Freedom of speech? Ok? Don't persecute me!

To describe 'morning glory' in those short film critic-like quotes: "a cringing performance'. I've actually been quoted before. It was for a heartlander play that was showing at Marine Parade CC a few years back. The reason I caught it was because Kumar was acting in it. He had a small segment where he was a Crow. After the entire thingmajig, I wrote in the comments box: Kumar basically stole the entire show with his hilarious potrayal of a crow in the HDB heartland (along with a systematic critique of the show because face it, the rest of the cast sucked). A few months later as they were re-staging the show, I realised I was quoted when a promotional phamplet quoted me, and ended with Wu Zhiyou (Full Time National Serviceman). Ugh. For those that loved the show and would get pissed if I dissed it, please by all means STOP READING.

I've watched bad plays before. I've watched bad movies before. Hell, I've definately watched bad musicals before (e.g. ACJC's Fame - It was the worst piece of crap I'd ever saw)... but nothing prepared me for 'morning glory'. To be fair and as a disclaimer, I would like to say that the actors (and actresses) were mostly alright. When they weren't singing. Ziliang was good la. Redeeming factor. Though if he sang I dunno whether I would say the same though (mel mel don't kill me!)... because it would be weird if an ah pek sang onstage. Especially since he was gonna die. But they could have added that. Maybe to make it more touching, make him sing with his deceased wife. Really, with the correct tone in the music, I think I wouldn've shed a tear. So many lost opportunities to make the entire thing so impactful but sad to say, they didn't think of it.

Let's start from the top. The show opened with a dance. In black. And it ended in white. I mean sure, you'll definitely wanna do a contrast coz afterall, he's supposed to be different at the end of everything. By different I mean either he learnt an important and valuable lesson, or different as in he's 6 feet under. But basically, there must be a difference in the beginning and the end of the entire musical kinda like bookends to a piece. It's so hard using that word when the entire show doesn't really justify as a musical. But I digress. I understand modern dance a little. I understand (kinda) what was going on. But what I don't understand was why it was included as part of the show (It's a show!) when it only basically served to confuse the general audience. By general audience, I refer to the audience that just wants to be treated something simple and easy to understand (e.g. the ah ma's and ah gong's that were present) and instead they have symbolisms of birth? death? and men in tights prancing around? We should know it's something inferred to the morning glory. But if you take away the dance before and after all the acts, you realise that the story is still there. Everything is still coherent. One thing to note. If you can take it out and everything's still the same. By all means. Cut. It means it's redundant. Be concise. The ensemble could be put to much better use. Like actually taking the time to learn how to act and not behave like stick figures in the background. Mingle more. Articulate. I suppose they're suffering from a lack of facial expressions too. The short one seemed frozen in either a constipated (or plastic) smile for most of the time, whilst the taller one (I know you!) was kinda like Lurch. But again, this is largely due to the vision (or rather lack of) on the part of the director. I supposed they could be more animated. But then again, there was too short a time in between dialog (if any) and the sudden spontaneous song-and-dance routine. Which leads to the next item on the list. The opening village scene.

If I recall, it was a really weird opening. For starters, if I remember correctly, it was a little bit of dialog between the ditzy girl and the supposed gay guy. And I only knew he was supposedly gay from melmel. Which meant he FAILED. Oh well. Not surprising. He couldn't even enunciate. There was abit of the usual Jackson-kinda-mumbling.. mumble mumble mumble. Then suddenly.. song and dance. The reason that the transition was bad was probably due to the lack of proper like dialog in binding the two together. Usually in a musical if one wanted to go into song and dance, it'll like build up slowly. So instead of people gossiping then suddenly see the couple coming in, then BAM go into song and dance, they could gossip gossip gossip, repeat certain words from the lyrics, nail it into us first. All this time, music should have started playing in the background. The intro was too long. Combine both what was going on in terms of action and maybe building up the atmosphere with increasing references to the lyrics in their dialogs (obviously your script has to have them saying stuff and maybe already going abit into the chorus playfully perhaps), they can probably do a better transition. Then there was the abrupt ending. It was like. Too short. It's like people were singing, dancing, la la la la, happy happy joy joy.. then suddenly diaow. Eh. Over already arh? You can almost hear the audiences go.. Errrr... Huurrrr... (and get better singers. cannot hear anything properly)

Personally I think the acting sequences in the hospital was fine. But what's up with the nurse hur. I mean seriously. Ok, I know she isn't who she seems to be from reading the phamplet and well, from the obvious way Michael goes "hurr.. Nurse Amy?" I get the point. But the audience doesn't. Or rather they fail to grasp the idea of why they had like one scene of Amy walking along the stage. I think it was an attempt to be artistic. Yet it failed. Why. Answer. Target audience too stupid. These people can't be bothered to think. And even so, there's no need to think. It's an expression which the director wants to portray. It's got significance to the story. But one must realise that if this intention isn't executed properly, it would bring negative results in such an audience. Suggestions to make it not so jia lat would be to maybe have her appear prior to hospital scenes, in a corner, with the spotlight on her.. then gradually the spotlight fades as the hospital brightens. She would then like disappear in the shadows. It's a suggestion. It might not be the best suggestion, but it's a plausible one.

On to Michael. Over enunciation to the point of almost bringing me to the brink of insanity. I felt compelled to stand up and grab a really long stick and stick it up his ass. Maybe it'll make him less high-pitched and irritating. Otherwise, he was fine. Again, he had potential to maybe sing a duet with his father. Doesn't really make sense having him singing with his dear ol' aunt pauline does it? Then again, should he even sing at all. Heh.

