Here's what Garth Jones, Cheshire Theatre Guild's Adjudicator thought of the production:

GENERAL

it was, after all, Halloween and according to the Director’s note October is a slot for “a dark themed play”, so “Dracula” was an appropriate choice, although this version had a subtle vein of comedy to lighten it. Whether it was quite light enough to sit side by side with “Spooky Cookery” is another matter!

So, as well as being faithful to the undoubted theatricality of this version by Liz Lochhead and the traditions of the original novel, we could also expect to be entertained by the stagecraft and spectacle of it all. After all, the director says he believes Harlequin Theatre to be “the most vibrant, adventurous and creative amateur dramatics society in Cheshire” and as a predecessor in this role he should know what he is talking about! Certainly, you know whatever you are going to see at Harlequin Theatre will be challenging and rewarding and this was no exception.

PRESENTATION

As the audience entered the auditorium they got a view of the set as usual and then were aware of a sleeping figure on stage left who suddenly awoke with a terrifying rattle of his chains. The link between set and production was established at once! And this was a presentation that was designed to accommodate the rapid changes of venue which a dramatisation of a novel often thrusts upon a director. Of course there are extra demands -the creation of fear, the illusion of a castle or a mental hospital, the green of a garden or various offices or houses. It is the visual side if you like of a “dark themed play’

SET

Set design: JON KERR and DAVID NORWOOD

Stage manager: EMMA JOHNSON

Asst Stage Managers: PHIL ASHBY-CROWE and KAREN NORWOOD

Construction and Decor: PHIL ASHBY-CROWE, CARMEN BOWETT, ELISE

BOWETT, ROGER BOULTBEE, EMMA JOHNSON, JON KERR, MATTHEW

LAM BERT, HANNAH LLOYD, MIKE McDONALD, DAVID NORWOOD, TIM

PICKERING, NAOMI SAVAGE and ADAM WADE

That veritable army of constructors and decor staff serves to emphasis what a mammoth task the designer had set. On the side where the chained figure first rattled his chains, there was an arching curved rostrum and steps beneath a barred window. A large rostrum with a green cloth served to create a garden. There were useful levels and steps adjacent and a dominant solid door with a brass knob on stage right overlooking a table and chairs which served for various rooms. The Gothic window on stage left was matched by one on the right.

It was all painted in grey and dark colours and was augmented with a huge bed and bed-head for some scenes (ingeniously stored under a black cloth upstage left and brought out and removed by two efficient stage managers). A trolley and a large coffin were also brought on as required. The levels and the areas for good acting positions were all skillfully built into this cleverly designed and well constructed set. It was a grim and frightening place in its own right and as such the ideal setting for this play. And, with electrifying results, the audience aisle itself was used for some exits and entrances and became part of the set. Wonderfully done!

PROPERTIES: JOHN and JOYCE SMITH, EMMA JOHNSON and PHIL ASHBY-CROWE

The size of the team and the way in which props such as the garlands of garlic were an integral part of the play all suggest the importance of the properties in this play. They were there to be used but also to set the play in its period in history and bring out its gothic nature. Perhaps the skill in which this was done is demonstrated in the unessential but evocative brain in a glass jar which almost took the attention away from the actors! The drinks, the crucifixes, the medical paraphernalia, the little cigars, the razor, garlic, the terrifying stakes and mallets — these were just some of the properties served up to flesh out the production (no pun intended!) It was not uniformly successful — a well creased and wrinkled photograph on thin paper and the modem syringe did not entirely convince perhaps but the overall effect was enormously evocative as well as useful for the performers. Well done to all the team!

LIGHTING: ROGER BOULTBEE and GORDON HAMLIN

Gordon was again involved in this together with, after a “prolonged absence” Roger and the two could not have had a greater challenge than this with its need for spine tingling lighting and rapid switches of location and the use of varied acting areas. A red glow on mysterious creeping hands or equally dramatic on steps and cells, suggesting the blood motif so much a part of the genre, or the contrasting warm lighting for an idyllic garden, or a spotlight on the bed were all part of the contrasts. Lightning flashes were of course a set piece of this performance and there were dramatic shafts of light as the play progressed. And of course there were the strobe effect — a little gratuitous perhaps but effective in removing the need for overly graphic action - and the smoke and mists all Gothic tales demand. It was all on cue and immensely atmospheric as well as directional and meticulously rigged. Well done to Gordon and Roger!

