Catherine Bennett resumes the weekly look at the performing arts world, with the sad end of Jerusalem, the luck of a cabbie, and French revolt. Do you hear the people sing?
Adam Alcock reviews Nigel Kennedy playing Vivaldi's Four Seasons and his own Four Elements at York Opera House.
Catherine Bennett highlights the trends in the performing arts world today.
Jonathan Cridford reviews 'Ghosts', one of the Freshers' plays for this year.
This production of Wicked! was certainly no different. With two protagonist witches (one of which is born green), a talking goat professor and winged monkeys, this reinterpreted Wizard of Oz story takes a long stretch of the imagination to get your head around. This production makes no apologies for its outrageously absurd nature and as such provides the humour necessary to make a production of this kind a truly pleasant experience.
The main and most interesting plot to Wicked! lies in the conflict between the two female leads. Galinda, the popular blonde bombshell, falls in love with Prince Fiyero much to the chagrin of Elphaba, the Shrek-like antithesis to the aforementioned lead. As the plot unravels the unexpected occurs and Fiyero falls madly in love with the green monster-like girl. It’s all very childlike but this is actually Wicked’s redeeming feature; it’s like going back to your favourite childhood story but with fresh eyes and some interesting twists along the way.
The production is by no means perfect. Much of the storyline is lost to the brilliant, but seemingly unnecessary, full-blown orchestra. Even though the music is absolutely superb and suits parts where the whole cast are singing together, when the leading roles belt out important plot cues and there is a huge crescendo, the words are lost and you are left wondering what on earth just happened. The acoustics of a Langwith lecture theatre just don’t afford this type of accompaniment and it’s certainly a shame that the production wasn’t again held in Central Hall.
In terms of acting, the female protagonists without doubt stole the show. Polly Ingham playing Galinda lit up the stage with a beautiful voice and just the right amount of dramatic exaggeration to make the part comical without making you cringe. Her partnership with Katharine Newman playing Elphaba was perfectly cast; the girls’ voices harmonised brilliantly and the bright blonde versus dark brunette contrast highlighted the good versus (misunderstood) evil theme. Newman managed to touch the audience’s hearts on every necessary occasion and at times made you forget that she was entirely painted in green. This, I suspect, was no mean feat.
This type of camped up musical isn’t generally my bag but nonetheless the ridiculous nature raised a smile or two as the Gilbert&Sullivan loving cast provided a little unpretentious relief from the stresses and strains of exam season. Although a lot of the storyline was lost by the orchestra and some of the technicalities could have done with some perfecting, this production of Wicked is without any major complaints. For fans of musicals and for those who wished to escape the monotony of everyday life, this production of Wicked! will certainly have been a treat.
To see tonight’s performance, get yourself down to L/N/028 and pay £5 on the door. Just follow the yellow brick road…(or Vanbrugh walkway down to Langwith).
Please stop reviewing. Please just stop. If you knew anything about Wicked at all, you would recognise that it isn't in fact particularly childlike, but deliberately ironic with a constant, knowing nod of reflection to its predecessor The Wizard of Oz. It's also not particularly camp, although that may be a reflection upon this performance so I can't say. Stop making grand sweeping statements about a genre that you profess not to like, nor particularly know anything about.
how can Wicked! not be childlike? The nods may be ironic but the storyline is a reinterpretation of the wizard of oz. Sounds like it might have a childlike quality to me!
Anon1
I think you get me wrong. I in no way said that the production was 'childish'. A story based on The Wizard of Oz can be (and I would suggest is) childlike whilst having sophisticated nuances of irony. Shrek is childlike but it has definite nods to a 'knowing' adult audience.
Also, a review from a member of G&S (who will be the only people who know the detailed nuances of the genre) would have been
1) difficult as they seemed a little busy
2) a completely biased perspective.
Please remember that all reviews are subjective.
Sorry, I was a little bit angry when I posted that. But...anon2...if you had actually seen Wicked, in full West End production, you would realise that childlike is not the best terminology suited towards it.
Anon1, in fairness, if you're going to attack someone for the content of their review then adding your name rather than hiding behind your computer might be the more mature thing to do really.
And as has been said, reviews are subjective and naturally represent the reviewers personal OPINION. Rather than insisting "Please stop reviewing", maybe add your own balanced view of the performance rather than just attacking someone else's.
comment deleted by the author
comment deleted by the author Actually, Anonymous #6 - I beg to differ. I happen to be an actual cast member of G&S and I can safely say it was none of us, based on the fact that at 8:57pm we were still doing the last performance, and I'm pretty sure none of us logged into the Yorker whilst onstage, interesting as that might have made things. Less of the clearly wrong accusations, yes? 
I agree with the posts above who said it isn't childish. While 'The Wizard of Oz' is a child's book, the book of Wicked is the book is a dark political satire. The whole plot of both book and musical is that the wizard is supressing the ability of speech of the Animals - a large portion of the population - and Elphaba fights against authority and thus gets unfairly portrayed as wicked. Not normal childhood reading.
I thought this production was very good, and a big Well Done to everyone involved 
'loving cast provided a little unpretentious relief '
No wonder you didnt enjoy it...
#10...huh?
I think the other thing the reviewer should remember is that "Wicked" is not a Gilbert and Sullivan operetta, and therefore making judgements about the show based upin that: "When walking into a Gilbert&Sullivan production, you anticipate a high degree of fanciful foolishness and a level of twee more suited to your grandmother’s tea-and-biscuit club than Saturday night at university." is a little silly. Also, G&S Soc make it clear that they put on on G&S show in the Spring Term, and another Non-G&S related show in the Summer Term. I'm sure not everyone in the society for the Summer Show loves G&S...otherwise, a good review
It's still a G&S production though isn't it? If it said when walking into G&S's operetta 'Wicked!' etc then that would be silly. The show is pretty twee on the grand scale of stuff to be seen at university isn't it? Not a bad thing mind you but it'd be fair to say it wasn't written to be marketed at students...
Err. What productions ARE solely marketed at students? I'm pretty sure most of the things put on by CHMS or DramaSoc are not intentionally marketed at students!?
Arts reviews: Serious Business
@#14, I would bet that Pantsoc's productions are solely marketed at students!
Yes #13 but the point is that when walking into a G&S soc Summer Show, you shouldn't be expecting the things that the reviewer described in the first paragraph, as their Summer Show could be any Musical in the world.
Well some people do #17! Do people not understand that reviews are opinion pieces?!
Even if the show can be anything in the world, a particular style of production is generally assumed from different societies. To say you 'shouldn't be expecting' something is a bit much...people can expect what they like!
ps. the fact that there were children in the audience for Wicked! says alot. Other productions from other societies such as DramaSoc may not be 'marketed' for students but I think the point is that wicked has no sex, no disturbing violence and is suitable for the family. Not like most other stuff on campus which is directed at a more mature audience.
'Arts reviews: Serious Business'
Assuming you're being sarcastic - Why should arts pieces be any less important and less debated than say, sports pieces or news pieces?
comment deleted by the author You must log in to submit a comment.
Report