up technique to wake up the body
• When playing a character, voice and face are the last elements: Begin with the spine and pelvic base and think about questions of the body (How long have I worked? Where is my head? Etc)
• Actors were seniors, but young people can struggle with physicality just as much
• “Our bodies tell the truth when our language doesn’t”
• Opening of play: trying to solve challenge of how to bring on the live musician, he came onto the stage as a mummer (part of Newfoundland culture)
• Musician responded to actor’s feelings, music was gentle; other option for a live musician is to escalate the tension—music can move forward rather than reflect back
• The end of Act One was “divine” (pulling the tooth, selling the marriage proposal)
• When miming, consider doing a workshop: sometimes the objects seemed to disappear rather than always be there throughout
• Company brought desire and commitment, and will continue to develop craft over time

Learn more about Theatre Ontario Festival 2018

Highlights of the Detailed Adjudication of “Little Gem” at Theatre Ontario Festival 2018

Toronto Irish Players' production of Little Gem

by Brandon Moore, Community Theatre and Communications Manager

Highlights of the detailed adjudication by Maja Ardal of Toronto Irish Players’ production of Little Gem by Elaine Murphy (representing ACT-CO, the Association of Community Theatres—Central Ontario.)

As always, this is my best effort to record the conversation at the Detailed Adjudication, with apology for any misrepresentations of the ideas of the members of the company and the adjudicator. Corrections and clarifications are always welcome in the comments.

• Elaine Murphy’s script is the authentic voices of working class women, love her ear and how she powered the voices into her work
• In Ireland, monologue is an art form—in the pub, over coffee
• This production was taken from an intimate environment (the Alumnae Theatre in Toronto) to a spacious environment (the Palace Theatre in London)
• Entirely direct address, which means you need to answer the question: Who are they talking to?
• Lovely set, felt airy, includes sketches of the unseen men from the play
• Three defined areas for each women
• Pre-show music was gently playing: Irish fusion soundscape; sound designer took play’s tag line of “birth, death and salsa” and sought out Celtic salsa
• The music playing quietly invited us in: created the expectation of an experience of intimacy
• Cyc created opportunities for colour
• Actors need to not feel rushed: establish the atmosphere in the opening moments
• The play functions as 3 one-person shows: fundamentals in a one-person show are the clear journey, take time to digest… how much did they break down the text?
• Also provides opportunities to create other characters
• All three start in a place of desperation (e.g. Kay has “an itch”)
• Challenging to act someone else’s stream of consciousness, with its digressions and the dilemmas that pop up in the text
• Amber’s opening monologue is challenging: mentions 15 characters; don’t always depend on just the text to find the characters, body language can help us find them too
• Lorraine’s journey is compelling, and the more of a freaked out mess she is at the beginning, the more we will enjoy it—opportunities are to let us hear the voices of the other characters (e.g. the customer, the HR person, etc.)
• The clarity of the text helped us immerse ourselves in the Irish culture, slang, etc.
• Irish are brilliant at “trouble” and making it funny
• Difficulty in one-person play is the characters have things done to themselves, they are not affecting each other in the moment
• Physical moments like the salsa dancing helped us to see what another character was like
• Plays has been seen both with and without an intermission; text doesn’t define it either way
• How do we feel closer to this work: follow the play by seeing every detail, the brightness of the lighting presented challenges (e.g. didn’t see the pregnancy test scene on the toilet), the dramatics and the colour can create a perfect mood
• The D.S. area had blue tips side-lighting, but 50% of the dimensional lighting did not work; it was a technical problem that the designer could not overcome while trying to adapt from the original space to this theatre; the set was set back because the U.S. top lights worked successfully
• Always take the risk of stopping the play and living the moment; Murphy goes off on tangents, so always explore every full stop, every period
• The stories are also filled with subtle details (e.g. how Kay stole Gem)
• Amber’s story has so many voices, hardest to connect (she also has the fewest people in the audience her age), the writing of her character is frantic
• Who are they talking to in their direct address?  The fourth wall changes throughout the play: sometimes stream of consciousness, talking to themselves, replaying a moment in the present tense; director focus on the flow so it wouldn’t look like stand-up, with movement to keep the play flowing
• Identify if the person being address is a friend or enemy; someone intimate or someone like a social worker you are explaining things to; that person may change—even in mid-monologue
• This venue had superior cyc lighting than previous venue; gave them the opportunity to make the visuals of the dance club far more significant, and to try and coordinate with the beats in the music
• Fundamentally, we felt these three women

Learn more about Theatre Ontario Festival 2018

Highlights of the Detailed Adjudication of “On a First Name Basis” at Theatre Ontario Festival 2018

Elmira Theatre Company's production of On a First Name Basis

by Brandon Moore, Community Theatre and Communications Manager

Highlights of the detailed adjudication by Maja Ardal of Elmira Theatre Company’s production of On a First Name Basis by Norm Foster (representing WODL, the Western Ontario Drama League.)

As always, this is my best effort to record the conversation at the Detailed Adjudication, with apology for any misrepresentations of the ideas of the members of the company and the adjudicator. Corrections and clarifications are always welcome in the comments.