SOUND: JAY REES

The evocative music could swell to match the dramatic climaxes on stage or to open a scene of tranquil escape with a softer, lyrical sound. It was well chosen and well cued, with the levels impeccably judged. And, of course with lightning comes thunder — again appropriately rendered. The hoot of an owl, pastoral bird-song or the sound of a stake being hammered home were equally effective in this well conceived sound-track to the production, for the sound became an essential part of it all as it unfolded. Well done, Jay.

COSTUMES: JULIE HOSKINS, ANN LLOYD, FIONA McGONAGLE and CARMEN BOWETT

What a task! Period costume and some popular characters an image of which is in the minds of so many of the audience add to the demands made on this team. The response was visually exciting.

Virginal white bodice and pantaloons for the young women, severe grey for the nurse in which a white apron was changed for one which was spattered and stained, white coats, rough cut asylum type suits for the inmate or trustee, frock coats and trousers, cutaway tweed style suits, maid’s uniform, warm colour and style for Mina’s and Lucy’s dresses, the traditional black for Dracula with a red edged gown, ghastly pale sensual attire for the three brides, brown overcoat and large hat for Van Helsing, black armbands for the mourners and so on — the list is endless. Except for the odd severe cut of a jacket or a variation in trouser widths there was scarcely a foot wrong. It was a feast for the eyes and so in keeping with the style of the set and the production as a whole. Well done, Julie, Ann, Fiona and Carmen.

ACTING:

Mina (CARMEN BOWETT)

With her dark hair and studied movement she was a deliberate contrast with the blonde and skittish Lucy. Her voice was strong in projection and rich in tone, with all the clarity of diction one would expect from her character, ‘Nothing. Else my mother would turn in her grave. Jam supposed to set you an example.” A succession of expensive looking gowns and lace helped establish her status and she often clasped her hands in front in a demure style. This helped her achieve an effective contrast as she paced round, wringing both hands in agitation. She struck the right sort of angelic pose in her white nightdress, even if the strap of a modern undergarment showed on the shoulder, and she played the victim with wide eyed innocence but a note of curiosity in her tone — very good judgement here. “For we drank deep of each other, sweet Jonathan. Rocked. Rocked on the waters by the little lapping waves

Indeed, her distress grew and was well portrayed in voice, using a variety of registers, and as she kneeled in prayer and as danger approached she held the audience’s sympathy well. The note of melodrama struck by the play needed such a heroine and she was able to provide it without diminishing the humanity of the character.

Well played, Carmen.

Lucy (NAOMI SAVAGE)

A contrast in hair, manner, movement and voice, she was the perfect foil to Mina, giving the impression with her ringlets and youthful treble in the voice of vulnerable youth which later modulated so convincingly into corrupted victim.

“The thinnest, thinnest waist and highest, highest hair

In catching that rising inflection and girlish tone able she did occasionally swallow some of her vowels, but the rest was clear and well articulated. In period gowns or more often white undergarments she became the epitome of the prey of Dracula, for her wayward behaviour and carefree movement suggested youthful sensuality waiting to be released. Indeed she caught this well in her well choreographed and frightening movement on the bed. Her raucous laughter or her quick revulsion at a mirror established her degeneration well. Her lust was evident in her voice and body as she reached out, “Sleep with me. Hold me. Love me all night “.

By contrast the weak gentle voice before her death recalled the Lucy that she was “My true friend, thank you..”

It was in its range and in the sheer physical effort involved a demanding role and Naomi succeeded in imbuing it with a convincing reality which went beyond the “Bride” of Dracula which she could also portray so well.

Well done!

Florrie (HANNAH LLOYD)

In a play like Dracula it’s hard to create interest in the other characters but as Florrie Hannah is given some good narrative and some good acting chances and she took them. She tried a little too hard at first perhaps to be a social contrast, subduing and evening out her delivery a little but could point a good line well, “The chicken sir. Leg or breast?”

The longer pieces were rather even in rhythm but clear enough but needed to be more of a contrast with her deliberate “learned by heart” letter, “Dear Lucy, I am so happy I am holding my darling husband’s hand” But her more animated dialogue dealing with the wiles of Lucy was clear and direct. As another “Bride” of Dracula she had all the animation and vocal skill one could need!

Nice one, Hannah.

Jonathan Harker (MATT BIRD)

One of the principal figures in the novel, he is obliged in this version to suggest more of what has happened offstage in the castle of Dracula. This he does with some nice contrasts between his almost priggish earnest tone and his sensual teasing and the power of his hypnosis or his encounter with the “Brides”.. His good, clear voice with an open tone helped him achieve these effects. He had excellent pace, taking cues quickly, but his articulation did not suffer. His scenes firstly with Dracula and later with Van Helsing were full of strongly played reactions, “They curdle my blood.” or

“Where are we going Van Helsing? Can you promise that Mina will be safe?”

