"Wicked" twice over

Well, I guess I've told quite a few friends that my friend and I didn't really enjoy Wicked : The Musical the first time I watched it (in London). Not that it was a bad production as everything was executed perfectly, singing great, etc. But somehow the songs/music didn't stick (I'll get to that later) and well, that time, I felt it very "teenage" or "high school musical" style then, which is in a way true, with the high school popularity phenomenon and meanness as such. I don't know, because I expected to like it then especially since I liked the story of Wizard of Oz (Judy Garland version).

On a side note, I was educated by my brother long ago that Wizard of Oz was actually a reference to the American dream - Dorothy represented the American dream, the Tin Man the industrious man, the Scarecrow the farmers, and the Lion, I can't remember. The Wizard also was representative of something (also can't remember), probably the government or something.

Anyway, with the coming of Wicked to Singapore, under peer influence (it's always fun to go in a group), I decided to give it another go to somehow "redeem" it since quite a few people did enjoy it. I thought, maybe I was jet-lagged then as I caught the show the first day I arrived in London and our seats weren't great. Or maybe my expectations were too high. I can't really pinpoint why.

So how was this?

Of course, I can't help but want to compare with the London show even though I could barely remember that. I found myself able to 'feel' a little more about the story and relationships; being able to feel some anger about who's the more wicked and also let myself be a little moved by the relationships. And I could see the humour in the show (I don't remember that aspect the first time), even though because it's not my first time watching the show, it felt a bit stating the obvious (it's just me lah). Well, I would say on the whole, it seemed like a better experience than before, although I still felt there's something missing in it for me. Why? What? The first act still seemed a bit long to me though.

As for the cast, Jemma Rix (as Elphaba) was of course the highlight with her unwavering and soaring vocals. The cast here somehow gave me a sense of being more "matured" to me. Haha! don't know why. Maybe it's Suzie Mathers as Glinda. I recall the one in London was more "girly" or "bimbotic" and probably projected the more "full of herself" character of Glinda. But this Glinda was less "girly" in that sense. In addition, I somehow felt London's execution of the choreography moves were more precise. But I could have remembered wrongly.

Now, on to the music. Sitting back on my second viewing, I could pay more attention to the music and songs. Well, the music ain't your usual "sticky" stuff, so it still didn't leave that much of an impression on me, except maybe for snippets or parts of songs. But it did struck me that they weren't easy songs to sing because of that and the lyrics were quite smart.

I guess one of the drawbacks I had of catching the show a second time was that I knew the whole story, so the little references that would "surprise" someone and make you go "oh...so that's..." (if you're familiar with Wizard of Oz) didn't garner the same response from me as the general audience. Which was a pity as I guess it would have made it more fun. Sorry, but I couldn't help but smile when Elphaba supposedly "melted" because I knew she didn't die. Actually, I think I kinda knew that too when I watched it the first time round. I wonder why? Maybe because she could stand in the rain earlier on?  It would have made a difference too even if I knew the story if I had enjoyed it the first time around. Too bad.

The National 'Live' in Singapore, 6 November 2011

I am so high now after the concert that I just needed to post this, before I forget about it. Ok, not till fever high but the natural buzz after a concert.

After the long wait since last year since the announcement they were coming for Mosaic Fest this year (which got postponed till tonight), I don't regret the $111 I paid (I felt that no point saving $20 that will only get me a seat upstairs behind) for my stall ticket in row Q, seat 15 to watch The National. The close-to-2-hours-long concert was awesome. (I think could take photos lah, since everyone was taking and no one stopped us) We were their 1st stop in Asia. :)

You know they are huge when it's a sell-out at Esplanade Theatre (all tiers), and by the queue before (and after) the concert trying to purchase their merchandise (t-shirts, selected CDs and limited edition poster). And there were obviously people who flew in to watch them. I wasn't a hardcore fan, but given 15 minutes to the show, I decided to start queuing too, but the queue hardly moved (inefficiency?) and with less than 10 minutes left, I decided against queuing and went to take my seat inside. And thankfully there didn't seem to be an autograph session (that I knew of) after the concert, or else I'll be very "dui". The moment I was in the venue, I couldn't help but feel the excitement and anticipation of the concert. Maybe it's contagious! And as I said I'm not a hardcore fan. So far, I've only bought their albums digitally. What I love about The National is the great sound, lyrics and of course, the swoon-worthy baritone deep rich voice of their frontman, Matt Berninger.

They sang many familiar songs, mainly from their 2 newer albums High Violet and Boxer (not counting The Virginia EP). My fave album is Boxer, but High Violet is slowly growing on me. I won't say I knew all the songs they sang, but they sang some of my faves like "The Apartment Story", "Bloodbuzz Ohio", "Sorrow", "Conversation 16", and of course "Fake Empire", which as I expected, closed the main segment. Other songs included (if I got them right) "Afraid of Everyone", "Squalor Victoria", "Mistaken for Strangers", "Cardinal Song", "Anyone's Ghost" and "Runaway", among others.
And how can have no encore? With the audience chanting "we want more", they came back on and opened the encore segment with the rather apt "Lucky You" (another song I liked) from their Sad Songs for Dirty Lovers album that had lyrics like "you want me, there's nothing you can do". Ha!

The climax of the whole show came when Matt, in the midst of "Terrible Love" (I think that was the song he was singing at that point) came down the stage stepping on the seat tops (balancing as he came) and striding down the stalls all the way down to the last row!

 

And wow! I was just next to him as he strode past me and came down sitting in the row behind for a brief moment before heading back to stage (the "normal" way). That was totally cool! Woah, didn't know Esplanade would actually allow something like that. The angmoh guy next to me actually congratulated me on having this opportunity, probably thinking I was a huge fan. Too bad my photo turned out blurry coz he was moving too much. :( But just to show how close I was (note: no zoom):

They closed the concert with an unplugged version of "Vanderlyle Crybaby Geeks".

张学友1/2世纪演唱会 (Jacky Cheung 1/2 Century Tour)

Yup, he's fifty and my, he doesn't look it!

It must be like 10 years since I last watched Jacky Cheung's concert. It's the first time his concert has been extended to 5 nights (usually it's 3) and a sell-out for all at that! I didn't go for the last couple of times, but this concert had a different format from the one I've been before.

