By Sarah Jarmon
CSPS - Rocky Horror is the kind of cult classic that die hard followers can feel comfortable coming home to, so it seemed an odd choice to start the show off with an unfamiliar, albeit hauntingly beautiful, rendition of “Science Fiction.” And while Meghan Donohue, this production’s Magenta, was more than equal to the task, belting the sliding notes of this revised piece with chilling grace, it nevertheless started the show off with a shaky equilibrium that never quite settled into comfortable territory.
The simplistic set worked well for this production, giving the actors opportunities to act as set pieces and props while providing levels and interesting stage pictures, which they did admirably. The most notable example of this was the transition from “Over at the Frankenstein Place” to Brad and Janet’s entry into the castle. When the lights cut out for the song there were audible gasps. Flashlights created both the storm and a wickedly appropriate convention for lighting Brad and Janet’s journey to the castle door where the phantoms, who formed the castle wall, rotated en mass to show the switch from outdoors to indoors. It was easily the most visually exciting section of the play. They set up this convention with the audience well, but regrettably underutilized it.
The sold-out house was comprised of more than a few Rocky Horror “virgins,” perhaps due to the slightly questionable casting of more than a few minors. But the large crowd on Thursday night was oddly subdued for a Rocky audience. There were some technical aspects that may have been the cause of this hush. The cast and crew were allowed only two days, of their already tight production schedule of twenty-three, to rehearse in the performance space. This manifested itself in a helter-skelter spattering of lighting issues and microphone complications. The most regrettable of which rendered all of what I’m sure was a wonderful rendition “Sweet Transvestite” entirely inaudible.
But when we couldn’t hear everything, we certainly had plenty to look at. The costumes blazed with the vibrant pizazz we in the Cedar Rapids arts community have come to almost unconsciously associate with Alisabeth Caraway. Oversexed pastels practically dripped off the phantoms, while Frank, Magenta, and Riff Raff were adorned in the more typical black leather and red lace Rocky fans the world over will instantly recognize.
The largest problem with this Rocky seemed to be character development. Janet started out with more worldly qualities than perhaps wise. She never quite came off as innocent and seemed all too willing to sex up Frank which made “Touch-a Touch-a Touch-a Touch me” less about giving in and more about going all out, which actually made me feel really sorry for Brad. The chorus themselves never really gave Ryan Foizey, or Frank ‘N’ Furter, the cowed and lustful respect Frank is due. That lack of reverence coupled with the choice to sodomize Eddie with a giant dildo gun, as opposed to murdering him with a chainsaw, muddied the story. Frank, whose Ziggy Stardust make-up and soulful vocal quality should have stood out above all else, was shunted aside in favor of Abby Pederson as a valley-girl version of Columbia, who was pretty consistently falling out of whatever top she was in.
Meghan Donohue and Rob Merritt stood out as the most believable characters. As Magenta, Megan went with classically sardonic and slightly bored, while Rob opted for an unusually nerdy thus understandably jealous Riff Raff. The duo were spot on and delightfully alien in contrast with the human phantoms whose in your face sexuality seemed slightly distasteful by comparison.
This performance did showcase the extremely ardent work that was put into this Rocky. Given a few more days and a bit more attention to the development of the plot this piece would have matured into a great show. The outstanding vocal talent and diversity of this group of actors made this a visually appealing wonderfully outrageous Rocky Horror to be remembered.
26 comments:
Ok, this issue needs to be addressed.
There was only one "minor" under the age of 18 and this person had full permission in writing from her parents to partake. This person only wore what was asked and did the choreography given to them, with nothing more inappropriate then the minor in TCR's Gypsy had to wear/do for the stripper scenes and less then what another minor in The Full Monty saw with his own eyes every night of the show. Everyone else despite their current high school status was of "age."
And if we are going to call all high school students "minors" as well then we should look at Theatre Cedar Rapids recent production of Hair where a high school student who had just turned 18 was full on mooning the audience so nudity for the "minor" and very blatantly speaking and singing of sex and simulating drug use.
Also if that was an issue look at recent broadway productions of shows such as Spring Awakening. MANY of that cast was under the age of 18 while simulating masturbation AND many other sexual acts.
It's THEATRE, not Porn. These are characters in a play. There was no nudity. This "minor" was wearing more onstage then every teen wears to the beach or even school half the time.
