Chicago Part 3: The Ugly

Though there was a lot to love about the Chicago Improv Festival, there were plenty of shows that I would have been fine not seeing. We won’t be mentioning any names of these groups. Every group has an average or sub-par performance, especially when they’re in a new, unfamiliar location, so just in case these performances were unusual, we won’t addle them with a negative review. However, a negative review can often teach us much, especially if we can avoid what went wrong. Here are the bottom 7:

Group 1: 4 men, 3 women. I’ve seen this group perform before, and have really liked them before. The set started out really well, with very heavy scene painting that set up a playground, complete with swings, a knocked out tooth, and a diamond ring. There wasn’t necessarily anything wrong with this show… but it didn’t really do anything for me either. Relationships were well set up and solid, but

what went wrong:  there was a lack of strong decisions or games, so the entire story was fairly level, with minimal raised stakes. The story was fairly predictable. Comedy comes from the unexpected, and there wasn’t any here.

Group 2: 8 women. This is another set that was perfectly fine, but generally unremarkable. This set was based on the word “psychology,” and took place all around the same multi-story apartment building in a series of two-person scenes. This is a great format, and led to some fun moments… there just weren’t enough of them. I’ll probably get into trouble for this, as I’m putting forth a wild generalization, but in general, I find that when improvisers start out, the female improvisers catch on to on-stage relationship building very easily, and have great emotional connections… but those scenes tend to be static. Male improvisers generally are more plot-based, and come up with these terrifically complex and fun situations.. but you really couldn’t give a flying flip about the characters, which usually have no depth.

what went wrong:  Being a group of all women, it suffered from gal-prov syndrome - great relationships, and nothing really happened. The pace was pretty quick… but just as a scene was starting to cook, an edit happened. There were lots of questions on stage that added no information. Each of the eight actors had at least two characters, which made for problems remembering names and a little confusion occasionally as to which character was on stage at any one moment. Also, the person in the booth was like a kid with a new toy, as he got in the way several times during this 30-minute set with different sound effects and the bubble machine. There really wasn’t a reason to hear a wolf howl while the characters were having a heart-to-heart on top of the skyscraper.

Group 3: 6 men, 3 women. This was a group of teenagers, which means that they were light on experience, but heavy on energy and enthusiasm. This group was fine, and will probably really be great once they gain some more life experience. The set began with each character actor coming forward all at the same time with an initiation, and each one continued their own scene - so the audience got an onslaught of nine simultaneous one-person scenes. Kind of a cool opening, if a little tough to figure out. Scenes went from one side of the stage to the other quickly, and there were a lot of funny moments, but

what went wrong: since the scenes were so quick, there was a quick joke, and then nothing else happened. Characters never connected, and scenes didn’t go anywhere. And with such quick scenes, it was tough to keep coming up with new ideas based on the same suggestion. If the actors had been older, they’d have never made it.

Group 4: 4 men, 3 women. This show featured short monologues followed by scenes. There were some fun games and characters, but

what went wrong: the show was almost completely unmemorable due to a bizarre circumstance in which characters with no relationships talked exclusively about things and events in an unemotional way and somehow managed to speak completely in generalities. In my experience, talking about “stuff,” especially without detail, is about the most boring thing you can do to an audience.

Group 5: 6 men, 1 woman.  I was surprised that one of the shows I decided to see turned out to be a scripted show… I guess that’s what I get for stumbling out away from the official Chicago Improv Festival schedule. Perhaps I shouldn’t have. I should let you know that before I started doing improv, I did scripted theater, both on stage and directing, for about 20 years. This show was absolutely one of the worst shows I have ever seen, although there were some really fun characters and moments, like puppets with human heads crossing Niagara Falls, a vampire that doesn’t realize what he is, and a strangely emotional man with a barrel instead of skin.

what went wrong: The script seemed like it had been written at about 2 a.m. the previous morning while the whole cast was stoned, drunk, or both. There were three tons of random lines and scenes tossed in that didn’t fit with any of the rest of the ’script’ (which appeared on stage during certain scenes that weren’t quite solid yet)… these were lines which you could tell the cast thought were hilarious, and the audience thought about 25% of them were good. What was intended to be a wholesale ripped off “Golden Ticket” musical number (from Willy Wonka) was instead a half-assed half-mumbled disaster. Maybe this show will be good after a complete re-write and another month of rehearsal, but somehow, I doubt it.

