Thank you for Voting
A political satire in a land and age when real world politics could easily be mistaken for a farce. Corrupt politicians, inflation, broken promises, weapons of mass destruction and the Irish. With such a wealth of material to draw from you’d expect any serious attempt at political satire to write itself. And so I thought, until a few hours ago…
Thank you for Voting (I’ve forgotten the subtitile) is a chronicle of a politician named Chaminda Pusswedilla’s rise to power through the usual political ranks. It touches on his qualifications, motives, opinions, morals and his ability to disregard all of the above in the name of personal gain. The story unravels partly as a talk show interview with the politician in question by a TV newsanchor and partly through a few scenes in the politicians office.
I’m not going to be overly harsh at this play because it wasn’t really bad. It had everything going for it. Decent actors, sets, costumes, A/V, sponsors and a world gone mad from which to draw inspiration. And with all that the end result can only be described as half-arsed. While farce, puns and malapropism abounded the humour was never cheap… just easy.
It felt like no one could bother to come up with clever jokes so the easy obvious laughs would just have to do. The lead character’s delivery was good enough that most of the time you were laughing (if you were laughing at all) at the performance and not the content, which was usually bloody obvious and followed predictable progressions.
Maybe things might have been better if the play focussed on a specific pivotal event on the road to political nirvana, or introduced a tertiary character such as a teenager with a drinking/gambling/humourous but PC-sexual orientation crisis. The roadmap played out on stage is one that we have seen countless times in the real world and holds no secrets to us, and yet that is the very thing presented to us as entertainment. A little extra garnish isn’t too much to expect. No brainpower is required for the enjoyment of this play. This is not a compliment, though I’m sure someone will see it as such.
Just two things about this production that I think are worth going into. The first is that tickets were half price on opening night. Interesting concept, probably instigated to get more butts in seats for the opening night in the hope of goodwill (assuming a good performance, of course). I wonder if it will pay off…
The second has to do with advertising. I don’t mind a few banners or product placement on stage. I don’t mind souvenirs that are just mini-business directories. I don’t even mind silent video adverts running in the background while acting occurs in the foreground. What I simply will not bloody stand for is being forced to sit through video advertisements with sound and nothing else to look at when I’ve paid money to get in the door. I don’t care if sets are being changed in the meantime, being forced to watch advertising is inexcusable and I do not see why it should be tolerated under any circumstances.
Other than that all I have to say is that this was a passable play. Not a best-effort production. More a easy-recliner-chair-effort production. Such minimal effort in fact that the StageLight&Magic website doesn’t carry any information on it apart from a short news post. And that’s a shame, because it could have been much better.
By the way, forgot to pick up a souvenir so details on actors etc. are a bit sparse at the mo. Will update as I get them.
Tags: Feroz Kamardeen, StageLight&Magic, Theater
November 30th, 2007 at 1:59 am
some more details on a random social networking site. (no linky because you need a working account to view it) - http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=19860306824
I’ve noticed pictures and an uploaded youtube video on that event page, if anyone is mildly interested (as I am) and can’t actually go see the thing.
On the play itself, don’t you think that the humour is unsubtle to appeal to the common denominator? Having seen a few of Indu’s plays (for another example of the comedy genre), I get the idea that it’s all supposed to be slapstick and over the top. Like Ugly Betty for theatre, if you like.
random meta: I hope you’re planning a visit to the Christmas themed play around the corner. The background on the site intrigues me.
November 30th, 2007 at 2:41 am
Yes, saw that on FB. Couldn’t seem to find it again while I was writing a review. I blame gremlins.
I was expecting un-subtle, just wasn’t expecting it to be so half-hearted. The last vaguely political satire piece I witnessed on stage was Indu’s Potta Harry, which frankly, I would have preferred over this. It would have been nice if they could have done more with it than just a simple extrapolation up the political food chain. instead, it just felt like I was paying to be told something I already knew.
And yes. Just saw that. Will be going. Sounds very intriguing. I vaguely recall having at least four things on my event schedule for December, but I can’t remember where I left it.
