Theatre in London

«
tick…tick…BOOM!
2 Pianos 4 Hands
»

tick…tick…BOOM!

Reviewed by Donald D'Haene, July 18, 2009

Warning: This review may contain spoilers.
By Jonathon Larson
Directed by Michael Paylor
Musical direction by Mark-Anthony Del Brocco
Played by Trevor Horman, Erica Laine and Chris Timmermans
A Noisy Mime Theatre Production
The Spriet Family Theatre
July 15–19, 2009

“Johnny can’t decide
Johnny has no guide
Johnny wants to hide
How do you know when it’s time to let go?
Johnny can’t decide”

Jon(athon Larson), here played by Trevor Horman, is an aspiring composer for musical theatre, who lives in SoHo, New York. He is nearing his thirtieth birthday and worries about his lack of achievement. His friend Michael (Chris Timmermans) wants to schedule a job interview for Jon with Michael’s firm and his girlfriend, Susan (Erica Laine) wants him to move to Cape Cod to raise a family and doesn’t view that as compatible with Jon’s “starving artist” lifestyle. The two people in Jon’s life recap their views on what Jon should do in the song cited above, Johnny Can’t Decide.

Ever since Rent burst onto the Broadway stage, fans of Jonathan Larson had been eager for more from an artist who helped bring musical theatre and contemporary issues to a younger, rock-loving generation. Due to Larson’s death the day prior to the opening of Rent on Broadway, his friends and family had to go back to songs and works from earlier shows. Hence tick, tick… Boom!, an autobiographical show Larson wrote and performed around the early 1990s.

The show was conceived as a one-man show, and Larson performed the work in various small venues in New York before abandoning it to work on what eventually became Rent. David Auburn (author of the acclaimed Proof) worked with the producers of tick to adapt the multiple versions that Larson had left into a coherent whole for three performers.

Considering the talents required of a performer who lands the role of the lead, and delivered in spades by Horman in this production, I would have preferred seeing a one-man version of this show, the one Larson intended.

Now for full disclosure: I am one of the few people on the planet who didn’t care for Larson’s hit show Rent so you can imagine where this review is going.

Nevertheless, there were some clever lines. “I’m still enjoying my pre-mid-life crisis,” and “Hello to shiny new parquet wood floors, as waxed as a wealthy girl’s legs,” to name just two.

I also thought the band (Dereyk Goodwin on drums, Jeff Lupker on lead guitar, Colin Anderson on bass guitar) led by pianist Timothy Cheung were excellent and the musical direction by Mark-Anthony Del Brocco confident and sure.

But there were several times, especially early on, when the actors were both static and stiff. There was a self-consciousness emanating from the performers. This worked for the lead’s character; less so for the supporting characters.

The piano staircase design was great. I was hoping for a number on that since it was such a strong image and set piece on the stage. It could have been used so that stagehands instead of actors could move the sometimes large set pieces. Yet I give full props to a girl in pumps who is willing!

The car scene was effective, the first humorous scene in my opinion, with some very good choreography. Chris Timmermans really shone in this number.

The performers from there appeared to be on a roll, as that scene was followed by my favourite song in the show, the duet, Therapy, a tongue-tripping conversation between Jon and Susan as they attempt to resolve an argument. The lyrics, singing, and choreography of this number were head and shoulders above anything else in the show.

“…But now it’s out in the open
Now it’s off our chest
Now it’s four a.m.
And we have therapy tomorrow
It’s too late to screw
So let’s just get some rest.”

Unfortunately, the characters had to return to dialogue.

I had moments when I wanted to shout out some dialogue of my own, “shut up and sing. Or get back into that car – you do good stuff in there.”

