Showing posts with label Maria Mercedes. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Maria Mercedes. Show all posts

26 August 2015

Interview: Daniel Lammin on Masterclass

Masterclass
1–13 September
fortyfivedownstairs.com


Maria Mercedes in the Sydney season of Masterclass. Photo by Clare Hawley 

The 2014 Melbourne Green Room Award–winning production of Master Class by Terrance McNallyhas finished its Sydney Hayes Theatre season and is returning to Melbourne’s fortyfivedownstairs on 1 September. Before heading beginning rehearsals, Lammin spoke to me about how they first approached the work, what it was like to be so successful, and how they’re approaching the remount.

The production won Maria Mercedes a Best Performer award and Daniel Lammin his first nomination as Best Director.

The play opened on Broadway in 1995. It’s fiction, but is inspired by a series of recorded master classes that Callas presented at Julliard in New York in 1971 when she was 54.

By then, she had experienced the best and the worst that fame and talent bring; from being the icon and La Divina to being judged on her weight and relationships. Lammin said, “she touched the divine, looked into the heart of the universe and heard what it sounded like, and no one comes back from that unscathed.”

She died of a heart attack in 1977 and is still iconised.

Daniel Lammin. Photo by Sarah Walker

How do you approach a re-mount knowing the expectations that follow such a successful first season?

My philosophy returning to Master Class was to regard the original season as unfinished. When I last spoke to Maria about the remount, both of us agreed that we had further to go with it, both in terms of her performance and with the production in general. Master Class is a deceptively dense play; its characterisation of Callas is enormous and the supporting characters are far more complex than they first appear.

Even with all the accolades and responses we got last year, we still wanted to go back and keep digging deeper.

How we approach that comes down to our own expectations of this new season. Not only will we be bringing a year’s worth of pondering and gained knowledge to it, but we also have two new cast members (Blake Bowden and Teresa Duddy), which basically means a completely new second act.
Because my original approach was to use the experiences of the original singers to inform their performances and interpretations of their characters, these new cast members will bring a whole new energy to the show and push myself and the rest of the cast into new territory. It’ll prevent us from resting on our laurels because there will be new dynamics and voices in the room that are totally unlike the original singers. The last thing I want them to do is imitate what was done before; I’m far more interested in what they have to bring.

That said, it is daunting and a little terrifying coming back to it given how well the first season went.
I’m still a young emerging director, so its success was overwhelming for me, and I’m a little nervous that I won’t be able to recapture whatever lightning in a bottle we got last year in our state of panic and passion in getting it on in the first place.

I don’t want to let down the audience, the cast and crew or the original production.

What gives me the drive with returning to Master Class though is that I’m not interested in repeating myself or just rehashing what we did before. Of course, we want to remount it because it was successful and people wanted to see it again (or at all), but artistically I had no interest in pulling it out of the box and plonking it on stage.

The play addresses so many things I feel very passionately and personally about – the role of art in a society, the sacrifices it requires, how unforgiving it is, the role of women in the arts, a celebration of the powerful women who brought me up and my Mediterranean heritage – and I didn’t feel at all satisfied that I’d said what I needed to say clearly enough. 

I want it to be just as fresh and dangerous, and to continue to push the play, the cast and the audience even further. If we’re going to do it again, I want to work the show and myself even harder than before.

Photo by Clare Hawley

Not being an opera singer, how did you work with the singers to integrate their first-hand experience of master classes and the needs of the piece?

In past productions, the singers in Master Class had usually been played by musical theatre actors. One of the things the producer Cameron Lukey was determined to do was use actual opera singers who could perform the arias with their necessary power. Not only did I see this as a creatively exciting decision, but also a tremendous resource for me to use in developing and rehearsing the show.

I’m a naturally inquisitive person, so when it came to approaching the opera, I just let that part of my personality take over for a bit. I have a passionate love of classical music, but my knowledge of opera is limited, so I started by just sitting and chatting with each of the singers about themselves. Why did they become an opera singer? What is their relationship with their career? How did they feel about their industry and its internal politics?

