Production Blog

A behind the scenes peek at rehearsals, artistic choices, artist interviews, and the daily business of running a theatre.

Read 'The Final Problem' by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle

Read Conan Doyle's "The Final Problem"

Read The Final Problem by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle

The Final Problem sets the scene for where we find ourselves at the beginning of Holmes & Watson. It is by no means necessary to read this prior to seeing the play, except for your own enhanced enjoyment. 

"It is with a heavy heart that I take up my pen to write these the last words in which I shall ever record the singular gifts by which my friend Mr. Sherlock Holmes was distinguished. In an incoherent and, as I deeply feel, an entirely inadequate fashion, I have endeavored to give some account of my strange experiences in his company from the chance which first brought us together at the period of the “Study in Scarlet,” up to the time of his interference in the matter of the “Naval Treaty”—an interference which had the unquestionable effect of preventing a serious international complication. It was my intention to have stopped there, and to have said nothing of that event which has created a void in my life which the lapse of two years has done little to fill. My hand has been forced, however, by the recent letters in which Colonel James Moriarty defends the memory of his brother, and I have no choice but to lay the facts before the public exactly as they occurred. I alone know the absolute truth of the matter, and I am satisfied that the time has come when no good purpose is to be served by its suppression. As far as I know, there have been only three accounts in the public press: that in the 'Journal de Geneve' on May 6th, 1891, the Reuter’s despatch in the English papers on May 7th, and finally the recent letters to which I have alluded. Of these the first and second were extremely condensed, while the last is, as I shall now show, an absolute perversion of the facts. It lies with me to tell for the first time what really took place between Professor Moriarty and Mr. Sherlock Holmes."  

A chat with David Coffee about playing THE FATHER

Q: Although this script is relatively recent, the role of André has become a role of note, a role that marks an achievement - like Vanya or Lear or Willy Loman. What is it about the role and the script that you find puts it among the greats?

A: The role of Andre, I find, is very much like King Lear. Here is a man who starts out very much in charge. (At least, that's his viewpoint.) As the play progresses, however, we see him starting to falter in his confidence. We, as an audience, also begin to doubt our own confidence in what we perceive to be reality. The audience literally experiences what Andre is going through.

To me, it reminds me of Jaques' famous speech from "As You Like It": the Seven Ages of Man. During the course of the play, we see Andre in all seven stages of life.

There lies the great challenge of Andre: to show a full lifetime on stage, to keep trying to find out what is real (and what is not) and, finally, to find the humor in the whole situation so as not to make the experience one big depressing evening.

As the title reads: "The Father" - a tragic farce. I look forward to our audiences joining us on the journey.

A moment with Director Tina Parker about THE FATHER

Q: This relatively new script has already received many prestigious awards and recognitions across the globe in its many incarnations and productions over the last few years. Without giving too much away, why do you think this story was crafted for the theatre, rather than a film or an opera or a ballet? What excites you theatrically about this script?

A: As Co-Artistic Director of Kitchen Dog Theater in Dallas, I read A LOT of plays every year. Very few surprise me any more in the way that THE FATHER did. It's brutally real and heartbreakingly hilarious--sometimes even in the same scene, with echoes of King Lear, Harold Pinter and All in the Family. The audience experiences the play through the eyes of Andre, who's navigating his way in the ever-shifting and often tricky landscape of old age and family and all that comes with that. Just when you think you've figured out the play, something will shift and send you down a different rabbit hole. And you, much like Andre, will struggle to find your footing and figure out what is going on. But I'm telling you, once the plays lands, without giving too much away here, the payoff is pretty tremendous. I can't wait to experience this wild beautiful ride with a live audience.

A moment with Director vickie washington about then and now

Q: While the events of this script took place over 65 years ago, there is a very contemporary and topical air to the piece that draws interesting parallels between the past and the present. This play deals with ideas like censorship, the relationship between art and politics, civil rights, in addition to many other things. In your examination and exploration of this play and in this production, what aspects of the script have been most important for you in telling this real-life story?