November 30th, 2007 at 10:59 am
well i thought it was a really good play.. (but may be i am a bit biased..)
i think the whole point of not putting anything on the SLM website was coz in their advertising campaign they kept denying that they had any involvement with the play.. (if you notice the posters it said Stagefirght and panic inc denies any involvement in the production of this drama).. so i’m guessing they wanted to keep their site clean from it as well.. (just guessing so)
i’m not sure if you’ve noticed but there was a facebook account for this Chaminda Pusswedilla character.. it was kinda hilarious to read his profile page and all.. but sometime later the admins at facebook decided to ban his account!!
November 30th, 2007 at 12:50 pm
I believe StageFright&Panic denies their involvement in all the plays they don’t produce. Is that joke still funny? And I noticed that the subsidiary stuff, the back stories, the hype seemed to have a little more thought put into it on average than the actual play. I even thought the faux news stories were pretty clever and delivered well. And hats off to Brandon for being the sultriest president of Norway evah.
I suppose what got to me the most is that everything depended on the delivery, but the actual content was rather ordinary. I’m pretty sure that if you wrote everything down and read it out loud you’d find that it really wasn’t that funny. Yes, people did laugh continuously throughout the performance… so in that respect this production was a success. But I feel that the production was content to settle for the easy laugh and not look further.
November 30th, 2007 at 3:52 pm
Well i too did go to see this play. and it was a foreign experience to me because im not all that fluent when it comes to Sinhalese. How ever i have seen some other plays that took stage in this country as well. seeing those i would say that the “Colombo Critic” is an unjust writer. i will explain why i say this,
well with regards to this play, as i said i did not get most of the jokes. this because i am not aware of the political setting of this country in detail and i know about 15 words in Sinhalese. How ever seeing the reaction of the people around me, and out of the jokes i did get, this play was a smash hit any day in my book. i saw the complete works of Willy Shakes in Singapore and the director of the play told me something quite valid soon after the play. I quote “a comedy is only as good as the audience reaction” and the audience was having fits of laughter right through out. So this play i think was a hit. Unfortunately i was not in the country when the complete works happened here. so i cant comment on that.
Another thing.. audiences might be dumb.. but if they are the people who come to see theatre, then the best thing that a director can do will be to cater to those masses. If someone did cater to the ppl with intelligence( someone like you sir, who will enjoy “non cheap comedy” as you say) then that production i think is a flop. this is simply because then the “DUMB” masses will not understand these jokes. so mo ppl will go dissatisfied.
Im sorry if i sound harsh, but i say this because i have been involved with theatre for a long time. in a lot of countries as well. and its obvious that Sri Lankan theatre is not upto par with a Broadway production. However, as a critic slamming everything done is this country because its not upto the standards of international theatre is not what you should be doing. that will make ur criticism a joke. In fact you should be fair by everyone. and get off ur high horse and learn to appreciate something that is actually enjoyable.
I even thought NOIR was quite entertaining. i thought Blood Brothers was quite entertaining as well, even though it was a carbon copy of the original production. what matters at the end of the day was that it was done really well. And as you say true, some characters were not the best you will see. how ever as a critic you must always remember that its your duty to criticize so that the criticized party will get better at their next production, not in a manner that they will want to stop their involvement in theatre all together.
So as i said sir i believe you are an unjust writer. If you want to make a positive impact to theatre with what you write, then read some articles written for bad Broadway plays. see how they write. then you can learn a thing or two about being a critic. just jabbering things out to the world because you hate the world and probably some people who are involved in theatre, just to get your frustration out is simply silly. and bordering on STUPID. you have a lot to learn with respect to being a responsible writer.
I will not write to this forum or read it further because its not worth it. but i would say according to you all Sri Lankan theatre production houses are really bad and below your so called level of intellect. well just think again. It might all be the other way around. A monkey thinks every one around the cage looking at it is amusing and dumb. you might be that monkey.
I was only harsh to you because i think thats the only way you know how to appreciate something.