This is a theatrical piece with staging, choreography and plot. The "actor" in question will be 18 in one month and is a very mature young lady who has been doing theatre for many years. She only played the part assigned and did a damn fine job doing so.
So if the hypocrisy could stop here that would be great. An instead of focusing on this ridiculous issue that was blown so far out of proportion how about we focus on the hard work and fine direction of Ms. Caraway and her cast and crew.
So Bravo to the entire production!
The reviewer's comment about "the questionable casting of more than a few minors" is inaccurate. There was a grand total of ONE performer in this cast who was 17 (and that peformer was required by the director to have a signed parental consent form in order to appear).
ALL other cast members were 18 or above. To say "more than a few minors" is untrue and misleading, and this should be corrected.
It should also be noted that high school students, as well as performers under the age of 18, have appeared in R-rated productions in the past in Cedar Rapids. Regardless of whether you agree with it, the precedent had certainly been set long before this production.
to be honest, this is a horrible review of the show. you are entitled to ur opinion but this makes the show sound absolutly HORRIBLE which it was not. i agree with what the people said before me, her parents consented her being there. it wasnt like she was onstage having sex in front of everyone to see, she was playing the part she was asked to play. it was an ACT...her CHARACTER...isnt that what theatres all about? if it was about being yourself and not crossing boundries it wouldnt be anything fun to watch. As for the other "questionably underaged"....there were people in that show over the age of 21 who looked young, yes, but they were OF AGE, so you cant assume they were all underaged. I was informed that this was how Ms Caraway wanted the cast to look and thats exactly what happened. They did nothing more than follow the direction of a wonderful director. and in my opinion, weve all seen Rocky enough to know what the shows about and what to expect...this gave the audience something different, something interesting so that theyre not looking at the same show they were all use to.When I went and seen the show on thursday and saturday i overheard people saying how amazing this production was because of the fact that it was so out there and different.
Ok. Who gives a crap if there was a minor in the show. Big deal. The big issue was that the show was absolutely horrible. "Science Fiction" is supposed to set the pace for the show, instead I wondered if I was going to stay awake through the first song. But I will admit that Megan was without a doubt the best (and only good) singer in the show. Most of the leading roles couldn't hold a note to save their life and there wasn't a single number where the music didn't change volume so the singer could match up with the karaoke track. All "artistic" changes in the show were absolutely terrible. The giant dildo, the changes in lyrics and in script just made me want to leave. But I stayed to see if the train wreck would get any worse, and it did. The whole 2nd act was a drag. Not once did I get excited. The gay sex scene with Brad and Frank went on way too long for comfort for even the biggest rocky fans. It was not funny. The floor show was bland, but not as bland as "I'm Going Home", which made me want to go home. And I about vomited when Rocky ran in place toward Riff Raff while being shot at. The choreography was amateur. The sound was horrendous. The whole show was a disgrace. Who honestly finds joy in seeing TCR's apparent 'god child', Ryan Foizey's pale, lanky body? I preferred him better as Riff Raff, when he was fully clothed. If you saw last year's show at TCR you could tell that this year's version tried way too hard to be like it, and failed miserably. In a nutshell, the director should stick to playing a slut on stage instead of imposing it upon high school students.
I thought that this show was quite good for an amateur show. It was put together in less than a month, and the cast pulled together and put forth the best show they could in the amount of time and resources they had!
The sound left a little to be desired though. The prerecorded music was often times too quiet and slow and took the audience out of the show. The super slow start to the show with the leeeeennnngggttthhhhyyyy version of "Science Fiction" slowed the show down so much that it couldn't get the audience involved in the traditional opening callbacks. Not the cast's fault, but the company who sells that CD should be shot for dooming any production that uses it. The "filler" background vocals on the tracks were too loud. It was completely apparent that we weren't hearing any of the phantoms singing onstage because the prerecorded vocals were too loud. Again, company fault and not the fault of Ms. Caraway and her cast.
The microphone issues were distracting, but those were also the issue of the space and not of the production. Had the production space allowed them more time to rehearse, (as was previously discussed to my understanding) they may have been able to fix them.
I thought the whole cast did well with the limited time they had. Rob Merritt as Riff Raff was hilarious and completely rocked the house with his vocals. I wish Riff Raff had more singing and his entrance was quite striking (and hot!). Meghan (the proper spelling of her name) Donohue was amazing and brought a dark sexiness to Magenta. Abby Pedersen as Columbia was a little hyperactive at times, but was fun to watch. I, personally, loved Ryan Foizey as Frank N. Furter. His portrayal reminded me a lot of Tim Curry and I loved hearing him sing. I thoguht he was great. Jackie Kehoe and Charlie Barnes were hilarious as Janet and Brad.