A: Words. Images. Stories/Storytelling. Music. Memory. Rhythm. Resistance to oppression. History. Courage... These are just some of the aspects that Carlyle Brown has deftly interwoven into this thought provoking and beautiful play. Just as Langston labors through the night to create a new poem, we have labored in rehearsal to birth the play. As director/midwife, I have been very attentive to the ‘breath of the play’ - the aspect of rhythm if you will. The deep breaths, the silences, the exhalations…, all vitally important in the birthing process. There is also another kind of rhythm that we find in the play. With each reading and with every rehearsal, we have all been struck by how contemporary the subject matter feels, and actually is. As Langston struggles to create a new poem on the eve of his appearance before the McCarthy Senate hearings in 1953; our daily news cycles remind us that history repeats, there are cycles...there is rhythm. Come breathe with us…

photo: Can Turkyilmaz

A chat with Djoré Nance about portraying “the Poet Laureate of Harlem”

Q: In this show, you are portraying one of America’s most important writers, Langston Hughes. There must be a different element of preparation that goes into portraying a real person. What has been similar and different in your preparation process for this show and this role in regards to playing such an iconic figure?

A: Preparing to be Langston Hughes in ‘Are You Now, or Have You Ever Been” has been truly the most rewarding experience of my life as an actor thus far. The preparation has been a noteworthy process, mostly because I’ve never played a historical figure before! There is a bevy of information on Langston Hughes, and many many still-living people who have intimate first-hand experience with the genius himself. Another welcome surprise has been some of the eerie similarities between us, even down to our looks! The way he speaks, his love and passion for music and art, his political leanings, his commitment to freedom and justice for all people, his solidarity with black people, are all deeply resonant for me. However, because of our similarities, it has created challenges as well. As actors, we must always serve the story and the piece, and the character within that framework. Carlyle Brown has created a richly hued and brilliantly nuanced character in Langston Hughes. It has been a challenge for me to get “Djoré” out of the way because Langston Hughes and I bear so many similarities. Being true to Langston for me begins with the voice, one of the places where words are made manifest. His voice and being as clear with my vocal choices as an actor ground me in Langston being Langston. I have enjoyed this work so much, I am absolutely over the moon to be back at Stage West and to be working with my FAVORITE director, the inimitable Mommy, otherwise known as vickie washington. She is a brilliant artist and I am thrilled to be birthing this iteration of “Are You Now, or Have You Ever Been” with her at the helm of a wonderful team!

A chat with Megan Haratine about playing Everybody and everyone

Q: For this show, a handful of the cast (including you) discover which roles they will be playing at any given performance during the show - what a thrill!! How do you prepare for a process like that, where you must know all of the roles, but only learn which role you will be playing each night during the show?

A: During the course of our rehearsals for Everybody, I have had to begin considering this show almost as a one person show in order to prepare for any possibility. In developing each character, I have leaned heavily into physical centers and differing vocal qualities and speech patterns, much of which is inherent in Jacobs-Jenkins’s vivid text and in each character’s actions. In doing so, I am hoping to be able to tap in more quickly not only to each character but also to the unique aspect of the story that they each represent.

In addition, we are working to build a strong foundation of trust among the “Somebodies” since we will need to have one another’s backs during the production no matter what configuration we may be in. Unlike some runs of shows, I will not be focusing as much on coining it fresh each time – since most likely, it will already be fresh based on a new set of who is play who – but rather I will need to stay grounded and flexible to ride whatever wave of possibility comes my way. 

I think this show is the epitome of what is exciting about live theatre – and also life itself! Anything can happen. All I can do is my best to prepare for anything and then live fully in the moment as it is handed to me.  

 

Show:

A moment with EVERYBODY Director Jake Nice

photo Robert W. Hart/Special Contributor

Q: Everybody is a contemporary adaptation of the medieval morality play entitled Everyman. In your interpretation of the script, what about this adaptation is timeless in regards to its source material, and what do you think is “right-now” about it?

A: Everybody and Everyman explore some of life’s biggest questions--why are we here, what happens after death, how ought we to live our lives, etcetera. Those themes are timeless and apply to all people, past and present. Both plays also portray universal concepts like Death, Strength, Beauty, and Knowledge/Understanding as personified figures who interact with their namesake characters as if they were human. Although our relationships with those concepts may change over time, they too are timeless and immortal.

The major difference between the plays is in their delivery. When writing Everybody, Branden Jacobs-Jenkins completely contemporised the antiquated language of Everyman by incorporating phrases like “homey,” “Society and the Media,” and “various streaming accounts.” He also made slight adjustments to the original play’s structure, making it more relatable for a modern audience while simultaneously challenging our 21st century expectations of the theatre. 