At some point in the show Chris’ character, Michael does imply he is in a relationship with a man — so my companions tell me. I must have been sleeping at the wheel, because I didn’t hear that. I guess that’s because Chris didn’t play it gay in any way. In fact, I’d suggest that if the characters Jonathon and Michael were in The Odd Couple, Jonathon would be Felix and Michael, Oscar. And later in the show, at just the point when I’m thinking, God, Larson could have used a gay best friend (Read, this play needs some of that kind of humour), I finally get that Michael is gay! I state this as I felt lack of humour is the weakest link in the play (either that or I have the wrong sense of humour) and you’d think the gay character would provide some of those laughs. [Hmm. I'm a gay writer who is stereotyping gays. Go figure!]

I did laugh at this, however: how believable is it that a gay man in a musical would be unable to “strap on” a Gucci belt or remove clothes for a dance number without tripping. I’m just saying…

As for Laine as Susan, the actor and character seemed, especially later in the show, at times, the most confident character on stage. When Jon suggests they should stay in New York because among other things, “You want to be a dancer,” she shoots back, “I AM a dancer,” and I fully expected her to jump out of bed and prove it. Laine also aced the moments when she acted out the part of a manager silencing Jon at a brainstorming session.

But the star of this show (and tomorrow to watch) is Trevor Horman. He has an early — well, imagine before the world was introduced to him — Steve Martin quality to his facial expressions and willowy body moves. He also has an endearing stage presence, strong voice and charisma that bodes well for future rolls in musical theatre.

Donald can’t decide
Donald has no guide
Donald wants to hide
Donald wonders, should you see the show?
Donald Can’t Decide

Donald D'Haene has been involved in local theatre for two decades. This fall, he will be a contributing writer for London's newest Arts Magazine, The Beat. He is PR Consultant for Pacheco Theatre’s Dec 2--5, McManus Studio production of P.S. Your Cat Is Dead and Producer for MTP's 2010 March musical, Nine.

5 Comments on “tick…tick…BOOM!”

  1. I stayed awake for the whole show says:
    July 19th, 2009 at 12:45 am

    As you have the grace to admit, and I quote directly from your review "At some point in the show Chris’ character, Michael does imply he is in a relationship with a man — so my companions tell me. I must have been sleeping at the wheel, because I didn’t hear that."

    I submit you were asleep at the wheel for more than just that part of the show." The first clue to Michael’s sexual preference comes toward the end of the scene in which MIchael asks John to drive him to the airport, and John asks about David. Michaels reply "It’s complicated" and the inflection clearly shows there is relationship in which Michael is involved and there are problems in it at that moment.

    You also write that "Chris didn’t play it gay in any way. In fact, I’d suggest that if the characters Jonathon and Michael were in The Odd Couple, Jonathon would be Felix and Michael, Oscar. And later in the show, at just the point when I’m thinking, God, Larson could have used a gay best friend (Read, this play needs some of that kind of humour), I finally get that Michael is gay!"

    Congratulations, you are now caught up with the rest of the audience.

    Moreover you say "I state this as I felt lack of humour is the weakest link in the play (either that or I have the wrong sense of humour) and you’d think the gay character would provide some of those laughs. [Hmm. "I'm a gay writer who is stereotyping gays. Go figure!]"

    Firstly there is plenty of humour in this play so maybe you do have the wrong sense of humour, perhaps even none at all. You say "I did laugh at this, however: how believable is it that a gay man in a musical would be unable to “strap on” a Gucci belt or remove clothes for a dance number without tripping" Are you saying only hetrosexuals fumble with belts, or have trouble removing clothes for a dance number without tripping?. What a ridiculous statement you make there.

    How was Chris to make his gay character more believable? If he had used stereotypical gestures and vocalizations I suspect you would have been all over Timermans, figuratively of course, for using such gestures and vocalizations to represent his character. The fact is that Michaels homosexuality is not a major issue in the play. Why then do you have to make it one? John and Michael are friends, close friends, and the fact that one is hetrosexual, the other gay really doesn’t affect the plot at all. Suggest ways the character of Michael could have provided more laughs, without resorting to the lisping, limped wrist character gays are often portrayed as. That would be offensive.

    You may have been around local theatre for two decades, but in this review at least you reveal a less than competent understanding of the show. Stay awake next time to make sure you don’t miss plot twists and revelations.

