Keeping Up Appearances

Keeping Up Appearances, is a stage play based upon the hit BBC TV Sit-Com. created and written by Roy Clarke and originally broadcast in the UK from 1990 to 1995. The central character is an eccentric and snobbish middle class social climber, Hyacinth Bucket (played by Patricia Routledge), who insists that her surname is pronounced "Bouquet", and her attempts to prove her social superiority, and to gain standing with those she considers upper class. Her attempts are constantly hampered by her lower class extended family, whom she is desperate to hide. Much of the humour comes from the conflict between Hyacinth's vision of herself and the reality of her underclass background. In each episode, she lands in a farcical situation as she battles to protect her social credibility.

The stage play that Bath Unity Players put on is a 2010 adaptation of the television show with the same name, which toured theatres in the UK and is not just a retelling of some of the TV episodes. The main plot of the show revolves around Emmet (Hyacinth’s neighbour) directing a play at the local village hall, but when Hyacinth is cast in the play's leading role disaster is in the making.

The play suited the Church Hall setting it was perfomed in very well, because the play itself was set inside a Church Hall! The whole venue was decorated accordingly to support this effect, which became more evident the more time you spent within it. As a result, there was a smaller performing stage on the actual Church Hall stage, with a floor area for ‘rehearsing’ and exit routes off the back of the stage, to the side and through the audience. The staging all looked very realistic and worked really well as a performing area, with suitable stage space for all.

The lighting was relatively simple but provided good coverage and was effectively cued. The sound – music and effects were also of a good standard and were well-executed.  All of the dialogue on stage and in the venue could be heard. With a more modern production, the costumes were easier to source but no less suitable in terms of style and quality. As well as the ‘standard’ character costumes, there were some great dresses and suits for the play scenes. Hair and Make-up were well-matched to the costumes. Properties were of a good standard.

The dialogue and action was conducted with good pace and comic timing, for which the directing team are to be congratulated. In reviewing the main principal performances:

• Hyacinth Bucket.. You commanded the stage as soon as you arrived on it and got the very essence of the character, whilst putting your own spin on the role. It would have been very easy just to try to imitate Patricia Routledge’s portrayal, but you made the part your own very successfully.  Very well done!
• Emmet. As Liz's brother Emmet, a musician and neighbour terrified of Hyacinth, we actually get to see one of the TV show’s running themes – Hyacinth trying to get a part in one of Emmet’s  productions. The part acted like the glue in the storyline and you held the role and the production together really well, despite the gradual melt-down of the character throughout the story as the chaos with Hyacinth increase! With great comic-timing you also made the part your own and delivered a delightful performance.
• Elizabeth – ‘Liz’.  As Hyacinth's neighbour Elizabeth "Liz" Warden and sister to Emmet, you delivered a suitably pitched performance in your fear of Hyacinth and desire to support your brother and his theatrical project. Though this is essentially almost a straight role, you completed it well and made the most of the comic moments you had. Well done.
• Daisy..  As Hyacinth’s working-class sister, you provided a lovely foil to Hyacinth’s snobbery. Your slightly understated style delivered some quite excellent comedic timing moments and your relationship with Onslow was both believable and charming. A lovely performance.
• Onslow. As Daisy's proudly "bone-idle" husband, you could see you were really enjoying the part and really caught the essence for the character. You often delivered your lines through the 4th wall and directly to the audience, which worked really well.
• Edward ‘Milly’ Milson.  A new character created for the stage show, you had great fun developing the character from nervous new drama club member to the object of Rose’s affections!  Nice delivery of lines and comedic moments. Well done!
• Rose. A nice portrayal of Hyacinth’s sexually aggressive and promiscuous younger sister. You too successfully made this your own take on the role and certainly enjoyed your attachment with ‘Milly’!
• Mrs Debden As the upper-class lady that Hyacinth is trying to impress, you played the role really well with all the mannerisms and the voices required. Nicely done.
• Daddy. A great fun part as Hyacinth’s father, in full world-war II mode. Well performed and very funny!
• Angry Woman. A minor role, but suitably angry!!

Stage versions of TV shows are notoriously tricky to complete successfully due to the expectations that audiences have for the roles. I’m pleased to say you managed this extremely well - keeping the core of the known characters, whilst allowing each actor to add their own interpretations. As a result, this was a very successful production, completed and maintained at a good pace with all of the characterisations and humour expected. It was greatly enjoyed by the capacity audience and a lovely evening of entertainment.  Thank you for your invitation and to your front of house team for looking after us.  We look forward to your future productions

PLEASE NOTE:

Any observation made by the reviewer can only be based on what he sees at the performance in question.  The reviewer may have received information in advance of the performance and it is inevitable that his assessment will be effected by that knowledge.

The N.O.D.A. Representative’s intention is to give an objective critique of the overall production and in particular the performance viewed.  It should be remembered that any review of this nature can only be objective as far as the techniques used during the performance observed.  Any criticisms expressed may not have been valid at other performances, and are only made to encourage higher standards in Amateur Theatre.

It is hoped that the audience’s appreciation of your efforts will have given everyone a lift and encouraged you to greater achievements in the future and that the observations made by the reviewer will prove helpful in improving future productions.

© NODA CIO. All rights reserved.