His skill was that he made this all seem natural and credible yet never lost an innuendo or a dramatic build up of the action. Sideways his jacket draped a little awkwardly but his physical energy and movement kept the action moving with excitement especially in the later scenes. It was a very well judged characterisation from Matt.

Arthur Seward (MATTHEW LAMBERT)

This is a difficult role to give credibility. A somewhat uptight medical figure, he is at once the suitor of Lucy and a major player in the exciting scenes of chase and destruction of Dracula. In all these he succeeded because of the flexible approach he employed. His voice and his movement could be brisk and business like and then soften with humanity, “And I just couldn’t believe it. Seeing an old Norwellian in this neck of the woods Then with another change of register he could be the loving and desperate man, “For the love of god, Van Helsing, tell me how to save her “.

Then with a tense, resigned yet animated tone he could be part of the pursuit, “We have to go there and stamp him out.”

With his upright stance, medical equipment to assist, he maintained that anguished yet firm manner throughout, whilst capturing successfully all these facets in his expressive and fast delivery. Indeed his clarity of diction and his timing of the lines were exemplary

— well done, indeed, Matthew.

Count Dracula (RICHARD SADLER)

How difficult it must be to avoid the clichés and the well trodden portrayals so firmly fixed in the popular imagination! Indeed the playwright almost expects and exploits the clichés, describing one of Dracula’s blood sucking moments, “The classic swoon. Blood all over the stage “.

Richard was blessed with an awesome stage presence and a rich and expressive voice, made even more resonant by the accent and the deliberate but never slow delivery. He balanced touches of melodramatic “horror”, with neck biting actions and swirling exits, with a natural, almost plausible explanation of his thoughts and character.

“Blood is too precious a thing in these days of dishonorable peace.”

Yet, with hands creeping round the bed or crouching stealthily on a rostrum he could be as traditional a vampire as one could wish for, “Blood of my blood. My bountfiul winepress for a while..” It was that absolute command of his medium, his assurance and bravura in the role that lent passion and menace to his superbly varied vocal characterisation — in his delivery of dialogue, the play suggested its success on radio! Powerful and commanding — a tour de force which succeeded throughout — well played Richard!

Renfield (ADAM WADE)

What a superbly written part and how splendidly portrayed, so that a rather minor but important element of the story is here transformed into a young and energetic, dramatic and immensely powerful characterisation. Of course the production helped him — there in his chains right at the start, but it was his athleticism and his expressive and shockingly and wonderfully over projected delivery which grabbed the audience by the throat and held them throughout. He could be momentarily lucid, with good normal tone and clear expression, then childishly wild, “I once knew a woman who swallowed afly. Perhaps she ‘ii die. Perhaps she won Indeed, humour was ever-present in a disturbing way — with lines like “Lord of the flies His bursts of ranting were superbly controlled “master, master, faster, faster” etc. and

the lyrical and sad content of some of his verses were a splendid contrast to such physical feats as his “swallowing” a fly or being thrown against the wall to die. His straining at the chain and his talented interpretation of his complex dialogue helped him create a pivotal and understandable character, acting as a sort of commentary on the two worlds in which he was a prisoner. Powerful stuff, Adam!

Nurse (JUDITH KNIGHT)

Welcomed as a newcomer, she had a small but important role to bring to life. The costume and its stained other self was a great help. With ruthless efficiency she could preside over forced feeding, then burst into angry shouting, using her voice clearly through both, “You stupid cur. Kick him.” As the victim of scalding stew or as a narrator! commentator on the inmate, her voice was used well, “one Jesus Christ Almighty “. It was a good, well delivered performance from Judith.

Drinkwater (SCOTT BRADY)

There was a “welcome back” for this player but he was not given the most promising of roles. Much credit to him then that he made so much of it and so successfully! As a sort of menacing presence standing upstage he was superb in his control and stance. His brutal holds and kicks served to emphasis the awfulness of the institution. A good, brooding character from Scott

Dr. Van Helsing (BEN BRUNSDON)

Think of Hammer and Peter Cushing and you have an idea as to how important this character is, even if it departed somewhat from the original concept! Here we had a breath of fresh air. Ben’s character, with his accent and his obsessive quest, forsook the hero concept and showed us instead a very powerful and convincing human character. Held back until the second half, Van Helsing’s opening monologue was delivered with unhurried clarity and expression, combining a light toned voice with a strong accent, to make the most of lines like, “I pack the ghastly paraphernalia of my beneficial trade, instruments, stethoscope..” It was an even rhythm to match his character but one which could be broken with such effect as he issued fast instructions or full of power as he intervened swiftly with action to match heightened delivery, “Not on your life. Not now. Not for your living soul and hers “. The almost poetical words of his pieces such as in Act 2 scene 8 were given a change of register and a well judged touch of fanaticism, “And I must enlighten you how deep the darkness..” It was a consistent and riveting performance of a powerful character.