Show:

Director Garret Storms on the world of the Jacob Marley

Q: This script has very little to offer in terms of suggestions for staging and scenic elements, leaving much of that up to the director’s vision. What influenced you to stage this production of Jacob Marley’s Christmas Carol the way that you have?

A: Much of what influenced my vision for the show stemmed from the wonderful Emily Scott Banks. She is a magical and enchanting artist and actress, and allowing her to inhabit a space that she could literally bring to life felt like the right move. We have kept things relatively simple - wooden platforms, exposed practical lights, suspended fabrics, and a odd collection of objects, all coming together to create a space that looks a bit like it has been lost to time. Something about it might resemble a cluttered old attic that hasn’t been touched in a good long while. But when inhabited by Emily, it comes to life as she creates new and imaginative functions for everyday objects. There is an element of imagination and childlike magic that permeates the production, similar to the imagination and childlike magic that tends to well up in us around this time of year - an air of possibility, of hope, of reflection as we stand in the present looking at both the past and the future. It was important to me that Emily be able to bring the space to life and allow it to breathe, making both the story and the storyteller the featured aspects of the production.

For those who saw the 2015 production at Stage West, you can anticipate many of the same elements that made that production so wonderful and well received. However, now that the Studio is in quite a different shape, there is a little something new and fresh about the production. Magic, mischief, memories, and more await you this holiday season at Stage West!

A chat with Emily Scott Banks about the adaptation and the solo journey

Q: A Christmas Carol is probably one of the most iconic stories ever written. In taking on this script again this holiday season, what are the most exciting aspects of this adaptation of the story and also the challenges of doing a one-person show?

A: As when we first did Marley three years ago, the most exciting aspects of this show for me are still how Garret has envisioned the magical world of this production from just objects found in the attic of Stage West (on nearly no budget), and how the Narrator, a female (and I have been told by the playwright the only one to do a one-actor version so far) has her own reasons for going on this journey telling the story of these men and spirits. The meta-layers in these two elements, both personally and theatrically, I adore.

As for the challenges of doing a one-person show, well, it’s more tiring in the rehearsal process! Since there aren’t any other actors the five hours can feel like a marathon, but at full-speed. I’m so lucky, both this time and the last, to share the show with a stage manager who is also an actor – this makes it feel as if I actually have a scene partner (beyond a pocket flash light!) and one who helps tell the story in their own Behind-the-Curtain, Oz-like way. When the audience shows up, however, it always feels like we’re all kind of discovering the story together each time, so it never really feels like it’s just me – because it definitely isn’t. There’s an amazing team that’s gone into making this Marley journey magical.

A chat with actor Shannon McGrann about the rebirth of an icon

Q: Nora Helmer may well be one of the most important characters ever written. In taking on this new incarnation of her, how do you think she is different from the original play, and how to you think that affects how A Doll’s House, Part 2 is different from A Doll’s House?

 

A: Nora in A Doll’s House, Part 2 has evolved into an individual with agency and her own means, as opposed to Nora in Ibsen’s A Doll’s House who is merely being an extension of her domestic situation. By Part 2, she has realized she has the power to make her own choices and knows she has to and can live with the consequences of those choices, whatever they may be. 

Here we are, over 100 years later, and we’re still holding men and women to different standards, even when they make similar sacrifices, similar transgressions, and have similar aspirations. Right now, the subject of equality is one of the most talked about things in our culture. We’re talking about it more frequently and openly. 

A moment with A DOLL’S HOUSE, PART 2 Director Clare Shaffer

Tom Fox/DMN Staff Photographer

Q: Henrik Ibsen’s A Doll’s House is probably one of the most important and iconic pieces of literature in the world canon. In what ways do you think that this new sequel is in dialogue with the original? And what do you think this sequel has to say that is different from the original?

A: A Doll’s House Part 2 is a modern continuation of the conversation about gender roles that Nora began just minutes before she walked out the door in 1879. In the original, Nora had just begun to understand the implications of the patriarchy—in Part 2, her views have matured and expanded beyond a critique of traditional marital values to include thoughts on subjects including polyamory, the epidemic of mansplaining, and gender performativity. She has progressed from discovering gender inequality to understanding and trying to combat it, giving the sequel a bolder and far more grounded protagonist. Ibsen’s Nora left home in search of her voice in a time when women were legally and socially considered inferior to their male counterparts—and in this sequel, we get to hear that strikingly relevant voice loud and clear. 

image: Tom Fox, DMN Staff photographer

A chat with OCTOROON actor Ryan Woods

Q: An Octoroon is a demanding script, while also funny and entertaining. It examines identity and race in a melodramatic style through a contemporary lens. It has a meta-theatrical play-within-a-play structure. What are the most exciting and challenging aspects of working on this script?