November 30th, 2007 at 4:41 pm
First of all, why do you keep calling me “sir”?
Second, please read the FAQ as I’ve already responded to most of your points there.
A couple of specific points… I never said the humour was “cheap” (quite the opposite in fact), I just said they didn’t try harder than they had to. There is a very big difference between the two which you seem to be unaware of. I also refrained from insulting the intelligence of the audience, because some of them happen to read my reviews and I didn’t want to hurt their feelings. If you want to call them “dumb” then go right ahead, just don’t pretend that I said it.
And if you think that all I do is “slam” theater productions then you really haven’t bothered to read anything I’ve written. I’ve been quite clear on what I thought was wrong with the play, what I thought was right with the play, admitted that it is funny but not clever-funny and also made some suggestions as to how it could have been better. In contrast you spent almost 700 words insulting me and my motives without actually providing any real substantiation.
I’ve pointed out before that ranting and fussing, calling me names on the comments isn’t the best way to express yourself. I’ve always said that if you have a different opinion to my own then you are quite welcome to write your own review and publish it on this site. Your comment (on a forum that is by your admission “not worth” your time) has already exceeded my review in word count by a fair margin so why don’t you put your money where your mouth is and practice what you preach?
December 1st, 2007 at 1:22 am
December 1st, 2007 at 3:16 am
Whoa, talk about critiquing the critic! Benny doesn’t pull any punches, does he? On a side note, I don’t think it’s fair to say Sri Lankan audiences won’t understand smart comedy… Presupposing, of course, that the audiences for Indu Dharmasena’s plays and for more highbrow theatre companies aren’t quite the same lot. Sorry to be prejudiced, but anyone who can sit through a Tomiya play without feeling (at least slightly) as if sandpaper has been drawn across their brain might not actually possess one.
Interesting review. In defense of the Colombo Critic I will say that I agreed every bit with everything said regarding the Devil and Billy Markham and Blood Brothers. The first was probably the best piece of theatre I’ve ever seen in any country, and the second was just bad. Trusting his/her judgment, I haven’t been put off going to see the play myself by the review (on Sunday), so I wouldn’t call it a bad review per se. And lets cut the CC some slack as well… The writing’s not quite James Agate or Kenneth Tynan, but as theatre develops one can only hope that criticism will rise above the level of fluffy endorsement spouted by the Mirror magazine. In that respect, the CC’s done a good job.
By the by, “a teenager with a drinking/gambling/humourous but PC-sexual orientation crisis”… Where did THAT come from??? lol
December 1st, 2007 at 9:38 am
Whoops, something I should have cleared up earlier: By “clever” I didn’t mean “highbrow”. I thought the news items (includng the cameos) were reasonably clever and the audience enjoyed them. All I’m saying is that we were presented with a pretty textbook political rise to power, one that held no surprises. The only difference is that Pusswedilla externalized and just plain blurted out everything we know happens in the background but is never publicized. “Clever” would have been giving us something we don’t already get from CNN (the real one)
While the banter between Westernthinking (the newsreader/talk-show host) and Pusswedilla was good, I felt that there was room for another personality on stage. I thought Pusswedilla’s son wasn’t given enough stage time and could have been a major source of amusement, given the wealth of real-world material to pull from. As for the specific suggestion you mentioned… I just thought it would be funny, and quite conventional by Sri Lankan standards. Imagine if Pusswedilla’s son was a younger version of Kolu. Or a drunk Brandon stumbling around on stage dressed as a cowboy. Just something unexpected and surreal would have been my suggestion.
My intention is not to stop people from seeing theater, only to give as accurate an evaluation of it as possible with the understanding that my views will not be shared by others. I rated this a 2 but someone else would probably rate it a lot higher. The difference between my rating and the other person’s is that I have to put this play in context with other theater productions I’ve reviewed, and agains’t something like Billy Markham or Equus this rates a 2. And my writing isn’t quite on par with a Agate but I’m sure I could give it a shot if someone paid me lots of money.
