|
Terry Pratchett's 'Men at Arms', adapted by Stephen
Briggs. As 'Lord of the Rings' approaches, the topic of adapting fantasy books for a visual medium is particularly relevant. It's a notoriously tricky task, even with access to a vast budget and a cast of thousands, to cast actors who look the part. Respect is therefore due to this production, for the actors all fit their roles admirably. Fans of the book will not be disappointed with the portrayal of any of the characters. Special mention is due to Peter Easterbrook as a superb Sergeant Colon and Matthew Somerville as the Patrician, but all were well cast and performed. This production was something of a triumph over adversity. The acting was universally good, excepting a couple of fumbled lines. The most obvious problem was with the sound effects. There were few, but those were both essential for the sense of the play, and very timing-specific. They were also, unfortunately, almost all late or entirely absent; and in a production involving guns being fired, for example, that's unforgivable. It is to be hoped that this problem will be resolved for future performances. The other problem the cast struggled to overcome was the script. The adaption was somewhat clunky, managing to give the feel of being both rushed and over-long. Perhaps part of the problem was that the humour in Mr. Pratchett's novels tends to lie in the descriptive passages and setting, while the characters are normally played fairly straight. The obligation to translate the comic book into a comic stage-play therefore resulted in some rather clumsy moments in which the action literally stopped for a humorous, but typically extraneous, 'footnote' lifted from the book. Furthermore, some of the dialogue taken directly from the book was weakened in the necessarily sparser context of the play. Overall, 'Men at Arms' sensibly chooses to pitch itself towards its most likely audience: fans of the book. They will not be disappointed.
|