A: An Octoroon is definitely a beast of a play. What excites me about working on such a challenging script is the relevancy it has in regards to the current social and political climate. Through its meta-theatrical structure of a ‘play within a play,’ it examines aspects of racism through the lens of melodrama (an adaptation of Dion Boucicault’s The Octoroon) which allows Jacobs-Jenkins to utilize broad racial stereotypes and tropes found in melodrama to shine a light on issues of racism. Examining racism in our society through humor and stereotypes is an effective way to get people to think and reconsider their own views.

What I find the most challenging is figuring out how to juggle portraying three different characters within the same story (which I found early on is no easy feat!). There’s the role of Branden Jacobs-Jenkins himself, who we see struggling with the fact that he’s not just a playwright, but a “black” playwright, and what it means to always have the qualifier of race put upon anything he chooses to do. This is something I think every person of color can relate to. Then we have George (the “protagonist”) and M’Closky (the “villain”) who are larger than life with their broad characterizations, but both highlight the complicated image of a racist. Trying to wrap my head around these three roles and their purpose in delivering the message of the story has been truly humbling.

But all of these things are what make working on this play so exciting! The audience is bombarded by a multitude of stereotypes and tropes, and through the lens of humor and melodrama, they are forced to examine how this adaptation of Boucicault’s play alludes to the many racial and societal problems that we struggle with today (especially in our current political climate). People will find themselves laughing, crying, and feeling immensely uncomfortable (sometimes all at the same time) which is what makes An Octoroon such a powerful piece of theatre. Audience members will leave the theatre reeling from the experience, but more importantly, they will leave reexamining their own beliefs concerning racial identity and politics, and what all of that really means in our “progressive” American society right now.

Drinking for Diversity

Nancy Churnin writes "Stage West's 'An Octoroon' underscores how far we've come — and still have to go — with racial equity in theater".  (You should click and read her piece. Lots of good stuff in there, plus it's the only way to keep getting arts reporting funded by our local news media...) We explored diversity on stage at our Happy Hour event the week before opening with artist Christopher Blay.

For each show this season, we had an opening event or happy hour to introduce folks to the show. At our An Octoroon Happy Hour we experienced artist Christopher Blay's relational aesthetics art experience Drinking for Diversity.

Here are the instructions:

And here's the pour chart, illustrating the casting breakdown by ethnicity for New York City theatres.

Some of our written and drawn responses to questions 2 & 3 above. 

We also got to hear director Akin Babatunde and the cast of An Octoroon discuss the show. 

A chat with DON'T DRESS FOR DINNER actor Catherine DuBord about farces

Q: Farces are know for quick rhythms, eccentric characters in extreme situations, and lots of entrances and exits. What do you find to be most exciting and challenging aspects of performing in a farce?

A: As actors in DFW, we don’t get many opportunities to do a full-blown farce. As modern actors, we tend to get grounded in naturalism. A Farce develops its comedy through physical humor and deliberate use of nonsense. The trick is to stay committed to the heightened importance of every single conversation or interaction. All of these characters are larger than life – very Shakespearean even. Each objective must be gone after with extreme vigor and the flexibility to turn on a dime. The fun part is getting comfortable in these people’s shoes, who live every moment larger than life. They love harder, cry louder and get angry more passionately than what contemporary society would deem acceptable. You have to be willing to strap yourself into this obscene roller coaster, keep your eyes open at all costs and take the ride every night. The hardest part is to remember to trust the work that we have put in as a company and know that we have built a fantastic, terrifying ride.

A moment with DON'T DRESS FOR DINNER Director Christie Vela about the update


Q: This play is normally set in the 1960's, but in this production you are pulling it forward into the 1980's. What inspired this decision and how do you feel that this adjustment of decade informs the direction you are taking with the show?