Back to the villagers (they had a song near the end). I didn't feel for them. I didn't feel the urgency nor the threat of war. Basically I felt nothing. I was stoned. Sure, they excerpted a clip from a war movie and left the stage black for us to 'imaGen' what was going on. Leave it to the audience's imagination. Sometimes it works. Sometimes it doesn't. A suggestion would be air raid sirens (as was used) and showing all the villages evacuating. Chaos, panic and you can have flashing lights. Simple? Droning of planes overhead (was it used?) would be cool at this point, then there could be the sound of a bomb dropping. When it hits, blackout immediately. Then cue the firefight sounds.. then when lights come on, show the village in ruins. You'll require more emotional output from the actors+actresses to make us FEEL your loss. I don't feel anything except a strong desire to walk up to them and slap them in their faces and go 'aye, sing properly la. your village kenna ravaged and you sing so emotional-essly' try taking a cue from Les Mis.. sing with gusto. Maybe, just maybe, they should have included lyrics in the booklet. 90% of the time all I was hearing was Jackson's mumbling. Quite incoherent.

Oh. Regarding the Captain hor. I think she's fine la. Nothing much to explore in this character anyway. Maybe go deeper into the psyche? Even so, I don't feel her guilt before she shot herself. It's like she's so gung ho and then suddenly she feels damn guilty. Maybe there isn't time to develop. Oh well, I think ley, she should have smoked la. It's like no smoke. Then very lame ley. Keanu Reeves smoked like 7 packets a day to get into character as Constantine in the upcoming movie. If you're required to smoke one cigarette, must as well smoke it. Realism helps. I heard from my cousin, a child actor, that he and some other kids were required to smoke as in actually smoke in one of their scenes. They were told to hold the smoke in their mouth and blow it out. Simple? But optional la. Cannot condemn based on this. But just a suggestion. Or maybe at least really light up. One cigarette won't possibly set off the fire exstinguishers right? right? Hmm.

It's been 2 days since I last edited this draft. And I've pretty much forgotten how the thing went. But I believe we still have 2 soliloquys to consider? 1st thing to consider here, were they necessary? As usual. Transition was lacking. Actors weren't convincing. How can they expect us to feel sorrow and moved when all we saw was a constipated guy in an army uniform clenching his fists and like flailing his arms? Incomprehensible (and bad) voice plus bad acting = switch off. Come to think of it. I didn't even applause whenever they ended a song. It could have been much better. The nurse amy too... too much ambiguity in this character. No transition. Leads to alot alot of question marks in the audience. Though I understood what was going on, I didn't really like the way they jumped straight into something. Straight into her walking, talking, then suddenly singing. Maybe she could have like stepped off the set and spotlight on her after her interaction with other cast members. Such a flow would greatly help things. Even if the song sucked, but at least she sounded like she could sing. Which is a plus point. The same couldn't be said of the others though.

Bad ending. Could it get any worse than this? I get the ending. Old man dies. 'Son' talks a little about the man's past. History. Like the son whom never knew his father. We dunno if father actually knew son. But by inference, I gather Michael had matured. However. What I don't get. And what's nagging me.. is WHY IS HE SINGING WITH HIS AUNT?! Abit the hurrR right. Don't tell me that only because she never die that's why he can only sing with her. C'mon la. FINALE ley. 2 people sing? Usually finale is the ENTIRE CAST right? POWER finale. Remember when the lights dimmed out? The audience were like waiting for the next scene? And they started announcing names? The entire row in front of me was like DUH? It's OVER?! Not that they wanted more la. But even the idiot that was slapping his thigh at certain bits of the play (Michael's enunciation) was shocked that it was over. Like that. (Despite me turning my head 90 degrees when he was rolling in his seat during 'Michael's performance, he did not get it that it was so not funny and that he shouldn't really be laughing and was getting on my nerves) Was it meant to be artistic? Maybe. Did it achieve that? No. What was the problem? VISION! NO VISION! Sigh. That's the importance of the director. If it doesn't work, make amendments. Visualise what it would look like. Find it a little weird? Nagging suspicion it might not work? Change it! This would be very important on my upcoming Repro direction. Unfortunately, the next repro film might be a flop again. And this time it would be on my head. Sigh.

Choice of music. Usually musicals go for 3-4 main tunes which get repeated when it came to an emotional, happy or basically stirring scene. Say an example would be the 'happy happy' villages song. Imagine how powerful it would be should the army guy come back and look at his home and the 'sad version' plays. Then he cries and maybe sits down on the steps holding a morning glory in his fingers and sing the 'sad version' which is basically the 'happy' version but sings it tearfully, slowly and basically i think it would be more appropriate. It's these tunes that get repeated and stuck into our heads. Not radiohead. They might wanna re-consider on that. In case any KR person involved in hall production is reading this and gets all hot under the collar, i'll like to just say that yes. I am an armchair general. I am an armchair critic. I have not directed a play, I have not written a score, nor have I told 20 actors how to act. But at least I have suggestions. Which may/may not make the production better. So it's a personal opinion. You should have stopped reading after the first paragraph if you're pissed.

It could have been so much better. I liked the idea of michael being his son corny as it might have been. In fact, all the elements made for a compelling story. Unfortunately the execution. Ugh. Transition. Ugh. It killed everything. Pardon me for being incoherent at times. I'm not exactly a good writer, but I do try my best. We'll need smoother transitions, better dialog.. and also less 'trying to be artistic' scenes. If you can't pull it off, don't. Treat the audience like idiots. It's the safest way to survive. Just look at Jack Neo. heh. I think next time, ask Dick Lee back to do the musical. My gripe is baically how bad it flowed and how bad it ended. If they had put more into these aspects, it might have been better. Really. It's got potential. If it ended with the full cast singing, I would have clapped. But it's over now. Just a stain in the long list of KR Hall Productions. If I recall anything else I want to add, I'll just update this post. Right now. I'm just sick and tired.

Let the flaming begin.