I thought this show was well-directed and well-performed. I would have liked to have had more audience interaction from the characters (particularly the phantoms) as well as had better sound. Other than that, well done!
Wow. Always interesting to read a comment from someone who went into a show with an axe to grind, as Poster #4 clearly did.
Whether you agreed with her or not, at least the original review's author stated very specific critiques of the production itself, and then gave reasons for those critiques. However, Poster #4 seems to think it's more fun to mock the physique of an actor; label cast members with bizarre insults ("God-child?" I don't even know what that's supposed to mean); type grade-school lines like "almost vomited;" refer to the director's "playing a slut;" and make sweeping generalizations about the entire cast's talent level.
It makes one wonder: Does Poster #4 have some sort of personal vendetta against CSPS, Mr. Foizey, Ms. Caraway or someone else involved with this production? Because that sure is how he/she comes across. Last time I checked, this site was designed for intelligent theatre discussion and critique. Not for bush-league antics and name-calling. I mean, seriously.
This has gotten a little out of hand. Sarah is COMPLETELY entitled to her opinion. She is not a professional critic, and is simply an informed and seasoned performer, who has a working knowledge of theatrical productions. He opinions were based on her familiarity with theatre, this show, and some of the actors who participated.
This show is the epitome of what theatre is meant to accomplish. When going to a show, one is supposed to be either amused, entertained, moved, affected, or led to have fun. No matter what your opinion of the show, it was entirely evident that we were having fun up there. I know that the show is a cult classic, and that it has a large following, but seriously. It's probably one of the stupidest stories written, that has been put to stage. It's NOT to be taken seriously at all. It's just meant to make you loosen up and have fun.
The bottom line, is that we DID put this together in very little time, and were slaves to our budget. We were the underdogs. We are NOT TCR and had nowhere NEAR the budget that they have/had. I know that the music choices were a subject of contempt for a number of patrons. I just want to briefly explain that the choice to use a haunting, director-written version of "Science Fiction", was due to an incredible difficulty in finding a tracked version of that song, that was at all decent. Trust me. You would NOT have enjoyed the only track that we were able to find, and I would not have been able to feel fully comfortable singing it. We would GLADLY accept any donations, going forward, so that future productions can afford the luxury of a live band. Until then, this is what we are left to use, and even the tracks aren't cheap.
And lastly, the sound was an issue. We acknowledge that. It was just as much of an issue for those of us performing, as it was for you who were watching. It was a constant frustration, but we did what we could with what we had. As previously mentioned, we were only allotted 2 actual rehearsal days in the space before we went to production. There was an issue with communication with CSPS and there was a double-booking issue. If you have ever had the pleasure of performing on stage, you know that a BIG part of the final product coming together, is feeling comfortable in the space. We got as comfortable as we could, with the short amount of time we had to get familiar. But that left us with some glitches.
In the end, it's important to remember that a production such as this, cult classic or not, is intended to be fun for both the performers and the cast. I apologize to anyone who saw the show, who did not have fun. As a member of the cast, I feel safe in speaking for everyone when I say, WE had a BLAST. And that's all that really matters.
Finally, I want to thank all of you who did come to the show. We could not have had so much fun without an audience, and you were a big part of why we did this. No matter your opinion, we value your support. Please consider coming again next year, and we will do everything we can to fix the issues that we were aware of, as well as those which you have brough to our attention, from this year's production.
Personally, you're all getting a BIT too personal. Leave out the "drama", and get back to the DRAMA.
Poster # 4-I don't want to make a big deal of this, but I will say this much:
We sold out. Every show. We were doing something right. I am sorry that I couldn't hear your cries, sighs and moans of disgust and boredom through the piercing sounds of laughter and appreciation from the other 150 people in the house. I have a difficult time, in reading your post, to find any sort of rational critique of our production-which to me and any other respectable and credible theatre goer, makes your "review" (for lack of a better word) null and void. This was simply a reason and a way to rag on people that you wouldn't otherwise have any merit to rag on. I enjoy reading reviews, not roasts. Review my character (Frank), fine...please do. Don't review MY character (Ryan). That's not your place; leave that for the people that I care to have close to me. For the record, I was wearing more clothes as Frank than I was in my ending costume as Riff Raff last year!
