Dark Lucy

How nice it is to go to see something, play or musical, that is entirely new to me. I enjoy reading mystery and psychological thrillers so I was in for a treat. Portishead Players have a reputation for excellent scenery and as the curtains opened the audience was not disappointed and applauded a clean, bright and attractive set.

The story was set 1969, almost 50 years ago … consequently almost a ‘period piece. And needs particular attention to detail of the ‘60’s. The opening scene is set in the living room of the local vicarage. It was an attractive room, plain pale green walls, a very ‘brilliant white door’ (the sort you can buy in B&Q today in 2017) led to the hall and attractive French doors led to the garden. Through a window set in a flat SL, a vista of the sky and garden could be seen but unfortunately the painted cloth or flat had been set low and a large black space was visible above the sky. The painted scene viewable though the French door was lovely. The return on the front scenery SL was too far back from the front curtain and when the curtain was open I could see into the wings. I was sitting to the left on the center aisle, so others to the left of me would have seen even more. Although visually this set had a very attractive feel, from a critical point of view there were many anomalies. The decor was of a modern 2017 ‘garden’ room with French windows and window frame, the furniture sofa and arm chairs ( 60’s-70’s) was appropriate to a garden room  it was  cottage style …incongruous in the living room where there were bookcases, a desk, drinks tray and the telephone, also a  dining table and chairs. It was a busy room.  NB… The plays opening scenes were of necessity very wordy with little ‘action’, thus there was plenty of time to look beyond the characters. My observations make up part of a ‘full critique’ as requested and would not have been worth mentioning in a short report which is always more about the performance than presentation.

The play was programmed to be three acts. Act 1 & 2 had the same setting but during the interval a complete new set was erected for a different location. This was  a room in a cottage where Dark Lucy lived and where…cleverly from  dialogue in acts one and two we were led to believe an old crone/witch  aged  at least 110 years lived in  a dilapidated old hovel. I say cleverly as the sight of the interior of the cottage was dim but clean and homely. So another red herring! I immediately recognized the same furniture as was in the vicarage… a pity that - although a small effort had been made to cover the sofa. This set had 3 working doors and was a design nightmare although absolutely spot on for the action. (Speaking to the director before the performance I was told of the difficulties with the door fittings and no matter what was tried, one door would not stay closed and had to be held by crew during the performance…. It did however remain open for much of act 3) I must comment about the skill and effort required to produce two full sets for one play. Most plays have a single box set throughout, so well done Portishead for not shrinking from this task. The cottage set worked well assisting the forthcoming unexpected action. With a brightly burning wood fire and dim but perfectly visible lighting to give effect and atmosphere, the stage was set for a creepy and unexpected outcome.

Each character wore clothing that was totally suitable and believable…ageless costumes that fitted into the story seamlessly.

This play is indeed a ‘mousetrap’ genre play, once seen will never be forgotten and the twists and turns will never cause surprise again. It was with surprise when before the performance I turned to the internet for a synopsis of the play ( I always like to check  what I am reviewing if I don’t know the piece) The synopsis consisted of a few lines, the same few lines I found in your programme. It was therefore essential for a skilled director to ensure plenty of red herrings and no evidence or hint in acts 1 & 2, of how the story will be resolved. Skillful Dave Richardson certainly achieved this. The director was blessed with a very talented and perfectly cast team of performers. I suspect the dialogue led to positions of the cast on stage but there were no awkward moves or masking of the other members.

During Act2 the action takes place primarily between  two characters, directing skill ensured that the pace was such that the audience was held, gripped with a horrid fascination of what was being revealed. This was a  well directed production.

GRACE ROBERTS- Carole Richardson. The role of a housekeeper is often a token cameo role, but my immediate thought was that Carole had made this role ‘her own’, so although a small role, it was memorable for her acting skill. She was natural in conversation and in reactions to situations...so we could imagine that she was the housekeeper, not an extra playing the role. Well done.  

REV GAVIN CLEVEDON- Tony Sutcliff.  I have seen Tony in numerous roles, some good, some excellent and this role must rate highly in his repertoire.  His demeanor was perfect for the rather unworldly, kind and thoughtful husband of the highly strung Carol. His slow concern, but otherwise uncertain belief in her supposed ‘hallucinations’ were masterly. His manner and his appearance were perfect for a country vicar. Very well performed.

CAROL CLEVEDON - Elane Retford. This role demanded a very skilful actor who could demonstrate fast and unpredictable emotions when portraying a disturbed character. She looked beautiful, reacted with terrific pace in dialogue and was wholly believable as a very distressed woman. During Act three she always had the upper hand during complex dialogue and physical action and demonstrated complete control. An articulate and intelligent characterisation and an excellent performance.

DR THOMAS VANN – Colin Astley. Colin is always at his very best when playing a quiet and thoughtful character. He brought gravitas and understanding to an increasingly difficult situation during Acts 1 &2. He added greatly to the entertainment during the opening scenes. His dialogue pace was good; he was quiet and clear and presented the role of a country GP perfectly. Well done.

MRS WILSON – Suzanne Salter-Brown.  When the character of Mrs Wilson entered. Her opening lines were rather hesitant and I worried that this part would be the weak link in the casting. But as soon as she was seated, Suzanne took control of the role and completely immersed herself in her characterisation. As the tormented mother of the missing Linda, she told her story in a very controlled but emotional manner. Her continuous ringing of hands and twisting her bag handle convinced me that she was desperate and worried. Again this member of the cast was very well cast. Her cuing in dialogue was excellent with good pace.  Well done.

EDWARD HASTINGS – Ben Salter. When this character appeared on stage in Act 3, I immediate felt he was different. To start… he had a strange tremor to his voice and a stilted, hesitant way of speaking which led me to think he was either trying too hard to be a different character or this was the actual character we would see develop. I didn’t like him! ( Edward…not Ben) I believe it was the latter and he never strayed from this strange characterisation and manner. This character was a surprise to me and through most of Act 3… until the end I was as transfixed as the rest of the audience. His was not a pleasant character and certain not one you could warm too and the ending brought a satisfactory conclusion. A complex and difficult character played well.

LUCY MANNING – Wendy Walmsley, I would never have recognized Wendy because of her excellent wig, makeup, costume and demeanor. This was cameo role of great importance and the early visions of her, served to whet the appetite. The clever ‘flash back’ to understanding her role and background in this play was revealing and was performed extremely well. Her character was a small but vital component of this story and was very interesting.

This was a most unusual play, an intense psychological thriller and the ending was totally unexpected… at least for me. It was very wordy and quite lengthy but never slow and never boring. This was due to the entertaining, talented cast, and also to the excellent pace of the dialogue. Additionally the story itself was intriguing and kept us engrossed.

It wasn’t perfect, a stumbled line here and there and a couple of prompts, but who remembers that. It was jolly good riveting entertainment and the whole team and Portishead Players should be well pleased and proud of the end result. Very well done.

Thank you for inviting me and for your usual welcome hospitality.

© NODA CIO. All rights reserved.