This led to talking about their own experiences of master classes, both as observers and performers. I would note down every little detail, from where they would stand in relation to the master running the class to the usual mistakes people would make.

We also discussed the differences between their experiences and the play itself. This was the stuff we used and referenced on the floor, throwing in tidbits to add to the realism of the piece.

This also meant that, rather than imposing anything on the singers (none of whom in the original production had ever acted in a play before), we were making their characters and performances more personal. I was also lucky to have Lukey, who trained as an opera singer, who was able to clarify and educate me on the more technical side of opera.

I wasn’t interested in making a piece of theatre with Callas as the absolute centre of attention. I wanted every character to be as rich and full as her, and knew that my best resource was the singers themselves.

As a director, I use the personality of the actor to help them find and inform their character; especially in this case where I was a novice entering their world. I wanted to be respectful of this industry and the people working in it, and to give the singers the opportunity to share not just their love of opera, but the impossibly hard work and dedication that goes into it.

I wanted Master Class to be as much a celebration of them as it was of Callas.

Photo by Clare Hawley
Did you (and Maria) listen to the recorded Callas master classes or did you approach it as a piece of writing?

Maria and I both took different approaches in our preparation for the show. Maria buried herself in research, reading countless books and biographies of Callas, while I decided to keep my research to a minimum and focus directly on the play text itself.

I broke it right down dramaturgically, right down to its punctuation, and studied the structure of the play and the rhythms of Callas’s dialogue. This meant that Maria would bring her mountains of knowledge into the room and allow that to inform her performance and I concerned myself with the technical side, never allowing her to put a pause or a comma wrong. I felt that was far more useful, so we had a balance of biographical knowledge and dramaturgical understanding of the play itself.

What became our greatest resource though were the recordings of Callas, particularly those specified for use in the play.

What set Callas apart was the unrelenting honesty with which she sang, less interested with technical skill than with expressing truth. That’s why her voice is so powerful, because her soul is in her singing, and this was a big clue for us to unlocking the ideas in McNally’s text. We also had hours of recordings from the actual master classes the play was inspired by, so we could listen to how Callas approached the students. It’s not verbatim in any way, but it was an interesting document to complement our understanding of the play.

Photo by Clare Hawley
How did you work with your Maria to become a Maria that was both Callas and Mercedes?

One of the rules I imposed on the show was that we weren’t doing what I called “the gay fantasia of Maria Callas” or anything that revealed in any melodrama or camp. She’s such an icon and a caricature, but I wasn’t interested in that, and I didn’t think the play itself was either.
We were far more interested in the soul of this woman than of doing a convincing imitation. We never talked about recreating her mannerisms or voice. We let the text itself and the given circumstances of Callas’s background inform us.

Like the singers, I also used Mercedes herself as a resource, drawing on her Greek background and her own experiences as a performer. It was very important to us both that we preserved Callas’s Greek heritage, because she’s rarely played in productions of Master Class by a Greek actor. It also helped that my family background is partly Maltese, so we both understood what it meant to be Mediterranean, so her put-downs and blunt comments weren’t about being a bitch but about that wonderful bluntness that Mediterranean women have.

We also spoke a lot about women in positions of power, the sexual politics between men and women and how threatening Callas would have been to the patriarchal opera world of the time.

Her uncompromising position as both an artist and a woman had an enormous effect on her professionally and romantically. This is where I thought Master Class was quite a violent and disturbing play, and Maria totally embraced that, so that in her monologues at the end of each act we went for something more visceral and uncomfortable. We wanted people to walk away from Master Class not with a set of quippy facts they could rattle off, but a deep understanding of the soul of this woman; one both immense and totally broken.

I have this driving need in being a theatre maker. With everything I do, I’m trying to hear the sound of the universe. I know that sounds ridiculous, but I want to hear the forces at work around us in all their beauty and their violence, and theatre is the tool that my inquisitive mind chooses to use to try and hear it. Callas was one of those people who actually heard it, and you know this from listening to her sing.