Well played, Ben.

Dr. Goldman / Mrs. Manners (KAREN NORWOOD)

Here is another performer who was also the Assistant Stage Manager, with some changes done in costume. Not just one but two small roles were given a convincing interpretation by Karen. Neat and efficient with clear diction, she helped to establish the institution and

the work of Seward with a precise and controlled Goldman and tongue twisting dialogue, “One might hypothesize, ..,that the anin?us in its negative, demonic phase.. Except for the odd tight-lipped “This is for you”, the other was almost a cipher — a useful dresser and supervisor of the household in stage manager style! Both had composure and presence — well played Karen!

3rd Vampire Bride (EMMA JOHNSON)

As Stage Manager and a member of the Properties team and Set Construction, could Emma have ever imagined she would be called upon to join two members of the cast in a frenzy or erotic honor and do it with the same convincing level of vocal and movement skills?! Well done!

The Child (KAIA BOWETT)

What an overwhelming experience to be thrust into a play like this with action and mayhem all around and yet retain such composure. Shy look away from the audience at first but as a result the more moving when she showed an open and expressive face. Perfect casting. Well done Kaia

PRODUCTION

The director shares with us his thoughts, which is refreshing as it gives criteria against which to be judged. It was an original thought about the “fourth wall” being extended to include doing away with most of the back wall, too, with storage of the bed, the stepping out onto the “grassed” and the free standing door frame. It helped the pace of the action and the flow of one large setting to another and was invaluable. It also fitted the free thinking style of the play. - a script which Jon felt was theatrically strong but giving a flavour of the complexity of the novel. Again that is what the production did, with its abandonment, or occasional ironic use, of stereotypes, its ever present twilight of a “cell” in the institution and its attention to the delivery of the often lyrical dialogue. But it is the flow of the action that was so important an indicator of successful transfer from novel to stage and that flow, with quick cues and changes, which marked out this successful production.

So, in ACT ONE

The challenges of Lochhead’s script were still to come when the audience were shocked into a scream of surprise (well, one was audible, at least) as Renfield woke with a crash of his chains and then continued to mesmerise the arriving audience right through to the start of the dialogue. That was a skilled director at work and it was hugely successful in setting the mood.

By contrast the pastoral French school of painting was evoked with the virginal white of Lucy on the swing, whilst Mina was the perfect big sister English rose with slightly severe scolding. Then the touches of parody — of a conventional woman’s magazine — but of modem times!

“Jonathan Harker, tall dark, handsome, blue eyed, articled clerk extraordinaire..” By contrast, Renfield ‘s parody was of the rhyme of the swallowing of a fly given complexity and some terrible undertones. And always pulling the chains to their limits. His final pleas echoed into the beginning of the next scene, economically staged on stage right and with brandy, cigars and swan vestas to add authenticity to the lively dialogue. —if you could take your eyes off the brain!

Violence was not the prerogative of the supernatural as strong delivery from the Nurse revealed, “Kick the shit out of him” The scene at table built to a strong vocal climax, even though when Seward was speaking to Mina he was obliged to speak much of it upstage. The touch of humour in Mina’ s change from strong denial to “You can come and stay with me tonight if you promise not to go away tomorrow” was perhaps not marked sufficiently? The style of the production was further established with the visible removal of the furniture by the stage hands. The scenes seemed to change as Mina and Florrie talked of service — some humour here, after the instructions “Yes, Mina!” And it was a nice use of spotlight for Florrie’s piece about being real. Then came the interspersion of the fly eating and the final confrontation between Harker and a “polite” Dracula, with good differentiated stage positions. The slow deliberate delivery suited lines like, “Liberty hall to you, my friend” And none of the dark humour in his expressions was lost “I know what I like Strong climactic delivery of descriptive prose “whirlpool. Of blood” was matched by anger “His fate” and a strong physical reaction to the crucifix. Jonathan had fear in his voice as he looked out front and listened to the “children of the night”.