• Norm Foster pours ideas, warmth, humour, heart onto the page; writes ordinary people in a way that is relatable
• There is so much to mine in a text like this which is literally about two people discovering each other
• Interesting décor choices to reflect his sophistication, his travel; particularly taken with the windows suggesting a world beyond this room
• Swing doors can be extremely fun on a set
• Atmosphere: Used classical pre-show music to set the mood; intention was to set the tone of David and the illusion of the world he has created for himself; classical music brings particular contexts with them—other choices could have been heavier and busier music, or evening bird song, or nothing at all
• The two actors demonstrated a familiarity with each other (as actors)
• The first act is harder than the second act: the mystery that neither character knows what is going to come from the other person—how does what they say affect me?: always break down the text beat to beat
• Lucy seemed to be the character who invited the audience in as the person through whom we access the play; this was not necessarily intentional by the director, David is egotistical and that works for him
• David is a character who speaks and then thinks about what he had said; with characters like this, find ways to push past the point of propriety: there are wounds, injuries, bruises between these characters; as well as what will hover in their relationship after the play is over
• The tone of irony that Lucy demonstrates: Is this always how she deals with him, or is it a new tactic she’s using for the first time?  If it’s not a new tactic, is David discovering (noticing) this for the first time?
• When interpreting any text, look for “the ticking clock” that keeps the audience excited, on the edge of their seats
• Alcohol, and its influence on characters, is a plot element that audiences will respond to: what does the text say about how they drink (e.g. Lucy can hold her alcohol); how do you show the journey of the alcohol’s increasing influence; what are the moments where tongues have been loosened because of the alcohol
• Examine the impact of characters on each other: How do Lucy and David change each other throughout the play?
• Physical moves—were they always moving on impulse? Sometimes the intention behind the movement didn’t always read, and how that physical space had changed because of the movement
• Some lovely moments of staging—such as Lucy ending up in David’s chair for a climactic revelation
• Production’s evolution since previous performance: a feeling that they found the truths more
• David’s dance: pure communication of character through body language; when music came on, hips started moving right away
• Actors finding the balance between “taking the moment” and feeling like they are long pauses, silences: the audience will fill those moments based on how we read what is going on between them
• Challenge of play: two people having a conversations; finding “what makes it dangerous” in the conversation will be what keep the audience hooked in
• Finding lovability in David: an unsympathetic character can be compelling; overtly lacks kindness on the surface; he is the walking wounded and has not dealt with his emotional truth
• There are explosions of anger in Act 2—these are opportunities in a text to take the characters to the brink
• When breaking down the beats: Why did you say that—think about if it’s coming from the belly? The head?

Maja also remarked on the audience’s festive atmosphere in the theatre—the audience didn’t want to be anywhere else but in there.

Learn more about Theatre Ontario Festival 2018

Welcome Maja Ardal as Festival 2018 Adjudicator

Theatre Ontario welcomes Maja Ardal as adjudicator for Theatre Ontario Festival 2018 in London. Maja most recently adjudicated the QUONTA Festival (northeastern Ontario) in 2015 in Sault Ste. Marie, and the London One-Act Play Festival in 2016. This will be her first time adjudicating Theatre Ontario Festival.

Maja has been working in theatre for forty-seven years. She is a director, playwright, actor, and theatre trainer. Her musical play, The Hero of Hunter Street, was produced by 4th Line Theatre in 2016. She researched and created One Thing Leads to Another, Theatre for Babies, produced by Young People’s Theatre, receiving two Dora Awards in 2015. It will tour Ontario in 2018, and she is developing the sequel, You and I.

“I am honoured to be invited to this festival,” said Maja. “My role as adjudicator is both challenging and delightful, and ultimately involves the moral responsibility of sharing my views in a way that enriches the communities' craft and passion for playmaking.”

Learn more about Maja Ardal

Theatre Ontario Festival 2018 will be held in London from May 16 to 20, 2018 and is co-hosted by Theatre Ontario, London Community Players, and the Western Ontario Drama League.

Read more about Theatre Ontario Festival

Highlights of the Detailed Adjudication of “Lucy” at Theatre Ontario Festival 2017

Sault Theatre Workshop's production of Lucy

by Brandon Moore, Community Theatre and Communications Manager

Highlights of the detailed adjudication by Annette G. Procunier of Sault Theatre Workshop’s production of Lucy by Damien Atkins (representing QUONTA, the northeastern Ontario community theatre association.)

• Home theatre has a 20-foot proscenium, 16-feet deep (with 4-feet added for this production); seats 90 people around tables with dessert service
• Found the play at last year’s Theatre Ontario Festival; director responded to portrayal of autism in a positive light; autism is a significant part of her life: works with people with autism, family
• Strength of the play is that text invites examination; interested in the fate of the characters after the play is over
• Seemed like they performed originally in a more intimate space: things happen in small, intimate ways; does the larger environment help the actors?
• Furniture C.S. would have benefited from places to create triangular/diagonal action to enhance the space; Morris’s office D.S.L. was an excellent choice: the cold side of the stage (theory is that since English reads from left to right, that is the way the eye looks as well, makes us uncomfortable) 
• Lucy had her own spotlight, effective choice
• Set design had black and white squares: Director wanted it to be unfinished, with gaps; White panels turned around to show us Lucy’s drawings—in the original production they looked too good to be Lucy’s work; drawings may have benefited from more colours; What about Vivian drawing too?—showing the growing closeness of their relationship
• Projections represented outside; were intended to be used in the exterior scene
• D.S. was used only for Vivian and Gavin’s opening scene; compromise in moving from space to space
• Lucy’s hoodie: kept us from seeing her face a little too much
• Sound design featured strong choices: not pastoral, music depicted a different living environment
• Autism sign on the set drew our eye because of the colour
• Company worked strongly on creating character; sometimes heard to hear the performers (e.g. in the opening scene: “How long?” “A year” – this was critical information we needed to hear better)
• Action was most poignant and provocative when the vocal work was at its clearest and strongest
• Vivian and Julia had a believable relationship; Julia’s intensity rose her with voice
• Characters are always trying to drive action, or convey information: What is it you want / From who? In rehearsal, play with driving the action, push further so the director can rein you back
• Vivian leaving her child with Gavin is an unusual choice: there is a lot to be mined in their relationship
• Intensity when Gavin returned was successful—his stakes were really high
• Challenge in climactic scene, both Morris and Julia felt they would have a normal response to intercede; especially since we have seen Julia intercede in the past. They didn’t want to draw focus—perhaps Julia could have tried to intercede and Morris stopped her. Actors should never feel uncomfortable in a scene; play around with the situation: interaction between Vivian, Gavin and Lucy was strong, but how to Julia and Morris fit in?
• Lucy was making her debut: Fun and difficult challenge for her: character is closed-off, actress is touchy, makes eye contact, etc.; she appreciated how the director helped her make her monologues feel real, less “fake/dramatic”
• Lucy was successful in being on stage, without being involved in the action
• Vivian’s truthfulness to her character’s “quirks”—the moment with the paint was a strong moment of connection between the two of them; similarly the touching of their foreheads was played truthfully
• Lighting and sound helped us visualize an internal situation; problem with dark spaces—seemed to be a problem throughout the Festival; actors need to keep their heads up and lighting designers should raise level slightly: atmosphere is important, but seeing the actors is more important
• When Lucy gives Vivian the fossil, the audience needed to see it more clearly: hold it up, be theatrical rather than realistic

As always, this is my best effort to record the conversation at the Detailed Adjudication, with apology for any misrepresentations of the ideas of the members of the company and the adjudicator. Corrections and clarifications are welcome in the comments.