The 1st hour of the concert saw a little musical-style performance where he sang and acted out songs with a storyline. A special video was produced for this with Shu Qi as the lead actress and him as the leading man, which was played while he performed on stage, singing and dancing, acting out the part on stage. Of course the girl on stage isn't Shu Qi lah. One of his dancers. It's a simple love story that goes like this: There is this guy who is like a playboy, a ladies' man. But one day, he meets a woman (SQ) and falls for her. He woos her and they get married. Things were very rosy initially, but somehow they grew distant and they fight. They reminisces (separately) about happy times together, visiting places where they used to go. But in the end, they reconcile.

This was followed by the "rock" segment, a song in tribute to Lydia Sum, then some of his fave dancing songs. He even joked that now that he's fifty, he should dance while he still can. Of course, after all that dancing, I believe he needed a breather and the concert moved into the "jazz" segment where he sang some songs from his latest jazz album Private Corner while seated with a pianist. He even showed a short animated film about his life story. Then of course there were his love ballads. There wasn't really an official encore segment but he knew what songs to sing that drew the applause. You could tell it was a more mature crowd with not so many screaming fans (as compared to the current pop stars), but there were still the light sticks swinging. We all grew up with his songs.

The light/laser show was very nice along with the stage contraptions with its moving lights and platforms. I couldn't see, but he said it was a stage made of glass. And his singing! He's not called 歌神 for nothing. His voice is still as good and clear, and always in control with a good range. Even his "screaming" (mainly the rock songs) sounded good. He fully demonstrated his versatility in singing any genre of songs, not to mention his sense of humour. I didn't know all the songs though, as I stopped following his songs for some time, but there were still some of the familiar favourites like 《一路上有你》，《李香兰》， 《心如刀割》， 《吻别》，etc.

The concert lasted at least 3 hours, ending past 11pm going on midnight.

Pas Perdus

"Calm...Calm...Calm" announced the PA system and so 4 people seemingly captive (in an asylum?) brings you to a place of wooden walls of infinite possibilities and amazing skill of juggling, balancing, music, precision...one could not keep his/her eyes off the "tricks" they were doing.

Translated from French as "Not Lost" (from an online translator), Pas Perdus is Les Argonautes' latest creation.

The amazing thing was that they could juggle most anything cuboid blocks, balls, etc. And imagine manipulating balls, stilts, wooden wall blocks that balances on only 1 corner. They even played pool using themselves. They had to be really be precise and have a good feel of the materials as well as good calculations of how to balance humans as well as huge objects. There was one part when 1 of them "climbed" to balance his whole body on stilts. This was very dangerous because any wrong move and he'll fall and hurt himself, or even be poked by the stilts. And they are multi-talented. They could play various instruments, like the violin, saxophone, trumpet and drums. And the way they were played, like hitting the drum from 2-3 metres away. etc. And if you've heard of piano four-hands, well, here you have violin four-hands! It's the 1st time I'm seeing something like that. Having learnt the violin when I was small, this left 1 of the deepest impressions for me during the show. Amazing. It's a bit difficult to describe everything. You've got to see it to know what I'm talking about.

(Pas Perdus was one of the programme curated by Esplanade for 'Flipside 2011', in conjunction with the Singapore Arts Festival.)

Dick Lee's "The Adventures of the Mad Chinaman"

When I first got wind of this (from a poster at Esplanade), I mistakenly thought it was going to be a musical. But on a more careful reading of the synopsis, realised it wasn't. I wasn't sure how it would turn out actually. Was it his greatest hits concert? I thought so at first, but it was not really that. Instead, it was like a biographical performance by Dick Lee. And so began the tale of one of our most acclaimed pop composers.

Set up as a living room, we are invited into his world. A world of his influences and inspiration. Dick Lee shared about how he got involved in music that led to a lifetime of composing music, his family, the musicians that inspired him, people who helped him, etc...basically, it's something straight out from his book of the same name "The Adventures of the Mad Chinaman". As he jokingly puts it, "I know some of you can't read, so that's why I'm putting up this show" (well, something like that). It's almost like the talk he gave at the library@esplanade some time ago, but a bit more complete and this time, with him playing the piano and singing his songs. Even though it was almost like a repeat of what I heard before, it was still engaging as Dick has his own sense of humour and charisma to hold your attention. However, I felt he did not play enough songs! I would liked to have watched him perform more of his songs.

Don't expect the pop songs we're all so familiar with that he wrote for others, but really, his personal songs from his own albums, and also from his musicals. They were good songs with stories behind them. As the story was in chronological order, you can quite distinctly hear how his music changed as he moved through the years and the influences he had like Elton John, Joni Mitchell, etc.A sad point of the programme came when he shared about the death of his sister, which I believed moved many, including myself. When he finally came to terms with her death, he wrote "No Goodbyes" which can be found in his 1993 Life Story album.
On a lighter note, you thought you had heard it all but even though the material has been used (and over-used) a dozen times, he still managed to make a dig at politics in fresh new way in the effortless sense as if it were not too intentional (but of course it was).

On an extra note, although I've heard "Life Story" a number of times, it was not until this show that I can't help but feel that "Home" actually bore some similarities to it. Was it just my perception?

A Juggler's Tale

I hadn't intended to write anything on this production as I really didn't know how to review it. But it was so badly done that I had to make a record of it here (only here). I rarely walk away from a production in the middle even if it wasn't great, so you know it must be quite bad when I was glad there was an intermission for me to escape. Very very disappointed. It was one of the worst productions I've caught this year (thus far). How did this get into the programme of Esplanade's "The Studios" series this year?

Written by Michael Ende, the author of The Neverending Story, I was expecting somthing better and 'fantasy-like' out of A Juggler's Tale. The synopsis was also pretty promising.

Synopsis:

A small circus is facing bankruptcy but a renowned chemical company offers the performers a lifeline – endorse their products and kick-start a big advertising campaign, performing all over the country.  One condition:  the mentally handicapped girl, Eli, adopted by the circus, must be put in a home.  Big dilemma:  Eli is sick from birth due to a historic environmental disaster caused by the same chemical company.

Silence.  Cold winter night. Eli asks circus clown Jojo to tell a story.  Boom! 

All the circus performers are whirled into a Tomorrow Land of enchanting make-belief and imagined alter-egos where good is pitted fervently against evil.

The JUGGLING begins….love, hate, idealism, pragmatism, anarchy, authority, freedom, control, dreamscape, reality, momentary, never-ending.