Group 6: 4 men, 2 women.  At the time, this was the worst improv show I had ever seen. Using an extended Harold format with no opening, this team explored the world around a ski resort. The show started out in a really promising way, with several compelling characters and good relationships. If only they had stopped after the first beat.

what went wrong: The Harold group games seemed to be either completely scripted or planned out to barely incorporate an audience suggestion. How do I know? They used props and lettered placards to introduce the games “Argument with a Dolphin” and “The Slap,” which respectively ended with an actress getting squirted with actual water and with an actor getting ‘comedically’ slapped after a long buildup. This group used props and costumes to differentiate characters… so as you can imagine, characters were all relatively similar. Like so many of the other groups you’ve read about so far, there was too much plot, a lack of specific detail, a general lack of games… but maybe that was good.

One game in particular involved a scene in which a man was talking to a foreigner in the visitor’s native language. For the audience, this meant watching a scene in complete gibberish. Not a bad idea, really, and it has the potential to be really fun. When the scene lasts from around 6-7 minutes (honestly… I started looking at my watch once I thought it had gone on too long, and it had already been two or three minutes at that point), you end up at the least boring and at the most angering your audience. The other people on the team had a complete failure to recognize when that particular game was done. I had to nearly physically restrain myself from rocketing onto the stage and editing the scene myself.

At some point during this disaster, I was looking at the actors on the sidelines, and I noticed that there was one actor that I had not seen yet, and at this point, we were in the third beat already. Again… maybe that was OK. When he entered in the 4th beat, he did nothing but deny, ask questions, and destroy the narrative. It was unbelievable. When the end came, it was a relief.

After this show, which was paired with Group 1 (above) for a price of $15, I was fairly upset, to say the least.  On the train on the way to a different show, I was in a rant (part of seeing a show with me, I suppose… if it’s crap, you will hear about it). During this diatribe, I remarked that I could have done a better show in a coma. A month later, we now have a show planned around that very idea… watch for “Coma Chameleon” coming in June. Even terrible shows are good for something.

Group 7: 3 men, 2 women.  A mere two days after the worst show I’d ever seen, this group came along, shattering the record. This group attempted short form games, which is ballsy for the Chicago Improv Festival, although if you do it well, you’ll really stand out. That didn’t happen, though the group started out well. They started with a version of “Doo Run Run” using holidays instead of names, and it was actually a great alternative to the version everyone else plays. It was a good two-minute warmup.

what went wrong:  They didn’t stop with that game. They moved on to “Symphony,” which they decided to play using only vomit noises. By the time they finished 10 minutes later (yes, 10 minutes of vomit noises), more than one of my companions were feeling physically ill. I was just bored. But even this wasn’t the worst part.

With 10-15 minutes left in the set, they decided to fill it with a “Revival,” in which they take audience suggestions and form a religion around them, then hold a revival. The game lasted way too long… was way too loud… too “wacky wacky,” completely unconnected to any kind of real emotion, completely devoid of any likeable character, and had entirely too much schtick. That’s not even the worst part.

At one point during this turd of a game, the actors call upon the entire audience to stand up and begin clapping along to their loud and terrible singing about Snagglepuss. Audience members that did not seem to be completely experiencing a come-to-Jesus moment were in for it. If you stood up and declined to clap, one of the actors would come up to you, point at you, and yell back to the stage that he had found an unbeliever. One of my traveling companions received this treatment, and was completely mortified, as was I.

At one point during this onslaught, I glanced down to the aisle beside the seats (seats are raised, hiding the aisle) and saw two fairly prominent national improvisers that had found their way to this hiding spot, where they wouldn’t have to participate and tacitly approve of this behavior. I have never before seen an audience bullied in this way.

As you read the following statement, remember that I own an improv theater, and spend hundreds of hours a month on improv: If this had been the first improv show I’d ever seen, I would never go to another one. Groups that do things like this might amuse their friends, but they will chase away more people than they attract, and that’s bad for all of us.

Overall: I’m not normally a Negative Nelly - I’m a natural optimist, and see the positive in everything. However, there are bad shows out there… hopefully we can see them, learn lessons from them, never repeat their mistakes, and improve the art of improvisation for everyone.

This entry was posted on Monday, May 25, 2009 at 13:57 and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response or trackback from your own site.

| Print