Highlights of the Detailed Adjudication of "Outside Mullingar" at Theatre Ontario Festival 2017

Toronto Irish Players' production of Outside Mullingar

by Brandon Moore, Community Theatre and Communications Manager

Highlights of the detailed adjudication by Annette G. Procunier of Toronto Irish Players’ production of Outside Mullingar by John Patrick Shanley (representing ACT-CO, the Association of Community Theatres—Central Ontario.)

• Script was chosen from their reading group; usually produce Irish-written works, but wanted to explore something from the diaspora
• Perform at Alumnae Theatre, a converted fire-hall with 146 seats
• Production had an economical approach to design; the two houses between Act 1 and Act 2 were alike yet different, frame set pieces to suggest
• Use of cyclorama colours helped provide mood
• Everything on the stage allowed us to become absorbed into the action, while using areas to give us sense of other places
• It’s a play of alternatives: holding onto the past, letting that eat up the present; waiting for something else rather than living in the now
• Wonderful, simple choice to show the passage of time by Anthony moving back and forth across the front of the stage, changing coats to show change of time
• Constant drinking during Act 2 was a wonderful choice; the characters didn’t drink a great deal, allowed that kind of conversation to start, in the script the scene rings a bit false without it; when he gets a bottle reflects change in relationship
• Entrances into the house lacked specificity: clarity of front entrance and the back entrance
• Singing by Rosemary and Aoife of “Wild Mountain Thyme” in the scene change helped inform the characters’ relationship—while functionally serving the set/costume change: we stayed in the world of the play
• Tony and Aoife’s scene: We believe their long shared history; they sat without a lot of blocking which was a good, risky choice; trusted in the text
• Anthony’s costumes could have been crustier-looking
• The physicality of Tony’s death: Director didn’t want it to be melancholy, Tony was a proud man bringing strength to the end, would have stood if he could; Legitimate choice, but suggestion is then to take more time, so that he would read less energetic
• Showing the ring in the final image of Act 1: make it clear that something is going to happen, especially since dialogue makes clear he has done nothing with the ring in three years
• Tony’s scene was a poignant exploration of “in love”
• First-class acting—performers had talent and technique
• Act 2 was a tour-de-force: Every comment had a reaction, nothing was without a response; took time, trusting audience to go with performers, kept audience engaged
• Different reaction at home, primarily an Irish audience with bigger laughs on Tony and Aoife talking about places where they come from, but other lines got laughs for the first time in Ottawa
• Good sense of them as neighbours, plausible that they would wait this long
• Actors were at their finest trying to “get it out: Anthony’s line “I believe that I am a honeybee” then we see Rosemary trying to process it; similarly “Yes, I’m a virgin” / “We can fix that” was beautifully played—characters were self-conscious but actors were not
• First performed in October/November; began remount on April 9
• Lighting designer couldn’t remember all the original cues—always the biggest challenge since costumes are the same, set fundamentally the same, lighting has different instruments, hung differently, not enough rehearsal time: it was clear what were mistakes in execution (rather than design)
• Similarly, sound levels will be different in new venue
• As a designer/director you must nitpick (“pick the fly shit out of the pepper”) but audiences won’t when they are absorbed in the production
• Re-visiting the work meant finding MORE: exploring more; seeing more things, knowing the characters more; things you had forgotten you re-discovered in a new way; director’s instruction was to “re-live”, not re-produce; positive vibes bringing it back into the working space after a successful run
• A specific example was the timing in the Guinness sequence; the moments were refined; “stage business” is good when it allows the characters time to react
• Repetition is human nature, character’s repetitive quicks help make characters seem more truthful
• Aoife walking away in her final scene with Rosemary, movement showed us that she was pronounced, her hip was causing problems, her death was imminent
• Anthony and Tony relationship: nagged each other, but there was no sense that he was going to leave
• Director acknowledged Producer as unsung hero, taking care of everyone including the Director
• Applauded their commitment to craft

As always, this is my best effort to record the conversation at the Detailed Adjudication, with apology for any misrepresentations of the ideas of the members of the company and the adjudicator. Corrections and clarifications are welcome in the comments.

Highlights of the Detailed Adjudication of “Better Living” at Theatre Ontario Festival 2017

Ghost Light Players' production of Better Living

by Brandon Moore, Community Theatre and Communications Manager

Highlights of the detailed adjudication by Annette G. Procunier of Ghost Light Players’ production of Better Living by George F. Walker (representing the Western Ontario Drama League—WODL)