She touched the divine, looked into the heart of the universe and heard what it sounded like, and no one comes back from that unscathed. For Maria and I, we want the audience to catch a glimpse of that, a woman caught in a awe-inspiring and terrible ecstasy that has made her divine and ripped her apart.

It’s an impossible task to set ourselves, but it was what we saw when we read the play and listened to Callas sing, and that’s what we wanted to give the audience.


This was on AussieTheatre.com.

29 August 2014

Review: Master Class

Master Class 
Left Bauer Productions
23 August 2014
fortyfive downstairs
to 28 August
fortyfivedownstairs.com


Today's performance of Master Class at fortyfive downstairs has sold out but if you book now, you might be able to get in before it finishes on Thursday.

Terrance McNally's play Master Class opened on Broadway in 1995. It's based on the series of master classes presented by Maria Callas at the Julliard School in New York in 1971, which were recorded and readily available. The play is fictional, with Callas working with an imagined first soprano, tenor and second soprano. It dilutes and magnifies Callas as a teacher and icon – which is a master class in opera performance in itself – and leaves the class to go into the mind of a woman who was so sure of her reputation but so uncertain of her self.

Maria Mercedes is Callas. She is remarkable. From the second before she walked into the space, the audience were hers. It's easy to copy Callas's mannerisms and look, but this performance is so far beyond anything so basic. As Callas and McNally talk about how to approach and perform a character, our Maria shows how to do it – without revealing as much as a hint of technique or process. Hers is the kind of astonishing performance that leaves the actor and the script invisible, if not forgotten.

The students (Georgia Wilkinson, Robert Barbaro and Anna Louise Cole – and accompanist Cameron Thomas) are amazing young Melbourne singers who already have established careers and could not have been more perfect to represent the standard of singer who deserved a master class with Callas. Each have their moment to sing, but they bring truth and guts to the work with their portrayals of singers facing a woman who has achieved the impossible and who is as likely to tear them to pieces as give them the support to never give up. And they let their characters sing in ways that allows Callas to correct them. I dare any singer to walk away without learning something.

Director Daniel Lammin's last work was The Cutting Boys at La Mama. Written and directed by Lammin, it was about the murder of a young woman and continued his exploration of how young men commit unthinkable violence. And here he is directing a play about an ageing woman and grand opera. Always be prepared to be surprised. As a director, he focussed on letting the text tells its story and led his actors to tell the truth about their characters through their own knowledge and experience.

I was at a matinee yesterday. Not only was it sold out, but received a standing ovation. This doesn't happen every Saturday afternoon at fortyfive downstairs and it was such a wonderful experience to be in an audience who were as committed to the world of the play as the actors were. Mercedes performance is so engaging that there's never a moment when the audience aren't the Julliard students. Callas tells a singer to find the honesty in her performance; this production find the honesty that lets Master Class be so much more than a text-on-stage play.

NOTE: extra matinee this Saturday, but I think it's sold out too. Worth calling and checking.


This was on AussieTheatre.com.



31 May 2011

Review: Love Never Dies

Love Never Dies
The Really Useful Company Asia Pacific
28 May 2011
Regent Theatre
www.ticketmaster.com.au



On opening night, Sir Andrew Lloyd Webber took a bow and shared the overflowing audience love with the Australian cast of Love Never Dies.  He told us he was never happy with the London version and said that this could be the best production he's seen of one of his shows.

After the West End version's mixed reviews (read bollocking) and the "postponement" of the Broadway version, all musical theatre eyes turned to Melbourne to see if the sequel to The Phantom of the Opera is really that scary. Regardless of any opinion,  Sir Andrew says it's what he imagined and Graeme Murphy (choreography) should have shown the knight how to do a convincing happy dance.

