The tickets were priced at RM37 after tax. We purchased two seats for the Sunday matinee show, August 9, at 3.00 pm. The venue is not large, yet the lack in size does somewhat allow for a more intimate setting. We were seated on the far right, close to the back, which allowed for a semi-decent view of the stage. I would say about three quarters of the ground seats were filled, and perhaps a sprinkling of the upper level as well. Most of the audience was seated before the play began, save for a few latecomers.
If you are not familiar with the story of Joseph, here is a very simple version: there was once a young man named Joseph who had big dreams, dreams in which his father, mother and many brothers bowed down to him. Upon hearing about these dreams, Joseph's brothers become angry, especially as Joseph is their father's favourite son, and eventually sell him to a slave trader. Somehow Joseph ends up in the house of Potiphar, captain of Pharaoh's guard, and does so well for himself that he is made head of the household. Potiphar's wife tries to seduce him but fails, so she accuses him of rape and has him sent to prison. But even there, Joseph rises in the ranks and is summoned to help Pharaoh interpret a dream, which he does. From then on Joseph's star does nothing but continue to rise. The crux of the story comes when a terrible famine hits and Joseph's brothers have to buy supplies from Joseph, who is now essentially the Prime Minister of Egypt.
Now, one might think a retelling would have some otherworldly interpretation, which was what I was hoping for. Unfortunately, it was not so. It might well have been the exact story of Joseph, with exercises of creative license to accommodate budget and setting constraints, plus attempts to modernise the story. There were less brothers, for one thing, which was probably the right move seeing as how biblical Joseph had eleven brothers. Joseph's father, Jacob, was some sort of businessman who had annual business trips to Tokyo. This was fine, except that when the brothers had to get supplies, they called it "going to New Egypt" because they couldn't use their "reserve funds". If you live in a globalised world where Daddy flies to Tokyo every year and presumably makes other intercontinental flights too, surely you wouldn't have to go to "New Egypt" just because you don't have anymore food? As for reserve funds, if you're short on food, what are reserve funds for? There were also several dream sequences in which a tailor speaks to Joseph in riddles. The actor who played the tailor was good but his character didn't seem to do anything except give Joseph vague words of encouragement and dress him in garments that were supposed to match what he was going through. Think about the title of the play, and the role of the tailor becomes even more confusing. Is he supposed to be Jesus? But Jesus does not show up yet in that part of the Bible! Even if it is a reinterpretation, or if the tailor is just a random man in Joseph's dreams, what purpose does he serve to further Joseph's story? He literally doesn't help in any way.
(The Tailor with Joseph)
Then there were the costumes. Granted, they were interesting to look at; punk-rock influences were strong, with lots of black leather, chains dangling from shoulders, military-style jackets and gold face paint. I suppose they did bring an interesting new element to the story but I also wondered what they were supposed to mean, apart from looking rather striking. In the Bible, when Jacob gives Joseph a coat, it is supposed to be very colourful and lovely and special, but in this play, the coat Joseph received didn't look like much. I actually thought his brothers' jackets stood out more.
(Lots of characters here with Pharaoh's throne, which looks suspiciously like a certain famous throne from a show about thrones)
Speaking of Joseph, you would think a titular character should be somewhat likable or at least interesting enough to hold your attention. This Joseph was nothing of the sort. He was whiny and arrogant and stayed that way until the end of the play. I had no desire whatsoever to see him succeed or even to see him at all. In the early scenes, his brothers were portrayed as aggressive, revenge-seeking types wanting to pay Joseph back for being the favourite and for daring to dream, but Joseph himself was such a stuck-up brat, lording his dreams over his brothers and basking in Jacob's attention, that I really did not mind him being sold into slavery.
(Joseph in prison with other prisoners and a hilarious chief jailor who completely stole the scene)
The play lasted about two hours, with a short intermission, and I fell asleep twice. That probably already indicates how interesting it was. A little harsh, one might say, but my friend also found certain scenes draggy, especially when the actors screamed their lines so much so it was hard to understand what they were saying.
(The cast taking their bows)
Was it a good show? I would not say I hated it, but it certainly was not worth RM37. I think it would have been better if 1) they had presented it as a faithful adaptation of the biblical story, sans the modernisation, as that completely threw the plot off - a wealthy business-minded family does not suddenly fall prey to starvation in a globalised world, or 2) they had taken more extreme liberties with the narrative - maybe Josephine and her eleven sisters in a dystopian world? I would pay to watch that. Perhaps those who are less familiar with the story of Joseph might have enjoyed it more. For my friend and I, The Tailor-Made Man was far too frustrating, confusing and predictable.
No comments:
Post a Comment