• Ghost Light Players is a two-year-old company; no permanent home—they enjoy moving to new spaces; found kindred spirits
• Director enjoys black comedy, absurdist theatre, “meaty” work: opportunities in George F. Walker; this was an exciting challenge
• Originally performed at the Bank Theatre in Leamington; seats 150 and they averaged about 75 people per performance which exceed their expectations—proscenium stage, braced set pieces, manual lighting board, two-channel sound system; 40 minutes away from their home in Windsor
• Texts like this from the late-70s/early-80s are resonating again with political extremism coming back; issues of family violence have not gone away
• Not an easy play to watch, learning curve for the audience; there will be people in the audience who have lived it; depended upon the truthfulness of the presentation
• Structure of text can be problematic: Opens with exposition, raucously funny, initially the father isn’t so dreadful—he seems benign; but evil hides in banality
• Text doesn’t articulate why the women get sucked back in; people do return to abuse, but it is a sparsely-written transition—all plays have difficulty in their writing, and the challenge is to figure them out
• Production was abundantly truthful—committed to believability and taking us into the world (and we didn’t want to be there)
• Set was evocative, audience members went up to the edge of the stage to see the detail
• Give your tech people all the time in the world—they get far less of it; in tech rehearsals, actors need to sit there and shut up
• Furniture arrangement: Sofa was parallel to the edge of the stage, with the chair perpendicular; if the chair was angle, we would have seen the person sitting in the chair much better
• Kitchen rocking chair interfered with them using the space; also, it read more like a living room rocking chair; it was Nora’s mother’s chair yet she never sat in it (actor had backstory to explain that, but audience didn’t see it)
• Loved the characters eating; it demonstrated compulsive behaviour but the heads down sometimes made it hard to hear
• Costumes and cell-phone made it clear it wasn’t set in the 1980s since the set (out of necessity) couldn’t tell us that
• Actors should take time with their initial entrance: they are the action and we want to absorb who they are; give us an action that allows us a second to see them (e.g. Junior’s entrance—wanted him to flaunt while not seeing Jack in the kitchen; could have been achieved if Jack was entirely U.S. and Junior flaunted to audience rather than mirror)
• Wonderful job of truthful movement, especially with a text requiring so much physicality
• Relationship between Gail and Junior was extremely clear about who was in charge, his naivete was finely acted
• Theatre is about truth not reality: believable people are essential and the actors committed to that; family members’ responses were distinct from each other
• Nora’s first entrance in full regalia was successful: actress created a world and lived in it; always be careful vocally: when voices rise, they can emphasize vowels at the expense of consonants (particularly for women)
• Risk-taking: characters/actors push each other to the limit, listened to each other as thought things were fresh and new
• Occasionally kept playing through the laughs; this is not stand-up comedy with punchlines (like a comedian telling jokes for predictable laughs), but the humour is essential to the work
• Pace and internal rhythm was good
• Nora clearly knew who Tom/Tim was, but decided to live their relationship in another way; it was scary; they talked through the fight scene and changed it a lot—talking is good, but performers can be hurt and should take the time to rehearse it; similarly the Tom/Jack fight was creepy
• Maryann had excellent flightiness
• The gun was not seen clearly by the audience; a stage gun would have had more impact than the sound effect
• The motorcycle helmet gag was a hoot; succeeded because there was no self-consciousness
• The final family scene left us with question of what happened to him, and then he comes in with the television—would his entrance have been more effective if he came in from the backyard, audience focus would go to him; they had tried that choice, but decided they preferred him sneaking into the family portrait—execution didn’t read as “sneaking”, read as he belonged there; what was the significance of the television? He will show them what’s going on in the world, part of his control over them

As always, this is my best effort to record the conversation at the Detailed Adjudication, with apology for any misrepresentations of the ideas of the members of the company and the adjudicator. Corrections and clarifications are welcome in the comments.

Highlights of the Detailed Adjudication of "Waiting for the Parade" at Theatre Ontario Festival 2017

Northumberland Players' production of Waiting for the Parade

by Brandon Moore, Community Theatre and Communications Manager

Highlights of the detailed adjudication by Annette G. Procunier of Northumberland Players’ production of Waiting for the Parade by John Murrell (representing the Eastern Ontario Drama League—EODL)

• Group performed originally in a 50-seat venue, the Firehall Theatre
• Director took on play from her interest in subject matter, heard stories of life at home during Second World War
• Play has interesting sensibility: written by a man, not Canadian- or British-born
• Takes place over six years, women age over the course of the play, challenge for company is depicting that evolution over time
• Established the character types, but then gnawed away at the edges
• Beautiful palette for the show
• Music was evocative, changed with the time of the play
• Props were excellent, but the only one that was unclear was the teddy bear in Catherine’s area: director intended to depict her child, problem was that it was not engaged enough in the action, seemed ornamental rather than useful
• Discussed differences between symbols and images: symbols are what they are (e.g. a cross is a clear Christian symbol) whereas images objects/sound/actions represent something
• Set used platforms/risers for certain areas: Marta’s area was quite full
• Lights are always a challenge in Festivals, especially with this show’s women of varying heights
• Janet’s hat had an ornamental object on top; she needed to keep her head up so that her face would not go into the shadow of the object—audiences need to see faces in order to hear them
• Each actress has an internal rhythm that helped distinguish the characters; they took time and were willing to react, there was never an disengaged moment
• When the characters were not in the scene, they were in their own world, not frozen (e.g. Marta was sewing by hand, referenced by her father for delicate work, the action draws us to her)
• Would Janet’s area with the piano have benefited from being on a riser/platform?  She is the “bossy boots” and would give her height and status
• Catherine’s playing area was S.C. and concerning: most central – does that mean hers is the most important story?
• Catherine’s story would play well S.R., delving into love and sexuality
• Had a riser U.S.C. – originally 3 feet high, but then stairs would be needed and would get in the way of the playing areas, lowered
• Clear white light isolation on Marta while she was talking to the officials was extremely effective
• Another effective scene was the fight between Catherine and Janet—rehearsing violence before the show is helpful so that nothing is left to chance
• Discussed choice in the blocking that Janet backed up when Catherine challenged her: it weakened her position; the intention could have been achieved by having her turn and walk away instead, it becomes Janet’s choice to move and remains vulnerable, Catherine then has to move to her—keeps the stakes up
• Eve did not caricature, which can be a trap with that character; she is naïve but not silly—as a teacher, she would have been eaten alive if she was silly; an excellent example of non-caricature was in the “practicing blackout” scene
• Monologue styles—performers should always think about who you are talking to when addressing the audience
• Good transition of scenes with motion taking us from moment-to-moment
• Costumes were lively, shoes were terrific—showed evolution of characters, especially Janet and Catherine
• Picnic was staged on the U.S.C. platform: In their home theatre, you cannot see scenes on the floor; may have benefitted here from being D.S.
• Play was funny, without being over-the-top (Margaret’s “I can’t stand that woman” was an example)
• Marta and Janet’s confrontation: it was indistinct where Janet was coming from, as she left in a different direction: the narrowness of the space meant that it was played very close together, environment did not allow characters to have appropriate responses (e.g. Janet not looking  at her)
• First entrances are always significant; the opening dances helped establish the relationships
• Eve’s reactions to Harry were good—textual question is “Why did she marry him?”
• Janet may be most “under-written” character in the play; her relationship with Jack is not established early, her monologue is where she articulates why she does what she does
• Ways to make Janet more aggressive through exploration of vocal work: sharpness/emphatic comes in consonants (“Nice and tight”)
• How nice that Janet could actually play the piano—music could be mournful when needed
• The dancing in the final scene could emphasize more of their relationships and its evolution
• Similarly, the singing evolves over the course of the show—the first time it is perfunctory, but it becomes better as we explore their personalities; Marta sings “Lili Marlene” differently (“It’s one of their songs”); unclear how they heard her sing: if she sang from her space in the set, it conveys the sense of her music disrupting the others (emphasized in her confrontation with Janet); Would that split focus?
• In an episodic script like this one, find ways to connect the dots
• The drinking scene following the news that Catherine’s husband was missing: Margaret had an effective balance of sympathetic without condoning, taking and giving focus effectively; Drunkenness was believable, not burlesque; Catherine stayed seated giving her an opportunity to show lack of focus concentration; Marta turned her glass over when she was done drinking—good choice as very European; Catherine’s fall with her dress flailing up was well executed and committed
• D-Day Monologues: Scene could have benefitted from taking greater risks in soundscape so that the battle sounds were 10-times louder by the end, forcing us into the horrible situation for a brief time
• Audience was listening intensely; credit to performers
• For actors, risk-taking should involve pushing scenes to the limit in order to find the boundary; you can always pull a scene back but can’t force it—for Catherine, successful examples were the fight with Janet, the drinking scene, the heartbreak of Margaret writing with the eraser-end of the pencil; similarly for Margaret painting her own legs—showed us that she had made the emotional leap
• Find everything in the script, all of the uncomfortable places

