In 2002,
I saw an Anglo-Chinese Junior College production of Oscar-nominated
screenplay writer John Logan's Never The Sinner, about two
young men who kill a young boy for what appears to be no reason other
than sport. Their subsequent trial for murder and the issues raised
about the ethics of the death penalty were less incendiary to the Ministry
of Education, however, one suspects, than the depiction of the two killers
as gay lovers but the production won Best Play at the inter-school Singapore
Youth Festival nonetheless. Kudos to the judges for recognising the
high production qualities and nimble acting by both the young leads.
But despite the best efforts of the cast and crew, the faults of the
script, which is based on a true story, remained. To be fair, it is
intelligent and comprehensive in dealing with the issues of the play.
Unfortunately, it is often didactic, clunky and derivative of many other
plays and films as well. It also veers from a psychological thriller
to a historical account, from a courtroom drama to a romance, never
quite finding its groove. The Stage Club's recent production likewise
failed to truly lift the script and in fact, arguably, exposed its faults
even more because of its understated staging. The earlier production
I saw was helped by a flashy set and the clever use of lighting (e.g.
a row of fairy lights all around the stage) to flesh out certain themes
(e.g. sensationalism in the media) but also add much-needed theatricality
to the proceedings. Here, however, a plainer set and more naturalistic
presentation weighed down an already leaden script. The blocking, for
example, which was very static, did not help the spells of lengthy speeches.
The cast was also a mixed bag. The ensemble of Steve Armstrong, Chris
Chua and Blair Earl was solid but only as individuals. Together, they
all seemed, most distractingly, to be in different plays, with Armstrong's
wildly over-the-top subpoenaed doctor and Chris Chua's low-key reporter
being two ends of a very wide spectrum. A very sensitive performance
from Phil McConnell as the lawyer defending the two young men did alleviate
matters. His beautifully calibrated performance struck just the right
note, bringing a certain softness to his character which gave it much-needed
heart. You immediately warmed to him and believed in the passion behind
his strident words in defence of the boys. The same could not be said
for Maureen McConnell's prosecutor, Roberta Crowe. I liked her immensely
in the Stage Club's recent run of Talking
Heads but here she was overly insistent and one-note and lacked
the shading that she has brought to previous roles.
This play lives or dies by its two central actors though and this is
where things get truly complex. I was impressed by the technical skills
of both Paul Hannon and Hansel Tan (who was also, interestingly enough,
in the 2002 student production). They had clearly studied their roles
thoroughly and they brought their characters to life most admirably
with attention to details like little gestures and mannerisms. Hannon,
admittedly unbelievable as a nineteen-year-old, also displayed a powerful
charisma onstage while Tan, in his first production outside of youth
and school theatre, showed a lot of potential and intelligence as an
actor. However, what the two actors lacked - and this was unfortunately
fundamental to the success of the production - was a chemistry that
made you abhor the horrific actions of the young men while still believing
in them and their relationship and wanting them to be acquitted. Unless
the audience is drawn to emotionally invest in the characters, the play
becomes little more than an exercise of reason. Sadly, save the little
asides during the courtroom scenes when the two boys would whisper to
one another and nudge each other conspiratorially, the two men, supposedly
so crazy in love, moved mostly as if entirely on cue and there was an
awkward stiffness and clockwork motion in their interactions. It would
have been nice if they had relaxed a little more into their characters
and also each other.
Still, even if I found the production as a whole less than inspiring,
it remained a solid presentation of a script that was still reasonably
moving at the end and provoked me into thinking deeply about human nature.
What drives someone to kill another human being? Can murder ever be
rationalised? - even if it is the murder of an insect or animal, or
in retaliation for the murder of another or, perhaps more topically,
even in the context of war. Why are some murders sanctioned but others
not and do these distinctions made by society really change the nature
of murder so it can somehow sometimes be tolerated or accepted? |
"Even if I found the production as a whole less than inspiring,
it remained a solid presentation of a script that was still reasonably
moving at the end and provoked me into thinking deeply about human nature"
Credits
Director: Daniel Toyne
Stage Manager: Dennis Oh
Lighting Design: Allan Davidson
Costumes: Hilary Richardson
Sound: Lily McConnell
Set Construction: David Hickman, Guy Robbins
Cast: Hansel Tan, Paul Hannon, Phil McConnell, Maureen
McConnell, Blair Earl, Steve Armstrong, Chris Chua and Emmanuelle Le
Bris
|