    Oh, by the way in your paragraph relating to Erica Laine you spelled "confident" incorrectly. It is confident, not confidant.

  2. Peter Janes says:
    July 19th, 2009 at 1:33 am

    @anonymous review reviewer: spelling fixed, thanks for keeping an eye on my work. Please keep applying your eagle eyes to the rest of the site in case I slip up again.

  3. I stayed awake for the whole show says says:
    July 20th, 2009 at 11:16 am

    Will do Peter. It might also be an idea to tell Donald to keep his eagle eyes on what is happening on the stage in front of him. That way he may be able to write factual and competent reviews in the future.

  4. I stayed awake for the whole show too!! says:
    July 20th, 2009 at 6:20 pm

    ….and because I did, I can say that I agree with the reviewer’s comments and thought he went easy on the show!!

    The band was quite good, however they overpowered the actors. The actors needed to project more.

    Articulation is required so the audience can understand everything that is being said. Dialogue was spoken fast in many areas and therefore lost to the audience. Maybe some of the humour you indicated existed, was in there.

    As for the humour, the only comical and entertaining part for me was the actor playing John’s dad.

    As a woman, I did not understand the choice / intention of costuming the female role scantily?
    I don’t need to see butt cheeks hanging out of shorts or a breast peaking out from a dress when it serves no purpose to the character. The character is a dance instructor, who garners respect, she was not portraying a call girl. I’m not saying she should be clothed from neck to toe, but the ‘trashier’ look was deceiving. The choice to establish respect for her was taken away from me.

    There was a comment about the reviewer needing to have his eagle eyes on the show. Well my ‘eagle eyes’ grew frustrated with the inconsistency between John & Micheal’s driving scenes. Michael let the audience know the car was a stick shift, and ‘drove the car’ yet when John drove him to the airport, his arm didn’t move ‘on the wheel’ and the only time he shifted the gear was when they arrived at the airport and he turned the car off.
    Additionally, when doing costume changes on set, the audience is distracted when the process does not flow. When John struggled with his buttons after the ‘bed” scene, I have no clue what he was singing about because I watched the buttons, then naturally you look to the other actor to see if she’s encountering challenges. Also, when the female was packing up, she missed some clothes, again another distraction to the audience. Props are great if used properly, if not, you lose your audience.

    Why was John’s agent portrayed as Estelle from Friends?

    In any level of theatre never should cast or crew members be walking on the set when the house is open. The set is another character of the story. I was surprised to see this happening before the show and during intermission. It’s disrespectful and very unprofessional. There was a back ladder that could be utilized or, like the cast during performance, went off stage and appeared in the upper level without having to walk up the piano staircase.

    Based on the quality of past shows from this company I was very disappointed by tick tick

  5. Michael Paylor says:
    July 21st, 2009 at 3:05 am

    It is nice to see that people are engaged and passionate about our work, one way or another!
    If I may ask both commenters, which shows did you attend? Just out of my own curiosity?
    I ask due to the fact that our leading man was unable to perform for several of the shows, and was therefore replaced at the last minute (5 hours notice). Perhaps some of the inconsistencies were due to this?
    We also would like to point out that nobody in the company feels the actress’ costumes were trashy in any way, nor would we want to portray her in this light. In fact, all of these costumes came from her own wardrobe, which is why we felt it would be an accurate portrayal of a young fashionable woman.
    As for the moving of set on stage before an audience, I’m afraid the space doesn’t allow for any of your suggestions in its current configuration. The ladder you mentioned simply goes to the balcony, which housed the band.
    We are glad you have found our shows to be of high quality, and are always looking to improve. We also do appreciate suggestions and constructive criticisms, if you would like to discuss anything further with us please feel free to email us at mpaylor@noisymime.net or lfryling@noisymime.net.

The opinions expressed by contributors to Theatre in London are those of the authors only. They do not necessarily represent or reflect the position of the editor, webmaster or other contributors.