Vancouver's Down Stage Right Productions makes a playful Evil Dead: The Musical
Book and lyrics by George Reinblatt. Music by Frank Cipolla, Christopher Bond, Melissa Morris, and George Reinblatt. Additional lyrics by Christopher Bond. Additional music by Rob Daleman. Presented by Down Stage Right Productions. Directed by Mark Carter. At the Norman Rothstein Theatre on Thursday, October 29. Continues until November 7
Two versions of Evil Dead: The Musical are going head-to-head in Vancouver right now. A troupe from Calgary, which has the professional rights,is playing the Vogue.And Down Stage Right Productions, the Vancouver company that holds the amateur rights, just opened at the Norman Rothstein. Artistically, the amateur folks win hands down.
In the musical, which is based on Sam Raimi’s trio of Evil Dead movies, five college kids head off to a cabin in the woods, where they inadvertently summon Candarian demons that kill the students and possess their bodies one at a time. When one of his hands becomes possessed, Ash, the hero, cuts it off with a chain saw. There is gore in the DSR production—the front rows get sprayed with stage blood—but its real success lies elsewhere.
The production at the Vogue is broadly comic but not terribly funny. When Ash’s friend Scott calls Ash’s sister Cheryl a stupid bitch—which he does a lot—the interpretation provides no commentary on his behaviour, so it feels dangerously like misogyny is being endorsed. And Scott’s girlfriend, Shelly, is presented as a stupid ’ho. The jokes at her expense are demeaning.
Because it’s vastly more playful, the DSR production puts a whole other spin on this material. Under Mark Carter’s direction, Ian Rozylo plays “Scotty”, as he’s known here, as if he were a desperately self-inflated early adolescent. Framed as idiotic, his misogyny becomes considerably less sinister. And it’s a nice touch that, in this production, when Scotty is pulled toward hell, it’s his cock that’s yanking him there.
Shelly is still an idiot in the DSR version, but at least she’s fully clothed and less relentlessly sexualized, so you can enjoy her as one clown among many.
That’s the key to DSR’s success: all of the characters, including Ash, are played as crazily camp. Scott Walters is stellar in the lead role, working the absurdity for all it’s worth. In the scene in which Ash’s hand attacks its owner, Walters makes thumb wrestling part of the life-and-death struggle. And he’s a knockout singer who adds stylin’ ornamentations to the already gymnastic score.
There’s strong work from the rest of the cast as well, and Ken Overbey’s witty choreography is a huge contributor to the evening’s success.
Misogyny still lurks beneath the surface but, in this mounting at least, Evil Dead: The Musical is solid entertainment.




Follow us on Twitter
Like us on Facebook
Comments
The choreography was ridiculous and made no sense to the story or the characters. And the zombies??? Other than wearing masks there was no difference between the "good" characters and the "zombie" characters.
There was no direction whatsoever in the DSR production. I did not care about any one of these characters, while at the Vogue, I was routing for Ash.
And what was with that lame cell phone joke??!! I wonder if that was even in the script because the Vogue production certainly didn't have that failure of a joke.
I say the Vogue show wins "HANDS DOWN" to quote Colin. Not that it should be a competition. Shouldn't we be encouraged to support ALL theatre?! As a lover of theatre, musical theatre and this show in particular, I say thank you to the Vogue cast and shake my head at the DSR production and Colin Thomas.
While I certainly think there has been more snippy comments from the local production (support homegrown talent, etc.) I can't say that the GZT people have been completely quiet on the matter either.
God forbid the Edmonton or Toronto theatre communities were to treat us so poorly when we take shows to their towns. Recently the Playhouse took their production of The Drowsy Chaperone to Edmonton and Ontario to great reviews... it's my understanding that those communities opened their arms to Vancouver based artists and companies....
But what do we get in Vancouver? The pathetic whining of one company about how they don't have a publicity budget as big as another companies. Big deal. I'm so sick of hearing about these two "rivaling" shows.
And I'm sure the DSR people are laughing now because they got a couple of good reviews - and perhaps the GZT people are licking their wounds because they were a bit more panned in the review sections... but who the hell cares? GZT seems to be selling out (or close to it) nightly at a far bigger theatre.
And finally, I have seen both. I liked the GZT one better. This isn't about the story, it's about one thing and one thing only and that's the physical aspects of the show. The DSR one sells higher priced tickets for a Splatter Zone that's akin to running through a sprinkler on a warm day... I'd sell it as a trickle zone personally.
But I have to respond to "Waiting for November 14th". Yes, the Playhouse took their production of The Drowsy Chaperone to Ottawa and received rave reviews. Well deserved.
What they did NOT do was choose to bring their production of Drowsy to Ottawa WITH THE KNOWLEDGE THAT ANOTHER THEATRE COMPANY (regardless of budget) WAS ALREADY PRODUCING THAT SHOW AT EXACTLY THE SAME TIME.
I have no problem with out-of-town productions -- it's how we hear other voices, see other ideas, remain in national + international conversations. What I have a problem with is the reprehensible actions of this particular cabal of producers. It is professionally unethical.
We already have a provincial government posed to slash investment in the arts (and social programs and education -- including school sports programs, and how that makes sense for an Olympic host I will never understand), why should we treat our peers with such an incredible lack of respect?
We cannot afford to eat our own. Dead or otherwise.
something so outrageously artificial, affected, inappropriate, or out-of-date as to be considered amusing b : a style or mode of personal or creative expression that is absurdly exaggerated and often fuses elements of high and popular culture Thought it would be nice to submit the definition for some of the readers.
Perhaps you miss the point of having a professional reviewer. Your comments, while obviously spirited, lack the knowledge and experience to support your own point. I have seen neither show, and will not comment on their respective qualities. Agree or not with Mr. Thomas' comments, he writes about what is presented to him in an unbiased fashion. Flabbergasted; you have chosen to tear apart someone elses work, supposedly, to the benefit of anothers. What you have inadvertently done, is made yourself sound like someone with an axe to grind. Pot shots aside, your slant on the piece sounds as though you are a member of the rival cast. While I am sure that there are no members of either show, defimating the names of the other cast, Fabbergasted's comments do, indeed sound like sour grapes.
Remember, our reviewers are there to give their opinion, and are being paid to do so. If you are going to try to be an armchair reviewer, receiving no money for your services, please at least speak intelligently if you want to be taken seriously.
I have seen both shows. I enjoyed both of them on different levels. Just go out and support the arts. Period. Who cares about anything else???
This probably makes me a troll...so what.....