A: When I read this play the first time, I immediately thought to set it in the 1980s. I was reminded, transported, to the movies and television shows then; in particular, the romantic comedies in which the women are clearly smarter than the men. I thought back on the “breaking the glass ceiling” elements of Working Girl, or Who’s That Girl, in which the “fish out of water” woman outsmarts the people who think they’re smarter than her. What fascinates me about these stories is that they are attempts to empower women that, all the same, take part in a culture of female objectification. And I believe that that’s something that we can observe to this day: how often do we quote Mean Girls? How much nostalgia do we and our kids have for other “girly” movies from the 2000s that, despite having only come out ten to fifteen years ago, played undeniable roles in our personal and cultural development? 
I think that it’s necessary that we confront these cultural, historical specifics. And, when you’re given a script like this--which is by turns hilarious and frustrating, just like any good farce--I think it’s important that we have fun when we do it.

A chat with HIR actor Zander Pryor about the attachments

Q: There are so many aspects of this play to grapple with and be entertained by. What excites you most about this play and why do you think that it is one of the most produced scripts in the nation right now?

A: It's hard to identify what excites me most about Hir. So many different aspects of it excite me but I think the part that makes me the most happy might be the inclusion of Max as a character. As cliche and predictable that might be, it makes me so happy to see a character like Max. What I specifically love about Max is that ze has a personality outside of being the "token trans" and an interesting, engaging personality at that. Max is openly trans and proud of that fact, which makes ze such a fun character to play. I can't express how much it meant to me that Taylor Mac specifies that Max should be played by a trans individual.

My own personal theory as to why this play has been produced so much relates to how it's simultaneously new and old. It's written in a genre that is quintessentially American and is quite familiar to theatergoers but it also addresses those who are normally left out of these narratives. It's telling the same story from the perspective of characters we have not heard from yet in this genre. In this fashion, Hir is both foreign and familiar. 

 

Show:

A selection from an interview with playwright Halley Feiffer about laughing through tears

Q: What inspired the play and how do you explore the relationship between laughter and grief?

A: The play is not inspired by true events. Nothing in the play ever happened. I wish I’d had a steamy sex scene in a bathroom. That has yet to happen to me, but it’s on the bucket list. Basically what happened was my mother, who is in wonderful health today, did have a hysterectomy to treat ovarian cancer a little over ten years ago. I was a college student at the time, and while I was in the hospital caring for her, I remember thinking, “I don’t know how to show up for my mother the way that I want to.” I was 20 years old, drinking really heavily, and just a profoundly selfish young person.

I remember looking at the curtain that separated her side of the room from her roommate’s and thinking, “God, wouldn’t it be great if there were some cute family member of her roommate, say her son, who I could flirt with and that would help make all this pain and fear go away.” And then because I’m not a 100% sociopath, I realized it was a very fucked up thought. But I filed it away to write about, because I did think it was a funny premise for a play.

In a way, that situation perfectly captured what that experience is like; that you at once want to show up and be useful for your loved one and, because we’re human beings, we’re filled with selfishness – we also want to escape.

It’s really interesting as you get older and meet more people and have more in-depth conversations, you realize that your way of going through the world might not be the way that everyone does. I’ve always chosen humor to cope with anything really. It just comes naturally to me; both my parents are incredibly funny people. That’s how I was raised and it’s in my blood. So I’ve found myself making jokes at the most inappropriate moments. I’ve also found it rather pleasantly surprising how healing it can be – and how responsive others may be to it too, in ways that you might not expect. Even in the most painful of circumstances, it really is, in my experience, the most effective tool to move through with compassion and lightness.

*full interview (conducted by Clare Drobot, Director of New Play Development at City Theatre) at http://www.citytheatrecompany.org/a-conversation-with-a-funny-thing-play...

A chat with actor Janielle Kastner

Q: You, like your character Karla in A Funny Thing... are both writers - she is an aspiring stand up comedian and comedy writer while you yourself are a playwright. In the rehearsal process, are you finding any other striking similarities between you and Karla? And conversely, in what ways to you think you are quite different from your character?