This unique Singaporean staging of The Juggler’s Tale (first time in Asia), marries creative energies from seven nationalities in the whimsical world of the celebrated German playwright, Michael Ende.  With award-winning Singaporean designers onboard, this production promises to be a spell-binding theatrical experience to charm all audiences, young and old, surpassing cultural and linguistic differences.

Join us in this whirlwind of human relationships, corporate brainwashing and individual core values.  Be touched by a simple yet complex tale of universal love that transcends all obstacles.

But unfortunately, the synopsis was better than what was performed. I don't know if they wanted to do something like "The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus", but I could catch no ball on where it was all going, or if it was going anywhere. It's not about understanding the story, as I'm ok with abstract stuff, but it was simply, badly done. The acting was bad, the singing was bad, everything seemed very unprofessional, and half the time, I couldn't really catch what was said, especially by the Japanese guy. I don't have anything against him, but the attempts at translating this multilingual production was half-hearted and there were no surtitles. Yes, it was creative enough to translate by responding to what was said (kind of like reiteration, e.g. "no, I'm sure he has gone to negotiate for us..."), but they were inconsistent. A big portion was not translated and looking at the audience who were of mixed races, it was detrimental, especially the portion when the princess in the fantasy world spoke and sung in Mandarin, with occasional lines of English, that was quite crucial in guiding the story. I didn't have a problem understanding, but I can't say so for the non-Chinese in the audience. They could have projected a translation in some way (maybe on the ceiling or ground or empty walls?), which would have been better...maybe costs was an issue.
Talking about singing, the "princess" was out of tune and others, well, when you're told that they had "sweet voices", you expect "sweet voices"...it just didn't match. They should have forgotten about the singing.

Anyway, let me start from the beginning. Entering the venue,the props and sets were actually quite impressive for the Theatre Studio, but that was all I could say that was redeeming of the show. The moment the play started, I could see it wasn't very promising. My hopes were a little raised when it transited into the fantasy land with the "princess" wheeled out on a nicely decorated platform on scaffolding (almost magical). I thought "maybe the starting wasn't so good as they put more effort into this part; and maybe they're using it as a contrast". But my hopes were dashed the moment they spoke. It was almost like you were rudely woken up from a dream. I was honestly hoping it would get better along the way, but it didn't pick up. They tried to be funny, but failed. I think if they had gone the speechless way, it might have been better, but then again, that would require good, expressive actors. Or at least some flashing of narratives. And the context was quite apt to become a musical, but then again, you'd need good singers.

It could have been so much more if done properly. It could have been magical, especially with an intended circus setting. There were just too many ways that this could have turned out to be better. You see, gestures and speech in fantasy are different and honestly, in this scenario, it had to be lighter, almost like a dance. I believe they would have benefited from a choreographer. They failed to make the audience believe they were in a fantasy world or even a circus, not to mention in a story being told. And underlying story morals weren't clear or strong.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
On an extra note, judging from what I've seen and heard, the synopses for this season were truly very well-written in the sense that they enticed you to watch, but were mostly misleading. I think DNR might have been one of the better plays, except that the synopsis was inaccurate, which kind of spoiled it.

Russian Night with Midori

I've always loved Russian classical music. I love its exuberance...so soulful, passionate and expressive.

And it was an all Russian programme (except the encore) on 23 April, with works by Rimsky-Korsakov, Tchaikovsky and Rachmaninov. This was my first time sitting in the Gallery (area behind the orchestra) as the other seats were already sold out by the time I bought my tickets. I could bask in the illusion that I was part of the orchestra, and a second violinist at that. Haha! Actually, I was more concerned with how well I will be able to receive the sound being seated as such.

As it was also a Goh Keng Swee Memorial Concert, there was a special addition (Rachmaninov's Vocalise) to the original programme to dedicate the concert to Dr. Goh, who was instrumental to the formation of the SSO as the founder. It's been almost a year since he passed on and with that, the concert was opened.

Being Easter weekend, it was not a surprise that the Russian Easter Festival Overture was chosen. These two pieces were a fine lead-up to the feature of the day, Midori's rendition of Tchaikovsky's Violin Concerto in D major. I've heard a lot about Midori and was very expectant of what I would hear that night. And she did not disappoint.

Known for its technical demands, Midori tackled the concerto with great proficiency. Although I could only see her back view from where I was, one can't miss the precision and great control. Every note played had their own power in them and even the soft notes were clear and sharp, yet not overpowering. I literally held my breath whenever she was tackling such notes for fear of breaking the moment (ok, I might be exaggerating). On top of that, she plays with such feeling that it rings in our hearts. I especially loved the soulful second movement Canzonetta (Andante). Only thing was that I wished I could have seen her expression and a clearer view of her playing, and of course, being at the back, some of the sound projection would have been lost.
The encore, if I heard what she said correctly, was the Prelude (and Fugue?) to Sonata No. 1 in G minor by Johann Sebastian Bach (I'm very bad at recognising pieces). Nice.

autograph signing during intermission

The second half of the concert heard the SSO playing Rachmaninov's Symphony No. 3 in A minor. After the long earlier half (at least an hour), I felt it was a rather long piece for me that night. But I could hear the conflict between Rachmaninov's nostalgia and bravado, as the programme notes suggested, as each theme was explored by the SSO consistently through the 3 movements. I liked the ending where "...in the end it is the mood of bravado which brings the Symphony to its exciting if slightly ambiguous conclusion".

Madoff: The Musical (staged reading)

I didn't really have any high expectations especially after last week. However, this turned out not too bad for someone's first full-length musical, the someone being Kate Ingber, who wrote both the book and the music. That's commendable.

Having learnt some "tips" on structure and style of musicals from J, I tried to assess the musical as such. But firstly, I need to say that The Chamber, though a nice place didn't serve as well in this instance. It could well be the sound system, but I had a bit of difficulty catching what was said and sung as the mics or maybe the hard walls or high ceilings caused the speech to sound muffled (echo?). And maybe also I was affected by the singing, which was a bit diverse in mix and quality, but keeping in mind that this is just a staged reading, I think it's not a big problem.