Razor, open shirt and blood were the staple diet of these stories, nicely played here. But the licking of the razor added a note of comedy perhaps? The Brides were a ritual movement, although the doll could only be a symbol? And, forsaking another convention Jon had Dracula exit through the audience — and in the central aisle he was able to cast his presence on the scene with Mina and Lucy. This aisle was used again in Act Two to tremendous effect when the iron gates were first erected and then on cue, “Only to /ook”dropped dramatically onto the surface of the playing area.

The bed was huge and a playing area in itself. It became a sort of stage for the varying and changing states of Lucy but with the growing horror there was still humour, with huge audience response to Florrie’s sharp, “Well, suppose it must be, else it wouldn ‘t be so popular”. Lucy flung herself around the bed as she related the tales of Renfield, with an agonised “Don ‘t leave me alone” as the searing white light prepared for the entry of Dracula and the ritual bite — but not much blood and not much made of the wedding dress.

In ACT TWO

The similar techniques now well established were carried through with the notes of humour played out even in moments of horror and the vocal skills applied to the expansive prose. Movement, especially as the idea of a pursuit gathered pace and momentum. Throughout the matter of fact obsession of Van Helsing was exploited well,

as with the placing of the garlic bands etc round the bed. Lucy’s black choker suggested her plight effectively as did the dark circles under her eyes. Positions parallel to her at the bed meant she had to play much of it facing sideways, eyes and mouth turned away. The medical treatment/transfusion was simple yet effectively done and Seward’s weak stagger emphasised he had given blood. Perhaps it went to the limits with the hands of Dracula creeping up the bed in a red glow? Any more and that balance in the play might go.

Lucy’s death however was well controlled and effective with strong delivery of a key line “She is dead But it is only the beginning”.

The bed was moved by stage hands who covered it in a black cover and left it upstage left. Light flirtation led to darker themes and Renfield was superb at the schizophrenia in his different use of voice and Seward’s growing violence (stronger and higher in pitch) emphasised his sense of loss. The tension was maintained in the pace and the rising climax of the hypnotism and the reactions of Mina and the others. Backs to the audience

— another brave device worked well. Van Helsing could not have done better with the studied delivery of

“These were made by your Lucy “.

The visual and dramatic was continued with the powerful leap and break of chains by Renfield. His urgency was well captured in contrast to Mina’s attempts at prayer. The un-dead Lucy was convincing as was the Child and again it was the strength of the reactions — Harker, Seward in particular - which caught the drama. Renfield on the leash and as a broken body at the wall used his physical skills to the best and the whole blood sucking business was effectively performed and led to a strobe effect as he made his escape. There is a strong visual theme to this production, none more so than when the black bier was wheeled out with well spread stage positions and clear brisk dialogue. The hammering of the stake (but he seemed to carry it away with him afterwards?) the menace of the three with crucifixes, the intermittent humour, “Their own personalities. In some cases several”

All showed the direction at its tautest and at its most powerful, culminating with the shaft of the dawn light, Mina’s ambiguity and her final joyously delivered

“I am cursed no more”

The music played a significant part as it finished on cue after the passionate kiss and the killing of the brides.

ENDEAVOUR, ORIGINALITY & THEATRICAL ATTAINMENT

The novel was an original, the adaptation with all its challenges was original and so, too, was this production. The setting and the rejection of back and front “walls” and the use of the aisle of the auditorium as well as the little area downstage right were all original features. The order of scenes, the totally original opening by the omnipresent Renfield were splendid features of the production. Endeavour goes without saying as the rest of this adjudication shows. It was immense. The scope of it, the costumes, settings and the splendid and more convincing characterisations were all signs of the endeavour and, again, of the originality of this production. And this endeavour led to high levels of theatrical attainment. The white light as we looked down on the huge bed, the crashing of the gate, the clash of Renfield’s chains, the stakes through the heart, the attacks of Dracula were just a few of the theatrical climaxes. Most important was the use of voices

— the fast cues, the rising inflections the clear diction and full tone mixing drama with humour in an imaginative way. The timing was first class and the energy and fluency very obvious.. But again it was the strength of observation which enabled the creation of such interesting and three dimensional characters in a multi-layered dramatisation which really stood out theatrically. Not for the squeamish perhaps although in certain areas -overplay of horror or overt sexuality and semi-nudity — the production was quite circumspect! Those who want blood and horror could always serve up those “Eyeballs in Blood Clot Sauce” when they reached home!

This was a big production in so many ways and the Harlequin Theatre has the courage and inventiveness to tackle it and breathe new life (!) into the complex play. Well done to all and, of course, JON and his team.

Garth Jones

GTG