A: The first moment of the play is maybe my favorite, when Karla is workshopping a new “dirty” joke. Partly because as an actor it’s fun to say the word “vibrator” that many times onstage, but also because as a writer I know how exhilarating it is to circle a scary-funny-honest-taboo idea, finally hone in on the exact right words for it, then launch it at an audience and make them deal. One of the biggest differences between Karla and myself is how, while we both like watching people squirm in response to our creative work, I am not great at watching people squirm socially. There are so many moments in the play where I would jump in and fix something that Karla doesn’t, whether preemptively letting someone off the hook when they’re trying to apologize, or even just simply listening to someone tell a story without actively nodding and affirming them the whole time. While Karla has her own grab-bag full of emotional dysfunctions, I’m sure she wouldn’t find herself politely held hostage by a stranger telling a story in line at CVS as often as I. We also both have single moms that mean the world to us, though Karla’s crass/”my artist daughter is selfish”/social worker mom is kind of exact upside-down to my devout/”everyone should come to my daughter’s new play”/special education teacher mom.

A chat with Delaney Milbourn about being the first

Delaney Milbourn, Actor in LIKE A BILLION LIKES

Q: This exciting world premiere has got to be a thrilling project to be a part of - to be the first to bring this story to life in a full production. What has been the most exciting part of working on this production and what themes in the play resonate with you most?

A: First of all, it is an honor to be a part of this project. I have enjoyed working with each and every person on this production. Bringing a show to life, building a world with its own set of rules that both the characters and audience get to briefly experience tends to be my favorite part of theatre. It has definitely been the most exciting part of this process for me so far. It can be challenging to find, it takes teamwork from everyone involved, but it usually brings a cast and crew together in such a unique way. I love it. In particular, I have loved building this world with my fellow cast mates and directing team. I find a lot in common with my character (keep in mind, not EVERYTHING, as Misty tends to be a bit naive and rash more often than not) but all she wants is to have a voice of her own in the world, and, really, just to matter. I believe that is one of the most relatable issues for the younger generation, if not everyone. So when social media is practically a free personal microphone, it seems like the place to feel important. But what happens when everyone else has a microphone? When everyone else speaks  just as loud? What do you do then?

There are many themes this play presents, many questions to be explored, but the plight of seeking worth by means of such an ever fleeting, shallow platform is such an intriguing one for me, to say the least.

A word with playwright Erik Forrest Jackson about the inspiration

Q: Your funny, thought-provoking, and deeply human new play deals with some interesting themes from the trials of adolescence and growing up to gender identity to family dynamics to the pressures young people feel and are under in the age of social media. What was the source of inspiration for this play and what has your process bee like writing and developing the exciting piece?

A: First off, I’ve got to state that it’s been a real honor to debut this work with Stage West, which consistently executes such care and intelligence with their productions. Their embrace of challenging theater and insanely high caliber of playwrights I’m in the company of this season thrill me to no end.

So, to answer your question, I began work on Like A Billion Likes about three years ago, but before it was one play, it was two.

In the immediate wake of the Caitlin Jenner media blitz, I was struck by how several camps quickly formed and faced off. Of course, there were the expected passionate detractors and supporters. But I found another camp quite a bit more compelling: those people who were at sea, struggling to comprehend just what was happening, both in Jenner’s life and in the cultural at large.

I was writing two different plays at the time. One was about a Texas teen who was desperate to get noticed. Another was about a gender nonconforming teen who was determined not to. When I developed the character of a floundering high school principal - the type of guy who would be flummoxed by Jenner and also quietly furious at the erosion of his cis male dominance - I had a lightbulb moment and realized he was a bridge that linked the two in-progress plays. I married the plots and started bumping these struggling, deeply flawed characters up agains one another, and things aligned in surprising new ways.

The piece became an exploration of assumptions and appropriation, of relationships forged out of opportunism and out of a genuine yearning to connect in a rapidly fragmented world - all amplified by the clumsy, inescapable bullhorn of social media.

I hope the play will shake up perceptions, pop some preconceptions, and maybe even make audiences laugh as they hopefully recognize in these characters aspects of their neighbors and maybe even themselves.

 

A chat with BJ Cleveland about putting on the halo

Q: What a role - the Almighty! You certainly have immeasurable experience performing for DFW audiences as one of the premiere talents in our region, and have a long history of fantastic roles and brilliant performances. For you, what is different about this play from others you’ve done, and what most excites you about performing this critically acclaimed new script for the DFW audiences who know and love you so well?