Even though the musical was called "Madoff", the protagonist here isn't Madoff, but Henry, whose a corporate spy; the story of Madoff told from Henry's point of view.
Generally, there was a sound flow and structure of the story, that gave it a sense of completeness. Well, the story was predictable as it went along (even cliche at some points), but hey, nothing's new in theatre. The songs also followed a more or less consistent theme/style, which helped in keeping the audience focused. I believe the reprise of songs/tunes are quite crucial in making a musical more memorable and in reminding the audience of certain aspects of the show. Well, there was one, at least, which was the repeated chorus of "Waking Up in Wall Street" by the readers. I think I'm beginning to understand how the style of music in a musical affect the audience's engagement level. Used to take it for granted. Besides that, as J said, a change of settings/locations within the story is important in a musical, which there was (as contrary to a play which can work in a confined setting). To add on, I think that a musical should also transcend time, i.e. events should occur over a period of time. These were 2 things Casino didn't have. There was also an attempt to introduce each main character, which is important, but I think a little more character development would be nice. But then again, there seems to be quite a few characters involved, so it might be difficult as it will cause the musical to overrun.

As opposed to J, I preferred the 2nd half of the musical. I think it's because they managed to sustain a "high" since this was supposed to be the "action" part of the musical, and I kinda preferred the songs in the 2nd Act, like when the 2 couples Henry and Jane, Bernie and Ruth, sang their love song. The readers/singers also seemed to be more "warmed up". I felt there was more continuity in this act than Act 1, which I felt seemed a bit "choppy" in the sense that I kept feeling each sequence was a little short before I could get myself into it. Maybe I'm slow lah. But I remind myself that it's just a reading, so maybe that's why.

Well, I guess I can conclude this was better than Casino. Will this be suitable to be fully staged? I don't know, but who knows what this might lead to?

Casino: The Musical (staged reading)

If anyone has heard of Musical Theatre Limited (MTL), they might have heard of the incubation programme they have to aid new writers in creating their own musicals.Usually, there will be a performance of some sort of the musical that comes out of the programme. Well, Casino was one of those, written by Richard Lord, with music composed by Kenneth Lyen. In this case, it was a staged reading.

I admit that it couldn't engage me beyond a certain point. Why? I realised the reason that the musical felt "disorganised". The structure wasn't very clear and the main gist/goal/focus seem to get lost or shifted along the way. In the beginning, it seemed it was set out to be a bet between two people on whether luck or technique prevailed in gambling, by which they had to find a casino "virgin" to test out. However, this was not explored or developed beyond that first mention, of which was totally forgotten until it was decidedly brought up in Act 2, like an afterthought. It would have been more interesting if there were more signs of the competition between the 2. The novice casino-goer, which turned out to be the protagonist didn't come out strong enough. Or maybe due to the context, we couldn't empathise with him. There wasn't any particular highs or lows to bring us into the musical either, just a story that goes on, or any songs that stood out with the changing themes. Not that the songs weren't any good, but they felt a bit disjointed, with little (musical) links between them, if you get what I mean. I guess the absence of any distinct conflicts (which would contribute to the highs & lows) made it more a play with songs. Usually, in musicals, the situation would call for a song, where the character can only express him/herself through singing. Of course, we don't expect every song in a musical to be so, but it usually comes with some emotional circumstance or occasion, whether happy, sad, angry, etc.

Well, to give credit, the book and lyrics were rather creative and clever, for it isn't easy coming out with witty words in the context. Unfortunately, I felt the humour a little contrived, such that it fell short in bringing on laughs (in my case). Maybe Richard was trying too hard to be smart with the words. He's good at that, but somehow, it didn't come through in the musical. You could tell he gave a lot of effort in working the words but it didn't work out in the context, maybe. Moreover, I felt the earthquake reference was slightly in bad taste. Well, maybe it might have felt different in a play setting.

I felt it might have had a good premise (the bet) to start with, which in my own interpretation, would be good to play up. Whatever their intent, I felt more emphasis could have been made on showing the irony that as the 2 tried to manipulate the protagonist with their "luck" and "technique" presumptions, there are greater forces beyond them that is "playing" them. If that was the moral or intention of the musical, then it should have developed that way, at least in my own personal opinion. But to each his own. Maybe they were going another direction which I couldn't see.

Well, at least I learnt that there should be some sort of structure, focus and a consistent theme of songs in a musical.

Murder in San Jose 《圣荷西谋杀案》

A simply-titled murder story, but a more than mystery sequence of events. Just reading the word "murder" piqued my interest (a genre I like) even as I read that it has been performed to rave reviews in Hong Kong. Murder in San Jose was specially commissioned for the 2009-2011 Hong Kong Arts Festivals, and counting this run in Singapore, it has been staged more than 30 times. Furthermore, the script had won "Best Script Award" at the Hong Kong Drama Awards.

Initially, I was afraid I wouldn't be able to follow the show well since it was in Cantonese, even though it has English and Chinese surtitles (my Cantonese not very good lah). But it turned out manageable (like watching Cantonese drama), although I did feel tempted to read the surtitles from time to time.

This isn't a whodunnit mystery. Rather, it has been categorised as a psychological thriller, although it didn't feel that way till the end. As it is, it was a sequence of events from what seemed like a marriage-on-rocks drama that led to a more sinister truth. Someone was murdered in the ending...but it wasn't as simple as that.

In an interesting prelude, characters went about their daily routines before the official curtains up while the audience were still entering (well, the curtains were already up). It was apparent that the man was just doing everything on his own, even having dinner. So we were prepped for the scenes to follow even as that scene faded out with the start of Act 1 proper.

Set in an isolated suburb in San Jose, Ling (Alice Lau/刘雅丽) had been staying there with her husband, Tang (Tang Wai-kit/邓伟杰) for some years now and expecting their first child. Her childhood friend, Sammi (Kearen Pang/彭秀慧) comes for a visit. Things ain't so pretty as Sammi observes, with Ling being her controlling self full of rules and Tang, the frustrated husband who's dominated by Ling even as he tries to be an online entrepreneur. Sammi is unwittingly embroiled in the struggle between the couple which soon spirals into a showdown as a result of Ling's sabotage on a possible business deal for Tang. Then it comes out. The murder. Tang is not really Tang, but a bartender Ling met. They tricked the real Tang into moving to this secluded spot and conspired to kill him, and the bartender took the identity of Tang. The fake "Tang" had to however not try to leave the country or he might be discovered. However, "Tang" can't stand Ling anymore. He asks Sammi to kill Ling as it'll either be her or Ling. If Ling dies, Sammi can take her place. Sammi is petrified, should she choose between her own survival or live as someone else? The scene blacks out as the pregnant Ling sits on a chair, with Sammi raising a baseball bat. So who died?
At the end, Sammi is not seen again, and Ling and "Tang" seem to return to their couple life.