And so Sir A should be thrilled. Simon Phillips strong direction leads a perfect cast, from the faultless and gorgeous ensemble to Ben Lewis as the Phantom, who I'd love to see play the original. Maria Mercedes (my favourite Frank'N'Furter) brings a creepy darkness to Madame Giry; Sharon Millerchip (who was Meg Giry in the original Australian production of Phantom) lets Meg struggle with bitterness and hope; Simon Gleeson shows the sadness and regret in Raoul; and Anna O'Byrne (who was so wonderful as Polly in Malthouse's Threepenny Opera) makes us believe Christine's regrets.

However, the star of the show is designer Gabriela Tylesova. Her design creates a nostalgic Coney Island with a part-irresistible, part-nightmarish beauty. This spectacular world of pearled colours, sepias and greys is like a hand-coloured seaside postcard, but it's an uncomfortable world where the glorious freaks outnumber the happy visitors. No detail has been spared on the exquisite costumes of hand-sewn lace,  beads and brocade, while the joy and humour of her seaside and dancing-girl costumes fills the stage. And the only thing more gorgeous than the painted tights are the shoes. The sight lines up front mean that a bit too much backstage "mystery" is revealed (which this can and must be fixed), but seeing the shoes and the boots (oh my god, those boots) is worth it. I couldn't decide which pair I loved the most.

Ok, so this production is glorious, so why are there so many euthanasia jokes about Love Never Dies?

Perhaps because a story with no heart doesn't need a Do Not Resusitate order.

It's ten years since the Phantom escaped his lynching in the catacombs of the Paris Opera House and lovers Christine and Raoul were free to get it on in peace. Christine's become famous, they have a ten year old son (who likes music) and they're in debt (not sure why). Meanwhile Madame and Meg Giry followed the Phantom to Coney Island where Meg is still trying to get his attention (and this time she's getting her gear off ). Oh, and Christine really did find the courage to show him he "is not alone" and has been pining for her deformed father-angel.

For those unfamiliar with the Phantom story, I'm not sure what narrative question brings new audiences into this piece, and those who know it will spend time re-assessing their memories of the characters and the story. Dramatically, most of act one is given away in the opening number (where Lewis is amazing), the exposition outweighs the story progression and the highlights of the rest are Meg's stand alone numbers with the ensemble and any time the whole cast is on the stage and the story is having a breather.

I think The Phantom of the Opera is a perfect piece of theatre; musically, emotionally and dramatically. I'm an unashamed fan of Sir Andrew. Cats will always be awesome, I don't know why Aspects of Love was never huge and I have a cassette of Starlight Express and enjoyed every lycra-clad, roller-skating moment of the Melbourne production. There, I've said it.

If someone had played me the music of Love Never Dies, I would have guessed it was a parody of Lloyd Webber. Musically, it's forgettable and dreary and builds to a climax song that relies on the voice of O'Byrne and the outrageously glorious design (even if we all know that the coloured peacocks are boys).

The music is sadly matched by the lyrics that lack any hint of subtext and ("A man as hideous as this is capable of anything") and fail to show anything that isn't bleeding obvious.

But all could be forgiven with a great story. Ben Elton wrote the book. Ben Elton: the alternative-comic hero of the 80s and 90s; the wittiest bloke on the planet; the man who spits out more best sellers than most people read; a dude who understands story. Yes, I am also a fan of Ben Elton and have wiped the recent Channel 9 experience from my memory. I don't know how he wrote this story. There's no tension, no mystery, no compelling dilemmas (dilemma is equal and compelling choices, not a coin toss between which is the least dull), no humour (!) and has a lazy and unfulfilling ending worthy of a day time soap.  However, the cast bring everything they have to make it as emotionally real as possible and I saw a couple of tears shed.

This production is an incredible opportunity to fix Love Never Dies and remind all the disbelievers of just how much Sir Andrew changed and influenced musical theatre.  I tired to "look with my heart and not with my eyes", but the only thing my heart skipped a beat over were the shoes.

This review originally appeared on AussieThearte.com