Please Help Me Find a Play!!!- Page 2

[NuggetMonkeys]

Posted: 9/9/04 at 7:04pm

Hooooold on.
How would you do SURE THING with four people?
(I was Bill in Sure Thing at my high school this past year, much fun and MUCH LUCK TO YOU!)
but please explain.
:)
-d.b.j-

[~FloweryFriend~]

Posted: 9/10/04 at 2:47am

To Nugget Monkeys... An abridged (yet extremely long) explanation of my idea.


SURE THING
Well, BASICALLY here was my plan.
(It's actually a lot more complicated than this, but it all makes plenty of sense in my head.)

SET: Turn two-person cube on its side so that top faces audience. Put two one-person cubes on top of that cube, next to each other with tops facing audience. Actors would then use this not really as a table, but more as a bar area. It is to be implied that they are seated behind that, even though in reality they are standing. (There was really no other way for me to create a table and chairs with blocks of equal height, so that was my solution. Also, I think that having them face the audience instead of each other adds to the awkwardness of the situation. It also allows for the goal of getting the other to make eye contact, which would not be a struggle if they were sitting at a normal table.) USL, a window. It has a ledge on it, where it would be possible to place a bell or two. (Set may be changed mid-play, by having the actors move the small cubes down and sit on them. Haven't decided whether I can use that to serve the script or not.)

ACTORS: Two men, both playing Bill. Two women, both playing Betty (plain costumes, same for each member of the pair to make transitions easier on the audience). Betty1 and Bill1 start the scene. Betty2 and Bill2 stand by the window ledge, observing (There are actually good reasons metaphorically for putting the window there, but I'll spare you the explanation). At the cues when a bell is to ring (at a beat change) and a character is to switch tactics, have their counterpart ring the bell, signifying an "I can do better" emotion, and then switching in. So when the first problem occurs with the encounter, Bill2 rings the bell, and he and Bill1 switch places. When the problems stem from Betty, then the women switch. A couple of times, both switch. I felt that this would add an interesting element of competition and building between the two actors playing each character. This is particularly true when Bill has quickly changed responses... I planned to have the two Bills fight over the chair (and the bell) during the fast beats places, such as "Straight-down-the-ticket Republican. (ding) Straight down the ticket Democrat. (ding) Can I tell you something about politics? (ding) I like to think of myself as a citizen of the universe. (ding) I am unaffiliated." I also was planning on at least one point when the Betty at the table, obviously unhappy, grabbed a bell and rang it so that the Bills would switch (after the line "One of them's pregnant, and Stephanie...").

I had it worked out very well, too. I used the times when both of them switch to help it get the pairings correct. The times when they were SO CLOSE to it working but it didn't were between Bill2 and Betty2. The times when it was least cohesive were between Bill1 and Betty1. And in the end, Bill2 and Betty2 find happiness together. (While they're by the window, I planned for the Bills and Bettys to still act toward each other as they would have at the table. While the 1s are fighting at the table, the 2s are flirting upstage. This provides an excuse for why some of the bad exchanges last as long as they do: the bell-ringers are distracted.)

Also, by having the alternate Bill and Betty ring the bells, I get around my limit on sound cues (since they would be from onstage, it's okay). Unfortunately, I can't really use lights to help indicate the switches since I am allowed so few cues, but I think I'd be able to get the point across in other ways.

I had almost completely worked out the Root Conflict Analysis, I felt I had a decent directorial concept (which, of course, I would have had time to improve upon), and I really understood the plights of the characters.

Anyway, I quickly proposed the idea of doing this play to my Professor this afternoon. He looked like he was considering it, and then said "Interesting... Yes, that's very interesting... Hmm... No. This production will be complicated enough. Doing something that isn't realism is only going to make it harder on you. Trust me. It's too difficult. Find something else."

The thing is, realism is a lot harder for me. My theatrical background is mostly as a playwright, not a director, and the things I write are structurally-based comedies (I mess with the boundaries of time and space a great deal. I like it when the past and present occur simaltaneously, or when characters in the same time and place argue about where they are and when it is). None of my writing has ever been realism. I honestly understand Theatre of the Absurd far more than standard works. "Waiting for Godot" makes a lot more sense to me than "Of Mice and Men". So while he thinks this type of play would make the directing too difficult, I see it as the only way that I'm going to have any clue as to what the heck I'm doing. (Not that I'm going to be good at it anyway.)

I really want to DIRECT this, not just STAGE it. I want to create a production, and not just be a traffic cop telling the actors where to stand. I want to make strong choices, and for every choice I make to have an actual purpose behind it, rooted in the script. That makes everything a heck of a lot harder (especially since I'm a first-time director. Perhaps I'm over-thinking this. I just really want it to be good. And not just for the grade. I want to prove to myself that I can direct a show that is worth seeing.)

Although it might be in vain, I think I'm going to continue working on my "Sure Thing" ideas over the weekend, and type up a full proposal of it. Then, I'll go to his office hours on Monday and say, "if I can prove to you that I can do this, and do it well, will you let me try?"
I figure that at this point, I have nothing to lose.
Wish me luck.

Updated On: 9/10/04 at 02:47 AM

[ckeaton]

Posted: 9/10/04 at 10:58am

A full length play that is really neat, because of its "time play" (past and the present exist on stage at the same time is "That Was Then" by Gerard Stembridge. The set is two different kitchens with a shared dining room in the center... It looks like a blast.

The description from my theatre's website:
"An earthy Irish couple invites a haughty English couple to dinner, desperate to get out of a sticky financial situation. Tension runs high, tempers flare, and almost everything that could go wrong…does. Five years later, the English couple find themselves in dire circumstances of their own, and it’s their turn to return the invitation. Irish-English relations have never been funnier than in this recent hit at Dublin’s Abbey Theatre."

http://www.gevatheatre.org/plays/thatwasthen.php
We're presenting the American premiere of this show in January.

PS- I think that the proposal idea is great. If you are rejected after that, it still shows that you are passionate about it.

[~FloweryFriend~]

Posted: 9/10/04 at 5:02pm

I'll read that, ckeaton. Thanks. I wish the professor would allow me to direct something like that.

I have to say, though, the idea of realism is becoming a little less scary. I'm working with two other girls right now on a directorial concept project over our class example play ("Trifles" by Susan Glaspell), and we came up with a lot of ideas that I think are strong choices that aid the script well. We have this central metaphor going, structuring a corner of the kitchen to resemble a large birdcage. I know it sounds dumb, but it's actually pretty cool. Anyway, going through that today, I realized that it's not as difficult to understand this play as I originally thought. And hey, if I can do it with this one, I'm sure I can understand another one. (Unfortunatley, I won't be able to do much with the set, lights, and costumes of my piece, but at least I'll be able to have a good enough understanding of it that I can make good use of what I'm given.)

[Unknown User]

Posted: 9/10/04 at 8:24pm

The Cool Sequester'd by Mindy Mayer. All girl cast, pretty small cast and pretty short. It is wonderful. I saw it preformed last year. WONDERFUL!