Hope I managed to describe the twist effectively. When the truth came to light, it made me realise how some of the things said earlier (even the funny bits) took on a double meaning now. The script was well-written and the actors played their parts well. Even though there was no intermission, the plot was fully engaging, and the 2 hours didn't feel long at all. It kept us moving along with the story perpetually, "driving" us through it all.

The only question I had was how come it was Ling and "Tang" (still don't know his real identity) who remained in the end? What happened to Sammi? If I assume she's dead, how did she die? She was the one holding the bat. Did "Tang" change his mind? Did Sammi back out? Was she really dead? Then how come the prelude had a figure that might be her (or not?).
Maybe as my friend said, it was better Sammi died. I think she would be too soft-hearted to live with killing the pregnant Ling.

Looks like I might need to review the script to see if I can shed any light on this, which fortunately, has been published (in Chinese & English) and was being sold at the venue. Maybe it'll serve as good reference in future. :)

H is for Hantu

H is for Hantu, to hunt you and to haunt you...and G is for Ghosts! (ok, that was pretty lame. Ha!)

Anyway, in case you didn't know, "hantu" is the malay word for "ghost". Not unfamiliar to the supernatural and comedy, Jonathan Lim marries these 2 in his latest (re-run) of H is for Hantu.

The story tells of how a kampung is set to be phased out by HDB to build more flats. However, unbeknownst to HDB, there are actually 2 kampungs (1 for the hantus, which was essentially a piece of forest behind the "living" kampung). Sazali, a boy who wants to preserve the kampung, tries to rally the kampung folks to support him, but to no avail so he turns to his hantu friends (yes, he sees dead people) who tries to convince the HDB officer (Angie) handling the relocation otherwise. However, they discover she's being haunted by a child ghost and he wants to help her (in the hope of her helping them). It turns out she used to live in the kampung and the child ghost was her best friend who's been using her to search for something they buried together. Angie had also been fighting for good packages for the kampung folks as the HDB project must still go own. However, eventually, they do get to preserve the forest part where the hantus lived with the help of environmentalists (through Angie's help). So all's well that ends well.

Besides the less than perfect recorded music (it sounded a bit noisy with static and some glitches) and the rather mixed genre of songs which was a bit distracting, I found it enjoyable, though a tad long. Maybe because I expected a 90-minute musical (from sistic's info) but it turned out to be 2 hours (excluding the delay and intermission). No particular song really stood out, but I probably took more notice of the pontianak's theme since it's totally based on what is known of it, like the parts with "hitting the nail on the head", "frangipani fragrance", etc. Think Jo Tan did well in that role as a less than scary pontianak, Cik Pon.

In the beginning, when Sazali started telling stories, I thought, hmm...is this going to be just storytelling? But it wasn't, although there were still narratives along the way. The references were funny in a "natural" way and most didn't turn out corny such that they didn't work (as opposed to another musical I watched recently...sorry, couldn't help but compare). I think the wayang kulit performance was rather well done for something like this and they managed to inject Singapore references into it with humour. It gave a contrast of what we used to value and the modern lifestyle. The warm, traditional "storytelling" that drew people, in the cold face of technology (multimedia presentation?). The puppets were pretty impressive too, especially with the massive Hantu Galah (tall ghost).

And what's a show about ghosts without a scary moment? Maybe the "hantus" portrayed from the beginning were on the comical side and the story was just getting "comfortable". But the turn of events (I felt this was the turning point or climax) happened shortly before the interval when Angie suddenly appeared like a zombie with a pale small puppet sitting on her shoulder (supposedly the ghost of a little girl). That was super CREEPY! The design of the puppet was such: white blank face, eyes with dark rings (making it look hollow) and dressed in a white dress. Creepy it really was, that it didn't send a chill down my spine, but chilled my heart instead, so much so that I nearly grabbed J's arm (yup, you might have noticed a slight cringe in your direction). It took some minutes for my heart to get back into the "light-heartedness" of the show again. I rarely feel this kind of chill you know (considering I do watch horror shows), so I must say it was pretty successful in producing the "tension" and made me wonder about what's going to happen in the later part of the show (but after the shock, I did consider a few scenarios that might have been expected). It kind of raised my rating of the show a little. Good thing I didn't have nightmares! Fortunately, the doll used later was less frightening. I think it was the suddenness of the appearance that spooked me. But as agreed with J, it did shift the initial focus of saving the kampung away, even though the ending brought it back again. But I guess it was intended, to create that "twist" to the story.

I would say it ended off in a happy mood, as a musical comedy would, with a medley of songs sung in the show.

Considering the factors, think I will give it a 3.5 out 5.

Mosaic Music Festival 2011

Mosaic Fest 2011 ended last night and this year, I didn't really catch as many shows as before.

15 Mar: The National (cancelled)
Alas, my most anticipated show for this year was unexpectedly cancelled. But it was for good reason. In the wake of Japan's earthquake, they decided to cancel/postpone their Asian tour, which included Japan. My heart goes out to the victims and country. God bless the nation and may it be restored to peace soon.

16 Mar: Tze N the Looking Glass - Stories from Wonderland
My friend Tze, and his Looking Glass ensemble were performing at the HTC Living Room (@Concourse) this year, so to show my support I went there with a friend. She also agreed that he was good. Theirs was a fusion mix of music with the piano, erhu, Indian violin, and saxophone. I can't say I'm able to appreciate fusion music that well, but I enjoyed the piano solos and interestingly, the erhu blended quite well. I think the sound system and set up could have been much improved. Certain instruments were too loud at points and drowned out the others. Also, the mic on the violin fell off...twice! Causing disruption to the music. But the show went on, with the rest playing, while the tech guy tried to fix the mic problem.

Of course, I bought their debut album Stories from Wonderland to support my friend, which is sold (only) at The Esplanade Shop.

As I said a couple of times, I still prefer his solos and later that evening, I asked him if he will release his own album. He said he was thinking about it. Well, hope he does. Anyway, the album has 2 of his solos "Prelude to Fly With Me" and "Stories from Wonderland".

20 March: Ed Harcourt

 

One man and seven mics (minus 1 for the piano); plus 1 piano, 2 guitars (electric & acoustic), 1 drum. With this set-up, you can expect something out of the ordinary. I asked my friend "Is he going to play all that himself?". And so he did. Wow!

