4 Play
4 short plays from the student writing project

Brookes Drama Studio, Headington Hill Campus. 5-7June 2003

After a little front of house uncertainty not designed to win over the punters the audience finally gained access to the Drama Studio and we were underway.

The first piece Antics was the most lightweight. The split-level set was promising with dancing raging overhead while the action took place on the main stage outside the loos and stairs.

Described as a 'short comedy set in a nightclub' Antics didn't stray far from predictable dialogue routes. It had all the standard elements to be expected in a nightclub setting (rude words, a sexual act, a fight) but lacked any kind of plot, direction, crisis point or resolution. The characters remained stereotypes and did not provide many laughs either. Whatever comedy might have been embedded in the script was not delivered with enough conviction (perhaps reflecting the actors' own reservations about the material?) A lot more work needed here.

The Mime and the Man had much more dramatic edge as the philosopher performer on his soapbox challenges the man of action, on his way somewhere fast, on the value of doing. This dialogue between people who are actually not communicating at all is well scripted, with strong and convincing performances by both actors.

It's Good To Talk is a mime and starts from a similar premise to The Mime and the Man. Two female characters react to each other and fail to communicate and yet become increasingly ensnared in a wordless power struggle expressed through action and inaction. Excellent direction and pacing of key moments kept the audience engaged and the clever use of music to affect atmosphere also contributed to the play's flow.

Loaded is the longest and most complex piece with varied elements woven into the plot. The dialogue between blackmailer and his supposed victim has suspense written through it. Several elements are not made clear to us from the start with the effect of creating inbuilt tension, and we are kept guessing about the situation of the characters. Tension builds as Mick and Julie wait for the man to arrive who will give them a large sum of money for an undeveloped film. Themes build slowly and systematically on each other; Mick's arm wound, Julie's obsession with plastic surgery, her desire to know what is on the film (Mick either doesn't know or is not telling). Questions spring up in the mind: does it matter what is on the film, where does the power really lie in this relationship, what motivates the characters to go through this for the money? There are strong dramatic ideas here and they are delivered with assurance leading us to a conclusive if not quite unexpected ending.

These plays contrast well with each other and once front of house is running smoothly will provide an enjoyable evening watching the progress of Brookes' current acting and writing talent.

Kathryn Karakaya