I wish I knew who you were, because if I did I could probably justify my saying that you are an insecure person that wants so badly to be on stage, but was never quite good enough. What good is an opinion if you're not proud to say it's yours? Cowardice. Your remarks and "review" speak more to your character than ours. Nice.
P.S- Come support your "TCR God child" in Annie. I'll be wearing a three piece suite. The only skin showing will be my face and hands...promise. Unless you ask nicely. ;) Asshole.
Ryan, from someone that is simply reading the comments I would like to say you did a fine job of pointing out that #4 should not talk about you personally, only your character. I do need to point out you made your own argument "null and void" by going on to bashing his/her character. Way to not think it through.
Can the person who manages this website please delete the comments that do not pertain to the ROCKY HORROR SHOW.
This wasn't a review of the "THE LIFE AND TIMES OF RYAN FOIZEY and THE CAST/CREW OF ROCKY HORROR" this was simply a review of a theatrical production, put together by a group of people looking to bring more theatrical opportunities to the Cedar Rapids Community in a venue that is perfectly suited for the show.
You are more than welcome to state your critique on THE SHOW, but leave the cast's personal life out of your comment.
I believe that the reason we do theatre in the first place is to PUSH the limits, to challenge the everyday thoughts, and to excite and evoke emotion. This blog proves that ROCKY HORROR 09 has done just that, positive and negative. But without darkness there is no light, and so it goes with theatre.
Personally attacking any of the actors, crew, directors, and so forth, is amateur, immature, and a GREAT way to get yourself some awesome Karma.
May you always remember that what goes around comes around, and that your comments are to be about the CHARACTER in the show--not the actors CHARACTER on the side lines.
Wonderful work by ALL involved with this production, quite pleased with the entire show if I may say so! The choreography was different and odd, but it flowed better than the past four years I've seen this production put on because it worked with THIS director's vision. and the costumes were all so different but beautifully rainbowed across the stage.
The people commenting on "I wish there was more audience participation". Hmmmmmm, last time I checked it's call AUDIENCE participation not CAST FORCES AUDIENCE participation.
Overall wonderful show, fun, lighthearted, silly at points, incredible at others, Mr. Foizey's vocal performance was by far the best Frank I've seen yet and I've seen the show 8 times in my career.
Don't dream it. Be it. And that's exactly what this team of actors did. They made this show happen in a small amount of time, and the CR theatrical world was against them, and they did the best with what they had, and I will say this was my favorite production of this show in Cedar Rapids.
Keep going Mr. Foizey, and Meghan, and the others who broke the molds with their characters. I am rooting for you out here in this crazy world. And to the directorial team, great work with a very difficult show. It has a cult following so it's VERY hard to keep everyone happy. But I say DO WHAT YOU GOTTA DO and do it the best you can. Turn a deaf ear to those who grimace at your art. They are not artists. Their opinions will come and go, but in the end you will be the better person.
To the "anonymous" post after my argument, I understand where you're coming from...However I do believe that my "character bashing" was merited considering that "#4's" post was a direct representation of their personal character. My performance, however, was not derivative of mine. I thought this through. They provided me the ammo to make them look ignorant.
wow....are you guys done yet?! LET IT GO!! this is just getting plain ignorant! Ppl are entitled to their OPINION but it should be left at just that. Theres a point you should not cross and a lot of you have crossed it....whether this performance was good or not, it made an impact and thats what theatres about. SO LET IT BE!
tee hee - oh the strung & drang is amusing - stop taking it all so seriously and just say it was fun or not!
you all are way silly.
ohmygawd did this suck or whut?
Ryan, (me again), Thank you for seeing my point and I understand your frustration but it was already recognized by anyone that had read his/her message that he/she was the one with no merit and but by you bashing them, you made yourself stoop to their level. In turn making you look like the ignorant one since you had already taken the time to make a valid point. I might add that while you noted the show’s success you really only stood up for yourself and left your director in the dust. I will leave your analysis of that up to you.
