Clever tunes won't deliver Mercy for this show
Written and directed by Kat Single-Dain. A Dusty Flowerpot Cabaret production at the Russian Hall on Friday, May 1. Continues until May 31
At two hours and 38 minutes, The Scarlet Queen of Mercy is about two hours too long.
The premise is that we’re in the ’40s and we’re watching the filming of a movie musical. In the movie, a cabaret singer named Ruby falls in love with the Prince of Bolonia, although he’s in disguise, so she doesn’t know he’s a prince. Ruby’s ex-husband, Gus, wants her back—and he’s a gangster, not the kind of guy you easily spurn twice.
In the framing story, the director of the movie wants to bed every woman on the set, including the actress who’s playing Ruby. A starlet named Marla is angling for fame. And Sterling, the guy who plays the Prince, is a former star of straight porn who’s in love with Frank, the assistant director.
If this all sounds promising, adjust your expectations. The Scarlet Queen of Mercy has about as much discipline as a toddler on a sugar high, and its chaotic, relentlessly tangential combination of musical numbers, scripted scenes, and ad-libbed conversations is so unfocused that it is only intermittently charming.
Because the essential ideas are so simple, there’s not much reason to care about any of it, either. The show is deliberately playing with clichés—the horny director, the ambitious starlet—but it doesn’t develop them with enough originality or depth to make them interesting.
It’s a shame that writer and director Kat Single-Dain’s script is such a train wreck, because some of the production elements work. Jack Garton, who plays Arthur, the director, sings a couple of blues numbers that will sizzle your socks. Consistently and wittily in character, Patrick Kearns (Frank, the exasperated, budget-conscious assistant director) delivers one of the best acting performances of the night. And Nathan Barrett’s Prince is goofily, credibly charming. I also enjoyed the bimbotic enthusiasm with which Candice Roberts endows Marla, the starlet.
The songs, many of which were written by Garton, Kearns, and Martin Reisle, are impressively right-on for the period and often clever. In the opening cabaret number, Ruby asks her beau for “A Little Ice Cream in my Cone”. And Single-Dain’s choreography is inventive.
The lighting is a disaster, though. The audience participation is mostly meaningless, and there are too many random elements to count—including a Carmen Miranda–type character, who wanders around with a pinwheel in her hair blowing bubbles. What?
Comments
3 Comments
Eleanor Boyle
May 4, 2015 at 9:35am
I beg to differ! Colin T is being too hard on Scarlet Queen of Mercy. Yes, the script was undisciplined and yes, there were details that need work. But I found the creativity breath-taking, and the whole play an exciting contrast to often-formulaic live theatre. With its large cast it had a lot of energy. It had humour, nuance, and some excellent music and movement. It was clearly based on a knowledge and love of the historical period and 'the movies.' There was a lot of talent and a huge amount of promise. I hope the group streamlines the script and presses on. I’ll definitely go to more Dusty Flowerpot Cabaret.
Guy Brewer
May 5, 2015 at 12:14am
I agree with Colin. It's his job to be critical. This is not a high school production, though it felt like one. A train wreck indeed. I've seen past Dusty Flowerpot shows. Nothing original here. The 1940's Film Noir, or what every they were trying to do, has been done so many times...and the cliches and oh, the bad stereotypes.. Haven't men and women, especially the women had enough of that shit? Uncreative, undisciplined direction from Kat Single- Dain and the cast produce sloppy work. It was a waste of my time. The Dusty Flowerpot Cabaret needs to learn to grow up and take risks. Maybe Kat Single-Dain needs to hand the writing and directing to someone with more chops and innovation. Sorry kids.
Chuck Millard
May 7, 2015 at 4:30pm
It was a lot of fun. It's awkwardness was part of its charm. Real life is awkward, and this experience was intended to put you in the middle of the action. Everyone had to do something, from the moment you walked in. You were in character whether you wanted to be or not. Everyone was an extra. In the staging I attended, they rolled with the awkwardness quite well, given how much audience participation was involved.
This wasn't a passive theater experience; it was meant to blur the lines. It's a play about the filming of a movie, and very obviously a bad movie, but like MST3K taught us, you can have as much fun with a bad movie as a good one, and Dusty Flowerpot did that. The true difference between a good and bad movie is effort, how much of themselves people put in it, and everyone I saw from the moment I walked in that Hall was in it all the way. Jack Garton was incredible and completely outrageous, Aaron Malkin rocked Doctor Von Payne, and Candice Roberts was ridiculous, yet I saw Nathan Barrett shed real tears. It had depth.
Sure, it could be tightened up a bit as it did go on a bit long, but it had a lot more greatness in there than Colin Thomas gives it credit for. It was a unique experience, and it will be a unique experience every time. Also, the Carmen Miranda–type gave me an ice cream cone.