As always, this is my best effort to record the conversation at the Detailed Adjudication, with apology for any misrepresentations of the ideas of the members of the company and the adjudicator. Corrections and clarifications are welcome in the comments.

Welcome Annette G. Procunier as Theatre Ontario Festival 2017 Adjudicator

Theatre Ontario is thrilled to welcome Annette G. Procunier as adjudicator for Theatre Ontario Festival 2017 in Ottawa. Annette most recently adjudicated the Eastern Ontario Drama League Festival in 2016, and last adjudicated Theatre Ontario Festival in 2012 in Sault Ste Marie.

Annette has worked in community, educational and professional theatre for over 45 years. She is a director, stage manager, play polisher, adjudicator and workshop leader. As an adjudicator Annette has participated in festivals in Europe, Canada, Japan and the United States having judged more than 125 festivals in 30 years. She has adjudicated the world theatre festival in Monaco for IATA and the national festival for the American Association of Community Theatre four times. No other adjudicator has been invited more than once. She is the author of the only book on adjudication Do You See What I See? and is a fellow of AACT—this honor was bestowed for “single-handedly raising the level of community theatre in America.” She is the only non-American to hold the distinction.

Theatre Ontario Festival 2017 will be held in Ottawa from May 17 to 21, 2017 and is co-hosted by Theatre Ontario, Ottawa Little Theatre, and the Eastern Ontario Drama League.

Related Reading

• Learn more about Annette G. Procunier
• Read more about Theatre Ontario Festival on the Theatre Ontario website
• Catch up on the blog posts from Theatre Ontario Festival 2016

Celebrating Learning Opportunities for Community Theatre Practitioners at Theatre Ontario Festival

Theatre Ontario Festival features a variety of educational events for the passionate, dedicated community theatre practitioners. Highlights included:

• Detailed adjudication of Curved, presented by Gateway Theatre Guild
• Detailed adjudication of Boeing Boeing, presented by Northumberland Players
• Detailed adjudication of 33 Variations, presented by Theatre Sarnia
• Detailed adjudication of The Drowning Girls, presented by The Curtain Club
• Comedy Scene Study workshop, with Michelle Jackett-Webster
• Playwright-in-Person with Donna-Michelle St. Bernard
• Stage Combat 101 workshop, with Joshua Bainbridge

Plus… catch-up on all of the social conversation from Theatre Ontario Festival 2016 on Storify

Highlights of the Detailed Adjudication of The Drowning Girls at Theatre Ontario Festival 2016

By Brandon Moore, Community Theatre and Communications Manager

Highlights of the detailed adjudication by Mimi Mekler of The Curtain Club’s production of The Drowning Girls by Beth Graham, Daniela Vlaskalic and Charlie Tomlinson (representing the Association of Community Theatres—Central Ontario—ACT-CO)

• Play requires water effects: characters in bathtubs, showers overhead—numerous issues to address (risk of mildew, electrical safety, temperature, hygiene, etc.); operation requires them to work independently of each other; explored different strategies.
• In original production, raked the stage from 15-feet at the front to 11-feet at the back to drain U.S. into a trough; too complicated to rake the state here, so created a lip.
• Varied temperature according to needs of actors, as best as possible. They always felt safe performing.
• Costumes experimented with different fabrics, eventually built the underwear and dresses out of curtain material that was sheer and dried quickly.
• Strength of production was its simplicity: specific and crystal clear
• What are the challenges and traps of the play? Director’s concept was of a purgatory. Bessie arrives first, alone until Alice arrives as playmate. Margaret is the new girl who shows up and hast to be taught the games—28 games in total.
• Props: The newspapers was created, found authentic stories to ground it in reality, and then sprayed (essentially a scotch-guard) so that they were water-safe and could be pulled out of the bathtub.
• The play has the qualities of a memory play: How do you make them active? Where do the characters make their discoveries?
• Alice and Margaret each have moments of discovery in narrative, Bessie is more challenging because she constantly forgave him, and gave him the template for his future actions—for her, it is in the gasp after the murder.
• Characters of Alice’s mother, the landlady are interesting—offered the women help but refused.
• Margaret’s realization when she is alone and has time to think that she doesn’t really know him—in spite of her background, wouldn’t she be more modest because of that discovery?
• Is there a moment of discovery that he is the same man? The clang of the prison door suggested something in common, recognized echoes and similarities. Needed clarity of that recognition.
• Blaming the victim encapsulated in that moment of “How could they be so stupid?”
• Thank goodness they were funny: the audience wouldn’t be able to take the play without the humour.  (Good example was Margaret pulling out the reading glasses, a moment we all recognized.)
• Why laughter at the end? Their journey is complete, and they are free from the purgatory. Did the audience reach that same point of sharing that joy?
• Fog and harmonium set the mood in the opening.
• Charades executed with great clarity.
• Crisp and clean calling of cues by the stage manager.
• Good costume choices: Margaret has buttons in the front because she has no one to help her.
• Lights had some difficulty balancing the level for the three tubs, in available time.
• Accent work of other characters was odd (protagonists are to be played without accents), but it grew over the course of the show.
• Good theatrical magic: props seeming to appear out of nowhere.
• The “stuttering” lighting effect of the period movie was extremely well-executed: established a convention and mood, but stopped because it would have been too much for the entire scene to be lit that way.
• The image of the dancing was another clear image: contrasts of varying heights, body types,  blonde/brunette/redhead, etc.
• Alice giving the pearls to George was a well-executed symbolic moment that clearly communicated scope of what he did.
• Bessie as the insurance salesman—good vocal work to become much more resonant to distinguish the character.  As the doctor, she took great pleasure in playing a horrible man.
• The scene with the cleaning ladies is a problematic, long scene. Good use of physical blocking around the tubs to show variety. Tried different accents for the three characters, with the tentative looks above. Would they have benefitted from being more personally affected by the events?
• Pouring water into the bathtubs—didn’t hear the sound of the water pouring, perhaps pouring from a greater height. Problem is that the water levels are not that high.
• Strong transformation into and through singing of Nearer My God to Thee.
• Hard to duplicate lighting effect in home theatre where the LEDs seemed to change the colour inside of the tubs.
• Production was expected to be a challenge for their audience, but it resonated positively with them.