Opening with Lustre, a song inspired by the birth of his daughter, Ed surrounded the Recital Studio with his music. He used 2 mics for different effects. Actually, he had 3 mics to sing into at the piano, each for different effects, used at different points in the concert. He was really good at the piano, but not restricted to that, he played the guitars too for songs like Church of No Religion, Born in the 70s, etc.
It turned awkward at one point, early on, with a technical glitch in the amp and he did an unplugged version of The Last Cigarette as he moved among the audience, while the tech guy came to fix the problem. Other problems came along as he took some time to tune his guitars, but all worked out eventually.

Things really upped when he fascinated us (me at least) with a live mix where he had some device to record and loop what he played, while he added on parts and instruments. I've never seen something like this before. His live performance was different from his recordings, the way he mixed the songs and played them live. His spasms of humour also livened up the crowd, making us howl like wolves for Heart of a Wolf, etc. attributing the performance to "an equal balance of chaos and professionalism".

I don't know how I would describe his music, alternative probably, with some electronica? rock? at some points, I could even hear some country in him, with his "grunge" voice. As my friend puts it, he's "at once brooding country gentleman, bad boy sheriff, earnest scientist".

What I really liked about his songs is the way he writes his lyrics. There's something about them that makes them unique. His music kind of grows on you.
He ended with a four-song encore, answering requests from the audience, and ended with Haywired.

Oh ya, I'm left "haywired" in a mind loop.

Closer by Pangdemonium! Productions

I haven't watched the movie so I can safely say I have an "unbiased" view of the production, although my emotional and analytical faculties might have been impaired by the flu I was having.

The whole plot revolves around truth, how it can hurt and alienate, rather than bring one closer to another. The 4 characters (Larry, Anna, Dan and Alice) intertwine in a series of love and lust affairs and can I say, sometimes of sexual politics? They make up, break up, then make up and break up again. How truth can be used as a weapon of "destruction" in the case of love. As the notes of the programme puts it, "while lies and deception cause damage, the truth, it seems, can make that damage irreparable...truth does not bring any of the characters closer." Is love a matter of choice?

I didn't feel that it was draggy (even though it was longer than I expected), and was giving it concentration throughout, which was a good thing. However, I didn't find it as engaging as I thought it should have been. To give credit, each actor/actress played their parts perfectly well, but when they crossed paths, there was something lacking that didn't bring out the intensity between characters as I would have imagined the play to be. A lack of chemistry maybe? The show didn't really reach a climatic point...it seemed to be getting there at points, but then didn't. As my friend puts it, it came out a little "flat".
I wasn't getting any closer to the core of the plot or the character-to-character relationship struggles...or maybe it was meant to be so? The "distant" feel?

However, I must say that strangely, the final scene gave me a sense of "relief" (not because it was ending lah). At that point, the truth is as truth is, all things released and laid bare. Each character had moved on with their own lives and Alice's real identity was revealed. No more tension, politics, struggles, etc. Just plain clarity.

On another note, I felt that the only one who could see through or acknowledge the facades of life was Alice (or Jane). She says some of the most bare truths of life like when at Anna's exhibition:

"It's a lie. It's a bunch of sad strangers photographed beautifully, and all the glittering assholes who appreciate art say it's beautiful 'cause that's what they want to see. But the people in the photos are sad, and alone, but the pictures make the world seem beautiful. So the exhibition's reassuring, which makes it a lie, and everyone loves a big fat lie."

I think I should go watch the movie since I've heard good reviews about it.

命运建筑师之远大前程 (Grand Expectations) - English review

(For the benefit of those who can't read Chinese, have done the review in English as well) 

Director: Edward Lam
Playwright/Creative Director: Sylvia Chang
Venue: Esplanade Theatre
Run: 5 & 6 Feb 2011 (part of Huayi Festival 2011)

Synopsis:
Little Devil (David Wang) and Baby (Lee Sinjie) are a pair of actors who specialise in posing as the perfect couple to help their clients in marketing their products. Once lovers, they have a love-hate relationship. Baby wishes to find her own happiness while Little Devil dreams of striking it rich. During one of their stints at a property launch, they meet Moses, the architect.

Moses (Tony Yang) is inspired and inexplicably attracted to Baby, the way she looks pregnant and her uninhibited way of expressing herself, her opinions of home decor, etc. He hires her to be his inspiration for a new project, to play a pregnant "happy wife at home" where she would stay at his house. However, as much as Baby wishes the situation to be real, Moses neglects her whenever he is inspired to work on his design. She is lonely and unhappy, unlike the role she plays. In a turn of events, she discovers she has a hereditary eye disease that slowly renders her blind. She decides to leave Moses once she serves her purpose and also have a last meal with Little Devil. Both Moses and Little Devil finally realise their real feelings for her when she disappears from their lives.

On another note, while seeking treatment for her eyes, Baby meets a doctor (Wang Zhan) who was coincidentally at that fateful launch, and who was also attracted to her then, only that she didn't notice him then. Unfortunately, now she can't really see him clearly, but they eventually get married and she has finally found her real happiness, using her heart to see.
_________
First things first, I found the play a tad long. It was 3 hours long. Yes, that's a long time, but Design for Living was of about the same length and it didn't feel that long. If I were to compare the two, I enjoyed Design for Living more. Nevertheless, the story picked up in the last half hour, which redeemed it in that aspect.

One interesting style was when I wondered why the playwright revealed the outcome in the beginning (1st scene), i.e. of who she chooses in the end. Eventually, I realised what it meant when during a narrative in the beginning, Baby said that "if I knew this day would come, I would have looked at you more carefully". Because she became blind.
_________

Thoughts

1）Two men who don't understand what a woman's happiness really is.
Little Devil thought that being rich will bring a woman happiness, so he keeps chasing after the "big money", wanting to be his own boss without being practical first. I believe he wanted to provide for Baby, but she probably wanted a more stable relationship.
Moses thought he could 'build' happiness by creating a house that a woman wants. But an empty house is not a home; a perfect house on the outside but emptiness inside is fruitless. A woman needs something real and speaks of a future, to build a home together.

2）Maybe I'm reading too much into things, but was the naming of the character "Baby" on purpose? An overuse of the word that it has become too cliche or meaningless? No longer precious. (Actually, a better translation of the "宝贝" is "Precious").

3）Baby was always living in a world of "fake" happiness, something short-lived and temporary, that only exists in role-play. So what the eyes see physically isn't real, only what we see in our hearts is.

4）Sometimes, you can't see what you see, you can't hear what you speak; you don't see what you should have seen and miss it; you speak what you do not mean and don't know what you say.

