Medea, March 16 at MAT-Great Falls

Last night Lana and I went to see Medea at MAT and I thought while the individual performances were solid, particularly those of Bethany Mason, who plays Medea, and Jeff Scolley, who plays her husband Jason, the whole production lacked a qualitative connection to the audience.

I felt the cultural gap between ancient Greece, where this play was originally performed, and current day was a little too big to bridge here.

Firstly, a few words on what I liked.

The scenes between Bethany and Jeff were legitimately dramatic, with real human emotions at play. Medea plays a woman scorned who's searching for a solution to her situation. She might be a bit crazy, yes, but viewers can almost see where she's coming from.

Jason, her husband, has taken up with another woman, and has seemingly cast Medea aside. This in of itself is something that's instantly relatable, and always will be no matter how much time has gone since the scene was originally written.

I thought Jeff really shined in the the final scene, as well.

Without giving anything away, Jeff delvers a healthy dose of anguish and when he delivers the lines, you can't help but feel that emotion, as well.

Bethany, too, did a great job in delivering each of her lines, which were many.

 It never felt as if she were stumbling through a scene to get to another one, or that she was out of character at any moment. As soon as the lights went up, she was Medea through and through.

With that, I'll say my main criticism with the show was that throughout the entire show I never received an answer to a basic question -- why?

Without sounding harsh, I'm not blind to the hard work it takes in producing any show, I couldn't help but feel as if I was unsure of why this play was being shown in front of me.

To better explain what I'm getting at here, I'll share a bit of a conversation I had with Ed Moran not too long ago.

Ed, as you may or may not know, has long been a play director in Great Falls. Some of his recent plays he's directed include "No Sex Please, We're British," and "I Hate Hamlet."

Ed and I talked a few months ago about how the one thing a successful theater must do is get people in the seats. The balancing act comes in holding your artistic integrity intact while giving audiences reasons to see the show.

Meaning, while you certainly don't want to pander to the lowest common denominator, you don't want to do something that's totally over their heads, either.

Audience members here in Great Falls, the ones who regularly attend plays, at least, are fairly easy to please.

In my opinion, a theater should not have to cater to them because they love almost anything you do.
The goal, if I were in charge, would be attracting people who don't regularly come to your theater.

Now, back to Medea, I had a difficult time deciphering who this play was geared toward. Is it young couples? Young men? Women? Children?

I don't think it would be women as Lana told me one thing that bothered her was the misogyny rampant throughout the play.

In one scene Medea "attempts" to mend her relationship with Jason, saying she should have been supportive of her husband's decision to find another wife and that she should have been helping plan the wedding.

Our modern sensibilities say that's not okay. Indeed, a play of this nature hearkens back to times when women were treated differently from men. It was a different cultural acceptance where men were supreme masters over women. It's not like that anymore, so perhaps to see a play go through those scenes seemed a little absurd.

Next, I felt the music chosen to back up certain scenes only put the question mark of who this play was for into greater focus.

At one point during a scene between Medea and the King, played by Dyllan Strom, which got a bit romantic in tone, smooth jazz was played in the background.

You don't need to be a music expert to know that jazz didn't exist in ancient Greece. It probably wouldn't distract many, but if you think about it, it seems a little strange.

The same goes with the use of Beethoven pieces played intermittently throughout. Beethoven was a 16th Century composer.

But then, if one questions why more modern music was used, you have to start to think what music would have been more appropriate. They could have found some non-time specific music or music from ancient Greece, but then how is that any more relatable? Rarely anyone will appreciate or recognize music from ancient Greece.

If you extend that line of reasoning further out, how can one assume modern audiences will relate to a play based in ancient Greece?

Yes, the emotions are still being felt today, and yes, this type of show was not being done anywhere else in town, and finally, yes, it was a chance to explore some interesting relations between a man and woman. All of this is true.

But, when a theater already has several hurdles to jump over in terms of getting people into the seats, because, let's face facts here: it's not an easy feat to sell out shows in Great Falls; why would you choose to place more hurdles in your way with a script that was written thousands of years ago?

I say this out of a place of love, concern, admiration and respect. While we had some misgivings about possibly why there weren't more butts in the seat, both Lana and I enjoyed the show. The performances were good. There was plenty to like here.

I just felt that this play was a bit too outside the realm of average people to understand. Maybe that was the point. But, as Ed told me, and I might be paraphrasing a bit here,  but he said basically,
"We all do this to see people in the seats. We all enjoy that feeling of a packed house and a standing ovation. It's why we do what we do."

So yes, you CAN present an ancient Greek horror-tragedy. You CAN even have several great performances within that play. But, my question still remains. Why should you when you risk performing it to half-empty rooms?
Especially when we have, even in Great Falls, multiple entertainment options.

If I'm a typical Great Falls native, looking to spend $30 on entertainment, is it unreasonable to think that I'd rather go to a nice dinner, see a rock band, buy a video game or a new DVD than go see an ancient Greek tragedy, even if it is live theater and I know about the plot?

The answer should be fairly obvious.