As always, this is my best effort to record the conversation at the Detailed Adjudication, with a standard apology for any misrepresentations of the ideas of the adjudicator and the members of the company. Corrections and clarifications are welcome in the comments.

Highlights of the Detailed Adjudication of 33 Variations at Theatre Ontario Festival 2016

By Brandon Moore, Community Theatre and Communications Manager

Highlights of the detailed adjudication by Mimi Mekler of Theatre Sarnia’s production of 33 Variations by Moisés Kaufman (representing the Western Ontario Drama League—WODL)

• Director’s research process began two years ago; actor handled research of ALS; learned that even research can lead astray (pronunciation correction that came up following their performance in WODL Festival); virtual tours of the places described.
• Gertie’s German accent involved Skyping with a friend in Germany.
• Conversation with actors around their goals, objectives, tactics for each character.
• Is assisted death legal in Germany? If so, why not in the hospital? Company believed character would want it at home.
• Used projections as required in script; established pre-show with the title of the play and single light on the piano.
• Opening moment: the pianist behaving as if starting a concert.
• Good choice in set design to use piano benches as furniture.
• First audience laugh in the opening scene—line helps us recognize the character and go with her
• Diabelli’s costume—Could it have told us more about his personality, beyond shabby and worn (needs money), evolves as his status grows.
• What is the status between Schindler and Diabelli; Diabelli is lower status, trying to grow his company.
• Katherine was well blocked in the negotiation scene between Diabelli and Schindler: demonstrating she is “immersed” in her work.
• Brought great clarity of choice to Katherine—there is no other possibility for her than work.
• The next Diabelli / Schindler scene had a lot of presentational blocking.
• Mike and Clara at the tech support office: Find ways to “turn up the heat” in this scene between them. Why does she kiss him? A thank-you for a break in the stress of being a caregiver. When we’re feeling stressed, the moment that makes us cry is when someone is nice to us. Explore these significant moments.
• Beethoven’s hair—he walked on stage and got a laugh, which was not the intention. Went to a place of caricature. They realized at performance that it was bigger than it had ever been before.
• Found ways to use projection scenes when not projecting by showing images of windows.
• Gertie’s initial costume made her seem dowdy, but the remainder of costumes were successful.
• Projection of the archives room was challenging: hard to convey size of the room on the smaller screens.
• One folio was small and hard to read in projection; may have benefitted from giving up realism.
• Strong balance of sound, awareness of music.
• Mike’s tie for the date was a great choice of costuming: he got dressed up, but he clearly has odd taste in clothes.
• Find ways to bring specificity and focus to the stakes in a scene: Example was the “When will it be ready?” scene between Beethoven, Diabelli, Schindler.
• Excellent projection at train station; nice intimate bench as set piece to physically force Katherine and Gertie together; great clarity between the two.
• Disco music—Did they try keeping it going? Experimented at rehearsal but decided to keep it like the other sound cues. The pounding music does reinforce Mike and  Clara’s relationship, similar to the way Beethoven’s music does.
• X-ray scene was extremely tasteful: brief flashes of light gave us impressions, sound cues were percussive, with actor’s breath over top of it; moment ends with Katherine leaning on Beethoven’s back.
• Blocking of finale of Act One: Choice made between options of realism vs stylized; carefully choreographed.
• The walker brought colour onto the stage; fortunate that it fit the colour scheme.
• Opening monologue—Mike and Clara were not frozen (which had previously been convention), drew focus.
• Well-executed comedy: humour is not in the line, but in the reaction to the line.
• Beethoven’s hair—Was it possible for the greying to layer over time? No, given backstage logistics, actor’s own hair.
• Schindler’s active listening while Katherine is discovering the lies in his biography, example of how you can own a moment without having dialogue.
• Cafeteria scene was extremely well-blocked with straight line, order of characters.
• Beethoven wandering while composing—Director wanted him to take up the full-stage; the fugue as struggle in all spaces. Did they ever try the monologue in stillness, with the full stage lx eventually reducing itself to a spotlight? Did his movement convey to us anything we didn’t already know.
• Clarity of Gertie’s accent was excellent—carried through to the final words of sentences. Emotionally she is withdrawing, theatrically she must keep going.
• The stakes of the Katherine/Gertie friendship falling apart were high and well-played.
• Wonderful directorial choice of the wheelchair dance, which was not written into the script.
• Kyrie was lovely to hear—strong vocal range by the cast.
• Great contrast of Katherine playing the opposites in the subsequent hallucination scene.
• Chose not to use the German pronunciation of Beethoven to keep it simple for the audience.
• The cuddle between Katherine and Clara in the bed was a wonderful, active choice.
• Minuet steps were historically accurate.
• Vocal warm-ups included singing Kyrie on piano; had homework and exercises to find their own.
• Props creation involved significant detail, and read well.

As always, this is my best effort to record the conversation at the Detailed Adjudication, with a standard apology for any misrepresentations of the ideas of the adjudicator and the members of the company. Corrections and clarifications are welcome in the comments.