命运建筑师之远大前程 (Grand Expectations) - 中文评介

 “不让你的眼睛

　再看见人世的伤心。。。”

一首熟悉的歌曲、一首感人的歌曲。。。一首“你的眼睛”（王展演唱）为这场戏拉开了序幕。显然的，这是一部关于“眼睛”的话剧。人往往被眼前的意象蒙骗了；说看得见，但其实看不见。

故事简介：
小鬼（王耀庆饰）和宝贝（李心洁饰）是一对专门扮演幸福情侣的搭档，在不同的场合替不同的客户演出完美的生活，赚取客人的信任。但曾经是情侣的他们其实并不幸福。年轻貌美的宝贝一心渴望遇见能带给她幸福的白马王子；小鬼总梦想有朝一日名成利就。两人似乎有一份又爱又恨的情债。在一次发展商推出新屋时，他们遇见了设计屋子的摩西（杨祐宁饰），一位满怀憧憬的青年建筑师。他看到了宝贝与小鬼的完美搭配。 “怀孕”的宝贝，化身幸福小女人，小鬼俨然是年轻企业家、她体贴的丈夫。两人真真假假的互动，紧扣众人的目光。
摩西深深被宝贝所吸引，他迷上她幸福孕妇的角色，更喜欢她毫无保留的表达方式。于是把宝贝从小鬼身边带走，邀请她在自己的全新设计作品里表演“一个女人的幸福”，并为他带来成功与名望。 只不过这只是一场“幸福”表演吗？宝贝能真的找到她在小鬼那儿所找不到的幸福吗？
摩西在这“幸福”的扮演中达到目的，找到灵感设计了“宝贝的家”。可是，在他冷落宝贝的当时，宝贝的幸福梦想破灭。她也渐渐因先天性的疾病瞎了。她决定在合约圆满后离去，也与小鬼共度了最后一顿晚餐，从此从他们的生命中消失。小鬼和摩西这时才发现宝贝在他们心里的地位。
不过，宝贝在寻医时遇见了王展饰演的眼科医生。原来，在那次的房屋发销场上，他也被宝贝吸引了，也撞见过她几次，只是宝贝没注意。只可惜，宝贝已无法清楚的看着他了。但他们最终也结为夫妇，宝贝也找到了她所渴望的真正幸福。

导演 (Director)： 林奕华 （Edward Lam）
编剧/创作总监 (Playwright/Creative Director)： 张艾嘉 (Sylvia Chang)
————

让我先讲讲坏的吧。感觉上，这场舞台剧有一点儿长（三个钟头）。对，三个钟头是很长，不过，前年的《华丽上班族之生活与生存》 (Design for Living) 也是差不多一样长，但感觉上不觉得如此。若要我跟那比，我比较喜欢《华丽上班族》。不过，我觉得最后的半个钟的剧情发展，稍微减轻那“长”的感觉，所以也不算差。

最初，我觉得奇怪为什么编剧这么早（第一场) 就把结局说出来（她选了谁）。后来，我在她瞎后才发现戏初的字句“如果知道有这么一天，我就仔细注意/看你了”的含意。

思绪/解剖：

1）两个男人。两个不懂女人所要的幸福是什么的男人。
小鬼以为只要有钱就能带个女人幸福。我相信他想赚大钱是因为他想给宝贝幸福，不过一味要当老板赚大钱是不切实际的。宝贝因此常和他吵架。我相信，她只想要个安稳踏实的感情。
摩西以为幸福是可以塑造的而想建一间能带给女人“幸福”的屋子。可是一个外表美满，但里头空荡荡的屋子是无法带给女人幸福的。女人需要一个充满真正美丽憧憬的未来。

2）我也想过，编剧命名 “宝贝”为“宝贝”是为了点题这名词的滥用吗？哈哈！或许我想太多了。

3）宝贝在戏里一直活在虚构的美满。她与小鬼的“幸福 、完美”搬演证实眼前所看到的其实都是假的，梦幻的。只有心里看到的是真的。

4）在剧中，摩西指出了一个重点。Sometimes, you can't see what you see, you can't hear what you speak. 人有时以为看见了，但其实错过了；也有时没听到自己所说的话而口是心非。

Something New, Something Old

It's been a long night. Just caught a double bill by Faithworks and sharing some thoughts on them.

I found the 1st play "Getting Married with Dad Dead Next Door" a tad draggy, such that I failed to find a strong message coming through to me (or it got blurred out). J commented that it's surprising since I'm usually quite perceptive...maybe I was tired...it was a bit long at around 75min (for a double bill). But I did deduce that the mother knew that the father was dead already, right at the beginning of the play (or did I assume it?). Maybe because I was paying more attention to what was said and acted out to deduce it by virtue of knowing already there's a dead dad. But this of course, as J said, meant that there was no element of "suspense" for me, which might have reduced the appreciation of the play and caused me to feel it was a bit long. I kept wondering when it will finally come to the point where all of them would discover that the rest of the family also knew that the father was dead, which I expected would be the climax of the show. But unfortunately, the climax didn't last long. Maybe a little shortening of the post-discovery might have brought it to a more impactful close. Generally, in my personal opinion, the play was nicely structured, the way the scenes changed with each set of characters, but it probably needs some tightening up.

As for the 2nd play "The Bench", it wasn't exactly a play, as in with a main storyline or theme, but more of snippets of happenings around a bench in a park. People come, people go. They did it in a cyclical manner, i.e. about things that happen on one day at the bench, then another day of similar happenings starts, with some new characters introduced into the existing characters' own mini-stories, or more "development" of relationships and about the characters' lives. I was getting concerned at when this pattern will end, and was a little expectant of whether these characters will finally meet at some point (which I think would have brought it to an interesting juncture), but that didn't happen. The more interesting part came when a geeky guy came out in the 2nd part, providing much comic relief. But it was predictable he would meet the lonely girl and something would develop from there. Both J and I felt this set-up might have been more suited for film then stage.

Guru of Chai

Just a short review...

I am not a good storyteller, and thus always admire those who can draw audiences when they tell a story, engaging people with what they speak. And Jacob Rajan is such, as the "guru of chai" in this production, with David Ward as the musician.

He tells a story of how a tea (chai) seller's encounter with a girl abandoned at a train station, and who sings most beautifully, charts the life he would have. A policeman falls for her, but she chooses a poet. Her choice sparks a series of events affecting all around, that leads to tragedies.