ok again...LET IT BE!!!!!!! people are obviously way too into this BLOG. Are you that bored that you have to keep checking this and fighting about it?! Yes, I know Im doing the same thing, but i get an email everytime people write on here, you guys on the other hand, just have no lives and want to waste your precious time in making others feel bad...SO STOP
Hello All,
I wrote the initial review. I want to say a couple of things. First Meghan, sorry I spelled your name wrong. That's my fault, I should have double checked it and I feel like an a hole. Next my statement about minors. I've spoken to most of the cast personally but because I don't know who it was that got so upset on these postings I'm saying it here. I suppose, like the name thing, I could have checked into this to make sure it was accurate. But a: I say minors about anyone under 21 not 18, b: I really didn't think I'd be upsetting so many people. If you read the statement I was talking about "virgins" in the audience. I just meant this rocky drew a large crowd of people who'd never been before. I did say "questionable" casting but I said that because EVERYONE was talking about it. It was upsetting a lot of people and I thought it bore mentioning, as it was such a large part of my experience of this show. Officially I am sorry. Next I feel the need to explain to some what a review should be, as I have come to understand it. I think all reviews should critique the show, in order for all involved to hear from a single audience member, who maybe has some theatrical background and know how, what worked and what didn't. For me, in my review I stated what I thought worked and what I thought could have worked better. To those of you who were upset I apologize but I was just being honest. To those of you who feel the need to be mean about either myself or anyone in the production, get a different forum.
Sarah wrote an excellent review. I respect her for writing an HONEST review. It had to be difficult to critique many of her friends and peers.
I think that she was very correct when she said that the casting of minors was controversial. Not only because this is a very adult show, but because many of the promotional appearances for the show took place in bars. I consider anyone under 21 to be "underage". I think what was questionable to MANY people in the theatre community was the behavior that took place during these "promo appearances" AND the costumes worn by these so-called minors. I think that if Alisabeth Caraway is going to cast minors in a very adult show, she needs to be ready to be responsible for their behavior, as well as ready to take some criticism for doing so. Does this have anything to do with your PERFORMANCE of Rocky Horror show that Sarah critiqued? No, it doesn't. It shouldn't have been mentioned in the review, but it SHOULD have been mentioned to the director.
I think it's ridiculous that poster #4 chose to stoop to a level of name calling and insults. He/she could have made some very valid points about the show, but unfortunately it's hard to take him/her seriously.
I think Sarah stated her review eloquently and to the point. I have heard her opinions echoed throughout the theatre community here in Cedar Rapids.
The point of theatre is to get people thinking, and TALKING - as many of the other posters on here have stated. However, I believe you shouldn't do a show if you don't think that you can do it WELL. All of the excuses about the microphone issues, and not being able to be in the space ahead of time - it's too bad that it happened that way, but the audience doesn't really care about that. Bottom line, they want to see a great show. Meghan stated that, "We are NOT TCR and had nowhere NEAR the budget that they have/had." TCR has a lot of donor support and funding because they have a long standing history of putting on quality shows. However, I have seen other theatre companies put on amazing shows with little to no budget at all. No one wants to hear excuses, they just want to see a quality show.
Wait -- I'm confused. You think a "minor" is anyone under 21? So a 20-year-old is old enough to fight in a war, get married, buy pornography and cigarettes or register to vote ... but isn't old enough to be in "The Rocky Horror Show?" How does that logic work?
The promo appearances took place in a bar, a place where you were *supposed* to be 21 to get in. I'm pretty sure that the law agrees with me, that anyone in the bar under 21 is, in fact, a minor.
christ almighty - is this all there is out there?
one of you says all that matters is you had a blast.
another says you made use of minors.
another that it is too much to ponder since it was an amateur production.
was it any good or not?
did the audience appreciate it or not?
did it have integrity or not?
right-o . . . you'll never agree.
get some experience - get some talent and move on.
damn.
enough already
Nothing is funnier than an anonymous commenter who puts up a comment about how people need to stop commenting.
If reading people's feedback bothers you so much, then try this amazing solution: Don't read it. If others want to discuss what they saw, or respond to one another's arguments, then why don't you just let them do that? That's what a discussion forum is for in the first place.
i agree with that last post. if people want to comment, let em. If i were the author of this review i'd be proud that my work had generated this much response, both good and bad. Same goes for the people that did this show. Art is supposed to make people respond, isn't it?
To the person who asked, I am not going to delete any comments on here. And we stand behind the review which is a well thought out, intelligent review of the show.
--owner of the blog
PS I corrected the spelling of Meghan Donohue's name. We regret the error.
Dear Mr. ICTheatreGuy:
Thank you for correcting the spelling of my name, but it's really not a big deal to me. Both my first and last names have been misspelled my WHOLE life, so I'm used to it. :)
Post a Comment