Highlights of the Detailed Adjudication of Boeing Boeing at Theatre Ontario Festival 2016

By Brandon Moore, Community Theatre and Communications Manager

Highlights of the detailed adjudication by Mimi Mekler of Northumberland Players’ production of Boeing Boeing by Marc Camoletti, translated by translated by Beverly Cross and Francis Evans (representing the Eastern Ontario Drama League—EODL)

• Farce plays in a particular style
• It was the director’s first farce; as an actor he was told once to take a good laugh and break into three—the science and experimentation of it appealed to him
• They worked with their props early; set was taped out for them
• Wanted to ensure character drove the comedy; director says he loves cheap laughs but he wanted them all to be earned
• Moments were shaped by circumstances (e.g. reminding them what’s behind the door)
• The women characters can’t be played as stupid—they don’t figure out what’s going on because they’re confident in the relationship
• Design was bold, primary and secondary colours, bright and well-lit; Matisse painting placed it in France; porthole in kitchen door created an opportunity for a good pay-off
• Bright white furniture but the arrangement of it was very straight; adapted set from 32-feet to 24-feet between original production in Cobourg and EODL Festival in Peterborough; decided not to expand it back for Theatre Ontario Festival; needed functionality and so the cast had pathways; also made good use of U.S. playing area
• How accurate were the costumes?: Researched colours, etc. but needed to be functional as well (e.g. a skirt slit in the right place in order for the actress to be able to jump into a character’s arms), colours were carried into lingerie, towels, etc.
• Why did they mic? Audio concerns, especially with the accents potentially affecting comprehension
• Opened with cel-phone announcements in style of aircraft messages
• The opening dance between Gloria and Berthe; not scripted, and established immediately for the audience that we are in a comedy. Why would they dance? Berthe is reluctant, Gloria draws her in, they have a history.
• Berthe is the only working class character in the play—she transgresses her class; from the commedia dell’arte tradition of the clever servant who runs everything
• How “American” was Gloria? Actress established her as not from the city, her flight attendant training would have trained any brash accent out of her. The other two flight attendants are clearly types: Italian hothead, German romantic—American what?
• Company had started rehearsals with the 1962 script, and then received the 2008 script which changed nationalities (Bernard was French, Robert was British, Gabriella was French etc.), numerous changes to be less offensive, subtle changes in some of the lines
• Vocal work: Gloria could have relaxed more, Berthe played effectively with speed in her delivery
• Make strong exits: Exit on the period rather than the last word
• Robert brought beige palette into the costuming
• Bernard breaks the fourth wall (established convention), able to find someone in the audience easily
• Well-executed effect of the hidden shelf in the desk with the flight schedules
• Would you understand the play if you turned down the sound? Bernard’s moment with the globe was a clear communication without the words
• Berthe leaning over Robert—this is an example of the transgressive behaviour that needed reactions from the other characters
• Always support accents to the end of the dialogue; vocal warm-ups are needed
• Bernard and Robert talking about the letter: good example of comic mirroring for physical laughs
• End of Act One with the men dancing to the music (unheard to them) was another fun theatrical touch
• Robert and Berthe sitting on the suitcase: good example of using something in a way differently than intended, but again—acknowledge her transgression
• Berthe’s drink gag was a great solution to a sequence with a lot of dialogue; would have benefitted from rehearsal so she could be on top of the actions, fully confident doing it
• Gretchen’s melodramatic choices gave her range; hair and make-up (distinct brows, buns) supported character
• Lovely moment of Gretchen enjoying the pillow
• The person who loaned them the couch didn’t want it returned after seeing how lasciviously it was used
• Act Two is when Robert begins to step out of his own persona and try on different personalities
• Good use of physical comedy double-takes for reveal that both Gabriella and Gretchen are there
• Puppet show behind the sofa—visibility underneath the sofa was an opportunity discovered when they got the furniture and saw the height they had underneath
• Physical comedy needs to read as truthful: Robert grabbing Bernard’s bum in the three-way hug with Gretchen didn’t read as accidental
• Gabriella evolved into the Italian “tough guy”—found many of her hand gestures online to emphasize words and moments; some were wonderful, a few needed more precision and clarity (less rushed)
• Robert’s “everybody’s going out” breaking the fourth wall towards the end of Act Two—less effective as it read as “rushed”, unclear if it was intended to break the fourth wall
• Top of Act Three settles back into realism
• Berthe comes in while Robert and Gretchen are holding hands; even if she didn’t see them, they needed to react as if she might have
• Establish payoffs to gags early—How did Robert know that the footstool opened before he used it?
• Gloria took her time well with the underwear; both made the most of this moment of discovery
• “It’s not impossible” establishes a different flavour in Gloria and Robert’s relationship
• Script continuity issues start to appear in Act Three—a uniform is taken off in the bathroom, and put back on in a bedroom
• Full company commitment to comedy: Berthe enters with a cleaver and a rubber chicken, the props offered to find a live chicken
• Berthe’s Act Three costume with hat coat and bag created a new look, good visual variety
• Robert not recognizing the telephone rings was a running gag—so it needed a “button” on the final telephone call
• Curtain call with dancing, flight attendant gestures, etc. was a fun way to finish the production

As always, this is my best effort to record the conversation at the Detailed Adjudication, with a standard apology for any misrepresentations of the ideas of the adjudicator and the members of the company. Corrections and clarifications are welcome in the comments.

Highlights of the Detailed Adjudication of Curved at Theatre Ontario Festival 2016

By Brandon Moore, Community Theatre and Communications Manager

Highlights of the detailed adjudication by Mimi Mekler of Gateway Theatre Guild’s production of Curved by Kristin Shepherd (representing QUONTA.)