I had gone to the show, expecting lots of laughter (which manifested in a number of the audience...some laughed really loud), but I found it hard to laugh a lot because behind the jokes made, therein lies poignant words of wisdom and of life's lesson. And then again, the story wasn't exactly a happy one. What was interesting was the use of some magic tricks as he told the story, conjuring items out of nowhere, transforming objects to other things.

One particular quote stood out for me:

"Life's sadness is born out of our attachments"

How true.

Have a sip of tea and ponder.

Model Citizens by The Necessary Stage

I'm finding it hard to pen my thoughts down. Mainly because this play by Haresh Sharma seems to have many underlying messages/layers that I'm not sure where to start. Maybe I should start with something simpler.

The synopsis.

A man stabs an MP at a Meet the People Session. But this is not their story. It is the story of the man’s girlfriend, an Indonesian maid who wants to get married and become a Singapore citizen. It is the story of the MP’s wife, who tries to cope with her husband’s injury and the media spotlight. It is the story of the maid’s employer, who is also struggling with her own tragedy. These 3 women may mean nothing to each other, but they need one another to survive. The maid, the employer and the MP’s wife. Are they all model citizens?

The 3 women cross paths, under an unexpected circumstance. 3 backgrounds, 3 languages, how do they communicate? Gradually, a slow convergence of the 3 women, from 3 diversities to a somewhat common ground occurred, with the use of magic realism (as so described) as they become a part of "cross-realities" that transcends language. Boundaries are blurred.

The sets. Simple as they are, I liked the way the sets (cupboards) were used to define the (confined) space representing each person. The sets were modified/"flipped"/moved around during the show to bring you to different zones physically and mentally (i.e. the characters' personal spaces). Apt that at the end, the cupboards were closed up, marking the end of the play, like closing a chapter as each character moves on.

The disturbing scene. It's interesting to note that 2 deaths were placed side-by-side and played out concurrently in a particular scene, one, the abortion scene of Melly and two, the moments before "Angel", Wendy's son took his own life as shown in a FB wall chat. 2 "youths", one, before it has a chance to live, another finding no reason to live. Is this a coincidence or intended placement? The only problem here was that it was difficult to watch both the online chat going on and the abortion taking place.

The issues. I guess one main question is, what really constitutes a "model citizen"? Is it the person who follows the rules, but is eventually unhappy and not really getting what she wants out of life? The mother who tries her best, but ends up with a dead son? A foreigner who desires so much to be a citizen that she tries all means to get her "green card" to stay? Just perfect on the outside, but not necessarily so on the inside. 
Social classes are explored with the higher, middle and lower classes converging. We see how power corrupts as it slowly manifests as a less than compassionate Mrs Chua who does it for "show" when she is on "cover duty" for her husband. An ugly side of her is revealed, true or not when she gets into an argument with Wendy and tears open Wendy's wounds. Maybe she was ok initially, but trying to be the "model citizen" and MP's wife took it away. For all of them, their dreams were forgotten.

Eventually, however, there was some hopefulness at the end with each finally letting go of the past (or present), and moving on. I believed it draws us back to where they all started. Their dreams - the "perfect" status, the "perfect" home, the "perfect" country.

The play ended with no curtain call...was it to maintain the tone? But there was a post-show dialogue session where I learnt some things. It's all about the point of view.

(yeah! finally got this out. Although there are still other stuff to discuss)

Rocky Horror Show

Starting off the new year of theatrical shows for me was The Rocky Horror Show which I caught last Saturday. Before I say anything, don't expect a conventional musical story. It's a crazy show that really isn't in for the storyline but really for the entertainment factor taken at face value. Judging from how some of the audience joined in the fun, dressed up to match the show, you can expect a participative audience (although not so wild here in Singapore). We saw use of flashlights, rubber gloves and playing cards "raining" down. Jeremy already gave a synopsis of the show, so I shall not go into that.

From the name of the show, one can expect it to be a rock-and-roll feature (of the 60s & 70s), and indeed it was, a raunchy one at that, in a retro setting. Well it's "rock-and-roll" if you know how the phrase came about. It's supposed to be a parody of science fiction and B-movie horror films (at least that's what's said for The Rocky Horror Picture Show), which I felt it did the job.

As a note, one must appreciate how the show opened. For someone who didn't really know anything about the show beforehand (except a review by CNA), it prepares the audience of how the musical was "set", like watching a movie double feature. Despite the difficulty in deciphering what was sung, one could catch the gist that it had something to do with science fiction and about a couple's, Brad & Janet, strange encounter. If you have watched the old-school science fiction series of the 50s and 60s (think Twilight Zone), you'll appreciate the way it's directed or played out and why you even had a narrator as well. Well, at least that's the way I saw it as I came out of the theatre. and ya, if you've watch those horror films too, it's almost like the classic portrayal of such a couple.

The musical saw an excellent cast who performed very well. And a 'performance' it was. I couldn't catch what they were singing for some parts, probably because the music was loud and also the echo mix? Nevertheless, there was great singing and acting all round as each was pretty much "in-character". Riff Raff (Kristian Lavercombe) was amazing in the range he displayed. I was especially impressed by his ability to reach so high a pitch in the last scene when he appeared to 'zap' Dr Frank-N-Furter. The song list featured many a good songs too.

In a ra-ra moment, the show ended with the cast leading the audience in the "Time Warp Dance", and before 10pm at that.

Walking With Dinosaurs

After Rapunzel, I met some other friends to watch "Walking With Dinosaurs" at the Singapore Indoor Stadium. I don't know about you, but dinosaurs were vaguely, part of my childhood memories. I even played with those dino transformers. I know, it's strange for a girl, but my playmates were people like my brother and ex-neighbour, who's a boy. But I had my dolls.

The show was an off-shoot of the popular documentary series of the same name, and it was amazing how they could bring in these giant-sized reptiles and make them run across the stage. The smaller dinosaurs were manned by humans wearing the dino suits, with robotic controls. And the big ones? Remotely controlled. It was a sight as they were very real and mobile. If only I could touch them.
They also had these rather innovative "plants" that sprouted out from the sets and they could retract them. Cool.

Basically, an explorer was the narrator who brings you through the different generations of dinosaurs and when each species appeared and adapted to the environment. I know it was really bad of us, but we were all prepping ourselves up for a fight between dinosaurs. Well, it did occur, but to a small extent.