A: Well, THAT was certainly a wonderful intro - It makes God happy! I think it is every actor's dream (and sometimes greatest fear) to work towards a one-man show format – quite a marathon of storytelling on our part. Although I am blessed to have two other wonderful actors, Doug Fowler and Parker Gray, as my "Wingmen" to share the experience, I cover about 93.5% of the lines. It's hard to imagine a role that would come with so much history (infinity), thought, reverence, and pre-conceived notions as the Almighty himself. So, no pressure there, right?

I'm a very physical actor, so the fact that I'm in the Heavenly Lounge sitting and visiting with the audience and not relying on a lot of physicality to tell my stories (or remember them) is a challenge for me (although, there is some hilarious physical comedy and even a song and dance!).

But the script by David Javerbaum (of The Daily Show) is funny, thought-inducing, irreverent, and surprisingly sentimental; I relish the words and re-telling the stories we grew up with in Sunday School from an original perspective. And specifically, talking about Junior (Jesus Christ to you) from a parent's point of view. It's hard not to get choked up. It's new, fresh, and funny. 

So come with an open mind, open heart and exposed funny bone - it will be tickled. 

Of course, GOD has taken over the body of B.J. Cleveland for the night, (and THANK GOD I'm available), so no there's NO telling what HE will say or do!

A word with director Harry Parker about the seriously funny

Q: This highly comedic and fun play is chock-full of laughs and hilarity, but also has some interesting things to say. What do you find most intriguing about the script, and what excites you most about directing this production?

A: For me, the most interesting thing about David Javerbaum’s An Act of God is the way he seasons what is largely a comic spin on God and the Ten Commandments, with moments of serious insight and some thoughtful ideas for the audience to ponder. Javerbaum has carefully modulated these two disparate elements into a carefully balanced evening that is designed to primarily entertain, but also to challenge. There are so many wild, hilarious, and controversial positions espoused by God in this play, that I seriously doubt that An Act of God will line up exactly with any single audience member’s individual theology. But that really isn’t the point. Javerbaum’s quest is to create a hilarious commentary on our concept of God, and he’s happy to provoke the audience along the way to accomplish this. Audiences will enjoy the play most thoroughly if they are able to laugh at religion a bit, and also at themselves.

A chat with Kally Duncan about the audience and the process

Q: This play, like the rest of Posner’s Chekhov cycle, asks that the audience have a unique role to play in the telling of the story - they are not only spectators but participants that the characters need in order to proceed in their story. And each character has their own specific relationship with the audience. What do you find most interesting about this conceit, and what most excited you about this play?

A: Having audience participation makes this show so unique because no two shows will ever be the same! It is set up kind of like a melodrama from the beginning so you know you’re going to have a good time. Whats interesting is that the audience pushes the characters toward different destinations, they guide us to new ideas. And we have no idea how the audience is going to respond! So its like an improv show at times, which can be extremely fun for us and the audience. 

I was so excited to join this cast, not only because the people involved are amazingly talented, but because I have a real love for Chekhov. I fell in love with Anton Chekhov’s plays in college and having the opportunity to bring Sonia to life in such a new and modern way is just incredible. Plus Aaron Posner’s writing is hysterical and so real! I have never laughed so much during a rehearsal process as I have with this show. The excitement of getting to work with such amazing artists was palpable, including the nervous butterflies, and as soon as I sat down at our table read I knew this was a once-in-a-lifetime show not to be missed.

 

A word with LIFE SUCKS. director Emily Scott Banks

Q: Having worked on last season’s production of Stupid F*cking Bird must have been highly informative in regards to approaching this season’s production of Life Sucks., both being a part of Aaron Posner’s Chekhov cycle. In your experience of directing both, what do you find are the similarities between these two productions, and what differences can audiences expect?

A: Both Stupid F*cking Bird and Life Sucks take place in the same world - in fact we even decided for our purposes, they were on the same lake, and the characters were likely neighbors or acquaintances. Both plays very much have the same voice and specific sense of rhythm that Aaron Posner brings to his writing. That said, the overall storyline of Bird lived in the element of the air, and was a bit more about youth and early adulthood; whereas Life Sucks is more of the earth, and deals more with the places in middle life. Both very much blend absurdity and heartbreak in a delicious cocktail, and both works invite and include the audience in writing the journey of the show - which makes the audience both necessary and culpable. We also made the conscious choice to not only include Easter eggs in both for those who know the Chekhov source material well, but to carry over little touches from Bird to Life Sucks - not essential for full enjoyment, but a little delight for those who have seen both.

Pages