• This was a premiere production of a new work – what was the process like?  Company wouldn’t leave the playwright alone, concerned about characters and how to portray, needed to learn to make own decisions
• Director described it as a sometimes painful birth
• Text is open to interpretation: playing what it means, trying opposites
• First performed in the Fall; relationships have developed between characters
• One performer described process as still going: in a house of mirrors, in a maze, sometimes hitting walls
• Also found joys in doing a character for the first time; unable to research other perspectives, finding hints to interpretations
• Plays has two structural elements: characters at microphone “stand-up comedy” vs. “traditional” interior scenes
• Opening stand-up scene: Director gradually grasped answers to questions—what are we trying to do to the audience? What is the relationships among the five characters in the first scene?
• Interpreting text: Who is the audience for the stand-up comedy? Are they allies or judges? Dell is trying to claim them and to impact the others
• Bring clarity to moments: When Granny Wave was listening to Dell, the intention was unclear? Her goal was for Dell to pull up her boot-straps…what action would bring clarity to that moment, and help us understand the dynamic between their characters?
• The opening scene is exposition, and actors cannot play exposition; need to always answer the question: What do I want from my scene partners? When it involves direct address to the audience, that question includes them—what do you want from them? Wavy interrupting Dell was a great example of that clarity in relationship between characters.
• What impels the characters to break out of a scene into the stand-up comedy?—Similar to why does a character burst into song in a musical? The most successful example of that was Chloe in the final scene—the tension in it drove her out of the scene.
• How did the cast become comfortable with the “taboo” sexual language? Company never found it jarring: a circle of women—company of women, written by a woman; part of the world
• Set Design: Curvy, feminine, areas were multi-purposes; original design concept involved three levels with more distinct, literal area definitions but the Director wanted it more undefined and the set was opened up during rehearsal
• One problem was the chair: it was realistic while other pieces were much more open. Options could have been more function cube, or more overtly symbolic (e.g. use a rocking chair, a symbol of motherhood, etc.); it was a late change to the set design, the original was more antique, squarer, but practically won out
• The cloth on the bed was extremely well-lit
• Choir music was live during the November performance, recorded for QUONTA and Theatre Ontario Festivals; song was specific from the playwright
• Costumes reflected a good carry-through of the colours; outrageous turquoise for Granny, and then neutral beige for Dell
• Wavy’s first costume was confusing (especially given the nature of the casting concept of an adult playing a child): Tried party dresses but didn’t find one that worked, Choice was that she was trying to look grown-up, playing dress-up and had took something from Granny. That choice could have been better served by more theatricality: not fitting well, or from an older time period
• Lighting areas seemed just off from the performers
• With the first laugh line, Wavy won over the audience
• In the opening scene, switching between the microphones and their voices was causing difficulties. The performers vocal work was fine, so microphone level might have been too high.
• Granny’s makeup was bold; and made for an easy transition when she was sick.
• Good choral work between Wavy and Granny: the pitch allowed us to hear them as individuals while achieving the choral effect.
• Granny’s stand-up technique choice read as indistinct; Dell (the master) and Wavy (pretending to be a stand-up comedian) had clarity of choices
• Chloe’s costume choices—conveying Chloe’s offstage life, impractical but keep her stable as she doesn’t have to follow work rules anymore
• The interior/realistic scenes had a presentational style: Was that intentional (for contrast with the stand-up comedy) or practical?  Director wanted them to be seen and heard, trying to keep it simple so the audience hears the text rather than the business
• Dell’s argument with Wavy about the shoes: It read as if the character had already given into the obstacle, rather than bringing tactics to persuade her to put on the shoes. (Performer had technical issues.)
• Nurse—a tiny part with almost the same line over and over, yet brought different tactics to it each time. This character is important and was well-played: the face of the world outside the play.
• Wavy riding the tricycle was a strong visual transition into the flower shop: the set change and music were good, but the counter trapped Estelle.
• Established night scene well with flashlights, sound of insects.
• Dell adding pauses to her stand-up routines through the play: established a clear transition towards the final one when she says nothing.
• Granny had good pitch range while speaking post-stroke; helped us understand a lot.
• Conflict in this scene could have benefitted from more interruptions: Not polite actors letting each other finish, listen where you have to, but building to a climax.
• In Act Two, Dell and Chloe had twinned physicality; conflict might have benefitted from a choice to play the opposites in the physicality instead
• Estelle and Wavy brought clear tactics to the fight.  Find ways to explore how to use props emotionally in a scene—the flowers, the vases, etc.
• One of Chloe’s addresses to the audience, she seemed to have a hard time finding “someone” to speak to… is that actually necessary?
• Dell and Wavy’s joke sequence was a lovely use of one-liners as sub-text. Text plus emotion created something larger.
• A technical sequence was off. They had introduced a new sound cue, the Stage Manager had only one rehearsal with it: Stage Management needs rehearsal time too! Approximately 50 to 75 cues in the show.
• The hospital visit: Estelle, Wavy, Granny all had clear moments if decision.
• Dell’s drowned look was effective: creepy and ambiguous.
• Leaves us with an uncomfortable question: What happens to Wavy after this play is over?
• Good curtain call music to set the right tone for the end of the play.

As always, this is my best effort to record the conversation at the Detailed Adjudication, with a standard apology for any misrepresentations of the ideas of the adjudicator and the members of the company. Corrections and clarifications are welcome in the comments.

Welcome Mimi Mekler as Festival 2016 Adjudicator

Theatre Ontario is thrilled to welcome Mimi Mekler as adjudicator for the 2016 Theatre Ontario Festival in North Bay.  Mimi most recently adjudicated the Western Ontario Drama League Festival in 2014, and last adjudicated for Theatre Ontario’s Festival in 1999 in Newmarket.

"The hard work, discoveries, accolades and camaraderie that are the backbone of the Theatre Ontario Festival make it a special event," said Mimi.  "I’m looking forward to being part of the process that goes into creating the most vibrant community theatre possible."

Mimi Mekler’s work as director, actor, dramaturge, writer and adjudicator has taken her from California to Czechoslovakia and Italy to Israel. She is a professor in the Acting Discipline at Sheridan College’s Music Theatre Department. She also teaches for the joint Theatre and Drama Studies programme at Sheridan and University of Toronto at Mississauga, and for the Digital Character programme for Sheridan’s acclaimed Computer Animation.  Her theatre experience is broad and varied. She is probably best known as Maggie in the long-running children’s TV series Crazy Quilt. Other acting highlights include playing a crazed nun in Bella Donna, portraying both Portia and Calpurnia in Julius Caesar, touring children’s shows and interactive plays, dubbing films in Prague, creating segments of R. Murray Schafer’s opera-in-the wilderness And Wolf Shall Inherit the Moon, and co-creating a clown-dance piece.  She is a member of Theatre Ontario's Talent Bank of theatre instructors.

Theatre Ontario Festival 2016 will be held in North Bay from May 18 to 22, 2016 and is co-hosted by Theatre Ontario, Gateway Theatre Guild, and QUONTA (the northeastern Ontario community theatre association.)

Related Reading

• Learn more about Theatre Ontario Festival 2016
• New to Festival? Catch-up on stories from Theatre Ontario Festival 2015 in Oshawa