December 17th, 2007 at 2:40 pm
Yes, I have been in and out of Facebook just like that bugger Anura during budget times! He has been defecating with the government and opposition at regular intervals. Now he has gone back to Horagolla I hear. Every hora goes there eh?
But I am not like that! I have been denied freedom of expression by Facebook. These buggers banned me no meya! Harima ketha wede neda?
But I am back. I will not defecate! I am here to serve you, and everyone else through the Sri Lankan stage. Because I am Honourable Chaminda Pusswedilla. President of Sri Lanka.
December 18th, 2007 at 3:29 pm
Of no relation to the above topic whatsoever, but in response to a comment…
Did you go to see that Christmas show? I’m curious to see what you thought of it. Have not seen a review yet…
December 18th, 2007 at 8:02 pm
well, if you must know, me and my friend left 20 mins in to the play
December 19th, 2007 at 1:13 am
defecation is a part of our culture no?
why do you look at it as if its the semi-viscous excrement you get after a few buckets of KFC?
CC:
“I rated this a 2 but someone else would probably rate it a lot higher.”
define your scale pls? 1-10 on a log10 scale?
owl: you and your friend… needed more space? like a room?
i heard that lotsa ppl had left half way…
apparently they didnt like pusswedilla’s humor
i went on a saturday and it was good…
didnt like the ads running during scene changes - i thought it was kinda cheap
but then again it goes with the TV show thingy
December 19th, 2007 at 12:51 pm
Owl, you ARE talking about the Christmas show right?
Because Shehal seems confused.
And is now confusing me.
December 19th, 2007 at 5:24 pm
i’m talking about the pusswedilla drama
some of my friends had left half way
i guess they needed the pompousness in a drama to be turned on / entertained
anyways this is not the forum to discuss christmas inc!
December 19th, 2007 at 9:24 pm
oh dear… I am talking bout the Christmas play man. puswedilla was awesome. I hated Christmas inc
January 20th, 2008 at 10:20 am
Nice to see somebody actually taking the effort to sit down and watch a play before writing a review on it.
I hope u went to see this play called Tom, Dick and Harry.
I went y day and it was freakin’ awesome. I loved the way the 3 main characters gelled and thought their was great chemistry on stage. I especially loved the guy who played the drunk immigrant. Amazing show from a relatively unknown cast..or so i thought.
Wud love to know ur observations on that.
Cheers
January 20th, 2008 at 12:41 pm
Hello Gopher Tulip. Was planning on attending Tom, Dick and Harry, but it looks like I might not get a chance. Unfortunately, things are a little hectic for me until February.
I would however be more than pleased if someone else would take the opportunity to write a review of this one. Do we have any takers?
January 20th, 2008 at 1:59 pm
Frankly, i don’t think i can do that cos i’m certainly not qualified for that. I rarely bother to drag my fanny to a theatre and even if i do so, it wud be due to the immense pressure that i get from my daughter or son.
But i sincerely hope that there is someone out there who is willing to take up the Critic’s offer and write a review on it. Personally, i had a wonderful time and it was so pleasurable to see a new breed of young actors bringing down the house.
January 22nd, 2008 at 10:40 pm
On Thankyou for Voting, I think the Critic made a valid point about the satire being so close to the real thing that it really had no edge, and the laughs were “too easy” and not a result of some clever writing or plot build-up. Its true a play like that had so much potential for taking real life incidents and making them punchier - not just more entertaining but perhaps more thought provoking . Satire can be a great way to dispel some of the apathy with which most readers of daily newspaper reports look upon politicians and politics. Having said that, I do think Benny has a point . For most Sri lankans a play like this is almost a catharsis in that it helps them laugh at the farcical and corrupt events/people responsible for most of their problems. Still, no reason not to raise the bar for a more sophisticated theatrical experience!
January 24th, 2008 at 9:34 am
Hi TCC - i guess that there was a post on Tom, Dick & Harry - could you please let us see what was written as it would be interesting to know what was said on the play. I am one of the producers and i cant get anyone to review the play either. Non of our media partners have the ability it would seem. So any feedback would be appreciated